[patrickalston]

I've own the same pair of CLS 1s since the 90s and have rarely felt the need to change.  I think it's one of the great speakers of all time.  From time to time, I'm seduced by deep bass that conventional speakers can deliver; however, none offer that midrange magic that comes with a planar. 

I'm curious, for those who have moved away from planars to another (or at least opted for a second speaker set), what did you move to and why?  Did you regret the change?   

[Ron D]

While not specifically answering your question but having owned a variety of Maggie's since the 80s and 1 pair of Acoustats (hybrid,  woofer and Stat panel), I think what could be the optimal solution is a pair of subs

[mick wolfe]

I've never owned an electrostatic, but I've had four pairs of Magnepans in the past. As the years went by, I eventually realized I preferred higher efficiency speakers and tube amplification above all else. In your case however, why not at least try a subwoofer or better yet, a pair of subs. I could see a pair of the smaller REL's working with the CLS's, but that's just speculation on my part. FWIW, nothing wrong with a second pair of speakers to swap in on occasion. Choose something that will work fine with your current amplification/set-up. If you want to keep your choice boxless, maybe a proven DIY open baffle design. If DIY isn't your thing, there are many finished open baffle designs currently on the market. This all said, don't discount modern box speakers as a second speaker option. The better current designs certainly don't sound "boxy". This at least to my ancient ear. Bottom line, there are a lot of good options to pursue in your case.

[rooze]

Try a newer Logan if you want the speed and transparency of electrostatic panels, and the low end of a cone driver in a box. They worked hard at trying to integrate 'low bass' into their panel designs for years, and built a variety of hybrids with panels and cone woofers, none of which sounded very integrated or cohesive.

But their more recent designs are far better. I've owned the Impression 11a and thought they sounded great.

[I.Greyhound Fan]

I went from Magnepans to Arendal 1528 speakers which give me the big sound that I enjoyed with my Maggie's for many years.  I felt it was a time for a change.  I miss the Maggie's though but I don't regret the change.  I also went from a Pass x250 amp and a BAT preamp to a Mark Levinson integrated amp.  I also do not need my dual subs anymore.

Change is good sometimes.   However, my old system did sound better. I just wanted tobdown size everything.

[Statman72]

I'm very happy with my pair of RiPol subs, which suppliment my DIY hybrid ESLs.   

I love the RiPol's clean, unobtrusive sound.  They are dipolar so they don't hit you in the chest like a sledgehammer but they give clean, tight, non-boomy bass that doesn't excite room modes like conventional subs often do.   Great for jazz-- not so much for home theater sound effects.

Mine are DIY versions,and I freely share my drawings.   

Here's a link to the RiPol sub build page, with photos, on my DIY ESL speaker website:
https://jazzman-esl-page.blogspot.com/2011/01/ripole-subs-are-underway.html

 

 

[Zuman]

I owned CLS 1s, upgraded them to CLS IIs, and eventually IIZs. I even had the recommended pair of Kinergetics subs. The CLS was what first seduced me into HiFi, and I loved them deeply. I eventually sold my entire system as growing children became our priority and serious listening to music - primarily a solo activity - just dried up.
Twenty-five or so years later, after a few stumbles, I discovered Von Schweikert speakers.  The current generation (starting with the Model ONE - initially known as the Endeavor SE) has remarkable transparency and the largest listening position sweet spot I've ever encountered. Pre-owned Endeavor SEs/Model ONEs can occasionally be found for around US$16-17k. If you search online, try searching for "Endeavor SE" rather than "Model ONE."
My personal Endeavor SEs are the first speaker I've loved since my CLSs, they have, like the CLS, a "pristine" sound, MUCH better bass, and the imaging is at the very top of world-class.

[Jon L]

I owned CLS 1s, upgraded them to CLS IIs, and eventually IIZs. I even had the recommended pair of Kinergetics subs.

IME Kinergistic subs and most subs simply destroy the most special quality of CLS IIz, i.e. ultra-pristine, see-through transparency of voices. If somebody has successfully integrated some special-sauce dipole/ripole sub system, power to them   

[Zuman]

IME Kinergistic subs and most subs simply destroy the most special quality of CLS IIz, i.e. ultra-pristine, see-through transparency of voices. If somebody has successfully integrated some special-sauce dipole/ripole sub system, power to them 

Can't disagree. I HAD the Kinergistics (thanks...not KinerGETics), but they always felt like a kludge and were clearly (uh, no pun intended) not in the same league as the CLS.

