Opinions on Speakers... please read.

[dourmaj]

Tossing around the idea of investing in a (new) pair of speakers.
Finally I'll have a decent budjet so I'm aiming a little higher these
days. However, I'm not really looking for a lot of excessive praise or
gloating - more like can you tell me something negative I should look
out for in any of the following:

B&W 703
B&W CDM-9t (I know these are discontinued)
Meadolark Kestrals
Theil 2.2
Martin Logan Aerius
Triangle Antal

Any other ideas?

Thanks

[JBorg]

> dourma wrote in message


> Tossing around the idea of investing in a (new) pair of speakers.
> Finally I'll have a decent budjet so I'm aiming a little higher these
> days. However, I'm not really looking for a lot of excessive praise or
> gloating - more like can you tell me something negative I should look
> out for in any of the following:
>
> B&W 703
> B&W CDM-9t (I know these are discontinued)
> Meadolark Kestrals


> Theil 2.2

Small but not so terrible.

> Martin Logan Aerius



Good value for the money. It came out in the early 90's. This had
been extensively reviewed in the audio press-- so search and read.

Only thing is that it is capricious when it comes to placement but
once achieve, beats 2.2's from sheer musical presentation.

> Triangle Antal
>
> Any other ideas?
>
> Thanks


[Anything happen in a month? I see that Lionel hasn't been taking
his psychotropic meds.]

[Bruce J. Richman]

Mr. Borg wrote:


>> dourma wrote in message
>
>
>> Tossing around the idea of investing in a (new) pair of speakers.
>> Finally I'll have a decent budjet so I'm aiming a little higher these
>> days. However, I'm not really looking for a lot of excessive praise or
>> gloating - more like can you tell me something negative I should look
>> out for in any of the following:
>>
>> B&W 703
>> B&W CDM-9t (I know these are discontinued)
>> Meadolark Kestrals
>
>
>> Theil 2.2
>
>Small but not so terrible.
>
>> Martin Logan Aerius
>
>
>
>Good value for the money. It came out in the early 90's. This had
>been extensively reviewed in the audio press-- so search and read.
>
>Only thing is that it is capricious when it comes to placement but
>once achieve, beats 2.2's from sheer musical presentation.
>

I'm in full agreement with your comments re. the Martin Logan Aerius. Planar
electrostatic speakers made by Martin Logan have a rather fanatical following,
and you can see all sorts of systems and read comments of enthusiasts on the
Martin Logan website, which you can find at:


www.martinloganowners.com

The Aerius has long been one of the most popular Martin Logan models, because
it is reasonably priced (especially on the used market) and does not take up
too much floor space. While it does not go as deep as the larger Martin Logan
models (it has an 8" woofer), it certainly does most things right, and has the
same low-distortion, spacious, extremely fast transient response that good
electrostatic panels are known for. Even if you decide to buy a more
conventional speaker, I would certainly advise you to at least audition some
Martin Logan models.

I should add that I'm prejudiced since I've been happily listening to Martin
Logan CLS II electrostatics for the past 8 years.



>> Triangle Antal
>>
>> Any other ideas?
>>

To see if you like the type of presentation a planar speaker
(non-electrostatic) can produce, I'd highly recommend you audtion a pair of
Magneplanars if at all possible.

For some of us, once you've heard the unboxed, relatively spacious sound of a
planar dipole, either electrostatic or planar magnetic, there's no turning back
:).

Like Martin Logans, Magneplanars come in a lot of different sizes, and can
often be fouind in the used market - e.g. Audiogon and/or eBay.



>> Thanks
>
>
>[Anything happen in a month? I see that Lionel hasn't been taking
>his psychotropic meds.]
>
>
>
>
>
>

Now Playing: Johnny Cash - The Man In Black (From the Franklin Mint collection
of "Greatest Country Music Recordings of All Time").

Up Next: Gerry Mulligan - Gerry Mulligan Meets Ben Webster (Mobile Fidelity
LP)

And finally: Boston Pops - Hearts in 3/4 Time (Living Stereo, shaded dog LP)

Heard in the mobile system earlier today - and highly recommended - a good
audition CD for speakers:

Bela Fleck - Live Art




Bruce J. Richman

[JBorg]

> Bruce J. Richman wrote in message
> > Mr. Borg wrote:
> >> dourma wrote in message

> >> Theil 2.2
> >
> >Small but not so terrible.
> >
> >> Martin Logan Aerius
> >
> >Good value for the money. It came out in the early 90's. This had
> >been extensively reviewed in the audio press-- so search and read.
> >
> >Only thing is that it is capricious when it comes to placement but
> >once achieve, beats 2.2's from sheer musical presentation.
> >
>
> I'm in full agreement with your comments re. the Martin Logan Aerius.

I had Aerius for about 9 years now and I never tire of sitting down to listen
to it. It is an inefficient speaker, however, and at about 84 dB/W/m, it really
needs to be driven with amp putting out at least 200w pc at 4 ohm.
I recently tweak my newly Marantz SA8260 SACD cd player using the
colossal conepoints by Mapleshade with dramatic results. Soundstaging,
layering, and focus went tighter, yet still full bodied and remain supple with
regard to instrument and voices. So on vocal recordings -- pure ecstasy as
long as you stay on sweet spot.


> Planar
> electrostatic speakers made by Martin Logan have a rather fanatical
> following, and you can see all sorts of systems and read comments of
> enthusiasts on the Martin Logan website, which you can find at:
>
> www.martinloganowners.com

I don't see the need, at least for me, to be fanatical with Martin Logans at this
time. The new Aerius now cost 3k + AFAIK and they still have not address
its tendency to beam at higher spl or its inability to maintain the soundstage
beyond 2 feet on either side off-axis. And then, there's my dust problem--
I really think that this is an issue much more than Mr. Sander think.


