arend-jan said:
Follow the wire up and down and you will see the schematic circuit is wrong. Remember there are two identical stators glued exactly on each other which may be confusing as we have to look to just a single stator.
It is intuitive to think that the different stator sections are parallel connected like the schematic shows and a fast glimp to the stator doesn't give a clue at first sight. But following the wire (which is easiest with a real audiostatic, you will find no split-up but a series connection within the single stator, thus in series.
Anyone with an audiostatic should be able to confirm this. Just unscrew the 3 screws at the back, remove the cover, and you will see the wires running upwards/downwards alternately:
1) the stator starts in the middle at the right of the high frequency section (correctly: full range), up and down you will move from the right to the left. Than:
2) a resistor (several in series) is connected from the high frequency section to the left of the left bass section.
3) running up and down it goes from left to right untill it meets the high section again; no it is bridged to the right bass section, the wire moves up and down from left to right again.
This can be seen from the photo as well, but is difficult to separate the different wires on the photo.
I hope there are some more owners of an audiostatic confirming this.
MJ,
I have owned a pair of 100's which I had extensively modified, To the best of my knowledge the schematic is correct. Only the middle of the stator get tn full signal off the transformer. The portions left and right of the stator are (HF) are attenuated to prevent the panel beaming.
Regards,
Jam
I have owned a pair of 100's which I had extensively modified, To the best of my knowledge the schematic is correct. Only the middle of the stator get tn full signal off the transformer. The portions left and right of the stator are (HF) are attenuated to prevent the panel beaming.
Regards,
Jam
jam said:
The middle gets the full signal indeed, but after leaving the middle part the signal is led through a resistor which is a crossover indeed. It removes the high frequency part above say 3,5 kHz.
The incorrect schematic will operate similar although the stator is fed parallel instead of series. Please note the 'split-up' in the upper part of the schematic. You won't find this split-up in your audiostatic, each stator is fed along a SINGLE wire which doesn't split-up afterwards. See my previous mail.
I invite you to unscrew the back of your esl and take a very good look.
edit: .... have owned......seems that you no longer own this esl?!!,
Hi,
to be precise You´re right MJ. But the middle HT-strip consists of just a few meters of copper wire. The resistance of this length of wire is of no importance and I regarded it as "0-Ohm-resistor", or at least negligible. It wouldn´t make any difference to connect the outer strips immediately via the 47k-resistors as it is sketched in the schematic. In practise this would mean just a tiny bit of more handywork.
jauu
Calvin
to be precise You´re right MJ. But the middle HT-strip consists of just a few meters of copper wire. The resistance of this length of wire is of no importance and I regarded it as "0-Ohm-resistor", or at least negligible. It wouldn´t make any difference to connect the outer strips immediately via the 47k-resistors as it is sketched in the schematic. In practise this would mean just a tiny bit of more handywork.
jauu
Calvin
MJ,
Electrically it makes no difference if the resistors come off the end of the stator wire from the center, or direct from the feed wire to the first stator section (center section)... yeah you do get whatever the internal resistance of the stator wire is, but probably that is negligable. Ok, perhaps there is some mysterious capacitive effect that further rolls off the highs... someone would have to verify that by testing an actual panel and switching the connection point and seeing if the freq response changes.
Ok on this?
Now, does anyone who has had an Audiostatic diaphragm out of the panel notice what the coating *might* be?? Is it graphite or something more exotic?
_-_-bear
Electrically it makes no difference if the resistors come off the end of the stator wire from the center, or direct from the feed wire to the first stator section (center section)... yeah you do get whatever the internal resistance of the stator wire is, but probably that is negligable. Ok, perhaps there is some mysterious capacitive effect that further rolls off the highs... someone would have to verify that by testing an actual panel and switching the connection point and seeing if the freq response changes.
Ok on this?
Now, does anyone who has had an Audiostatic diaphragm out of the panel notice what the coating *might* be?? Is it graphite or something more exotic?
_-_-bear
The schematic from SDS Lab is correct. Believe me, I've restored
12 pairs of Audiostatics. The membrane coating on those speakers have been graphite powder polished into the 12u membrane surface. The membranes have been glued to the distances with, as far as I've been able to see, ordinary double sided office tape and silicon.
12 pairs of Audiostatics. The membrane coating on those speakers have been graphite powder polished into the 12u membrane surface. The membranes have been glued to the distances with, as far as I've been able to see, ordinary double sided office tape and silicon.
