Martin Logan speakers

sorry to be joining this conversation so late, but was a wondering what y'all think of pairing a denon avrx7200w with a pair of ESL 9s. will that amp have enough power? i can bi-amp the speakers, but just not sure...

much thanks in advance for your input!

I haven't heard the 13A or 15A Expressions yet.

But I do know this about my Montis setup...... Went to 2 Stereo separated REL S3 subs right next to the Montis and tuned them to accommodate the speaker, not overwhealm it.

Have a Krell KSA-200S currently driving the Montis, and with the addition of the 2 RELs, full bodied sound that seems like it would cost four times as much to achieve.

I wouldn't buy too old a Martin Logan speaker.
They are very reliable recently and you can get some great deals on ones that aren't too old. I had A TUBE AMP for 5 years on a set of ML ESLs. Sweet sound, but nothing like Krell amp with my tube preamp combo.

Here’s what ML says about the Montis’ woofer:

" Montis uses an extremely precise 24-bit Vojtko™ DSP engine in conjunction with a powerful 200-watt class-D amplifier to deliver a stunningly detailed low-frequency performance reaching down to 29Hz—uncommon in cabinets this compact"

I know that ML speakers do not have the tightest bass available, I have owned speakers with tighter bass, but ML is aware of the problem of the bass lagging and overshooting and work to optimize their bass response. Other manufacturers may do it better, but I still don’t hear an awful, lagging or bloated bass from MLs. I find the bass control to be very respectable and tuneful. Not at all "one note." I do not have golden ears and I’m not a bass freak, though.

I don’t get what people mean when they say the woofer response lags behind the panel so badly. In Stereophile’s review of the Montis the step response of the woofer lags behind the panel by 1.7 milliseconds. This is a greater lag than many cone speakers but can people really distinguish a 1.7 millisecond response lag from a 1 millisecond response lag? Live music must sound very disjointed to people who can.

Another reason I like MLs is the way the music is totally unattached to the speakers. It would be hard for me to give this up.

Just want to add something else, I have no idea what people are saying about a small sweet spot with the ML’s. I have a huge sweet spot with mine. I own several speakers and the only speaker that gives me a narrow window where I have to put my head to hear into the music is my very large Magnepan’s. I have not experienced this issue with my Request ML’s. 

I think that when people start talking about “enough power” as a issue to whether an amp is going to sound good on a speaker or if more power is needed, they really don’t have much experience in hifi audio. The only reason one needs more power is if the amp is running out of power while playing music. Aside from that, no one can really tell you what amp is going to sound best in your particular setup/room. There can be recommendations but ultimately you have to find what amp works well for you. I think it is a silly question to ask if ML’s are still considered good speakers. ML’s are great speakers! One of the most desired sounds in Hong Kong is the older Monolith ML with Conrad Johnson Premier One tube amp. I own the Request and have tried many amps on them. I like the way a really good powerful EL34 amp sounds on my ML’s but for my setup/room, I found a Class A 50watt Threshold to be the best match. 

Even though they aren’t for me, I completely get why some people love ML speakers and find most other types wanting.  They have their own sound that if you love it, you love it.

To the OP: don’t be put off by anyone else (like me) who prefer other speakers.   

I bought a pair of impression 11A’s last April, and I love em! 
Owned many many speakers over the years and these are one of my favorites. Bass is seamless to these ears.. I just wish I’d have gotten the 13A, for a little bigger soundstage and bass wallop (but these speakers can rock out in my 14’ x 25 basement listening room ..

To the OP, I haven't listened to Vistas specifically, but I've owned an older model in the Aeon i's, and a newer model in the Expression 13As, and I can say that yes MLs are very directional, and yes panel to woofer integration hasn't been a strength of theirs, but both of these are much improved with the newer models, imo.  I'm not sure where the Vistas sit in this spectrum, but If you can get a good deal, and you have a dedicated room where you can really fine tune the listening and speaker positions, then electrostats can be magical.  Don't throw them in the corners of a multipurpose living room and expect to get the same results.  

