martin logan vs magnepan sound

The former is an electrostat, the latter planar magnetic. Apples and oranges. The former is like Jezebel, very beautiful on top and mid, bottom end is a different story. Magnepan is a good speaker, cheap but the time and money spent on tweaks to get its fullest will cost you. There is no such thing as overpowered magnepans! Both requres a decent amp.

Me, I will take the maggies if push comes to shove.

Disclaimer: I owned ML Aerius, Aeon, and Ascents. Magnepan 1.6 (two pairs), one stock one modified. I now have a different speakers.

regards,

Abe

These are the only two speakers I have been able to live with. I refer to them as Betty and Veronica. If you are familiiar witht the Archie Comics. Betty is the maggie. Veronica is martin logan. I would not say they have house sound. It's more like they both have limitations.Both remain excellent bargains.

Maggies need to be played loud. They are the perfect amplifier load. Room placement is important. Excellent bass coherence. Like Betty the maggies will be happy with dinner and a movie. She also cleans up well and can handle formal affairs just fine. Don't believe maggies don't have bass.
Martin logans are a lot more finnicky. Can sound horrible with wrong equipment or improper room placement. Dinner and a movie just will not get it for them. They prefer formal affairs. Excellent coherence and low level resolution. Small sweet spot. Poor vertical dispersion.
Which is better? I used to say Martin logan. With the ribbon tweeter, I say it's a toss up.

The only ML that was ever fully integrated from top to bottom was the pure electrostatic CLS model (without a cone subwoofer). Otherwise with the exception of the SL3 (to my ears) none of the larger ML offerings had good integration of the electrostatic panel and subwoofer. They aren't bad but I think the Innersound Eros was far superior. The maggies sound more seemless but need lots of current. Properly set up and run the 1.6 maggies are a better buy. ML should consider re-issuing the CLS series.

i have owned magnepans. i currently have 1.6s. i have heard martin logans extensively. my friend has a pair of requests. while the speakers sound different, there are differences between current martin logans and older martin logans. there is a difference between hybrid elctrostatic and full range electrostatic.

personally, i prefer the treble of the martin logans--a bit purer with less timbral errors. i don't like the bass of the hybrids, nor do i like the integration of panels with bass. i am waiting for the new clx, a full range electrostatic

Very different sounds, Logans are not only Electrostat but use a dynamic woofer so bass will be better out of the box but you can add a sub to Maggie and end up with virtually same result. The Logan is not for everyone nor is the Magnepan but I would say more will like the Magnepan long term over the thrilling Logan which may not be exactly the kind of speaker you have forever, dont get me wrong both are great speaker makers but not everyone has the same taste.
I have owned both Planar and Electrostat's......long term investment would be Magnepan for me but they need lots of good clean power and and both need a good sized room to breath and get the best out of them (they cant be close to the wall behind them) Cheers