"Of course the Mms of the Accuton D20 has a really small vallue of 0.09 g, but this tweeter costs 2,700Euro/Each."
There was NEVER any discussion on performance vs. price. If there was a price limitation on this discussion on ESL performance I sure missed that rule anyway.
"Also how can you compare a dome with a big membrange for the highs that measures 1.5"x48" that is just 0,16g?"
I was not the one who broght the mass issue up, you did. You mentioned "3gr" and I still don´t know what you want to say with that.
"so there's enough Xmax in order dynamics not be compressed and have very good bass and extension"
It´s not the stators that is the problem it is the very fact that there is no suspension and not enough flexibility in the membrane. I´m surprised you say this now since you did refer to AWS´s findings that reflect what I say.
"And one final thing: as I have said before you can't compare the mass (2.8 g) of the esl membrane that handles 30hz-23000hz with the sum of Mms of the three at least cones in a full-range electrodynamic loudspeaker"
And your point is?
"(that always overcomes the value of 70g)... If you can't accept this then, I don't know how to give you another point of view"
You will not and should not give me another point of view, as I am fully aware what I talk about. Which you seem not to be. Don´t you think I know what my cone drivers weigh? You seem to imply that I´m clueless on driver techology. What it it you are so fixated by moving mass? Moving mass has little to do with performance looking at it in isolation. You do not get good performance just becasue your transducers moving mass is low, it´s just a part of a the equation.
You brought up the "3gr" and "0.16gr", I simply responded with mass not being the only factor that determine driver performance. And while we´re at it, if mass now is so important, then there are dynamic drivers with lower moving mass than any ESL membrane you have referd to yet., therefore I refered to the lightest dynamic driver I´m aware of. Or are you the only one allowed to do that in this discussion?
I really don´t know what you argue about, maybe you need to read my posts again and let it melt in.
Happy listening!
/Peter
There was NEVER any discussion on performance vs. price. If there was a price limitation on this discussion on ESL performance I sure missed that rule anyway.
"Also how can you compare a dome with a big membrange for the highs that measures 1.5"x48" that is just 0,16g?"
I was not the one who broght the mass issue up, you did. You mentioned "3gr" and I still don´t know what you want to say with that.
"so there's enough Xmax in order dynamics not be compressed and have very good bass and extension"
It´s not the stators that is the problem it is the very fact that there is no suspension and not enough flexibility in the membrane. I´m surprised you say this now since you did refer to AWS´s findings that reflect what I say.
"And one final thing: as I have said before you can't compare the mass (2.8 g) of the esl membrane that handles 30hz-23000hz with the sum of Mms of the three at least cones in a full-range electrodynamic loudspeaker"
And your point is?
"(that always overcomes the value of 70g)... If you can't accept this then, I don't know how to give you another point of view"
You will not and should not give me another point of view, as I am fully aware what I talk about. Which you seem not to be. Don´t you think I know what my cone drivers weigh? You seem to imply that I´m clueless on driver techology. What it it you are so fixated by moving mass? Moving mass has little to do with performance looking at it in isolation. You do not get good performance just becasue your transducers moving mass is low, it´s just a part of a the equation.
You brought up the "3gr" and "0.16gr", I simply responded with mass not being the only factor that determine driver performance. And while we´re at it, if mass now is so important, then there are dynamic drivers with lower moving mass than any ESL membrane you have referd to yet., therefore I refered to the lightest dynamic driver I´m aware of. Or are you the only one allowed to do that in this discussion?
I really don´t know what you argue about, maybe you need to read my posts again and let it melt in.
Happy listening!
/Peter
I am sorry! My english aren't that good! Of cousrse I didn't said or implied that you are clueless about this subject, but I wanted you to know that there are many other points of view for the subject of sound which is most of it subjective (isn't it)? BTW I am a newbee and I am trying to find my way through.
Happy listening...
Happy listening...
The Bandor 50mm moving coil unit, which will give an audible sound between 20Hz-20kHz (although it is bass light below 100Hz and needs a woofer) has a moving mass of about 1.5g in the 4 ohm version.
Well, I thought I should mention it.
