Martin Logan CLX ART $ 22,950. is it a price reduction?
- Thread starter Gregadd
- Start date
Hi
I find these speakers gorgeous, among the best looking speakers around.
About subs,my current thinking is that subs are a requirement for optimum bass reproduction in any system with any speaker even those with substantial bass output. The reason is that it is very rare to impossible to find a position in the room where bass and imaging are both optimized. I stress the plural: at least 2 subs, preferably more
I find these speakers gorgeous, among the best looking speakers around.
About subs,my current thinking is that subs are a requirement for optimum bass reproduction in any system with any speaker even those with substantial bass output. The reason is that it is very rare to impossible to find a position in the room where bass and imaging are both optimized. I stress the plural: at least 2 subs, preferably more
WarningnLong, OT postbut I was asked ..so ..
Greg
The basics of this are something most audiophiles know but resign themselves to/with... The best position for staging/imaging is rarely if ever the same for best bass... We all know it, we all have experience it but we do think somehow that our speaker position is the best compromise... It has come to me through research that this compromise can be avoided.
I hope you don’t mind my retracing my path to this:
The Magnepan are truly full range. Properly positioned and with adequate amplification, they will move air in a most surprising way, pant-leg-flapping-type of bass with a degree of realism if not impact, that most cone speakers rarely manage. That always came at th3 expense of staging … Often I would get great bass but the 10-feet big mouth syndrome that line-sources are often criticized for. IOW the images were too big... Oh! They were very satisfying on big orchestral works... Mahler on Magnepan is a match but smaller combos suffered from well no longer being so small… So I tried a sub and this for years... It never seemed to work well with the planars... I got to the audiophile conclusion and myth laden that it would “never” be possible to marry a subwoofer with the “fast” planar … But I was using just one sub …
Fast forward 2 years back, 2008. I have been reading the work of Floyd Toole and Sean Olive and they came to the conclusions that several subs were better than one … Interesting thought I so I tried... With the subs in the usual Left and right and the subs working in augmentation… i-e the Main playing full range but positioned for staging with the back wave heavily absorbed and the subs crossed rather low (around 40 Hz) but flanking the mains.. Then I read about Earl Geddes in an interesting discussion he had with someone from DTS (the Company) about Stereo Bass (on AVS) and read his point bout multiple subs in extremely non symmetrical configurations: One in the back corner behind the speakers, one somewhere halfway between the listening position and the speakers plane on one side and the other on the opposite wall (side) but off the floor oaf possible.. No big deal for placement; what is important is infinitely variable phase, level and crossover point for each sub. I had that with my subs… So I tried that... It took me several weeks and I persisted and the bass I got from the Maggies were the best bass I have ever heard from any system …
Thus my new position which is Earl Geddes’s At least three subs positioned as described earlier … with any system even full range speakers... You will get much better bass and a sense of integration that is difficult to believe... The most interesting part is that the bass is better both subjectively (The air was being compressed in my closed, concrete room) and objectively (I was measuring the flattest I have ever without equalizer ... I had a response that was essentially flat from 14 Hz to 150 Hz with “only” 2 Sunfire True Signature and one “Junior”… I got serious output under 20 Hz, with one of the subs in corner loading … Takes a while to find proper level, frequency and phase, a long while but it DOES work and well and surprisingly well… Makes me wonder what that could have been with more serious subs, either DIY or commercial. I hasten to say that DIY is one area where the commercial offerings are surpassed routinely…
I wanted to add to this long post that when I heard Steve’s system I find it odd to pair the X-2 with a pair of subs... Well the integration is there for those who can hear and while Steve’s has adopted the symmetrical (left and Right Subs) I have no doubt that his system wouldn’t have been that kind of good with out the subs. They allowed Steve’s to place the X-2 for best staging/imaging and to have the bass needed for a world class system… I was convinced even before then but find more interesting to go toward that.
AS you can see I am a convert... Better bass possible in a system? At least 3 subs in dissymmetrical fashion, a la Geddes… A person called Melhau has a nice write-up on his experiences with three subs, much more precise than this post …HERE
Greg
The basics of this are something most audiophiles know but resign themselves to/with... The best position for staging/imaging is rarely if ever the same for best bass... We all know it, we all have experience it but we do think somehow that our speaker position is the best compromise... It has come to me through research that this compromise can be avoided.
