Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Planars & Exotics

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

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 21st November 2012, 07:21 PM   #11
diyAudio Member
 
CharlieM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Savannah, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcb121055 View Post
Hi CharlieM.
Since equalization is in the mix and since you will be crossing over from the panels to the woofer section high enough probably, have you considered an open baffle type of implementation for the woofers? Wouldn't it be desirable to have the dipole characteristic down to where the subwoofers take over?
I have to agree with you in as much as I think the best sonic arrangement would be a tall line source array of high-quality OB woofers next to a tall line source electrostat, like the ML Statements ($$$). And if cost and floor space and physical size were not issues for me, I might have gone that route. There are many good designs and I think mine offer a pretty good compromise between cost, size, esthetics, and performance. I have to confess though, the TL cabinets were a bitch to build.

I think you can still get seamless blending between the panel and a TL loaded woofer-- although over a more limited listening area. As the panel behaves as a line source and the woofer a point source, they can only be adjusted to balance over a small spatial area. Basically, you can aim the panels and adjust the woofer/panel outputs to achieve precise balance at the focal sweet spot (only). Moving out of their narrow sweet spot the panel/woofer become progressively unbalanced. Funny thing though-- if you get far enough out of the sweet spot, approximate balance returns.

One more consideration: Flat panel electrostats like mine give magnificent slam and imaging at the expense of constricting the sweet spot to a miniscule size. On the other hand, curved panels (like ML's) give a much wider sweet spot at the expense of less slam and less precise imaging. I figure if you go with flat panels the good listening position is only about 2 square feet in size anyway, and that's where you're going to sit, so you really haven't gained or lost much by going with or not going with a line source array of OB woofers.

The same case could not be made for curved or segmented panels, however, in which case the OB woofers would balance with the panel basically everywhere within a much wider listening area and at any distance.

Last edited by CharlieM; 21st November 2012 at 07:29 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2012, 12:18 AM   #12
Few is offline Few  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Maine, USA
Hi Charlie,
Have you done a comparison of flat vs. curved panels when it comes to "slam?" My experience when building flat panels was consistent with your description: the transients were reproduced in ways that reminded me of horns. Rim shots are real shots, not rounded, blurred semblances of something brief.

I've heard Martin-Logan speakers in show rooms but there were so many variables I wasn't ready to draw conclusions. Have you found that flat vs. curved really determines the amount of "slam-iness?" I wonder what this implies when considering narrower planar-magnetic (magnetostatic---whatever you want to call them) drivers.

MANY years ago a demo of Apogee Duettas was embedded in my memory as one of the very few audio experiences that redefined what audio reproduction is capable of. Of course those midrange and tweeter drivers were quite narrow. Nonetheless, they stopped me in my tracks---partly because of their ability to reproduce transients faithfully.

Few
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2012, 01:13 AM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
CharlieM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Savannah, GA
To be fair, I have not done a side-by-side comparison in the same room. Rather, my impression, based on the last time I heard a pair of ML hybrids in a showroom was that my flat panels had better slam and imaging. Also to be fair, these were not the top end Summits and my panels are somewhat larger.
Perhaps a better word than "slam" would be to say that my flat panels had more "intensity".


BTW:
As I recall back in the spring of 2008 when I was designing my speakers I was pretty warped out wondering if my 12x48 panels would be large enough to give the slam I wanted and it was you who assured me that they would. You were right of course... they can play ear-slitting loud.

Last edited by CharlieM; 24th November 2012 at 01:34 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2012, 02:04 AM   #14
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jackson,michigan
Yes, I have to agree Few.

I still have the very same Duette's that I First heard back in the 90's and enjoyed them as setup, for a few years.
Now they are just stashed away in need of repair.

But their sound is still solid in my memory.
The ML's I heard sounded very good and I was impressed but they were just good, as I recall.
The Duette's are a notch above IMHO.
As ML's seemed to fill the room nicely but imaging with the Duette's was just in your face accurate as can be!!

