Effects Of Power Cords On Electrostatic Speakers

@terry9  Humm...Listen before I buy? I was going to order the speakers online from overseas-- they are clones of the BG NEO10 & NEO8s--and so I've been relying on others' recommendations. When you said "every time I slide into cones, I have to replace them" - "them" is referring to the cones you regretfully acquired? And the isobaric subs: I don't know that I've ever communicated with someone with those: worth the double cabinets and double drivers? If so, why? what is really accomplished? (While in the process of ordering subs and designing cabinets, I want to consider every worthy alternative to get the best I can.) 

I used "audiophile" power cables on my Crosby Quad 63s. Once my ’57s were restored I used good quality standard power cables (part of the restoration by Electrostatic Solutions was converting the connectors to more standard types).

They sound fine, actually better than ever. I bought them in 74, they were made in ’73 and were my reference until around 1990. Now, they run in a second system, largely period, and great fun. Kind of how far we haven't come in almost 65 years.

@hsbrock Yes, I always replace the cones. An isobaric sub usually has a driver installed in the usual way in a cabinet of optimal size, plus a driver facing the other direction, the two drivers forming a clam-shell, and wired out of phase. The result is one cone compressing air inside the box, and the other cone driving air in the room, so that distortion is dramatically reduced.

Thinking of it another way, there are two motors to move the same amount of air.

I like drivers from Scanspeak. Their best are very clean and fast, and the isobaric configuration makes them faster. Also, you get another few Hz at the bottom end.

Another great thing about DIY - you don't have to use cheap amps with all their shortcomings. I began with cheap amps, but wasn't satisfied until I hooked up a Bryston 4B SST that I had lying around - BIG difference.

To keep this in perspective, most of my bass adjustment comes from Magnepan DWM panels, also Bryston powered. It's only a few notes every 20 records that need the sub, so it's not really worth the money unless you've got a lot invested, or you listen to a lot of organ music. IMO

Thank you @terry9 .  I will take a look at Scanspeak, Bryston & Magnepan. And I do listen to a fair amount of organ music, and I don't know of anything else that produces such sustained below 50Hz-low notes that can be so tough on subs, so maybe you've just put me onto something I need to be considering barely in time for me to make my purchase decisions, as I was about to place orders. 

Glad to help, @hsbrock . I run 4 large modern Quads (modified) as main speakers, but find that my room needs a bass assist. The Magnepan DWM panels are just the ticket - magnets on both sides of the diaphragm provide a push-pull configuration for low distortion and FAST response.

I asked Bryston for advice for driving DWM's, and they immediately recommended the 20 year old SST design for bass augmentation. He opined that the latest designs were better, but I would hear little difference in my application. I LIKE the combination of Magnepan and Bryston - it's in my HT too.

@hsbrock

Yes you want to listen to the speaker before buying, even if it means getting on a plane. If you love the sound, take careful not of what is feeding them.

Different speaker designs… particularly categories have strengths and weaknesses. We as enthusiasts have values and a history of listening to music and systems.

When you get in to the high end there are certain things that attract you. Typically details and slam… then you learn about sound stage and transparency, then imaging and microdetails and finally rhythm and pace. It is really easy to go around chasing the next thing you have learned about and loose site of the music.

It becomes an analitical activity to get a little better detail, or imaging… etc. planar do some amazing stuff. But they are a huge amount of work getting around their shortcomings and requirements. For instance most planar need optimization to tolerances of 1/8 “ in all three dimensions. But there is no formula… this can take months or even longer of moving them around. The support electronics must exactly be optimized for the job. Very high quality because planar are revealing, massive power, very nature The source must be really natural sounding. Room require to can be very critical.

For me, after decades of upgrades with planar. I got season tickets to the symphony. Which I have had now for ten years. I quickly realized that my fantastic system did an outstanding job of reproducing the venue and mastering qualities. But after 45 minutes of listening to my system i got bored. I was fascinated by its technical prownes and not by being pulled into the music. This is when I turned away and started to look for a really musical system.

I upgraded virtually everything. Moved to dynamic speakers (there is more than one reason most all speaks are dynamic, one is, in general they can be made to get more of the total picture correct). Changed all of my electronics… I no longer put lots of money into massive power but to highly musical. My system now sounds like my trips to the symphony. I listen three hours a day and have to drag myself away from it. Long journey. Happy to talk more about it.

I consider power cables to be filters, and all that wayward power from the utilities to be needing correction. It's not complicated in that regard.

