Magnepan or Martin Logan


so which one is better CLS-2z or MG 3.6R anyone?
jack
Hello, I was trying to get any information anyone would have on the Maggie 1.4. How do these compare to the new 1.6 QR? Any historial information would also be appreciated. Thanks,
As is the case with most speaker descisions I think it is one of trade offs...I think the martin logans are definitely more transparent/airy but I think the maggies are more better integrated in terms of their bass midrange and high frequency sections ...I also think the magnapans create a larger sound stage ...as others have said ...can't go wrong with either...Kimbo
HI, I have a good amount of experience with maggies smgb's and 3.3r's, I will tell you this: you must have a powerful amp with excellent current capability, and they pretty much have to be at least 8ft off the back walls to throw thier best sound stage, so there is a serious wife factor involved. Now if you can meet those two goals, the maggies are mind blowing speakers.
I used to own the Magnepan SMGa. I sold them to try something new. In a way I still regret this. Nothing sounds quite as magical as they did: clear, beautiful midrange, quite a decent bass, beguiling. Great for voice, jazz, and chamber music.
I owned Maggie 2.5Rs, then moved to ML QuestZs (now up for sale at $2,000), now Maggie MG20s. Having lived with both brands, Maggies are more musical by far (and throw a bigger sound stage). MLs were more efficient and dynamic, more detailed, and very forward (should be superior eh?!). I first loved the MLs focusing on the detail, but in time, Maggies are livable, loveable, and musical. Maggies are by far a much more beatiful speaker. A bitch to set up though.