Has anyone heard the Martin Logan Mosaics? (1 Viewer)

[EdNichols]

If so, what did you think? Did you compare them to anything else? If so, what and did they compare?

 

[Evan M.]

I have auditioned the Mosaics and in one word....amazing!! I find it odd that they are not talked about more. The thing I liked about them is that they are a ribbon speaker as opposed to the ML's that are electrostats. You do not need to plug them in and you do not have to feed them as much power as other ML's. plus they sound almost as good. Do not get me wrong...they are power hungry just not over board. I was told that 100watts of good true power would be sufficient for them. The thing that amazed me about them was how they filled the room with music, it almost sounded as if speakers were behind me playing. The soundstage was incredible. They are very clean sounding and looking. I compared them to Mirage, Boston acoustics and Vienna. They have a lot of punch that I was not expecting. I did not get them for one reason only.....MONEY!! they are 2000$ which was a bit out of my price range. Plus I would want to get a couple of mono blocks to power them because I would not want to tax my receiver too much. I went with Boston vr3's, very nice for the money.
If you plan on using them for HT strictly I would not get them though. They are very musical and I do not think that you will do them justice in a strictly HT setup. They sound great for HT but it almost seems like a shame to have these speakers performing for "only" HT. Give them a good listen though. I really think you will be amazed at the sound that comes out of those little floor standers,

 

[EdNichols]

What were they driving them with?

 

[Evan M.]

B&K separates......I believe 120 watts per channel.

 

[cabreau]

I was with Evan M. one of the times that he demoed the Mosaics. I agree, they are simply amazing. He laughed because when the music started, I looked up at the ceiling and behind me, looking for in-wall speakers that were helping out the two Mosaics with the sound...I found none. That was his reaction the first time he heard them with his wife. He looked around, wondering which surround speakers were also turned on. The soundstage is so large and enveloping, from just those two front speakers, that if you close your eyes, you cannot figure out where they are...they are like the Matrix...they are everywhere and they are nowhere. I'm struggling with the idea of trading in my Paradigm's next year and upgrading to the Mosaics instead of the Studio 100's. They are the same price.

I don't think it was B&K separates powering it though, was it? Weren't they powering them with that HUMONGOUS Yamaha flagship receiver that they had in there?

 

[Jeff Aguilar]

I am currently running my Martin Logan Aerius i's with a Parasound 85X5 amp. I use the Parasound for home theater and I use a small 30 watt tube amp for two channel music. These are a little harder to run then the Mosaics. The Aerius i's are the generation before the Aeon's.

$2000 is quite a bit for a new pair of speakers. For me anyway. That is why I bought my used. I got a great pair of Martin Logan's on Audiogon. If I was to buy a new pair of Aeon's or Aeon i's, that would have run me $3,500 to $3,750 for the pair. But by buying a speaker a few years old that sound so close to the new one, it only looks a little bit differently, only ran me $1,250! I love my Martin Logan's! I really do not ever see me investing in another set of speakers. Of course unless it is a larger set of Martin Logan's.

I bought my speakers locally. So I got to meet the former owner. This was the most expensive thing I have bought online and it was a great experience.

Jeff Aguilar

 

[Evan M.]

Not sure cabreau....you may be correct about the yamaha rxz-1 powering it. If you get those speakers I am going to beat you up and steal them from you LOL........ummmm actually maybe my wife will beat you up, she is tougher than me

 

[cabreau]

She sure is.

 

[BradZ]

This goes against the current grain, but I thought the Mosaics were fatiguing to listen to. Immediately they had a lot of presence, but after about 10 minutes of listening they were just too up front. I've listened to them a couple of times- once with ROTEL gear and another time with Primare stuff. I think my main problem is that they offer none of the magic of electro-stat Logans. It's really not even fair to compare them to the Aerius or the Aeons- they're a different beast altogether.

It's a neat design and I like the looks of the speaker, but I think there are better buys in the $2000 category.

In the end it's personal preference, if you like them that's all that counts.

 

[cabreau]

Just goes to show how different peoples' ears can be. The last thing in the world that I thought of these was fatiguing. They are so rich and full to me. Often times people are fatigued easily by speakers that can actually reproduce all of the sounds that were meant to be heard. You will hear much more from a Boston Acoustic VR-3 than a Bose satellite, for instance. I'm not saying that this is the case with Bradz, I'm just saying...wellll...maybe he forgot to eat his Wheaties that morning before going out and listening to such grand speakers.

eg, I can listen to Phish live on the stereo, but if I was there, live, with all the different sounds that were actually there being thrown at my ears, I'd get fatigued much faster. Also, shrill and tinny sounds fatigue me...but then again the "muddiness" that I perceived from the Paradigm cc-370 compared to the cc-470 fatigued me...so it's all preference, you just have to listen.

Bradz, curious, what was fatiguing about the Mosaics? Highs, mids, lows? Imagine a 5 band eq rating each band from 1-10. 10 being the highest. How would you set it with a neutral pair of speakers?

 

[BradZ]

again this is a highly subjective hobby we enjoy, but to me the highs were emphasized too much with the Mosaics. I wouldn't call them bright, but it seemed to me that the bass and the highs didn't mesh well. In that way one might say that these little babies are like their larger siblings. With the larger Logan stats there always seemed to be a hump where the stats stopped and the bass started, it wasn't so noticable with the Mosaics, but there definitely was a tonal difference between the ribbons and the traditional woofer. I kept hearing the highs with more intensity than the bass which kept me from just enjoying the music.

As far as a reference, my speakers are Dynaudios which tend to be rated as very neutral. So for my tastes, I'm looking for flat fives all the way across. The mosaics were probably a 3 on the lows and a 7-8 on the highs. Does that make sense? I just thought they skewed to the high end.

Again- I love the midrange and highs on the traditional Logan Stats, and perhaps that's why I don't like the Mosaics, they never opened up the way that Logans are supposed to. I do understand how someone could like the sound of the Mosaics, it's just not my cup of tea.

 

[Shane Martin]

I plan to give them a listen as soon as I can. The nearest Dealer is about 45 minutes from me.

I've heard that these are different beasts from several folks. I guess this is a somewhat different design that the usual ML speakers?

Either way I plan to give them a listen.

 

[cabreau]

Thanks Bradz, that makes sense. It's awesome hearing about everyones' different preferences.