Although the cone area is a fraction of the size of a full-range electrostatic, the excursion is quite astonishing for such a tiny unit. I use four of them in the Nonsuch 4 loudspeaker but for the last couple of months I've been listening to a new prototype Seventh Veil speaker that uses just one driver per side.
Well, I thought I should mention it.
Although the cone area is a fraction of the size of a full-range electrostatic, the excursion is quite astonishing for such a tiny unit. I use four of them in the Nonsuch 4 loudspeaker but for the last couple of months I've been listening to a new prototype Seventh Veil speaker that uses just one driver per side.
Michael,
no worries. I´m a "foreigner" as well. Lots of typos and errors in my writings for sure.
I agree with you that sound and music is a highly subjective thing, however certain things are not, as the physics and science of driver technology.
It´s easy to say which drivers has the lowest distortion in this or that range, or what technolgy has widest bandwith and so on, but just as you say, how it will sound in the end depends on many things and are ultimately a subjective thing.
To make my stand on ESL a little more clear again. Just becasue I have not listened to a really good set up yet does not mean that the technology is bad per se of course, in such case there wouldn´t be so many fans of ESL´s. What I question though, is WHAT in ESL´s that makes them good for many people.
If one look at every sincle parameter then you can almost be sure that there are other technologies that excels upon ESL´s, however, it is still very possible that the "compromises" and the final "sum of all parts" that makes a ESL is something that makes them very good indeed (and the very best according to many). Often people feel the need to justify their "way" or choices by claiming this or that using technical language though, and when that is incorrect I tend to question it.
/Peter
no worries. I´m a "foreigner" as well. Lots of typos and errors in my writings for sure
.I agree with you that sound and music is a highly subjective thing, however certain things are not, as the physics and science of driver technology.
It´s easy to say which drivers has the lowest distortion in this or that range, or what technolgy has widest bandwith and so on, but just as you say, how it will sound in the end depends on many things and are ultimately a subjective thing.
To make my stand on ESL a little more clear again. Just becasue I have not listened to a really good set up yet does not mean that the technology is bad per se of course, in such case there wouldn´t be so many fans of ESL´s. What I question though, is WHAT in ESL´s that makes them good for many people.
If one look at every sincle parameter then you can almost be sure that there are other technologies that excels upon ESL´s, however, it is still very possible that the "compromises" and the final "sum of all parts" that makes a ESL is something that makes them very good indeed (and the very best according to many). Often people feel the need to justify their "way" or choices by claiming this or that using technical language though, and when that is incorrect I tend to question it.
/Peter
Pan
> Ribbons are the drivers with lowest distortion in midrange. Dynamic drivers rules in bass and highs... talking distortion now.
- Why or on what expereince do you think ribbons are better in midrange? Mmm maybe Apogee?
- And in the highs, though eg Seas Millennium comes close, surely ribbons are better than dynamic drivers?
The Excel is meant to be more detailed than the equivalent (Phoenix) Scan Speaks, but I thought primarily in the upper bass. But is it much better in the mids?
It’d be interesting to compare an Excel dipole mid with an electrostatic.
Actually I know a guy who has an Excel dipole – the SL Orion, who lives only about 5 km from a guy who built his own very good, and relatively compact electrostatics.
If I could convince/ help the electrostatics be schlepped over to the Orions, that would be very interesting.
I agree that (as a centre speaker with diploe L & R) in terms of integration; and in any configuration for power response - the Excel dipole would win.
> Ribbons are the drivers with lowest distortion in midrange. Dynamic drivers rules in bass and highs... talking distortion now.
- Why or on what expereince do you think ribbons are better in midrange? Mmm maybe Apogee?
- And in the highs, though eg Seas Millennium comes close, surely ribbons are better than dynamic drivers?
The Excel is meant to be more detailed than the equivalent (Phoenix) Scan Speaks, but I thought primarily in the upper bass. But is it much better in the mids?
It’d be interesting to compare an Excel dipole mid with an electrostatic.
Actually I know a guy who has an Excel dipole – the SL Orion, who lives only about 5 km from a guy who built his own very good, and relatively compact electrostatics.
If I could convince/ help the electrostatics be schlepped over to the Orions, that would be very interesting.
I agree that (as a centre speaker with diploe L & R) in terms of integration; and in any configuration for power response - the Excel dipole would win.
