I have a lot to add here. I just bought some Summits this year.
There are undoubtedly many detractors of ML and I can understand where they are coming from. Anyways, I just bought my first of high quality speakers this year. I am a newcomer to high end audio, but I jumped straight into the deep end. I auditioned over 25 pairs of speakers before choosing, with a 6 cd auditioning array, filling up a small Mead notebook during this time. Fwiw, I know little or nothing about engineering or physics. I do however have a few degrees in classical music performance, internationally included. My honest experiences:
The compromises with ML hybrid electrostats, in order, in my opinion:
-sweetspot somewhere between small and tiny. (I’ve heard that SPL decreases only inversely with distance, not exponentially as with dynamic drivers, hence, the beaminess).
-Decent amount of space from boundaries is required
-Extremely tough impedances that require a high-current amp
-The self powered models must be plugged in
-Some compression at “reference levels”
Their strengths, not in order, in my opinion (compared to only what I have heard):
-IMO, unparalled transparency
-Unparalled midrange transients
-Unparalled low-level dynamics
-Unparalled “decay”(improper term?) You know, the death of a struck piano note, or plucked guitar note into death, ppp, pianississimo (I guess this is part of previous point)
-Unparalled vocal reproduction, generally strong with acoustical music in general.
-Lack of tremendous sibilance/hiss
-no tweeters to blow, er, something like that?… I listened to a drum solo of a few minutes, at the literal maximum output of a $5k Krell integrated, and I did not find any easily detectable distortions as I would with most dynamic speakers.
Some of these strengths were unparalleled even compared to two pairs of $90,000 speakers I’ve heard, the Dynaudio Evidences and Focal Grande Utopias. Then again, they don’t share the same weaknesses either, but just making a point.
Once I was bitten by ‘stats, I located my local Quad dealer. Unfortunately, they no longer sell their ESL’s, because the market is being driven by HT. I was disappointed, but at least I heard a lot of their other offerings, such as the 22Ls, BWs, SFs, etc.
It is IMHO, that to do MLs right, you ought to shoot for the Summits. The Vistas and Vantages exhibited a rather easily detectable mid-bass suckout (which I must imagine is due to integration issues, x-over, something). The Summits are not remotely close to having the same issue, imo. Yes, they msrp at 11k, but a good deal can be found, with patience. I am like hifihoney, I don’t think I will ever buy a new-in-box high end product. I was next in line for a used pair off the ‘gon that sold for 5.2k. Missed on that, still found a great deal shortly after. I’ve never heard any older line of ML’s.
Essentially due to this mid-bass suckout (real issue with linearity), at that price point (Vistas), I could find myself either getting top notch bookshelves+sub, or perhaps a used pair of floorstanders from BW, Dynaudio, Revel, Monitor Audio. (I particularly enjoyed Confidence and Contours of Dynaudio).
It must be said that my enjoyment from my speakers is surely related to the fact that I listen to at least 99% acoustical music: classical and jazz. These speakers aren’t for everybody. If I am ever lucky to put them in their own dedicated 2 channel room, I can guarantee you that I am not buying ‘stats as replacement mains for the HT.
Hope this helps shape your own viewpoint, best of luck.
