Jump to content

Blind testing with speakers (general public)


deepak

Recommended Posts

I think you're wrong. So they're aggressive about advertising, so what? Wouldn't you be, if you were in that business in this day and age? I'm not going to blame them for treating a business like a business, even if it is a labor of love -- the two are not mutually exclusive.

That said, from what I read in the interview a year or so back (Absolute Sound, I think), they do concern themselves with sound quality. They couldn't handle the number of returns on the original CLX, so they discontinued the speaker entirely. How's that for quality control. And they figured out how to make it profitable again, so they reintroduced it -- what were you saying about smaller panels? I think I hear a famous spritzer backpedal coming...

And sure, they care about looks -- with all the comments I've read about "at that price, I expect it to look good as well as sound good", I would too. Again, the two are not mutually exclusive. Just because they actually show some initiative about one, does not mean that it's to the exclusion of the other.

I think you're just holding a grudge. What'd they do to you -- did a friend of yours buy a CLX that didn't work?

No grudge here except the usual of selling crap at high prices to people that don't know any better. A friend did buy a CLS Mk1 one and it works just fine and is a great speaker. The CLS was a labor of love and respect for electrostatics but those days are long gone for ML. They've been bought out and are not now only making money.

They claiming that the care about sound doesn't make it true in any way. That's akin to Ray's claim of the B-52 being the end all preamp and some are buying that crap. If simple cathode followers and flimsy, outdated ESL's strapped to bass units that can't work together are your thing then more power to you.

I don't see how discontinuing the CLX makes them care about QC other then that they want to sell products that work (i.e. produce some sound) so they don't have handle repairs all the time (like Quad). ML could have made a lot of money on the CLX if they had simply copied the CLS with a stiffer panel with a thinner diaphragm, more bias and in a braced aluminum frame. It's simple and works well. Another tweak they could charge a fortune for would be the stands to minimize room reflections. ML are a bit like Quad though as they started out doing something new but were bought out and are now rehashing the same old crap but the Quads are quite good when working right.

To put all of this into context lets look at Sound Lab. The CLX was 25k$ so well into S-L territory. Sound Lab have been hard at work making speakers that last and are on the cutting edge with the ProStat and it's domestic variant the Majestic. They've reached new heights in producing stiff frames from wood and the 12kV bias is groundbreaking. They use teflon coated diaphragms to make the insane bias possible without the fear of arcing. They've also worked on the backplates making the speakers more efficient with better components in the signal path.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They've been bought out and are not now only making money.

They claiming that the care about sound doesn't make it true in any way.

I can't believe you put these two sentences so close together. Just because you say the first sentence, doesn't make it true in any way either. Are you that in love with your own opinion that you think of it as fact? Jesus. I was synopsizing the article, they didn't just claim to care about sound, they discussed it in great detail. You obviously didn't read the article, otherwise you wouldn't be spouting off this uninformed nonsense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read the article as there is only one audio publication that is worth paying any attention to, the rest is crap IMO. I'm drawing my conclusions from having lived with a few ML's (back in my speaker days) and having quite a few friends that do own Logans and are happy with them. I've also worked on them, replacing panels and the like. I'd love to be able to tolerate the Logan's as they are cheap and look good but they simply aren't good and the design sucks, even in comparison to granddad, the ESL57. It's my opinion and it is based on my knowledge of ES technology and studying how their speakers are built. If you like them, that's fine but never claim that they are well designed or built as that is a load of BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read the article as there is only one audio publication that is worth paying any attention to, the rest is crap IMO. I'm drawing my conclusions from having lived with a few ML's (back in my speaker days) and having quite a few friends that do own Logans and are happy with them. I've also worked on them, replacing panels and the like. I'd love to be able to tolerate the Logan's as they are cheap and look good but they simply aren't good and the design sucks, even in comparison to granddad, the ESL57. It's my opinion and it is based on my knowledge of ES technology and studying how their speakers are built. If you like them, that's fine but never claim that they are well designed or built as that is a load of BS.
You're changing the subject -- weren't we talking primarily about sound? I mean, I agree, build quality should be an issue (especially at those prices, just like sound and looks), but my main argument is sound, as the original study seemed to point out that many people agree that they make great sound. So I've got >50% of a study that says you're wrong, at least about that.

Also, you said yourself that your experiences are in the past, not in the recent, and yet one of your issues seems to be that they were bought out. Was any of your experience post buy-out? So why would that be an issue, I would think that you would think that that would be an improvement?

Still sounds like you have a bone to pick, and if I sound like I have a bone to pick, it's because I despise people who spout off nonsense. Much of the time you have useful information to contribute, but every once in a while, you forget yourself and just get diarrhea of the brain. That's the only reason I spoke up -- I was just "calling you on it".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The "planars have a huge sweet spot" argument never held water to me. My maggies were extremely sensitive to where I sat, to the point where I had to have my head within a few inches for optimal sound.

Of course, I had mine standing straight up, and they can get rather "beamy" that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah the Sennheiser remote control looking thing. It'd be my missing half of the Surrounder Pro setup.

I've got one that I'm sure we could work a deal on, I haven't used it in years. I think I've even got the original (although somewhat beat up) box when it was sold with the HD580s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.