What an incredibly informative thread.
I just picked up an unused Brother PC-401 fax printing cartridge at the local thrift store for $2. At 47 Metres long, there should be plenty to play with.
I measured it on my DMM at roughly 1 Megohm/ cm probe spacing. Is this too much resistance?
For those interested, the box lists the ingredients:
Polyethylene terephthalate
Paraffin wax
Microcrystalline wax
Carbon black
Ester wax
Ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer
Now, that first one might be the plastic part of the cartridge, I'm not a chemist.
I don't know when/ if I'll ever get around to building an ESL. But, for two bucks, I could't pass it up.
Max
I just picked up an unused Brother PC-401 fax printing cartridge at the local thrift store for $2. At 47 Metres long, there should be plenty to play with.
I measured it on my DMM at roughly 1 Megohm/ cm probe spacing. Is this too much resistance?
For those interested, the box lists the ingredients:
Polyethylene terephthalate
Paraffin wax
Microcrystalline wax
Carbon black
Ester wax
Ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer
Now, that first one might be the plastic part of the cartridge, I'm not a chemist.
I don't know when/ if I'll ever get around to building an ESL. But, for two bucks, I could't pass it up.
Max
one meg ohm will work...
I'll take one last shot at this (I promiss). Gigen how much time it takes for the average DIYer to decide and prepare to build his own ESL speakers yet alone construct it to satisfaction why would you consider using less than the best available materials available? Not many DIYers have the desire or energy to build more than one such set if successful.
The idea behind forums like this is to provide assistance and a fast learning curve for those who don't have the time to reinvent the wheel but are prepared to give a reasonable try to see if they can build a set of their own stats. If you search you will find that most things have been tried and those that work are passed on and the duds dropped.
This idea while not fully in the dud pile should be there. Yes the film will work and yes you might find it cheap. How are you ever going to know what kind of a deal you got when every manufacturer of these things use different materials?
If you consider your time worth $10.00 an hour I think it would be a fair estimate to say most DIYers have spent at least what it costs to buy first class materials just in reading and thinking. So save up the $75-100.00 to buy it and have at it. That way if your project works out you will not be left wonder how much better it could sound if you had used good materials to begin with. If you have the time and enjoy the doing part of things and work fast then none of this matters. If not do it right do it once. Regards Moray James.
I'll take one last shot at this (I promiss). Gigen how much time it takes for the average DIYer to decide and prepare to build his own ESL speakers yet alone construct it to satisfaction why would you consider using less than the best available materials available? Not many DIYers have the desire or energy to build more than one such set if successful.
The idea behind forums like this is to provide assistance and a fast learning curve for those who don't have the time to reinvent the wheel but are prepared to give a reasonable try to see if they can build a set of their own stats. If you search you will find that most things have been tried and those that work are passed on and the duds dropped.
This idea while not fully in the dud pile should be there. Yes the film will work and yes you might find it cheap. How are you ever going to know what kind of a deal you got when every manufacturer of these things use different materials?
If you consider your time worth $10.00 an hour I think it would be a fair estimate to say most DIYers have spent at least what it costs to buy first class materials just in reading and thinking. So save up the $75-100.00 to buy it and have at it. That way if your project works out you will not be left wonder how much better it could sound if you had used good materials to begin with. If you have the time and enjoy the doing part of things and work fast then none of this matters. If not do it right do it once. Regards Moray James.
Re: one meg ohm will work...
AMEN !!!!
building ESL = as best sounding as possible
so there is no point in trying the "cheap" route
BUY WHAT IT NEEDS to work the best possible!
There should be no ( not much neway ) compromises on the sound performance when building an ESL
just as with a Race car !!
moray james said:
AMEN !!!!
building ESL = as best sounding as possible
so there is no point in trying the "cheap" route
BUY WHAT IT NEEDS to work the best possible!
There should be no ( not much neway ) compromises on the sound performance when building an ESL
just as with a Race car !!
What if it turned out that the cheapest readily available material also happened to be one of the best? I'm not saying that this fax film is, but just entertain the notion, please.
