Electrostatic speakers?

[Justdafactsmaam]

They have a box for a magnetically driven woofer.
They have a crossover to control the signal between panel and woofer.
They have small panels.

It's marketing hype trying to sell the magic of panels in a small form factor to the 'audiophile' market.

They are not selling magic anything. Do have any objective data to support any position that these speakers are inadequate as audiophile speakers? Particularly as audiophile speakers for audiophiles who are interested in electrostatic speakers but have relatively small or limited spaces?

 

[NTK]

Don't know if this is considered good enough to be called an electrostatic speaker when the electrostatic panel only covers the top ~3.5 octaves (out of the audible 10).

 

[Blumlein 88]

Are you folks aware that Acoustat and Soundlabs have parallel step up transformers? A 200:1 for lower frequencies and 50:1 for higher frequencies. There are filters around a few hundred hertz to separate the input to the step up transformers. The outputs are then blended together on the panel itself.

Of course the ESL-57 had a woofer/mid and separate tweeter panel.

 

[Newman]

Don't know if this is considered good enough to be called an electrostatic speaker when the electrostatic panel only covers the top ~3.5 octaves (out of the audible 10).

View attachment 365875

Yeah, that’s just an electrostatic tweeter.

I also commented just a couple of weeks ago on its use of backfill behind an ES panel.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Don't know if this is considered good enough to be called an electrostatic speaker when the electrostatic panel only covers the top ~3.5 octaves (out of the audible 10).

View attachment 365875

That’s not the electrostatic panel

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Yeah, that’s just an electrostatic tweeter.

I also commented just a couple of weeks ago on its use of backfill behind an ES panel.

No, that’s an additional side firing dome tweeter for people who want side wall reflections. It can be turned on and off

 

[Newman]

My mistake, I thought NTK was talking about the ES panel being 3.5 octaves.

My second sentence holds, though, about ES panels being unsuited to mounting in a box.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

My mistake, I thought NTK was talking about the ES panel being 3.5 octaves.

My second sentence holds, though, about ES panels being unsuited to mounting in a box.

How are they uniquely unsuited to a box enclosure? Is there any data to support the assertion?

 

[Newman]

Are you writing that after reading my linked comment?

 

[misterdog]

They are not selling magic anything. Do have any objective data to support any position that these speakers are inadequate as audiophile speakers? Particularly as audiophile speakers for audiophiles who are interested in electrostatic speakers but have relatively small or limited spaces?

Peter Walker was a genius not a fool.
His white papers on the design are available still from the 1950's Wireless World magazine.

If he could have 'got away' with building a speaker with one panel he would not have produced the 63 with four panels and the 989 with six panels.
Do you think he didn't try smaller first ?

That's how panel speakers work, very low but fast output over a large surface area.

So to reduce this to the size of a shoe box and push it up against a wall - must be magic.

Few people wish for loudspeakers the size of a door including me, that is why I bought the Martin Logan Electromotion which also claimed magical things, turned out the magic was just a marketing trick.

 

[Duke]

No, that’s an additional side firing dome tweeter for people who want side wall reflections. It can be turned on and off

My understanding is that one of the roles the side-firing tweeter plays, and maybe even the primary role it plays, is correcting the spectral balance of the in-room reflection field. (I'm sure it has some effect on spatial quality as well.)

The flat electrostatic panels will beam, resulting in significantly less high-frequency energy in the reflection field than in the direct sound. To correct or at least reduce the spectral discrepancy between the two, the side-firing tweeter's power response is tipped up, such that it "zigs" where the panel's off-axis response "zags".

I used to do something similar when I was running Quad 57s. Ime it works and works well. Whether or not it would "measure" well, I don't know.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Peter Walker was a genius not a fool.

Argument from authority. Zero objective data

His white papers on the design are available still from the 1950's Wireless World magazine.

That’s nice. Can you cite actual data from those papers?

If he could have 'got away' with building a speaker with one panel he would not have produced the 63 with four panels and the 989 with six panels.
Do you think he didn't try smaller first ?

I am not going to speculate on one person’s efforts at designing a speaker back in the 50s

Do you have any objective data to support the assertion? If you do can you please cite it?

That's how panel speakers work, very low but fast output over a large surface area.

So to reduce this to the size of a shoe box and push it up against a wall - must be magic.

