Speed kills....
Never heard them, but you may want to try: http://www.eminent-tech.com/LFT8.html Also, you may want to try other "planar" type such as Martin-Logan, Magneplanar, etc. This may be your cup of tea. Of course, YMMV. Good Luck! |
When trying to replicate Stax headphone SQ on speakers, don't forget to pay attention to the amp and power circuits. I liked Duke's linking of perceived speed to upper frequency behavior. I've found improved transient attack to be the biggest benefit to having larger amps and better power cords/conditioners/multiple dedicated circuits. Add to that some treble clarity, and you also get air which is a trait I highly covet. I don't think I've heard horns match hard domes in that area, and definitely not electrostats. Larger speaker cabinets also move less and provide a better launch for the wavefront. YMMV and good luck! |
Yes Erik, absolutely. ESL’s are almost often implemented as dipoles (sound launched forward and rearward), but not always as line sources. None of the Quads are line sources, but all are dipoles (though the rear of the 57 comes covered in felt---the center tweeter---and burlap---the entire back of the speaker). And of course a line source can also be made with multiple cones or domes, and as either a direct radiator loudspeaker or a dipole. |
I was just thinking, if we want to talk about the benefits of the ESL as a driver, maybe we shouldn't compare them to box speakers, but dipoles and line sources instead. That is a much more fair comparison of the ESL's quality than in a conventional box. You get very similar dispersion patterns (but not the vertical narrow control) |
I was a little too absolute: the perception of speed comes from the dispersion alone. I should have said "mostly" from the controlled dispersion pattern. And honestly, overall, ESL's are some of the most room friendly speakers on earth. Pairing them with a sub is where this all goes bad. Subs need treatment, EQ and good placement. |
@inna wrote: "I don't like in your face sound of horns but I understand that's not the case." There are a LOT of things I don't like about many horns! In-your-face sound, tiny sweet spot, cupped-hands, and being the obvious source of the sounds you're hearing. Ime those problems arise from horn geometries optimized for things other than home hifi. The geometries I use are benign as far as internal reflections go, which prevents cupped-hands effect and helps the horn to "disappear" as the sound source. Imaging is also improved... one time at an audio show a man who had been an employee of a horn loudspeaker company remarked, "Wow, I didn't know horns could image!" They can as long as their geometries don't work against that. They can also have an unusually wide sweet spot, and again it's the specifics of the horn geometry (and speaker set-up) that make it possible. But the relative lack of reverberant energy (due to their narrow radiation patterns) does, as you noted, make horns tend to have a more "in your face" presentation. Personally I really like the feeling of being enveloped in the acoustic space of the recording, which is just the opposite kind of presentation. So on my more expensive systems I use additional drivers to add a bit of beneficial late-onset reverberant energy, which imo does a good job of conveying that feeling of envelopment. So I am very picky about which horns I use. And even then if the budget allows, I put a fair amount of effort into minimizing and/or working around the things they don't naturally do well. There are a lot of intensely passionate designers out there doing their best to deliver the things they think matter the most. It's not the road to riches for most of us, but it sure is fun. Duke |
@inna asked: "Could you explain in general terms your rationale behind choosing those particular drivers for the least expensive model, forgot the name, the one with big woofer and compression driver?" I use big prosound woofers and compression drivers (mounted to low-coloration waveguide-style horns) primarily for radiation pattern control. I want the radiation pattern to be narrow enough that, when aimed properly, we can minimize detrimental early reflections. And I want the radiation pattern to be as uniform as is reasonably possible so that the reverberant energy is spectrally correct. Sometimes this calls for an additional rear-firing tweeter. Additional benefits of using prosound drivers include good efficiency, complete freedom from thermal compression effects at home audio listening levels, and a benign impedance curve. And ime you get more bang for your buck with good prosound drivers. Drawbacks include large enclosure size and having to deal with anti-horn and anti-big-woofer prejudice. People think big woofers are "slow". Based on power-to-weight (applied motor strength to moving mass) ratios, my big woofer falls in between the 5.5" Scanspeak Illuminator and the 7.0" Scanspeak Illuminator. Unfortunately anti-horn prejudice is harder to overcome, as many people listen with their eyes even when they don’t hear any horn signature. The new model I’ll be showing at RMAF has a 12" midwoofer with a significantly more powerful motor, resulting in a power-to-weight ratio that compares favorably to high-end 5" midrange cones. Actually the compression driver has more to do with the subjective impression of "speed", but I’m not sure how to make an accurate apples-to-apples comparison with a good direct radiator dome tweeter - the specs I’d need aren’t available. But I’m reasonably confident the compression driver would do well in the comparison. Something I found over in the prosound world is that sheer horsepower matters too. There seems to be a correlation between total motor strength and how hard a speaker "hits" down low, while power-to-weight ratio seems to matter more as we go up the spectrum. This just based on personal observations. Duke |
Erik, did you meant to say "the perception of speed does NOT come from dispersion alone"? Or is that in fact the main tenet of your assertion? For speaker designers who have used the Quad 57 as their standard for natural timbre reproduction, I’ve read that in interviews many times over the years (more than a few designers have Quads in their labs), most recently by Roger Modjeski, who said in an AudiogoN post that he voiced his new Music Reference Direct-Drive ESL speaker with the 57---Eric. |
