Non-ES speakers closest to electrostatic sound?
 

"tony sayer"
In article

Electrostats may not be completely time coherent, but as they have a
single driver,

But they don't.


** The ESL 63 / 988 is highly phase ( time ) coherent and uses 8
independent panels.

Production units are tested in the factory against a calibrated reference
unit using 1 kHz square wave drive. The signal from a measurement mic 2
metres on axis of the unit under test is viewed on a scope and must
produce
a good square wave there.

Yes that is very impressive;) How many moving coil designs could do
that....



** None - when you include both the good square wave and close frequency
/ phase matching.




............ Phil

Non-ES speakers closest to electrostatic sound?
 

"Dave Plowman (News)"
Scott Dorsey
The LS 3/5a has no bass at all, fake or not.

You'd need to define 'bass'.




** The Euro definition:

Bass - the low frequency portion of the musical spectrum, below the mid
range.


The US definition:

Bass - what a speaker produces that makes the floor shake.

Corollary: No bass - when floor is not shaking.





............. Phil

Non-ES speakers closest to electrostatic sound?
 

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 09:35:38 +0000, Eiron wrote:

mick wrote:

Any idea how well Voigt pipes would sound in smallish rooms,

If you had an SACD player feeding a current-dumping amp into a pair of
Voigt pipes, all linked with Russ Andrews cables, then every part of your
system would be based on fallacies. :-)

lol!
Care to join me in a snake-oil cocktail?

--
Mick
(no M$ software on here... :-) )
Web: http://www.nascom.info

Non-ES speakers closest to electrostatic sound?
 

In article , AKT
writes
Paul Stamler wrote:

: When it first came out, the LS3/5a (mfg. by Rogers, Spendor, Harbeth, KEF
: and several others) was compared to the original Quad ESL by Stereophile.
: I'm not sure the comparison was really valid -- the spatial qualities are
: very different -- but there's a certain tonal commonality to them.

Many moons ago I was in the situation summarized by OP: I would have
loved to buy the Quads but there was no room for them. I listened to a
large number of "box" speakers, including the LS3/5a's, and ended up
buying Spendors BC1's. My target was great affordable sound, not
British speakers or BBC inspired designs per se, which is why I was
quite impressed when precisely such speakers ended up dominating my
short list. Still, good as LS3/5a's and my BC1s were, I could never
mistake the sound for Quad ESL...

I think apart from the sound, or rather, lack of it, from the ESL the
BBC influenced designs that are very neutral are what appeal to you.

Course these designs are totally lacking "character", are "lifeless"
posses "no dynamics" etc.. All the positive qualities that endear them
to moi!.

Being the proud owner of said ESL's and BC1's and LS3/5A....
--
Tony Sayer

Non-ES speakers closest to electrostatic sound?
 

Here's one:

http://www.newformresearch.com/

-------------

Bob Cain wrote:


William Sommerwerck wrote:

Orthodynamic speakers -- ie, a conductor on a flat plastic substrate.



What!???



They're fairly common. Several companies sell them, including one in
Seattle.


Wierd that Googling "orthodynamic speaker" or "orthodynamic loudspeaker"
turns up nothing.


Bob

Non-ES speakers closest to electrostatic sound?
 

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 18:51:23 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton"
"Phil Allison"

"MINe 109"

There was at least one post that put them
down as "Chinese" speakers having nothing to do with Quad.

http://www.quad-hifi.co.uk/lseriesworks.htm

According to Quad, all parts are designed "in-house".

** Yep - "in house" means in Shenzhen, China - where the Chang
brothers factory is located.

The Changs own IAG ( International Audio Group ) which also owns the
Wharfedale brand - guess where they are made now.

Try not to be such a **** here as you are in RAT.

** Go to *straight into hell* you vile lump of pommy excrement.

Argued with your usual wit and brilliance.............

When Quad say they are designed 'in house', that means in the UK, where
the R&D facilities are situated.

** Shame that none of Peter Walker's old team are to be found there.

They'd all be dead by now.....................

Shame all the components are made in the Chinese factory.

No shame at all, lots of good stuff is made in China these days. What
matters is where it was designed and specified.

Yes, they are *manufactured* in China, but to a UK design suited to UK
ears and rooms.

** It is a Chinese made speaker - badged "Quad" to dramatically increased
the price and fleece the gullible.

Xenophobic ****.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Non-ES speakers closest to electrostatic sound?
 

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 08:33:36 GMT, Alex wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

: If your room size is such that you don't have the space for Quads,
: then you don't have the space to place *any* speaker far enough from
: the walls...

Walls are not the problem, even for Quads. The back wall can be several
feet away. Their width is problematic but because of the passage space
to a window and to another room, not because of walls. Placing slim
speakers and surrounding them w/plenty of air should be no problem.

If you want the Quad sound, you'll need to be using a dipole. To get
any bass from a dipole, it needs to be wide.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Non-ES speakers closest to electrostatic sound?
 

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 00:52:27 -0800, Bob Cain
wrote:

William Sommerwerck wrote:

Orthodynamic speakers -- ie, a conductor on a flat plastic substrate.

What!???

They're fairly common. Several companies sell them, including one in Seattle.

Wierd that Googling "orthodynamic speaker" or "orthodynamic
loudspeaker" turns up nothing.

I get 37 hits - maybe you need a new ISP? :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Non-ES speakers closest to electrostatic sound?
 

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 09:08:20 +0000, tony sayer
wrote:

In article , Phil Allison
writes

"Dave Plowman

Electrostats may not be completely time coherent, but as they have a
single driver,

But they don't.


** The ESL 63 / 988 is highly phase ( time ) coherent and uses 8
independent panels.

Production units are tested in the factory against a calibrated reference
unit using 1 kHz square wave drive. The signal from a measurement mic 2
metres on axis of the unit under test is viewed on a scope and must produce
a good square wave there.

Yes that is very impressive;) How many moving coil designs could do
that....

All Dunlavys, for a start.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Non-ES speakers closest to electrostatic sound?
 

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 20:39:04 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:

"tony sayer"
In article

Electrostats may not be completely time coherent, but as they have a
single driver,

But they don't.


** The ESL 63 / 988 is highly phase ( time ) coherent and uses 8
independent panels.

Production units are tested in the factory against a calibrated reference
unit using 1 kHz square wave drive. The signal from a measurement mic 2
metres on axis of the unit under test is viewed on a scope and must
produce
a good square wave there.

Yes that is very impressive;) How many moving coil designs could do
that....

** None - when you include both the good square wave and close frequency
/ phase matching.

Bull****. Although phase-coherent dynamic speakers went out of fashion
in the '70s, there are still quite a few around. All Dunlavys, all
single-driver KEF Uni-Qs, and those egg-shaped ones with a single
driver, whose name I forget, just for starters.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering