Comments for MartinLogan Purity Floor-standing Electrostatic Hybrid Speakers at http://www.hometheaterhifi.com , comment 1 to 31 out of 20 comments http://www.hometheaterhifi.com Wed, 08 Sep 2010 23:22:50 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-2064 To Rafael: If you have listened to both, and your impression is that the ML Purity system sounds better, then what the pundits say about B&W being superior is irrelevant. It's what YOU like that counts. Magazine reviews and opinions are just for guides to checking out equipment you are considering. It's sort of like a restaurant guide. It tells you what restaurants are in your area, what a dinner costs, and whether they liked the food or not. One caveat with all electrostatics: They are not capable of playing really loud, because the membrane moves such a small distance. The hybrid design of the Purity's helps, because the low frequencies are handled by a cone woofer. Nevertheless, SPL is a limitation of electrostatic designs. On the humorous side, even though I use a 50 Hz crossover for my full range electrostatics, when the subwoofers really get going, the membrane vibrates from the low frequencies coming from the subs so much, I can hear it. - JEJ Wed, 05 Aug 2009 04:38:43 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-2059 Newbie here, so take it easy please.... I am considering buying a set of ML Purity or B&W CM7 (or even a CM9). The price difference is not significant or important from my standpoint. I will be using the system for home theater primarily (let's disregard the rest of the system for now). To me, the ML Purity system sounds much better but I keep reading B&W is superior. For my intended use, would the MLs be better? - Rafael Mon, 03 Aug 2009 02:04:59 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-1594 I used a standard RCA cable for the line-level connection. The speakers have a built-in power amplifier. - JEJ Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:05:24 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-1587 I dont understand useing the line level connection from pre-amp to the speaker,what type cable did you use in your review or recommeded.I have wrote to martin logan ltd all they would say they dont any specific brand recommendation,also i wrote hi-fi world when they reviewed in september 2008 in the review the phrase the used was signal cable ? i would need 2x2metre lenghts. thanks neil hutson - james neil hutson Tue, 24 Feb 2009 07:33:01 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-1407 Hi, I'd like to second Bob's request, have you done any auditing on ML Source? How is Source compares to Purity. I went to my local home theater store to listen both Source and Purity. For some reason, Source sounds much crisp compare to Purity. And Purity seems to have a stronger bass performance. I listened to the same CD for both speakers. Thanks for any inputs. - Andrew K .P Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:44:05 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-1208 i'm still not sure i understand the advantage of having a built in amplifier...does that mean that i can hook it up directly to my yamaha receiver and not worry about driving the speakers? thanks - alberto Sat, 08 Nov 2008 14:51:36 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-1105 The bigger the ESL panel, the louder it will be able to play. Hybrids have cone woofers and the larger ESLs will have larger woofers. Transparency and detail are the same regardless of the ESL size, but smaller ESls cannot play as loud. The membrane only can move a small distance. If you have ESLs in the front, using cone-type speakers in the rear will produce a change in tonality between the front and rear. Better to use ESLs all the way around. Put larger ones in the front and smaller ones in the rear. - JEJ Sat, 27 Sep 2008 09:16:45 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-1103 Thanks for the review and comments. I understand the internal power and woofer differences between the Source and Purity, can you help me with the difference in sound. I intend on using in a 5.1 set up with a sub woofer and the Matinee center. Possibly Definitive Technology surrounds. Are the Purities worth the extra $? If I choose the Purity can I save on the amp/pre amp set up? - Bob F Sat, 27 Sep 2008 08:37:46 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-735 HI Maybe i missed it but did you comment on the how the internal amps sounded on the ML purity's. I recently heard a demo of the puritys powered by 200w Class A xindacs, they certainly sounded special. But i was being told that the internal amps were up to it. - Tastech Sat, 10 May 2008 23:05:15 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-698 "because they had to be very big in order to produce sound at all frequencies." True to some extent. How would you compare the general performance of Quad's ESL to ML while the size is significantly different? With small size it still covers more frequencies. Cheers - IP Thu, 01 May 2008 21:06:05 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-648 The Purity's were already broken in when I got them, but I always let speakers play for a few days with white noise at about 80 dB before