I still have dreams of the original Martin Logan CLS (not the succesive iteraterions). They still are the bench mark for transparency and beauty of speaker design. Sure it had it's flaws, but it's one of those speakers that you never forget - like your favorite super model.
Anyone have there favorite electrostat, DIY or otherwise? I've been eyeing the new Audiostatic DCM5 - another full range beauty on par with the CLS in aesthetics. Don't know how it sounds though.
Anyone have there favorite electrostat, DIY or otherwise? I've been eyeing the new Audiostatic DCM5 - another full range beauty on par with the CLS in aesthetics. Don't know how it sounds though.
Audiostatic 900
Most impressive I´ve heard were the Audiostatic 900.
They are IIRC a total of 6 panels (3 on each side) of which 4 were the Audiostatic 300 and 2 of which I do not know the designation but they were for the low frequencies only.
Incredible life like sound with pinpoint imaging.
It felt like you would be able to stand up and walk in between the musicians.
Cheers,
Johan
Most impressive I´ve heard were the Audiostatic 900.
They are IIRC a total of 6 panels (3 on each side) of which 4 were the Audiostatic 300 and 2 of which I do not know the designation but they were for the low frequencies only.
Incredible life like sound with pinpoint imaging.
It felt like you would be able to stand up and walk in between the musicians.
Cheers,
Johan
Re: Audiostatic 900
That is exactly the illusion I get from my own Ultor TM design when I stand and walk around the area in front of and between them. Closing my eyes and facing my back to the speakers as I move completes the illusion because it reinforces the realism. It is like you have just approached the stage and the space between the musicians has opened up, the bass player is over there, the sax player is to your immediate right, the singer is in front of you, drums are in the back.
JohanH said:
That is exactly the illusion I get from my own Ultor TM design when I stand and walk around the area in front of and between them. Closing my eyes and facing my back to the speakers as I move completes the illusion because it reinforces the realism. It is like you have just approached the stage and the space between the musicians has opened up, the bass player is over there, the sax player is to your immediate right, the singer is in front of you, drums are in the back.
Hi,
in comparison to CLS and the quads the audiostatics suffer from the smaller width of the baffle. As a result the acoustic shortcut starts at higher frequencies leading to less efficiency at lower frequencies.
They try compensate by appropriate means but physics cant be ignored. The frequency response of the audiostatic shows a dip between 100 and 250Hz.Thus they sound clear but imo too anemic in this range. Music lives from energy basically in this frequency range.
What for good has been a ES 900, if the smaller ones are perfect ? I listened to the ES 900 and that was near to perfect. But it has 3 times membrane area and three times the baffle width.
What am i saying?
A ESL-fullrange makes sense, BUT it needs very large membrane area and baffle width. Anything else is a compromise. Some might accept it.
Capaciti
in comparison to CLS and the quads the audiostatics suffer from the smaller width of the baffle. As a result the acoustic shortcut starts at higher frequencies leading to less efficiency at lower frequencies.
They try compensate by appropriate means but physics cant be ignored. The frequency response of the audiostatic shows a dip between 100 and 250Hz.Thus they sound clear but imo too anemic in this range. Music lives from energy basically in this frequency range.
What for good has been a ES 900, if the smaller ones are perfect ? I listened to the ES 900 and that was near to perfect. But it has 3 times membrane area and three times the baffle width.
What am i saying?
A ESL-fullrange makes sense, BUT it needs very large membrane area and baffle width. Anything else is a compromise. Some might accept it.
Capaciti
Hi,
Audiostatic made several kind of esls. Some types were fitted with a mirror drive. This circuit ( an extra transformer was used) acts like an equalizer with caused the voltage of the stator to increase with lower frequences. The audiostatics with mirrordrive (RS-series) are quite well balanced. Not perfect, but better than the audiostatics without mirror drive, like the new (!) DCM5 or the old ES100 full range ESLs.
Don't know which type exactly we are talking about, but I liked the ES200RS.
The ES200RS and the Martin Logan CLS1 are one of the best full range I've heard.
Audiostatic made several kind of esls. Some types were fitted with a mirror drive. This circuit ( an extra transformer was used) acts like an equalizer with caused the voltage of the stator to increase with lower frequences. The audiostatics with mirrordrive (RS-series) are quite well balanced. Not perfect, but better than the audiostatics without mirror drive, like the new (!) DCM5 or the old ES100 full range ESLs.
Don't know which type exactly we are talking about, but I liked the ES200RS.
The ES200RS and the Martin Logan CLS1 are one of the best full range I've heard.
The DCM5 does have mirror drive (see their website) and total of 8 mm excursion. How does an electrostat have such high excursion without efficiency dipping below 80dB? Although their website seem to imply it can play loud, go deep, and be driven by 50 watts, I doubt it.
I agree the original CLS is one of the best sounding full range, and the most beautiful speaker ever designed IMO. However, the it was prone to failure and ate amps for breakfast.
The new steel framed Quads look promising.
I agree the original CLS is one of the best sounding full range, and the most beautiful speaker ever designed IMO. However, the it was prone to failure and ate amps for breakfast.
The new steel framed Quads look promising.
Audiostatic DCM5
For me the most impressive full range i've heard was a Beveridge with subwoofers (somewere in the late 70')
Audiostatics specs indicate an excursion of 8 mm. For me it is not clear if they mean a spacer thickness of 4 mm on each side of the membrane (so total of 8 mm) or spacers of 8 mm (total of 16 mm) which seems very large. With a spacer of 4 mm seems it should be possible to retain a reasonable efficienty, provided that a higher HV-supply is used and sufficient step-up is used.
Does anyone know the exact spacer thickness ?
Regards,
Edwin
For me the most impressive full range i've heard was a Beveridge with subwoofers (somewere in the late 70')
Audiostatics specs indicate an excursion of 8 mm. For me it is not clear if they mean a spacer thickness of 4 mm on each side of the membrane (so total of 8 mm) or spacers of 8 mm (total of 16 mm) which seems very large. With a spacer of 4 mm seems it should be possible to retain a reasonable efficienty, provided that a higher HV-supply is used and sufficient step-up is used.
Does anyone know the exact spacer thickness ?
Regards,
Edwin
MJ Dijkstra
No electronic equalisation can remove baffle step problem and this also holds true for the Audiostatic.
I agree that the ideal loudspeaker is small point making all frequencies, but it is not possible, so real loudspeaker must be large to not have baffle step problem in the lowest midrange
or it must be Manger Zerobox or similar design
or it must be omnipolar.
No electronic equalisation can remove baffle step problem and this also holds true for the Audiostatic.
I agree that the ideal loudspeaker is small point making all frequencies, but it is not possible, so real loudspeaker must be large to not have baffle step problem in the lowest midrange
or it must be Manger Zerobox or similar design
or it must be omnipolar.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.