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 26th August 2013, 08:17 AM   #11
diyAudio Member
 
StigErik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldam View Post
Can a G&B rd75 DIY with a crossover at 300 or 600 Htz with OB bass match with an old second hand Quad ESL63 ? Possible scenario with my bufget...
Depending on how you do it, you can definitely get better and deeper bass, much more maximum SPL, wider and more controlled dispersion than the ESL63.

I have RD75 in dipole plus dipoles bass, and I love it. Its been too long since Ive heard the ESL63 so I really cant tell the sonic difference between the two.

The RD75 can go lower than 300 Hz. I cross over at 180 Hz in my current setup.
__________________
dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles and dipoles
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th August 2013, 01:17 PM   #12
Eldam is offline Eldam  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Hi Stigerik,

Thank you for the answer about the RD75, i am happy of that because I read many of your threads and your solution was one on my too long short list for an futur improvement (hard to listen all technologies and hard to trial between testimonies with personal tastes, but it helps a lot).

If B&G I will hesitate between rd75 or Neo10 + Neo 3. Two of my speakers ar cut below 150 and 125 Hz, I think it's great. I believe a good bass has something like a bump between 80 & 100-110 Hz and below can gently dip with 6db by octave without big problem in most of the domestic rooms...(not sure of that...my 2 cents experience). The two first octave is not a need for me...

II didn't understand why you need so much 18" drivers below 180 hz but it is theorical for me because never heard a rd75. When i read the data about the rd75 i see a dip below 600 Hz. For me it's equal to a thin sound (same problem as OB with conventionl driver) but I think maybe you use electronic compensation and/or foam panel to have a flater curve. I read above 100 to 200 Hz more than 12" bass driver can give a too plain sound to male vocal...
Do you use U-Frame for bass or just OB frame ? multi drivers are to reduce distorsion or improve speed by low cone movement to match with the rd75 ? How do you manage the distorsion below 300 to 600 hz with the rd75? A 10" or 12" in U or H frame gave you bad results to hear

About midrange inyour memory would you tell than the ESL63 is equal or bader than the RD75? Is it harder to manage the rear wave with an big esl like QUAD ?

I can have in my living room 1 m between rear wall an side wall and 3.5 at listening position with a base of 3 m. Is it good for planar or ribbon system ?

At least did you hear maggies (how diferent they sound in relation to your system) or tweaked maggies la magnestand (more neo magnets? )

Sorry StigErik...a lot of questions... feel free to answer if you want in the direction which seems to have sense for you.... I have to focus.

In my mind wich each of the technologies : ribbon, magneplanar, esl, flat speaker (welcome to that new one), the bass have to be stronger with active crossover (not expensive in 2 way with minidsp but expensive in their 3 ways product). Is a linkwitz Orion OB bass with two heavy 10" a solution or an line aray la Infinity RS ?
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th August 2013, 01:51 PM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
StigErik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
A lot of questions... I will try to answer some of them.

I don't hear or measure any problematic distortion rise from the RD75 below 300 or 600 Hz at reasonable SPLs, so I dont know the reason you ask how I handle it...

The frequency response of the RD75 depends on two things mainly - baffle/box loading and listening distance. It will get more LF extension in a closed box, and it will also get more level below 1 kHz with a wide open baffle.

The driver is a true line-source above 1 kHz, but below is will get more and more omni-directional. This means that the frequency response below 1 kHz will vary with distance - the closer you go the more LF level you will get.

To sum that up - if you listen at close distances (2 meters or less) a small (or no baffle) dipole will give a fairly flat response. At greater distances you need a wider baffle to compensate for the roll-off in response.

I think that electronic compensation is necessary in any case, not just with OB's, preferably a full DSP solution with digital XO as well as EQ.


The main reason I have so many 21" woofers is that I attempted to get undistorted output from a dipole down to 20 Hz. I almost succeeded with that...


