1.7 will not provide anymore kick as you say over CLS 2. Maybe consider a subwoofer or bass system. Or another type of loudspeaker like dynamic or horn loaded.
23 responses Add your response
Keep the Logans -- you already love them for all the right reasons; and Maggies can never replicate the accuracy of an electrostat. Get a single ML Depth subwoofer and stick it right in the middle of the panels (see my system) and you'll have the best of all worlds.
Do not get two Depths! The panels radiate front and back, at 180 degrees out of phase; so a single, omnidirectional sub in the center, does a much better job phase-matching to the panels, than two subs ever can (i.e., the sub disappears.) If your room happens to be larger than say 18 x 25, you'll probably need the (larger) Descent subwoofer in order to listen to rock at a more realistic level ;--) You should also consider (again, if you have a larger room) replacing the panels with the new version as I just did, especially if yours are over 20 yrs old (like mine.) The new ones have a more robust diaphragm and a slightly higher power handling capacity. However, if your room is 'normal' size, replacing the panels is optional if the old ones are working OK. And ML now says they plan to always have replacements available in the future (although they were originally $800/pr, now $1500!)
The Depth vs. the Descent? Having smaller, lighter woofers, the Depth has very fast response, and excels at producing bass transients which is as you say, what you want for great rock (and I agree.) However, if you need more bass output to fill a larger room, DO NOT use two Depths! Go to a single Descent instead, because the phase-matching benefits of a single sub still outweigh the (slightly) better transients you'll get with the Depth.
You can get a used Depth on AgoN for under $1K. I've also been told (by someone who knows;--) that the original Depth and Descent models have better performance, and almost no reliability issues, compared to the "i" models.
Yeah, hang on to those CLS's!
I'll say it once more: ONE sub, properly placed between them (and set to 90 deg. phase angle, 80Hz or lower xovr.) provides the MOST seamless performance with panel speakers. Maggies or ML; large room or small. If you haven't tried it, you're in store for a very pleasant surprise ;--)
Electrodynamic vs. electrostatic sonics is a matter of personal preference -- I've owned both.
Theaudiotweak,Who needs 2 subs I have a bass horn that's 800lbs and near the size of a shed. And yes [Rrog]I've heard 1.7 and of maggies I have owned 2.7-3.6 as well as ML CLS 2Z and descents. A good friend runs 4 CLS 2Z inc my old pair and 4 Descent in his system hes not lacking in dynamics or kick as poster mentions.He mostly listens to music in 2 channel with subs. I do enjoy when others disagree they go right for attacks on ones honestly, hearing or ability to judge proper set up.
With a test tone selected, played at the same frequency as the chosen crossover point of the subs, and while using a calibrated mic and RTA display you can easily set the phase of two subs to gain the best in room response. Adjusting the phase adjusts for the null of the response curves of the sub and the mains. To achieve the most accurate response one needs a variable phase control not just a two way or three way phase switch. Tom
Owner was running MF Kilowatt amps on 1.7S its a fine loudspeaker but its dynamic capabilities due to panel area are not greater than CLS2. And this is what the poster is referring to. Toss in Dipole effect and OB size. Bass- Midbass is going to suffer its just part of the design compromise this size panel with this amount of surface area this amount of power handling and excursion, toss in OB with Dipole design and that's just the way it is mate, read up on Open baffle, dipole effect, loudspeaker design and you will agree. This doesn't mean 1.7 isn't a good loudspeaker or that the bass isn't usable its just not perfect as are all things. OBs in general can not pressurize its just the nature of the OB dipole design. Bass frequency or midbass are limited by size of baffle. The rear wave will cancel the front the distance the wave travels is the frequency cut off. All OB suffer from this doesnt mean they are not good loudspeaker. The ML multi CLS system is owned by member Yada he also runs dual ML center C. And one of our giant KCS bass systems with 31.5 in woofer. His homes giant.
No need to read up on designs. I use my ears. If we are comparing Magnepan 1.7's to Yada's system we are not comparing apples to apples, are we. I admit Martin Logan CLS's are interesting speakers to say the least. I thoroughly enjoyed the CLS's during the time I owned them. However, their sound has very little to do with the sound of music. It is more of a hifi extravaganza, not to mention the fact that they do not have any usable bass in most systems and in most rooms. The dynamics the CLS has is in a very narrow window of the upper midrange. The Magnepan 1.7 is not the best speaker in the world, but it out classes the CLS by a mile in terms of sheer musical enjoyment. Sales of these two speakers tells the story. There are very few speakers considered to be a best buy and Magnepan is one of them. The merits of the CLS are still as controversial as they were on day one. What the CLS does have is looks. I have thought many times about taking another stab at the CLS's, but I decided not. With all of their system matching problems, clogged diaphrams and the rising cost of replacement parts the CLS is a very risky purchase.
