There is a recently applied patent that takes another very different look at making an electrostatic loudspeaker. Particularly the way the stators are made.
I contacted the patent holder and asked if it was OK to give a DIY approach on his design a go. As long as I was not promoting it commercially he was OK with it.
So here is a short video of the very open design as a proof of concept. Yes it works and it works fine.
Sensitivity is very acceptable, distortion is low, but what is most remarkable and I don't know of any way of measuring that, is how OPEN is sounds. That was also most likely the intention of the design in the first place.
The designer claims a complete break on the relation between open area and capacitance, but that is, sorry to say, not true. There is a fixed relation between the two, but obstructions area is much smaller than with wire or PCB stators.
Took several days of 3D printing the 500+ parts that are in there and several weeks of manual labour to apply and assemble the whole contraption.
Per panel the square space is like a Quad ESL-63 panel. Eventually we want to try and build a complete speaker with 4 of these panels each. The ultimate goal would be to apply the delay rings as well.
Panel size Mylar surface 58x17 cm. That is 98.600 mm2 of surface area.
Obstruction surface is only 18.300 mm2, only 18,5%.
Open surface remaining is a whopping .... well you can see it in the short video.
Stator to stator capacitance is 90 pF.
Diaphragm movement space twice 2,5 mm (also like the Quad-63 panel)
Please note that this is a patented design and done here just for the fun of proving that it can be made with simple means and to have a listen at the characteristics without having to travel half the world to hear the original concept. There are still a lot of thoughts on how to change/improve upon what is demonstrated here.
I contacted the patent holder and asked if it was OK to give a DIY approach on his design a go. As long as I was not promoting it commercially he was OK with it.
So here is a short video of the very open design as a proof of concept. Yes it works and it works fine.
Sensitivity is very acceptable, distortion is low, but what is most remarkable and I don't know of any way of measuring that, is how OPEN is sounds. That was also most likely the intention of the design in the first place.
The designer claims a complete break on the relation between open area and capacitance, but that is, sorry to say, not true. There is a fixed relation between the two, but obstructions area is much smaller than with wire or PCB stators.
Took several days of 3D printing the 500+ parts that are in there and several weeks of manual labour to apply and assemble the whole contraption.
Per panel the square space is like a Quad ESL-63 panel. Eventually we want to try and build a complete speaker with 4 of these panels each. The ultimate goal would be to apply the delay rings as well.
Panel size Mylar surface 58x17 cm. That is 98.600 mm2 of surface area.
Obstruction surface is only 18.300 mm2, only 18,5%.
Open surface remaining is a whopping .... well you can see it in the short video.
Stator to stator capacitance is 90 pF.
Diaphragm movement space twice 2,5 mm (also like the Quad-63 panel)
Please note that this is a patented design and done here just for the fun of proving that it can be made with simple means and to have a listen at the characteristics without having to travel half the world to hear the original concept. There are still a lot of thoughts on how to change/improve upon what is demonstrated here.
Last edited:
500 plus parts is simple? Someone got a patent on stators with 81.5% open area? No link to the patent?
Last edited:
500 plus parts is simple in comparisons to his "production" approach described in the patent, yes. Maybe I will find a better way of making the construction easier, maybe not.
Yes, the stator design is patented June 2022. My go at it came to 81,5% open, not sure what his aim or result was.
The patent only describes the idea, not the specifics as always is the case with a patent.
As mentioned there is still relation between openness and capacitance. Not sure (yet) whether or not is is linear or any other relation. I would have to make variants to make any conclusion on that. Also there is the question if I completely understood his goal or I came up with something different LOL.
Yes, the stator design is patented June 2022. My go at it came to 81,5% open, not sure what his aim or result was.
The patent only describes the idea, not the specifics as always is the case with a patent.
As mentioned there is still relation between openness and capacitance. Not sure (yet) whether or not is is linear or any other relation. I would have to make variants to make any conclusion on that. Also there is the question if I completely understood his goal or I came up with something different LOL.
