Maggies or Martin Logans?

Fpeel -

The comparison between Maggie 3.6 and Martin CLS is a tough one. I prefer the tonal balance of the Maggies, and the coherence and low-level performance of the CLS. I'd probably go with the CLS, as to me it does more of the goosebumps thing, but I like 'em both very much.

I really like both of these. I prefer the Martin Logans sans cone, but then they can be hard to drive become a bit bright and glassy and of course leave some thing to be desired in the bass region. But my oh my can they sound transparent and coherent. I strongly prefer the 3 series Maggies over the smaller ones. They are easier (not by a huge margin) to driive than the ML's. They don't have the coherence of the ML's (or other speakers for that matter) but their not too shabby either. I think the ML's are more startling but long term the Maggies might be easier to live with. I haven't heard them but the Eminent Tech's and the new Quads look promising.

I consistently over the years have preferred Maggies but I think this is almost totally a matter of individual taste. You can't really go wrong with either one.

Let us know what you decide.

will

I just went through this process myself. I think the Magnepan 3.6s are probalby more truthful, but they are also brutual on poorly-recorded material. I compared with the Ascent and Odyssey, and if I were *only* doing 2-channel, I think I might have ended up with the Maggies. But I can only get the stuff by the rest of the family if it works in the theatre, so we had to compare the surrounds too. And in this, both of the M-L centers just crushed the Magnepan equivalents. We ended up with Odysseys and a Cinema, due to the center channel situation, the fact that all of the M-L models are kinder to poor recordings (of which I have plenty), and because part of the family (me and the teenagers) likes more bass than the 3.6's present.