The opposite is true too. I asked him a question and it seemed to me he answered it very honestly, then the "filth" began with your post about "mental masturbation", he simply mirrored your innuendo.
This ( what Streng calls dc-shift ) is also discussed by Baxandall; Loudspeaker and Headphone Handbook chapter 3 ) chapter 3.2.11.
Baxendall shows change of level of an 1 kHz while having a 20 Hz - 100 Hz swept, on an esl63. Change of 1kHz is about 0.4 dB for sustained bass input.
This is what I expect too from what I I read untill now.
According to Baxandall, for esl63s transformer , "simplex behaviour is obtained up to about 50 kHz"
/örjan
Last edited:
Last edited:
re: esl speakers impedance that is clearly level dependent
Forgot, core saturation in the transformers is part of this too, I think especially in esl 57.
/örjan
Forgot, core saturation in the transformers is part of this too, I think especially in esl 57.
/örjan
My expectation would be just a shift in directivity and/or amplitude.
Hence my thinking a polar plot.
Jn
Wow, you really are letting it get to you...
Not like you are exactly innocent yourself...
If you don't like what someone says, or find their way of disagreeing to be disagreeable, just don't respond to it. Just agree to disagree.
Or perhaps you enjoy trying to up the ante, and increase the argument.
Not like you are exactly innocent yourself...
If you don't like what someone says, or find their way of disagreeing to be disagreeable, just don't respond to it. Just agree to disagree.
Or perhaps you enjoy trying to up the ante, and increase the argument.
Meanwhile - in amongst the odd custard pie throw, the whole technical debate on ESLs has been very interesting, a lot of ideas challenged and good debate actually, as long as you slide your eyes over the silly bits.
Some very good papers on the subject have been brought to light too!
And now - there's two great guys going try and put some of the theorising to the test!
Excellent stuff.
Look at it this way - hypothesis - discussion - experiment... Good science is going to be the result by all appearances! And the flying fur was entertaining too, at times!
Some very good papers on the subject have been brought to light too!
And now - there's two great guys going try and put some of the theorising to the test!
Excellent stuff.
Look at it this way - hypothesis - discussion - experiment... Good science is going to be the result by all appearances! And the flying fur was entertaining too, at times!
March 19, 2003 Update
I've been rebuilding Quad ESL-57 and ESL-63 electrostatic speakers using some really nice 3.8 micron thick polyester film purchased from ER Audio. I decided to have a fresh set of aluminum perforated metal stator material powder coated, to try this super thin film. This film is roughly twenty five times tinner than a human hair. The mass of the 16" x 46" diaphragm is about 2.5 grams. After building a set of panels with this film, and listening to them, they turned out to be HARSH. It turns out that the ESL Information Exchange transformers have a bit of leakage inductance problem which is causing a rising treble response problem. This makes for the most detailed and revealing speakers I've ever heard, but a bit "teeth drilling".
All transformers have some leakage inductance and will cause a resonant peak in the ESL response. The frequency response change can be seen here. A resistor in series with the primary will damp this impedance peak and flatten the treble response. However, the magnitude of the peak in this case indicates that these transformers may have a bit of a problem. I tried a number of different resistor values in series with the transformer primary, the frequency response of these changes can be seen here
It is interesting to note that the original panels also exhibited this rising response, but the mass of the diaphragm caused the panel to start rolling off as the frequency response started increasing. However there was still some frequency response anomalies. The frequency response of the new panels with the shunt resistor versus the old thick mylar panels can be seen here.
The impedance of the panel with the shunt resistor is also slightly better, as it doesn't drop to nearly zero at high frequencies, as seen here. However, ESL's are still very nasty loads as compared to standard cone and dome speakers as seen here.
As with most ESL's, precise consistent panels are easy to construct. This pair of panels both measured at the same point in the room and with the panels positioned as closely the same as possible are shown here. The panels aren't positioned exactly the same, so there is a slight deviation in response. The panels measured at their standard listening positions with the measurement microphone at the listening position are shown here.
To Be Continued...
DIY ESL's Verison 1.0
-RM
I've been rebuilding Quad ESL-57 and ESL-63 electrostatic speakers using some really nice 3.8 micron thick polyester film purchased from ER Audio. I decided to have a fresh set of aluminum perforated metal stator material powder coated, to try this super thin film. This film is roughly twenty five times tinner than a human hair. The mass of the 16" x 46" diaphragm is about 2.5 grams. After building a set of panels with this film, and listening to them, they turned out to be HARSH. It turns out that the ESL Information Exchange transformers have a bit of leakage inductance problem which is causing a rising treble response problem. This makes for the most detailed and revealing speakers I've ever heard, but a bit "teeth drilling".
