Why do Martin Logans sound lean/ thin (transparent) compared to other stats?

[Phelonious Ponk]

Rear reflections and shiny pants aside, it's a bit difficult to ignore that the blind listening tests confirmed what was found in measurements, on all sides of the speakers, in an anechoic chamber. They measured poorly; they were rated poorly in listening tests. But presumably, this is a hobby about listening to music. If you love the sound of your speakers, it really shouldn't matter if they are accurate, and it shouldn't matter at all if I like them. Turn off the computer. Listen to your MLs and enjoy.

Tim

 

[Argonaut]

Rear reflections and shiny pants aside, it's a bit difficult to ignore that the blind listening tests confirmed what was found in measurements, on all sides of the speakers, in an anechoic chamber. They measured poorly;

Tim

Measure Poorly, Really !?!?

Not according to Noel Keywood, a very well regarded industry 'measurist'

MEASURED PERFORMANCE
The vertical high frequency panel of the CLX is a little directional, but less so than the budget Martin Logan models; moving the measuring microphone laterally in front of the CLX altered the basic high to low energy balance, rather than upsetting frequency response. This means midrange and treble remains as smooth and extended as our stepped sine wave analysis shows, moving up or down in prominence, as listening position changes, relative to bass and midrange frequencies below 1kHz. So whilst the CLX is listening position critical, it isn’t too demanding in this respect. It also drove our 28ft square measuring room well, much like the Kingsound Prince II tested in our April 09 issue, giving a consistent sound over a wide frontal area.

Frequency response of the CLX is flat from 700Hz all the way up to 20kHz, so it will sound even in its midband and upper midband/treble delivery. Below 700Hz output is on average 3dB up, right down to 55Hz no less. With a monopole this would give a fulsome balance, but with a dipole it gives a natural balance, likely because the solid radiation angle and associated acoustic power is less. A low frequency peak at 60Hz (third octave analysis, not shown here) suggests there will be no lack of punchy bass. This looks like a carefully tailored euphonic balance that will be easy on the ear.

Electrostatics are usually insensitive but the CLX isn't much different from conventional loudspeakers in this area, producing 84dB sound pressure level from one nominal Watt of input (2.84V). This is far better than the 11dB less sensitive (73dB) Kingsound Prince IIs for example. The CLX is a similar amplifier load however, comprising a huge low frequency peak, our analysis shows, reaching a maximum of 125 Ohms at 16Hz, falling to 11 Ohms DCR at 0Hz and 1.5 Ohms at 20kHz. Above 100Hz impedance falls below 15 Ohms and the overall figure measured a normal 5.5 Ohms. The CLX is reactive at low frequencies only, which should not be a problem to amplifiers. Above 300Hz it is largely resistive, making it an easy amplifier load, except for the 1.5 Ohm minimum at 20kHz which could conceivably be too demanding for some solid-state amplifiers. Again, valve amplifiers cope best.

The loudspeaker’s spectral decay over 200mS showed there is remarkably little colouration, a strength of the electrostatic, and decay is fast and even across the frequency spectrum, with a small amount of overhang at 60Hz as expected. Distortion levels were a little above conventional loudspeakers and varied across the bass panel area below 100Hz, falling from 3% at 40Hz down to 1% or so at 100Hz, then around 0.3% up to 1kHz, falling to 0.1% to 6kHz.

