Hi,
It's a long time I wanted to ask some question to experienced people of the planars forum.
At 44 I have three systems and want to upgrade for only ONE or maybe with a less ambitious second just for modern music. The speakers are Boston Lynfield 400L (known for there clarity, soundstage and speed in all there audioband), Kef 104/2 (soundstage & fullness), Proac D15 (known for their average tone color) . All have qualities & defaults and now I consider that the sources are nearly good enough for me with a Rega Planar 3 and multiples digital sources (SB+DACs; CD players) I tuned or I 'm going to make like the subbu DAC.
I read a lot to try to understand the direction to go in regard to my budget. Can I have better for less than 2k $ ? I want to keep the Kef for rock music but want to beat The Boston Acoustic Lynfield 400L and ProacD15 for classic & Jazz & litlle orchestral music.
I hesitate between DIY and second hand because of my budget. I hesitate too with the technology. I'm impressed by the work made by some people in OB with classic drivers and by some like StigErik with mixed thechnology with G&B RD75 and bass driver. I didn't understand well the difference between Martin Logan, Magneplanar and little line array with ribons.
Is a Magneplanar 3.7 better than a Quad 2905 in a standalone conf ? It's to understand because both are too expensive for me, even in second hand.
Can a G&B rd75 DIY with a crossover at 300 or 600 Htz with OB bass match with an old second hand Quad ESL63 ? Possible scenario with my bufget...
Is it possible to go to DIY ESL with good result with my budget in relation to the second hand market ?
I give up with the ideas of horns system with Onken cause known to be expensive (TAD 4001) and nearly impossible to set up (approximative quality of most tweeter in tonal color?!, management between horn and bass box). I read a lot of JM Le Cleach cause it's easy for me to understand because of the same mother language. My final understanding is that the room intergration is one of the key domestic audio and many made a great work to explain that : S Linkwitz, Geedle, fellows of DIYA who explains how to deal with the listening room.
Here it's first approach for me to try understand from felows who try these different technologies and why they think one has more advantage than an other to ultimatly choose just one ! It is said than Quad have maybe the qualities I'm looking for like non fatiguabale listening and soundstage, but it is said too than the last 3.7 Maggies has fantastic tonal colors ?
Thank you for yours testimonies in the absolute and/or in regard to my 2000 $ budget (plan to sell two speakers).
Elldam
It's a long time I wanted to ask some question to experienced people of the planars forum.
At 44 I have three systems and want to upgrade for only ONE or maybe with a less ambitious second just for modern music. The speakers are Boston Lynfield 400L (known for there clarity, soundstage and speed in all there audioband), Kef 104/2 (soundstage & fullness), Proac D15 (known for their average tone color) . All have qualities & defaults and now I consider that the sources are nearly good enough for me with a Rega Planar 3 and multiples digital sources (SB+DACs; CD players) I tuned or I 'm going to make like the subbu DAC.
I read a lot to try to understand the direction to go in regard to my budget. Can I have better for less than 2k $ ? I want to keep the Kef for rock music but want to beat The Boston Acoustic Lynfield 400L and ProacD15 for classic & Jazz & litlle orchestral music.
I hesitate between DIY and second hand because of my budget. I hesitate too with the technology. I'm impressed by the work made by some people in OB with classic drivers and by some like StigErik with mixed thechnology with G&B RD75 and bass driver. I didn't understand well the difference between Martin Logan, Magneplanar and little line array with ribons.
Is a Magneplanar 3.7 better than a Quad 2905 in a standalone conf ? It's to understand because both are too expensive for me, even in second hand.
Can a G&B rd75 DIY with a crossover at 300 or 600 Htz with OB bass match with an old second hand Quad ESL63 ? Possible scenario with my bufget...
Is it possible to go to DIY ESL with good result with my budget in relation to the second hand market ?
I give up with the ideas of horns system with Onken cause known to be expensive (TAD 4001) and nearly impossible to set up (approximative quality of most tweeter in tonal color?!, management between horn and bass box). I read a lot of JM Le Cleach cause it's easy for me to understand because of the same mother language. My final understanding is that the room intergration is one of the key domestic audio and many made a great work to explain that : S Linkwitz, Geedle, fellows of DIYA who explains how to deal with the listening room.