@ghdprentice @terry9 I have spent my time studying the websites of Magnepan DWM and Bryston, watching videos, learning all I can. Then I just encountered the recent comments above. Living in a small city there is not a single audio store that carries any speakers with Planars, yet I am still convinced by the words that they are the way to go, simply by my reading of the technology and its rationale and the accompanying testimonials by those I respect. The biggest challenge is that I’ve got woofers with sensitivity of 97-100dB, the planars are 92-94, and for over 55 years I’ve liked it when the point source disappears, thus I’ve considered open baffle, and to increase the efficiency of the planars I’ve looked for open back AMT Planars, and I’ve thought about using them dipole with Bi-Horns front and back, positioning them away from the wall, etc. I’ve figured that even 30Wrms would do for the Planars because, if I can gain 10dB with the horns, that would give me a max. SPL beyond any volume I listen to. The most difficult music I like is choral with organ and/or symphony accompaniment, e.g., the Tabernacle Choir, as well as other classical, but I’d like to build matching systems for our children as well, and at least one of them plays bass guitar and I suppose our grandchildren may like rock and other (all 7 are married, and about 24 grandchildren), which puts limits on the budget. I am leaning towards active speakers and using a tube pre-amp where all the controls are. My wife of 46 years likes the Eagles and the more mellow folk-rock, while I am more of a Beatles & Stones guy, but I don’t get into that as much anymore. So yes, the musicality is what I am anxious about, because I like to just sit and listen and zone out for hours, or even do my reading with the background music playing, enjoying the peacefulness, and so the transparency and brilliance are important, and for me that means precise transients and clarity, while also having speakers than can handle the sustained bass of the organ, which also require cone control (I’ve got my eyes on some 15" woofers with high BL and considering Isobaric to increase the transient-cone control). The most creative/challenging part of the above will be designing-building the Bi-Horns for the Planars (for which I’ll use a cabinet design app and laser/CNC for the work). So, I am all ears to any and all knowledge you of much more experience can give me, especially the steps in your evolution in your journey from power prowess to musicality, and anything to understand about planars and adapting them to horns. (For design work I’ll be using REW and WinISP.) Hopefully these might be legacy systems, heirlooms to pass down to grandchildren.

@ghdprentice is always worth reading. I have never heard a really good cone system, but I’m sure that his is worth every dime and that I would love it.

By all means, get on a plane and hang out in a high end store for a couple of days. That’s where I heard my first planars, Magnepan Tympani 1a’s, back in ’73. Never went back to cones for very long - longest was a hybrid, but the marriage of the cone and ESL drivers was closer to a discord after a while - to my ears. At that time.

But - I’m really wedded to my ESL’s and Class A monoblocks (dissipate 110W, deliver about 30W). The great thing about solid state is that you can design amps which cannot overdrive the speakers - so you don’t need protection circuits or other devices, which always degrade the sound. Magnepans with Brystons round out the system, which my room needs

If you have the itch to improve, you can upgrade the crossovers. Not hard and definitely worth the money.

The new Grado Epoch cartridge gets me closer to live music, but my ears tell me that there’s still a way to go.

@terry9 

thank you for your kind words

I think this is why auditioning is really important.
 

There are many spectacular sounding planar systems out there.

I remember listening to a set of ESS AMT 1D’s and having tears come to my eyes. But in my current system, they would be intolerable. Their lack of coherence across the audio spectrum was far too great, as well as many other shortcomings. So a lot of the stuff has to do with where are in your journey. Auditioning is really important.

Different audiophiles have different end points.

@ghdprentice Ah, coherence. Yes, that's the big one. After smoothness, though, IMO. The Quad 2905's do both well.

*munching popcorn, too lazy to go score some beer...wipes hands...*

@ghdprentice :

Different audiophiles have different end points.

Yeah, and that’s more/less the line in the sand.... ;)

Isn’t it....

I’ve 4 ESS ’large’ amts’ that, given their coherence flaws & other shortcomings I prefer over cones & domes....

I used to own a pair of 1Bs', as flawed as they may have been...

I don't own a lava lamp; never have, either...watching wax in oil warmed by a lamp has limited appeal...unless one is very....🙄....'thrashed'...

(I do have one of these...

...although mine is elongated....like a big blue sperm...*L*)

I don't 'engage' it while listening, nor have I changed the ac cord on it, to make it 'more intense', or 'mellow'....   It just is what it is, and enjoyed as such...😏

@terry9 @ghdprentice Now you’ve both got me with more systems to check out and understand. (I spent last evening until now checking out systems & You Tube videos discussing these systems.) I can see why I’ll need to make a trip to listen to the Planars, which I’ll probably have to do at the end of the month. Now "coherence"? What do you mean by the term? Seamless integration with the various drivers across the audio spectrum? relative dispersion of the drivers? or does it refer to traits within a driver itself? And also, I’m still researching what specs I might look at to identify the dynamic range of a driver.