The CLX delivers a smooth yet extended sound into the room, free from serious frequency response anomalies. The balance emphasises lows a little, for warmth and body, and low bass output is strong and deep. Its basic accuracy and smoothness of output is excellent for such a big panel, it drives the room evenly and colouration is extremely low, so this is a quality design. NK

 

[Gregadd]

We ignore measurements all the time. That's the reason speaker manufacturers don't publish overall distotrtion figures for speakers. My own experience with ML CLs indicate this. . I took home just about every amp m. dealer had, The rest I aufditoned at the store. Although thery all sounded different, there was absolutely No problem. To properly drive the ML you need high power and high current.
For example with the Krell monoblocks the expereice left me cold. But the Rowland Research 5 was a wonderful match. The speaker is very transparent. That means you are listening to the components up the chaon and not the speaker itself. Some speakers are more finicky than others. I recall when the CLS debuted . The reviws about ML being a diffcult load prompted just abour every high end amplifier maker to fear the CLS might cause his amp to oscillate . It proved to be much adieu about nothing. I confimred t

 

[Argonaut]

We ignore measurements all the time. That's the reason speaker manufacturers don't publish overall distotrtion figures for speakers. My own experience aith ML CLs indicate the sphis mysle . I took home just about every amp m. dealer had, The rest I aufditoned at the store. Although thery all sounded different, there was absolutely No problem. To properly drive the ML you need high power and high current.
For example with the Krell monoblocks the expereice left me cold. But the Rowland Research 5 was a wonderful match. The speaker is very transparent. That means you are listening to the components up the chaon and not the speaker itself. Some speakers are more finicky than others. I recall when the CLS debuted . The reviws about ML being a diffcult load prompted just abour every high end amplifier maker to fear the CLS might cause his amp to oscillate . It proved to be much adieu about nothing. I confimred t

The exact point I tend to reiterate myself Greg, CLX's are ruthless in revealing any sins of commission upstream of them and quite often the room accoustics in which they find themselves demo'd in show conditions.

 

[sbo6]

I thought the line stating, "A low frequency peak at 60Hz (third octave analysis, not shown here) suggests there will be no lack of punchy bass. This looks like a carefully tailored euphonic balance that will be easy on the ear." as if the peak is a good thing. That's an absolutely horrible place to have a peak, right smack in the middle of a bass guitar and left hand piano...

 

[Argonaut]

You might consider so, and yet there is no mention of any audible anomaly mentioned within any of the 'professional' subjective reviews, https://www.martinlogan.com/learn/reviews.php?model=clx

Together with with NK commenting upon his own findings thus,

" The CLX delivers a smooth yet extended sound into the room, free from serious frequency response anomalies "

I can but comment upon my own system in that I concur with the above statement, both audibly and within 'In' room response measurement sweeps.

 

[sbo6]

You might consider so, and yet there is no mention of any audible anomaly mentioned within any of the 'professional' subjective reviews, https://www.martinlogan.com/learn/reviews.php?model=clx

Together with with NK commenting upon his own findings thus,

" The CLX delivers a smooth yet extended sound into the room, free from serious frequency response anomalies "

I can but comment upon my own system in that I concur with the above statement, both audibly and within 'In' room response measurement sweeps.

Then I guess he's contradicting his own review..

 

[Argonaut]

Then I guess he's contradicting his own review..

Curiously! to a degree, however the balance of comment would seem to be in favour of '60Hz No Problemo' Would that run contradictory to your own findings ?

 

[kach22i]

I entirely concur with this point. For my part I could never trust the validity of anyone wearing Shiny Pants!

That joke is still funny six months later.

 

[sbo6]

Curiously! to a degree, however the balance of comment would seem to be in favour of '60Hz No Problemo' Would that run contradictory to your own findings ?

I only heard the CLX once and it was an absolutely horrible demo, so I can't confirm nor deny any issue. On a slightly different topic, I'd be curious to compare the CLX bass vs Neolith. While the Neolith is assuredly more robust with 2 large drivers, my $ would be on the 1/4 price CLX... Go figure that marketing conundrum..

 

[Gregadd]

While a 60 hz peak may be undesirable ,how dows it translate to weak and thin? There is no way for meto prove it in the written word. My ML CLS not only had a visceral impapct but I could feel it on the surface of my skin and my couch.

 

[sbo6]

You don't necessarily need 60Hz for visceral impact. Add a sub <=40HZ and you'll feel visceral impact.