Here it's first approach for me to try understand from felows who try these different technologies and why they think one has more advantage than an other to ultimatly choose just one ! It is said than Quad have maybe the qualities I'm looking for like non fatiguabale listening and soundstage, but it is said too than the last 3.7 Maggies has fantastic tonal colors ?
Thank you for yours testimonies in the absolute and/or in regard to my 2000 $ budget (plan to sell two speakers).
Elldam
Last edited:
Hi Jaimo,
Thanks for inputs.
I'm not sure a 1.6 is far better than my Boston ?
Is a moded Maggie1.6 equal to a normal 3.6 ?
Is a 1.6 better than a Quad ESL57 (or 63 because) because both ~same price on second hand market ?
My (p)reference amp is a Chord (200 w 8 homs & 400 4 homs). If not good enough are Ncores with SMPS a good match for planars ?
Hi Joaquin, viva el curanto of Chiloé (cooked of course in a hole) !
Thank you for confirmation with planar vs horns. I have a question :have tonal colors in the low medium, high bass sufisant thick, flesh meat like in real life or have we deal with light tonal colors in this area ?
Thanks for inputs.
I'm not sure a 1.6 is far better than my Boston ?
Is a moded Maggie1.6 equal to a normal 3.6 ?
Is a 1.6 better than a Quad ESL57 (or 63 because) because both ~same price on second hand market ?
My (p)reference amp is a Chord (200 w 8 homs & 400 4 homs). If not good enough are Ncores with SMPS a good match for planars ?
Hi Joaquin, viva el curanto of Chiloé (cooked of course in a hole) !
Thank you for confirmation with planar vs horns. I have a question :have tonal colors in the low medium, high bass sufisant thick, flesh meat like in real life or have we deal with light tonal colors in this area ?
when I was a little child , once I ate curanto near Chiloé , excellent experience !!! glad you know about it ...about your question ; depends too much on the room . I think below 100hz they might need some help , although many people use it with no additional help , neither in the top or bottom . If you like bass instruments or classic , the foundation imho of that kind of music is in the lower frecuencies , but they are a very good design and solution because they are like 95dB . so i got away with a 45 amp . the planars (fals) and a big mono woofer speaker between them @ about 100hz .
Last edited:
I was honored to test Curanto and how it was cooked in a local party in Chiloé 3 years ago ! It was traditionaly cooked in a hole with vegetables & with hot stones covered by vegetable and some earths... delicious !
It's the first time I heard about the japanese FLAT speakers (just googled it!). Had you bought the drivers or made it with spare parts ? I think it's not in my budget. I would like to hear it !
It's the first time I heard about the japanese FLAT speakers (just googled it!). Had you bought the drivers or made it with spare parts ? I think it's not in my budget. I would like to hear it !
Last edited:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I make the cabinets , dont get fooled with the size of the drivers , they have a very wide dispersion . The good thing they use no crossover , very nice technology , I think they are like USD 600 each on ebay . The big ones are very expensive . but the little ones are a nice solution .
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
this is now , I tend to do some experiments .
Their is no substitute for listening to your potential new speakers. I have never heard any Magneplanar for any length of time. I have owned Quad ESL 57's and ESL 63's. I like the ESL 57 better for its looks, and in the listening position for its sound, but overall I chose the ESL 63 for its wider stereo hot spot, and that is want I use now at home, I should sell the ESL 57's.
The speakers you have I cant judge, but I have never heard a Moving coil speaker that can match the realism of an electrostatic speaker.
The speakers you have I cant judge, but I have never heard a Moving coil speaker that can match the realism of an electrostatic speaker.
Thank you Owen,
Interesting...both 57 vs 63 and ESL vs conventionel.
It us incredible Because i surmise industrials make heavy conventional speakers to sell them very expensive....
Joaqin,
Beautiful work...i like too the bass with the vertical flow port.
The Flat driver equal to the b&g rd75 in price...
I will ask to à friend who lives in Tokyo how've they cost in Japan.
Very non conventional système you have. Bravo.
