MartinLogan Remakes Motion Series Speakers

[Penelinfi]

Well, that Andrew Robinson guy reviewed those XT b100 now

Basic measurement at 3:44 looks good
Although if this is in room may be slightly bright?

 

[norman bates]

should have kept the bearded scruff............... lol
43k views in 3 days, seems like there is some interest.............

I wonder what his wife thinks of it............

Very smooth round over on ribbon waveguide..........
Granted, vertically, the highs probably arn't hitting the waveguide walls.
I'd assume 1' vertical dispersion sitting 10' away for frequencies done by the 1.25" wide x 2.5" tall ribbon tweet.

Kevlar can have some nasty resonances that can be hammered flat but can be heard and seen on a waterfall plot.
On a woofer, I'd like to see copper cap or shorting rings.

wonder how it would do vs a m106....................

I'll watch it tonight.

 

[Dimitrov]

I need to upgrade from my Paradigm Studio 20 v5 bookshelves and hoping the XT B100 will do the trick. I know Audioholics are reviewing their floor standers soon but I'm very interested in the bookshelves. I wish we had hard data on them, but the best we have are in-room measurements that look pretty good. Would prefer a more comprehensive measurement unless someone buys a pair and sends them to Amir for review.

 

[norman bates]

Or buy 1 from crutchfield.

Bigger tweet than emotiva.
Comes in wood, white, or black.

Steep competition at 800 each.
Pair of Polk m200 for $700, pair of emotiva t1+ (3 ways) for $900, pair of revel m16 for $1k, pair of (improved) klipsch rp600m ii, or on sale single revel m106 for $770.
Or even a single 6" golden ear brx for $950.

Some love ribbons, eventhough they can harmonicaly measure worse than domes.
I remember Zaph's measurements years ago.

maybe the micro detail outweighs the macro.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Or buy 1 from crutchfield.

Bigger tweet than emotiva.
Comes in wood, white, or black.

Steep competition at 800 each.
Pair of Polk m200 for $700, pair of emotiva t1+ (3 ways) for $900, pair of revel m16 for $1k, pair of (improved) klipsch rp600m ii, or on sale single revel m106 for $770.
Or even a single 6" golden ear brx for $950.

Some love ribbons, eventhough they can harmonicaly measure worse than domes.
I remember Zaph's measurements years ago.

maybe the micro detail outweighs the macro.

An AMT is not a ribbon. Good ones typically have THD readings in line with a good dome.

 

[norman bates]

True, thanks for reminding me.

 

[norman bates]

the 5.5" woofered motion b10
hope you like smashing pumpkins................

 

[norman bates]

saw this posted today on avs forum

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/martin-logan-xt-f100.3270362/

"I have heard them at the Best Buy in Columbus, Ohio at the Polaris Location , they didn't actually have em in Stock so the guy had to call his Boss cause they had a Pair so next had to actually put them in Stock an right then an there they opened them up an Set them up ran them thru Arcam Stuff really sounded Fantastic not even broken in listened to some Rock , Country and some Gospel they were really Great , i want a Pair lol but the Front is Matte Black an sides were Gloss Black were really nice looking an the Salesman goes i really like these an the Adjustable feet were really Cool looking . The way they had them set up wasn't really Close to how i would have them set up the angle and toe in towards you but we listened to em for like 40 minutes . Played a couple Boston Tunes an then went Country-Rock with 5 Finger Death punches " Blue on Black " some Chris Stapleton then actually forgot went some Blues with Might Sam Mcclain's " When the Hurt is Over " and " Im So Lonely " But they are really Good my Budd has a Set of Motion 40's an i got Golden Ear's Triton 5's and the Sound is waaaay better than them , I WANT EM , lol just gotta Sell my Golden Ear's hope this Helps ya'll"

 

[kchap]

Do these work on the same principle as the Heil Air Motion Transformers (Heil AMT)?

Edited

 

[geox]

Good times in the speaker market these days

Perlisten R4b vs Kef R3 Meta vs Martin Logan B100 with Polk R200 as the baseline - price performance leader is good for us.. consumers.

can wait for the measurements, comparisons and subjective opinions.

 

[norman bates]

from robinson's review above vs klpsch............

"But of all the speakers in our comparison the Klipsch rp600m Mark II has the most in common with the B100. All things considered, the B100 is the better speaker but for less than 750 for the pair, the 600 amps pack quite the punch and in many ways are comparable especially when it comes to clarity and spaciousness. The 600s have more bass though it's not quite as tight as the b100s. But they are more amplifier friendly which can be a savings."

"or even the Klipsch 600m Mark II, do you get twice the performance with the B100 ? I think that you do. You definitely get twice to build quality and twice the appearance and pride of ownership for your money with the B100. They are phenomenal, phenomenally built and looking speakers."

I was hoping to hear one of them has more micro or macro detail.............

 

[norman bates]

kchap, I think they do, like the heil.

 

[OldManMatt]

My XT-B100's were delivered yesterday, I ordered from Best Buy and have 14 days to decide if I want to keep or return. I only sat in front of them for a song or two so no critical type listening yet. I did hook them up in my TV room and had YouTube music playing thru TV to Dac into amp half the day yesterday at loud volume while I was on the back patio putting together a new board for a dynakit st-70. So at the moment the Logans are on stands where my Polk R200's normally sit.

My personal initial impressions are that they look nice with a well made enclosure. I really like the one piece front baffle with the wave guide. My first AMT tweeter and this one has some size to it. They ML's are about a pound heavier than the Polks even though the Polks are about 2 inches deeper in size. I'd say the tweeter and high frequency's are what really stand out vs the R200, with more vertical and horizontal dispersion. Polks seem more balanced in low-mid low bass area, but I'll spend more time with the Logan's today to try and get a better feel for that assessment. Initially right out of the box I felt the Logans sounded a little shrill with heavy sibilance..but when I came back inside the house after a couple hours of them playing all of that went away. I'm not too sure about that rated spec of 93db sensitivity.

So that is just a quick little insight of what I thought/experienced. I am a big fan of the Polk R200, but I think the tweeter on the Logans made me perceive them as a little more refined sounding. The Logans cost ($1700) about 3x's the amount I paid for a new pair of R200's though ($575).

 

[OldManMatt]

That second pic was suppose to show the Polk R200's on the same stands...but it looks like the top is cut off. Only pic I have of the Polk's. 3rd pic is the board I finished, I was so happy about it I wanted to show it off.

 

[MarcT]

My XT-B100's were delivered yesterday, I ordered from Best Buy and have 14 days to decide if I want to keep or return. I only sat in front of them for a song or two so no critical type listening yet. I did hook them up in my TV room and had YouTube music playing thru TV to Dac into amp half the day yesterday at loud volume while I was on the back patio putting together a new board for a dynakit st-70. So at the moment the Logans are on stands where my Polk R200's normally sit.

My personal initial impressions are that they look nice with a well made enclosure. I really like the one piece front baffle with the wave guide. My first AMT tweeter and this one has some size to it. They ML's are about a pound heavier than the Polks even though the Polks are about 2 inches deeper in size. I'd say the tweeter and high frequency's are what really stand out vs the R200, with more vertical and horizontal dispersion. Polks seem more balanced in low-mid low bass area, but I'll spend more time with the Logan's today to try and get a better feel for that assessment. Initially right out of the box I felt the Logans sounded a little shrill with heavy sibilance..but when I came back inside the house after a couple hours of them playing all of that went away. I'm not too sure about that rated spec of 93db sensitivity.

So that is just a quick little insight of what I thought/experienced. I am a big fan of the Polk R200, but I think the tweeter on the Logans made me perceive them as a little more refined sounding. The Logans cost ($1700) about 3x's the amount I paid for a new pair of R200's though ($575).

Thanks for the report. I'll be very interested to hear any further impressions you may have of the B100 tweeters, especially with respect to dialog intelligibility. I say that because my center speaker is the Polk LSiM706c, which has a similar ring radiator tweeter to that of the R200. I know it's supposed to be a good tweeter, with good dispersion, but the sound just doesn't seem that clear to me unless my ears are pretty much right in line with the tweeter. Dialog intelligibility is my top priority.

 

[OldManMatt]

K

Thanks for the report. I'll be very interested to hear any further impressions you may have of the B100 tweeters, especially with respect to dialog intelligibility. I say that because my center speaker is the Polk LSiM706c, which has a similar ring radiator tweeter to that of the R200. I know it's supposed to be a good tweeter, with good dispersion, but the sound just doesn't seem that clear to me unless my ears are pretty much right in line with the tweeter. Dialog intelligibility is my top priority.

I think the tweeter on the Logan is the star of the show. It's definitely a little more lively than the Polk's ring. Although contrary to the data I seen on the R200's when I measured mine with Dirac on my Arcam SA30 my Polks had a good 3 to 4 db drop off after say 9 or 10khz. I've never had issues with intelligibility though.. actually after I got the polks I ditched my center channel and AVP all together and switched to 2.1 for TV and music in the living room. Phantom center has been working fine for me. I can say that even with only the limited amount of time with the Logan's voices seem a little crisper and cleaner when watching TV. I should be able to spend some time with the Logans tonight and tomorrow, give me a chance to find out what I don't and do like about them. I had to send my Arcam in due to issues with a channel so I'm not feeding the Logan's with the cleanest of power right now. I'm using an old B&K amp that I use to use with my AVP.

 

[norman bates]

Thank you for weighing in !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am worried more was spent on the cabinet than the speaker.