 

[Gregadd]

I used a pair of subs at 100hz/

I just want to know what contribution a 60 hz bump could make a speaker sounding thin?

 

[Ron Resnick]

I'd be curious to compare the CLX bass vs Neolith. While the Neolith is assuredly more robust with 2 large drivers, my $ would be on the 1/4 price CLX... Go figure that marketing conundrum..

I have had three different MartinLogan speakers over the last 28 years, and I have heard the Neolith at a show, so I would like to try to reconcile some of the views on this thread because I think some of the posts in this thread talk past each other without understanding each other (and, in my opinion, without understanding the real issue).

1) I believe there are five primary criticisms of MartinLogan speakers A) - E) and one commonly proposed solution F):

A) The electrostatic panel sounds a little thin or lean and does not present singers and instruments with the corporeal incarnation and "body" of ribbons and, especially, of conventional dynamic drivers.

B) The CLX has little to no bass.

C) The CLX is not very dynamic.

D) In the hybrid models there is an audible discontinuity between the electrostatic panel and the woofer.

E) The hybrid models do not reproduce low frequencies with the same resolution, detail and texture with which the electrostatic panel reproduces middle and high frequencies, or with the same resolution, detail and texture with which ribbon and magnetic planar panels reproduce low frequencies.

F) Adding a subwoofer to the CLX solves the issues of A) thinness/leanness/lack of "body," B) lack of bass and C) lack of dynamics.

2) I personally think that A) the electrostatic panel is a little thin and lean and lacking "body," B) the CLX lacks bass (of course it lacks bass -- the -3dB spec is 55 hz) and C) the CLX is not very dynamic all are accurate.

3) For whatever reason I appear to be not sensitive to the discontinuity between the ML electrostatic panel and the woofer (I used the Monolith III for many years and I did not have a big problem with the discontinuity). D) is not an issue for me.

4) I think E) is accurate. The woofer in the ML hybrids cannot reproduce low frequencies with the resolution, texture and detail of a Magnepan panel or an Analysis Audio panel or a full-range ribbon. If that is your sonic priority you will have to go with a planar speaker which uses a large panel to reproduce 200 to 400 Hz (but, of course, you will be giving up cone excursion impact below 100 Hz).

5) I think people talk past each other on this subject because they try to solve the thinness/leanness/lack of body issue with a subwoofer. But I think the thinness/leanness/lack of body is due to the absence of a large magnetic planar driver, or a decent-sized conventional driver, covering 200 to 400 Hz. I do not believe that any subwoofer to which the signal is crossed over at 100 Hz or 80 Hz or 60 Hz is going to address the lack of richness and body in the upper base/lower midrange region of the ML electrostatic panel.

6) Here is my theory to explain why even a four tower SOTA system such as the mighty Genesis 1.1 may have a weakness in the upper bass/lower midrange region: No matter how herculean the base towers are, if the crossover to a planar system occurs no higher than at about 100 Hz, then there is a richness and weight and body and cone excursion impact deficit in the critical 200 Hz to 400 Hz range. Even the amazing big Genesis woofer towers may roll off too quickly to provide impact at 400 hz, and no midrange ribbon (let alone an electrostatic panel) is going to provide the body and richness to satisfy us in the region of 200 to 400 Hz of the dual 9" drivers of the Rockport Arrakis or the 13" woofer of a Big Wilson or the four 11" woofers of the Evolution Acoustics MM7, etc.

Thus I believe the discussion about subwoofers to solve the thinness/leanness/lack of body of the CLX is inapposite and misplaced.

This theory is why I think the MartinLogan Neolith may be a brilliant design if its 12" driver -- specifically covering 60 - 400 hz (higher than any ML speaker before it) -- provides in an ESL hybrid almost exactly the warmth and weight and body and richness and cone excursion impact we get in that frequency range from the best dynamic driver speakers.

Yes, this means I am willing to sacrifice E) to get cone excursion impact.