Interesting...both 57 vs 63 and ESL vs conventionel.
It us incredible Because i surmise industrials make heavy conventional speakers to sell them very expensive....
Joaqin,
Beautiful work...i like too the bass with the vertical flow port.
The Flat driver equal to the b&g rd75 in price...
I will ask to à friend who lives in Tokyo how've they cost in Japan.
Very non conventional système you have. Bravo.
Depending on how you do it, you can definitely get better and deeper bass, much more maximum SPL, wider and more controlled dispersion than the ESL63.
I have RD75 in dipole plus dipoles bass, and I love it. Its been too long since Ive heard the ESL63 so I really cant tell the sonic difference between the two.
The RD75 can go lower than 300 Hz. I cross over at 180 Hz in my current setup.
Hi Stigerik,
Thank you for the answer about the RD75, i am happy of that because I read many of your threads and your solution was one on my too long short list for an futur improvement (hard to listen all technologies and hard to trial between testimonies with personal tastes, but it helps a lot).
If B&G I will hesitate between rd75 or Neo10 + Neo 3. Two of my speakers ar cut below 150 and 125 Hz, I think it's great. I believe a good bass has something like a bump between 80 & 100-110 Hz and below can gently dip with 6db by octave without big problem in most of the domestic rooms...(not sure of that...my 2 cents experience). The two first octave is not a need for me...
II didn't understand why you need so much 18" drivers below 180 hz but it is theorical for me because never heard a rd75. When i read the data about the rd75 i see a dip below 600 Hz. For me it's equal to a thin sound (same problem as OB with conventionl driver) but I think maybe you use electronic compensation and/or foam panel to have a flater curve. I read above 100 to 200 Hz more than 12" bass driver can give a too plain sound to male vocal...
Do you use U-Frame for bass or just OB frame ? multi drivers are to reduce distorsion or improve speed by low cone movement to match with the rd75 ? How do you manage the distorsion below 300 to 600 hz with the rd75? A 10" or 12" in U or H frame gave you bad results to hear
About midrange inyour memory would you tell than the ESL63 is equal or bader than the RD75? Is it harder to manage the rear wave with an big esl like QUAD ?
I can have in my living room 1 m between rear wall an side wall and 3.5 at listening position with a base of 3 m. Is it good for planar or ribbon system ?
At least did you hear maggies (how diferent they sound in relation to your system) or tweaked maggies à la magnestand (more neo magnets? )
Sorry StigErik...a lot of questions... feel free to answer if you want in the direction which seems to have sense for you.... I have to focus.
In my mind wich each of the technologies : ribbon, magneplanar, esl, flat speaker (welcome to that new one), the bass have to be stronger with active crossover (not expensive in 2 way with minidsp but expensive in their 3 ways product). Is a linkwitz Orion OB bass with two heavy 10" a solution or an line aray à la Infinity RS ?
Thank you for the answer about the RD75, i am happy of that because I read many of your threads and your solution was one on my too long short list for an futur improvement (hard to listen all technologies and hard to trial between testimonies with personal tastes, but it helps a lot
).If B&G I will hesitate between rd75 or Neo10 + Neo 3. Two of my speakers ar cut below 150 and 125 Hz, I think it's great. I believe a good bass has something like a bump between 80 & 100-110 Hz and below can gently dip with 6db by octave without big problem in most of the domestic rooms...(not sure of that...my 2 cents experience). The two first octave is not a need for me...
II didn't understand why you need so much 18" drivers below 180 hz but it is theorical for me because never heard a rd75. When i read the data about the rd75 i see a dip below 600 Hz. For me it's equal to a thin sound (same problem as OB with conventionl driver) but I think maybe you use electronic compensation and/or foam panel to have a flater curve. I read above 100 to 200 Hz more than 12" bass driver can give a too plain sound to male vocal...
Do you use U-Frame for bass or just OB frame ? multi drivers are to reduce distorsion or improve speed by low cone movement to match with the rd75 ? How do you manage the distorsion below 300 to 600 hz with the rd75? A 10" or 12" in U or H frame gave you bad results to hear
About midrange inyour memory would you tell than the ESL63 is equal or bader than the RD75? Is it harder to manage the rear wave with an big esl like QUAD ?