I was figuring the tweet would be the star.
Due to the vertical size of the tweet, I'd imagine vertical sweet spot would be small, I doubt the "waveguide" is doing anything vertically.
But width, I'm not sure it would have the horizontal dispersion for the highs to even see the waveguide.
But the waveguide can help move the tweeter physically back for a deeper reverse null for the crossover.

If it is a little weak in the midbass, I wonder if there is any baffle step in the crossover...................

The woofer cone looks fun, but I'd rather have shorting rings or copper cap on the pole piece in addition to the kevlar.

I saw where someone sent back his emotiva (with amt) saying (approximately), "yea the tweet is good, but the woofer is, meh."

I hope that is not the case on these.
But I do applaud ML for trying to do non panel speakers.
Seems a hard sell nowadays....................

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Yes, they call it their Folded Motion Waveguide.

"After an extensive evaluation of nearly 50 design options, the Folded Motion® Waveguide profile was meticulously chosen to harmoniously align the tweeters output with the dispersion of the midrange drivers, enhancing the performance of our already incredible Gen2 Folded Motion® Tweeters. The Folded Motion® Waveguide helps blanket the listening area with evenly distributed detail and precision, ensuring an optimal experience for everyone. The waveguide also enhances the Controlled Dispersion output of the tweeter, offering generous coverage while minimizing unwanted room reflections."

ML-Motion Series

products.martinlogan.com

Meticulously copied from Revel.

 

[OldManMatt]

Thank you for weighing in !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am worried more was spent on the cabinet than the speaker.

I was figuring the tweet would be the star.
Due to the vertical size of the tweet, I'd imagine vertical sweet spot would be small, I doubt the "waveguide" is doing anything vertically.
But width, I'm not sure it would have the horizontal dispersion for the highs to even see the waveguide.
But the waveguide can help move the tweeter physically back for a deeper reverse null for the crossover.

If it is a little weak in the midbass, I wonder if there is any baffle step in the crossover...................

The woofer cone looks fun, but I'd rather have shorting rings or copper cap on the pole piece in addition to the kevlar.

I saw where someone sent back his emotiva (with amt) saying (approximately), "yea the tweet is good, but the woofer is, meh."

I hope that is not the case on these.
But I do applaud ML for trying to do non panel speakers.
Seems a hard sell nowadays....................

View attachment 274192

The vertical and horizontal sweet spot of this AMT tweeter may be small compared to other speakers but it is a little better than the Polk's. Well the horizontal on the Polk' isn't overly bad but if you sit up straight or especially stand you can hear the difference quite easily. If you want the full effect of that ring tweeter you really want to be ear level with it..but it still sounds good to me even if I wonder if to the side of the room. I personally don't need to be sitting down right in front of a speaker to enjoy it lol.
As for the Logan's "Nomax" reinforced Kevlar woofer, maybe it needs to be worn in a little bit but I don't feel it's as balanced or linear into the tweeter. I wish I had enough time with this speaker (14 days) to try and contact Amir to set up getting some data on this speaker. If I decide to keep it I would have no issues sending it in. I'm just not too sure if I'm keeping it at this point.

On the Martin Logan site I did read something about letting the speaker play for 72hours at 90db for some type of break in. Now I didn't have it cranked at 90db but it's been playing a good 80db for a good 24 hours on and off at this point. I did hook up the tube amp I just finished to the ML's and it sounds good. The power sounds really clean, no hiss or hum whatsoever with my ear right next to the AMT tweeter. After listening to a few tracks I liked it, but bass guitar strums and notes seem so distant and quiet, like I have to concentrate on them to hear them under the crisp clean vocals and electric guitar. I put the Polk's back in and it sounds more balanced, just not as extended in the high frequencies.

I really want to like the ML's, well I do like them but what I want is to love them. I think it's a good speaker and I do love the look, I think many people would be very happy with them. So far my issue is are they 3x's better than the Polk's? I DK about that lol. Guess it just depends on people's preferences. Wish I could incorporate the R-200's woofer with the B-100's tweeter and enclosure. Maybe I need to give the Logans more time. I'll spend another week with them before I add anything else to this thread. Maybe by then someone else will have some opinions on the speaker or better yet we can get some data on it. What I report is just my opinion and what I perceive in my listening space with my equipment. Too many variables when people start assessing speakers with no data involved.

 

[norman bates]

thank you.
my money would be there is a lack of baffle step, similar to the klipsch rp600f ii.......

Klipsch RP-5000F II, RP-6000F II and RP-8000F II reviewed by Erin

https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/klipsch_rp_5000f_ii/ https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/klipsch_rp_6000f_ii/ https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/klipsch_rp_8000f_ii/

www.audiosciencereview.com

I think the r200's are $750 for a pair now.