2. speakers
  3. 1050321889

B&W vs Martin Logan

I currently have Martin Logan Odessey/Theater/Aerius in my system with Krell amplification and processing. I'm considering a change. I've heard many good things about B&W. Could someone with experience with both tell me the pros and cons of each. If I go with the B&W it will be the nautilus 802's or the 800's for my main speakers, and 805's for the rear of our theater. My listening is about 60% theater and 40% 2 channel. Thanks for the advice.
simancd
ehart
215 posts
 
I just compared the 802s and the ML Ascents head-to-head today. Troutki's comments here are right on. I preferred the ML myself for two-channel listening, especially for female vocals. Really mind-blowing presence and soundstage. An "oh wow" experience. Mediocre bass, however.

The N802 sounds very good too, like a really good speaker, warm, natural, a little too rich in the bass for my taste. Would certainly be better for home theatre and for rock music.

Tough choice...
elb's avatar
elb
100 posts
 
Why not add the Martin Logan Descent sub to your system for extra body?
frank1952e27
15 posts
 
B&W CM4's above..sorry
wvick
70 posts
 
The signature 800 is a huge improvement over the N802. I can't speak for the Martin Logan's, I've never been a fan. I have had N802's in a Krell system and never warmed up to the sound. They lacked bass and I could never tame the tweeter. I sold them. I would take the 800's any day but I went with WP 7's and am very happy.
More to discover