> The Aerius has long been one of the most popular Martin Logan models,
> because it is reasonably priced (especially on the used market) and does not
> take up too much floor space. While it does not go as deep as the larger
> Martin Logan models (it has an 8" woofer), it certainly does most things right,
> and has the same low-distortion, spacious, extremely fast transient response
> that good electrostatic panels are known for. Even if you decide to buy a
> more conventional speaker, I would certainly advise you to at least audition
> some Martin Logan models.

Fast transient response are an outrageous spectacle for the ears. With
recordings notably filled with percussive instruments, Aerius maintain their
coherent structures unrestrain.


> I should add that I'm prejudiced since I've been happily listening to Martin
> Logan CLS II electrostatics for the past 8 years.

I had the fancy to to audition the original CLS for an hour or so back then at
my fav. saloon. As I recall, the guys running the floor had trouble matching
subwoofers. to carryout and to compensate for the sound below where the
CLS'es output dissipates. We would stand behind in front of the stators and
step forward incrementally one at the time. Starting beyond 4 feet and away
from the stators, we would have spots where bass would suddenly disappear
and then reappear a step or two. It was room boundaries and sound bouncing
back causing phase cancellation, so I just rolled my eyes.

Other than this minor thing, I never heard speakers so revealing, so appealing.


>
> >> Triangle Antal
> >>
> >>
> >> Any other ideas?

Buy speakers with amplifier in mind.



> Now Playing: Johnny Cash - The Man In Black (From the Franklin Mint
> collection of "Greatest Country Music Recordings of All Time").
>
> Up Next: Gerry Mulligan - Gerry Mulligan Meets Ben Webster (Mobile
> Fidelity LP)
>
> And finally: Boston Pops - Hearts in 3/4 Time (Living Stereo, shaded
> dog LP)
>
> Heard in the mobile system earlier today - and highly recommended - a good
> audition CD for speakers:
>
> Bela Fleck - Live Art
>
>
> Bruce J. Richman

Thank you.

--

Now playing:

Friday Night In San Francisco
with Al DiMeola, John McLaughlin, & Paco De Lucia
(SACD Stereo)

Next:

Gustav Mahler Symphony no. 6
by St.Petersburg Phil. Orchestra
(20bit / 128 x oversmpling)
RS by DARPRO, Italy

[Bruce J. Richman]

J Borg wrote:


>> Bruce J. Richman wrote in message
>> > Mr. Borg wrote:
>> >> dourma wrote in message
>
>> >> Theil 2.2
>> >
>> >Small but not so terrible.
>> >
>> >> Martin Logan Aerius
>> >
>> >Good value for the money. It came out in the early 90's. This had
>> >been extensively reviewed in the audio press-- so search and read.
>> >
>> >Only thing is that it is capricious when it comes to placement but
>> >once achieve, beats 2.2's from sheer musical presentation.
>> >
>>
>> I'm in full agreement with your comments re. the Martin Logan Aerius.
>
>I had Aerius for about 9 years now and I never tire of sitting down to
>listen
>to it. It is an inefficient speaker, however, and at about 84 dB/W/m, it
>really
>needs to be driven with amp putting out at least 200w pc at 4 ohm.

While I have no doubt that all that power can be helpful, especially if one is
using solid state equipment, I know of many happy ML owners who don't feel that
extremely high power amplification is needed. This may be especially true if
one is using tubed amplfiers. What *is* needed IMHO is an amplifier that can
provide plenty of current to deal with the fairly wide impedance swings for
which ML speakers are known. While it's strictly a matter of taste, I prefer a
moderately powered, but high quality tubed amplifier for use with Martin
Logans. I can't explain why on technical grounds, but I just think that tubes
and electrostatics are an awfully effective match in many cases.



>I recently tweak my newly Marantz SA8260 SACD cd player using the
>colossal conepoints by Mapleshade with dramatic results. Soundstaging,
>layering, and focus went tighter, yet still full bodied and remain supple
>with
>regard to instrument and voices. So on vocal recordings -- pure ecstasy as
>long as you stay on sweet spot.
>
>

I haven't bought any SACD gear yet. I guess I'm like many, waiting to see how
the format wars develop and/or get resolved. That said, I certainly have heard
good things about SACD, including, for me, at least, the somewhat "telling:"
comment that for many subjective listeners, they sound more like good analogue
recordings than Redbook CDs. If this is true, I shall definitely be paying
close attention. :)



>> Planar
>> electrostatic speakers made by Martin Logan have a rather fanatical
>> following, and you can see all sorts of systems and read comments of
>> enthusiasts on the Martin Logan website, which you can find at:
>>
>> www.martinloganowners.com
>
>I don't see the need, at least for me, to be fanatical with Martin Logans at
>this
>time. The new Aerius now cost 3k + AFAIK and they still have not address
>its tendency to beam at higher spl or its inability to maintain the
>soundstage
>beyond 2 feet on either side off-axis. And then, there's my dust problem--
>I really think that this is an issue much more than Mr. Sander think.
>

Actually, I put in the link for the benefit of the other poster that was
considering Martin Logan speakers along with many other brands. I think
problems of beaming are somewhat related to room placement, and perhaps also
the size of the panels. My CLS IIs admittedly have a much larger panel surface
which I think provides less sense of beaming. I never find overly precise
instrumental positioning to be a problem. Speaker placement for electrostatics
is critical and requires some experimentation.

Regarding price, it is true that the new Martin Logans are expensive, but I've
seen many used Martin Logan Aerius and SL3 speakers on the used market for
between $ 1000 and $ 2000 per pair. In my view, at these prices, the value and
quality involved is hard to beat. If I were in the market today, I would try
and find an affordable pair of one of the larger panel Martin Logans, however -
for example either an SL3, Ascent or ReQuest.