[patrickalston]

@rooze wrote "Try a newer Logan if you want the speed and transparency of electrostatic panels, and the low end of a cone driver in a box."

RESPONSE - My brother owns a newer Martin Logan and the maggie LRS+ and I've listened to most of the newer hybrid models.  The hybrids certainly go deeper because of the woofer, but my experience has been that they're certainly not better than the full-range CLS 1 at what it does best (which is why it remains in my system after decades).

 

[patrickalston]

@zuman - wrote "Twenty-five or so years later, after a few stumbles, I discovered Von Schweikert speakers."

RESPONSE:  I've never heard of Von Schweikert.  I'll certainly check them out. 

@statman72 wrote:  "Mine are DIY versions,and I freely share my drawings.   
Here's a link to the RiPol sub build page, with photos, on my DIY ESL speaker website:
https://jazzman-esl-page.blogspot.com/2011/01/ripole-subs-are-underway.html"

RESPONSE - That sounds adventurous; however, at this point in my life, I lack your ambition.

I suspect that the solution is to add a sub or two.  I'm curious, of those recommending sub, why no one suggested using martin-logan sub that I assume would be able to match the panel's speed.  Am I missing something?

[Zuman]

@zuman - wrote "Twenty-five or so years later, after a few stumbles, I discovered Von Schweikert speakers."

RESPONSE:  I've never heard of Von Schweikert.  I'll certainly check them out. 

Here's a pretty thorough review of the Von Schweikerts I have: https://www.enjoythemusic.com/superioraudio/equipment/0522/Von_Schweikert_Audio_Endeavor_SE_Floorstanding_Loudspeaker_Review.htm

[brooklyn]

I've had various different models of Maggie's over a 40 year span. I enjoyed them all.. I only integrated a sub with
my last pair which were the .7's.. In the latest audio room I have now the .7's were just in the way with my room
configuration.. I hated to sell them but I have no regrets after having a love affair with them for many years.

I made friends with a bunch of like minded audiophiles guys in my area, they all have excellent systems with
dynamic driving speakers.. I started to become addicted to the type of sound that dynamic drivers can produce.
Needless to say I now have two separate systems and alternate them in my room.. The speakers I fell in love
with are the Sonus Faber Olympica Nova 1's and the Spendor Classic 2/3's.. both speaker systems are used with
different Integrated amps and a pair of REL T/9x subs that are wired in stereo. I'm happy..

 

[WGH]

I have heard 3 different large Maggies with subs a few times, every time the integration was seamless. The subs were as fast as the Maggies and disappeared so effectively that you have to crawl down and listen to hear if they are on. What was the sub? A REL Gibraltar G2.

Unfortunately the G2 is long discontinued. The sub was a sealed design with a big class A amp and a long throw 10" driver that was super quick. I owned a REL G2 for a couple of years, the sub was never stressed playing music but the 10" driver maxed out during action films. The bigger REL G1 MkII with a 12" driver does home theater just fine and is just as quick. Unfortunately the G1 is also discontinued.

The Maggies I heard with a REL sub were the 1.7i, 2.7i and 3.5. A Magnepan speaker is totally transformed when the system has tight bass to 15 Hz. The soundstage opens up even more, low level room sounds can clearly be heard and a listener is in the recording space. The CLS 1 would also be transformed. REL subs make space.

A couple of guys in our audio club have both open baffle subs and Rythmik subs. The systems sound just fine, music has a controlled low bass foundation and are a pleasure to listen to. A REL sub takes bass to another level that is both tighter and deeper all the while not being there at all. Music sounds like life.

The good news is REL makes a sealed sub that is faster and better than my G1 MkII. The bad new is the price.


The No.31 would be the only model that would seamlessly blend with the CLS 1. It costs (cough, cough, gulp) $9,000. Find one to listen too if you can. I live in Tucson and can demo my G1 MkII, the sound is very, very close.

https://rel.net/collections/reference-series

 

[Statman72]

I suspect that the solution is to add a sub or two.  I'm curious, of those recommending sub, why no one suggested using martin-logan sub that I assume would be able to match the panel's speed.  Am I missing something?

