Storm III or Stadium III for Martin Logan SL3's?

Hi Guys,

I have decided to invest into either a Rel Stadium III or Storm III to match my Martin Logan SL3's but need your advise in which of the two would integrate better with my ML's. My listening room is 15X20 carpeted with 8'ceiling.

Is the Stadium too big for my SL3's and is it worth the extra $$? Thanks again in advance for your time and input.
I have not heard the Stadium in this setup. However, I have a storm III in roughly the same size room first mated to SL3's and then Aeons and now Maggie 1.6's and it has worked very well with all. This system does both HT and music, but I would never have considered it unless it played music well first.
With the possible exception of the Studios and peculiar system matching, Rel subs are generally never "too big" for your room because as you move up the line you also get more speed/"quicker" bass. For best integration, you're not suppose to crank up the volume anyways, so it shouldn't be a matter of too much bass output. It's like the motor of treadmill. The bigger and more powerful the motor, the smoother and quieter it will be even though you never stress it.
The Stadium is a better choice. Have you thought about the ML depth or descent sub. I have the Descent with my SL3's in a smaller room than your's.The ML subs are better matched to their Electrostatic speakers. Both the Depth and Descent have won numerous awards. You can read them on their website.
I had the Stadium. Sold it and bought the Revel B15 - maybe the built-in EQ works especially well in my room, but it was a very significant improvement.
I have SL3'3...and the REL Stadium with Mac 402, Levinson CD and preamp, MIT Shotgun cables....sounds just beautiful.