For the record, I measured the film: 16 layers= 0.0065" (6.5 mil) so divide by 16 and multiply by 25.4 and we get 0.01031875mm, or 10.3 microns for a single thickness.
That's thinner than some commercial offerings, so it can't be that bad.
Perhaps the nay-sayers are opposed to the opaque film because it results in a lack of 'transparancy'.
Max
For the record, I measured the film: 16 layers= 0.0065" (6.5 mil) so divide by 16 and multiply by 25.4 and we get 0.01031875mm, or 10.3 microns for a single thickness.
That's thinner than some commercial offerings, so it can't be that bad.
Perhaps the nay-sayers are opposed to the opaque film because it results in a lack of 'transparancy'.
Max
Tell me why...
no modern day ESL manufacturer that I can think of that use anything but tensilized polyester diaphragms?
Ok your PE film is fairly thin but not thin enough (twice as thick as you should be considering 6 micron or thinner) but it does not have the strength or stretch caracteristics of tensilized polyester. If you stretch this material it will loose tension over time.
This has nothig to do with "na saying" anything. I already said that the film would work. It just won't work anywhere near as well as the polyester film discribed. Personally I don't care about (visual) transparency I perfer opaque as it blocks light from behind the speaker.
You have ignored most all of my arguement given, that is to get the best results possible the first time around. I get the impression that you are taking this personally somehow. So ok you can use this material and build a set of working panels and then you can build another set (with 6 micron polyester) to prove to yourself that the first set is good enough for you. That way when the first set stretches and looses efficiency you will have a back up set to use.
This is all about using the right materials to get the job done so twenty or thirty years from now your first pair of ESL's will still be working as well as new. If you have almost no money or you just don't care use what you have at hand to build your panels. There is nothing wrong with that it works and you can enjoy it alot. But if you have already invested many hours of reading and searching ESL's then do the project justice and get the right stuff and build yourself a first class pair of ESL's. Best regards Moray James.
no modern day ESL manufacturer that I can think of that use anything but tensilized polyester diaphragms?
Ok your PE film is fairly thin but not thin enough (twice as thick as you should be considering 6 micron or thinner) but it does not have the strength or stretch caracteristics of tensilized polyester. If you stretch this material it will loose tension over time.
This has nothig to do with "na saying" anything. I already said that the film would work. It just won't work anywhere near as well as the polyester film discribed. Personally I don't care about (visual) transparency I perfer opaque as it blocks light from behind the speaker.
You have ignored most all of my arguement given, that is to get the best results possible the first time around. I get the impression that you are taking this personally somehow. So ok you can use this material and build a set of working panels and then you can build another set (with 6 micron polyester) to prove to yourself that the first set is good enough for you. That way when the first set stretches and looses efficiency you will have a back up set to use.
This is all about using the right materials to get the job done so twenty or thirty years from now your first pair of ESL's will still be working as well as new. If you have almost no money or you just don't care use what you have at hand to build your panels. There is nothing wrong with that it works and you can enjoy it alot. But if you have already invested many hours of reading and searching ESL's then do the project justice and get the right stuff and build yourself a first class pair of ESL's. Best regards Moray James.
Only polyesther please....
I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to discover new materials. But I'm fearfull that people do choose wrong material, so let's not drift that way...
For example -as can be read in the ESL club link- polyethylene (PE) is to weak for usage as membrane. This plastic is very common for carrying bags. Make sure you at least use polyesther, if there do exist any fax rolls made from polyesther with a layer of ink with the right conductivity it can be interesting.
Everybody should know that all kinds of plastics there exist have been tried, the bottleneck is more to get the right coating....
I don't think there's anything wrong with trying to discover new materials. But I'm fearfull that people do choose wrong material, so let's not drift that way...
For example -as can be read in the ESL club link- polyethylene (PE) is to weak for usage as membrane. This plastic is very common for carrying bags. Make sure you at least use polyesther, if there do exist any fax rolls made from polyesther with a layer of ink with the right conductivity it can be interesting.
Everybody should know that all kinds of plastics there exist have been tried, the bottleneck is more to get the right coating....
Re: Tell me why...
