lrb@alex.ctrg.rri.uwo.ca (3787 x4108) (06/05/91)
i've been very happy with the CLS's for the last few years, but hear
mostly on the net about people's sequels.
why are people seemingly prefering the sequels over the cls, or is it
that cls owners are just too busy listening....
--
Lance R. Bailey Systems Manager box: Robarts Research Institute
email: lrb@rri.uwo.ca Clinical Trials Resources Group
fax: 519.663.3789 P.O. Box 5015, 100 Perth Dr.
vox: 519.663.3787 ext. 4108 London, Canada N6A 5K8JWB@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (06/06/91)
In article <12782@uwm.edu>, lrb@alex.ctrg.rri.uwo.ca (3787 x4108) says: > >i've been very happy with the CLS's for the last few years, but hear >mostly on the net about people's sequels. > If you're happy, why change? >why are people seemingly prefering the sequels over the cls, or is it >that cls owners are just too busy listening.... > For me, I was going from MGIIB's, which I felt had no bass, to the Sequel II's because of their bass among other things. They were in the price range I felt I could afford, fit my room well, and I must admit, reviewed well. The CLS's, from what I read, lacked bass. I confess that I didn't take the time to compare the two since the CLS's were more money and I perferred the looks of the Sequel's. just my 2 cents worth... John Beach
brucej@sequent.UUCP (Bruce Jones) (06/06/91)
In article <12782@uwm.edu> lrb@alex.ctrg.rri.uwo.ca (3787 x4108) writes: >why are people seemingly prefering the sequels over the cls, or is it >that cls owners are just too busy listening.... I suppose it depends on what kind of music you listen to. I listen to rock and jazz, and want to have percussive bass and drums. Music you can *feel* as well as hear. The Sequels have a decent low end and the wonderful ML stat panel. The small size of the stat panel (as compared to the CLS) is a compromise, of course, but I found the CLS's unsatisfying for serious rock'n'roll and my pockets aren't quite deep enough for Quests or Monoliths. Perhaps I'd be happier with a set of CLS's and a subwoofer, but for now the Sequels are more than enough. It's time now for upgraded electronics.... -- brucej
chu@hanauma.jpl.nasa.gov (Eugene Chu) (06/07/91)
In article <12823@uwm.edu> JWB@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU writes: > >In article <12782@uwm.edu>, lrb@alex.ctrg.rri.uwo.ca (3787 x4108) says: >> >>i've been very happy with the CLS's for the last few years, but hear >>mostly on the net about people's sequels. >> > >If you're happy, why change? > >>why are people seemingly prefering the sequels over the cls, or is it >>that cls owners are just too busy listening.... >> > >For me, I was going from MGIIB's, which I felt had no bass, to the >Sequel II's because of their bass among other things. They were in >the price range I felt I could afford, fit my room well, and I must >admit, reviewed well. The CLS's, from what I read, lacked bass. I >confess that I didn't take the time to compare the two since the CLS's >were more money and I perferred the looks of the Sequel's. > >just my 2 cents worth... > >John Beach In my listening tests, the CLS, as most electrostatic speakers, do indeed lack bass response. This is due to the fact that these types of speakers are bipolar, with radiation patterns behind the speakers exactly out of phase with those of the front. For medium to high frequencies, this is not a problem, as these acuostic energies have fairly short wavelenghts, and when the front and back waves meet, they have less of a tendency to cancel each other. This could cause interference that could upset imaging, so what one usually does is to place sound absorbant materials behind them and to their sides. At lower frequencies, the front and back waves meet while still close to their maximal out of phase relationship, and would tend to cancel each other. This is why they appear to have less response at lower frequencies. I once saw an audio shop do something very interesting to enhance the bass response of the CLS: they built a bass trap against one of the walls and set the CLS in front of them. That was the only time I've ever heard a set of CLS with decent bass response. The Sequel on the other hand, has an enclosed and baffled bass driver to provide bass response. It works quite well, I think. BTW, for those who have the Sequel, are the top rear edges of the side panels straight, or is there a triangular cut into them? When the Sequels first came out, they had the straight edge. But that design tended to add a resonance to the overall sound, and they later came out with the same panel with the cut in it. In general, ES speakers are fantastic for mid to high frequency response and imaging for a carefully situated listener. But they're all too pricy for me. eyc My opinnions only.