Martin logan vs. B&W


Anyone has experience with both brands or done some A/Bs? (especially B&W 800s and larger logans- ascent or higher)

what are the main differences and + and -s
what made you choose one over the other?
what kind of music did you use to compare them?

thanks for your input
Jay
jungsan

Showing 1 response by macdadtexas

Well Stravinsky's the Firebird would sound better on the B & W's, a Beethoven piano concerto would sound much better on the Martin Logan's. That said, I really have trouble with hybrid speakers in general. The sound differences between the very, very fine panels of the ML and it's cone woofer always sound mismatched to me. The only hybrids that I have heard that really seem to get this right are the Innersounds. Otherwise, I really think that planar speakers such as Soundlabs, Quads and Magnepan's are light years ahead of the hybrids.

As far as traditional speakers, I really, really like the B & W's. The build quality is spectacular, and the sonics have a great consistant tonality. Very musical. I agree with Beemer in that they are very different. If you like a warmer, detailed sound, full orchestra, B & W's are great. If you tend towards more intimate music, I would suggest the planars or hybrid. Before you buy the ML's I would suggest that you audition the Quads, Soundlabs, and Magnepan's. At the very least listen to the very fine Innersound speakers, if you really want a hybrid.

Good luck.