I've heard Magnepan 1.7 recently. They are nice, but nowhere in the league of the RD-75 in my opinion.
__________________
dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles and dipoles
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th August 2013, 02:07 PM   #14
Eldam is offline Eldam  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
wow...21" BASS; amasing ! cool !

i thought about distorsion below 600hz because the curve dip below thes 600 hz in the datasheet and the more volume to try to move the area to compensate the dip the more distorsion you have with it... in theory ! But as i said I never heard the rd75. I thought that an electronic compensation add distorsion because of the longer exursion with the planar for a flater curve... just theory, if there are no distorsion with measure and ears I understand it's the way to go and that's you do ! Thanks for testimonie

ok for the magnepan 1.7.

Thank you for the usefull answers StigErik
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th August 2013, 02:13 PM   #15
Jaimo is offline Jaimo  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldam View Post
Hi Jaimo,
Thanks for inputs.

I'm not sure a 1.6 is far better than my Boston ?

Is a moded Maggie1.6 equal to a normal 3.6 ?

Is a 1.6 better than a Quad ESL57 (or 63 because) because both ~same price on second hand market ?

My (p)reference amp is a Chord (200 w 8 homs & 400 4 homs). If not good enough are Ncores with SMPS a good match for planars ?

Hi Joaquin, viva el curanto of Chilo (cooked of course in a hole) !

Thank you for confirmation with planar vs horns. I have a question :have tonal colors in the low medium, high bass sufisant thick, flesh meat like in real life or have we deal with light tonal colors in this area ?
It's tough to make these comparisons. The MG3.6's are way too large for my room so they were never considered from a practical standpoint. I have previously owned a pair of ESL57's but found them to be one trick ponies - Narrow sweet spot, limited LF, great for acoustic Jazz and Classical but not so good for Rock etc.

The Maggies were my compromise and changing to a good PP Tube amp (from a Bryston 4B-ST) made a huge difference. I proceeded to do the Peter Gunn xover mod and this took my system to the next level.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th August 2013, 03:15 PM   #16
Eldam is offline Eldam  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Thank you Jaimo,

Sure, very difficult and subjective that's why I ask to people who heard several planar technologies (& I assume most of them had classical speakers before).

Thank you for testimonie. I understand now that magneplanars seem to be a better compromise in relation to standard ESL like 57 or 63 when no active bass subwoofer is added.
H Bryston 4B-ST is a winner amp, your new PP Tub amp has to be a good challenger. Yes I read some threads about P Gunn...a large improvement if I remember.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th August 2013, 08:17 PM   #17
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Jackson,michigan
Hi there,

It is very possible to build a DIYesl well within the means of your budget.
And you can build them any size you like.
As long as you follow a few simple guide lines you shouldn't have any problems achieving your goals.

I started out in Planar's with a set of Apogee's and they where fabulous.
But, Then I built a few small sets of esl's 9" X 22" and 3.25"X 9.75" and I must say that the sound quality is definitely a notch above the Apogee's even for their size.

Although a bit lacking in the low end as expected due to their smaller surface area.

Both panels sounded exactly the same as far as any timbre is concerned as there was no timbre to speak off.

There was a bit more low end extension with the larger panel due to it being wider,But being wider also caused it to be more directional compared to my smaller panel.
This is just something that is ruled by physics and is true for all types of planar drivers.

The way around too decrease the directional beaming aspect and use a wider panel for more low end is to, either, electrically segment the stator, or, physically segment the diaphragm into smaller sections of about 2" to 4" wide.

To this day I favor my smaller panels more because of their wider dispersion due to their smaller width.

Electrically segmenting the panel seems to have the most benefit for wide panel designs.
As it helps to create a lesser load(higher impedance) for the amplifier while increasing the surface area for more bass and in the meantime maintaining a wide dispersion factor.

Cost effective?
IMHO, Very much so !!!