>
>> The Aerius has long been one of the most popular Martin Logan models,
>> because it is reasonably priced (especially on the used market) and does
>not
>> take up too much floor space. While it does not go as deep as the larger
>> Martin Logan models (it has an 8" woofer), it certainly does most things
>right,
>> and has the same low-distortion, spacious, extremely fast transient
>response
>> that good electrostatic panels are known for. Even if you decide to buy a
>> more conventional speaker, I would certainly advise you to at least
>audition
>> some Martin Logan models.
>
>Fast transient response are an outrageous spectacle for the ears. With
>recordings notably filled with percussive instruments, Aerius maintain their
>
>coherent structures unrestrain.
>

Agreed. It's quite an experience to hear rock or acoustic jazz through an
electrostatic speaker. Ditto for classical guitar. The speed of the transient
response can really be breathtaking at times and adds greatly to the realism
experienced.


>> I should add that I'm prejudiced since I've been happily listening to
>Martin
>> Logan CLS II electrostatics for the past 8 years.
>
>I had the fancy to to audition the original CLS for an hour or so back then
>at
>my fav. saloon. As I recall, the guys running the floor had trouble matching
>
>subwoofers. to carryout and to compensate for the sound below where the
>CLS'es output dissipates. We would stand behind in front of the stators and
>step forward incrementally one at the time. Starting beyond 4 feet and away
>from the stators, we would have spots where bass would suddenly disappear
>and then reappear a step or two. It was room boundaries and sound bouncing
>back causing phase cancellation, so I just rolled my eyes.
>

I don't sit very far away from the speakers. The CLS II's -3db point is at 35
Hz. If suitable care is taken room placement, low end response is not a major
problem, unless one really misses the bottom octave. Of course, they can be
significantly augmented by use of a good subwoofer. Since I'm not an organ
works afficionado (although a little E. Power Biggs once in a while is
enjoyable), the lack of extreme low bass does not bother me particularly.




>Other than this minor thing, I never heard speakers so revealing, so
>appealing.
>

Another nice thing about the CLS IIs is their amazing coherence from top to
bottom of their range. No doubt this is due to their being only one membrane
involved and no crossovers.




>
>>
>> >> Triangle Antal
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Any other ideas?
>
>Buy speakers with amplifier in mind.
>

Absolutely. Ideally, speakers should be audtioned with the emplifier one
intends to use if at all possible. When I was auditioning Martin Logans, I
listened to them with a number of different amplifiers, both solid state and
tubed, before I finally made any purchase decisions.



>
>
>> Now Playing: Johnny Cash - The Man In Black (From the Franklin Mint
>> collection of "Greatest Country Music Recordings of All Time").
>>
>> Up Next: Gerry Mulligan - Gerry Mulligan Meets Ben Webster (Mobile
>> Fidelity LP)
>>
>> And finally: Boston Pops - Hearts in 3/4 Time (Living Stereo, shaded
>> dog LP)
>>
>> Heard in the mobile system earlier today - and highly recommended - a good
>> audition CD for speakers:
>>
>> Bela Fleck - Live Art
>>
>>
>> Bruce J. Richman
>
>Thank you.
>
>--
>
>Now playing:
>
>Friday Night In San Francisco
>with Al DiMeola, John McLaughlin, & Paco De Lucia
>(SACD Stereo)
>
>Next:
>
>Gustav Mahler Symphony no. 6
>by St.Petersburg Phil. Orchestra
>(20bit / 128 x oversmpling)
>RS by DARPRO, Italy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Bruce J. Richman

[Sander deWaal]

(JBorg) said:

>I don't see the need, at least for me, to be fanatical with Martin Logans at this
>time. The new Aerius now cost 3k + AFAIK and they still have not address
>its tendency to beam at higher spl or its inability to maintain the soundstage
>beyond 2 feet on either side off-axis. And then, there's my dust problem--
>I really think that this is an issue much more than Mr. Sander think.

Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)

I know, I know, it's Sanders.

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

[JBorg]

> Bruce J. Richman wrote in message
> >> J Borg wrote:
> >> Bruce J. Richman wrote in message
> >> > Mr. Borg wrote:
> >> >> dourma wrote in message
>
>
>
> >> >> Theil 2.2
> >> >
> >> >Small but not so terrible.
> >> >
> >> >> Martin Logan Aerius
> >> >
> >> >Good value for the money. It came out in the early 90's. This had
> >> >been extensively reviewed in the audio press-- so search and read.
> >> >
> >> >Only thing is that it is capricious when it comes to placement but
> >> >once achieve, beats 2.2's from sheer musical presentation.
>
>
> While I have no doubt that all that power can be helpful, especially if one is
> using solid state equipment, I know of many happy ML owners who don't feel
> that extremely high power amplification is needed. This may be especially true
> if one is using tubed amplfiers. What *is* needed IMHO is an amplifier that
> can provide plenty of current to deal with the fairly wide impedance swings for
> which ML speakers are known. While it's strictly a matter of taste, I prefer a
> moderately powered, but high quality tubed amplifier for use with Martin
> Logans. I can't explain why on technical grounds, but I just think that tubes
> and electrostatics are an awfully effective match in many cases.

It's hard to disagree with your assessment there particularly when
deciding to use
"high quality" tube amps as the best match for ML speakersbut I was
persuaded
along the way to use SS to best energize these hybrid speaker.
It was mainly the issue of the constraint with allocating the budget
that time for me.
I did manage to pair them with a line-level tube preamp from Audio
Research to
glaze the panels.