Rick,
distortion wise ribbons is the best in midrange. Bo Bengtsson, the designer of the ribbons that was used by Red Rose, measure about 0.03% THD at 90dB with his new ribbon lines. In the highs the Accuton diamond tweeters have the record in low distortion as far as I know. The best highs I´ve heard are the Accuton tweeters.
I know how you think. Most people claim that ribbons have "the best highs"... what is best? There are several dynamic tweeters that reach up to 100k so BW is no problem. The Accuton drivers have lower THD than any ribbon I´m aware of in the top octaves. In the end, dispersion and matching in power response is very important also.
People also claim that ribbons (similar to ESLs) are so very light that it would solve all problems.. ribbons is "faster" and so on... no thei´r not faster (if rise time = "fast"). Impulse response and decay... dunno, I have not seen really good comparable graphs that shows ribbons to be superior. Just becasue the moving mass is low does not mean that the membrane/foil stops quick after excitation. That is a question of mass vs. damping/suspension which is bad in many ribbon designs... not all necessarily.
"If I could convince/ help the electrostatics be schlepped over to the Orions, that would be very interesting."
Indeed.
distortion wise ribbons is the best in midrange. Bo Bengtsson, the designer of the ribbons that was used by Red Rose, measure about 0.03% THD at 90dB with his new ribbon lines. In the highs the Accuton diamond tweeters have the record in low distortion as far as I know. The best highs I´ve heard are the Accuton tweeters.
I know how you think. Most people claim that ribbons have "the best highs"... what is best? There are several dynamic tweeters that reach up to 100k so BW is no problem. The Accuton drivers have lower THD than any ribbon I´m aware of in the top octaves. In the end, dispersion and matching in power response is very important also.
People also claim that ribbons (similar to ESLs) are so very light that it would solve all problems.. ribbons is "faster" and so on... no thei´r not faster (if rise time = "fast"). Impulse response and decay... dunno, I have not seen really good comparable graphs that shows ribbons to be superior. Just becasue the moving mass is low does not mean that the membrane/foil stops quick after excitation. That is a question of mass vs. damping/suspension which is bad in many ribbon designs... not all necessarily.
"If I could convince/ help the electrostatics be schlepped over to the Orions, that would be very interesting."
Indeed.
Pan
I thought Red Rose ribbons were Aurum Cantus, the largest of which would do only *upper midrange, down to c. 1200 Hz.
(Ribbons for DIY that go lower are available from E-speakers for big $)
THD is a tool, but not great one I feel, for measuring distortion.
Regardless, the 0.03% THD at 90dB – what Hz was this?
I know we don’t have a $ rule (so far), but how much are the Accuton tweeters. Do they actually use diamonds in each, or is that the machine that makes them?
Cheers
I thought Red Rose ribbons were Aurum Cantus, the largest of which would do only *upper midrange, down to c. 1200 Hz.
(Ribbons for DIY that go lower are available from E-speakers for big $)
THD is a tool, but not great one I feel, for measuring distortion.
Regardless, the 0.03% THD at 90dB – what Hz was this?
I know we don’t have a $ rule (so far), but how much are the Accuton tweeters. Do they actually use diamonds in each, or is that the machine that makes them?
Cheers
There is three electrical/mechanical reasons why e-stats sound good.
1. No crossover. Meaning nothing to introduce distortions ( phase, nonlinear ... ) and after couple caps, coils and resistors expensive speaker cables and big damping factor of your amp becomes pointless and useless.
Of course You can use electronic crossover and bi-tri amplification but still you have additional electronics in signal path. If you think this is not so bad what about two or three drivers working
together on same freq. (crossover point) for good part of the bandwidth and sound will come from two or three drivers
with different cone/dome material with different sound signature.
Do not forget about interference and sound wave cancellation between drivers. Another problem comes to mind,
and that is different impedance of the used drivers. Even if you use same 8 ohms drivers, inductance and resistance
is different meaning different phase delay between drivers. All this does not exists for e-stats except for high freq.
interference with wide planar drivers and consequent high freq. beaming (narrow dispersion).