I've never heard a ML sub but I assumed they are mono-polar.

I had previously tried several mono-polar subs (Velodine SPL1200, Dayton 12, dual Sunfire 10's), and at low volume they added some low end grunt that had been missing-- but at moderate and higher volume they all sounded like one-note boom boxes.  I came to realize that the one-note boom was my room's resonance being excited. 

Everything changed when I added the RiPol subs: The one-note boom disappeared and the blending with my dipole-hybrid ESLs is so seamless that I can't discern the crossover point. 

I should point out that my ESLs are dipole-hybrids that use a low-Q midbass woofer on an open baffle, and the RiPol subs are a special type of dipole that projects a cardioidal radiation pattern with a pronounced frontal lobe and off-axis nulls.  Accordingly; they less likely to excite room modes.   

I concluded that, at least with my room and setup, dipolar subs work better, and RiPols are the ticket. 

RiPols are not perfect though.  Like all dipoles, they are inefficient, and you can't compensate with more amp power because they have no entrapped air mass to cushion the woofers from exceeding X-max, which is why I always recommend at least a pair of them rather than risk over-driving just one. 

To answer your question; I didn't recommend a ML sub because I believe dipole subs work better with ESLs.   

   

[Doublej]

For REL subs check out the used market. There is currently a single G2 at TMR, and a pair of G2 and a pair of G1MkII on Audio Mart.

YMMV.

[WGH]

I wrote a review comparing the REL G2 and G1 MkII when I had both in the house:
https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=187300.msg1963493#msg1963493

Even though I loved the REL G2 and two of them wouldn't take up as much space as a G1 MkII, I would pass unless you got a screaming deal.

I bought the G2 from The Music Room (TMR) for $1,861.21 + $179 shipping = $2,040.21 on 4/29/2019.

The REL G1 and G2 with their distinctive teardrop shapes were first announced at the 2009 CEDIA Expo, the G1 was first demoed at the Feb. 28, 2010 Sound and Vision: The Bristol Show. The G2 arrived later that year. The two subs had a long life with the G2 being discontinued about the time I bought mine in 2019. The G1 was upgraded to the MkII in 2017 and then silently disappeared from the REL website in August 2022 when the new No. 31 and No. 32 Reference subs were announced, which are bigger, better, badder and more expensive than the G1 MkII.


The G2 subs could be 15 years old. I would call REL customer service (they are really nice) to see if the plate amps can be rebuilt and at what cost, the caps are getting old. My main concern is the 10" driver. The original driver has a design flaw, the leads to the spider are glued to the cone. Years of flexing causes metal fatigue and the leads break close to the spider and cannot be repaired. REL is aware of the flaw and silently introduced the 10" MkII driver that fixes the flaw. I had to replace the single driver at a cost of $800, they were in stock in January 2020 but that was 6 years ago.




The REL G1 and G1 MkII sound similar but the G1 MkII is completely different and has an updated driver (fixed the design flaw?) Never ever buy the original plain jane G1, they are still around for cheap but they are door stops at this point.

I paid $4,395 + tax new from Upsacle Audio for my G1 MkII with a full REL warranty.

$5250.00 for a pair of G1 MkII is a great deal, if I already didn't have one I would drop everything and make the two hour drive to Scottsdale tomorrow.

[Housteau]

I had also owned CLS 1's and Acoustats in the past.  Martin Logan panels, of any vintage, absolutely have that midrange magic.  However, that 'holy grail" of sound needs to include the middle and upper electrostatic bass.  Martin Logan panels cannot do that.  Some Soundlabs can, but at the price of size and sometimes being less than friendly to associated gear. 

Prodigio Audio (formerly Popori) are able to continue with that midrange magic down into the 30's, in some cases.  There is nothing quite like true electrostatic bass.  Yes, I use bass towers but they do not roll in until 34Hz.

[Housteau]

Should that chart show a Harmon type rising low end?  In a word, no.  However, if an in-room mic was used at the listening seat, then yes, it should.  This chart was made using in-ear binaural mics with a filtered response caused by the shape of the eras, distance between them, etc.  Flat is what the ear - brain system want to see inside the ear canal.  However, it takes an in-room curve with a rising low end to achieve this.