ESL vs. AMT, theoretical questions.

[Nevod]

There is relatively plenty theoretical information on ESL, but I haven't seen any research or book regarding AMT, not that I've been looking for a long time, but still.

I do not want to go into depths right now( but if anyone can point me to a good source of information on AMT, I would appreciate that greatly). My questions are shallow and simple. Also I have to note that I'm regarding headphones primarily, floor speakers are not out of the question, but the focus is on the cans.

If someone wants to build an no-compromise sound emitter, which one would have the edge? I see that the AMT really leads in these moments:
1) Higher volume displacement and hence, higher dynamic range.
2) Nearly purely active impedance, so it's easy to drive.
3) And the value of that impedance is more or less 'common', AMT doesn't require special high-voltage amplifier, which suffers from its own problems, and works with pretty much any other amp.

So now, which has higher potential in frequency responce, clarity and low distortion? The construction of AMT doesn't seem very low-distortion, but there are claims that AMT headphones have better clarity than ESL ones. It can depend on construction, of course, but there's not much to modify in the standard 'flat' ESL, while AMT's have several different constructions.

Sorry for not so well thought-out questions, but I don't have deep knowledge on AMT.

[LineArray]

I do not know the current AMT designs
by Mundorf e.g.

I once listened to an ESS AMT 2-way
(the original driver) and was not convinced.

To me it was rather colored, and did not integrate
well with the woofer.

But that is a single experience and is surely
not sufficient for disregarding the AMT principle.

Kind Regards

[Keith Taylor]

Nevod, as I mentioned in the Electrostatic AMT? thread, a paper or book on pleated diaphragm loudspeakers is long overdue.

(1) Higher volume displacement for less motion seems attractive, but this may only apply to higher frequencies as real life AMT's are subject to the same laws as cones, domes etc. For each octave lower you wish to go the motion increases by a factor of four.

(2) The impedance curve is flatter than a cone/dome, particularly at resonance.

(3) I agree

Keith

[torroid88]

Search on Google Patents for patents by Oskar Heil, the inventor of the AMT ...