CLS2Z is not controversial where you pull that out. And to be honest I wouldn't want any maggies or logans anymore moved on not my cup of tea. I answered posters questions Rrog you seem to just insist on being right without excepting others have different experience levels and personal tastes. So you owned a early version of CLS and didn't enjoy as much as your 1.7 I get it. Doesn't invalidate any other contribution to this thread. So with your logic if its popular its better, if it sells in greater nums its better? So your a bud light, wonder bread, MC donalds eater who feels it just doesn't get any better, these are top selling brands so must be the best...
Johnk, Are we cross? The OP is asking for opinions of Martin Logan CLS vs Magnepan 1.7's. I gave my opinion and there is no doubt in my mind Magnepan 1.7's are better suited to the type of music the OP listens to. I do not own Magnepan speakers as you mentioned. However, I have heard the 1.7's on several occasions and I believe they are better suited, in every way, to the type of music the OP listens to. So, Yada's system blows your dress up. Somehow I don't see how this helps the OP in making a decission. What's wrong with Bud Light and Wonder Bread?
Well, I just think this conversation has no basis in reality. Planar magnetic vs. electrostatic is simply apples to oranges -- and so are their native sonics! Like I already advised the OP, "Keep the Logans -- you already love them for all the right reasons; and Maggies can never replicate the accuracy of an electrostat."
There are a few 'wherefores' and 'notwithstandings' in connection with both of these speakers, however, and if they were not being observed by those above who recounted their personal experiences, then I don't put much stock in those experiences -- sorry, but here, for instance, is a typical 'whereas':
If you aren't running an electrostat (ANY electrostat) with a decent, conventional tube amp (conventional, meaning with output transformers!) then I don't care what you think about their sound because you've never really HEARD them!
If you aren't running your planar magnetic with the BEST (most refined) solid state amp you can afford (afford = minimum six figures these days), or a great refined used ss, like a Levinson 23.5, then I don't care what you think about THEIR sound because you've never really HEARD them either! And in the case of planar magnetics, you will absolutely NEVER enjoy them (regardless of amp) unless most of your listening is at, or just below, performance levels. This is because their membranes are heavy (compared to stats) and so their ability to move air (versus input power) falls sharply at a certain point; not gradually, like cone drivers and most stats.
Electrostats simply DON'T DO BASS!! So get over it. Deploy a single sub as I described, and you'll never even know it's there -- but it HAS to radiate omnidirectionally, like the Logan subs, or any downward-firing sub.
There is nothing like the accurate sound of panel/dipole bass (Maggies that is, not Logans ;--)) or dipole cones mounted (face-to-face) on an infinite baffle (basically the same thing as 'panel bass')
even Maggies can't be all-they-can-be basswise, if you're unwilling to go to the trouble of bi-amping them. Otherwise get a sub and deploy it as with stats.
Speaker cables are another MAJOR issue in the Maggie v. Logan discussion:
*Electrostats are a capacitive load.
You CAN NOT use CARDAS or other MULTI-STRANDED cable! They have something like 400 to 500 picofarads per foot. If you use them, you're in for a mush-fest! You need something under 20 ppf/foot; under 16 is better! Solid core is always a good bet. Purist Proteus Provectus, Speltz AntiCables, or the (now discontinued) Vitual Dynamics models. These all have ultra-low capacitance because they a.) have solid core conductors and b.) have separated + and -- runs. Speaker cables for electrostats should also have a certain amount of resistance (yes, resistance!) according to Roger Sanders, and he ought to know!
*Maggies are an inductive load.
Cables with low inductance are preferable. Flat cables (like NoDoze) are naturally low inductance. So are any cables with separated runs (again, like AntiCables or Purist Provectus or many of the Virtual Dynamics models). And keep them off carpeted floors. If you use cables with high inductance characteristics, prepare to be scratching your head and wondering why you spent all that money ;~))
Don't know the specs of your cables? CALL THE DAMN MANUFACTURER UP AND ASK THEM! It's your money; and if he/she can't/won't tell you, then demand your money back -- including return shipping! I'm serious, I actually threatened one manufacturer (whose products I actually like quite a lot) but I wasn't kidding, and I had an answer a day later!
Bottom line, in my opinion, is that there are just too many variables that (differently) affect the optimum performance of each one of these two designs. Yes you CAN have a discussion about them, of the "compare and contrast" variety, but unless you are willing to experience them, or are sure you HAVE experienced them each, under the optimal conditions for each, then nothing you THINK YOU KNOW is probably going to be very relevant to a discussion like this.
I have to agree about Maggies and power,I thought my 1.6's were fine till a friend brought over a highly modded Hafler 500 that put out a measured 535 watts a side and showed me I had never really heard them.
Said friend was a retired EE Professor at U of Wisconsin and kindly sold me the amp for $20 !