ML Summit X vs Magnepan 3.6r

[Dafos]

About 10 years back I had the 1.6 driven by a VT 100/LS 16 and later the ref 2 which certainly nudged the performance several notches. However, I ended up selling the 1.6 cuz I couldn't quite tame a "brightness" regardless of any tweak I employed from switching to a higher value fuse, changing the steel jumpers to thicker cables, by passing the fuse and even covering my back wall with a comforter blanket! But I can't seem to forget the wide, expansive stage and I'm thinking that with upgraded electronics and a new treated, better damped room, I'd give the higher model 3.6 a shot, specially if I can nail one at a good discount.

[AudioNut]

Originally Posted by Dafos

Thanks for all the inputs. I'm actually thinking of these as an alternative (not to replace) my Magico Mini 2's. Julian, I noticed you've moved on to dynamic speakers, and I'm specially familiar and love the Guarneris. Why did you make the move away from these planar/stats? Just like you, I. Running JL Audio F 112's with my Magico.

I moved away from the Martin Logan planar speakers because I also owned Avalon Eidolons which, from my particular perspective, were as transparent and refined as were the Martin Logans, and actually better than the ML's at soundstaging, as well as being more dynamic. They also fit the decor of my room better than the Martin Logans.

Now please recall that my ML's were the original Summits, which, I understand, have been significantly improved upon by the Summit X's.

Years ago, the Avalon speakers, among dynamic speakers, were somewhat unique in their incredible transparency, refinement, soundstaging and imaging ability, although I understand that certain modern dynamic speaker designs - like the Magico - now share those capabilities. I have owned Avalon Eidolons since 1999, and at the time I bought them, they were "one of a kind" and are still eminently listenable speakers.

I bought the Guarneri's for a second system and they are exceptionally good sounding speakers.

I had previously sold the big Magnepans because they blocked the view of the lake which may be seen through the windows of my listening room, and my wife had convinced me that this was important to her!

Avalon Eidolons in the same setting . . .

[Mikado463]

Originally Posted by Dafos

ML is more than 3x the cost so what do you get for that additional cost, aside form the powered bass modules?

no 'asides' about it, the Logans can produce 'real bass' !

now add a couple of sub's to the Maggies and you have something, both speakers require competent amplification.........pick your flavor !

[Mikado463]

Originally Posted by AudioNut

I had previously sold the big Magnepans because they blocked the view of the lake which may be seen through the windows of my listening room,

any di-pole speaker that has glass behind it can never be a good thing ! I understand the Avalon attraction, one of the few 'box' speakers that most of us 'planar guys' can actually enjoy !

[AudioNut]

Originally Posted by Mikado463

any di-pole speaker that has glass behind it can never be a good thing ! I understand the Avalon attraction, one of the few 'box' speakers that most of us 'planar guys' can actually enjoy !

You are normally correct in your statement about di-pole planar speakers and glass - except my particular room was fully treated with tube traps and other acoustic treatment devices so as to minimize the effects of the glass. The ceiling was a special acoustic tile, tuned to the room and the floor was cork with a special glazed finish that was non-reflective, plus the floor in front of the speakers was covered by a large oriental rug with heavy padding underneath.

Furnishings consisted of fairly heavy upholstered furniture and the room was essentially "dead" to a slap test. Almost anechoic and non reflective with the treatments in place.

In the pictures, you can't see the large tube traps just outside the edge of the second set of windows, nor the traps that lined the side walls.

Actually the di-poles sounded exceptionally good in that room in spite of the glass!

Now, the room just upstairs and directly above the "good sounding room" sounded terrible, no matter what I did to treat it. . . . too much glass, I expect . . and the glass actually went up another level from the top level you can see here.



living room-126.jpg

[bart]

A really great view Julian! Wow!
And I do mean the house, the lake... AND the speakers

[trponhunter]

actually, if you can get the logans far enough away from the wall behind them, there's a lot of advantages to a line source as opposed to a monopole point source in the room in terms of eliminating the room from the euation. Line sources greatly reduce floor and ceiling reflections, and di poles minimize the side wall reflection.

[llcancado]

Summit X owners, I am considering this speaker to pair with a Simaudio 650D/C2300/MC402 stereo system. How would they match with these electronics? My other contenders are Aerial 7T, B&W802D and Wilson Sofia III. Would appreciate any comments on how these speakers may compare with the above mentioned front end equipment.

[peacefulcargo]

I have used Mac solid state and valve and you will not have any problems with the Summit X, in fact your amps will be better than great. I have also owned the Wilson Sophia for a time, my view is they need a soft dome tweeter to be a great speaker.

[hifinutt]

Originally Posted by llcancado

Summit X owners, I am considering this speaker to pair with a Simaudio 650D/C2300/MC402 stereo system. How would they match with these electronics? My other contenders are Aerial 7T, B&W802D and Wilson Sofia III. Would appreciate any comments on how these speakers may compare with the above mentioned front end equipment.

well the summit are a lot smaller in footprint and have great waf than the b&w . they are easier to move and have a magnificent scale to die for