Electrostatic speakers?

[Axo1989]

I have been hoping you would explain the first part of this statement ("electrostats are pressure source devices"), as well as why the second part ("so will not act well when backfilled with acoustic resistance material") follows from the first.

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you; I'm trying to understand your position.

I'm not sure what's implied either. For example, those loudspeakers aren't using electrostatics to move air, they are using them to move a membrane surface to move air. The wavefront and time domain behaviour is somewhat different from conventional dynamic drivers, but air will behave like air wrt behaviour in proximate acoustic material in either case. Maybe something else is being described?

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

I have been hoping you would explain the first part of this statement ("electrostats are pressure source devices"), as well as why the second part ("so will not act well when backfilled with acoustic resistance material") follows from the first.

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you; I'm trying to understand your position.

Part and parcel with what I have been asking about.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

I have led the horse to water. What you did next is noted.

Sad that someone with your username would be unable to recognise a fact when presented.

Sad, but not unexpected. When someone is all-too-willing to assert as fact that Toole did the research he did because he was motivated to sell Harman loudspeakers, then we know we are dealing with someone who sees facts as optional.

So the goal at HK was not to sell speakers? OK……..

By the way that is a gross misrepresentation of what I actually said.

 

[misterdog]

I will add that my personal experience matches that of the reviewers. IME virtually every multitrack studio recording is greatly enhanced by the wider, deeper, taller sound stage and the significantly greater sense of image proximity and recording venue acoustics with the BACCH cross talk cancelation DSP

Not so much with cable lifters. ;- )

Maybe just choose to use amps and DAC's where crosstalk is minimalised, rather than chose to use some software to 'Hopefully' correct a problem you have created.

Just a thought.

my personal experience

This is an objective forum where ' I think, and I assume' count for nothing, unless backed up with scientific fact - is it not ?

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Maybe just choose to use amps and DAC's where crosstalk is minimalised, rather than chose to use some software to 'Hopefully' correct a problem you have created.

Just a thought.

A thought borne from complete ignorance on the subject.

This is an objective forum where ' I think, and I assume' count for nothing, unless backed up with scientific fact - is it not ?

It is an objective forum where assertions of fact are expected to be supported by objective evidence but casual expressions of personal preferences and experiences are accepted as such with the understood levels of reliability that comes with personal opinions based on non controlled auditions

There is also some expectation of members doing reasonable due diligence to educate themselves when commenting on subjects or products. Your comments on the BACCH and crosstalk in general have only exposed your total ignorance on the subject and on the product.

I may as well be talking to a flat earther about astronomy or a creationist about biology

 

[misterdog]

Anyway I'm bowing out of this informed scientific debate, because I have a dream.

The kick bass drum, appears to me to be too large to carry about easily.

My vision is to create the sound of the kick bass drum,

But in the the size of a saucepan.

In the same way that some see that an ESL panel's , realism and low THD (not mentioned in the eventually supplied FACTS) 'might' be possible.

My neighbour two doors up is the vice chancellor of the local university, and I have him on board to 'create' some software that will convince people that my 'vision' is indeed the sound of a kick bass drum.

Each individual will be required to wear some in ear microphones and then AI will create a tailored EQ response.
Leading to the 'impression' that they are hearing the absolute epitomy of the original sound source.

Its all about the science and de facts.

 

[misterdog]

A thought borne from complete ignorance on the subject.

It is an objective forum where assertions of fact are expected to be supported by objective evidence but casual expressions of personal preferences and experiences are accepted as such with the understood levels of reliability that comes with personal opinions based on non controlled auditions

There is also some expectation of members doing reasonable due diligence to educate themselves when commenting on subjects or products. Your comments on the BACCH and crosstalk in general have only exposed your total ignorance on the subject and on the product.

I may as well be talking to a flat earther about astronomy or a creationist about biology

Or you could just be living on fantasy island.

 

[Duke]

Maybe just choose to use amps and DAC's where crosstalk is minimalised, rather than chose to use some software to 'Hopefully' correct a problem you have created.

This is a completely different issue from interaural crosstalk.

Interaural crosstalk is when your right ear hears the signal from the left speaker that was intended for the left ear, and vice-versa. This largely limits stereo to the space between the two speakers, with at least two exceptions: Strong early sidewall reflections can broaden the soundstage (and imo there are tradeoffs for doing this); and there are special processing techniques which can broaden the soundstage well beyond the locations of the loudspeakers. Q-Sound is one such techique, and is used in two albums that I'm aware of: Roger Waters' "Amused to Death" and Madonna's "Immaculate Collection". Q-Sound is also used in an instrumental bridge on the Yes song "Owner of a Lonely Heart". Q-Sound works by embedding a crosstalk cancelling signal in the recording.

