REL or Martin Logan?


Just wondering if anybody has compared two.I would throw Vandersteen 2Wq into mix but they are single price point unlike ML and REL.Have heard very nice bass from Velodyne,Revel etc and know if you want to spend $3K you can get great bass that intgergrates with many speakers but have heard that those with fast very pitch accurate speaker that are fast like Magnepan,Martin Logan,Quad ESL's etc do better with multiple drivers creating depth of bass and air pushed because they themselves are faster (at their price points they exceed large 15-18" units).

I have horn speakers now but no matter what I have I am more into music than HT so would sacrifice some depth or slam for finese and easy integration.Also am intrigue by single driver TBI's but haven't heard them while I have heard REL Strata.The one execption I have thought to this out because of sophisticated software is new velodyne DD series but still think ML,REL, or even Vandersteen (which would be shy of depth I want) would be better design wis so wondeing if anybody has gone head to head REL/ML
Thanks
Chazzbo
chazzbo
Last year I narrowed my sub selection down to these two brands. I could not compare the two subs in the same room however. They were in separate systems in side by side rooms. Both subs did an extremely well job of blending with the systems in which they were paired. I could not reach a decision. I spoke with another dealer who also had both subs on demo. The advice I was given was that they were both great subs with the Martin Logan being a bit faster and the Rel being more powerful as he had tried both in the same system. I decided on the Martin Logans. I bought two Descents which give me a ton of "impact" and are at the same time very fast. The Velodyne models were not as good with music as the Rel or Martin Logan subs from what I could tell after hearing them in several different set-ups. If a dealer carried Martin Logan or Rel as well as Velodyne, that dealer would always recommend one of those two over the Velodyne for music. I would also say that the Martin Logan was so much more attractive than the Rel that it played a factor in my decision. I thought the Rel B1 was just a big plain rectangular box and the worst looking sub of any that I was considering. The performance of the Rel B1 though was great and I could have easily lived with it, hidden from view, lol.
You have horns why not a bass horn? I can build one in your price range as a former dual ML decent owner I can tell you bass horns are much better than subwoofers which I also build.
definitely Rel.
the rel doesnt impose a sound of its own. it doesnt call attention. it integrates seamlessly with my main speakers.
i do agree the ML is more powerful but its presence makes it annoying at times because it simply wants to say "i'm here , I'm here."
Have you read about the new JL Audio Fathom. It seems to be getting outstanding reviews.
Thanks for detailed resposes.I think REL wins out here.Now need to hear them and if I can find Magellan by TBI Has one driver in unique short square (like little coffee table) and what makes sense is you can get them passive and hok both up to one amp/x-over unit at attractive price.Got great review at www.6moons.com.Knoiw they were good enough to be used effectively with Vavantegarde Uno's in opne set up.Builder said it was better than Avant's own $4K system and way cheaper.Johnk appreciete offer about horn but thinking of getting out of horns beacuse even though I like my Odeon Tosca from Germany it is really not good with large scale dynamic muisc though plays jazz (my main use) very well.But would like speaker than can play larger scale,moredynamic/complex muisc as well.Unsure at this point about efficiency.Would love Avantegarde Uno's but cost and space isue.maybe the Silverline Sonatta with these new Redwine T 30 stereo or 70 mono amps instead of current tube set up.Not sure if I will need HT sub and if so velodyne DD would be choice mut if muisc cheap pick would be Vandersteen 2wq or REL maybe Strata.
Thanks
Chazz