 

[Argonaut]

Ron, Such a well crafted 'point of view' deserves a Fuller response than I have time to pen right now, In the meantime I have taken the liberty of posting a link to a CLX subject search over at the ML owners forum should any members be interested enough in reading a differing perspective.

http://www.martinloganowners.com/forum/search.php?searchid=958105&pp=

Even Justin at one time included the CLX's in his personal Top5 list

 

[microstrip]

Ron,

Just to remember that the full range SoundLab A1 PX covers between 200 Hz and 400Hz with an electrostatic panel and does not sound thin or lean. Even properly amplified Quad ESL63's did not sound lean or thin, although they have limitations in dynamics.

IMHO the "lack of body" referred characteristic is mostly due to improper electronics, cables and room - but I have heard great dynamic speakers suffering from the same problem.

My opinions apply to what I call reasonable loudness of acoustic music - not trying to reproduce stadium concert levels!

 

[MtnHam]

Ron,

Just to remember that the full range SoundLab A1 PX covers between 200 Hz and 400Hz with an electrostatic panel and does not sound thin or lean. Even properly amplified Quad ESL63's did not sound lean or thin, although they have limitations in dynamics.

IMHO the "lack of body" referred characteristic is mostly due to improper electronics, cables and room - but I have heard great dynamic speakers suffering from the same problem.

My opinions apply to what I call reasonable loudness of acoustic music - not trying to reproduce stadium concert levels!

All the larger Sound Lab PX panels cover the full range (26-20,000Hz) with a singe driver and do not sound thin or lean when properly set up with an appropriate amp.

 

[awsmone]

I have had three different MartinLogan speakers over the last 28 years, and I have heard the Neolith at a show, so I would like to try to reconcile some of the views on this thread because I think some of the posts in this thread talk past each other without understanding each other (and, in my opinion, without understanding the real issue).

1) I believe there are five primary criticisms of MartinLogan speakers A) - E) and one commonly proposed solution F):

A) The electrostatic panel sounds a little thin or lean and does not present singers and instruments with the corporeal incarnation and "body" of ribbons and, especially, of conventional dynamic drivers.

B) The CLX has little to no bass.

C) The CLX is not very dynamic.

D) In the hybrid models there is an audible discontinuity between the electrostatic panel and the woofer.

E) The hybrid models do not reproduce low frequencies with the same resolution, detail and texture with which the electrostatic panel reproduces middle and high frequencies, or with the same resolution, detail and texture with which ribbon and magnetic planar panels reproduce low frequencies.

F) Adding a subwoofer to the CLX solves the issues of A) thinness/leanness/lack of "body," B) lack of bass and C) lack of dynamics.

2) I personally think that A) the electrostatic panel is a little thin and lean and lacking "body," B) the CLX lacks bass (of course it lacks bass -- the -3dB spec is 55 hz) and C) the CLX is not very dynamic all are accurate.

3) For whatever reason I appear to be not sensitive to the discontinuity between the ML electrostatic panel and the woofer (I used the Monolith III for many years and I did not have a big problem with the discontinuity). D) is not an issue for me.

4) I think E) is accurate. The woofer in the ML hybrids cannot reproduce low frequencies with the resolution, texture and detail of a Magnepan panel or an Analysis Audio panel or a full-range ribbon. If that is your sonic priority you will have to go with a planar speaker which uses a large panel to reproduce 200 to 400 Hz (but, of course, you will be giving up cone excursion impact below 100 Hz).

5) I think people talk past each other on this subject because they try to solve the thinness/leanness/lack of body issue with a subwoofer. But I think the thinness/leanness/lack of body is due to the absence of a large magnetic planar driver, or a decent-sized conventional driver, covering 200 to 400 Hz. I do not believe that any subwoofer to which the signal is crossed over at 100 Hz or 80 Hz or 60 Hz is going to address the lack of richness and body in the upper base/lower midrange region of the ML electrostatic panel.

