diyAudio

diyAudio (https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/index.php)
-   Planars & Exotics (https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/planars-and-exotics/)
-   -   Electrostats vs conventional drivers (https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/planars-and-exotics/17424-electrostats-vs-conventional-drivers.html)

Vikash 7th July 2003 08:00 PM

Electrostats vs conventional drivers
 
I was under the impression that conventional drive units were unable to produce transients comparable to that of electrostats, simply due to the inherent methods in which they produce sound. I never questioned it until someone in the forum wrote...

Quote:

...distortion is low and these babies are faster than electrostatics
...Steve was comparing them with his beloved Bandor units, and of course he has a respected opinion, which opened my mind to whether conventional drivers can really be as fast as Electrostats?

My assumption was that conventional drivers were just easier to work with for the diy hobbyist which is why they're the subject of 90%+ of posts.

Any input to clear this up would be great.

Vikash.

peranders 7th July 2003 08:12 PM

This is only talk. You must listen and make your mind up.

I have Martin Logan SL3 at home and they are very OK but they sound not very inspiring in larger rooms like exhibition halls. In theory the transisent ability is maybe better but in real life?

They are also not very good as party animals, too soft.

Tempted to build?
http://www.ele.tut.fi/~artoko/audio/...rs/hybrid.html

SY 7th July 2003 08:38 PM

Here's a question to ask yourself: if electrostatic drivers have intrinsically better risetime than dynamics, why did Dayton-Wright have to tack on a piezo tweeter to their 'stats? Why did the Quad/Decca need a Decca?

The rise time of a 'stat depends on the motor strength and moving mass, just like an electromagnetic driver.

MarcelvdG 7th July 2003 08:44 PM

Well-designed thin membrane electrostatic loudspeakers have an extremely neutral and predictable mid range response, much better than the typical dynamic loudspeaker. At mid-range frequencies, most of the electrostatic force effectively operates directly on the air. The membrane mass spoils the fun at high frequencies, the membrane stifness does the same at low frequencies.

I have no idea if this answers your question...

Stefano 7th July 2003 08:53 PM

I'm sorry to tell you that i've never listened to a elettrostatic loudspeaker, but i've readed some test with mesures and i've seen that they've got a lot of distortion

Vikash 7th July 2003 09:32 PM

interesting point SY, but maybe thats related to something other than transient response - perhaps there are issues with electrostats and high frequencies (i have no idea - just a possiblity).

I see the relationship with force strength and mass which derives the acceleration factor. It's the inherent characteristics of an ES panel (mass/force ratio) that results in the fast rise times presumeably.

It would be interesting is if someone could quantify this acceleration factor for some ESL, so that we could compare it to some midrange driver. Assuming of couse that this is the major variable in measuring transient response. I may be way off...

SY 7th July 2003 09:49 PM

Vikash: The ESL has the additional complication of mass loading from the air; yes, that happens with conventional drivers, but the panel types have a much larger area. The results you get will depend on the drivers you pick- what I was trying to say is that there isn't necessarily any inherent rise-time advantage to ESLs and other panel speakers. Most of the issues of acceleration factor are treated in Peter Walker's papers and patents, and are also reviewed in the Sanders ESL book.

To forestall the obvious question, I use both.

Vikash 7th July 2003 09:55 PM

Marcel, dynamic bass drivers are mixed with ES panels due to size constraints. i.e huge pannels would be required to produce low notes which is generally not feasible. Please correct me.

But on the other end of the frequency scale, the same doesn't apply I assume. Since the panels are smaller then, does this not maintain the same ratio to 'effectively operate directly on the air'? Or have i just completely left the density of air out of the equation... hmmm (I should really go to sleep)

Stefano, I'd like to read any online sources you have that show the distortion effects. This is something i wasn't aware of.

Thanks for the feedback guys...

Audiofanatic 7th July 2003 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Stefano
I'm sorry to tell you that i've never listened to a elettrostatic loudspeaker, but i've readed some test with mesures and i've seen that they've got a lot of distortion

DISTORTION???????????????????????????:bigeyes: :bigeyes:
Caused by the amp that's attached to it! ;)

I'v had a few ESL's my self Martin Logan CLS I, SL3, Sequel II and Audiostatic's ES-100, ES-200, ES-300 and at the moment DIY ESL FINAL 1700 CLONE.

And all of them had some kind of defect. I repair them all and know what i'm talking about.
There is only one tweeter that can equal an ESL, and that's the Raven Ribbon tweeter :)

The weakness of Martin Logan is in the 12 micron thick MYLAR and the coating. I'v replace the foil's with 4 micron and they sounded better than ever.

IMHO, there is nothing that sounds faster than an ESL!

All the best!

Audiofanatic ;)

7V 8th July 2003 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by peranders
I have Martin Logan SL3 at home and they are very OK but they sound not very inspiring in larger rooms like exhibition halls.
Well, I have to admit that my "faster than a speeding electrostatic" Nonsuch 4s wouldn't inspire in exhibition halls either. Nor, to be honest, would they be adequate for the Millenium Dome or even a lower division football stadium. That's hardly the point anyway. They were designed specifically for living rooms and listening rooms.

I love electrostatics and when I grew up in hi-fi I visited the friend who had the original Quad ELS57s most often. That was the sound that I carried in my head through the design process. My aim was to design a speaker with the qualities of an electrostatic but with more bass slam and more room (and spouse) friendly.

Objectively, testing the loudspeaker's impulse and waterfall responses are pretty good guides to 'speed' (and I promise to publish some graphs once I get the time to fix up my pc so that it can take the O/S that will run the sound-card that I can use with my software and calibrated mike, blah, blah ...) - but that's not really the point either. As P-A says:
Quote:

This is only talk. You must listen and make your mind up.
Here's the deal, Vikash. I notice that your posts are sporting the good old British flag and I suspect that you're not a million miles away. I'm hoping to set up a system at a friend's apartment in Putney. You'd be most welcome to come down and audition it. All you'd have to do is post a totally truthful account of your impressions on this forum. What do you think?

Steve


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:43 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 18.75%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2019 diyAudio

Wiki