JonasKarud said:
- I can't see any split-up within a stator, see my previous mail, so schematic is incorrect, just look carefully.
- there is no graphite powder coating on audiostatic; they are transparant from origin, but as dirt attaches to the membrane, it becomes dark. There are some low resistance black coloured 'loops' around the perimeter within the older designs.
- 12 micron? I have had different thickness of Mylar between my fingers and the film of audiostatic is definately not 12 micron. It is more like 6 micron which was confirmed by the author of a dutch esl-book. (all ES models)
- the double sided tape and silicon is correct
Sorry, but the schematic at http://www.nacl.de/esl/ is correct!
The left side of the left package the 47 k resistors are connected to the bass stator wires at the extreme left and the right side of this resistor package is connected to the full range wires and to the drive transformer. The transformer signal a.k.a runs directly to the middle full range wires and also trough the left resistor package over to the extreme left of the wires. These wires run up and down a number of times. After the last run down, the wire is not clued to the distance, instead it is lifted and soldered to the right bass stator wires, bridging the eight full range wires in the middle. Exactly as the schematic shows.
Most of the speakers I've restored were the big ES300 model and I can send you a old piece of an Audiostatic membrane to show that it is indeed 12u, measured with micrometer, and graphitized.
The left side of the left package the 47 k resistors are connected to the bass stator wires at the extreme left and the right side of this resistor package is connected to the full range wires and to the drive transformer. The transformer signal a.k.a runs directly to the middle full range wires and also trough the left resistor package over to the extreme left of the wires. These wires run up and down a number of times. After the last run down, the wire is not clued to the distance, instead it is lifted and soldered to the right bass stator wires, bridging the eight full range wires in the middle. Exactly as the schematic shows.
Most of the speakers I've restored were the big ES300 model and I can send you a old piece of an Audiostatic membrane to show that it is indeed 12u, measured with micrometer, and graphitized.
JonasKarud said:
I invite you to take a picture of the split-up. (cause it is not there)
The ES300 had a vacuum evaporated coating with very high resistance. This was nescessary as these esls have really low frequency range and do need a high resistance coating to prevent charge migration. The coating has been documented by E. Fikier in his book as well as the thickness of 6 micron.
Could it be that your speaker wasn't in original condition?
Martin:
This is correctly described by you, Martin and it is also how the schematic shows the circuit. Remember that there is as good as zero ohms in the wires and therefor can be regarded as "solid plate stators made of wire"
Can You please make a swift drawing on how you think the
SDS Labs schematics should look like? I don't think Sheldon at SDS Labs make mistakes on such a simple circuit.
12 years ago I bought 500 meters of the film that Martin Logan uses and according to the manufacturer, the highest reliable resistance You can get with vacuum deposit is about 5-6 MEGAOHM/square and the thinnest film you can do this on is 12u due to the process heat.
This is correctly described by you, Martin and it is also how the schematic shows the circuit. Remember that there is as good as zero ohms in the wires and therefor can be regarded as "solid plate stators made of wire"
Can You please make a swift drawing on how you think the
SDS Labs schematics should look like? I don't think Sheldon at SDS Labs make mistakes on such a simple circuit.
12 years ago I bought 500 meters of the film that Martin Logan uses and according to the manufacturer, the highest reliable resistance You can get with vacuum deposit is about 5-6 MEGAOHM/square and the thinnest film you can do this on is 12u due to the process heat.
Hi,
Correction, the book mentioned 'doted', not evaporated.
The exact material and method is not described in the book, possibly a company secret. The book only mentions the resistance which is 10 exp 12 as I remember correctly. According to audiostatic these models needed to charge up for at least 24 hours because of this high resistance. A low resistance black coloured loop around the perimeter promotes the charging proces while probably decreasing the dissipative effect of the slightly hygroscopic pertinac spacer assembly..
Obviously, these range of resistance is not what you would get using graphite! Just measure it!
Th book is also clear about the film thickness of 6 micron.
As I sell 6 micron myself I've got a good reference.
Measuring the thickness of the film with a kind of device usually requires multiple folding of the film introducing severe inaccuracy.
I agree the fullk range section aproaches zero ohm resistance. But thye drawing shows it connected parallel with the bass section while it is in series (no split-ip) in reality. Again, probably no practical implications
Correction, the book mentioned 'doted', not evaporated.