6) Here is my theory to explain why even a four tower SOTA system such as the mighty Genesis 1.1 may have a weakness in the upper bass/lower midrange region: No matter how herculean the base towers are, if the crossover to a planar system occurs no higher than at about 100 Hz, then there is a richness and weight and body and cone excursion impact deficit in the critical 200 Hz to 400 Hz range. Even the amazing big Genesis woofer towers may roll off too quickly to provide impact at 400 hz, and no midrange ribbon (let alone an electrostatic panel) is going to provide the body and richness to satisfy us in the region of 200 to 400 Hz of the dual 9" drivers of the Rockport Arrakis or the 13" woofer of a Big Wilson or the four 11" woofers of the Evolution Acoustics MM7, etc.

Thus I believe the discussion about subwoofers to solve the thinness/leanness/lack of body of the CLX is inapposite and misplaced.

This theory is why I think the MartinLogan Neolith may be a brilliant design if its 12" driver -- specifically covering 60 - 400 hz (higher than any ML speaker before it) -- provides in an ESL hybrid almost exactly the warmth and weight and body and richness and cone excursion impact we get in that frequency range from the best dynamic driver speakers.

Yes, this means I am willing to sacrifice E) to get cone excursion impact.

Thanks Ron

Great post

As someone who has done battle with first Prodigies and now CLX for last 9 years

I dont dispute most of your claims

However I have learnt that to maximise the CLXs you must not use dynamic speaker techniques to get the most out of them

I do believe that CLXs are mildly deficient in the 100 to 250 hz region, my own frequency measurements show this

However the following need to be taken into account when evaluating CLXs

Firstly as Dipoles placement in the room is critical, as they radiate as much backwards as forwards, if this is close to a front wall, although this will boost bass the Haas effect will come into play, I suggest moving away from front walls as much as possible

Secondly, the speaker cable will have a big effect on sound, as there is a large transformer in the CLX as a step up, speaker cable needs to be of very low inductance to avoid ringing which will be heard as an overly bright sound, simple experiment with cat 5 cable as speaker cable will show the big difference low inductance cable will make, many high end cables are high inductance and unsuitable with CLXs

Thirdly, many SS amps struggle with the bass panels, as the impedance goes up, their output goes down, SS amps with very low output impedance can work well, I found Class D amps such as Belcanto 1000ref worked well, many others i tried did not YMMV....

I found Tube amplifiers love the bass panels for the very reason, SS amps don't

I found a particular synergy with EL 34, in Class A, triode mode, my theory is the big voltage swings, and the soft clipping of these valves, these give the bass panels a profound punchy sound,

Although I have used three subwoofers with the CLX, which balances out the mentioned 60hz resonance peak and dialled in the mid bass warmth lacking in say string bass and cello....I recently made a much better discovery....

Use panel bass, as the added dipoles drops the lowest notes to around 30hz with a 6db boost

I have used both the Quad 57 bass panels and Magnapan DWM, which are specifically designed for this purpose with great effect using a crossover

If you add a parametric equaliser, then you can dial out the peaks also

Finally, as stated in the original review in HiFi world, place the panels firing straight down the room, and as close to the side walls as practicable

I think with all these mods....most of which are free or inexpensive, non irritating and un thin sound can be achieved

I must disagree with you about imagery of CLX with EL34 valves as the voices and instruments can seem eerily present

Also Ron 100-400 is not the power spectrum and does not give you slam, this come a lot lower

Perceived balance of a speaker comes from the way we perceive the different energies at different frequencies a speaker gives into a room

CLXs have a very large mid treble panel, hence a lot of energy in this band, unless coupled with a lot of bass energy the perceived balance will seem thin, also panels lose energy in a linear rather than inverse square relationship, so this mid treble balance will be projected further into the room

So finally recommendations are

1. Place away from front wall
2. Close to side wall, facing straight down the rpom, only the inner third of the mid treble panel should be seen straight on (torch method)
3. Use Tubes (EL34, 211, 845) or SS with big damping factor e.g. 1:1000
4. Low inductance cabling ( try cat 5 as an experiment)
5. Add multiple subwoofers or try Dipole bass e.g. Magnapan DWM....at least 2

### if u take off the panel over the power supply after leaving clx disconnected from the mains overnight to the outer edge is crossover board on top are two
red switches the more posterior boost bass 1 db and the second a further 2 db. This is not mentioned in the manual. These change the balance and warmth .