I hope you don’t mind my retracing my path to this:
The Magnepan are truly full range. Properly positioned and with adequate amplification, they will move air in a most surprising way, pant-leg-flapping-type of bass with a degree of realism if not impact, that most cone speakers rarely manage. That always came at th3 expense of staging … Often I would get great bass but the 10-feet big mouth syndrome that line-sources are often criticized for. IOW the images were too big... Oh! They were very satisfying on big orchestral works... Mahler on Magnepan is a match but smaller combos suffered from well no longer being so small… So I tried a sub and this for years... It never seemed to work well with the planars... I got to the audiophile conclusion and myth laden that it would “never” be possible to marry a subwoofer with the “fast” planar … But I was using just one sub …
Fast forward 2 years back, 2008. I have been reading the work of Floyd Toole and Sean Olive and they came to the conclusions that several subs were better than one … Interesting thought I so I tried... With the subs in the usual Left and right and the subs working in augmentation… i-e the Main playing full range but positioned for staging with the back wave heavily absorbed and the subs crossed rather low (around 40 Hz) but flanking the mains.. Then I read about Earl Geddes in an interesting discussion he had with someone from DTS (the Company) about Stereo Bass (on AVS) and read his point bout multiple subs in extremely non symmetrical configurations: One in the back corner behind the speakers, one somewhere halfway between the listening position and the speakers plane on one side and the other on the opposite wall (side) but off the floor oaf possible.. No big deal for placement; what is important is infinitely variable phase, level and crossover point for each sub. I had that with my subs… So I tried that... It took me several weeks and I persisted and the bass I got from the Maggies were the best bass I have ever heard from any system …
Thus my new position which is Earl Geddes’s At least three subs positioned as described earlier … with any system even full range speakers... You will get much better bass and a sense of integration that is difficult to believe... The most interesting part is that the bass is better both subjectively (The air was being compressed in my closed, concrete room) and objectively (I was measuring the flattest I have ever without equalizer ... I had a response that was essentially flat from 14 Hz to 150 Hz with “only” 2 Sunfire True Signature and one “Junior”… I got serious output under 20 Hz, with one of the subs in corner loading … Takes a while to find proper level, frequency and phase, a long while but it DOES work and well and surprisingly well… Makes me wonder what that could have been with more serious subs, either DIY or commercial. I hasten to say that DIY is one area where the commercial offerings are surpassed routinely…
I wanted to add to this long post that when I heard Steve’s system I find it odd to pair the X-2 with a pair of subs... Well the integration is there for those who can hear and while Steve’s has adopted the symmetrical (left and Right Subs) I have no doubt that his system wouldn’t have been that kind of good with out the subs. They allowed Steve’s to place the X-2 for best staging/imaging and to have the bass needed for a world class system… I was convinced even before then but find more interesting to go toward that.
AS you can see I am a convert... Better bass possible in a system? At least 3 subs in dissymmetrical fashion, a la Geddes… A person called Melhau has a nice write-up on his experiences with three subs, much more precise than this post …HERE
Thanks Frantz.
Unfortunately many manufacturers still regard subs as an accessory. I can't remember where but I saw an article where 5-7 subs were being used. What we are talking about in subs is inertia not speed. After all the the woofer only has to vibrate less than 100 times per second. The other drivers go all the way to 20KHZ and beyond. IMO if you don't have subs you should at least have a filter blocking those frequencies form reaching your speaker. In fact the filter should probably be applied at the source.
Unfortunately many manufacturers still regard subs as an accessory. I can't remember where but I saw an article where 5-7 subs were being used. What we are talking about in subs is inertia not speed. After all the the woofer only has to vibrate less than 100 times per second. The other drivers go all the way to 20KHZ and beyond. IMO if you don't have subs you should at least have a filter blocking those frequencies form reaching your speaker. In fact the filter should probably be applied at the source.
Greg
The thread is abiut the CLX unfortunately. I could debate the issue with you if others don't mind... THe inertia concept is correct to a certain extent but truly there are a lot of very good subs out there. The integration problem doesn't stem so much from the transducers themselves but from poor set-up. Having a sub match with mains is never simple, never a simple, set once and ofrget undertaking. The requirements are numerous, patience and some understading of the fundamentals is almost mandatory. it requires some serious re-thinking. Cutting the output of any of the speakers low or high is not always the best solution for example ...a , for most audiophile, a counter-intuitive notion.
To summarize and to leave much needed debate space to the beautiful speaker in the OP, It would benefit most if not all system to experiment with at least 2 subs... with variable crossover, phase and level controls. First position the speakers , the main where they image the best, leave them alone. No filter no nothing , simply place them in the room where the sound they project from say 200 Hz upwardis the best interm of balance and staging/imaging.. then gring up the subs carefully move them around a bit, measure as much as you can (do not equalize), meaasure some more leaving the main alone and doing their things... At the end , believe me you will be more than satisfied.. it won't happen overnight, I can tell you ..more like weeks ... then add a third sub ....
