martin logan vs magnepan sound

They definitely sound different.

I tend to like Maggies better. I'm not a big fan of the ML hybrid design. The overall presentation just never sounds quite right or convincing to me, but that may just be my taste.

I had Maggie mg1.3c's for 20 years.

Maggies, like most good speakers, are easy on the ear. They sound better and better over time during extended listening sessions.

With the dynamic bass drivers, the MLs move more air resulting in more impact and dynamics with the bass than comparable maggies, perhaps.

How about a Martin Logan CLX v Magnepan MG-20 shootout?

I have heard ML speakers over time, but I must say that I prefer Maggies for the sound stage. The ability to listen to the Maggies for long periods of time without fatigue won me over compared to the ML's also.

As for the date of writing (April 2013), I think the situation re ML hybrids is considerably improved at this point in time since the last comments here. The recent vintages of ML hybrids (Vantage, Spire, Summit, etc.) use a powered subwoofer which decreases the need of tremendously high powered amplification. Also, the sub is adjustable in level which makes these speakers more adaptable to a wider variety of rooms. Plus, the integration between the woofer and the electrostatic panel is much improved over the earlier versions. Both Magnepans and ML's can sound wonderful in the right system, but I prefer these modern ML's because of their greater low level resolution, more natural mids and highs, greater efficiency and deeper bass. Nothing is perfect of course, but the tradeoffs in the MLs seem to my ears to be good ones and the problems relatively minimal.

If I had the right room for them, I would really like to give newer MLs a test run. One of the things I like most about audio is trying out products that demonstrate a unique design approach. MLs fall into that category.