Hope that helps

regards

Andrew

 

[bonzo75]

Ron, Such a well crafted 'point of view' deserves a Fuller response than I have time to pen right now, In the meantime I have taken the liberty of posting a link to a CLX subject search over at the ML owners forum should any members be interested enough in reading a differing perspective.

http://www.martinloganowners.com/forum/search.php?searchid=958105&pp=

Even Justin at one time included the CLX's in his personal Top5 list

Link doesn't work

 

[bonzo75]

Thanks Ron

Great post

As someone who has done battle with first Prodigies and now CLX for last 9 years

I dont dispute most of your claims

However I have learnt that to maximise the CLXs you must not use dynamic speaker techniques to get the most out of them

I do believe that CLXs are mildly deficient in the 100 to 250 hz region, my own frequency measurements show this

However the following need to be taken into account when evaluating CLXs

Firstly as Dipoles placement in the room is critical, as they radiate as much backwards as forwards, if this is close to a front wall, although this will boost bass the Haas effect will come into play, I suggest moving away from front walls as much as possible

Secondly, the speaker cable will have a big effect on sound, as there is a large transformer in the CLX as a step up, speaker cable needs to be of very low inductance to avoid ringing which will be heard as an overly bright sound, simple experiment with cat 5 cable as speaker cable will show the big difference low inductance cable will make, many high end cables are high inductance and unsuitable with CLXs

Thirdly, many SS amps struggle with the bass panels, as the impedance goes up, their output goes down, SS amps with very low output impedance can work well, I found Class D amps such as Belcanto 1000ref worked well, many others i tried did not YMMV....

I found Tube amplifiers love the bass panels for the very reason, SS amps don't

I found a particular synergy with EL 34, in Class A, triode mode, my theory is the big voltage swings, and the soft clipping of these valves, these give the bass panels a profound punchy sound,

Although I have used three subwoofers with the CLX, which balances out the mentioned 60hz resonance peak and dialled in the mid bass warmth lacking in say string bass and cello....I recently made a much better discovery....

Use panel bass, as the added dipoles drops the lowest notes to around 30hz with a 6db boost

I have used both the Quad 57 bass panels and Magnapan DWM, which are specifically designed for this purpose with great effect using a crossover

If you add a parametric equaliser, then you can dial out the peaks also

Finally, as stated in the original review in HiFi world, place the panels firing straight down the room, and as close to the side walls as practicable

I think with all these mods....most of which are free or inexpensive, non irritating and un thin sound can be achieved

I must disagree with you about imagery of CLX with EL34 valves as the voices and instruments can seem eerily present

Also Ron 100-400 is not the power spectrum and does not give you slam, this come a lot lower

Perceived balance of a speaker comes from the way we perceive the different energies at different frequencies a speaker gives into a room

CLXs have a very large mid treble panel, hence a lot of energy in this band, unless coupled with a lot of bass energy the perceived balance will seem thin, also panels lose energy in a linear rather than inverse square relationship, so this mid treble balance will be projected further into the room

So finally recommendations are

1. Place away from front wall
2. Close to side wall, facing straight down the rpom, only the inner third of the mid treble panel should be seen straight on (torch method)
3. Use Tubes (EL34, 211, 845) or SS with big damping factor e.g. 1:1000
4. Low inductance cabling ( try cat 5 as an experiment)
5. Add multiple subwoofers or try Dipole bass e.g. Magnapan DWM....at least 2

Hope that helps

regards

Andrew

Great post.