Magnepan or Martin Logan

I disagree with above comments from a few weeks ago regarding the treble range reproduction of an esl panel when compared to a pure ribbon. No esl panel can hope to have the transient response of a pure ribbon. It is evident in the listening, as well as the measuring. An esl panel, by it's very nature, has a VERY strong force (through high voltage static electricity) that is applied to the panel to get it STARTED moving. But, to STOP it moving (or rather to "damp" it's motion), the panel is almost free to rattle around within it's small excursion limit (and weak surface rigitity/damping capability of surface resonances of the mylar). THIS TRANSLATES TO: the esl having a near perfect RISE time, BUT A VERY SLOW AND SMEARED DECAY TIME, about equal to that of a small/rigid/lightweight cone speaker with a very powerful motor. The result is that no esl has accurate high frequency performance AT MODERATE OR HIGH LISTENING LEVELS, at least I think so. NO DRIVER CAN FOLLOW A HIGH FREQUENCY WAVEFORM'S TRANSIENT BEHAVIOR BETTER THAN A PURE RIBBON. DYNAMIC behavior is ANOTHER story, though. I feel that the best soft dome tweeters actually reproduce the envelope of dynamic range in the treble BETTER than esl's, or ribbons (even with their larger emissive surface area). Anyway, you can never have it all in one package (you can fool yourself into thinking you do, but that's YOUR problem). THAT'S WHY I HAVE SEVERAL DIFFERENT TYPES OF SPEAKERS THAT I ENJOY. They all have a truth to tell. That said, a design which can utilize more than one of the best quality dome tweeters in parallel seems like the best compromise, except in the EXTREME nearfield.

I noticed the same apparent 'smudging' in a narrow band of the midrange on my 3.5s and later, a pair 20Rs, and with both Bryston and Krell amps. This phenomonon disapeared entirely when I went to a Pass X350. Possibly the best amp for this type of loudspeaker.

I had the big maggies, and switched to the ML Monoliths. They are a little bright depending on the choice of cables and or amp. Overall I prefer the soundstage and imaging on the ML's compared to the maggies. I do agree with the comments above. They are both great sounding speakers, it's just personal preference.

I own the ML ReQuest's and if you like crystal clear vocals, transparency and enough punch to serve as home theater speakers, they are,in my opinion, among the best speakers regardless of price. I compared them to the CLS-2's and the Monolith's and found them to be much more powerful than the cls-2's and more coherent than the (more expensive) monolith's. The maggie's are certainly good speakers, but don't have the alround capabilites of the Ml's (listen to some organ music and you'll know what I mean).

Unless, of course, you augment with a stellar subwoofer. I do enjoy organ music, especially RR "Pomp and Pipes".