As for the 13As, I decided to stick with ML when I chose them over other dynamic / cone speakers like the Sopra 2s (which I also really liked) because they just blew everything else I demoed away in terms of imaging.  I will grant that you are probably giving something up in terms of dynamic slam vs a cone speaker, but larger panels help, and so do subs, so I'm not lacking for dynamics or low end extension. 

I still went with MLs even though I'm primarily a rock and electronic music guy and could afford more expensive dynamic speakers.   Hope that helps. 

I have a pair of Acent i, with a Martin Logan Desent i subwoofer. I power them with a SS Musical Fidelity intergrated amp, for a modesty priced system they sound fine to me.

My friend , the above posts are appreciated because Martin Logan speakers are very worthy of consideration. Unfortunately, they don't address your basic question. My Vistas are augmented by Martin Logan Depth I subs, so I have cured some ills. As documented above in this blog, buying old Vistas, is very risky, why take a chance on a rather old speaker, now very long out of warranty.
'
.

Echoing what's been said already, the VT130 will have no problem driving the Vistas and will be a great match.  Unless you want rock concert volume levels, but then you probably should be looking at other speakers if that's the case.  I have EM-ESL's which are pretty similar and drive them with a ARC VSI-60 and have no need for additional power.  I previously drove them with Rotel and Parasound solid state amps and Rogue tube amps.  Love them with tubes, hate them with solid state. 

My ESL 13a complete my latest high end system (Krell 575 mono/ Audio Research and PS Audio) and I couldn’t be happier. The subwoofer and panel are seamless; whatever problem they may have had in the past is non existent. It does have a small sweet spot. My friend owns the markedly less expensive ESL. His system is amazing. We’ve both owned lot speakers through the years and agree that the latest line by ML is our favorite. 

I also have ML CLX but paired with Descent i subs with CLX filters.  They integrate very well once set up properly.

I agree with Audioman58 that X-over capacitors can be replaced for an improvement, I used VCAP CuTF and OIMP as replacements for the factory Solens (big improvement but a very tight fit).

I power them with either Krell KSA 250 or ARC Classic 150 depending on my mood.  

I had CLS I, II and z, all driven by an ARC D115 mkII for nearly 30 years. You will love the sound of the VT130 on the Vistas. Midrange magic.

Replaced them with ML CLXs driven by an ARC REF150SE.

BTW, the pairing of the CLXs with the new BalancedForce subs is exceptional, once you fine tune the crossover with the Perfect Bass Kit.  Near ruler flat in room bass.

I have owned Martin Logans for years and family and friends alike are amazed at the sound.  I have a surround system being run by Classe 5200 and an SSP 800.  Movies and music sound great no matter whats playing.

The quality and the amount of bass on the models with passive woofers is very dependent on the room placement and the partnering amplifier. I have my Aerius i in room corners, about 3 feet in from the back wall and about 2 feet from side walls and about 12 feet apart and 12 feet from the listening chair. I do have a subwoofer in the room but I don't find the speaker bass lacking for most music and only use he subwoofer when listening at low volumes. I was driving them with a borrowed pair of Bryston 7B-ST mono blocks for a while and  the bass response from those 8" woofers was completely adequate. Most people have the speakers way into the room so the bass module can't couple with the room. If the room shape allows, they can be placed very close to the side walls without any issues since they don't really have much side-wall reflections. Just my experience.

Owned 7 pair of  logans over the years plus descent subs and have heard most newer models and honestly they got it right on CLS2Z and the other models well they dont have that magic. Logan also has raised prices as have others and cut corners on quality.

Quad Esl and 63s ushered me into high end audio (I owned the 63s and later added Gradient subs) so I have a soft spot for stats.

I’ve heard and auditioned many ML stats since the 90s.

