[grsimmon]

I currently own Mirage OMD series omni speakers and really like the broad sweetspot for classical and jazz.  I suspect I would like other omni's like German Physiks, Ohm,  Duevel, and Morrison.

But.....

I've been interested in the properties of modern Martin Logans,  but don't have an easy way to audition.  And there's no way I can afford the MurAudio's.

How broad is the listening area for curvilinear ML electrostats?  Or is limited to one or two seats on the couch? If it helps I run a small Mirage omni in the center for ambience fill in.


Thanks for any comparisons or your impressions!

[weatherman1]

I own a pair of ML Montis which are positioned about 10' apart on either side of a corner fireplace.  It took month's to get the back/side wall position and toe angle to produce the sound stage I was happy with.  I also listen to jazz/classical with a large collection of pipe organ.  The sound stage now well extends from may favorite sweet spot chair to an arc extending approx. 8 feet on either side.  The other attribute of the ML's, like all planar/ES speakers, is the speed of response which helps, IMHO, with sonic placement of instruments and vocals within the soundstage.  The delayed back signal in my room seems to leave no holes in the sonic field.

[dB Cooper]

As I interpreted the question, it was about the feasible listening area rather than the perceived sound stage at the sweet spot.

Following based on listening to M-L's at shows: Broader than flat-panel 'stats, but that isn't saying much. Where I heard them, they had them on the short side of a very large room with the seating well back (probably 12-15') from the speakers. Not practical for many situations. Advocates of planars often say that the narrow propagation minimizes room interactions, which to me is a good argument for headphones, which minimize room interactions completely. Planars are 'roomphones'. When I heard the Sanders 'stats, the sound changed dramatically when I moved literally 2-3 inches to either side. M-L's are not quite as 'beamy', but still not a 'have your friends over' speaker, and nowhere near as broad a dispersion pattern as the omnis you have. In my experience, ribbons like the RAAL deliver most, if not all of, the speed/detail that is the biggest selling point of planars without the minuscule 'sweet spot'.

[Mr Peabody]

In my experience I'd have to concur with DBC.  We had an ML dealer for a while and I have auditioned in my home a set.  I haven't listened to any current models, nor have I listened with a set 10 feet apart.

As stated ML is not a group listening or walk around the room  speaker.  However, I really enjoy the sound of the electrostat models.  The sound will be a change from what you are used to, so if possible an audition is in order, or, at least buy with a return policy.  Nothing against your current speaker but I think you'd like the sound as long as it met your listening habit.

[dB Cooper]

No knock on the sound, the sound was very good- in the sweet spot- and the sweet spot was somewhat bigger than 'flat panel' types. I got spoiled by my Allisons which sounded the same virtually everywhere in the room. The detail of 'stats is seductive, but a good ribbon based system can go toe-to-toe with planars imho, with much less sensitivity to speaker placement (note that weatherman reports he spent months on this) and listening position. But the perfect speaker has yet to be made, so you picks your poison...

[dolsey01]

I've long been a dipole/bipole/omni-directional fan.  I really liked the original and later Mirage Msi series speakers but didn't have the space for them at the time. 

I ended up winning a pair of ML Aerius i and have since owned the Clarity and EM-ESL.  Prior to the EM-ESL I had a pair of Mirage OM9 and OM10 before that.

To this day I still kick myself for selling (Practically giving away) the OM9s.  The huge room filling soundstage it missed with certain recordings. 

While the EM-ESL is a better sounding speaker to me, there is something special about a Mirage Omni that will be hard to find elsewhere (without spending huge $$$).

To answer your actual question, in my room the sweat spot with the MLs is about the width of two heads.  That's it, any more or less and the soundstage collapses to one side.

[grsimmon]

Thank you much for these replies,  very helpful.   Right now listening to these Mirage OMD 28's, and placement even for these can make a big difference.

[dB Cooper]

We might be talking about two different things here: Speaker placement and listening location. Even an omni system will be influenced by its location in the room, despite the fact that such systems tend to have much larger 'sweet spots' (especially compared to planars). My Allisons, which were 'forward omni', sounded almost exactly the same anywhere in the room but had very specific placement requirements to accomplish this. Planars are very sensitive to both room placement and listening location. For some, the payoff- glorious detail and 'speed' and great soundstage (but over a very small sweet spot) are worth it; for others, not. One thing for sure, the design approaches of your Mirage omnis and any planar are about as far apart as design approaches can be, so make sure you have a bail-out option in case you decide they're not for you after all.

[Jazzman53]

Roger Sanders asserts that minimal dispersion (beaming) gives the most precise imaging and in my experience with flat panels, he's right.  The flip side to that coin is that speakers that beamy are essentially useless for entertaining guests unless they're sitting in your lap at the focus. 

Curved panels like ML's are less beamy but not as much as advertised.  Some argue that a slightly curved panel like ML uses gives the best compromise between dispersion and imaging and that truly omni directional speakers playing in a typical room suffer many early reflections and the resulting imaging is smeared and confused.

I personally use and now prefer electrically segmented flat panel ESL's.  They have wider and more uniform dispersion than curved panels and in that respect are better for entertaining guests.  Of course, you then don't get as precise imaging as you would get from an unsegmented flat panel  (there's no free lunch).   

I don't have any measurements comparing planar and omni-directional speakers but you might find the following comparisons between different planar speakers interesting:

Directivity sonograms comparing unsegmented, curved and segmented ESL’s: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/planars-exotics/246846-first-time-esl-builder-14.html#post4163636