A binaural recording played back through headphones would be an example of a playback chain that takes advantage of the absence of crosstalk. The improvement in spatial realism goes well beyond expanding the soundstage width. If you click on the link and listen for a couple of minutes through headphones with eyes closed, I think you will notice a much more realistic spatial quality than is normally possible through headphones. My understanding is that a binaural recording played back through headphones is comparable to what the BACCH system does with most normal recordings over speakers (I say "most" because I don't know what types of recordings would be unsuitable for playback through a BACCH system).

This is an objective forum where ' I think, and I assume' count for nothing, unless backed up with scientific fact - is it not ?

If there is to be progress, boxes must be thought outside of. While we are all free to discount one another's "thinking", I would hope that "thinking" itself is not automatically assumed to "count for nothing". I would hope that thoughts expressed be evaluted on their merits, and not solely by whether or not they are repetitions of currently accepted "scientific fact".

 

[misterdog]

Heirloom quality materials and finishes

• Strong, accurate bass, not boomy club bass
• Tight, palpable impact and slam
• Properly damped, unlike see-through electrostatics, for most accurate transients

These are the 'Objective' quotes from your eventually posted scientific facts from the loudspeakers you claim 'might work'

With no mention of the distortion from the attached 2 woofers and side firing tweeter.
Or the effect of the second crossover which turns off half of the Electrostatic panel.

• Secondary partial crossoveron electrostatics
  • Resistor-only 1st order passive at 5 kHz

• Crossover: 2nd order @ 500 Hz
  • Far below the disturbance-sensitive hearing region of 1 kHz - 3 kHz

So the secondary crossover is far above the 'disturbance-sensitive hearing region of 1 kHz - 3 kHz' - what a load of marketing .................................................................

 

[misterdog]

If there is to be progress, boxes must be thought outside of.

'Progress' is an interesting philosophical concept.

My analogue replay system cost 30 times that of my digital replay system, it incorporates the RIAA system which I could choose to alter by changing a few resistors and capacitors, to suit 'my personal preference'.

I choose to listen to the originally recorded material, mastered in reference to that defined RIAA.

In the same way I listen to Red Book Audio without the 'advantages' of digital manipulation.

Others opinions may vary- which I respect.


To a degree.

 

[Duke]

So the secondary crossover is far above the 'disturbance-sensitive hearing region of 1 kHz - 3 kHz' - what a load of marketing .................................................................

Imo it makes a lot of sense to keep crossovers out of the region where the ear is most sensitive to the kinds of issues crossovers often present. And the 5 kHz "secondary crossover" is not only slightly above this region (which imo extends up to 4 kHz but that's just a difference of opinion), but also in this case is an extremely benign type of crossover. If I understand correctly, it's not even a "crossover" - it's merely filtering applied to gently roll off the top end of one of the two electrostatic panels.

You may not realize it, but this statement: "what a load of marketing .................................................................", is a logical fallacy known as "appeal to ridicule". It is not a substantive argument. I'm not even sure what you are objecting to, much less your line of reasoning that leads to your objection.

Others opinions may vary- which I respect.


To a degree.

In my opinion, ^^this^^ is progress!

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

These are the 'Objective' quotes from your eventually posted scientific facts from the loudspeakers you claim 'might work'

No. *THIS* is the objective data you continue to ignore and deny is there

• Frequency response, on axis, ±3 dB
  • 30 Hz - 20 kHz in medium to large rooms
  • 20 Hz - 20 kHz in small rooms
• Maximum continuous SPL from pair at sweet spot
  • 112 dB in small room at 8’ distance [2.5m]
  • 108 dB in medium to large room at 13' [4m]
  • Peak transient SPL at least 6 dB higher

Why? Why do you ignore this data and continue to falsely claim there is none?

And if you need more there is this
https://3d3a.princeton.edu/janszen-loudspeaker-za21

 

[Newman]

No. *THIS* is the objective data you continue to ignore and deny is there

• Frequency response, on axis, ±3 dB
  • 30 Hz - 20 kHz in medium to large rooms
  • 20 Hz - 20 kHz in small rooms
• Maximum continuous SPL from pair at sweet spot
  • 112 dB in small room at 8’ distance [2.5m]
  • 108 dB in medium to large room at 13' [4m]
  • Peak transient SPL at least 6 dB higher

Why? Why do you ignore this data and continue to falsely claim there is none?