I find the ML sound to have a generally pleasant “golden upper midrange” to my ears that I like, though MLs, especially older models could veer into being a bit bright and slightly fatiguing. Never the case with Quads for me.

I was recently chilling listening to my friend’s set up with the ML Ethos, a standard ML hybrid and came away with the same feeling I’ve had every single time I hear ML. It’s a place I love to visit - I will always eagerly sit down on front of a pair to experience that special stat transparency, openness and (with some sources) realism.

But I very quickly also realize why I could never live with them as a main speaker. I find the discontinuaty between the low frequencies (cone) and midrange up (stat) impossible to ignore. When there is some bass in the track that portion of the sound will have some presence, but everything rendered by the stat has a ghostly, skeletal, flatter “I can hear it but it’s not really there moving air” quality. It’s especially painful for rock/pop where the drive of the sub/cone can fool you that air is being excited in the room but it’s easy to notice instruments in the midrange - eg electric guitars, synths, lack any punch.

Plus I’ve never found the quality of bass in any ML hybrid to be that good - I hear more of a plodding quality “yep the sub has kicked in” vs tight, tonally integrated bass.

I’ve heard since the 90s onward “ML has better cone/stat integration now” but I’ve never once found it to be the case, including various newer statement products at shows.

Whatever route ML has stayed on in its hybrid designs, I don’t think it will ever yield truly excellent integration, if it hasn’t by now.

i remember getting more convincing integration many years ago with the dipole Gradient subs made for my Quad 63s.

I’d love to hear the Janszen hybrids which many report as a truly successful integration design.

Anyway, although it sounds like I’m coming down hard on the MLs I still love listening to them. It’s just whenever I spend time with a ML by the end I come home wanting to hug my cone speakers, as they  provide both an amazing sense of boxless transparency and a sense of density and punch through the whole range that I find more satisfying and realistic.

Thought I’d chime in here.

Yes, you’ll find Martin Logan speakers - at least their higher end stuff - to be well regarded.

I’ve wanted a pair of ML’s since hearing the CLS in the 1980’s and didn’t get around to it until about two summers ago when I bought a pre-owned system consisting of the reQuest (gen2), Bryston 4ST and then traded from my old Mac C28 to a Krell KRC3 preamp. Even as a used system with near-vintage equipment, the performance is hard to beat until you get to the 'next level' of strata in high-end systems.

As noted above, the characteristics of ANY type of ESL will be quite different than a voice coil design, though some speakers (like the Dahlquist DQ10s that they replaced) simulate it fairly well. However, simulate isn’t duplicate. The response rate of a low mass mylar surface comes through in surprising ways. Yes, they can have a tiny sweet spot if not in the right room or placed incorrectly. However, when run in tandem with a good subwoofer, I don’t necessarily agree with them not being suitable for rock, though not at higher listening levels. If you’re running a mosh pit, you might want a cone driver for its... uh... ’durability’ for that purpose. ;-)

I’m not familiar with that AR amp, but if you have a chance, why not give them a try? Since you don’t define what ’outrageously expensive’ means, why not ’roll the dice’ and grab a pre-owned 4BST for under $900-ish.

Hope this helps!

I currently own Montis powered by Pass Labs INT-150  I agree with the comments that they do sound best with classical/jazz/acoustic.  However in my listening room they are more than adequate for rock at any reasonable volume.  If you are an extreme bass freak, they probably won't cut it for you.  As far as bass to panel integration, in my opinion the models with powered woofer with DSP are where ML finally got it right.  Maybe not absolute perfection, but very, very close.  Anyway on to your specific question about Vistas.  These were the entry level with the narrower 9" panel and 8" bass reflex.  Similar to the Theos when I was looking.  I found the bass to be not adequate at all on that model.  For me at least a subwoofer would have been a must have.