I can have in my living room 1 m between rear wall an side wall and 3.5 at listening position with a base of 3 m. Is it good for planar or ribbon system ?
At least did you hear maggies (how diferent they sound in relation to your system) or tweaked maggies à la magnestand (more neo magnets? )
Sorry StigErik...a lot of questions... feel free to answer if you want in the direction which seems to have sense for you.... I have to focus.
In my mind wich each of the technologies : ribbon, magneplanar, esl, flat speaker (welcome to that new one), the bass have to be stronger with active crossover (not expensive in 2 way with minidsp but expensive in their 3 ways product). Is a linkwitz Orion OB bass with two heavy 10" a solution or an line aray à la Infinity RS ?
A lot of questions... I will try to answer some of them.
I don't hear or measure any problematic distortion rise from the RD75 below 300 or 600 Hz at reasonable SPLs, so I dont know the reason you ask how I handle it...
The frequency response of the RD75 depends on two things mainly - baffle/box loading and listening distance. It will get more LF extension in a closed box, and it will also get more level below 1 kHz with a wide open baffle.
The driver is a true line-source above 1 kHz, but below is will get more and more omni-directional. This means that the frequency response below 1 kHz will vary with distance - the closer you go the more LF level you will get.
To sum that up - if you listen at close distances (2 meters or less) a small (or no baffle) dipole will give a fairly flat response. At greater distances you need a wider baffle to compensate for the roll-off in response.
I think that electronic compensation is necessary in any case, not just with OB's, preferably a full DSP solution with digital XO as well as EQ.
The main reason I have so many 21" woofers is that I attempted to get undistorted output from a dipole down to 20 Hz. I almost succeeded with that...
I've heard Magnepan 1.7 recently. They are nice, but nowhere in the league of the RD-75 in my opinion.
I don't hear or measure any problematic distortion rise from the RD75 below 300 or 600 Hz at reasonable SPLs, so I dont know the reason you ask how I handle it...
The frequency response of the RD75 depends on two things mainly - baffle/box loading and listening distance. It will get more LF extension in a closed box, and it will also get more level below 1 kHz with a wide open baffle.
The driver is a true line-source above 1 kHz, but below is will get more and more omni-directional. This means that the frequency response below 1 kHz will vary with distance - the closer you go the more LF level you will get.
To sum that up - if you listen at close distances (2 meters or less) a small (or no baffle) dipole will give a fairly flat response. At greater distances you need a wider baffle to compensate for the roll-off in response.
I think that electronic compensation is necessary in any case, not just with OB's, preferably a full DSP solution with digital XO as well as EQ.
The main reason I have so many 21" woofers is that I attempted to get undistorted output from a dipole down to 20 Hz. I almost succeeded with that...
I've heard Magnepan 1.7 recently. They are nice, but nowhere in the league of the RD-75 in my opinion.
wow...21" BASS; amasing ! cool !
i thought about distorsion below 600hz because the curve dip below thes 600 hz in the datasheet and the more volume to try to move the area to compensate the dip the more distorsion you have with it... in theory ! But as i said I never heard the rd75. I thought that an electronic compensation add distorsion because of the longer exursion with the planar for a flater curve... just theory, if there are no distorsion with measure and ears I understand it's the way to go and that's you do ! Thanks for testimonie
ok for the magnepan 1.7.
Thank you for the usefull answers StigErik
i thought about distorsion below 600hz because the curve dip below thes 600 hz in the datasheet and the more volume to try to move the area to compensate the dip the more distorsion you have with it... in theory ! But as i said I never heard the rd75. I thought that an electronic compensation add distorsion because of the longer exursion with the planar for a flater curve... just theory, if there are no distorsion with measure and ears I understand it's the way to go and that's you do ! Thanks for testimonie
ok for the magnepan 1.7.
Thank you for the usefull answers StigErik
It's tough to make these comparisons. The MG3.6's are way too large for my room so they were never considered from a practical standpoint. I have previously owned a pair of ESL57's but found them to be one trick ponies - Narrow sweet spot, limited LF, great for acoustic Jazz and Classical but not so good for Rock etc.