Do you have any data? Perhaps measurements of the JansZen speakers in question? Have you auditioned them? This is supposed to be a science based audio forum. What are the alleged objective problems with the JansZen speakers and where is the objective data to support them?

 

[Blumlein 88]

I am not going to speculate on one person’s efforts at designing a speaker back in the 50s

It was called the ESL 63 because that is when he had the idea of how to build it. They were first sold I think in 1981.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

My understanding is that one of the roles the side-firing tweeter plays, and maybe even the primary role it plays, is correcting the spectral balance of the in-room reflection field. (I'm sure it has some effect on spatial quality as well.)

The flat electrostatic panels will beam, resulting in significantly less high-frequency energy in the reflection field than in the direct sound. To correct or at least reduce the spectral discrepancy between the two, the side-firing tweeter's power response is tipped up, such that it "zigs" where the panel's off-axis response "zags".

I used to do something similar when I was running Quad 57s. Ime it works and works well. Whether or not it would "measure" well, I don't know.

Here is the actual reason given on their website

“The airLayer comprises high grade, silk dome (Carmelita) or silk ring-dome (Valentina) tweeters mounted to the outboard side of each speaker. Their sound strikes and reflects from each speaker's near side wall and diffuses about the room.This was initially an option, but everyone ordered the speakers with it, so it was made standard.
Their levels can be adjusted from silent to overly loud by turning a dial on the back of the speaker. This adjustability lets you get the right effect in any room, regardless of wall distance, room reverberancy, or symmetry.
What effect is that? It actually produces two different effects at once, and serves two purposes: providing an extra layer of 'air' when seated, and treble compensation when up and walking around.”

I can tell you first hand that in person David Janszen said they were there for people who enjoy the added sense of spaciousness they provide.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Are you writing that after reading my linked comment?

Do you mean this one?

“@lewdish Another problem with the one in your photo is that electrostatics are pressure source devices, so will not act well when backfilled with acoustic resistance material.”

If so then yes. If not then no.

 

[Duke]

Here is the actual reason given on their website

"What effect is that? It actually produces two different effects at once, and serves two purposes: providing an extra layer of 'air' when seated, and treble compensation when up and walking around.”

Makes sense to me. Lack of "air" is arguably one way of describing a shortage of high frequency energy in the reflection field.

 

[AlfaHolic]

I’m a sucker for electrostatic speakers. I have full range dipoles (Quad 988s), hybrid dipoles (ML 13as), and hybrid non-dipoles (Janszen Valentinas). They all have their strengths and weaknesses. The Janszens are much more flexible when it comes to room placement, and are — by design — are highly directional. I rarely use the side-firing tweeters, but they are helpful for providing a sense of “space” and providing high frequency reinforcement for listeners who aren’t in the narrow sweet spot. (And to clarify, the crossover to the electrostatic panels is 500 hz).

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Makes sense to me. Lack of "air" is arguably one way of describing a shortage of high frequency energy in the reflection field.

If one wants added energy in the reflected field the JansZens do offer that option.

Personally I have no interest in hearing the listening room

 

[Duke]

If one wants added energy in the reflected field the JansZens do offer that option.

Personally I have no interest in hearing the listening room

Ime it is desirable to minimize the spectral discrepancy between the direct sound and the reflection field. I think that a significant discrepancy between the two can result in listening fatigue over time.

Many years ago I made a speaker with a side-mounted tweeter that fired at the near-side wall, and that is no longer where I would choose to locate a secondary tweeter. I no longer believe that increasing the amount of energy in the first ipsilateral reflections is desirable.

Ime correcting the spectral balance of the reflection field can actually result in hearing LESS of the listening room, IF done in a way that does not increase the early reflections. I can explain if you'd like.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Ime it is desirable to minimize the spectral discrepancy between the direct sound and the reflection field. I think that a significant discrepancy between the two can result in listening fatigue over time.

Many years ago I made a speaker with a side-mounted tweeter that fired at the near-side wall, and that is no longer where I would choose to locate a secondary tweeter. I no longer believe that increasing the amount of energy in the first ipsilateral reflections is desirable.

Ime correcting the spectral balance of the reflection field can actually result in hearing LESS of the listening room, IF done in a way that does not increase the early reflections. I can explain if you'd like.

Certainly if you have to hear the room you don’t want it to act as a passive equalizer.

I still think the better solution is to kill the room. That will result in hearing less of the room.