Martin Logan Quest Z Bass - can it be fixed ?

Mikey44, for my money I'd scratch the idea of investing money into a pair of Quest Z's, and instead go with a pair of Vista's, which one can find in the area of $2k, if it's an issue of attempting to meet a budget concern. Even Vantages which have recently sold at $2500 are a great buy. Unless the Quest Z has had a panel replacement, not likely, you're eventually looking at investing over $1200 for a new set of panels eventually. It makes better sense to me simply to invest the money and make it work for you by gaining access to the ML's newer stat technology thereby perhaps eliminating woofer/panel issues or concerns.

I found the clear spar panels of the newer logans to be a cut above the former generation speakers. Also the woofer and panels of the newer generation speakers blend much better than those of the previous designs. Having owned ML's for many years I found the newer designs actually sound much better, but I'm still content with the CLS' for they're the best of the lot, imho.

Coltrane, Well look who's calling the kettle black, perhaps you might remember your previous post here and before:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?cspkr&1291996908&openusid&zzColtrane1&4&5#Coltrane1
I offered a question, an answer to which might provide clarification, as one might have construed that one should act fast before you actually pull your ad.
Perhaps you should re-read my post too. I made no hard and fast recommendations, but your advice seemed to suggest that your recommendation, due to your experience was superior, despite your claims that you seem to prefer to listen at less than realistic levels and despite what appeared to be a technical compromise. It was you that started to step on other opinions in order to promote your own.
Perhaps we can start over in a more polite manner?

Unsound, you felt stepped on by my response? I realize it flew in the face of what you'd suggested about the product being difficult to drive, but that's what differing opinions do. It's not personal. Your experience has not been mine, that's all.

Yes, I suppose one could come to the conclusion that having owned the ML product line almost to exclusivity over an extended period of time I'm experienced with the product, but superiority doesn't enter into the equation. I've merely shared my truth based upon extensive product experience, which obviously differed from yours.

Well, rather than apologize for having made a false presumption and smear about my reference to the SET you're now suggesting I was attempting to drum up business by suggesting the ad was about to be removed? Oh my. Did it ever occur to you sir, that I was offering the SET ad by way of a physical photographic example that indeed CLS' were in fact being driven by a 10 watt SET and nothing more? But if one is lashing out in an attempt to smear another because they felt somehow slighted they're reaching for any and everything as a defense, I understand.

85dB for jazz, is a perfect listening level in my room. One doesn't need earshattering volume levels to properly enjoy good music. More volume does not equal better sound, it's only louder sound. Even with a 10 watt SET I could gain more volume from the CLS's, but I choose that level as my max. Frankly, your ears might thank you for softening that dial back a tad bit. We can of course agree to disagree about what it takes to properly drive the product line in question. Civility first. I'm all for it.

O.K., then.

Well, I don't know if 'muddy' is the correct term, or the most common one to describe the Quest-z, but, there is something just not there to me. My JBL 240Ti's or AR9's sound much better at those frewquencies. But, the Quest's are not in the same room, or house for that matter. At what price could you folks 'live' with the Quest-z's I wonder ?