Martin Logan Versus Magnepan

I had the 1.6 and Aerius i to compare for about 4 days, I whent with the Aerius, but I also had speakers from that dealer that I could trade up and get credit from. If not for that advantage the maggies might have won.It really was a harder decision then I thought it would be considering the Logans where about a grand more.The maggies are astounding for the money. The dispersion was a little better with the Martin Logans, but both speakers really sound best in that one sweet spot.As far as driving them I was using a Sonagraph sa250 at the time (125) per side and neither seemed that difficult to drive. Currently have proceed so I am considering going over to the 3.6, or maybe mg20 if I can fit them in my room. The only other thing I can say is the Martin Logans look as good as the day i bought them, no cloth to sag or get pricked. IE. they are cat proof.

having tried all three my first choice would be the SL3but by a very small margin over the 1.6 if price were a consideration the 1.6 would win easily the aerius has no bass to speak of I thought and id also more expensive than the 1.6

I have owned the Magnaplanar 1.6 and currently own the 3.6R. I listened to the Aerius and SL3 last weekend at a local dealer. I believe the Magnepans provide a more coherent, seemless sound from highs to lows (perhaps the Martin Logan dynamic cone woofers don't blend very well with the electrostatic panels). I preferred the tight, well focused bass of the Magnepans, especially from the 3.6R's. I can't think of any aspect of the Martin Logan speakers I preferred to the Magnepans. The Magnepans sounded MUCH more like real live music when reproducing female vocals. I think you get much more for your money with Magnepans. I am driving the 3.6R's with an 80 watt per channel (into 8 ohms, 160 watts into 4 ohms) Linn Klout amp. It drives the 3.6R's to very loud levels in my 17 x 28 room. The 3.6R (and 1.6) do have a small sweet spot, but I listen alone, or with one other listener, most of the time, and it isn't a problem for me. The Martin Logans didn't provide as precise an image (again on female vocals) as the 3.6 or 1.6 did. The 3.6R ribbon tweeter is in a class by itself, and no other speaker, including Martin Logans, can reproduce high frequencies more muscially than the Magnaplanar ribbon. The ribbon has an effect on the initial transients of most instruments, even those one associates with the mid range, so the ribbon has a profound effect on music reproduced on the 3.6R. For the coherency of the sound and the extremely musical ribbon "driver" I recommend the Magneplanar 3.6R. The 1.6 is an incredible bargain, as well. Happy listening!

check out the newform research r645 or nhb645. see the comments on audioreview. i'm currently saving my $$$ for a pair... doug

For less than the price of either of these speakers new -- both evry nice speakers -- you can get mint condition used CLS2's or CLSz's and experience a full on electrostatic. Far better than either in terms of transparency and ability to resolve detail. Matched with a really fast sub woofer, like the Vandersteen, near perfect.