Magnepan or Martin Logan

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.

The other responses I read are interesting. I own both Martin Logan CLS2Z's and Magneplanar Tympani's. I switch them from time to time. The ML are definitely more "you are in the performance". The Maggies are more integrated, the bass is awesome. The ML bass needs to be augmented. I use a Genesis sub. The Maggies Have a region in the voice range where they can be harsh. The ML don't have this problem, and above about 70-80 hz they are more integrated. Both benefit from being set up with attention to distance from the listener. The closer they are to being the exact same distance from the listener the more they will reward you. If you like your Music loud the Maggies are it. The Maggies need a lot of breathing room, more than the ML's. However, both need at least 3-4 ft from back wall or side wall or you won't want to listen to them. The maggies also have a more head in the vise effect than do the ML's. The ML's imaging is more realistic than the Maggies and deeper. The maggies required less power than did the ML's. The conclusion try both in your room. I like both. The CLS's do not sound like Sequels. They are far more integrated and weaker in the percieved bass. They are very different but most of their virtues and strengths are similar but they sound different.

Congratulations, Jack, you are barking up the right tree. You might want to add Quad USA Monitors and Sound Labs to your list - they offer different, legitimate sets of tradeoffs and outstanding sound. If I was buying used, I'd be careful about buying Martins. Think about the forces acting on that curved diaphragm at it's moving. It gets stretched as it moves out, and compressed as it moves in. Too much loud music, for too long, and you need a new diaphragm. Martin diaphragms are easy to replace because there's a need for it. Sound Labs use a segmented curve that gives wider dispersion than the Martins, and (among other things) allows the use of a much thinner, lighter diaphragm. Maggies are very well executed and voiced, but IMHO ribbons don't have the resolving potential full range electrostatics do. That large, low-pressure radiating area gives a "through an open window" effect ribbons can't really emulate (nor anything else, for that matter). Martins, Sound Labs and Quads use various techniques to get better high frequency dispersion than traditional flat panel electrostats, and so are the best of the breed.