I think, the deep multiplex tunnel-like "waveguide" is bigger acoustical problem, than the small openness or "obstruction". I'm pretty sure the wire stator causes a lot of smaller influnce to the acoustical radiation than the ominous stator.
@neodymium The tunnel-like wave guide is the same as the Quad ESL-63 panel. Same depth of grid pattern.
Wire stators needs the same kind of structure to hold the wires and be stiff enough.
Wire stators needs the same kind of structure to hold the wires and be stiff enough.
Um, OK. The patented 81% open area stator is great but an 87% open area one can't possibly work? Did I miss something besides a link to the mysterious patent?
If you use this cloth, you'll have 84% open area. Would that work? Or is there some other reason that wire cloth (suitably supported) wouldn't work?
If you use this cloth, you'll have 84% open area. Would that work? Or is there some other reason that wire cloth (suitably supported) wouldn't work?
Last edited:
@MarkRehorst I don't claim anything great nor anything magic, just showing a test setup of a new idea that works based on a patent I found interesting.
Last edited:
You found a patent, the main feature of which seems to be 81.5% open area stators, though maybe it isn't, but we'll never know because you can't be bothered to provide a link to it. I suggest wire cloth with 87% open area and you dismiss it with no explanation of why it can't possibly work.
This sort of doling out (or withholding) information in little bits is really annoying. If you have something to share then share it. If you're not going to share the info, don't bother posting.
This sort of doling out (or withholding) information in little bits is really annoying. If you have something to share then share it. If you're not going to share the info, don't bother posting.
@cristobool Have to correct that in my favour. The open space on the PCB stator is 40%, so the obstruction (what you asked) is 60%
There are roughly 13.200 holes of 2 mm, that is 41.448 mm2 of holes against the total 98.600 surface
There are roughly 13.200 holes of 2 mm, that is 41.448 mm2 of holes against the total 98.600 surface
Who is this inventive guy and where is a link to the patent?
It's kind of funny: While haggling about the 81.5% openness of this approach, yourself are 81.5% obstructive in terms of forwarding informations. 100% openness instead by yourself might be both more appropriate to the subject and also useful for all of us if you really intend to open an interesting discussion.
Last edited:
Couldn't there be a discussion about the video demo at hand without the patent?
I just mentioned the patent to make sure everybody knew this is not (entirely) my own idea. I regret that now. Should have left that out I guess.
There is a design at hand that shows the openness and works also as shown.
I just mentioned the patent to make sure everybody knew this is not (entirely) my own idea. I regret that now. Should have left that out I guess.
There is a design at hand that shows the openness and works also as shown.
Haven't thought about that at all yet.
The idea is about the different way of driving the diaphragm.
There can be dust covers like in the Quad ESL-63 because the panel size is 100% identical and it can be build in like the original panels. Same size, same thickness, same mounting with 4 screws on the aluminium L rail.
In the video you see it mounted in our 63 panel test mounting.
The idea is about the different way of driving the diaphragm.
There can be dust covers like in the Quad ESL-63 because the panel size is 100% identical and it can be build in like the original panels. Same size, same thickness, same mounting with 4 screws on the aluminium L rail.
In the video you see it mounted in our 63 panel test mounting.
Yes, it's an interesting, beautifully photographed video of an electrostatic speaker with 81.5% open area stators playing music. I can't think of what else to say about it except that it would be nice to know what the "special sauce" is that makes it work, especially when you say an 87% open area stator wouldn't. And I would ask the same questions whether I knew it was patented or not (except for wanting a link to the patent). What are the 500+ pieces of printed plastic doing? Oops, there I go asking questions again... silly me.
If you're not going to explain how the thing is different, other than the obvious open area, what did you think people were going to discuss? The color scheme? Discussion involves an exchange of information, ideas, and opinions. If you aren't willing to provide any of that, how can a discussion take place?
This is an electrostatic speaker that I am building:
It doesn't use stators, radiation is omnidirectional at all frequencies between 20Hz and 50 kHz, and it sounds great!
Now lets have a discussion about it, but don't ask me for any details.
Last edited: