Anyone listened to ML Vantage?


Hello,

I have heard very positively of ML Summits, but that is beyong my reach! Wondering if anyone had an encounter with the new Vantage, which is the smaller sibling of the Summit?

ML sent be the brochure and the specs of Vantage and they look good except for the 8" diameter woofer. Ascent, which is being replaced by Vantage had a 10" woofer, so I am wondering if that is a compromise. (However the Vantage has the Aluminium cone woofer, which ML claims is up to the task)

PS: If anyone needs the specs please PM me and I shall email. It appears that the ML website is not yet updated with Vantage.

Cheers,
amal
Ive been emailing people who have there vantage/vista's up for sale to find out how they stacked up to previous Logans in the same price. The response's I got were incredible. So many of them said the new Logan line sounds like home theater mass produced speakers. I found this interesting as Ive read this elsewhere as well.

I was interested in the clx, till I saw what they looked like, and how over priced they are. This showed me Martin Logan is not the same company they once were. I will say there service(jim powers) is the best out there. Nobody even comes close to this guy!
I wouldn't knock the CLX until you've heard it. At the 2008 Munich High End show, it won a "Best of Show" award. Those who HAVE heard it (I've not) say it's jaw-dropping good. Getting OPTIMAL sound from ML's (whether new or older models) takes a fair bit of effort, and MANY owners (even some dealers) don't know how to properly set them up. If you slap them up against a wall, with an underpowered amp, you'll definitely get "mid-fi" sound. In the right room, with the right components, you get MAGIC!
Thats the whole problem, setting them up. not only was I never happy with where they were placed, and I tried everything from 2 ft to 9ft!!! Who in the world wants a speaker like this? There is no optimal positions with a logan. You set it for one area, you loose in another. No thanks. Also, regardless what the clx sounds like, my eyes dont fail me, they are about as ugly as Ive ever seen, and they look like they were put together from spare parts from past logans, and the frame is even worse!

Also, do you honestly think since the cls was made, the price ratio for making them has gone up more then 4 times. This is typical Martin Logan lately. They once made great speakers at there price points, then the new versions came out. They have offered less and almost double the price. Buy into marketing if you wish, but there is one constant with panel speakers, the bigger the better. I have heard the vista,vantage,summitt, not impressed at all. Sure, the summitts sounded nice, but at 10k? Give me some Legacy Audio whispers any day of the week. Both are around the same price used. Save yourself from placement issue's, amp issue's, and all out better sound from the Legacy Whispers.

I will say Martin Logans service is out of this world! Jim Powers is the man. Martin Logan should pay this man anything he asks, because he is simply amazing at quick responses and following through! Nobody, I mean nobody can top this guy in my experience.
I think you have to be careful about taking comments on any dipole speaker without seeing how the responder had them set up. I have seen absolutely rediculous positions with apogee, logans, and mags such as the speakers being 2 feet from the rear wall with an equipment rack (5 feet wide) between the speakers with only a foot between the rack and the edge of the speaker in the same plane.

Dipoles are critical with the rear wave. It's as important as the front wave. You need an 8 milisecond delay for the rear wave in order for it to be perceived as added depth otherwise it detracts from the effect. Sound moves about 1 foot per milisecond so thats a minimum of 4 feet to the rear wall and there can be nothing between the speakers or its interfering with the rear wave. Instructions often say shorter distances to such boundaries are ok but thats to open up the market to people who wouldnt otherwise buy. Couple this with people adding in their own opinion as to what tolerances can be applied to the recommended distances and you get ideas like,"Well it says 2-5 feet to the rear wall is optimum, so 1 1/2 feet is passable". The result is that short distances result in early reflections which actually decrease depth illusion and confuse central images. The speaker also loses the 'blat' in horns and hollows out female voices.

Once prperly set up a true dipole effect will blow away any other direct radiating speaker. If you cant optimize these things then you cant give a true opinion of how they sound. You can only comment on a compromised set-up with a compromised opinion. Dipoles are not for small rooms. 4 feet to the rear wall, 4 feet from the speaker to listener, and 4 feet behind them suggests 12x12 as the smallest rooms. If you dont have this, a high resolution minimonitor with a good servo sub will outperform a poorly set up dipole.