>
> >I recently tweak my newly Marantz SA8260 SACD cd player using the
> >colossal conepoints by Mapleshade with dramatic results. Soundstaging,
> >layering, and focus went tighter, yet still full bodied and remain supple
> >with regard to instrument and voices. So on vocal recordings -- pure ecstasy
> >as long as you stay on sweet spot.
> >
> >
>
> I haven't bought any SACD gear yet. I guess I'm like many, waiting to see how
> the format wars develop and/or get resolved. That said, I certainly have heard
> good things about SACD, including, for me, at least, the somewhat "telling:"
> comment that for many subjective listeners, they sound more like good analogue
> recordings than Redbook CDs. If this is true, I shall definitely be paying
> close attention. :)


I wanted a new cd player capable of playing SACDs, the differences I
hear
with this new format were immediate in the detail. It is dynamic that
when
sudden loud passages comes, it leaves the background speck of details
intact.
This was my impression then and now. My Marantz SA8260 SACD player
is somewhat an experimental investment for me and I don't wish to
spend
more than $900.00 for an sacd player during the format wars.

>

[JBorg]

> Sander deWaal wrote
> > JBorg said:
>
> >I don't see the need, at least for me, to be fanatical with Martin Logans
> >at this time. The new Aerius now cost 3k + AFAIK and they still have
> >not address its tendency to beam at higher spl or its inability to maintain
> >the soundstage beyond 2 feet on either side off-axis. And then, there's
> >my dust problem-- I really think that this is an issue much more than
> >Mr. Sander think.
>
> Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
> I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
>
> I know, I know, it's Sanders.

Yup, it's Sanders and his dust. It's hard to believe that houseborne
grime, grit, ashes, dirt, filth, flakes, fragments, granules, lint,
dust and soot don't make it to the panels and stay there becoming
cream pie over time.

How about electrified fungus?



> --
> Sander deWaal
> Vacuum Audio Consultancy

[Bruce J. Richman]

J Borg wrote"


>> Bruce J. Richman wrote in message
>> >> J Borg wrote:
>> >> Bruce J. Richman wrote in message
>> >> > Mr. Borg wrote:
>> >> >> dourma wrote in message
> >
>>
>>
>> >> >> Theil 2.2
>> >> >
>> >> >Small but not so terrible.
>> >> >
>> >> >> Martin Logan Aerius
>> >> >
>> >> >Good value for the money. It came out in the early 90's. This had
>> >> >been extensively reviewed in the audio press-- so search and read.
>> >> >
>> >> >Only thing is that it is capricious when it comes to placement but
>> >> >once achieve, beats 2.2's from sheer musical presentation.
>>
>>
>> While I have no doubt that all that power can be helpful, especially if one
>is
>> using solid state equipment, I know of many happy ML owners who don't feel
>> that extremely high power amplification is needed. This may be especially
>true
>> if one is using tubed amplfiers. What *is* needed IMHO is an amplifier
>that
>> can provide plenty of current to deal with the fairly wide impedance swings
>for
>> which ML speakers are known. While it's strictly a matter of taste, I
>prefer a
>> moderately powered, but high quality tubed amplifier for use with Martin
>> Logans. I can't explain why on technical grounds, but I just think that
>tubes
>> and electrostatics are an awfully effective match in many cases.
>
>It's hard to disagree with your assessment there particularly when
>deciding to use
> "high quality" tube amps as the best match for ML speakersbut I was
>persuaded
>along the way to use SS to best energize these hybrid speaker.
>It was mainly the issue of the constraint with allocating the budget
>that time for me.
>I did manage to pair them with a line-level tube preamp from Audio
>Research to
>glaze the panels.
>

You've made a very valid point. I'd like a more powerful tubed amplifier, but
costs are definitely a consideration. The pairing of a good tubed preamplifier
with a solid state amplifier is an option I've considered frequently.
Depending on a number of factors, I might eventually try this combination, but
despite definitely being able to use more power, I'm pretty happy with what
I've currently got.



>>
>> >I recently tweak my newly Marantz SA8260 SACD cd player using the
>> >colossal conepoints by Mapleshade with dramatic results. Soundstaging,
>> >layering, and focus went tighter, yet still full bodied and remain supple
>> >with regard to instrument and voices. So on vocal recordings -- pure
>ecstasy
>> >as long as you stay on sweet spot.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I haven't bought any SACD gear yet. I guess I'm like many, waiting to see
>how
>> the format wars develop and/or get resolved. That said, I certainly have
>heard
>> good things about SACD, including, for me, at least, the somewhat
>"telling:"
>> comment that for many subjective listeners, they sound more like good
>analogue
>> recordings than Redbook CDs. If this is true, I shall definitely be paying
>> close attention. :)
>
>
>I wanted a new cd player capable of playing SACDs, the differences I
>hear
>with this new format were immediate in the detail. It is dynamic that
>when
>sudden loud passages comes, it leaves the background speck of details
>intact.
>This was my impression then and now. My Marantz SA8260 SACD player
>is somewhat an experimental investment for me and I don't wish to
>spend
>more than $900.00 for an sacd player during the format wars.
>
>>
>


This sounds like a very sensible approach to me. My CD player/DAC is not the
most modern, but it works well, the DAC is tubed with the kind of
non-fatigueing sound I favor, and considering that most of my listening is to
vinyl, I'm not in any rush to upgrade just for the sake of upgrading. :)



Bruce J. Richman

[Bruce J. Richman]

J Borg wrote:


>> Sander deWaal wrote
>> > JBorg said:
>>
>> >I don't see the need, at least for me, to be fanatical with Martin Logans
>> >at this time. The new Aerius now cost 3k + AFAIK and they still have
>> >not address its tendency to beam at higher spl or its inability to
>maintain
>> >the soundstage beyond 2 feet on either side off-axis. And then, there's
>> >my dust problem-- I really think that this is an issue much more than
>> >Mr. Sander think.
>>
>> Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
>> I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
>>
>> I know, I know, it's Sanders.
>
>Yup, it's Sanders and his dust. It's hard to believe that houseborne
>grime, grit, ashes, dirt, filth, flakes, fragments, granules, lint,
>dust and soot don't make it to the panels and stay there becoming
>cream pie over time.
>
>How about electrified fungus?
>
>
>
>> --
>> Sander deWaal
>> Vacuum Audio Consultancy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I've found that vacuuming the ES panels periodoically can make a big
difference.



