Quad 989 vs Martin Logan CLS IIz?

Never owned the 989 but I did for a short period have USA 63's. The CLS 2Z blows them away and doesn't have to be vacuumed and is infinitely more reliable. The CLS does need a sub.

I also had to respond to audiokinesis. I put a sound meter on the CLS2Z and I have to wonder what distance he referes too. I can get 95db out of them at 40 feet. I use a Radio shack sound meter. What is he using?

Hello Dannylw,

My source is a phone call to the Martin Logan factory. I had a customer inquiring if he could get 100+ dB peaks with the InnerSound amp driving his CLS's, so I called the factory. They told me the CLS's wouldn't do much over 93 dB no matter how much power you put into them. I assume that's for a single speaker.

I did not attempt to verify the figure for myself.

Based on your experiences and measurements, I now have to wonder if what the Martin people told me is accurate. I suppose I should have given the source of my information in my post, but it never occurred to me that it might be inaccurate.

Thanks for posting your findings!

Just thought I would chip in. I have just received my IIz's and I'm not sure how loud they will go I'll meter them once they are broken in... One thing I will say is that they do seem to plateau at a certain volume! (but seriously who listens at that (93db) for extended periods of time!

Miles

ps. I have never had the pleasure of listening to the Quads... If they sound better than the CLS's all I can say is congrats you have a very fine speaker indeed! Enjoy!

audiokinesis I didn't mean to sound harsh. I measured the level playing both speakers. I did try A and C weighting. Keep in mind that I'm probably getting a composite splice of front and backwave. I 've noticed that unlike a lot of speakers I've heard the volume does not drop appreciably with distance.