Panel Sound

I never heard Martin Logan speakers but I have Gallo Ref 3.5's. I can give you some idea what they sound like by sharing my most recent experience with them.

I have been searching for reasonably priced solid stands for the Ref 3.5's. Many of these enhanced maple stands cost upwards of $1000.00, for common wood of all things. Searching the internet I discovered a material used in shooting ranges to stop large caliber high velocity bullets. I gave some thought to the high energy absorption required of such a material. I thought the characteristics required for that application could be easily transferrable for use as loudspeaker stands. The website is the following and the product is described in detail:

http://www.blackironrubber.com/ballistic_rubber.html

I ordered two blocks of vulcanized ballistic rubber. They measure ideally for the Ref 3.5 platform: 8" x 8" x 16" and are very heavy and solid at 41 pounds each. They arrived yesterday.

I would never have believed such a dramatic transformation in the sound of these speakers. The overall impact is tremendous. The resultant bass is the equivalent of adding two high quality subwoofers without the expense and complexity. The bass is not only fuller and deeper but has greater layers of detail and tone color. There is more range and nuance. The mid and high frequencies likewise have a three dimensional quality with subtle cues previously masked by the lower profile of the speakers directly on the floor. Horns are not anemic sounding but very full with the appropriately realistic sound pressure levels. You can hear the individual notes on each string of a guitar. What especially amazes me is it seems I have gained more efficiency. The Ref 3.5's play louder at the same volume setting I previously used. The soundstage is much wider and deeper with the instrumentalists moving farther into the room without a loss of depth of field. Also, overall clarity is substantially improved and the experience seems cleaner overall.

These loudspeakers absolutely need to be raised at least 8 inches off the floor. The tweeters are now at my seated ear level, 8 inches higher than stock. I previously had them slightly toed in but this is no longer necessary. I moved them about 6 inches closer to the center line and pointed straight ahead. They are positioned 10 feet apart and i sit about 12 feet away with the woofers facing each other.

There are two minor cautions. These blocks are priced at $41.00 each but the UPS ground shipping is costly due to the total 82 pound weight, or about $1.00 per pound. They are made of vulcanized rubber and have a pronounced oily rubber smell prevailing in the room when you first take them out of the box. I helped to disperse this by leaving the window and door open all day with only the fan on the HVAC operating (my dedicated room has its own HVAC).

This is the best $158.00 I have ever spent. Seriously, this is like getting an entirely new music library and loudspeakers at once without spending exorbitant amounts of money on high end audiophile approved products.

These are now the best speakers that i have ever owned. Better than the ADS 810's, the 1590's, the PMC's or the Avalon Eidolons. Now that I have the room tuned in properly I know I am absolutely correct on the sound of these Ref 3.5's.

I hope this helps some in your decision.

Stats RULE and the BEST STATS are made by Roger Sanders. Nothing can be better. Sanders Sound Systems. If they are out of your budget, get a 2nd mortgage or rob a bank.

I think soundlab should be included as a consideration to this post.

Part of what sounds so nice with a good dipole speaker traces back to its dipole radiation pattern, and what it does right as far as the reverberant field when set up correctly.

Let's start with a quick look at the sound fields in a good recital hall. We have a very clean first-arrival sound, then a few weak reflections off the people in front of us, then after a fairly long time delay, the reflections from the walls start to arrive. Since the walls are diffusive rather than absorptive, this reflected energy is not only powerful but also spectrally correct, and from it we get that rich timbre and sense of envelopment and immersion in the music.

When set up correctly (preferably a good 5 feet out from the wall), dipoles come reasonably close to approximating this situation, within the limitations of our room size. We have a nice clean first arrival sound, then relatively weak early reflections until the spectrally-correct backwave energy arrives after bouncing off the wall behind the speakers. This relatively late-onset, powerful, spectrally-correct reverberant energy significantly enhances the timbre, envelopment, and even clarity of the presentation (I realize that last claim is somewhat counter-intuitive, and can explain it if you'd like).

A wide-pattern monopole speaker usually falls short of a correctly set up dipole in two areas: The spectral correctness of the reverberant energy, and duration of the path-length-induced time delay. Both of these matter to the ear/brain system.

I've done some work with alternative polydirectional configurations that fire their spectrally-correct reverberant energy off in a different direction, for situations where it's not feasible to position the speakers far out into the room.

Nothing against a good monopole - I build those too - but there are things that good dipoles, or other types of polydirectionals, do better than monopoles. And if that's part of what you've fallen in love with about your dipoles, it's hart do go back.

Imo, ime, ymmv, etc.

Duke
dealer/manufacturer

Very much in agreement with Harri009. I went to a Minneapolis audio dealer that had all the ML models and Magnepan models. One at a time he moved in the next ML model up in the line into the room and the sound was detailed but musical they were not. After the 3rd or 4th ML demo, I told him to bring in the Magnepans .the 3.5. Wow, now you're talking'! We then tried the 20.1 and it was great but not much beyond the 3.5. The Magnepans brought on a "you are there" factor the ML's simply could not.

I lived with the 3.3 and later the 3.5 for many years. But then I had one brief comparison of the Magnepans against the Soundlab U1's. It was not even close. The SL's so severely outperformed my beloved 3.5's. I shortly thereafter went for an older pair of SL A1's and have enjoyed them immensely ever since. The ML stats were not even close to this. Perhaps the later ML models have changed. Only an audition and direct comparison of the each of the speakers in your own system can confirm this.

John