Bruce J. Richman

[dourmaj]

(Bruce J. Richman) wrote in message >...
> J Borg wrote:
> > While I have no doubt that all that power can be helpful, especially if one is
> using solid state equipment, I know of many happy ML owners who don't feel that
> extremely high power amplification is needed. This may be especially true if
> one is using tubed amplfiers. What *is* needed IMHO is an amplifier that can
> provide plenty of current to deal with the fairly wide impedance swings for
> which ML speakers are known. While it's strictly a matter of taste, I prefer a
> moderately powered, but high quality tubed amplifier for use with Martin
> Logans. I can't explain why on technical grounds, but I just think that tubes
> and electrostatics are an awfully effective match in many cases.
>

Ok... so let me ask then... what tube amps are we talking about here?

I use a Pass Aleph 5 and a CJ MV75A1 that has been dramatically
upgraded... I am going to pressume that either of these beasts will
handle the impedance shifts of the MLs (certainly the Pass!)... and
the CJ once powered a pair of Ohm Walsh 5's which are almost as power
hunger as speakers can get...

I'm not interested in spending any more money on an amp so I'd like to
get an idea on how picky these speakers are with power requirements.

Thanks

J-

[Bruce J. Richman]

dourmaj wrote:


(Bruce J. Richman) wrote in message
>...
>> J Borg wrote:
>> > While I have no doubt that all that power can be helpful, especially if
>one is
>> using solid state equipment, I know of many happy ML owners who don't feel
>that
>> extremely high power amplification is needed. This may be especially true
>if
>> one is using tubed amplfiers. What *is* needed IMHO is an amplifier that
>can
>> provide plenty of current to deal with the fairly wide impedance swings for
>> which ML speakers are known. While it's strictly a matter of taste, I
>prefer a
>> moderately powered, but high quality tubed amplifier for use with Martin
>> Logans. I can't explain why on technical grounds, but I just think that
>tubes
>> and electrostatics are an awfully effective match in many cases.
>>
>
>Ok... so let me ask then... what tube amps are we talking about here?
>
>I use a Pass Aleph 5 and a CJ MV75A1 that has been dramatically
>upgraded... I am going to pressume that either of these beasts will
>handle the impedance shifts of the MLs (certainly the Pass!)... and
>the CJ once powered a pair of Ohm Walsh 5's which are almost as power
>hunger as speakers can get...
>

I think you'll be in good shape with either of these amplifiers. In my own
case, I power a pair of Martin Logan CLS IIs, which are less efficient then the
Aerius, with a Conrad Johnson Premier 11A that puts out at least 70
watts/channel into a 4 ohm load and is stable into much lower impedances as
well. I say at least 70 watts, because the amplifier has been tweaked with Ei
KT-90 Type 3 output tubes which are reputed to provide a little more power than
the 6550 output tubes with which it is originally configured. I also have used
it in the past with both GE anjd Svetlana 6550C output tubes with certainly
enough output to drive the speakers to satisfying listening levels. I know
other Martin Logan users that have used either Audio Research or VTL amplifiers
with excellent results as well. My preamplifier is a CJ PV12 with internal
phono stage.

Before purchasing the Martin Logans, I had a chance to audtion them with a
numbewr of different preamplifier/amplifier combinations, both tubed and SS,
and IMHO the CJ combination sounded the best with these speakers. I would
strongly recommend that you try and audition a pair of Martin Logans with your
own electronics before purchase if at all possible.


>I'm not interested in spending any more money on an amp so I'd like to
>get an idea on how picky these speakers are with power requirements.
>
>Thanks
>
>J-
>
>
>
>
>
>


Bruce J. Richman

[Sander deWaal]

(Bruce J. Richman) said:

>You've made a very valid point. I'd like a more powerful tubed amplifier, but
>costs are definitely a consideration. The pairing of a good tubed preamplifier
>with a solid state amplifier is an option I've considered frequently.
>Depending on a number of factors, I might eventually try this combination, but
>despite definitely being able to use more power, I'm pretty happy with what
>I've currently got.

Bruce,

How about a hybrid amplifier?
With hybrid I don't mean just a tube pre and SS amp, but a real
synergy btw. tube and transistor.
The commercial products I'm thinking about are e.g. the Solen Tigre or
NYAL Moscode types, but it's certainly possible to go the DIY route.
For about $1000 max. and a little time you'll have a kickass amp
that'll suit your needs.
My hybrid MOSFET amp cost me about $300, mainly because I used a
19"cabinet and had to buy 2 800 VA mains transformers and said
cabinet.

Ok, Ok, it won't have that fancy name tag on it :-)


--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

[Bruce J. Richman]

Sander de Waal wrote:


(Bruce J. Richman) said:
>
>>You've made a very valid point. I'd like a more powerful tubed amplifier,
>but
>>costs are definitely a consideration. The pairing of a good tubed
>preamplifier
>>with a solid state amplifier is an option I've considered frequently.
>>Depending on a number of factors, I might eventually try this combination,
>but
>>despite definitely being able to use more power, I'm pretty happy with what
>>I've currently got.
>
>Bruce,
>
>How about a hybrid amplifier?
>With hybrid I don't mean just a tube pre and SS amp, but a real
>synergy btw. tube and transistor.
>The commercial products I'm thinking about are e.g. the Solen Tigre or
>NYAL Moscode types, but it's certainly possible to go the DIY route.
>For about $1000 max. and a little time you'll have a kickass amp
>that'll suit your needs.
>My hybrid MOSFET amp cost me about $300, mainly because I used a
>19"cabinet and had to buy 2 800 VA mains transformers and said
>cabinet.
>
>Ok, Ok, it won't have that fancy name tag on it :-)
>
>
>--
>Sander deWaal
>Vacuum Audio Consultancy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Well, that's a possibility. I don't really care about fancy names, but it's
been a long time since I've held a soldeing iron ::.
(Although I did build my first amplifier when I was 18 - I had a good set of
instructions and a schemnatic at that time). Interestingly enough, I've read
some favorable comments about some of the older Counterpoint amplifiers, which
were hybrids, but I'd be a little reluctant to get an amplifier from a
manufacturer no longer in business. At some point, I might try and get a more
powerful amplifier, since mine has about 70-75 watts/channel. But I figured
I'd need at least double my current power to probably make an audible
difference.



