Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!info-high-audio-request
From: verdix.com!brucej@sequent.UUCP (Bruce Jones)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: logan CLS versus sequel
Message-ID: <12828@uwm.edu>
Date: 6 Jun 91 12:53:53 GMT
Sender: news@uwm.edu
Lines: 17
Approved: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


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