The exact material and method is not described in the book, possibly a company secret. The book only mentions the resistance which is 10 exp 12 as I remember correctly. According to audiostatic these models needed to charge up for at least 24 hours because of this high resistance. A low resistance black coloured loop around the perimeter promotes the charging proces while probably decreasing the dissipative effect of the slightly hygroscopic pertinac spacer assembly..
Obviously, these range of resistance is not what you would get using graphite! Just measure it!
Th book is also clear about the film thickness of 6 micron.
As I sell 6 micron myself I've got a good reference.
Measuring the thickness of the film with a kind of device usually requires multiple folding of the film introducing severe inaccuracy.
I agree the fullk range section aproaches zero ohm resistance. But thye drawing shows it connected parallel with the bass section while it is in series (no split-ip) in reality. Again, probably no practical implications
Hi,
as Jonas said the sputtered films are available in no less than 12µm in thickness, simply because the transporting mechanisms in the vacuum chambers cannot transport thinner films and the heat that is introduced into the systems is too high so that thinner films would wrinkle and be destroyed.
The films made by CPF are sputtered with ITO (Indium TinOxide) which doesn´t allow for very high resistances. 5MOhm/sqr beeing the maximum for OCM-type, 3MOhm/sqr for the standard OCKM. Even though these films are produced for a mass market (TFT-displays) the CPF-films are terribly expensive. Furthermore to my knowledge ITO has not proven to be long time stable under ESL-conditions. The same is rumoured for Ti- and Gold-based techniques. Looks as if metallic-based coatings are not the path to endor.
So if anyone uses less than 12µm thick films there will be other coatings, like acrylics, polymeres, etc. doped with some antistatic like carbon black, etc.
jauu
Calvin
as Jonas said the sputtered films are available in no less than 12µm in thickness, simply because the transporting mechanisms in the vacuum chambers cannot transport thinner films and the heat that is introduced into the systems is too high so that thinner films would wrinkle and be destroyed.
The films made by CPF are sputtered with ITO (Indium TinOxide) which doesn´t allow for very high resistances. 5MOhm/sqr beeing the maximum for OCM-type, 3MOhm/sqr for the standard OCKM. Even though these films are produced for a mass market (TFT-displays) the CPF-films are terribly expensive. Furthermore to my knowledge ITO has not proven to be long time stable under ESL-conditions. The same is rumoured for Ti- and Gold-based techniques. Looks as if metallic-based coatings are not the path to endor.
So if anyone uses less than 12µm thick films there will be other coatings, like acrylics, polymeres, etc. doped with some antistatic like carbon black, etc.
jauu
Calvin
Hi Calvinl,
Audiostatic used different coatings during time. Some of them even a bit green coloured suggesting gold.
Within the ES models the film was less than 12 micron. I can easily measure the weight of the film, unfortunately I do not posess a piece of the original film anymore. That would be the most accurate way.
The resistance of ES-film is very high indeed, exceeding the range of my equipment. Yet there was no sign of any fluid applied on.
At last, aluminium metalized film of 6 micron has been sold a lot in the beginning of the dutch ESL club. These films are also used in making capacitors. Obviously it is possible to do these things with 6 micron.
Audiostatic used different coatings during time. Some of them even a bit green coloured suggesting gold.
Within the ES models the film was less than 12 micron. I can easily measure the weight of the film, unfortunately I do not posess a piece of the original film anymore. That would be the most accurate way.
The resistance of ES-film is very high indeed, exceeding the range of my equipment. Yet there was no sign of any fluid applied on.
At last, aluminium metalized film of 6 micron has been sold a lot in the beginning of the dutch ESL club. These films are also used in making capacitors. Obviously it is possible to do these things with 6 micron.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/solarsail.htm/printable
For the nonbelievers, 5 micron metalized Mylar
For the nonbelievers, 5 micron metalized Mylar
Hi,
are we talking about high resistance coatings? Aluminium is not!
The only high-resistance coating on films thinner than 6µm I know of is Germanium. But tis is used very seldom and only for space-usage as it is horribly costly. The problem with sputtering (PVD and similar procedures) is that a lot of heat is generated in this process and that the substrates should be able to withstand ~250°C. Even so, the sticking forces of the coating to the substrate are not the best. This can be optimized be plasma treatment of the film before.
