[stieger]

Hi folks,

Just curious, as I currently have a dedicated martin logan theater, how do these two speaker types compare?

I enjoy the openess of the ML, but at times they feel a little harsh probably due to the electrstatic panel - I'd prefer something a little "warmer" but yet staying as detailed.

For home theater, how do these two speakers compare?  I have aerius, sequels, and the logo center.  I will be buying a VMPS Large subwoofer this week, but wanted people's opinions on the sound differences and in particular if anyone has changed from one to the other and "never looked back."

Thx,

Stieger

[Tweaker]

I have RM2s and have owned electrostats (Acoustat) and listened extensively to MLs and the VMPS have the detail but are far more dynamic. The RM2s are also a bit on the warm side in my system but that is a sound I had to work at to achieve.

[ScottMayo]

Hi folks,

Just curious, as I currently have a dedicated martin logan theater, how do these two speaker types compare?

I enjoy the openess of the ML, but at times they feel a little harsh probably due to the electrstatic panel - I'd prefer something a little "warmer" but yet staying as detailed.

For home theater, how do these two speakers compare?  I have aerius, sequels, and the logo center.  I will be buying a VMPS Large subwoofer this week, but wanted people's opinions on the sound differences an ...

A friend of mine, a few years back, had some electrostatics (ESL Quads). I got to hear them a fair amount. I liked the detail, but I found them tiring after a while. Nice speakers, but they just didn't do it for me. Admittedly, not the same as your ML's.

I heard VMPS and never looked back. More detail, but much less fatigue, and much more natural sounding. And imaging to die for. They might be overkill for a HT, but it's the direction I'm heading in.

It's hard to say what you'll like, though. Can you audition some speakers? That's the only way to tell.

[SWG255]

Two years ago when i was considering new speakers and bought VMPS RM40s, I listened briefly to the Martin-Logans and decided they weren't dynamic enough for my taste.  I also felt the integration of the M-L woofers wasn't as good as the woofers in the VMPS speakers.

Whether the VMPS speakers would be less fatiguing depends on system component synergy. As with any detailed speaker the VMPS will faithfully pass along what's in front of them in the signal chain.

[woodsyi]

I have RM40s.  I also set up my mom with a pair of Soundlab A5s (only a few were made to a size slightly smaller than A3s).  As expected the stats are glorious with superfast and airy sound.  Bass is aumented with SVS subs at 70 Hz using an active x-over but they don't integrate well.  They are excellent for vocals, chamber music, operas, and even symphonies.  RM40, on the other hand, have meatier sound and considerably better bass -- much more versatile.  Last night I spun some Kraftwerks LPs and they rocked.  I wouldn't be able to say that with the Soundlab stats.

[mcrespo71]

Seems like comparing apples to oranges.  Stats aren't even in the same league in terms of dynamics.

Michael

[Florian]

I have to say a few words in here also  
Being a planar speaker fan i love magnetostatics, electrostatics. To compare the two would be highly unfair since they are very different. To say that electrostatics are dynamically challanged or that planars are dynamically challanged is wrong in my opinion. The VMPS can play very loud, but so can panels and stats but they require much more power in general to do so. In terms or low level resolution, and details in general the VMPS are not in the same leauge as the big panels from Apogee, Acoustat, Martin Logans and some others. I am not a fan of Martin Logan in general, but with the right tube equipment and the right room they can sound incredibly good. Yes, they do have integration issues between the panel and the subwoofer which VMPS does not have. But on the other hand, i dont like the bass from my 30's and the 626 go quite low for a bookshelf speaker but lack depth which is fine of course. The single panel design gives a better integration, larger soundfield and simply more micro dynamics and detail then the small panels in the VMPS.

To compare them to some companys of today like Magnepan, Martin Logan and Soundlab is interesting. I had a 3.6 right before i sold them for the 30's. For about one week i had both in the same room and compared them. To be honest i shouldnt have sold them, but before i get bashed for this please let me finish The big Maggies where not as detailed and lacked the pin point imaging that the VMPS speakers have. They lacked the ability to play with small amplifiers and they were very room fussy. The 30's on the other hand, are easy to please, are less room fussy and show very good detail. The integration and bass power is better on the Maggies, and instruments have close to real size and the transiants and small steps shown in the music sound more natural and pleasing on the Maggies. The 30's are a hard animal to judge. If you go from 200Hz and up they are extremely coherent and can play very loud and very precise and dont require much power to do so.

I have tested the 30's on pure reference equipment with my friend. The primary listening config was from top to bottom.

Krell KPS25t
Krell X64 Studio DAC
Jadis JP80 Preamp
2x Krell KSA250's or Conrad Johnson Premier 5's

The Analog section was the Goldmund T-3 Reference and the Forsell Air Reference with the Audio Research Reference Phono setup and the K. Jade system.

These electronics are without doubt on the top of the food chain and made the 30's sing absolutly wonderfull. I consider to be one of the very few speakers that can sound really really good. Much better then anything i have heard from speakers companys like B&W, Dynaudio etc...But they lacked the essence, the lower registers that make a fat opera singer sound like a fat opera singer. The power, the emotional drama was completely missing, and that is what electrostatics and big planar speakers capture. The scale, micro dynamics, transiants the complete musical picture for me only exists in large planars.  The RM30's have never played powerfull in the bass in the 3 rooms i have had them in, with room acoutics, without them, with equipment costing more then a house or anything else. So i would not go by bass power, since the bigger panels simply do more and do more correctly while having very good to exellent integration (non-ML-hybrids). Someone could run the subwoofers with them, like we did. We used a modified Rel StudioIII and had to x-over at aprox. 200Hz to get the balance sort of back in but this is too high for a subwoofer to run along. A speaker which simply just gets it right is the big Apogee's, and its unfortunate that they dont exist anymore. Simply put, perfect integration, no character, bass output like there is no tomorrow (-1db at 23Hz measured over 4m off axsis) and easy on the amps. Well the latest generation.

If you audition a VMPS speaker, which you should i would recommend the optional internal damping. Run them with high powered tubes and preferably a subwoofer. They can play with lots of detail, exellent imaging and they can play loud. But dont expect more detail and a better integration or tonal balance then with your panels. That in my opinion, will not happen. In terms of absolute dynamics, detail and integration you cant walk by a big panel.

You have to listen for yourself and decide. Good luck!

PS: This is not a put down, and i enjoy them very much and they are a very fine speaker. I am completely honest and these are my views. I just dont want that someone thinks i am bashing them or anything in their own home.

[Tweaker]

Florian said:

To say that electrostatics are dynamically challanged or that planars are dynamically challanged is wrong in my opinion. The VMPS can play very loud, but so can panels and stats but they require much more power in general to do so.

  I had a pair of Acoustats, (and Maggies too, the little SMGA which I loved) and they could play very loud. But they weren't particularily dynamic compared to a conventional moving coil speaker and certainly not compared to my RM2s. I think when we're discussing dynamics we're talking about the punch or swing from soft to loud that many musical instruments (or voices) can produce that not all speakers can capture. I've never heard a large panel stat or planar reproduce, for example, the incredible power of a soprano like Renata Scotto or, especially, Eva Marton like the RM2s can. No comparison. My Acoustats did produce more detail but irritatingly so. The light shone too brightly, so to speak. Just my 2 cents worth, of course and I can only speak for the RM2. Never heard any of the other VMPS models.

[Florian]

Well then you need to hear some panels wich are from the new ages
So far my visitors where talking about the hair standing up their neck when
we got some dynamic explosions from orchestras in here  

[Zero]

Florian,

Would still like to have an idea on what you do for a living to bring home so much cash to afford those toys..  Im sure its not all spun up into audio as well....

Sorry gentlemen, nothing to really add to this thread as my experience with ribbons is limited to a brief stint with Carver Amazings and short sessions with a variety of ML's (mostly on Krell or Bryston electronics).

[Florian]

Florian,


Would still like to have an idea on what you do for a living to bring home so much cash to afford those toys..  Im sure its not all spun up into audio as well....

Sorry gentlemen, nothing to really add to this thread as my experience with ribbons is limited to a brief stint with Carver Amazings and short sessions with a variety of ML's (mostly on Krell or Bryston electronics).

I got there mostly by upgrading and luck. I teach the german military how to use their computers on a english operating system. Write webpages, and fix computers on the side. The extreme High End equipment is owned by my friend which i meet quite often. Together we explore whats possible in music reproduction. I am only 22 and still live at home, so the next priority is to get a place of my own but in times like these its not that easy.

Cheers

-Flo

[Tweaker]

Well then you need to hear some panels wich are from the new ages

I've listened to both Maggies and Martin Logans within the last couple of years and I stand by my assesment. And it is really MLs we should be discussing here as it is what Stieger owns and is wanting to know how VMPS stacks up against.

[CornellAlum]

Germany has a lottery doesn't it   Seriously, I doubt it is any of your business, as that is a personal question when asked that way.  

[Florian]

Well then you need to hear some panels wich are from the new ages

I've listened to both Maggies and Martin Logans within the last couple of years and I stand by my assesment. And it is really MLs we should be discussing here as it is what Stieger owns and is wanting to know how VMPS stacks up against.

Well, then i should make it more clearly.    In my book the Martin Logans show more detail, are faster and capture the essence of music better. With their subwoofer they also play lower and with their built in amp you can use tubes on the panels which really help them. As far as your experience goes, a SMGa is so incredibly old and cannot be compared to any of the newer maggies at all. Besided, Maggies the "entry" in planar sound in my book.

The RM30's are a great speaker, but lacks bass power and the ultimate detail in my opinion. But they exell in integration, loudness, dynamic swings and ease on amplifier and room.

But your right back on the topic. The VMPS will play louder, and are easier to place and show great detail. But the ML have more detail, better micro dynamics and throw a larger stage and have more bass power then the 30's-

The RM40 might be a different animal. I have been told by my friends that the RM2's are quite different sounding then the 30's so you have to judge for yourself. My experience only acounts for the 626 and 30's.

Flo

PS: In the end its up to what you like, the panels can be a pain to setup and Martin Logan is known to have panels which need to be replaced every now and then. Plus Brian is as close as a designer can get to its customers and has shown exellent service !

[Tweaker]

All I can say is the RM30 must really be a different beast than the RM2. Perhaps Brian can chime in with a comparison as I have not heard the RM30 but if it is being bested by a ML than it is not in the league as the RM2 in that regard. (Dynamics).

[Florian]

All I can say is the RM30 must really be a different beast than the RM2. Perhaps Brian can chime in with a comparison as I have not heard the RM30 but if it is being bested by a ML than it is not in the league as the RM2 in that regard. (Dynamics).

You have to differentiate. If we are talking about "from low to max volume" then the 30's take the cake. But music is made out of the small dynamic shifts in the music, and the electrostats or magnetostatics exellent in that area and get it more right.  

[Tweaker]

If we are talking about "from low to max volume"

 That is exactly what I thought I had done in my second post on this subject. That is what dynamics in music is. The swing from soft to loud. As far as  the small dynamic shifts as you describe I still say the RM2s are more than a match for the MLs I have heard. However I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Hopefully stieger can get a chance to listen to  some VMPS and decide for himself.

[Skynyrd]

I own both of these.  I've had the RM40's for about six months and the Martin Logan Quests for about ten years.

The Quests have a "canny" sound that really irks me on a regular basis.  They totally lose musicality on many recordings.  They also have overly warm bass that lacks definition.  Better this than no bass at all, though.
In the upper mids, the Logans are amazing in their airiness and presence, with very good stereo imaging.  I really like their industrial design and their looks.

The RM40's lower treble sometimes sounds harsh, this irks me on some recordings.  The bass response does some truly evil booming in the 110 hertz region on some recordings--recordings I really love--and I can't fix it with putty pinching.  The RM40's ability to recreate a deep and coherant soundstage with amazing transient speed has to be heard to be believed.   These speakers sound wayyy better when I spin vinyl.  CD's bring out the harshies.

Most 'philes are wayy into elecronics.  I primarily use Van Alstine stuff.  Still sounds pretty harsh sometimes.  Death to the high end, I say. My next electronic purchases will likely be from the pro audio side of things!

Some day I'd like a warm sounding speaker like the B and W DM7 Mark Two's that I got for free.  Except for their abominable treble and crossover harshness which renders them truly obsolete, of course.

Have a blast with your purchase!  Speakers rule!  Balance the audiophile nervosa with some great tunes!

Skynyrd

[ScottMayo]

The RM40's lower treble sometimes sounds harsh, this irks me on some recordings. The bass response does some truly evil booming in the 110 hertz region on some recordings--recordings I really love--and I can't fix it with putty pinching.

You wouldn't have a room dimension that's a multiple of 10', would you? Or maybe 10.5' ceilings? The RM40's might be excitng a room mode. Not every speaker triggers every mode - it depends on positioning, among other things. If it's the room, the putty isn't going to do much...

[ekovalsky]

I recently got to hear the Martin Logan Summit at a dealer.  I was impressed by it -- the Xstat panel integrated pretty well with the woofer, the bass was solid and reasonably deep, and the midrange and treble were transparent, detailed, and "fast".  Quality control and parts quality looked good and the transparent panel is a big hit with the ladies, according to the dealer who told me that interior decorators and clients tend to pick them over box speakers for custom home theater installs.

Unless you plan on listening at dangerously high levels or using these in a behemoth room, there shouldn't be any significant dynamic limitations.  That said, if you enjoy listening to heavy metal at heavy metal at 115dB planars or cones would be the better choice.

Amp matching is very important with the M-L speakers as the impedance in the treble dips very low as it does in all electrostats.  I heard the Summits with McIntosh 1201 monoblocks / arcwelders.

Overall I thought the Summit was a good speaker for the money, particularly for a salon brand competing with B&W and the like.  M-L has come a long way as their other models I've heard in the past, excluding the Statement E2, failed to impress me.

Choosing between M-L and VMPS should be pretty easy as they are very different speakers in sonic characteristics and aesthetics.  Hopefully with the large numbers of M-L dealers and many VMPS owners willing to demo their speakers, any prospective buyer could hear both and decide for him- or herself.