Bruce J. Richman

[Sander deWaal]

(Bruce J. Richman) said:

>Well, that's a possibility. I don't really care about fancy names, but it's
>been a long time since I've held a soldeing iron ::.
>(Although I did build my first amplifier when I was 18 - I had a good set of
>instructions and a schemnatic at that time). Interestingly enough, I've read
>some favorable comments about some of the older Counterpoint amplifiers, which
>were hybrids, but I'd be a little reluctant to get an amplifier from a
>manufacturer no longer in business. At some point, I might try and get a more
>powerful amplifier, since mine has about 70-75 watts/channel. But I figured
>I'd need at least double my current power to probably make an audible
>difference.

The ability to use a soldering iron is reciproke to the use of
obsolete amplifiers :-)
BTW power reserve in watts means nothing, power reserve in amperes is
what counts.
Also, stability in reactive loads is important.

Any time you want an amp built, let me know! :-) <wink wink, nod nod>

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

[Bruce J. Richman]

Sander de Waal wrote:


(Bruce J. Richman) said:
>
>>Well, that's a possibility. I don't really care about fancy names, but
>it's
>>been a long time since I've held a soldeing iron ::.
>>(Although I did build my first amplifier when I was 18 - I had a good set of
>>instructions and a schemnatic at that time). Interestingly enough, I've
>read
>>some favorable comments about some of the older Counterpoint amplifiers,
>which
>>were hybrids, but I'd be a little reluctant to get an amplifier from a
>>manufacturer no longer in business. At some point, I might try and get a
>more
>>powerful amplifier, since mine has about 70-75 watts/channel. But I figured
>>I'd need at least double my current power to probably make an audible
>>difference.
>
>The ability to use a soldering iron is reciproke to the use of
>obsolete amplifiers :-)
>BTW power reserve in watts means nothing, power reserve in amperes is
>what counts.

I know. That's why I use a Conrad Johnson that can handle the wild impedance
swings of the Martin Logans.



>Also, stability in reactive loads is important.
>
>Any time you want an amp built, let me know! :-) <wink wink, nod nod>
>
>--
>Sander deWaal
>Vacuum Audio Consultancy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

I'll keep it in mind. :)


(Although if I had the right set of instructions and could get a parts list and
parts, I wouldn't rule out building another one).



Bruce J. Richman

[JBorg]

> Bruce J. Richman wrote
> > Sander deWaal wrote

>
> > I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
>
>
> I've found that vacuuming the ES panels periodoically can make a big
> difference.


I wanted to raise the issue of dust and dirt to potential buyers of electrostat
panel speakers. This was something I address to the salesman before I bought
a pair of Aerius. I was told that as long as they're periodically unplugged,
discharge, and vacuumed about every 3 months, they're fine.

Actually, depending on one's location and climates, some folk may find it
a tiresome chores 'cause it might have to be done every month or so and
the fact will remain -- it will make a difference.

As with the Maggies, I cannot ascertain how it's done without envisioning an
excruciating cruel imagining. Ymmv.

[JBorg]

> dourmaj wrote

>
> Ok... so let me ask then... what tube amps are we talking about here?
>
> I use a Pass Aleph 5 and a CJ MV75A1 that has been dramatically
> upgraded... I am going to pressume that either of these beasts will
> handle the impedance shifts of the MLs (certainly the Pass!)... and
> the CJ once powered a pair of Ohm Walsh 5's which are almost as
> power hunger as speakers can get...

These sound like a potential match for the Aerius, and considering the
extra effort you put forth to tweak these amps, your discriminating taste
show. As been said, try hooking them together if possile.

Don't be stir with the grime and grits, among others, the potential
returns for Aerius is not bad.


> I'm not interested in spending any more money on an amp so I'd like to
> get an idea on how picky these speakers are with power requirements.
>
> Thanks
>
> J-

[Sandman]

"Sander deWaal" > wrote in message
...
> (JBorg) said:
>
> >I don't see the need, at least for me, to be fanatical with Martin Logans
at this
> >time. The new Aerius now cost 3k + AFAIK and they still have not address
> >its tendency to beam at higher spl or its inability to maintain the
soundstage
> >beyond 2 feet on either side off-axis. And then, there's my dust
problem--
> >I really think that this is an issue much more than Mr. Sander think.
>
> Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
> I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
>
> I know, I know, it's Sanders.

Very funny. I wouldn't be caught dead with the Aerius model. It sounds
weak, pale, thin, and beamy compared to the Quest Z's and ReQuests. I don't
know what JBorg's "dust problem" is, though. Undoubtedly, the recent Aerius
models have the same panel as the upgraded Quest Z's and Requests - a panel
which discharges completely when the amps are turned off. All it takes is
periodic vacuuming with a soft brush to eliminate periodic dust.

[Sander deWaal]

"Sandman" > said:

>> >I really think that this is an issue much more than Mr. Sander think.

>> Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
>> I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)

>> I know, I know, it's Sanders.

>Very funny.

I think he meant mr.Sanders, the designer of ML.

--
Sander deWaal
Vacuum Audio Consultancy

[Bruce J. Richman]

Sander deWaal wrote"


>"Sandman" > said:
>
>>> >I really think that this is an issue much more than Mr. Sander think.
>
>>> Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
>>> I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
>
>>> I know, I know, it's Sanders.
>
>>Very funny.
>
>I think he meant mr.Sanders, the designer of ML.
>
>--
>Sander deWaal
>Vacuum Audio Consultancy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

That's a possibility. He also could have meant Colonel Sanders, the designer
of what to eat when listening to Martin Logans. (Do they have KFC in the
Netherlands?)



Bruce J. Richman

[JBorg]

> Sandman wrote in message
> > Sander deWaal wrote in message

>
>
>
> > Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
> > I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
> >
> > I know, I know, it's Sanders.
>
> Very funny. I wouldn't be caught dead with the Aerius model. It sounds
> weak, pale, thin, and beamy compared to the Quest Z's and ReQuests.

Aerius do tend to be on tizzy side when paired with SS amps and preamps
that's why I decided to pair it with a pure tube preamp from AR. With it,
the treble is less screechy, edgy, or grainy and the overall sound became
warmer and fuller. They still start to beam though when the knob reach
2 o'clock and beyond. Soundstaging begins to collapse in my set-up
therein.

> I don't
> know what JBorg's "dust problem" is, though. Undoubtedly, the recent
> Aerius models have the same panel as the upgraded Quest Z's and
> Requests - a panel which discharges completely when the amps are
> turned off.

The original Aerius speaker does not come equiped with an automatic sensor
to shut off when signal stop at specified time. They (dealer) recommended
to me at during that time that the orig. Aerius should be unplug for 2-3 days
before any meaningful clean up is done. I've no problem with these.

As you said, the recent models from ML now discharges completely when
it senses no signal from amps. I don't understand why they would bother
adding this option at an additional expense for each speaker for no reason
other than Mr. Sanders think they're cute. Why can't he just let 'em
"constantly charge." ?


> All it takes is periodic vacuuming with a soft brush to eliminate periodic dust.

But why would the recent models from ML discharges completely when the
amps are turned off?

[Sandman]

"JBorg" > wrote in message
om...
> > Sandman wrote in message
> > > Sander deWaal wrote in message
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
> > > I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
> > >
> > > I know, I know, it's Sanders.
> >
> > Very funny. I wouldn't be caught dead with the Aerius model. It sounds
> > weak, pale, thin, and beamy compared to the Quest Z's and ReQuests.
>
> Aerius do tend to be on tizzy side when paired with SS amps and preamps
> that's why I decided to pair it with a pure tube preamp from AR. With it,
> the treble is less screechy, edgy, or grainy and the overall sound became
> warmer and fuller. They still start to beam though when the knob reach
> 2 o'clock and beyond. Soundstaging begins to collapse in my set-up
> therein.

You're right about using tube amps or preamps (preferably both) with M/L
speakers. But I found even with tubed gear, the Aerius sounded threadbare
compared to its larger brethren.

> > I don't
> > know what JBorg's "dust problem" is, though. Undoubtedly, the recent
> > Aerius models have the same panel as the upgraded Quest Z's and
> > Requests - a panel which discharges completely when the amps are
> > turned off.
>
> The original Aerius speaker does not come equiped with an automatic sensor
> to shut off when signal stop at specified time. They (dealer) recommended
> to me at during that time that the orig. Aerius should be unplug for 2-3
days
> before any meaningful clean up is done. I've no problem with these.
>
> As you said, the recent models from ML now discharges completely when
> it senses no signal from amps. I don't understand why they would bother
> adding this option at an additional expense for each speaker for no reason
> other than Mr. Sanders think they're cute. Why can't he just let 'em
> "constantly charge." ?

Because, as I discovered the hard way, with my original M/L Quest Z panels,
the elecrostatically charged panels attract dust in the air, and over years,
if constantly charged, this will accumulate to the point it did on my
panels, vastly decreasing sensitivity to the point that (1) the preamp
volume control needs to be increasingly raised over time until (2) all you
get is the grunge of a dead panel. So I had them replaced with the newer
panels which discharge automatically when the amps are shut off.
>
> > All it takes is periodic vacuuming with a soft brush to eliminate
periodic dust.
>
> But why would the recent models from ML discharges completely when the
> amps are turned off?

Because as soon as the panels discharge, there's no longer an electrostatic
charge to hold the dust and grit from the air to the panels. Most falls of
to the bottom of the panels, and that plus any remaining dust are easily
removed with vacuuming. It's important to keep the panels clean. The
efficiency of the panels will not diminish so long as they are kept clean.

[Sandman]

"Sander deWaal" > wrote in message
...
> "Sandman" > said:
>
> >> >I really think that this is an issue much more than Mr. Sander think.
>
> >> Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
> >> I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
>
> >> I know, I know, it's Sanders.
>
> >Very funny.
>
> I think he meant mr.Sanders, the designer of ML.

Hmmm... I suppose if "Mr. Gayle" were mentioned, I'd have known which
"Sanders" was being referenced. :-)

[Sandman]

"Bruce J. Richman" > wrote in message
...
> Sander deWaal wrote"
>
>
> >"Sandman" > said:
> >
> >>> >I really think that this is an issue much more than Mr. Sander think.
> >
> >>> Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
> >>> I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
> >
> >>> I know, I know, it's Sanders.
> >
> >>Very funny.
> >
> >I think he meant mr.Sanders, the designer of ML.
> >
> >--
> >Sander deWaal
> >Vacuum Audio Consultancy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> That's a possibility. He also could have meant Colonel Sanders, the
designer
> of what to eat when listening to Martin Logans. (Do they have KFC in the
> Netherlands?)


Um... er... could it be you meant to say "of what *not* to eat"???

I prefer not to eat at all when listening to Martin Logans. If you must put
anything in your mouth when listening to M/L's, I recommend sipping Cristal.

