Anyone built roger sanders designs?

[graeme uk]

I got the electrostatic loudspeaker design cookbook for christmas (i asked for it).
Its very interesting. Has anyone built the intergrated hybrids as he describes in the book?

Ive searched but didnt find much, has anyone built them pretty much exactly as he suggests, with the suggested equalization and crossovers?

I dont know much about ESL's but have recently aquired some quad 63's. I think a hybrid design may suit me better. Is the info in teh sanders book still up to date and recomended? There are certain views i dont agree with (like putting all your vinyl on tape and selling your TT) so wondered if people with more ESL experience can see any 'issues' in his ESL thinking.

[CharlieM]

I used Sanders' book and guidelines for my esl's and I am very pleased with the results. Not being experienced at building circuits, I opted to use a DBX 223 adjustable active crossover set to 380 Hz in lieu of a building a crossover and I'm using a 10-band graphic EQ in lieu of a dedicated shelving circuit to compensate the dipole "suckout", per Sanders' data. I believe that Sanders' data and recommendations are sound. I even used a beam-splitter TL bass cabinet but mine is configured a bit differently than the corner design shown in Sanders' book. The 3 links below give details. The CarverSite link has the build photos:

The Jazzman's Electrostatic Loudspeaker Blog
It's Alive !!
http://thecarversite.com/yetanotherf...g=posts&t=1500

[CharlieM]

I should add that I did not use the thin (.020") Lincaine aluminum material for stators as described in Sanders' book. Rather, I opted for heavier 18-gauge steel perforated stators with .141" diameter holes and 51% open area; which I believe is optimum and a better choice.

[Calvin]

Hi,

R.Sanders book is still a valuable resource, especially to begin wuith building ESLs since it cioncentrates on practical solutions. Some information is now outdated (like the ´non-coated-stators´), but most of it is still all right.
I don´t agree with him in some points regarding hybrids.
That are:
a) high crossover frequency between panel and bass
b) transmissionline as bass

a) Sonically its my experience that a somewhat lower crossover frequency around 150Hz-250Hz (depending on panel size) than Sanders suggests is favourable. You need more equing which makes active circuitry even more desirable or even necessary. If You cross over passively You have to cross over at higher frequencies. But then...going passive doesn´t exploit the full potential of an ESL.
b) ESL bass tends to be rather soft sounding because of the highish Q-values. Dynamically a ESL bass is quite restricted.
Used as bass drivers dynamic speakers are far superior and more compact than ESLs. Transmissionlines tend to produce a similar soft bass, but reach higher dynamics. So a hybrid of TML and ESL could sound similar to what one knows from common fullrange ESLs. If You like that fine, but a lot of music that relies on a powerful and precise bass simply doesn´t sound well, like Rock and Pop. Dipolar bases and closed boxes are imho the more compact and superior solution and integrate better with the panel and sound more precise than an TML.

jauu
Calvin

[graeme uk]

Great, thatnks. Thats just the kind of info i was after.

I have some quad 63's but although there very good im not entirely convinced. I think a hybrid will b better for me as i listen to alot of rock.

I think other bass enclosure designs would be better then.

I will probably build a complete new speaker but may mess with adding woofers and a crossover to my 63's for now to get a feel for the sound.

I would like to drive the esl's from my el84 valve amp. It isnt really up to powering the 63's properly but if i build a panel specificaly for say 150hz and up i can use less spacing and make it easier to drive right?

Then use a seperate, probably SS amp for the woofers.

[arend-jan]

Did you ever try the ESL63 with a more powerful amplifier? It will sound a lot better especially the bass. This speaker needs more power.

[graeme uk]

Yes, they could do with more power. Not tried other amps yet but i will when i get the chance.

[Calvin]

Hi,

the Quad is designed as Fullrange ESL and as such underlies all the restrictions of a FR. To this the special ´problems´ of the 63 series add, as are primarily lousy dynamics. Especially when listening to Rock, the dynamic deficiencies fully apply. For such music something like a ML is far more appropiate.
I assume Your EL84 amp is a two tube ultra-linear design delivering something around 10W? If so You´ll hardly find any ESL-panel thatr can be driven properly with such low wattage amps. 20-25W should be minimum.

jauu
Calvin

[graeme uk]

The el84 is PP, cant remember how its currently wired, ive tried a few options.
It provides about 15w per channel according to the manufacturer.

I know this isnt ideal and a new amp will need to be built eventualy.

Is it easier to drive a mid/top esl than a full range esl?

I like the quads but they are a little bright and fatigueing, i believe this is due to the amp distorting as it cant cope?

They also lack a little low down. (i knew all this before i bought them)
I could do with decent response down to 30hz and i could do with a little more punch to give rock and similar the drive that it needs.

Hence me considering selling the quads and building a hybrid.

Do you think its possible to build a mid/top panel that could be driven by my el84? Obviously a seperate amp for the lows.

[a.wayne]

Originally Posted by Calvin

Hi,

the Quad is designed as Fullrange ESL and as such underlies all the restrictions of a FR. To this the special ´problems´ of the 63 series add, as are primarily lousy dynamics. Especially when listening to Rock, the dynamic deficiencies fully apply. For such music something like a ML is far more appropiate.
I assume Your EL84 amp is a two tube ultra-linear design delivering something around 10W? If so You´ll hardly find any ESL-panel thatr can be driven properly with such low wattage amps. 20-25W should be minimum.

jauu
Calvin

Hello Calvin.

Agree on X-over points around the 200-300 hz range , disagree that a sealed bass enclosure is the way to go ( i find this to be the worst ) IMO, but open for persuasion, if i encounter such

In regards to Quad speakers . I used to feel the same way until i heard a double stacked PK setup. Very high SPL's and good bass slam. Of course i would agree it would benefit from a good subwoofer setup , but i would also wager 90% of those hearing it would be happy with the Bass response as is ..

Ohh , I, must mention , I'm not a fan of the quads , due to it's lack of dynamics and soft top end , so i was taken by surprise of the sonics. I would absolutely say it was easily a huge improvement over stock and easily place the quads right up there with the best ESl's.
I have also heard PK's triple stacked version but felt it did not sound as good as that double stacked version, both played with excellent dynamics and power , unbelievable for a quad and on Par with other big ESL's i have heard .

Yes the old quad has a new lease( i would look into this graeme uk ) on life and worth a listen to those of such persuasion and for the record .... I have no affiliation with PK or old quad speakers ....

.

For the OP , Sanders no longer makes or recommends a curved ESL s . Favoring straight flat panels.

Cheers ...