Martin Logan Logos vs Theatre vs Cinema

We are putting together a planar speaker home theatre system. Martin Logan electrostats will probably wind up for the front/surrounds (CLS, Aerius) or Magnepans. The Martin Logans are more likely as the CLS is might attractive as a full range electrostat.

In any event the center channel speaker is an issue. We lean to the Logos as it is a true electrostat and not a hybrid (ie, no woofers..correct me if mistaken) and the Theatre and Cinema are both hybrids (as is the Soundlab center channel).

Is there a reason Martin Logan discontinued the all electrostatic center channel in favour of hybrid design? Is there simply not enough panel area to generate decent SPL and freq range?

Amplification requirements are understood for all of these speakers. Such amps as a Bryston 7b monoblock are being considered or older Threshold S/500 type things.

The current Martin Logan center channels are both hybrids - just like ALL of Martin Logan's current lineup.

It's difficult to make a dipole unit produce the kind of
long wavelength bass sound - the fact that it's a dipole
means that the bass emitted by the panel is acoustically
"shorted out" since it will have destructive interference
with the back wave.

A relatively small baffle like the Logos doesn't isolate
the front and back bass waves very well. When the
wavelength is bigger than the speaker - there's not much
the speaker can do. It's bad enough for a "full-sized"
electrostat - even more so for the diminutive Logos.

This is where the hybrid design comes in - the small
dynamic woofers in the Cinema and Theater are not hampered
by concerns about backwave cancellation.

Martin Logan discontinued the all electrostatic Logos
center channel - just as it discontinued the all
electrostatic CLS "full-sized" speaker.

Dr. Gregory Greenman

I personally have tried two of the Martin Logan Center Speakers.

I started with the Cinema and really like the sound but the soundstage was no comparsion to the Logo which I later upgrade to.

I want to make a note here Logos does have a tweeter and woofer driver. The woofer is enclosed in the back cabinet. So it would be consider as a hybrid

Someday in the future I would like to try the Theater i to see if it would be better than the Logos.

Please check out this link for Logos manual:

If anyone could put some input in from Logos to the new Theater I would be interested to hear some feedback.

I went from a brand new late model Logos to a new late model Theater, (not Theatre i). The difference in dynamics and output was a surprise to me. I kept the Theater and sold the Logos.

I never did upgrade to the Theater i because of the dongle. The convenience of not needing a traditional IEC power cord did not appeal to me. I prefer the option to use a power cord of my choice. I never purchased the new Generation 2 stat panel because of the power cord. No one had one locally for me to demo. I might have been moved to purchase the newest Theater i.

Has anyone ever owned both the Theater and Theater i? Any major upgrade there?

I wonder what the new high end Martin Logan product will be like in 2005.

I have an all Martin Logan theater with CLS IIz's up front, scripts in the rear, and a Theater as center. I've listened extensively to the Logos and the Theater.....and prefer the Theater. Having said that, when noone is off axis, I prefer to use phantom center mode and let the CLS IIz's handle the front!!! I've done extensive a-b comparisons with the center in and center out. The soundstage is wider and deeper in phantom center mode.