Okay, that's useful information. Not being a chemist, I was not aware of these materials' properties.
Not at all, and I hope neither are you. I was just playing a little devil's advocate without a full deck of cards.
Well, I haven't invested many hours just yet. I've only been toying with the idea. So far, I know just enough to get myself into trouble, or so it would seem.
Max
moray james said:
Okay, that's useful information. Not being a chemist, I was not aware of these materials' properties.
Not at all, and I hope neither are you. I was just playing a little devil's advocate without a full deck of cards.
Well, I haven't invested many hours just yet. I've only been toying with the idea. So far, I know just enough to get myself into trouble, or so it would seem.
Max
Re: Only polyesther please....
The problem of the required materials starts with the question: 'What do you want?'
For example, if we are discussing coatings, do you want it to be transparant?, humidity independent?, low mass? Or do you just want to get some sound out of your ESLs?
There is no bottleneck here; you can get whatever you want.
Ranging from an egg on clingfilm after urinating on it to the EC-coating!
v-bro said:
The problem of the required materials starts with the question: 'What do you want?'
For example, if we are discussing coatings, do you want it to be transparant?, humidity independent?, low mass? Or do you just want to get some sound out of your ESLs?
There is no bottleneck here; you can get whatever you want.
Ranging from an egg on clingfilm after urinating on it to the EC-coating!
fax rol
according to the info as mentioned by maxro,
the faxrol is made of polyethylene teraphtalate (PET).
This is not PE film but the same material as Mylar, Hostaphan e.a.
Whether it is tensilised or not is unsure. I have never understood what this means or what difference it makes, since the production of PET film requires stretching in both directions. It should
mean a pretensioned film, that requires less stretching to attain a
certain tension which is useful for heath shrinking.
If you tension mechanically, you should be able to attain the same tension by stretching a bit more.
I agree with Moray that the resistance is on the high side, (not sure
whether the measurements done are after heath treating the coating).
So it's probably not the ultimate film/coating combination, but I
think it's very interesting for doing first tests and prototypes.
For the moment I used a 8 micron PE film called Winwrap Plus (packaging film) for my tests to spare my Mylar till i'm convinced I corrected all (or most) of my errors.
With this film I was testing if distributed resonance can be achieved (it does). I also have discovered that black rubber is unsuited for spacers, because its far to conducting and my charging leaks away. So I'm glad I used the cheap film in stead of genuine Mylar (the winwrap plus was send to me for free by the distributer for doing tests).
Regards,
Edwin Renders
according to the info as mentioned by maxro,
the faxrol is made of polyethylene teraphtalate (PET).
This is not PE film but the same material as Mylar, Hostaphan e.a.
Whether it is tensilised or not is unsure. I have never understood what this means or what difference it makes, since the production of PET film requires stretching in both directions. It should
mean a pretensioned film, that requires less stretching to attain a
certain tension which is useful for heath shrinking.
If you tension mechanically, you should be able to attain the same tension by stretching a bit more.
I agree with Moray that the resistance is on the high side, (not sure
whether the measurements done are after heath treating the coating).
So it's probably not the ultimate film/coating combination, but I
think it's very interesting for doing first tests and prototypes.
For the moment I used a 8 micron PE film called Winwrap Plus (packaging film) for my tests to spare my Mylar till i'm convinced I corrected all (or most) of my errors.
With this film I was testing if distributed resonance can be achieved (it does). I also have discovered that black rubber is unsuited for spacers, because its far to conducting and my charging leaks away. So I'm glad I used the cheap film in stead of genuine Mylar (the winwrap plus was send to me for free by the distributer for doing tests).
Regards,
Edwin Renders
Re: fax rol
Resistance was measured straight out of the package.
So, now I'm confused, what I have is essentially Mylar? I tried a quick google search and found a DuPont PDF stating that "Mylar ® polyester is a biaxially oriented, thermoplastic film made from ethylene glycol and dimethyl terephthalate".
I gather that "polyester" is a generic group of chemicals to which polyethylene teraphtalate belongs.