Ion bombardement which would build a resistive layer without additional material buildup (it kind of modifys the molekular structure of the film itself) introduces very much heat, wrinkles the film and reaches values of probabely no lower than 10^16 Ohm/sqr.
Anyway chemistry has found very promising alternatives
The greenish color could be Ormecon, a "organic metal in a acrylic binder". It´s reported that it´s not very suited for ESL-usage.
jauu
Calvin
are we talking about high resistance coatings? Aluminium is not!
The only high-resistance coating on films thinner than 6µm I know of is Germanium. But tis is used very seldom and only for space-usage as it is horribly costly. The problem with sputtering (PVD and similar procedures) is that a lot of heat is generated in this process and that the substrates should be able to withstand ~250°C. Even so, the sticking forces of the coating to the substrate are not the best. This can be optimized be plasma treatment of the film before.
Ion bombardement which would build a resistive layer without additional material buildup (it kind of modifys the molekular structure of the film itself) introduces very much heat, wrinkles the film and reaches values of probabely no lower than 10^16 Ohm/sqr.
Anyway chemistry has found very promising alternatives
The greenish color could be Ormecon, a "organic metal in a acrylic binder". It´s reported that it´s not very suited for ESL-usage.
jauu
Calvin
Schematic
Dear MJ,
Here we go again.
Take it from me, Audiofanatic the schematic is correct but it looks like it is connected parallel but it is not, it is just a way of showing you that the bass panel is on the left and right side of the high section or full freq. wires.
So you're right if you say that the schematic is not like it is on the ES-series but it is electrically right !
About the 12 micron foil, I mean film, this is again RIGHT! I've seen and replaced 12 micron foil, again film from ES-100's. Sorry again MJ.
The coating Audiostatic uses is not a poly whatever, it is not like the coating on the Martin Logan's or the new Quad's it's like a plastic that is glued on the mylar and you're not able to take it of with alcohol or Thinner. I think it's like the old Quad coating (ESL-55/57).
Last thing!
The best way to modify this speaker is to replace the film with 4 micron and use graphite coating! It's not clear but sound's great!
Just my 2 cents.
Cheers,
Audiofanatic
Edit: The schematic is wrong but not in the connection of the wires but on the HV section! In all Audiostatic ES series the diodes are not single but two in series and the first Cap's (2 of them) are paralleled.
Dear MJ,
Here we go again.
Take it from me, Audiofanatic
the schematic is correct but it looks like it is connected parallel but it is not, it is just a way of showing you that the bass panel is on the left and right side of the high section or full freq. wires.So you're right if you say that the schematic is not like it is on the ES-series but it is electrically right !
About the 12 micron foil, I mean film
, this is again RIGHT! I've seen and replaced 12 micron foil, again film from ES-100's. Sorry again MJ.The coating Audiostatic uses is not a poly whatever, it is not like the coating on the Martin Logan's or the new Quad's it's like a plastic that is glued on the mylar and you're not able to take it of with alcohol or Thinner. I think it's like the old Quad coating (ESL-55/57).
Last thing!
The best way to modify this speaker is to replace the film with 4 micron and use graphite coating! It's not clear but sound's great!
Just my 2 cents.
Cheers,
Audiofanatic
Edit: The schematic is wrong but not in the connection of the wires but on the HV section! In all Audiostatic ES series the diodes are not single but two in series and the first Cap's (2 of them) are paralleled.
Hi,
What the.....
Look to the schematic, it shows two wires connected to each side of the resistor! It is not there in reality. I know you've got some es-panels under your nose. Just take a look at the resistor and follow the wire. When time permits I will take a picture of the electronics to end the discussion!!!! A picture already has bee presented here, but it is not that clear (while some might seen my point already)
The 12 micron is not as is documented by E. Fikier!
Do you have a piece of original film left?
I can measure it without problem.
You are right about 4 micron sounding better
What the.....
Look to the schematic, it shows two wires connected to each side of the resistor! It is not there in reality. I know you've got some es-panels under your nose. Just take a look at the resistor and follow the wire. When time permits I will take a picture of the electronics to end the discussion!!!! A picture already has bee presented here, but it is not that clear (while some might seen my point already)
The 12 micron is not as is documented by E. Fikier!
Do you have a piece of original film left?
I can measure it without problem.
You are right about 4 micron sounding better
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.