Then I made my First ESL's it was the 7.25" X 21" diaphragm version and it to me was a notch above the Duette's as far as clarity.
Then I took them to where I had the studio in Florida to show my friend Dave and John where the Duette's were still setup and they were both impressed.

Dave had just got a couple of Otari Mastering decks and we listened to a copy of a master in 24 Bit and played off it of the Otari MTR-15 of "Don Mclean live at the BBC" that my friend John had engineered, and, my ESl's almost put the Duettes to shame.
If I had a bass system for them at the time they would have.

That tape was digitized off of the 2" master that he still had.
Since then my friend John Bainter has passed away and I don't know if the tape has ever gotten back to Don and released yet.

Sadly, I never received my own personal copy for to enjoy.

John is credited for the engineering of the "American Pie" album and Molly Hatchet's "Flirtin' with Disaster" among a few others so it was really quite a treat to hear the recording as a First generation copy.

I have been focusing on narrower panels as you already know as my little panels were the next ones that I had made and when it came to imagining this became my new favorite as they also had an even wider dispersion.

I did not understand why this was until recently, But they were more comfortable to listen to as they weren't as directional.

Their low end extension was not as good as the bigger panels for obvious reasons.
The bigger panel was about the equivalent to an 8" woofer.

My next venture is of a electrically segmented stator design so we shall see very soon how this will work out.

I hope I didn't go off topic to much with this but here are a couple of sneak peeks of my next panel.

I love your design Charlie and I am still debating the idea of building a TL enclosure as I am trying to figure out how I can make it smaller without losing much or if any performance.
The new software helps very much so, But, I am still clueless as too what parameters and curves to shoot for.
Although, I do have a better idea after some more researching and playing with the new program.

Everything that Roger Sanders said in his paper makes a lot of since to me about bass systems for ESL's, and, follows along the my own findings as well.

I guess I just have to build one to find out !!

Cheers !!!

jer
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Ready for The Diaphragm.jpg (168.3 KB, 62 views)
File Type: jpg Ready for The Diaphragm no flash.jpg (148.0 KB, 60 views)
File Type: jpg side view.jpg (53.2 KB, 60 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2012, 02:47 AM   #15
diyAudio Member
 
CharlieM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Savannah, GA
Quote:
Originally Posted by geraldfryjr View Post
Yes, I have to agree Few.

I love your design Charlie and I am still debating the idea of building a TL enclosure as I am trying to figure out how I can make it smaller without losing much or if any performance.
The new software helps very much so, But, I am still clueless as too what parameters and curves to shoot for.
Although, I do have a better idea after some more researching and playing with the new program.

Everything that Roger Sanders said in his paper makes a lot of since to me about bass systems for ESL's, and, follows along the my own findings as well.

I guess I just have to build one to find out !!

Cheers !!!

jer
Modeling a transmission line is the sort of thing that can end you up in a psycho ward. I eventually gave up trying to figure it out and just took a chance using Sanders' generic Cookbook guidelines, which I will summarize as follows:
* Box surface behind woofer should approximate a curve
* Line must be tapered to preclude standing waves & 7-12ft length.
* Ideal Line area 125% of cone area at front end, tapering to 100% of cone area at terminus. Can be as small as 100% at front & 70% at terminus.
* Stuffing density about 0.5 lbs/ft3... more for shorter lines.
* Low Q woofer
  Reply With Quote

Reply


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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
somewhat unconventional ESL design zweetvoetje Planars & Exotics 44 31st October 2010 02:12 PM
Is % open area the wrong parameter for ESL stator design? Few Planars & Exotics 6 23rd May 2007 09:58 PM
Quad ESL Design ak_47_boy Planars & Exotics 28 14th January 2007 06:42 PM
Sealed ESL Design for DIYers Altaic Planars & Exotics 26 7th November 2002 08:51 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:20 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2