clsII vs. magneplanar 3.6R / help needed

[djangoherbert]

hello, I own the 3.6R / would it be a good choice to change to ML CLSII / I am a freak for details, or are the maggies able to compete with the logans in this field. is it right that the maggies have more beautiful tonal colors? couldn't check it by myself up to now, as I don't own a preamp to play / bought the maggies without a chance to hear them...

[Florian]

I had a 3.6R and a 3.6R/SE :-)

If you want more details you can either go fully active on the 3.6 which is a huge improvment. Also high powered tubes or hybrids improve this a lot. The Martin Logan is very good for voices but has a very limited dynamic power, tonal colors are less and they have absolutly no bass (45Hz and down). You would need go with a seperate x-over and very fast subwoofers (VS' Servo etc) which makes them a hybrid and is not the ideal solution. You can look for Apogee's which are as detailed (even more detailed in the bass) as electrostatics. But they need to be rebuild, are big, heavy ackward and some models will kill even a Krell amp. Parts are avaliable for Apogee's which have a even better tolerance than the originals. Either APOGEE Scintilla's, DIVA's, Fullranges or Studio Grands, or the DUETTA's sound better than the 3.6 in my opinion But the 3.6 is still a damn good speaker beating many systems several times more expensive, and to me there is no box thats better. (i am sure you agree). Bewarned tough, i paid about 8000$ US for my rebuild Scintilla and a tad more for my new comming DIVA's. But they are truly magnificent and the end story. Check out Soundlabs too, truly State of the Art speakers too which also represent the end.

-Flo

PS; The 3.6 is better than the CLS in my book, if interested i can get you a new CSL which a customer traded in for 1.6's