2. No box. Thank to that fact only sound source will be driver not the box. When box walls move(and they do)
box will produce sound, and boxes are not very musical. Also back-wave reflecting of inside of the box and coming out through speaker cone ( out of phase).
3. Low mass/area ratio. We talking about e-stats diaphragm weight (2-3 grams not very impressive) but mass/area ratio is
unbeatable. I can't imagine dynamic driver with 4micron thick cone. And exactly why is this low mass/area important?
Not so much rise time but thank to air damping stop time (decay). Low mass = low inertia. Pure physics.
All this combined in one package equals excellence. But there is also more than one drawback with e-stats.
I don't know where to start. Big size = Your wife/girlfrend will hate it. Dependence on air humidity (arcing or sensitivity goes up-down), problems with imaging (hard to find good place in the room), need for good stabile amp. (usually monster),
limited life (2-10 years), not ready to play immediately upon turn-on (time vary from 10min to couple hours), frequent need for repairs, high price ....
But still, we are deeply in love. It is like beautiful girl, You know she is a ***** but You cant leave her, because she can give you
unforgettable ride, if You know what I mean.
Regards.
1. No crossover. Meaning nothing to introduce distortions ( phase, nonlinear ... ) and after couple caps, coils and resistors expensive speaker cables and big damping factor of your amp becomes pointless and useless.
Of course You can use electronic crossover and bi-tri amplification but still you have additional electronics in signal path. If you think this is not so bad what about two or three drivers working
together on same freq. (crossover point) for good part of the bandwidth and sound will come from two or three drivers
with different cone/dome material with different sound signature.
Do not forget about interference and sound wave cancellation between drivers. Another problem comes to mind,
and that is different impedance of the used drivers. Even if you use same 8 ohms drivers, inductance and resistance
is different meaning different phase delay between drivers. All this does not exists for e-stats except for high freq.
interference with wide planar drivers and consequent high freq. beaming (narrow dispersion).
2. No box. Thank to that fact only sound source will be driver not the box. When box walls move(and they do)
box will produce sound, and boxes are not very musical. Also back-wave reflecting of inside of the box and coming out through speaker cone ( out of phase).
3. Low mass/area ratio. We talking about e-stats diaphragm weight (2-3 grams not very impressive) but mass/area ratio is
unbeatable. I can't imagine dynamic driver with 4micron thick cone. And exactly why is this low mass/area important?
Not so much rise time but thank to air damping stop time (decay). Low mass = low inertia. Pure physics.
All this combined in one package equals excellence. But there is also more than one drawback with e-stats.
I don't know where to start. Big size = Your wife/girlfrend will hate it. Dependence on air humidity (arcing or sensitivity goes up-down), problems with imaging (hard to find good place in the room), need for good stabile amp. (usually monster),
limited life (2-10 years), not ready to play immediately upon turn-on (time vary from 10min to couple hours), frequent need for repairs, high price ....
But still, we are deeply in love. It is like beautiful girl, You know she is a ***** but You cant leave her, because she can give you
unforgettable ride, if You know what I mean.
Regards.
rick57 said:
As far as I know Bo Bengtsson has noting to do with Aurum, that may be wrong though. It´s possible that the small ribbons is AC but the long line sources are Bo Bengtsson designs. He designs ribons that go really low. Harmonic distortion is a very good and important "tool" to judge speaker performance.
I do not remember at which frequency.
The Accutons are pure synthetical diamond domes and are very costly. Something like $2500-$4200/each.
/Peter
Sasha,
1)
We now have active as well as digital crossovers that solves the problems you mention. This can be used with E-stats as well to avoid the upper bass/low midrange crossing.
"what about two or three drivers working
together on same freq. (crossover point) for good part of the bandwidth and sound will come from two or three drivers
with different cone/dome material with different sound signature."
This is a good thing simply becsue it can give better dispersion and you can use cones using same material if you feel that is important. Aluminuim, titanium and ceramic drivers are available for subs up to tweeters. However this is not important since you can´t compare the sound of bass to sound of treebles, it´s different sounds all together and you need specific drivers for each band in order to optimize performance and that is a weak point of ESLs and other wideband tranducers. You simply can not make one driver that is equally good at bass, mids and highs.
"Do not forget about interference and sound wave cancellation between drivers."
