SDA 1c vs ML SL3

cayovelez

I just got a set of prestine shape ML SL3 and wow!!!!!! They sound incredible, compared to my upgraded 1c. Same room, same crapy location for both sets. Can anyone tell me why I should keep my 1c vs ML SL3 ? Please no bashing, and don't get me wrong I love my 1c, and spent a lot of time upgrading them, but I got the ML SL3 really cheap, and wonder if I should get rid of my 1c.

Schurkey

First guess: Within 6 months (probably less) you'll be hearing things in the MLs that don't sound so perfect.

Might be worth holding on to the Polks for a rematch once you get used to hearing the MLs.

cayovelez

Schurkey, thanks for your comment. I am more than likely keeping my 1c, but I will tell you that after 2 whole days and the entire 1973 Grateful dead live shows......wow the SL3 are just awesome. Tomorrow 1974 shows all day long.

heiney9

Come back in 6 months and see if you feel the same way. My point is don't make hasty decisions when it comes to audio. If you can afford to keep both for awhile, that's the best way to compare. A day or two means nothing.

H9

punk-roc

but if you decide to get rid of your 1c's make sure to let me know first =P

Jason

Pycroft

I have no specific comments on the ML's cause I've never heard them (and frankly don't even know what ML is ). I would like to add, however, that I had 1C's, and moved to something different - Sony SSM7's. I have been EXTREMELY happy, not that the 1C's didn't sound fantastic, but it was more about preference. I don't look back and regret it, but I would agree that you may want to A/B the speakers and give it some time to sink in before making a drastic move.

James

Joe08867

Pycroft he is talking about Martin Logan SL3's. Extremely nice speakers but like the others have said I would hold off getting rid of the 1C's. Maybe you can set both up for different types of music. Kind of an a/b switch setup.

ML SL3's for those that don't know.

polkfarmboy

I am with joe on this for sure

Hold onto both , I have kept my polk rti8 for listening to older tracks and with my tube amp

ML are super awesome and I love the detail in mine but this is also a downfall but there is nothing that can touch them with a good recording from an excellent source and you have the best speakers in the world

Hawkeye

Hold on to both if you can. The ML sound is intoxicating but you may find it does not do some music as well as a box. Some may disagree with that, but I find them to be very unforgiving due to placement, associated gear and less than perfect recordings.

They are new to your ears. Let them work on you for awhile before making a decision.

Gordon

cayovelez

Thanks all for the comments. I am planning on keeping the 1c, I worked very hard upgrading the crossovers, spikes, and rdo194. I would hate to get rid of them, they are sounding very good. However, yesterday after listening to the entire 1974 Grateful dead live, wow the Martin Logan SL3 are just blowing me away. I understand what people are saying about placement and quality of the recordings, but these speakers are just fantastic. Thanks for the comments.

cayovelez

Today I listen to some other music, and bi-amped the SL3 and wow. I like the 2 speakers a lot, however the SL3 are brand new to me and i am very impressed by their imaging. There are details on the recordings that I could never hear on my polks. I could pick 20 channels out of 27 in Neil's drum kit, and wow I can really hear them. The SL3 are very impressive, but wow they are more impressive once I bi-amp them. I have some monitor stage mixes from rush that are incredible, I can hear foot steps on stage.

headrott

A friend owns some Martin Logan SL3's and I have heard them a number of times. While I do think they sound very good, they seem to be missing some of the midrange that Polks possess. I have not heard a pair of 1C's recently (it's been about 6 years), but I own a pair of 2B's and 3.1TL's and compared to those the ML SL3's seem thin on the mid and bottom end (IMO). You may feel differently even after some time with them but as others have stated don't make a hasty decision.

Greg

inspiredsports

I know in post #1 you mentioned that your speaker placement is less than optimal; in fact I think you deemed it to be "crappy".

The Martin Logan's may not mind the compromised position as much as the Polk's. In my experience, I've found very subtle location changes can cause dramatic changes of the sound quality of Polk speakers.

It's too bad you can't listen to both sets in a more optimal setting.

cayovelez

I understand that placement for my Polks is very important, and you are right, the ML SL3 are more forgiven in that regard. Don't get me wrong, I love my 1Cs they are fantastic, their mid-range is far better than the SL3, however it is the clarity and depthness, and staging levels that I really enjoy on the SL3. I have experienced in a short time that they both have their own strenght. The SL3 are new to me so, more listening is due.

Audioquest

cayovelez wrote: »

I understand that placement for my Polks is very important, and you are right, the ML SL3 are more forgiven in that regard. Don't get me wrong, I love my 1Cs they are fantastic, their mid-range is far better than the SL3, however it is the clarity and depthness, and staging levels that I really enjoy on the SL3. I have experienced in a short time that they both have their own strenght. The SL3 are new to me so, more listening is due.

