Acoustat cloth socks part of damping?

[Chaddy]

I just picked up a pair of Acoustat Model 3's, and would like to replace the cloth grill socks, among other things. The original socks are still available (see me for details) but not in any color I like. I have heard that some ESLs use fabric to damp diaphram resonance, and so am left wondering if grill cloth other than the original will have adverse effects?

Thanks in advance for any advice. I can hardly wait to get these set up in my living room!

[The Peasant]

Personally, I prefer Acoustats without grill cloths at all, the panels in these speakers have individual resonance damping pads attached to the back of each one and that is all they really need. The grill cloths muffle the sound a bit and you can always turn down the high-frequency balance to compensate for any increased top end brightness without them. I plan to buy some very thin fabric to recover mine. (Have to keep the cat out!)

Take care,
Doug

[moray james]

The Pesant speaks the truth. You can sock your stats with a sheer stretchy fabric the color of your choice. Stay with monofilament fabrics. Stay away from fiberous fabrics (fuzzy) as these will cause phase problems.
You might consider building a new simple set of frames and turn your Three's into 0ne plus 0ne's. The 0ne plus 0ne stages and images the best of all the acoustats and is visually more attractive than the fat short Three. Best of luck and regards Moray James.

[Chaddy]

Thank you gentlemen, I appreciate your thoughts on the matter.

[bear]

I'd keep 'em as IIIs... better bass.

_-_-bear

[moray james]

I agree that the 3 configuration will make for better bass. However the three will not even come close to the stage and image qualities of a single wide Acoustat panel. Furthermore God made small high quality subs that will make better bass than a three. A couple of HSU 8 inch powered subs will make an excellent foundation for a set of 0ne plus 0ne's and the 10 inchers will drive a big room with ease. The combination will not be too expensive and one can always start off with no sub then move to mono sub and finally to stereo subs. As I said each to his own.
Here is a suggestion for the three's. This is one of those rare win win scenarios where we get the cake and eat it too. Set them up so that the narrower centre panel is firing straight ahead and is about 18 inches up off of the ground (in the frame with a solid panel below) and the two wider panels are situated on either side (at 90 degrees) running from the ground up. In this way you will get both the bass of a three configuration and the image of a 0ne plus 0ne. The extended height of the centre panel will ensure that you are not off axis of the panel when standing up. This should also offer a rather interesting architecture to the visual looks of the speaker. This configuration will also offer a very rigid structure which ought to also help in the bass dept.
Input is welcome regarding this idea. I have in the past done a number of Acoustats where there were two vertical stacks of panels fixed at right angles to each other. This resulted in the image and stage of a single wide stack with almost the bass of a two wide stack. Regards Moray James.

[Lucius]

Is it just the 3 configuration in the Acoustats that there is
a problem with stage & image qualities or is this a general
problem with wide ESL's? What is the perfect width for
imaging?

Regards to Everyone

Lucius

[moray james]

All of the wider panels, 2,3 and four wide panels share the problem of poor image. Another part of the multi wide panels is that you get cancelation between the panels that are at angles to each other. Going to a single width panel (average 9 inches) will yield better image. A six inch wide panel will image better than a 9 inch one but then you start to loose low end response so it is a trade off. Hope this helps. Regards Moray James.

[Lucius]

All of the wider panels, 2,3 and four wide panels share the problem of poor image. Another part of the multi wide panels is that you get cancelation between the panels that are at angles to each other. Going to a single width panel (average 9 inches) will yield better image. A six inch wide panel will image better than a 9 inch one but then you start to loose low end response so it is a trade off. Hope this helps. Regards Moray James.

Moray

Taking this further a 4" would have even better
sound stage & imaging which would be great playing
my singing chip monks collection. ( Jus' kidden')
But seriously is this because a narrow ESL has
more dispersion or is there more to it? Besides angle
cancelation between segments, does any kind of
segment in the panel degrade imaging?

Regards

Lucius

[moray james]

You are right. You might want to talk to jack seaton (captain jack) who is responsible for the zen speaker. Jack's zen is 4 inches wide and runs very wide range. If you segment a planel vertically with say a 1/4 inch wide stator spacer that will not have any adverse effect upon the performance of the panel. If you want you can PM me and we can see if the captain is available to talk to you. Regards Moray James.