That is true but not a big problem IMO in a good design.
"Even if you use same 8 ohms drivers, inductance and resistance
is different meaning different phase delay between drivers."
This is no problem, you need to look at the end result, you can´t look at one driver in isolation since a multiway speaker is the sum of it´s drivers, x-over and correction/EQ circuits. You can make TP speakers with flat impedance linear phase and no destructive time delays between drivers.
2)
I have used boxless dynamic speakers for years. There are boxless ribbon speakers as well. And even if a box is used there should be no problem with box sound and in-box-reflection if the design is good. Also the reflection is not "out of phase" if left untreated, but simply are delayed in time and can be anything from in phase to out of phase and everything in between.
3)
"And exactly why is this low mass/area important?
Not so much rise time but thank to air damping stop time (decay). Low mass = low inertia. Pure physics."
But in the end the only thing that matters is the CSD plot and that is not pretty on the ESLs I have seen, so in the end that does not matter. As I said earlier, you can´t normally just look at one parameter in isolation and believe that the end result will be good. The ESL membrane suffers from resonances which makes this virtue (low mass) a moot point.
"But still, we are deeply in love. It is like beautiful girl, You know she is a ***** but You cant leave her, because she can give you
unforgettable ride, if You know what I mean."
Congrats, I know what you mean
Cheers!
/Peter
Regards.
1)
We now have active as well as digital crossovers that solves the problems you mention. This can be used with E-stats as well to avoid the upper bass/low midrange crossing.
"what about two or three drivers working
together on same freq. (crossover point) for good part of the bandwidth and sound will come from two or three drivers
with different cone/dome material with different sound signature."
This is a good thing simply becsue it can give better dispersion and you can use cones using same material if you feel that is important. Aluminuim, titanium and ceramic drivers are available for subs up to tweeters. However this is not important since you can´t compare the sound of bass to sound of treebles, it´s different sounds all together and you need specific drivers for each band in order to optimize performance and that is a weak point of ESLs and other wideband tranducers. You simply can not make one driver that is equally good at bass, mids and highs.
"Do not forget about interference and sound wave cancellation between drivers."
That is true but not a big problem IMO in a good design.
"Even if you use same 8 ohms drivers, inductance and resistance
is different meaning different phase delay between drivers."
This is no problem, you need to look at the end result, you can´t look at one driver in isolation since a multiway speaker is the sum of it´s drivers, x-over and correction/EQ circuits. You can make TP speakers with flat impedance linear phase and no destructive time delays between drivers.
2)
I have used boxless dynamic speakers for years. There are boxless ribbon speakers as well. And even if a box is used there should be no problem with box sound and in-box-reflection if the design is good. Also the reflection is not "out of phase" if left untreated, but simply are delayed in time and can be anything from in phase to out of phase and everything in between.
3)
"And exactly why is this low mass/area important?
Not so much rise time but thank to air damping stop time (decay). Low mass = low inertia. Pure physics."
But in the end the only thing that matters is the CSD plot and that is not pretty on the ESLs I have seen, so in the end that does not matter. As I said earlier, you can´t normally just look at one parameter in isolation and believe that the end result will be good. The ESL membrane suffers from resonances which makes this virtue (low mass) a moot point.
"But still, we are deeply in love. It is like beautiful girl, You know she is a ***** but You cant leave her, because she can give you
unforgettable ride, if You know what I mean."
Congrats, I know what you mean
Cheers!
/Peter
Regards.
(Don’t think I mentioned before)
Easier DIY electros - part two of a new project from Rod Elliot:
http://sound.westhost.com/project105.htm
Easier DIY electros - part two of a new project from Rod Elliot:
http://sound.westhost.com/project105.htm
A little off topic, perhaps, but the unconventional Manger driver, which in some respects might be considered quasi-ESL, gives an intriguing sound qualitatively different from especially conventional drivers, and is more resolving, IME, than ribbons or ESLs ... I kid you not---for instance, HF SACD noise, which I never could easily distinguish on ribbon speakers, is easily heard on the Manger, like a strange form of tape hiss that trails the music.