The Maggies were my compromise and changing to a good PP Tube amp (from a Bryston 4B-ST) made a huge difference. I proceeded to do the Peter Gunn xover mod and this took my system to the next level.
Thank you Jaimo,
Sure, very difficult and subjective that's why I ask to people who heard several planar technologies (& I assume most of them had classical speakers before).
Thank you for testimonie. I understand now that magneplanars seem to be a better compromise in relation to standard ESL like 57 or 63 when no active bass subwoofer is added.
Hé Bryston 4B-ST is a winner amp, your new PP Tub amp has to be a good challenger. Yes I read some threads about P Gunn...a large improvement if I remember.
Sure, very difficult and subjective that's why I ask to people who heard several planar technologies (& I assume most of them had classical speakers before).
Thank you for testimonie. I understand now that magneplanars seem to be a better compromise in relation to standard ESL like 57 or 63 when no active bass subwoofer is added.
Hé Bryston 4B-ST is a winner amp, your new PP Tub amp has to be a good challenger. Yes I read some threads about P Gunn...a large improvement if I remember.
Hi there,
It is very possible to build a DIYesl well within the means of your budget.
And you can build them any size you like.
As long as you follow a few simple guide lines you shouldn't have any problems achieving your goals.
I started out in Planar's with a set of Apogee's and they where fabulous.
But, Then I built a few small sets of esl's 9" X 22" and 3.25"X 9.75" and I must say that the sound quality is definitely a notch above the Apogee's even for their size.
Although a bit lacking in the low end as expected due to their smaller surface area.
Both panels sounded exactly the same as far as any timbre is concerned as there was no timbre to speak off.
There was a bit more low end extension with the larger panel due to it being wider,But being wider also caused it to be more directional compared to my smaller panel.
This is just something that is ruled by physics and is true for all types of planar drivers.
The way around too decrease the directional beaming aspect and use a wider panel for more low end is to, either, electrically segment the stator, or, physically segment the diaphragm into smaller sections of about 2" to 4" wide.
To this day I favor my smaller panels more because of their wider dispersion due to their smaller width.
Electrically segmenting the panel seems to have the most benefit for wide panel designs.
As it helps to create a lesser load(higher impedance) for the amplifier while increasing the surface area for more bass and in the meantime maintaining a wide dispersion factor.
Cost effective?
IMHO, Very much so !!!
I think DIYesl's can give you the most bang for your buck in performance and definitely sound quality.
I have gotten my little panels as high as and more than about +105db on an average, and, as high as +110db before at 1 meter and there quality did not change.
They just got louder!
Compression from heating of the Voice coil simply doesn't exist with ESL's.
Although getting that loud is not the norm and it does take some extreme voltages to get there.
But at least to +105db is a very real plateau for a common setup.
My panels cost me about $20 in materials to build as I used aluminium window screen and white plastic egg crate lighting diffuser's to build them with.
It is by far the cheapest method to use and is great for experimenting with due to the low cost of the materials.
Perforated metal is most everyone's choice of material to use, but it does come with a higher cost of the metal.
Wire stators are another cost effective method (sometimes) and will allow you to very easily employ electrical segmentation for a wider horizontal dispersion.
Building the frames to keep the wire perfectly straight is quite labor intensive but it is not that hard to do.
I got around this on my latest design by using some Steel TIG welding wire.
I used a .0625" wire as it was all I could find when I got it 10 years ago but there are thinner gauges available now.
Just make sure that they are straight to begin with should you choose to use this type of material
Using perforated metal is by far the easiest method of construction and the others are more labor intensive but well worth the effort in the end for any of the methods you choose.
The First and far most important thing is to have a proper stator coating thickness on your panels!!!
This I believe is the main down fall of the ole' 57's as they weren't designed to accommodate today's higher power amplifiers with voltage swings much over 20V to 25Vrms.
Not having enough stator coating is the most common issue that beginning ESL builders have.
There was one DIYer here that followed the same basic dimensions of the 57's but only much taller and they turned out very very nice!!
Second, Good Magnets don't come cheap these days and this is what has stopped me from messing with the ribbons anymore, Besides I like the sound of ESL's better anyhow.
If you wanted to just try it out a DIYesl it need not be very big at all or even tall.
After 10years of building them I am still hooked on my little Desktop design and it sounds so good that I have yet to even hook them up in stereo!!!
But that is mainly because of research reasons as it is easier to hear any flaws that might exist using one panel than using two panels.
I did listen to them in stereo when I First made them in 2003 and that impression is still clear as a bell in my mind, and, I have made many improvements since then with my newest models.
You may have seen these but here are a few pictures of my little panel designs.
Cheers!!
jer
It is very possible to build a DIYesl well within the means of your budget.
And you can build them any size you like.
As long as you follow a few simple guide lines you shouldn't have any problems achieving your goals.
I started out in Planar's with a set of Apogee's and they where fabulous.
But, Then I built a few small sets of esl's 9" X 22" and 3.25"X 9.75" and I must say that the sound quality is definitely a notch above the Apogee's even for their size.
Although a bit lacking in the low end as expected due to their smaller surface area.
Both panels sounded exactly the same as far as any timbre is concerned as there was no timbre to speak off.
There was a bit more low end extension with the larger panel due to it being wider,But being wider also caused it to be more directional compared to my smaller panel.
This is just something that is ruled by physics and is true for all types of planar drivers.
The way around too decrease the directional beaming aspect and use a wider panel for more low end is to, either, electrically segment the stator, or, physically segment the diaphragm into smaller sections of about 2" to 4" wide.
To this day I favor my smaller panels more because of their wider dispersion due to their smaller width.
Electrically segmenting the panel seems to have the most benefit for wide panel designs.
As it helps to create a lesser load(higher impedance) for the amplifier while increasing the surface area for more bass and in the meantime maintaining a wide dispersion factor.
Cost effective?
IMHO, Very much so !!!
I think DIYesl's can give you the most bang for your buck in performance and definitely sound quality.
I have gotten my little panels as high as and more than about +105db on an average, and, as high as +110db before at 1 meter and there quality did not change.
They just got louder!
Compression from heating of the Voice coil simply doesn't exist with ESL's.
Although getting that loud is not the norm and it does take some extreme voltages to get there.
But at least to +105db is a very real plateau for a common setup.
My panels cost me about $20 in materials to build as I used aluminium window screen and white plastic egg crate lighting diffuser's to build them with.
It is by far the cheapest method to use and is great for experimenting with due to the low cost of the materials.
Perforated metal is most everyone's choice of material to use, but it does come with a higher cost of the metal.
Wire stators are another cost effective method (sometimes) and will allow you to very easily employ electrical segmentation for a wider horizontal dispersion.
Building the frames to keep the wire perfectly straight is quite labor intensive but it is not that hard to do.
I got around this on my latest design by using some Steel TIG welding wire.
I used a .0625" wire as it was all I could find when I got it 10 years ago but there are thinner gauges available now.
Just make sure that they are straight to begin with should you choose to use this type of material
Using perforated metal is by far the easiest method of construction and the others are more labor intensive but well worth the effort in the end for any of the methods you choose.
The First and far most important thing is to have a proper stator coating thickness on your panels!!!
This I believe is the main down fall of the ole' 57's as they weren't designed to accommodate today's higher power amplifiers with voltage swings much over 20V to 25Vrms.
Not having enough stator coating is the most common issue that beginning ESL builders have.
There was one DIYer here that followed the same basic dimensions of the 57's but only much taller and they turned out very very nice!!
Second, Good Magnets don't come cheap these days and this is what has stopped me from messing with the ribbons anymore, Besides I like the sound of ESL's better anyhow.
If you wanted to just try it out a DIYesl it need not be very big at all or even tall.
After 10years of building them I am still hooked on my little Desktop design and it sounds so good that I have yet to even hook them up in stereo!!!
But that is mainly because of research reasons as it is easier to hear any flaws that might exist using one panel than using two panels.
I did listen to them in stereo when I First made them in 2003 and that impression is still clear as a bell in my mind, and, I have made many improvements since then with my newest models.