And if you need more there is this
https://3d3a.princeton.edu/janszen-loudspeaker-za21

Mate. If you think that is data, then Amir can pack up his instruments and we can all go home. All we have to do is read the spec sheets and, like you do, call it “objective data”.

Seriously.

And if you are naive enough to believe a spec of FR within +-3 dB from 30 Hz through the bass region, then you have a bit to learn about ‘manufacturer’s licence’. Backed up by an actual measurement plot that is, shall we say, ‘cherry picked’. That company should issue a warning, Don’t Try This At Home.

Maybe that’s why you thought the Choueri infomercial you linked was a sufficient response to a request for Science.

It’s all starting to add up.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Mate. If you think that is data, then Amir can pack up his instruments and we can all go home. All we have to do is read the spec sheets and, like you do, call it “objective data”.

Seriously.

And if you are naive enough to believe a spec of FR within +-3 dB from 30 Hz through the bass region, then you have a bit to learn about ‘manufacturer’s licence’. Backed up by an actual measurement plot that is, shall we say, ‘cherry picked’. That company should issue a warning, Don’t Try This At Home.

Maybe that’s why you thought the Choueri infomercial you linked was a sufficient response to a request for Science.

It’s all starting to add up.

So what about the Stereophile measurements of the Janszen speakers? Is something more than nothing?

 

[ampguy]

I have a pair of Quad ESL, the original electrostatic loudspeaker. These are late editions from the end of their production run. To me, I have found nothing that has compared within reason. They are still in original condition and work fine. A couple of years ago I gave them a thorough cleaning and was advised that if they continue to work, no other things need to be done. I dread the day when they stop working. I have put a lot of hours on them this past year with the lock down and worry that I will miss them when it comes time to move back to the city.

They truly are remarkable and hard to believe they were developed in the 50’s.

I've also had a pair or two of these, driven by tube mono blocks. Mine were rebuilt by a guy named Sheldon in AZ.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Maybe that’s why you thought the Choueri infomercial you linked was a sufficient response to a request for Science.

It’s all starting to add up.

It’s sad that you would disparage real science for the sake of your religious devotion to Toole. But it’s your loss. If you dig 1990s technology enjoy. Do you have a vintage Donkey Kong console to go with your stereo?

 

[misterdog]

So this additional tweeter, with yet another crossover (so three in total).

• airLayer feature
  • High grade, silk ring-dome tweeter mounted on outboard side of each speaker
  • Adjustable level from off to overly loud
  • Its sound is reflected from each near side wall
  • 2nd order crossover at 2 kHz
  • When adjusted to be just slightly on, enhances the sense of spaciousness
  • When adjusted to higher volume, provides extra treble for informal, off-axis listening

None of the provided data states whether the tweeter was on, low or high when the measurements were taken.

The crossover is right in the middle of the zone previously stated to be the disturbance-sensitive hearing region of 1 kHz - 3 kHz.

• Crossover: 2nd order @ 500 Hz
  • Far below the disturbance-sensitive hearing region of 1 kHz - 3 kHz
  • Entire midrange and treble carried by the electrostatic elements -

Except of course when the tweeter is on....

 

[NTK]

Mate. If you think that is data, then Amir can pack up his instruments and we can all go home. All we have to do is read the spec sheets and, like you do, call it “objective data”.

Seriously.

And if you are naive enough to believe a spec of FR within +-3 dB from 30 Hz through the bass region, then you have a bit to learn about ‘manufacturer’s licence’. Backed up by an actual measurement plot that is, shall we say, ‘cherry picked’. That company should issue a warning, Don’t Try This At Home.

Maybe that’s why you thought the Choueri infomercial you linked was a sufficient response to a request for Science.

It’s all starting to add up.

To be fair to Choueiri and his group, the Princeton measurement wasn't exactly +/- 3 dB (and due to the limitations of his anechoic chamber, the FR curves start at 300 Hz), see on the axis response curve (more like +/- 10 dB) .

 

[STC]

A binaural recording played back through headphones would be an example of a playback chain that takes advantage of the absence of crosstalk.

All stereo recordings takes advantage of the absence of crosstalk with headphones but at the expense of missing pinna frequency shaping. Binaural with headphones is without XT and pinna frequency shaping although it’s not yours.

 

[dlaloum]

All stereo recordings takes advantage of the absence of crosstalk with headphones but at the expense of missing pinna frequency shaping. Binaural with headphones is without XT and pinna frequency shaping although it’s not yours.

Which is where components or software which applies proper HRTF (head related transfer function... ie: providing compensation for the shape of head and ear) - can result in superb "speaker like" reproduction of stereo, without needing binaural recording methods.