Yea another first time advice thread.
With materials improvements and manufacturing, there seems to be a great resurgence in AMT and planers. OK, maybe it is time to bite. I am most used to the midline SEAS tweeters like the 27TBG/C. I know mid-woofers like the ER18x reed paper quite well and would like to try it with some sort of AMT, ribbon or planer. The B&G Neo 3 looks like a pretty easy to use and a reasonable migration from dome to planer. Any thoughts or alternatives? I am not jumping into $1000 tweeters right off the bat, but if I start with trash, I will never come back. My better half is very very sensitive to distortion. Does this sound like a reasonable place to start? LR4 @ 2600 or so? The woofer can go shallower is the tweeter could.
With materials improvements and manufacturing, there seems to be a great resurgence in AMT and planers. OK, maybe it is time to bite. I am most used to the midline SEAS tweeters like the 27TBG/C. I know mid-woofers like the ER18x reed paper quite well and would like to try it with some sort of AMT, ribbon or planer. The B&G Neo 3 looks like a pretty easy to use and a reasonable migration from dome to planer. Any thoughts or alternatives? I am not jumping into $1000 tweeters right off the bat, but if I start with trash, I will never come back. My better half is very very sensitive to distortion. Does this sound like a reasonable place to start? LR4 @ 2600 or so? The woofer can go shallower is the tweeter could.
Welcome to the dark side , your life is forever changed and you cant go back, ohhh , yes , those dinky toy amps will have to go ...
My HCA 1200's? Don't tell John! Where I would first try them is in my office with my toy Hafler/Exicon 120.
It is possible to build electrostatic single drivers to get up to 30 KHz, just like ribbon tweeters. Its gets increasingly hard above 15 KHz for electrostatics. The electrostatic "tweter" cut off can be as low as 70 Hz, or maybe even lower, but making a single driver do all this is harder, and has other compromises, hence most electrostatics are segmented. Your idea of a crossover at 2600 Hz is very very conservative, for an electrostatic tweeter, and quiet optimistic for many ribbon based tweeters. I would recommend you go to a HiFI show and audition a electrostatic speaker, they all sound very similar as they have so much lower distortion than moving coil "dynamic" speakers.
I would also caution you away from using a passive crossover with planar speakers and coupling them with conventional Moving coil "dynamic" speakers, as even ribbon speakers can have quiet a different character/distortion profile, but I do remember hearing a few passive crossover tweeter dynamic bass two way speakers that sounded very very good.
Best of luck.
Owen
I would also caution you away from using a passive crossover with planar speakers and coupling them with conventional Moving coil "dynamic" speakers, as even ribbon speakers can have quiet a different character/distortion profile, but I do remember hearing a few passive crossover tweeter dynamic bass two way speakers that sounded very very good.
Best of luck.
Owen
A poorly executed crossover can screw up anything. Mr. Fourier would suggest it is not inherently a problem. The "distortion profile" I am looking for is very simple. LOW. Full range planers have other issues. Size for one. Level for another. Of course cost raises it's ugly head too.
I need to stick with the small monitor form factor. 6 1/2 woofer etc. In this application, I will be sitting dead on-center all the time.
Now, that word pops up: character. Yes, all drivers have character because as a whole, they all stink and produce way more distortion than anything else in the system from mic to ears. If the planer is lower distortion, that is a character we should get used to. If higher, well there are these new ceramic domes out there...
If I do pop on a set of B&G neo3's, what are the crossover recommendations? Steep? Shallow? Above or below 2600 or so? Some of the "ring ribbons" look to need way too high a crossover for the mid-woofer I will be using. It looks like about a 3 inch ribbon will do 2500. Does the distortion get really bad as it gets lower like a dome?
I need to stick with the small monitor form factor. 6 1/2 woofer etc. In this application, I will be sitting dead on-center all the time.
Now, that word pops up: character. Yes, all drivers have character because as a whole, they all stink and produce way more distortion than anything else in the system from mic to ears. If the planer is lower distortion, that is a character we should get used to. If higher, well there are these new ceramic domes out there...
If I do pop on a set of B&G neo3's, what are the crossover recommendations? Steep? Shallow? Above or below 2600 or so? Some of the "ring ribbons" look to need way too high a crossover for the mid-woofer I will be using. It looks like about a 3 inch ribbon will do 2500. Does the distortion get really bad as it gets lower like a dome?
BTW, The first ES I heard was the Koss. I very much likes the ML Sequal's. I know maggies pretty well and old Quads. Apogees I heard could not take even Jazz. Big ES speakers don't fit on my office shelf.
"Show" You have GOT to be kidding. We don't even have any stereo stores to speak of any more. One in Baltimore, maybe one in N. Va.
"Show" You have GOT to be kidding. We don't even have any stereo stores to speak of any more. One in Baltimore, maybe one in N. Va.