Any experience attaching horns to a planar? Or are there any systems out there that do so (besides Joseph Crowe’s)? Any suggestions on things to keep in mind were I to go down the path of putting a horn onto a Planar? I don’t know if I can afford a Planar that would cover all bass, so I’ve been focusing on a tight, high BL driver that would carry it up to, say, 160-320Hz, with the Planars taking over from there and up, so one concern I have (naturally) is how they might blend together for tonality purposes around the crossover point. 

Very good points.

By 'coherence' I mean that all frequencies have the same character, which is hard to get when treble comes from a beryllium tweeter and bass comes from a paper cone, but easy to get when they all come from the same membrane. To get that in the HT I went to 6 MMW's, 2 DWM's, and 1 Quad 2905 (centre), with Bryston amps. These Magnepans are all based on the older planar-magnetic technology rather than the quasi-ribbons or ribbons, which may have been a mistake - but I knew that I loved that sound, and in the HT it's a wonderful, engaging, immersive, coherent sound.

Magnepan DWM goes down to a usable 37Hz in my room, so the big 20.7 or 30.7 should do that too - recall that they use the same bass technology as the DWM. I haven't heard the 20.7 or 30.7, so check that the ribbons integrate well with the planar-magnetic panels.

And of course, your room is its own study, so YMMV with the bass response. It's an ongoing journey, but you're starting at a very good place.

I would crossover to cones at a lower frequency. Actually, I cross over at 50 Hz with an 18Db / octave electronic crossover, so the cones are silent for anything north of 100 Hz.

The DWM’s don’t cost much and you can plant a swarm of them around your chair. I just needed two in the HT and two in the 2-channel room. Most of the bass came from them rather than the isobaric sub when I played "Power and Glory", which was recorded direct to disk in the stone cathedral in LA, from M&K records.

I've often wondered how horns would work - an excellent question. Do tell me when you find out.

I found that the most important thing is shielding on the power cables for electrostats. A minimum 14-gauge cable, though.

Galen Gareis presented the following talk at the Masterclass Sessions at the AXPONA show, titled "The Uncommonly Understood Nature of Common Cable Characteristics."

Technical Papers: Iconoclast Cable

Video posted on this page.

As an engineer for 4+ decades, I found this fascinating. Especially since most of my EE peers did not have the knowledge of cable design. This should be a must see in entirety for all the cable naysayers.

Anyways, he does make a few comments toward the end about why E-stats can run better with a different cable than most box speakers being fed by standard amplifier.

Hope this helps.

@bugredmachine Good point! ESL's need low capacitance / high inductance cable, whereas magnetic speakers need the opposite. Otherwise is gone the HF !

Easy to get low capacitance / high inductance cables: just run two separate wires an inch apart. Save the bucks for better transducers.

@hsbrock

Yes, seamless integration across the audio spectrum. The character of the ribbons or ATM is completely different from a dynamic woofer. One of the reasons big Maggie’s are attractive (with massive power amps). You get the same character of sound across the audio spectrum. I never could hear the difference in character of the drivers on my ESS AMT 1D’s, until I could. Then I happily moved on.. and up… typically most of us increase our investment over time… and each level up has less overall weaknesses and more strengths (provided you choose wisely).

So many aspects of audio are unimportant until you hear them… then you just cannot un-hear them.

Roger Sanders makes two different speaker cables: one specifically for ESL's, the other for planar-magnetics.

Hi, John. Good to see you here!

After we spoke and I got to running the numbers on electrostatic speakers. Most ’Stats run voltages in the 350V - 450V at 12ma - 25ma. Current requirements are steady state and the speaker power supply does little in the context of dynamics. The only "real" advantages to using aftermarket power cables is in the context of noise reduction.

I do have an idea on this. We’ll talk...

"So many aspects of audio are unimportant until you hear them… then you just cannot un-hear them."

Audiogon quote of the week.

Thank you to @ghdprentice @terry9 @steakster for your insights and time helping me to better grasp where to go from here. My wife is afraid that I have heard so many things that our budget will never un-hear them.    ;-)

@piaudiol I've never had ESL's running less than a KV. Which ones were you thinking of?

Jeez...  this is what happens with an old brain, late hours, no glasses and a stiff brandy:

It should have read - "voltages in the 1350V - 4500V @ .12ma - 2.5ma."