Oh, and I suppose we should keep in mind that the thickness was measured with the conductive coating already applied. So, depending on DIY coating method, this could account for a couple microns.
Max
EdwinR3 said:
Resistance was measured straight out of the package.
So, now I'm confused, what I have is essentially Mylar? I tried a quick google search and found a DuPont PDF stating that "Mylar ® polyester is a biaxially oriented, thermoplastic film made from ethylene glycol and dimethyl terephthalate".
I gather that "polyester" is a generic group of chemicals to which polyethylene teraphtalate belongs.
Oh, and I suppose we should keep in mind that the thickness was measured with the conductive coating already applied. So, depending on DIY coating method, this could account for a couple microns.
Max
.. hi to all . i'm reading all your comments with great pleasure and interest . there is nice info concentrating here ..
..brother moray james is very right about his remarks and comments but we do live in a world full of comprimises . so theres a nice compromise between time, money, effort, fun and results to consider for a DIY adventure . anyways i think we DIY for 2 main reasons: either we are not sudisfied with commercial products and see room for improovment (resulting in much tweaking also) so we invest in the best of matterials and methods that we know of . or we luck the big bucks but its obvious it doesn have to cost that much so a person with some technical skills and suitable matterials arround him can't resist enjoying a "good" result for a fraction of a commercial unit cost .
so we all have to make our compromises and preferably out of any "box" whatsoever ..
..now let me amase you some more whith my speciment's thickness measurements :
. 20 layers of my film measure 0,15mm so thats 7,5ìm thick . .
. and then i thought of this: film on paper ink face down heated with gun @100C till film stuck to paper then peel film off paper . this way >70% of ink stayed on paper . resistivity became 3 ÌÙ@1 inch and 20 layers measure 0,08mm thus a thickness of just 4ìm .! !. this implies messing with the film but results can be predictable and redused thickness and higher resistivity is a big plus.. attached foto shows this experiment . wrinkles could be avoided by streching the film over paper with some scotch tape around it . and even pressed aditionaly with a suitable roler uppon heating to leave more ink on the paper ..
theres a logical deduction in my mind that says that lengthier rolls would use thinner film just to still fit in the fax mashine .
. for those who are willing to test this solution i would like to advise not to buy before they try . open up a fax whith a known film make inside and tap gently on the film with a DMM to be sure . or find used roll to measure and then buy the same .
. maybe brother Coffee was abit dissapointed as he bought a bit hastly but i kinda feel that his matterial is on the 10~20 MÙ region . i do hope thats the case ..
..brother moray james is very right about his remarks and comments but we do live in a world full of comprimises . so theres a nice compromise between time, money, effort, fun and results to consider for a DIY adventure . anyways i think we DIY for 2 main reasons: either we are not sudisfied with commercial products and see room for improovment (resulting in much tweaking also) so we invest in the best of matterials and methods that we know of . or we luck the big bucks but its obvious it doesn have to cost that much so a person with some technical skills and suitable matterials arround him can't resist enjoying a "good" result for a fraction of a commercial unit cost .
so we all have to make our compromises and preferably out of any "box" whatsoever ..
..now let me amase you some more whith my speciment's thickness measurements :
. 20 layers of my film measure 0,15mm so thats 7,5ìm thick . .
. and then i thought of this: film on paper ink face down heated with gun @100C till film stuck to paper then peel film off paper . this way >70% of ink stayed on paper . resistivity became 3 ÌÙ@1 inch and 20 layers measure 0,08mm thus a thickness of just 4ìm .!
!. this implies messing with the film but results can be predictable and redused thickness and higher resistivity is a big plus.. attached foto shows this experiment . wrinkles could be avoided by streching the film over paper with some scotch tape around it . and even pressed aditionaly with a suitable roler uppon heating to leave more ink on the paper .. theres a logical deduction in my mind that says that lengthier rolls would use thinner film just to still fit in the fax mashine .. for those who are willing to test this solution i would like to advise not to buy before they try . open up a fax whith a known film make inside and tap gently on the film with a DMM to be sure . or find used roll to measure and then buy the same .
