Magnepan or Martin Logan


so which one is better CLS-2z or MG 3.6R anyone?
jack
Jack. I look at this site often and I find it amazing when people ask "which is better". It's like asking "Which is better Hanes or Fruit of the Loom". Its all a matter of fit and your ear.Have you ever walked into a Hi Fi store and someone is listening to a set of speakers that they just think are the best thing since sliced bread but that you would only play in your garage. I have listened to almost the whole line in the speaker that you are asking about. My advise is to find a GOOD dealer,one that will hopefully let you take them home and try them. Speakers always sound different at home. A/B the 2 brands and then decide by what you like. You might want to get advise from a good dealer as far as associated equipment! Good Luck!
Both good. I think MLs are harder to match with amps. I've heard many ML setups which were too bright, or thin because of the amps not the speakers. Done properly they can't be beat for transparency and clarity with full bodied warmth. But the Maggies integrate a little better at the low end because most MLs have cone woofers.
Oops. I noticed that you were talking about CLS. No woofer. Ok, it really needs bass. But even more transparent.
Re; Dannylw's comment about Maggies being harsh in some voice ranges---I have Maggie 3.5's and have noticed what can best be described as sounding like a scratchy voice coil in a dynamic speaker, on massed male vpoices, and on some high volume massed violins. Almost as if the ribbons are breaking up. This is the same with both speakers, with two different amps (Krell and C-J), and two different CD players (Rotel and Wadia 830). Anyone else notice anything similar? It's about to drive me nuts! JimP
I own the Maggie 3.5r and am very pleased with the soundstage and open highend. The trade off is juggling the placement to maximize bass response. Watch the ML for impedance! They can draw down an amp to just a few ohms.