So i have the Summit X. They are not allrounder and sound best on Classic and on music with natural sounding and not amplified instruments. Problem is, Summit/Montis Monolith.... show every detail on the recording. Sometimes to much. On Metal and Funky music stuff you don´t want to hear detail but more the pure groove and punch imo.

A Powerful amplification is essential to the ML Panel. The Bass cabinett ist active on the summit but the Panel´s Resistive resistance need best strong power.
I have a GRUENSCH CSE II  power amplifier which is said one of the best to do the job. I also use a Lyngdorf TDAI Digital amp using for room correction specially for older ML, i had the Request ML for years.
The Gruensch fix the "moving instrument" problem others and smaller amp´s cant solve even if they sound good on first impression.

Wow.   Great comments.      For those of you who have had bad Martin Logan experiences, I extend my condolences, and my special thanks.   It's always harder to talk about experiences that have not gone as well as they should have.      I admit that I am reconsidering my Martin Logan experiment...

I owned the Montis for a while.

You can sum up those speakers by listening to two consecutive Fleetwood Mac songs in Rumours.

The simple acoustic song "Never going back again" sounds as open and transparent as you could ever want.  Simply gorgeous.

By the end of the next track "Don't stop" you'll be ready to put them up for sale here.  They just sound so disjointed and wrong with a driving drum beat and bass line.  And any distorted electric guitar just sounds really dry and flat out wrong.  It's weird.

They SUCK for rock music IMO.

My other gripe is that the cabinets they used on Montis, for a $10k speaker, leave a little to be desired.  The new models seem to have rectified this.

I sold mine and got Focal Sopra 2's.  They sound just as open and effortless in the mids, just as transparent, and their bass driver integration is just worlds better and much more dynamic.  Any ML fanatic who dismisses "cones and domes" simply hasn't heard a really good cone and dome speaker.

I would be delinquent if I did not respond. I have had a pair of Vistas for 5.5 years. One speaker made three trips to Kansas and the other made 2 for repairs/replacements. To Martin Logan's credit they paid for everything, including shipping. Just about every part as well as the  two panels were replaced; they even replaced one speaker's base that had some wood chipped off. With the last repair, I received an extended warranty, now expired. Mine were 2K, a sell off from Audio Advisor. All of the cautions about setup are true as are the comments regarding the small window of appreciation. They also need lots of power. Unless you are getting these for a rock bottom price and you know their repair history, I would advise you to look elsewhere.  

I've got original CLS in a second system. Magic in mid range and with acoustic music, and more convincing than any of the hybrid MLs I've listened to (haven't heard the Monoliths or Summits though).

I had a pair of ML Aries "I's" for a couple of years and drove them with a ARC Classic 60. My best day in audio was the day I sold the ML's and bought the Legacy Signature III's. 

Lute, guitar, piano and small jazz trios are fine on the ML's, but when you want to move some air .... well ... 

Frank

I’ve been running my Audio Research VT100 with a pair of Martin Logan Aerius for years and have thoroughly enjoyed it.  

there's a mcintosh dealer in whittier ca. that's been around since the late 50's or so. they like matin logan speakers.

Here in Switzerland you see Martin Logon very often combined with big McIntosh amps. The advantage is these solid state amps can deliver 2-8 Ohm the same power. And as far as I know Martin Logan need a lot of power and are not that tube friendly (not 8 Ohm).

I have not listened to the ML Vista's, but came within inches of buying a pair of NOS Summit X's from a dealer.  I had heard the Expressions, which replaced the Summit X's and then listened to the Summit X's-- big mistake.  Martin Logan has not, and cannot, get the bass depth and timing right on these speakers.  Listening to a piano concerto, it was among the best sound I had ever heard-- from any speaker.  Put on something with a set of drums in it, or a bass guitar, and it goes right down the drain.  I walked away from a brand new set of Summit X's at $5,400 for the pair just for this reason.  The Neolith's, with their huge size (and more than $50,000 price), may have solved the bass problem.  But you didn't ask about spending $50,000 in your post.  Trust your ears :)

Thank you all for these great comments.   Very informative, and much appreciated!