Sorry, the correct link to Part TWO,
with an unusual approach to treble dispersion:
http://sound.westhost.com/project1052.htm
with an unusual approach to treble dispersion:
http://sound.westhost.com/project1052.htm
Michael,
Don't worry too much about the objectivism from Peter and others about what ESLs can and can't do. Their opinion is to be respected, but needs to be sorted in your mind like all things written on the web.
I have noticed over several postings that you have a 'gut feeling' that the ESL-3 is for you. Just go for Mackinlay's ESL-3, you will NOT be disappointed !! It's laser-like precision and Electron Microscope's view on the music is a revelation.
As someone who has kind of done it all recently with the best of cones and ribbons (Accutons & Ravens), see pic below, the ESL-3 with it's ultra thin 3.8 micron membrane is up there with the best.
Regards,
Steve M.
Don't worry too much about the objectivism from Peter and others about what ESLs can and can't do. Their opinion is to be respected, but needs to be sorted in your mind like all things written on the web.
I have noticed over several postings that you have a 'gut feeling' that the ESL-3 is for you. Just go for Mackinlay's ESL-3, you will NOT be disappointed !! It's laser-like precision and Electron Microscope's view on the music is a revelation.
As someone who has kind of done it all recently with the best of cones and ribbons (Accutons & Ravens), see pic below, the ESL-3 with it's ultra thin 3.8 micron membrane is up there with the best.
Regards,
Steve M.
Attachments
And, another pic of a mega buck $10,000AUD x 90kg speaker I bought using all Seas Excel magnesium drivers, the mighty VAF-I93.
Believe it not but for my tastes in music which is mainly acoustic material, jazz (shimmering cymbals etc) and female vocals, the humble kit ER Audio ESL-3 @ $1,300USD beats them all really...
Steve M.
Believe it not but for my tastes in music which is mainly acoustic material, jazz (shimmering cymbals etc) and female vocals, the humble kit ER Audio ESL-3 @ $1,300USD beats them all really...
Steve M.
Attachments
As I said earlier, I don´t doubt that ESLs can be very good but it´s the flawed technical explanations from some fans that I question.
Steve, you should try a dynamic dipole with Seas/Accuton/Raven type and quality of drivers. The dipole operation with its figure 8 polar pattern can be a revelation even with dynamic drivers, not only ESLs.
/Peter
Steve, you should try a dynamic dipole with Seas/Accuton/Raven type and quality of drivers. The dipole operation with its figure 8 polar pattern can be a revelation even with dynamic drivers, not only ESLs.
/Peter
Chose Your Compromises!!
Not true. You can likely get the same materials to work for your woofer and for your mid drivers, but not your tweeter. The three drivers mentioned here will *each* have a unique and different harmonic signature due to structural, mechanical, size and construction differences. IF made of the same materials you might find them to be sufficiently similar. Might. Since the tweeter will be different, you no longer have the desired "signature" across the board.
There are ESLs that are perfectly good using a single cell for wide band (<40Hz - >20kHz). The most notable commercial product was the Acoustat series. While they are not the absolute ultimate in performance by today's SOTA standards, I'd say that they are still the equal or better of close to 99% of all commercial hi-fi speakers available. You can argue about the MLII, they are also single diaphragm wide range.
it is a big problem, one that is often ignored or lived with. the polar response of most speakers is horrendous. I think Klang + Ton shows nice 3D graphics of the measured polar response of the speakers that they test. Look at it some time... ick!
You may wish to accept this compromise, but with an ESL you don't have to have the same degree of compromise. You can argue that with a Beveridge you have none.
no you can't. You're going to have compromises throughout, if for no other reason than that you can't control the polar response vs. frequency without using a huge number of drivers. But, I'm not sure what a "TP" speaker is - so maybe I've missed something.
While you might be able to build something that sums properly on axis, it won't anywhere else.
Not sure what this refers to exactly, but for certain the reflections back to the cone inside an enclosure absolutely will affect the output by creating sum+difference variations.
The delay from a dipole may or may not be long enough to be past the Haas effect threshold.
An ESL doesn't have to be a dipole. In which case the same problems apply as with cone drivers in a box.