. maybe brother Coffee was abit dissapointed as he bought a bit hastly but i kinda feel that his matterial is on the 10~20 MÙ region . i do hope thats the case ..
Attachments
tmyr said:
Exactly my thinking, I think if you got the hang of it you can refit the stators pretty easily with a new membrane.
I also agree with Edwinr3 that it seems wise to first get the hang of building an esl and later get the best materials.
Eventhough the right polyesther is not expensive I do find 20 EUR. pretty expensive for a jar of EC coating (also because it has to be used within a couple of months...) Added to this the extra work to apply the coating in the right way...
My guess is a ready made membrane would help out a lot of DIY-ers. Only it would be ultra if there exist rolls that are prone to bring at least as good results as my Quads..
No offense to anyone...
v-bro said:
Eventhough the right polyesther is not expensive I do find 20 EUR. pretty expensive for a jar of EC coating (also because it has to be used within a couple of months...) Added to this the extra work to apply the coating in the right way...
No offense to anyone...
I think the EC-coating is not expensive at all. Certainly, if you take into account the amount of time (limited batches) and money to make it. I think it is pretty good value for money if you compare it with other products.
The shelf-life is around 6 months (exact date is printed on the bottle), which is not a problem in most cases.
MJ Dijkstra said:
That's why I said "no offense" because I believe you when you say it's a lot of work to make...When I know what size of stators I'm going to use I will use-up the bottle within this period making spare membranes as I DO intend to go this way unless there's easier good functioning options...
To Moray: I sold several QUAD ESL-63 speakers, when I worked for a hifi shop for four years. Maybe I never had the chance to listen to them after a good burn-in period but I liked the midrange of my 57's better. And I'm quite a midrange oriented listener, the 63's had other benefits (very 'roomy' sound) but they tended to lack the 'presence' of the 57's.
Film coating...
I agree with MJ Dijkstra this is a reasonable price and is good value. For those who disagree or simply do not have the funds to purchase this type of coating alternate coatings that are very inexpensive have been given.
I do not think that conductive coating should extend to the frame but rather should stop short of the frame. High resistance coating is a good thing as it prevents the surface charge from moving on the diaphragm. Regards Moray James.
MJ Dijkstra said:
I agree with MJ Dijkstra this is a reasonable price and is good value. For those who disagree or simply do not have the funds to purchase this type of coating alternate coatings that are very inexpensive have been given.
I do not think that conductive coating should extend to the frame but rather should stop short of the frame. High resistance coating is a good thing as it prevents the surface charge from moving on the diaphragm. Regards Moray James.
Quad 57 mid/tweeter panels...
use 4.5 micron polyester film. The thinner film is used on the 63 to ensure there is enough stretch to provide bass. The bass panel of the 57 used thicker Saran film as this was the film at the time that had the most available stretch even though it was thicker. Thinner mylar films (than the 4.5 micron) did not exist at that time. Saran today is only the same in name the film has been sold to another company and the entire line is chemically different. I have been told by a Canadian Quad rebuilder that he uses 3 micron polyester film to rebuild 57 bass panels with excellent results. Regards Moray James.
v-bro said:
use 4.5 micron polyester film. The thinner film is used on the 63 to ensure there is enough stretch to provide bass. The bass panel of the 57 used thicker Saran film as this was the film at the time that had the most available stretch even though it was thicker. Thinner mylar films (than the 4.5 micron) did not exist at that time. Saran today is only the same in name the film has been sold to another company and the entire line is chemically different. I have been told by a Canadian Quad rebuilder that he uses 3 micron polyester film to rebuild 57 bass panels with excellent results. Regards Moray James.
That seems like a good idea Moray, I will have some time after about two weeks and will get into contact with MJ, thanks for all your efforts and support! 
And Tmyr, you're a true explorer and give the world great inspiration!
Maybe you can take them over to a shop to compare them to commercial ESLs, I have such a shop around the corner...
Or just keep enjoying the way it is....
And Tmyr, you're a true explorer and give the world great inspiration!
Maybe you can take them over to a shop to compare them to commercial ESLs, I have such a shop around the corner...
Or just keep enjoying the way it is....
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.