@bdp24 Erik, there is a reason loudspeaker designers still work hard to get theirs to sound as natural (lifelike timbres, especially vocals) as the 1957 Quad ESL. Can you point out specific evidence or is this your personal assumption? Limitations yes, but not at what’s most important to some music lovers. Add a pair or quad of dipole subs, and you may forget about what they don’t do. I’m not saying otherwise, just wanted to suggest to arm chair speaker designers that the perception of speed comes from the dispersion alone. Best, E |
Another excellent post by Duke. I'll just say that we don't want exaggerated unnatural speed and dynamics. Another point - do we want to correct the recording with equipment and speakers ? My position - theoretically yes, in reality - do no harm first than correct if you can. Amp/speakers/room - delivering unit, source - driving unit. And a few wires. |
Erik, there is a reason loudspeaker designers still work hard to get theirs to sound as natural (lifelike timbres, especially vocals) as the 1957 Quad ESL. Limitations yes, but not at what's most important to some music lovers. Add a pair or quad of dipole subs, and you may forget about what they don't do. |
Ime Stax headphones are a very tough act to follow. What they do well, they do very very well. In general I think the closest approaches in a loudspeaker system will be what Erik suggested, "large drivers in a well treated room." And imo those "large drivers" can be dynamic or electrostatic. When it comes to the subjective impression of "speed", imo the factors that come into play include the frequency response; power-to-weight ratios (motor strength vs moving mass); coherence of the leading-edge of the waveform; and smooth and quick and uniform decay at the trailing edge of the waveform. Imo amp + speaker + room = a "system within a system", meaning that how the speaker interacts with the amp and with the room both matter. This will be an over-simplification, but the amp sees the speaker's impedance curve, and the room sees the speaker's radiation pattern. It may not be obvious that the frequency response plays a role in "speed", but the balance of top-octave energy relative to the rest of the spectrum is closely related to our perception of "speed". Note that most speakers are beaming in their top octave, so even if their on-axis response looks good "on paper", once the reverberant energy is factored in, they are often lacking in top-octave energy, which will manifest as a subjective lack of speed. But tipping up the on-axis response to compensate can cause listening fatigue. So imo the solution involves minimizing the spectral discrepancy between the first-arrival sound and the reverberant field. Duke dealer/manufacturer/feels the need for speed |
Roger Modjeski says that’s because of the extremely low moving mass of the Mylar used in ESL drivers. It's not just mass, but the amount of force you can exert against the mass and, critically, self-damping. ESL's suck at the last bit of this, nor are they particularly smooth in the frequency domain. If you want shocking speed, glass smooth frequency response and lack of smearing you need large drivers in a well treated room. :) |
Prof: the t8's are slow when I compare them to my stax headphones. Very coherent but slow. I guess I'm trying to replicate the stax sound but on a larger scale. that probably puts me in the planar camp, but space is an issue, otherwise the new maggies would certainly be something I would entertain. The hales are17 years old and I would like to think speaker design has evolved to the point where there are now options that didn't exist previously. Would Martin Logan's get me there? They have a slightly larger footprint than the hales and suffer in the wife agreement dept. Is there anything else out there? |
My present speakers are hales t8's (hales has been out of business a long time ago) and they are about as far away from that ideal as you can get. Wait...are you saying you think the Hales T8's are "slow" with transients or something? I sure wouldn't say so, having heard them a few times, and having owned the slightly smaller T5s (and I still own Hales T1 speakers). I'd take the T8's over any planar speaker I've heard. But, hey, we all get the "want something different" itch. |
Erik, as you know ESL’s aren’t the only dipole planars. Magneplanars and Eminent Technology LFT’s, both magnetic-planar/ribbon speakers, also have nulls to either side (their radiation pattern is a figure-of-8), but they don’t have the apparent speed of ESL’s, or their liquid see-through transparency and low-level detail. Roger Modjeski says that’s because of the extremely low moving mass of the Mylar used in ESL drivers. The thought of ESL speakers with direct-drive tube amps really has me lusting. Guess I’m gonna hafta sell some of my vintage drums! |
The Music Reference ESLs achieve much better dispersion without sacrificing speed. While some designed curved panels to improve dispersion, there were other sonic trade offs involved. It's why Roger Sanders stuck with a flat panel. Roger Modjeski learned a thing or two from Harold Beveridge. I took the panels out of my Acoustat Model 2's and had Roger modify them to mimic his panels dispersion. The difference is not subtle. One doesn't have to sit in the sweet spot with their head in a vice to enjoy the sonic pleasures of what an ESL should provide. Not to mention the mid-range in Roger's design is the closest I have ever heard to an ESL-57. One of the major disadvantages of an ESL is the transformer. I never used the Acoustat interfaces as I run mine with direct drive amps and before that ran them with the same electronics and transformer Roger designed for his ESLs, powering the speakers with a Music Reference RM-200. Based on my experience I can easily say direct drive is the way to go. |
A lot of the aparent speed and detail of electrostats is in the lack of dispersion, but the truth is they can store quite a lot of energy which in any other speaker we’d blame for muddy sounding results. Take a look at figure 6 here: https://www.stereophile.com/content/martinlogan-masterpiece-renaissance-esl-15a-loudspeaker-measurem... What electrostatics do spectacularly very well is ignore a lot of the room acoustics. It's really hard to achieve the same level of clarity at the listening room with point source type speakers. And please don’t come after me, I like ESL speakers. I just want to broaden the understanding of what it is we like about them. |
Music Reference is offering a direct-drive ESL for $12k. That buys you left and right panels, each of which is powered by it's own direct-drive tube amp (no output transformer on the amp, no input transformer on the panels!), plus a pair of 8" dynamic woofers for 100Hz down. No power amp(s) needed, nor speaker cables. |