You may have seen these but here are a few pictures of my little panel designs.
Cheers!!
jer
Attachments
And I agree this is a very important issue for ESL speakers. Having experienced the ESL 57, the only change I wish they had segmented the tweeter panel to improve dispersion. It must be about 4-5" between the widest apart holes in the stators.
I have also built an electrostatic speaker. 6 cm x 14 cm diaphragm area. I was amassed how well it went. The next experiment may have a diaphragm area of 5 cm x 6 cm. And I can recommend building electrostatic speakers.
I have yet to even approach the problems solved by Quad in the ESL 57 or ESL 63, namely making the electrostatic near full range, (70Hz-18KHz) without it being extremely directional, and the ESL 57 is still quiet directional, but I bet many DIY designs are more so. The ESL 57 has a tweeter/midrange and the two bass panels integrate very well but not perfectly, but the ESL 57 Bass panels are almost indestructible, The Bass panels are fully protected from shorting even if the diaphragm hits the stators but it does not sound nice (You need a greater than 30W amplifier to do this). The smaller tweeter/midrange overcomes some of the directional issues in the ESL 57. The ESL 63 is far more complex, with compression for signals above 10V and hard protection above 50V so making the ESL 63 much harder to damage, but sonicly geraldfryjr's approach to segmenting stators vertically while Quad does this in circles. The newer Quad speakers try to enhance the ESL 63's attempt at analogue delay.
From experience I totally agree, I think amplifier selection is critical for the ESL-57.
I would suggest no more than a 30W amp and the amplifier must be unconditional stable. The speaker will present loads from 32 Ohms down to 2 Ohms. If you like valve amplifiers (or early transistor such as the Leak stereo 30+) under 30 Volt (pp) output (around 30 Watts) I think the ESL 57 is a great match, possibly the best choice of loud speaker ever made commercially for valve / low power amplifiers.
You will need to install Quads protection circuit for the ESL 57 if you are using many amplifiers above 15W RMS power. The protection circuit has been around for at least 1993 but some ESL57's might not have it installed. If you dont want to use Quads protection circuit, I would use no more than a 15 W amp.
Its a lot more sensitive than modern electrostatic speakers. So considerably more practical for valve amplifier fans than any DIY Electrostatic speakers I have seen.
You must remember the ESL 57 is an attempt to build an ESL in a reproducible way, using semi unskilled labor in the cheapest way in 1957 for commercial production. It is possible to make better, but you might need a lot of test equipment/time to make a two way electrostatic work as well. The ESL 63 is with minor revisions still available today as the current Quad model, and this level of full range and wide dispersion is a much harder objective.
My electrostatic speaker was tiny, so the bass was very limited, unless used as a headphone, but even though it was a first prototype it still sounded very good. The next one I build will probably be even smaller, but for now I must concentrate on other things.
Correction:
The Quad ESL 53 has compression for signals above 40V and hard protection above 55V.
thank you for the advices,
Are there good sites with pictures or movies about the ESL DIY and the coating problem aspect ?
Is it a too simple question to tell : what makes an ESL better sounding in relation to a magnet ribbon: : the technology, the height ? Or is there no one beter than the other (let say between 100 hz and above) ?
Is there a passive filter in a segmented ESLor is it just a segmented coating on the plastic film ?
Really hesitate between ribon like rd75 (expensive an dangerous travel between Part express and France), second hand esl 63 (but scared about bass integration even with a minidsp) and a fully but tall and segmented esl or kit like australian ER esl (the price is not a gift too in relation to a fully DIY)
Are there good sites with pictures or movies about the ESL DIY and the coating problem aspect ?
Is it a too simple question to tell : what makes an ESL better sounding in relation to a magnet ribbon: : the technology, the height ? Or is there no one beter than the other (let say between 100 hz and above) ?
Is there a passive filter in a segmented ESLor is it just a segmented coating on the plastic film ?
Really hesitate between ribon like rd75 (expensive an dangerous travel between Part express and France), second hand esl 63 (but scared about bass integration even with a minidsp) and a fully but tall and segmented esl or kit like australian ER esl (the price is not a gift too in relation to a fully DIY)
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.