I do the critical listening and bench tests. - JEJ Thu, 17 Apr 2008 13:26:31 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-641 According to ML those Purity's have to be broken in for 72hours. Would this impact or change your benchmark results? - Xavierwalls Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:51:21 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-597 I've been a big fan of and builder of esl's for many years... For me, the ML-Purity's are a blessing and way overdue. I hope to see more "evolutions" to esl speakers... - Roy Tue, 08 Apr 2008 07:28:42 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-340 The Strata Mini's have a slightly brighter high end, and deeper bass because of the large powered woofer. - JEJ Sat, 01 Mar 2008 09:56:27 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-339 My test lab is not constant, unfortunately, because there is a continuous flow of new equipment coming in and going out. There are various components sitting in different spots on any one occasion. Although I do put the speakers in the same spot when measuring, they are of different height and some of the tweeters are at a slanted angle. So, I could not trust a standard room filter. I wish I could. I will probably add a 2 meter measurement to go with the 1 foot and 1 meter graphs in future reviews though. - JEJ Sat, 01 Mar 2008 09:53:33 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-336 I too would love to hear a comparison to the Strata Mini. The Mini, and the Martin Logan Source (Purity is out of my price range I think) are the two speakers I'd love to listen to and pick up now, and I heard the Mini once at an AV123 GTG last summer, but would like to hear how the two brands compare from someone that has listened to both extensively. - Chris Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:00:04 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-305 Great review as always. Your reviews always provide a good balance between objective data and personal subjective impressions. Too many "audiophile" equipment reviews out there tend to indulge in poetic yet capricious descriptions of equipment performance, such as "the tweeter sounds like butter..." What does that even mean??? Or even more ridiculous, many reviewers claim to have super human hearing ability, such as reporting that they can detect increased distortion levels at 20khz... I know one such person, who owns many expensive pieces of high end audio gear, visited an audiologist as a request from his ENT physician due to a sinus condition, only to find out that he cannot even hear anything above 12khz... Besides, how sound is produced interacts a lot with the listening environment before the pressure wave reach one's ears, and then there is the element of psychoacoustic, and finally, acoustic memory. Subjective descriptions may ellicit poetic imagination in the readers, but that is just it, imagination and not real word objective performance... I do have one suggestion for your reviews. I see that you informed another reader in another review that you do not perform these measurement tests under anechoic conditions, and with good reasons unless one is well funded by a research lab... However, it would be helpful to see more closed mike response measurements taken off axis from the tweeter, both horizontally and vertically. Furthermore, the response measurements taken 1 meter from the speaker would be more meaningful if there are test graphs showing the room mode/modal pressure variations and speaker boundry interferences. Better yet, if the testing room is constant (hopefully it is), all response graphs taken 1 meter away from the speakers can be adjusted with the known notches and bumps present in the testing environment (which I suspect you may already have done as I do not seen to see any floor relction notch)... The above mentioned additional information would be appreciated, as the extra pieces of objective findings can further help your readers to come to a closer prediction of a tested speaker's actual sound signature. In any case, great reviews! - CWNYC Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:15:07 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-270 I love your reviews, mainly because of the raw data in the benchmarks, not just a bunch of music reviews and thats it. Please keep it up! How would these compare to those Onix Strata Minis you reviewed a year ago? They seem comparable in price after you allocate the extra $1000 or so towards an amp for the Strata. The ML uses electrostatic technology while the Strata uses planar-magnetic. - Mark Wed, 27 Feb 2008 07:59:13 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-218 McIntosh power amplifiers are ideal for ESLs because (1) they have so much power, and (2) they have output transformer taps for low impedance speakers. If you get a full range ESL, these factors will become more important. - JEJ Mon, 25 Feb 2008 09:38:45 +0100 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/speakers-products-menu-column1-42/273-a-secrets-speaker-review.html#comment-210 I new to ESL speakers. Any idea how this speaker would work with a McIntosh MC 2600 power amp pushing 600 WPC? - JFP Sun, 24 Feb 2008 08:38:30 +0100