In some ways I can now see a system fullu fullrange with the CLX as mains.. I would have used three subs in dissymetric arrangement ... I would not have cared or a descent.. There are out there some very serious subs, somewhat snubbed by audiophile orhtodoxy that are much better than one would think. One of these are the Rythmik Audioline of subs... Serious, very serious, in this audiophile nonsensical type of pricing, downright inexpensive. ANother brand which somes to mind and whose products would rival anything I have heard from more established names in High End is our very own Mark Seaton's Submersive (and other named ) subs. I would not forget Paradigm which I used inmy experiences .. their top fo the line at half the price of the JL Audio is fully competitive with the Gotham ... and if one only wants to experiment , the fun, small, rather potent and very flexible Sunfire True subs is available to make you understand what you have been missing.. I see them floating around for $500-600 on ebay..
All in all people most people have noidea what cleaner and adequate bass brings to music reproduction... Really no idea ... Even things like Baroque Chamber music reproduction is enhanced with good bass, with better bass ... So for prospective owner of the CLX, its reduced bass output should not be a put-off .... Not at all ...
The thread is abiut the CLX unfortunately. I could debate the issue with you if others don't mind... THe inertia concept is correct to a certain extent but truly there are a lot of very good subs out there. The integration problem doesn't stem so much from the transducers themselves but from poor set-up. Having a sub match with mains is never simple, never a simple, set once and ofrget undertaking. The requirements are numerous, patience and some understading of the fundamentals is almost mandatory. it requires some serious re-thinking. Cutting the output of any of the speakers low or high is not always the best solution for example ...a , for most audiophile, a counter-intuitive notion.
To summarize and to leave much needed debate space to the beautiful speaker in the OP, It would benefit most if not all system to experiment with at least 2 subs... with variable crossover, phase and level controls. First position the speakers , the main where they image the best, leave them alone. No filter no nothing , simply place them in the room where the sound they project from say 200 Hz upwardis the best interm of balance and staging/imaging.. then gring up the subs carefully move them around a bit, measure as much as you can (do not equalize), meaasure some more leaving the main alone and doing their things... At the end , believe me you will be more than satisfied.. it won't happen overnight, I can tell you ..more like weeks ... then add a third sub ....
In some ways I can now see a system fullu fullrange with the CLX as mains.. I would have used three subs in dissymetric arrangement ... I would not have cared or a descent.. There are out there some very serious subs, somewhat snubbed by audiophile orhtodoxy that are much better than one would think. One of these are the Rythmik Audioline of subs... Serious, very serious, in this audiophile nonsensical type of pricing, downright inexpensive. ANother brand which somes to mind and whose products would rival anything I have heard from more established names in High End is our very own Mark Seaton's Submersive (and other named ) subs. I would not forget Paradigm which I used inmy experiences .. their top fo the line at half the price of the JL Audio is fully competitive with the Gotham ... and if one only wants to experiment , the fun, small, rather potent and very flexible Sunfire True subs is available to make you understand what you have been missing.. I see them floating around for $500-600 on ebay..
All in all people most people have noidea what cleaner and adequate bass brings to music reproduction... Really no idea ... Even things like Baroque Chamber music reproduction is enhanced with good bass, with better bass ... So for prospective owner of the CLX, its reduced bass output should not be a put-off .... Not at all ...
I started the thread so I think I am entitled to digress.There is only so much you can say about how a speaker looks. If you are sending bass notes to a speaker that is unable to handle them then that speaker is distorting!. Moreover it is sucking up resources necessary for other parts of the spectrum. One way or another you are going to have to deal with the bass.
My audition of the Sanders hybrid at RMAF gives you some idea about good bass. There are other examples. The notion that the bass driver does not call. attention to itself at all.
The Gothams might be overkill with the CLX. Maybe a line source bass tower might be better.
My audition of the Sanders hybrid at RMAF gives you some idea about good bass. There are other examples. The notion that the bass driver does not call. attention to itself at all.
The Gothams might be overkill with the CLX. Maybe a line source bass tower might be better.
a pair of f112s would be great I think.
There's something that spooks me about placing a front firing sub behind a stat where a portion of the pressure wave will hit the mylar and make it move in ways its not supposed to. The mere thought creeps me out. Probably just irrational paranoia.
Back on topic, I guess wood finishes cost less than high gloss paint these days. In any case it's great that ML passed on the savings to the customer.
