QUAD vs Martin Logan vs Magnepan

Thanks for the advice guys, I really appreciate your opinion. I suppose I should provide you with a bit more detail regarding my interest in the above speakers. I'd always had an interest in hifi and while searching for a Rega Planar 3 turntable found myself in a fairly hi-end store. While there I experienced a real 'freak-out' moment, I literally heard Tracy Chapman appear over my left shoulder, the effect was a bit bewildering to be honest as I'd never any idea that electronics/hifi equipment could be so convincing - to be specific had I been blindfolded I would have been convince there was a real person present, but not only that I could pinpoint exactly wher the 'voice' appeared as it had an uncanny 3d quality to it. Upon enquiry I was informed that the sound was coming from a pair of electrostatic speakers (the brand name escapes me) - but these were nowhere near the apparent location of the 'voice'. Anyways that moment has been a BIG influence on my current inerests. For those of you experienced with, well. general mid-range hifi gear I have a further question. Was that 'real person in the room' effect simply down to the traits & charactoristics of the electrostatic ?....or do box speakers, when partnered with good components, perform that trick similarly.

Again, many thanks

You can do this with well set up 'box' speakers as well as panels and electrostats. In fact the first time I heard this holographic effect was with a small pair of Thiel 04's (box 2 way floorstanders) driven by a Threshold class A amp, a Conrad Johnson tube pre-amp and a TT (I forget the make etc) playing an LP of Depth of Image by Opus Three - about 25 years ago! You felt you could walk in amoungst the musicians.

Its far more about set up (including room treatments if necessary) than speaker type. And its not particularily easy to get holographic imaging with panel speakers or Quads either although these speakers can sound more atmospheric with less effort because of the back wave from the speaker, which is not to say they are easy to set up. Quite to the contrary, for what goes as excellent sound its much easier to set up appropriate box speakers.

As with other things in this hobby its all about some sort of trade offs, but I've always found that careful attention to matching speakers to room size then proper set up is FAR FAR more important than speaker type or electronics. You can get excellent sound with well selected but ordinary stuff if you can match up the components and perfect the set up. Conversely outstanding components not matched up or not properly set up can sound like, and often do sound like, crap! JMHO of course.

Oh, BTW it goes without saying fine full range highly resolving speakers properly set up and driven can sound amazing..........

Hey Safox. Just to make sure you are in the loop on a new product. Quad recently released 2 new 'stat speakers. These are both sonically better and look significantly better than the 988 and 989 models. Price might be higher than the 988s and 989s, but if so not by much.

Heard the bigger one during a 20 minute demo in July and was impressed. More low end, more dynamics, probably more extended upper end, though don't quote me there. (I must qualify myself as a former Quad US Monitor owner and a Quad lover.)

i have listened to all three speakers. the all ribbon magnepan are not at all lacking in the treble! perod. if you don't have the right amp, the magnepan will bleed your ears. the best quad ever made wa the 57. forget about the current quads. get a sound lab if you want a full range electrostatic speaker.

the magnepan 20.1 needs serious amplification and watch that spectral balance.

i still think that even with its limited bass response and dynamic range, the quad 57 is an ideal speaker.

if you want more mid bass, buy 4 of them. i owned 4 quad 57 for 7 years.

The previous responses all seem to be well on target.

I've only heard a demo of the Quads. Impressive, yes, but like all large panels they have a very narrow sweet spot. Take that into consideration. It's a law of physics that when the wavelength is equal to or smaller than the size of the source the dispersion decrease accordingly and interference patterns are created.

I have auditioned three of the ML models and the Maggie 1.6. The 1.6 is an incredible value. Although I didn't buy them because of the large panel issues already mentioned.

My favorite of the MLs is the Clarity. It surprised me too. I was expecting to salivate over the Summit. Didn't happen. Only months later did I come to the conclusion that it may have been the smaller panel on the Clarity—less beaming and combing. And most disappointing, all the MLs demonstrated the same weakness; the bass isn't very well resolved. It's not bad, but for the money, ML should get the bass tightened up.

What ever you do, here's the best advise I've ever been given; Before you spend your money, audition, audition, audition.