Have you considered making electrostatic drivers? I surprised my self how easy it was, with some PCB material, and some polythene sheet and the usual components for the diaphragm, and would not buy conventional tweeters now for a hybrid. I made some thing approaching the size of a 3" X 4" design.
Oh things are much better for HiFi here in Hamburg Germany, we have at least 6 Hi End shops and at least one annual show. I was stunned how bad most systems I heard sounded, though most looked very very nicely finished.
Not a clue myself
With the B&G neo3's I think I would pick a 4-5" midwoofer, or go three way with a smaller mid range that can reach 4-10K without nastier harmonics.
Not a clue myself, I favor shallow crossovers, but reading a little, people are talking about a 3-4K crossover frequency, which is unlikely to play nice with a 6.5" woofer, which I think is a little large for a 2 way speaker.
With the B&G neo3's I think I would pick a 4-5" midwoofer, or go three way with a smaller mid range that can reach 4-10K without nastier harmonics.
Hi,
It´d be as if he couldn´t notice the difference in acceleration between an old ´Duck´ the C2V and a modern race car.
jauu
Calvin
If someone compared my ESLs to Quads and told me the above right in the face, I´d narcotize him, get all the blob and smear out of his ears, wake him up and have him listen properly.
It´d be as if he couldn´t notice the difference in acceleration between an old ´Duck´ the C2V and a modern race car.
jauu
Calvin
I was far too general in my statement. Please see clarification.
Compared to the moving coil speakers (and variance of) I think it is fair to say all ESL speakers sound similar, but you are quiet right stating they are not the same. In my experience some ESL speakers sound better than others. I also should state that I have not heard your designs. Judging from your posts your designs are very highly optimized. That is not what I said and I apologize.
In my experience Quad ESL 63 and ESL 57 models do sound different, and clearly a 1960's Stax headphone I have, has less Bass than a Stax Lambda Pro I also own. I would also say that Martin Logan speakers sound a little different too. Also a reconditioned Quad ESL 57 sounds different from an old one with 50 year old panels with arcing problems.
What I meant to say is I think nearly all ESL speakers sound more similar to each other than when compared with good moving coil speakers. Also in my opinion all ESL speakers I have experienced sound better in the sweet spot, and worse off axis.
I have heard a single ended ESL speaker (all the others where push pull designs) that sounded worse than all ESL speakers I have ever heard, but still sounded better than any tweeter I had ever heard, but that was a long time ago and I may be misrepresenting the situation.
I believe at least geometry, stator design and electrostatic force, between stators, surface resistivity of diaphragms, diaphragm tension, all contribute to the differences in sound quality in ESL speakers, but with acceptable quality ESL speakers, in my experience they all sound more similar to lifelike sounds than any moving coil speaker and in that respect the differences between acceptable ESL speakers are small.
My own simple ESL headphone/tweeter that I built sounded very good, and more similar to ESL 57's than ESL 63's in a good way, even though I just chucked it together and it was not very optimized, but still sounded noticeably better to my mind than moving coil speakers.
I think Peter Walker (designer of Quad speakers) said something to the effect that: It was not hard to make better ESL speakers than Quad made, only hard to make them in mass production, with a semi skilled work force and with a high degree of consistency, at a low price.
I suggest though that unless people can audition your speakers next to another high quality ESL speaker, the listener will have little difference between their memories of sound quality. Because a very lifelike and very very lifelike is hard to hold in ones memory, where as all but one or two moving coil speakers where at best vaguely lifelike. I am sure you disagree, and feel that the difference is clearly audible, but your a speaker designer specializing in ESL models and so are listening for ESL speaker failing.
I would love to hear your speakers one day Calvin, Sadly I have never heard your speaker designs. From your posting I believe compared to Quad designs your less focused on low price and mass production, and more on sound quality, and I have no doubt you have made some ESL speakers very worthy of audition, I would be very surprised if your models don't sound great, and appreciate the help you make to this group.
Compared to the moving coil speakers (and variance of) I think it is fair to say all ESL speakers sound similar, but you are quiet right stating they are not the same. In my experience some ESL speakers sound better than others. I also should state that I have not heard your designs. Judging from your posts your designs are very highly optimized. That is not what I said and I apologize.
In my experience Quad ESL 63 and ESL 57 models do sound different, and clearly a 1960's Stax headphone I have, has less Bass than a Stax Lambda Pro I also own. I would also say that Martin Logan speakers sound a little different too. Also a reconditioned Quad ESL 57 sounds different from an old one with 50 year old panels with arcing problems.
What I meant to say is I think nearly all ESL speakers sound more similar to each other than when compared with good moving coil speakers. Also in my opinion all ESL speakers I have experienced sound better in the sweet spot, and worse off axis.
I have heard a single ended ESL speaker (all the others where push pull designs) that sounded worse than all ESL speakers I have ever heard, but still sounded better than any tweeter I had ever heard, but that was a long time ago and I may be misrepresenting the situation.