I have owned several , one flow even in their best is  average capacitors . I had the 11A. Solen, And gum drop type nothing special I replaced with big Clarity CSA,on bass ,and Mundorf Supreme Huge upgrade. Why they are so cheap is beyond me 
myself and other have told them ,on deaf ears Maggie same crap.
even their $80k flagship cheap Mundorf Evo give me a break .
at least use the Black Supreme, , Silver Gold oil in flagship
all competitors use better Xover capacitors , resistors, And inductors are good , itmakes no sence.

I was a Martin Logan dealer for many years and have personally owned almost every speaker they have made and have setup well over 100 pairs.

The Vistas are not that hard to drive, (90db sensitivity).  The ARC VT130 should have no problem.  That said, IMHO, the Martin Logans will perform better with higher powered amps, but decent tube amplification can be a wonderful thing.

In the right room and set up properly, Martin Logans are hard to beat.

jcder

I love ML speakers and have owned a few, but with the right amp if your to get the very best from them .
Most ML speakers dive down to less than 1ohm in the highs 10-20khz, this could very well reduce the sparkle and extension in the highs, using the AR tube amp/s it may sound distant and recessed. Also very hard for a tube is around 4.5khz were it’s 3ohm and -60degrees negative phase angle, this could reduce "presence" using tube as an amp.
Here is a shot of the Montis impedance/phase graph, which will be very similar to the Vista.
https://www.stereophile.com/images/912Montisfig1.jpg

Cheers George

I have listened to the M-L Montis in a VERY large room with cathedral ceiling.  Because of the room size we sat farther from the speakers than in most installations and experienced a much wider sweet spot. As has been said here so many times, so much depends upon the space in which you listen.

I probably should stay quiet, but here's my (limited, very limited) experience with ML's:  I loved the sound but found that the " sweet spot" was incredibly tiny, and that even a half-head's width off of that led to such a stunning drop in sound I could not consider them.  Maybe it was the pair I was auditioning, not sure.  Others may have had a different experience.

The Vista looks like the upgraded version of the older Aerius i model that I have and they are decent sounding speakers. The ESL speakers have a different sound from the mainstream voice coil design and are also very directional with a very narrow sweetspot. They are bi-polar by design so you need at least 3 feet space behind them to get a good soundstage. As for the power requirements, it all depends on your listening room size, how loud is you listen to your music but I don’t think anything less than a 50wpc 4 ohm capable amplifier will make them sound any good, regardless of the room size. I don’t see a 4 ohm spec for the VT130 but my guess is it’ll have a hard time delivering a tight bass as well as a crisp high octave. The midrange will probably sound real good. By the way, I think the VT130 is one of the coolest looking ARC gears. A real classic. 

Since 15 years I have ML   model Sl3  ...odyssey  prodigy and now summit x with viola legacy I' m very happy 

I think MLs are great speakers. The Absolute Sound gave the ML Neolith their "Overall Product of the Year 2015". The Neolith is probabIy out of your price range, but it does say something about MLs.

I don’t know if the 130 would have enough power for MLs. A lot of people say they sound best with tubes, but I haven’t tried them. There was a post a few days ago from someone who had Summit Xs and loved PrimaLuna amps with them. I think they put out 75 or 80 wpc.

My experience is that they like a lot of power in a solid state amp that doubles watts as impedence halves. I’d like to try tubes with them but I’m really happy with the sound I have now.

With each generation of speakers ML is getting better at integrating the cone woofer with the panel. I don’t know how well they were doing that with the Vistas, but that is the main gripe people had about them in the past.

Sorry I can't comment on the Vistas.  But...I have a friend with M-L Montis with a 16 tube AR amp and I've never heard M-L ESLs sound as good. Great match!