Martin Logan Ascent i vs. Odyssey

I find them to work very well in HT applications. If placed correctly, They don't lack dynamics, which is really the main component for HT. Paired with a good Sub(s), MLs do very well in HT. But I would agree that their main strength is in music which emphasizes the mid and upper frequency ranges. Vocals/jazz/classical all sound very good on stats. don't worry, didn't take it as a criticism at all, as I would say that is a common conception about MLs

'so much more at peace with my large DIY oris horns and fostex f200a speakers and low power SET amps...Maybe you should look into avantgarde or DIY before upgrading your ascents.Just my 2cents worth Dont mean to offend'

I agree.

Are Panel speakers only for easy listening music or jazz? coz thats all I can hear from the rooms with panels at hi-fi shows. Not that this is a criticism just an observation.

I have the Ascent I's and pair them with Velodyne SPL-1500Rs. The Rs are fantastic and blend seamlessly with the Ascents once set up properly. I do have an acoustically treated room which helps, but have never wished for a larger soundstage. Of course amp choice and Pre choice is going to have an effect on this as well. My room is 13.8 X 24.8 X 8ft and the soundstage is beyond the speakers width, and very 3 dimensional. Although I don't think I would gain anything from the Odysseys (primarly the Odyssesys really only improved the bass in my listening sessions), I do often wonder if a move up to Prodigy's are worth it. It seems like it would be with the better specs and larger Stat panel. Although the summits are phenomenal, I really enjoy the look of the older models. Completely subjective of course.

I had the Ascent and Odyssey too. Ascent was too weak in the bass. I didn't like the integration of the bass driver and stat on the odyssey. I ended up with the Wilson Sophia instead.

Thanks for all the replies.

I did end up getting the Odysseys. They are pretty well broken in now, and I am very impressed with the transition to the mid-bass- a fuller sound vs. what I remember of the Ascents. I am still playing with room placement- sometimes the bass is great, sometimes a bit shy. Seems like if I back them closer to the wall the bass gets reinforced, but at some point the soundstage collapses a bit and the Martin Logan magic diminishes (not bad, but a noticeable change).

Bill

I have owned both the Ascents and Odysseys.
I now have a pair of Prodigy's which I run with tube mono blocks. I have had these around a year now.
I have always ran tube amps with Martin Logan's speakers, while the Ascents did lack some in the bass I never felt the needed a sub.
The Odysseys are excellent speakers with better bass then the Ascents and overall a bigger sound stage, and again I personally never thought the needed a sub, I have always had plenty off bass,I guess it depends on your system and what you are powering them with.
They love the power especially the Bigger Odysseys and Prodigy's, if you under power them I can see why the bass might not be there.
I think your Classe CAM200 monoblocks will mate very well with both but in the long run you will be allot happier with the Odysseys.
Good Luck.

I recently purchased a set of odyssey's after listening to Ascents they did sound a little thin to me. I purchased the Odysseys knowing full well that they would sound fuller. More or less because of the 2 speaker placement (which the ascents do not have). I have matched the Odyssey with an aerial sw12 sub (and i don't think you would be happy running without a sub) and I am very very pleased.

Also,
I am pushing the speakers with a yamaha Rx-z9, Although I need to push it from -79db to about -30db they sound clear regardless of what i'm pushing thru them. Looking back I'm very happy I didn't go with the ascents. Besides for the price I bought them here on audiogon the ody's were cheaper than the ascents (well not quite but close enuff)... sorry if i come off like a stereophile noob but as a pro-musician i do have fairly good ears... I'd also reccomend listining to B&W nautilis revels and paradigms... imo the soundstage was less... but if my room 30x20 was for music and not HT I would have gone for the revels....

Must respectfully disagree with JohnK. I don't know why he couldn't settle in to his Logans. Just because they are innovators in product development doesn't mean one can't get comfortable with a pair for years. I have a pair of CLS IIz's that are basically the only part of my system I almost never fantasize about upgrading.
I have mine paired with Vandersteen 2wq subs with great results.

harry

Hi owned most logans, odyssey is much better than ascent,Had to use descent sub with ascent ,odyssey didnt need it as much.but after hearing good horns and fullrange drivers with SET tube amps. I will not go back to logans, had good sound with large tube amps running logans owned ML speakers for 10years was fun but frustrating always thinking I need the new more pricy ML or bigger better amps cables ,room treatments etc so much more at peace with my large DIY oris horns and fostex f200a speakers and low power SET amps...Maybe you should look into avantgarde or DIY before upgrading your ascents.Just my 2cents worth Dont mean to offend

Bill try over on the Martinlogan fan site

www.martinloganowners.com

Miles