I believe at least geometry, stator design and electrostatic force, between stators, surface resistivity of diaphragms, diaphragm tension, all contribute to the differences in sound quality in ESL speakers, but with acceptable quality ESL speakers, in my experience they all sound more similar to lifelike sounds than any moving coil speaker and in that respect the differences between acceptable ESL speakers are small.
My own simple ESL headphone/tweeter that I built sounded very good, and more similar to ESL 57's than ESL 63's in a good way, even though I just chucked it together and it was not very optimized, but still sounded noticeably better to my mind than moving coil speakers.
I think Peter Walker (designer of Quad speakers) said something to the effect that: It was not hard to make better ESL speakers than Quad made, only hard to make them in mass production, with a semi skilled work force and with a high degree of consistency, at a low price.
I suggest though that unless people can audition your speakers next to another high quality ESL speaker, the listener will have little difference between their memories of sound quality. Because a very lifelike and very very lifelike is hard to hold in ones memory, where as all but one or two moving coil speakers where at best vaguely lifelike. I am sure you disagree, and feel that the difference is clearly audible, but your a speaker designer specializing in ESL models and so are listening for ESL speaker failing.
I would love to hear your speakers one day Calvin, Sadly I have never heard your speaker designs. From your posting I believe compared to Quad designs your less focused on low price and mass production, and more on sound quality, and I have no doubt you have made some ESL speakers very worthy of audition, I would be very surprised if your models don't sound great, and appreciate the help you make to this group.
Hi,
hey Owen .. no pun intended, just jokin..
I understood fully what You meant in first place, but others with lower or no experience with ESLs might misunderstand You.
After my experience seemingly all ESLs exhibit a kind of reproduction quality that differentiates them from dynamic speakers, the more obvious so the larger the panel and the larger its bandwidth range.
It´s the mids and to a degree the highs where no dynamic speaker can sound as natural and authentic as a well built ESL.
It is this special mids-quality that anybody recognizes instantly on first listening and that keeps us Planaristi at these enigmatic devices.
But within the group of ESLs You find everything from low quality to SotA.
jauu
Calvin
hey Owen .. no pun intended, just jokin..
I understood fully what You meant in first place, but others with lower or no experience with ESLs might misunderstand You.
After my experience seemingly all ESLs exhibit a kind of reproduction quality that differentiates them from dynamic speakers, the more obvious so the larger the panel and the larger its bandwidth range.
It´s the mids and to a degree the highs where no dynamic speaker can sound as natural and authentic as a well built ESL.
It is this special mids-quality that anybody recognizes instantly on first listening and that keeps us Planaristi at these enigmatic devices.
But within the group of ESLs You find everything from low quality to SotA.
jauu
Calvin
Thanks for the follow up.
I am clearly not down with the kids, I had to look up "SotA".
I am guessing the definition I found for SOTA is correct "State Of The Art":
Refurbished 57, can do alot more than 30 watts with no issues , same for 63...
Hi,
If someone compared my ESLs to Quads and told me the above right in the face, I´d narcotize him, get all the blob and smear out of his ears, wake him up and have him listen properly.
It´d be as if he couldn´t notice the difference in acceleration between an old ´Duck´ the C2V and a modern race car.
jauu
Calvin
I always mistook yours for a 57 .....
I did not know a 2Cv could accelerate.
I unfortunately do not have the floor space for a large ESL. That is why I was looking at tweeters. It has been a long time since I heard Quads. I had two friends with 57's. MV50's, PV5's. One with an SP-12/Denon, the other a SOTA/Denon. They would argue for hours on the differences in the tables. I remember them to be very nice. No bass, no treble, but the mids were wonderful.
I unfortunately do not have the floor space for a large ESL. That is why I was looking at tweeters. It has been a long time since I heard Quads. I had two friends with 57's. MV50's, PV5's. One with an SP-12/Denon, the other a SOTA/Denon. They would argue for hours on the differences in the tables. I remember them to be very nice. No bass, no treble, but the mids were wonderful.
About 2CV, duration & performance. When you tense yourself the diagphram like a 6 micron one for your ESL: what is the duration of such work ? Do you have to change the diaphragm all the 5 years, 2 years , 10 years. Is it a question of surface : bigger more fragile ?
I saw a link showed by a fellow here (Jazz...) with normal stators you can remove with magnets.
Is it the same with another magneplanars like Magneplanar or B&G big or small drivers ? Do they have the same sounding qualities 10 years after (assuming our ears change too in ten yeras !)
Have two planars speaker to be new for benchmark their sounding qualities ?
I saw a link showed by a fellow here (Jazz...) with normal stators you can remove with magnets.
Is it the same with another magneplanars like Magneplanar or B&G big or small drivers ? Do they have the same sounding qualities 10 years after (assuming our ears change too in ten yeras !)
Have two planars speaker to be new for benchmark their sounding qualities ?
Last edited:
I think it is possible for ESL loud speakers to last many years without any change in performance.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.