Why are these speakers so bright but others not?


I'm in the process of upgrading my 10 year old system. It currently consists of:

Arcam FMJ CD23
VPI HW 19jr./Audioquest PT6/Sumiko BPS
Audible Illusions Mod 3 pre
OCM 500
Monster Sigma Retro Gold interconnects and speaker cable
Monster AVS 2000/HTPS 7000 power conditioners
Martin Logan Odyssey speakers

I previously had PSB Stratus Gold's and had finally tuned and tweaked my system so that it was reasonably balanced in my room (approx 20 X 13.5 X 7.5, glass on one side with only partial treatment). I had the opportunity to borrow and purchase equipment from work with mixed results.

ML Odyssey - these worked great so I bought these and am sticking with them. Bass is still uneven and not as extended as the PSB's though.

Revel Ultima Studio - very bass lean and tinny

Magnepan 3.6R - edgy and bright. way too big for my room anyway so I'm selling these.

What gives? Why are two speakers so well suited to the room and too very highly regarded speakers not?

I'm going to borrow an amp from work to see if that changes the situation since I know some of these speaks are tough to drive. Any more ideas?
donato
You are correct about different amps for different speakers - the match is critical, but even more critical is the speaker set up in the room. And, even if properly set up I would not expect them to sound the same, no matter how highly regarded. Except for a slightly low ceiling you have a reasonably sized room for all of these speakers. Different designs require different speaker and listening position placement and acoustical treatment to get the best sound. You are presently considering 3 different designs all of which need different placement considerations. You have a lot of work to do on each speaker before you can fairly judge its value to you in your room.
the psb's are by far the best match with your system. the ocm is avery neutral ss amp and the arcam is likewise. the psb's easily are the best overall performers in this group.
I did play with speaker and seating placement somewhat, but I was just surprised how not good I found the Revel and 3.6R's in my room. Not that they aren't excellent speakers - the clarity and lack of distortian in Revel's midrange came through unhampered as did the sense of space with the Maggies (although obviously constrained in my room and placement).

The PSBs and the Martin Logan's ended up being located very close to the same location which was interesting because they are so different a design. My PSBs (original golds) are front ported and the MLs have the panel and on of it's woofs rear firing. I think the MLs also did well in my room because of the narrow dispersion (i.e. mitigating brightness of untreated room). I thought I could place the Revel's in a fairly similar location to the PSBs, but I could't get enough bass without putting them pretty close to the front wall. I do have lumpy response in my room below 60Hz.

I originally built my system around the PSBs way back when, hence the amp, but I fell in love with vocals and instruments on the MLs despite some of the other tradeoffs (bass in my room, some dynamics). Midrange is so much cleaner and so much more detailed.