[JBorg]

> Sandman wrote in message
> > JBorg wrote in message
> > > Sandman wrote in message
> > > > Sander deWaal wrote in message
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
> > > > I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
> > > >
> > > > I know, I know, it's Sanders.
> > >
> > > Very funny. I wouldn't be caught dead with the Aerius model. It sounds
> > > weak, pale, thin, and beamy compared to the Quest Z's and ReQuests.
> >
> > Aerius do tend to be on tizzy side when paired with SS amps and preamps
> > that's why I decided to pair it with a pure tube preamp from AR. With it,
> > the treble is less screechy, edgy, or grainy and the overall sound became
> > warmer and fuller. They still start to beam though when the knob reach
> > 2 o'clock and beyond. Soundstaging begins to collapse in my set-up
> > therein.
>
> You're right about using tube amps or preamps (preferably both) with M/L
> speakers. But I found even with tubed gear, the Aerius sounded threadbare
> compared to its larger brethren.
>
>
> > > I don't know what JBorg's "dust problem" is, though. Undoubtedly, the recent
> > > Aerius models have the same panel as the upgraded Quest Z's and
> > > Requests - a panel which discharges completely when the amps are
> > > turned off.
> >
> > The original Aerius speaker does not come equiped with an automatic sensor
> > to shut off when signal stop at specified time. They (dealer) recommended
> > to me at during that time that the orig. Aerius should be unplug for 2-3
> > days before any meaningful clean up is done. I've no problem with these.
> >
> > As you said, the recent models from ML now discharges completely when
> > it senses no signal from amps. I don't understand why they would bother
> > adding this option at an additional expense for each speaker for no reason
> > other than Mr. Sanders think they're cute. Why can't he just let 'em
> > "constantly charge." ?
>
> Because, as I discovered the hard way, with my original M/L Quest Z panels,
> the elecrostatically charged panels attract dust in the air, and over years,
> if constantly charged, this will accumulate to the point it did on my
> panels, vastly decreasing sensitivity to the point that (1) the preamp
> volume control needs to be increasingly raised over time until (2) all you
> get is the grunge of a dead panel. So I had them replaced with the newer
> panels which discharge automatically when the amps are shut off.
> >
> > > All it takes is periodic vacuuming with a soft brush to eliminate
> > > periodic dust.
> >
> > But why would the recent models from ML discharges completely when the
> > amps are turned off?
>
> Because as soon as the panels discharge, there's no longer an electrostatic
> charge to hold the dust and grit from the air to the panels. Most falls of
> to the bottom of the panels, and that plus any remaining dust are easily
> removed with vacuuming. It's important to keep the panels clean. The
> efficiency of the panels will not diminish so long as they are kept clean.
>

Thanks for the explanation. It seems you do know about my "dust problem"
afterall.

[Sandman]

"JBorg" > wrote in message
om...
> > Sandman wrote in message
> > > JBorg wrote in message
> > > > Sandman wrote in message
> > > > > Sander deWaal wrote in message
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Huh? Where did trifle little ME enter this picture?
> > > > > I own *Maggies*, goddammit! :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > I know, I know, it's Sanders.
> > > >
> > > > Very funny. I wouldn't be caught dead with the Aerius model. It
sounds
> > > > weak, pale, thin, and beamy compared to the Quest Z's and ReQuests.
> > >
> > > Aerius do tend to be on tizzy side when paired with SS amps and
preamps
> > > that's why I decided to pair it with a pure tube preamp from AR. With
it,
> > > the treble is less screechy, edgy, or grainy and the overall sound
became
> > > warmer and fuller. They still start to beam though when the knob
reach
> > > 2 o'clock and beyond. Soundstaging begins to collapse in my set-up
> > > therein.
> >
> > You're right about using tube amps or preamps (preferably both) with M/L
> > speakers. But I found even with tubed gear, the Aerius sounded
threadbare
> > compared to its larger brethren.
> >
> >
> > > > I don't know what JBorg's "dust problem" is, though. Undoubtedly,
the recent
> > > > Aerius models have the same panel as the upgraded Quest Z's and
> > > > Requests - a panel which discharges completely when the amps are
> > > > turned off.
> > >
> > > The original Aerius speaker does not come equiped with an automatic
sensor
> > > to shut off when signal stop at specified time. They (dealer)
recommended
> > > to me at during that time that the orig. Aerius should be unplug for
2-3
> > > days before any meaningful clean up is done. I've no problem with
these.
> > >
> > > As you said, the recent models from ML now discharges completely when
> > > it senses no signal from amps. I don't understand why they would
bother
> > > adding this option at an additional expense for each speaker for no
reason
> > > other than Mr. Sanders think they're cute. Why can't he just let 'em
> > > "constantly charge." ?
> >
> > Because, as I discovered the hard way, with my original M/L Quest Z
panels,
> > the elecrostatically charged panels attract dust in the air, and over
years,
> > if constantly charged, this will accumulate to the point it did on my
> > panels, vastly decreasing sensitivity to the point that (1) the preamp
> > volume control needs to be increasingly raised over time until (2) all
you
> > get is the grunge of a dead panel. So I had them replaced with the
newer
> > panels which discharge automatically when the amps are shut off.
> > >
> > > > All it takes is periodic vacuuming with a soft brush to eliminate
> > > > periodic dust.
> > >
> > > But why would the recent models from ML discharges completely when the
> > > amps are turned off?
> >
> > Because as soon as the panels discharge, there's no longer an
electrostatic
> > charge to hold the dust and grit from the air to the panels. Most falls
of
> > to the bottom of the panels, and that plus any remaining dust are easily
> > removed with vacuuming. It's important to keep the panels clean. The
> > efficiency of the panels will not diminish so long as they are kept
clean.
> >
>
> Thanks for the explanation. It seems you do know about my "dust problem"
> afterall.

You're welcome. As I said, I had to learn the hard way. The new panels
weren't in existence when I purchased the Quest Z's in 1991. The panels
died 8 years later, and only then did I learn through the technician I hired
that M/L had come out with the new panels which solved the problem which led
to the death of the original panels - daily dust accumulation sticking to
the panels over years. Good luck with the info!