It is a good thing that ESLs use a low diaphragm mass, since the electrostatic force is weak!
well constructed ESLs tend to have less stored energy than do cone loudspeakers, so I have no idea what plots you've been looking at. Some modern ribbon drivers equal or exceed ESLs but they are not wide range devices, and you can't usually make a big ribbon do the same thing as a ribbon tweeter. Ribbons are good though.
The bottom line is that you have to chose the compromises that you can live with. Every speaker system has its own set of compromises. There is no doubt that well done ESLs are superior means of making hi-fi sound. Probably the best ESLs are still superior in most categories to dynamic drivers still today. If you haven't heard a good ESL system that actually sounds good, then you've just missed out on something special.
Dynamic speakers will do a great many things very well, when carefully created - and there is no doubt that digital correction will serve ultimately to improve dynamic drivers as well as everything else speaker wise - eventually.
_-_-bear 
Pan said:
Not true. You can likely get the same materials to work for your woofer and for your mid drivers, but not your tweeter. The three drivers mentioned here will *each* have a unique and different harmonic signature due to structural, mechanical, size and construction differences. IF made of the same materials you might find them to be sufficiently similar. Might. Since the tweeter will be different, you no longer have the desired "signature" across the board.
There are ESLs that are perfectly good using a single cell for wide band (<40Hz - >20kHz). The most notable commercial product was the Acoustat series. While they are not the absolute ultimate in performance by today's SOTA standards, I'd say that they are still the equal or better of close to 99% of all commercial hi-fi speakers available. You can argue about the MLII, they are also single diaphragm wide range.
it is a big problem, one that is often ignored or lived with. the polar response of most speakers is horrendous. I think Klang + Ton shows nice 3D graphics of the measured polar response of the speakers that they test. Look at it some time... ick!
You may wish to accept this compromise, but with an ESL you don't have to have the same degree of compromise. You can argue that with a Beveridge you have none.
no you can't. You're going to have compromises throughout, if for no other reason than that you can't control the polar response vs. frequency without using a huge number of drivers. But, I'm not sure what a "TP" speaker is - so maybe I've missed something.
While you might be able to build something that sums properly on axis, it won't anywhere else.
Not sure what this refers to exactly, but for certain the reflections back to the cone inside an enclosure absolutely will affect the output by creating sum+difference variations.
The delay from a dipole may or may not be long enough to be past the Haas effect threshold.
An ESL doesn't have to be a dipole. In which case the same problems apply as with cone drivers in a box.
It is a good thing that ESLs use a low diaphragm mass, since the electrostatic force is weak!
well constructed ESLs tend to have less stored energy than do cone loudspeakers, so I have no idea what plots you've been looking at. Some modern ribbon drivers equal or exceed ESLs but they are not wide range devices, and you can't usually make a big ribbon do the same thing as a ribbon tweeter. Ribbons are good though.
"But still, we are deeply in love. It is like beautiful girl, You know she is a ***** but You cant leave her, because she can give you
unforgettable ride, if You know what I mean."
Congrats, I know what you mean
Cheers!
/Peter
Regards.
The bottom line is that you have to chose the compromises that you can live with. Every speaker system has its own set of compromises. There is no doubt that well done ESLs are superior means of making hi-fi sound. Probably the best ESLs are still superior in most categories to dynamic drivers still today. If you haven't heard a good ESL system that actually sounds good, then you've just missed out on something special.
Dynamic speakers will do a great many things very well, when carefully created - and there is no doubt that digital correction will serve ultimately to improve dynamic drivers as well as everything else speaker wise - eventually.
_-_-bear
"barber Pole"
This is the classic "Barber Pole" approach to horizontal dispersion.
It works adequately when then source speakers are either very small or a significant distance from the listener. In close proximity the illustrated means for HF dispersion is going to have multiple problems. Most of them are fairly obvious intuitively just by looking at it. (it's not a great plan for dipoles...)
I'd go for another solution myself.
_-_-bear
rick57 said:
This is the classic "Barber Pole" approach to horizontal dispersion.
It works adequately when then source speakers are either very small or a significant distance from the listener. In close proximity the illustrated means for HF dispersion is going to have multiple problems. Most of them are fairly obvious intuitively just by looking at it. (it's not a great plan for dipoles...)
I'd go for another solution myself.
_-_-bear