All transformers have some leakage inductance and will cause a resonant peak in the ESL response. The frequency response change can be seen here. A resistor in series with the primary will damp this impedance peak and flatten the treble response. However, the magnitude of the peak in this case indicates that these transformers may have a bit of a problem. I tried a number of different resistor values in series with the transformer primary, the frequency response of these changes can be seen here
It is interesting to note that the original panels also exhibited this rising response, but the mass of the diaphragm caused the panel to start rolling off as the frequency response started increasing. However there was still some frequency response anomalies. The frequency response of the new panels with the shunt resistor versus the old thick mylar panels can be seen here.
The impedance of the panel with the shunt resistor is also slightly better, as it doesn't drop to nearly zero at high frequencies, as seen here. However, ESL's are still very nasty loads as compared to standard cone and dome speakers as seen here.
As with most ESL's, precise consistent panels are easy to construct. This pair of panels both measured at the same point in the room and with the panels positioned as closely the same as possible are shown here. The panels aren't positioned exactly the same, so there is a slight deviation in response. The panels measured at their standard listening positions with the measurement microphone at the listening position are shown here.
To Be Continued...
DIY ESL's Verison 1.0
-RM
Language and communication methods set aside, it's difficult for me to know whose information to trust the most here as there is a lot of knowledge on display, spoken with authority, that is beyond mine and I can't believe there are quite so many versions of "reality". I'm left with judging who comes across to me as the most honest.
That what I hope for when asking questions. Simple questions with sometimes difficult answers.
🙂
-RNM
Last edited:
the majority of the time, my expressed thoughts have been formed thru tests and measurements. Listening keeps me from assuming I am right. There are times when I was wrong thru listening tests. But I still learned something important from that.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Then Richard's comment was at most a slightly crass statement about publishing for promotions more than because of really important technical information. A lot of that stuff does go on, often some authors on a paper out of courtesy rather than because all of them did significant work. The other guys will reciprocate the favor for their papers. A much more gentle observation from Kahneman:
"I have always believed that scientific research is another domain where a form of optimism is essential to success: I have yet to meet a successful scientist who lacks the ability to exaggerate the importance of what he or she is doing, and I believe that someone who lacks a delusional sense of significance will wilt in the face of repeated experiences of multiple small failures and rare successes, the fate of most researchers."
No, I don't hate anybody. Not Syn08, just want him to me more tolerant. I don't care if nobody knows why, but fact is NJM7805 sounded better to me for a particular audio application than LT1963. No need to go crazy shouting bs, which if anything is BS in and of itself.
Why bring that up in the present context? Everyone agrees the advertising is awful, so why do you want to argue about that. Whatever the advertising, Bybees are still reported to have a small effect on sound quality if some current is run through them in a sensitive circuit. The effect can be to sound worse or better. That's just an observation from trusted listeners who formed their opinions independently, not a comment about advertising. Why can't those be two separate issues?
Last edited:
JN,
You cragick, snurfly, zirgut, you need to learn the proper use of language in a forum such as this. Really! Or even "Really?" Finally try "Really! 😉 "
No need to discuss any more than that when dueling with a barzinging fleper slurgic.
BTY Bill, I hate to leave you out even though you didn't contribute to this bit of bergleblump. So my advice to you comes from Groucho Marx, try a cigar next time!
Tourny, just because you had a moderately successful career using your ears professionally, doesn't mean you really hear better than everyone else. Probably only 99.95% of them.
RNM, meat excepted was 10 points less GFR. (That should really confuse the peanut gallery!)
JC good luck on handling the crowds!
Scott, not to leave you out I agree with everything you posted. Really! 😉
You cragick, snurfly, zirgut, you need to learn the proper use of language in a forum such as this. Really! Or even "Really?" Finally try "Really! 😉 "
No need to discuss any more than that when dueling with a barzinging fleper slurgic.
BTY Bill, I hate to leave you out even though you didn't contribute to this bit of bergleblump. So my advice to you comes from Groucho Marx, try a cigar next time!
Tourny, just because you had a moderately successful career using your ears professionally, doesn't mean you really hear better than everyone else. Probably only 99.95% of them.
RNM, meat excepted was 10 points less GFR. (That should really confuse the peanut gallery!)
JC good luck on handling the crowds!
Scott, not to leave you out I agree with everything you posted. Really! 😉
Last edited:
1. There isn't time in a day or in a life to investigate every interesting observation.
2. Without a well equipped lab, lots of time and sufficient expertise, some things are not practical to measure. You assume everyone who hears what you don't know how to measure is wrong. Never seems to occur to you that there can be things you never thought of figuring out how to measure (although such things are certainly measurable and fully explainable by conventional physics).
Essentially, you are defending him if you only complain about the reactions of his victims.
You really think only one side in this deserves criticism?
Then those that can't hear a difference can't be trusted, not even good FUDmongering.
Didn't say that myself. Don't know why you make up fake stories then criticize the fake stories.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.