Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Planars & Exotics ESL's, planars, and alternative technologies

ESL Diaphragm material, Anyone tried different?
ESL Diaphragm material, Anyone tried different?
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 19th December 2017, 09:58 PM   #1
Alastair E is offline Alastair E  Wales
diyAudio Member
 
Alastair E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South Wales
Default ESL Diaphragm material, Anyone tried different?

==To the usual Mylar/Polyester used for diaphragms with various coatings...

How about Polythene coated with anti-static 'licron' or whatever its called....

Polythene is a whole lot easier to get....
__________________
Das Beste Oder Nichts
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2017, 11:19 PM   #2
CharlieM is offline CharlieM  United States
diyAudio Member
 
CharlieM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Savannah, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alastair E View Post
==To the usual Mylar/Polyester used for diaphragms with various coatings...

How about Polythene coated with anti-static 'licron' or whatever its called....

Polythene is a whole lot easier to get....
Assuming you were referring to "polyethylene", it would work of course but it would be a poor choice compared to polyester because it has significantly lower tensile strength, much higher elongation and much lower surface energy. Hence, it would not hold tension as well and Licron Crystal would not adhere to it nearly well.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2017, 08:53 AM   #3
MrMagic is offline MrMagic  Greece
diyAudio Member
 
MrMagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Athens
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieM View Post
Licron Crystal would not adhere to it nearly well.
Do you know how Licron differs from graphite powder?
I have used the later successfully applied on kitchen wrap (Sanitas brand) membrane (=5 microns thick) for headphones, which easily stretches and holds tension while it applies much less force on the frame and obviously transfers less vibrations -and it's heat-shrinkable to correct any wrinkles with a hair-dryer after several years.

I'm interested because soon I'll make a new, improved pair and I consider other materials.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2017, 03:38 PM   #4
ondesx is offline ondesx  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMagic View Post
... kitchen wrap (Sanitas brand) membrane (=5 microns thick)...
You mean Cling Film ? Like this one :

Special Cling Film for Use in Microwave Ovens | SANITAS
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2017, 09:32 PM   #5
Alastair E is offline Alastair E  Wales
diyAudio Member
 
Alastair E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South Wales
Only reason I asked was because I have some 20uM parcel/item wrapping poly film--Like an industrial cling-film that Ive used to make dust shields with for ESL57 bass-panels, Works rather well, at the time of my O/P I couldn't find the correct mylar films for them.

Since then, Ive found a seller in Taiwan on ebay selling both the films in Dupont Mylar and the original Nylon based coatings suitable for the 57 speakers, here--
Electrostatic Speaker Mylar C 6um 40M + Elvamide 60g | eBay

My choice now is, Do I stick with the original thicknesses or use say a thinner for the treble--What would you do/use? What advantages if any, would I see changing the thicknesses?
They supply down to 2uM while the original ESL57 treble is 6uM and the bass is 12uM

I have a complete spare set of 6 panels from a scrapped ESL57 pair I can rebuild and experiment with, while still keeping my original ESL57 good working panels as they were made...
__________________
Das Beste Oder Nichts
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2017, 09:56 PM   #6
MrMagic is offline MrMagic  Greece
diyAudio Member
 
MrMagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Athens
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondesx View Post
You mean Cling Film ? Like this one :

Special Cling Film for Use in Microwave Ovens | SANITAS
Yes, the simple one, not the one for microwave ovens -that must be new.
After 17 years, it still works. I had to apply heat with a hair dryer once, after leaving them for a decade unused, from the outside of the headphones -and it was stretched perfectly.

That said, I haven't tried other materials so I can't compare it.
I can only say that I'm very happy with the sound quality (which I liked more than a Stax model I tried after I made them), although the Stax one was 2-4 times louder (obviously due to less distance -0.6 vs 1.6mm).
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2017, 10:07 PM   #7
MarcelvdG is offline MarcelvdG  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Haarlem, the Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alastair E View Post
Only reason I asked was because I have some 20uM parcel/item wrapping poly film--Like an industrial cling-film that Ive used to make dust shields with for ESL57 bass-panels, Works rather well, at the time of my O/P I couldn't find the correct mylar films for them.

Since then, Ive found a seller in Taiwan on ebay selling both the films in Dupont Mylar and the original Nylon based coatings suitable for the 57 speakers, here--
Electrostatic Speaker Mylar C 6um 40M + Elvamide 60g | eBay

My choice now is, Do I stick with the original thicknesses or use say a thinner for the treble--What would you do/use? What advantages if any, would I see changing the thicknesses?
They supply down to 2uM while the original ESL57 treble is 6uM and the bass is 12uM

I have a complete spare set of 6 panels from a scrapped ESL57 pair I can rebuild and experiment with, while still keeping my original ESL57 good working panels as they were made...
The advantage of thin diaphragms is less treble loss due to diaphragm mass, but chances are that QUAD corrected for the treble loss somehow, so I wouldn't change it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2017, 10:20 PM   #8
MrMagic is offline MrMagic  Greece
diyAudio Member
 
MrMagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Athens
@Alastair E
Until someone else that has actually tried different thicknesses for ESLs responds, I can only say that I would take the following into account:

1. The mass of the air that is moved, is usually much heavier than the mass of the film itself.
2. Still, in high frequencies the less mass, the better.
Obviously a thinner film will have a higher frequency response -whether that would be significant or not, I can't say.
3. The resonance will also be higher and weaker.
4. A thinner film will transfer less vibrations to the frame due to less stretching force, more elasticity and resistance.
5. A thinner film will be more vulnerable to sparks that create tiny holes -that depends on the voltage, I haven't seen any holes to the wrap film at 1KV.

Last edited by MrMagic; 21st December 2017 at 10:33 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd December 2017, 08:37 PM   #9
Alastair E is offline Alastair E  Wales
diyAudio Member
 
Alastair E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South Wales
Thanks guys for the input.

I think I'll use the same thicknesses as originals, Who am I to try and second guess and 'improve' something that has such a stellar reputation, while not completely understanding every nuance of their functionings!

My working speakers do sound really very nice with their 40-50 year old panels, so they must have got it right.

--Everything is available at a reasonable cost to repair my spare set very closely to the original specs......

Ive stripped down the first treble panel this evening to examine the arc damage, Pretty horrible, and surprising how much melting there is of the stator material, but with a little care, I should be able to renovate it.
__________________
Das Beste Oder Nichts
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd December 2017, 11:31 PM   #10
sumotan is offline sumotan  Indonesia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
At the end of the day its a catch 22, guess itís a matter of choosing your poison.
Cleaner treble will make the sound lighter & that will offset the balance of the sound.

Merry Xmas
  Reply With Quote

Reply


ESL Diaphragm material, Anyone tried different?Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What is the Name of this Diaphragm Material? spaceman5 Full Range 23 20th November 2016 04:42 AM
Planar Magnetic Diaphragm Material TheAHan Full Range 4 21st September 2015 05:03 PM
Acoustic centres vs diaphragm material David Gatti Multi-Way 9 10th May 2007 09:55 PM
Diaphragm / adhesive material choices? moray james Planars & Exotics 20 7th May 2005 07:08 AM
Amorphous metal as ideal diaphragm material? 454Casull Multi-Way 14 2nd April 2004 10:40 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:26 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.79%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2018 diyAudio
Wiki