I think DIYesl's can give you the most bang for your buck in performance and definitely sound quality.

I have gotten my little panels as high as and more than about +105db on an average, and, as high as +110db before at 1 meter and there quality did not change.
They just got louder!
Compression from heating of the Voice coil simply doesn't exist with ESL's.
Although getting that loud is not the norm and it does take some extreme voltages to get there.
But at least to +105db is a very real plateau for a common setup.

My panels cost me about $20 in materials to build as I used aluminium window screen and white plastic egg crate lighting diffuser's to build them with.
It is by far the cheapest method to use and is great for experimenting with due to the low cost of the materials.

Perforated metal is most everyone's choice of material to use, but it does come with a higher cost of the metal.

Wire stators are another cost effective method (sometimes) and will allow you to very easily employ electrical segmentation for a wider horizontal dispersion.
Building the frames to keep the wire perfectly straight is quite labor intensive but it is not that hard to do.

I got around this on my latest design by using some Steel TIG welding wire.

I used a .0625" wire as it was all I could find when I got it 10 years ago but there are thinner gauges available now.
Just make sure that they are straight to begin with should you choose to use this type of material

Using perforated metal is by far the easiest method of construction and the others are more labor intensive but well worth the effort in the end for any of the methods you choose.

The First and far most important thing is to have a proper stator coating thickness on your panels!!!

This I believe is the main down fall of the ole' 57's as they weren't designed to accommodate today's higher power amplifiers with voltage swings much over 20V to 25Vrms.

Not having enough stator coating is the most common issue that beginning ESL builders have.

There was one DIYer here that followed the same basic dimensions of the 57's but only much taller and they turned out very very nice!!

Second, Good Magnets don't come cheap these days and this is what has stopped me from messing with the ribbons anymore, Besides I like the sound of ESL's better anyhow.

If you wanted to just try it out a DIYesl it need not be very big at all or even tall.

After 10years of building them I am still hooked on my little Desktop design and it sounds so good that I have yet to even hook them up in stereo!!!

But that is mainly because of research reasons as it is easier to hear any flaws that might exist using one panel than using two panels.

I did listen to them in stereo when I First made them in 2003 and that impression is still clear as a bell in my mind, and, I have made many improvements since then with my newest models.

You may have seen these but here are a few pictures of my little panel designs.

Cheers!!

jer
Attached Images
File Type: jpg esl1.jpg (99.2 KB, 105 views)
File Type: jpg esl2.jpg (69.1 KB, 102 views)
File Type: jpg esl 3.jpg (83.6 KB, 102 views)
File Type: jpg esl4.jpg (75.3 KB, 91 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2013, 09:28 PM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hamburg
Quote:
Originally Posted by geraldfryjr View Post
To this day I favor my smaller panels more because of their wider dispersion due to their smaller width.
And I agree this is a very important issue for ESL speakers. Having experienced the ESL 57, the only change I wish they had segmented the tweeter panel to improve dispersion. It must be about 4-5" between the widest apart holes in the stators.

Quote:
Originally Posted by geraldfryjr View Post
I think DIYesl's can give you the most bang for your buck in performance and definitely sound quality.
I have also built an electrostatic speaker. 6 cm x 14 cm diaphragm area. I was amassed how well it went. The next experiment may have a diaphragm area of 5 cm x 6 cm. And I can recommend building electrostatic speakers.

