Martin Logan SL3 vs Ascents

I've been away from this forum for a while and dropped in to find this tiff over ML speakers, past and present. Why is it any time someone voices a different opinion from another's the ad hominem attacks follow? Ed makes a valid point about Amandarae's premise - Amandarae then accuses him of breaching conventional ethics and (paraphrasing here) disrespecting her opinion. Whew!

I have a full complement of MLs: Ascents, Aerius i, and Cinema.... love them all. However, I also agree with Ed that the CLS is the best speaker they've ever made.....IF, and that's a big "if", you can accept their limitations on the bottom end; i.e, it is not there. The dynamic range is also nothing to write home about. Nonetheless they are amazing speakers, especially when used for chamber and small ensemble music.

Have been in this crazy hobby a long time and have seen numerous examples where "upgrades" and/or "improvements" were in fact retrograde. (Someone cited McIntosh and Marantz -- you could add Aragon to that list, IMO.)

I'll probably get flamed for this. Fine. Do your worst! But the point is still valid that not every advertised step forward is such, regardless of the intentions of the designer. Does any company do this deliberately? Well, that seems doubtful to me. Would any of these designers admit in the still watches of the night that they wish they hadn't released this or that? Of course! Have any of you ever wished you had or hadn't done something???

I've met Gayle Sanders and can assure you his driving passion is to offer the best technology can bring to bear consistent with the respective price points. You can believe what you like, but his integrity and honesty are refreshing. (In fact, one could take the latest and limited release of the CLS update as a tacit admission that maybe ML should have continued offering them.)

Me? I'm happy to own Logans of any type and plan to stay with them because to my ears they get closer to the musical truth than all but the most hideously expensive box speakers. Unless you're as wealthy as Croesus, you wil always have to compromise in this hobby, as perfection can be approached but not reached.

My kevlar vest and asbestos suit are on. All my comments are meant respectfully to all here and you're perfectly free to disagree. But don't take them personally, as they are not written as such.

Whoooo wheeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Amandarae: Your opinion is perfectly valid. It may even be correct. The arguments you provide to bolster your stated position, however, ARE flawed. A perfect example is your comment:

"They are still doing great business and introduces new products year by year! Also, the most important thing, people are buying them! "

Ok, so by your stated premise, Britney Spears is a cultural treasure because people buy her records, and the Quarter pounder with cheese is gourmet food. Bose speakers are the best, because people buy the most of them, too. Good sales does not necessarily indicate good product. In addition, M-L retailers don't have a pair of SL-3s set up next to the Ascents, do they? You say you have listened to both with the same system-- tell us how they SOUND. Please.

Does that make sense? I'd like to know why you think the SL-3 inferior to the Ascent, in terms of SOUND QUALITY, not sales performance and M-L marketing strategy.

Personally, I live in ignorance land about most of the new M-L speakers because I'm afraid if I go look at them I'll come home with a pair and my SL-3s are not yet the weak point of my system.

Lastly, to pretty much everyone on Audiogon: It's a tough world. Wear a helmet. It's the internet. It's just audio. Take a deep breath. Realize that sentiments in the written word are not as easy to discern as in face to face conversation. Have a nice day.

Nicely stated Pmkalby. You beat me to it with your analogy re: Bose speakers and Britney Spears.

I don't think that the designer ever has intentions to release an inferior product to its' predecessor. I DO, however, think that they are often pushed to do so by the folks from Sales and Marketing. They need a new product to push. A reason to place another 2 page spread in S'phile et al. Another excuse to submit a hot new product for review by the rags so that can write their "quid" for their "pro quo" (or is it the other way around?). And, finally, they need a reason to justify the new price increase. Don't try to justify the 25% bump by claiming higher parts or build quality. C'mon.

Call my a cynic, but a company the size of ML simply cannot help but to be driven by such motives. They've got bills to pay and stakeholders to satisfy. I don't fault them for it. It's capitalism. But please don't try to argue that all new models are better. (BTW - The original CLS was and is (arguably) the absolute best product that ML ever made - especially considering its' original price point.)

It seems that a lot of you received a supply of Kool-Aid with your purchase. Bottoms up!