Upgrading from Martin Logan SL3s

Having owned virtually every ML speaker during the time frame you've owned the SL3's, 1995-present, I'd suggest you're so accustomed to the ML signature sound it's tough leaving ML and finding pleasing performance in a traditional 3 way design. I've tried it for years, and the closest I've come to that lush electrostatic heaven was delivered via a single driver design matched to a small 300 B SET amp.

I'd heartily 2nd the earlier suggestion of moving on to newer Logans. Vista's, Vantages, and Summits will bring you a fresh performance and be a step up from the SL3's.

To those who've not experienced integrated bass with ML's that's never been an issue with my CLS's, Requests, or SL3's. Any decent sub properly dialed in at the right crossover point has never had me longing for something different from a traditional speaker design...in fact the trade off to be had by leaving the ML sound completely is too large a trade off, for as I suggested, once electrostatic never back...although I always have several different types of speakers and amplifiers on hand, therefore I choose not to have to live without them...bottom line, once that lush midrange is in your ears it's an uphill battle for a traditional speaker to compete with...but certainly if one has enough money they can in theory perhaps find something better...but at the price point for a pair of SL3's upgraded w/fresh new panels, or used Vantages commonly found now at $2500, I don't personally know of anything that will deliver the sonic goods at that price point that will be nearly as satisfying.

Your last post was long-winded causing me to lose interest.

Actually Coltrane's post was well articulated and should be read by Lostbears with interest.

Hey if you like your Merlin box speakers more power to you, but Coltrane and I think alike. good luck leaving stats after living with them.

Steelhead, The Sl3s are about the perfect size for my room. I have thought about getting a newer Martin Logan speaker of similar size. I have now also thought about replacing the panels of My SL3s. But I was also looking for suggestions on other speakers to audition. So far I have borrowed a couple of dealer demo's and not found anything that I thought was worth upgrading too.

Coltrane1, I know what you mean about finding it hard to go from an electrostat to a regular box type speaker. Before the SL3s I owned both Apogee and Soundlab speakers. I have so far not really found any 3 way box speaker that I could live with long term. Maybe just rebuilding the SL3s is the way to go. I have also thought about upgrading to a newer pair of Martin Logan's. The problem with that though is that I really don't like the way the newer ones look. So maybe it is a fools errand. I should just redo the SL3s and maybe look into getting a sub.

A subwoofer is a great idea in my humble opinion. I found that using a good subwoofer to augment the bottom end of a Martin Logan set-up was well worth doing. Over the 14 years that I had my Quest Z's, I bought, (and sold), a bunch of different subs. Some I found worked better and blended seamlessly, while others were pieces of crap and only "muttled up" the sound. The good ones were: Velodyne, but NOT the big ones. 15" and 18" drivers can be too slow and plodding, did not mate well with a "fast" panel speaker such as M.L., so stay away from the BIG Velodynes, like the FSR18, F18, ULD15, ULD18. I've owned them all. Go for the smaller driver Velodynes if you must. IMHO. Von Schweikert used to make a pair of subs, each containing two rear firing active 10" drivers in a sealed cabinet. Called the Towers of Power. Those were killer with my M.L.'s., (they were a completely black fabric covered pair of subs and looked like Vandersteens). Had them for many years and loved them. I ultimately ended up with a JM Lab/Focal Sub Utopia which is an awesome match, and just seemed to fill in that bottom octave without imposing itself. Very smooth and natural, and it's a beautiful looking, furniture grade cabinet with a 1000watt amp built in. It's built like a battleship. I still have it today and use it in conjunction with my MBL 101e Mk2's. Other subs I've bought over the years, but didn't like with my M.L.'s, (and ended up selling off pretty quick)- ANYTHING Sunfire. Had 3 different sizes of those little Bob Carver designed "true subwoofers"...basically a little nuclear bomb in a box. I found them to be sloppy and loose, and boomy. Not worth the trouble. To hard to integrate, crappy sounding. They're really just good for lots of noise, but suck for music.
I've also had one of those BagEnd "infrasub" 18's. The thing was GIANT, produced big boomy sound, and was slow as MUD. It's much better if used in a home theater system with the LFE output. Great for explosions, car crashes, Sci-fi space battle scenes, and loud sound effects. But NOT with music. NOT with M.L.'s
I would stay away from those if I were you. Now Martin Logan makes some great subs,(the Depth, the Decent, the Abyss i think they are called??), and while I have never owned a M.L. sub, a friend of mine did and loaned it to me, it was clear that it was intended for use with "fast" speakers, and really worked wonders with my Quest Z's.
So there you go Lostbears, from my firsthand experience I would tell you to go for it! Buy a sub and you will not be disappointed. They add a whole new dimension to an already great speaker. Just stay away from the crappy ones I mentioned. I see M.L. subs all over this A-gon so I know you could snap one up for a pretty good deal. Better yet go for stereo subs...buy 2 M.L.'s!! That would be a beautiful thing!