I have yet to even approach the problems solved by Quad in the ESL 57 or ESL 63, namely making the electrostatic near full range, (70Hz-18KHz) without it being extremely directional, and the ESL 57 is still quiet directional, but I bet many DIY designs are more so. The ESL 57 has a tweeter/midrange and the two bass panels integrate very well but not perfectly, but the ESL 57 Bass panels are almost indestructible, The Bass panels are fully protected from shorting even if the diaphragm hits the stators but it does not sound nice (You need a greater than 30W amplifier to do this). The smaller tweeter/midrange overcomes some of the directional issues in the ESL 57. The ESL 63 is far more complex, with compression for signals above 10V and hard protection above 50V so making the ESL 63 much harder to damage, but sonicly geraldfryjr's approach to segmenting stators vertically while Quad does this in circles. The newer Quad speakers try to enhance the ESL 63's attempt at analogue delay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by geraldfryjr View Post
This I believe is the main down fall of the ole' 57's as they weren't designed to accommodate today's higher power amplifiers with voltage swings much over 20V to 25Vrms.
From experience I totally agree, I think amplifier selection is critical for the ESL-57.

I would suggest no more than a 30W amp and the amplifier must be unconditional stable. The speaker will present loads from 32 Ohms down to 2 Ohms. If you like valve amplifiers (or early transistor such as the Leak stereo 30+) under 30 Volt (pp) output (around 30 Watts) I think the ESL 57 is a great match, possibly the best choice of loud speaker ever made commercially for valve / low power amplifiers.

You will need to install Quads protection circuit for the ESL 57 if you are using many amplifiers above 15W RMS power. The protection circuit has been around for at least 1993 but some ESL57's might not have it installed. If you dont want to use Quads protection circuit, I would use no more than a 15 W amp.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bazukaz View Post
According to manufacturer quad esl 57 has a sensitivity of 93 dB.
87 is still reasonable for the tweeter unit after aging but 82 likely indicates a problem.

Regards,
Lukas.
Its a lot more sensitive than modern electrostatic speakers. So considerably more practical for valve amplifier fans than any DIY Electrostatic speakers I have seen.

You must remember the ESL 57 is an attempt to build an ESL in a reproducible way, using semi unskilled labor in the cheapest way in 1957 for commercial production. It is possible to make better, but you might need a lot of test equipment/time to make a two way electrostatic work as well. The ESL 63 is with minor revisions still available today as the current Quad model, and this level of full range and wide dispersion is a much harder objective.

My electrostatic speaker was tiny, so the bass was very limited, unless used as a headphone, but even though it was a first prototype it still sounded very good. The next one I build will probably be even smaller, but for now I must concentrate on other things.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2013, 09:32 PM   #19
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Hamburg
Quote:
Originally Posted by owenhamburg View Post
The ESL 63 is far more complex, with compression for signals above 10V and hard protection above 50V so making the ESL 63 much harder to damage, but sonicly geraldfryjr's approach to segmenting stators vertically while Quad does this in circles. The newer Quad speakers try to enhance the ESL 63's attempt at analogue delay.
Correction:

The Quad ESL 53 has compression for signals above 40V and hard protection above 55V.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th August 2013, 11:04 PM   #20
Eldam is offline Eldam  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
thank you for the advices,

Are there good sites with pictures or movies about the ESL DIY and the coating problem aspect ?

Is it a too simple question to tell : what makes an ESL better sounding in relation to a magnet ribbon: : the technology, the height ? Or is there no one beter than the other (let say between 100 hz and above) ?

Is there a passive filter in a segmented ESLor is it just a segmented coating on the plastic film ?

Really hesitate between ribon like rd75 (expensive an dangerous travel between Part express and France), second hand esl 63 (but scared about bass integration even with a minidsp) and a fully but tall and segmented esl or kit like australian ER esl (the price is not a gift too in relation to a fully DIY)
  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
Suitable Drivers for University Classic bass horn Cab fergs1 Multi-Way 14 7th December 2011 07:28 PM
Dayton Classic drivers? Apfelsauce Subwoofers 7 17th April 2011 03:44 AM
Classic OB using Betsy Godzilla Wild Burro Audio 1 14th October 2010 03:38 PM
Bruce Horns with classic 8" Jensen full range drivers brsanko Swap Meet 1 10th June 2010 03:28 PM
2 drivers in OB Kensai Full Range 6 21st June 2006 09:45 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:30 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