Greg
It is a little more complicated than just sending bass and the speaker distorting... it is not necessarily so.. the mechanical aspect of the speaker does take over in some instances then you simply have a circuit presenting a very high impedance to the amps at those low frequencies ... I don't know about the particulars of the CLX, hardly. I did own a CLS and liked it., I remember that you would send bass to it and it would not even care...simply will not show any sign of panel movement at anything around 40 Hz..30 Hz nore the amp or the speaker (CLS) would seem to do anything.. The CLS gave way to the ESL-63 which I thought it was going to displace...ultimately finding the CLS sound thin for too many musical pieces ...
I am stressing on subS , not sub, SubS with an "s" plural. The Gotham are great subs and would benefit any speakers. I do however believe they can be surpassed by some DIY or combination of less expensive subwoofers. Paradigm comes to mind but also the Seaton subs which are far from slouces .. very, very potent, although not good looking as the Gotham(all right they are ugly) but two Submersives would likely surpass one Gotham in ANY category worth to mention at 1/3 the price.. You loose the ultra-flexibity of the JL Audio onboard processor but this can be more than made up by something as inexpensive as the $300 Behringer DXC 2496 which while not easy to use at first is flexible beyond the wildest dream of any audiophile and utterly transparent in the bass, where it would be operating anyway... SO the choice of subs is vast. I don't honestly see what a line array subs would bring to the equation to be honest... more drivers maybe but not much else, directivity is not a concern at those frequencies , the speakers are all omni tin this region so...
So to tease everyone back to the CLX.. if one is thinking out of the box, one can assemble a word class reproduction system centered around the CLX... I would say that three subs plus the CLX is likely to surpass several megabucks speakers out there .. Three Padigm subs plus the CLX ? mhhhh?? Three Submersives ... and see if you can summon the help of the designer (Mark Seaton) s to integrate them with your CLX? Believe me people once we start to think the out-of-the box, out of the audiophile orthodoxy, we are opening ourselves to serious enjoyment of , yes, our music collection ...
It is a little more complicated than just sending bass and the speaker distorting... it is not necessarily so.. the mechanical aspect of the speaker does take over in some instances then you simply have a circuit presenting a very high impedance to the amps at those low frequencies ... I don't know about the particulars of the CLX, hardly. I did own a CLS and liked it., I remember that you would send bass to it and it would not even care...simply will not show any sign of panel movement at anything around 40 Hz..30 Hz nore the amp or the speaker (CLS) would seem to do anything.. The CLS gave way to the ESL-63 which I thought it was going to displace...ultimately finding the CLS sound thin for too many musical pieces ...
I am stressing on subS , not sub, SubS with an "s" plural. The Gotham are great subs and would benefit any speakers. I do however believe they can be surpassed by some DIY or combination of less expensive subwoofers. Paradigm comes to mind but also the Seaton subs which are far from slouces .. very, very potent, although not good looking as the Gotham(all right they are ugly) but two Submersives would likely surpass one Gotham in ANY category worth to mention at 1/3 the price.. You loose the ultra-flexibity of the JL Audio onboard processor but this can be more than made up by something as inexpensive as the $300 Behringer DXC 2496 which while not easy to use at first is flexible beyond the wildest dream of any audiophile and utterly transparent in the bass, where it would be operating anyway... SO the choice of subs is vast. I don't honestly see what a line array subs would bring to the equation to be honest... more drivers maybe but not much else, directivity is not a concern at those frequencies , the speakers are all omni tin this region so...
So to tease everyone back to the CLX.. if one is thinking out of the box, one can assemble a word class reproduction system centered around the CLX... I would say that three subs plus the CLX is likely to surpass several megabucks speakers out there .. Three Padigm subs plus the CLX ? mhhhh?? Three Submersives ... and see if you can summon the help of the designer (Mark Seaton) s to integrate them with your CLX? Believe me people once we start to think the out-of-the box, out of the audiophile orthodoxy, we are opening ourselves to serious enjoyment of , yes, our music collection ...
Sorry. That is the Martin Logan Statement e2 @$120k that was discontinued in 2001 according to the ML Website. I heard it at Overture Audio. It is decidedly lifelike.
Here you go, Frantz: http://www.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?spkrfull&1290825550&/Martin-Logan-+-Kinner-Mini-Sta
Kinergetics in this case.
Slowly but surely, I'm working on a Geddes 3 random location setup, just as you've described, to complement my Summits.
Frantz is that Freudian slip or is your needle stuck.
Kinnergetics SW800 Subwoofer System
this is somewhat technical. I admit I have not read it yet. Probably for home theatre too. if you just want to look at the pictures, see pages 9-11.
http://www.harman.com/EN-US/OurComp...p/Documents/Scientific Publications/13680.pdf
Last edited:
Similar threads