I found with the ML speakers I've owned, that they are quite upstream component dependent on getting the best from them, moreso that a lot of cone driver speakers. A nice neutral SS amp with a high quality tube preamp works wonders. A drawback I found is they tend to beam the output making for a narrow sweet listening spot. The Polks likely have a much wider soundstage in that respect. As the others said, take some time to analyze which sounds best to you as that is what ultimately counts.

cayovelez

First of all thanks for all that replied to my post. So far I am in favor of the ML due to the fact that their imaging is incredible, specially when power well. Bi-amping them made a huge difference. I am not into loud hard rock, which my 1c hands down win for. For my everyday normal listening conditions and music level the ML are so far the winner. I am going to follow everyones advice and keep the 1c. Thanks all.

vc69

inspiredsports wrote: »

I know in post #1 you mentioned that your speaker placement is less than optimal; in fact I think you deemed it to be "crappy".

The Martin Logan's may not mind the compromised position as much as the Polk's. In my experience, I've found very subtle location changes can cause dramatic changes of the sound quality of Polk speakers.

It's too bad you can't listen to both sets in a more optimal setting.

I would agree wholeheartedly with this statement. I like ML's a lot, but placement is so crucial and that goes x2 for the SDA's.

cayovelez

Thanks Kevin, I agree I wish that I have a better place for these two speakers to better evaluate them, but I can't. I will tell you that the details of the ML is incredible. I am still on my honeymoon phase with these speakers and I am going to follow everyone's advice to give some time to evaluate, but soooooo far the ML are very far ahead. i recalled in 89 falling in love with a properly setup 1c. but my music taste have changed from those days.

falconcry72

cayovelez wrote: »

after 2 whole days and the entire 1973 Grateful dead live shows.......

How'd you manage that? The Dead played 72 shows in 1973 that averaged 3 hours a piece; that would take a week and a half of non-stop listening! :eek:

cayovelez wrote: »

yesterday after listening to the entire 1974 Grateful dead live...

1974: 40 shows X 3hrs a piece = 5 non-stop days of music!

Just breakin your chops. I'm glad you're diggin your new speakers and some good Dead. 1973 and 1974 are among my favorite years for them.:D

heiney9

cayovelez wrote: »

I am not into loud hard rock, which my 1c hands down win for.

Hmmmm......I never thought the SDA's did rock all that well. Never a rock speaker IMO, they can do rock, but I certainly wouldn't characterize them as a "good" rock speaker.

Glad you're enjoying both.

H9

vc69

cayovelez wrote: »

Schurkey, thanks for your comment. I am more than likely keeping my 1c, but I will tell you that after 2 whole days and the entire 1973 Grateful dead live shows......wow the SL3 are just awesome. Tomorrow 1974 shows all day long.

falconcry72 wrote: »

How'd you manage that? The Dead played 72 shows in 1973 that averaged 3 hours a piece; that would take a week and a half of non-stop listening! :eek:

Better (faster) listening through modern chemical enhancement perhaps?

cayovelez

falconcry72,

Thanks for busting my chops good....I deserve it. I have an Alesis ADAT with all my Dead shows. Only missing 8 shows alltogether. For 73 I played for about 18-19 hours straight picking my favorite venues based on my likes. And for 74 did the same. Now I have been playing some other years as well and some other bands. These, ML are just phenomenal for this kind of music, can hear Jerry in some 74 shows yell at Bear Stanley(that is pretty awesome) could not hear that on my polks.

dpowell

inspiredsports wrote: »

The Martin Logan's may not mind the compromised position as much as the Polk's. In my experience, I've found very subtle location changes can cause dramatic changes of the sound quality of Polk speakers.

It's too bad you can't listen to both sets in a more optimal setting.

+1. Too bad you can't hear the 1C's at their best.

Hypnotoad

Congratulations on your find.

The only Martin Logan's I have heard were at Fry's here in Houston and they sounded awful because they don't know how to set them up properly. The best speakers I have ever heard were a pair of Janszen Electrostatics, they cost as much as a new car, I was blown away by them.

When I bought my 1C's I had a choice, I could have got some ML Eon's locally fairly cheaply. Still twice the price of what I paid for the 1C's. But that wasn't the deciding factor, I love the SDA sound, I even have a pair in my bedroom, 2A's.

Electrostatics are very detailed and need good components or they can be overly bright IMO.

The 1C's are very fussy on placement, I had mine for 3 months until I realized they were too close together, I moved them a foot further apart and they are different speakers.

Cone speakers will never have the detail of electrostatics they are different animals altogether.

I have some Boston Acoustics A200's, a very nice speaker I put them in rotation now and again. I like them for a while but always go back to my SDA's.

I am sure I would have enjoyed the ML Eon's but I know I love my 1C's.

Keep your 1C's and experiment with placement you might be surprised, and keep enjoying your new ML's.

cayovelez

Well,

First of all I need to say thanks for all the people that suggested for me to keep my 1c while auditioning the Martin Logan SL3. After 6 or so months of listening to both for extended periods each and side by side at times, the SDA 1c Won and by far. I think it was Schurkey that was right on.

Fongolio

Awesome. I've heard the ML's you have in an audio store and was quite amazed but I wondered about the long term versus my 1C's and you've just saved me a bunch of time and money. I'm still cookoo for cocoa puffs about my 1C's!!