2. speakers
  3. 1097718613

Martin-Logan as alternative to Magnepan 1.6's

I was in a dealer's showroom today and explained to him what I was trying to do: build a new system that is 90% as good as it gets for placement in a little bit of an ackward room. I had pretty much settled on the Magneplanar 1.6's with an amp "with enough power to run an arc welder". My dealer suggested I consider the Martin-Logan Mosaic or Clarity speakers. Used, I would even consider the Aeon's.

The advantages of the Martin-Logans are a) easier to set up, b) they could be adequately powered by a good hybrid integrated amp ($1500 to $2000 range), and c) their good sound could be appreciated at low volumes better, i.e. if one was hosting a dinner party.

The Martin-Logan Clarity's are about $2600 vs $1750 for the Maggies (plus Mye stands, etc.). How much different are these two speakers? If one of my goals is to produce the feeling of a large open space in which an orchestra or jazz quartet is playing, (with excellent tube electronics and adequate interconnects/speaker cables) will I be able to accomplish this with the M-L Clarity's? Will I be at least 90% there, as compared to what I could do with box speakers (Theil 2.6's would come to mind)?

I expect there are committed fans of each speaker
delsfan
gkmcl
3 posts
 
I've owned and enjoyed Maggie's for 20 years (1.6's, 1.5's and smga's)but I'm also a fan of M-L (at friends). I've found the room to make more of a difference than you'd expect and have found cathedral and/or high ceilings to allow Maggies to open up (it might be the larger volume of the room equates to a little higher level). You should listen to both but if your room is not large I would expect the M-L's to be better in a more intimate setting.
rooze's avatar
rooze
577 posts
 
Delsfan, having heard Aeon's, SL3's, Prodigy's, and the Aerius, I would suggest sticking with the Magnepans. I've never heard an ML where the woofer integrates seamlessly with the electrostatic panels. I've only ever heard them in a dealer environment, with less than perfect setup, and I know from what other people say that they can sound really good, but I just don't think you'll have the same issues with the 1.6. What is the problem with your room?....remember that planers radiate in a figure 8 pattern so sidewall influences are less than with a typical box speaker. The only real issue I would see is if the wall behind the speaker is uneven, or opens into another room or whatever. You need that wall to be even and parallel with the speaker to reflect evenly back into the room. If you sit fairly 'nearfield' you can eliminate many room influences, with the exception of the wall behind the speaker.
I'd stick with the 1.6 over ML's.
meta
20 posts
 
I completely agree with Rooze. With ML integration of woofers is problematic and their sound (at lower frequencies where woofer kicks-in) is room dependent. Few years ago I helped a friend of mine with purchase and a set-up of Magnepans 1.6 and their sound was incredible (If you go with Magnepans, please consider good quality sub-woofer).
I am personally a proud owner of Martin Logan CLS and use 2 separate sub-woofers to avoid problems with integration.
kkm
124 posts
 
I had once faced the same choices that you are, I went with the Maggies because, to my ears, the ML are colored, at certain notes, I could hear the tzzz of the mylar. For me to pick speakers, I shouldn't be able to identify, if blind folded, the line of speakers playing, with the ML's, I could. Also agree with those that mentioned the cone and 'stat integration. Use music that go to the extreme scales to see how well they integrate.
hasse
230 posts
 
I had Sequel II´s, SL-3´s and reQuests before I decided to switch to the Maggie 3.6´s. I´ve never regretted the decision.
More to discover