Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Andre Jute Andre Jute is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,661
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

Eeyore wrote:

Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:

I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are


Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.

Graham


Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and
b) buy or build a pair of horns with Lowther driver and make my HWAF
mods to them, which are simple enough even for your limited dexterity
to achieve. You can see here how (relatively) simple it can be if you
start out with the factory-sawn wood: http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/K...20T91HWAF3.jpg

If QUAD ESL are beyond your budget, and my T91 HWAF Lowther horns
beyond your woodworking skills or budget, you might consider that it
is not difficult to align a speaker to whatever bass is required and
to match it the DF of the amp. My Impresario speaker at
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/K...Impresario.jpg
can be built for under £250 per pair, are simple straightsided boxes
with only one brace the same size as a top or bottom panel, therefore
can be built even by the tenthumbed, and work with an inexpensive SE
amp for which I also provide a design, my SEntry amp using trioded
EL34, a cheap taste of Nirvana for those on student budgets:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/Jute-EL34-SEntry.jpg

I might add that as a psychologist I understand perception, including
a point about musical perception that electronics engineers have the
greatest difficulty in grasping, to wit that the weight of the
fundamental is pretty low in reconstructing the frequency in the ear.
I demonstrated that the other day with regard to 196Hz on a violin in
a letter to Iain Churches which, typically, elicited no discussion
because no-one except he and I are interested, and we already know
about it. It means that the vaunted "audio range" of the engineers,
20Hz to 20kHz, is a joke at both ends, at the top end because most
people never were able to hear that high, at the bottom end because
the lowest note on any musical instrument, 16Hz on some organs, is
more than adequately produced in *any room of correct length* (and
preferably golden ratio proportions) by an amp that goes down to only
32Hz. That is one reason why my T39 KISS Amp
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/T...trafi-crct.jpg
is rolled off at 32Hz. (The other reason for rolling off an amp for
use with horns precisely right, or on the high side of precisely right
if you cannot achieve precision, is that a horn unloads the driver
right suddenly under Fs and you don't want the cone flapping around
pointlessly, a tricky special-instance consideration with horns).

So, to summarize, no "phoney low end boost" chez Jute (except for when
I deliberately do it as a joke, as for instance on my "Christmas
Pipes" for playing Gregorian Chant with *extra ambiance*). Quite the
contrary. I have put in the thought and spent the money to match my
amps and rooms precisely to the best speakers I could buy or build. It
is a method you might consider seriously now that you have outgrown
boomboxes, if indeed you have. I make no moral judgement about vented
speakers, you understand; I am merely more interested in making the
music sound like the concert hall than in the sound in isolation.

Andre Jute
For more visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
John Byrns John Byrns is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,441
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

In article
,
Andre Jute wrote:

I might add that as a psychologist I understand perception, including
a point about musical perception that electronics engineers have the
greatest difficulty in grasping, to wit that the weight of the
fundamental is pretty low in reconstructing the frequency in the ear.
I demonstrated that the other day with regard to 196Hz on a violin in
a letter to Iain Churches which, typically, elicited no discussion
because no-one except he and I are interested, and we already know
about it.


Andre, I missed your discussion with Iain, but I must disagree with your
claim "that electronics engineers have the greatest difficulty in
grasping" this. Any electronics engineer that has worked on the design
of of small table radios understands this point about musical perception.


Regards,

John Byrns

--
Surf my web pages at, http://fmamradios.com/
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Andre Jute Andre Jute is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,661
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

John Byrns wrote:

In article
,
Andre Jute wrote:

I might add that as a psychologist I understand perception, including
a point about musical perception that electronics engineers have the
greatest difficulty in grasping, to wit that the weight of the
fundamental is pretty low in reconstructing the frequency in the ear.
I demonstrated that the other day with regard to 196Hz on a violin in
a letter to Iain Churches which, typically, elicited no discussion
because no-one except he and I are interested, and we already know
about it.


Andre, I missed your discussion with Iain, but I must disagree with your
claim "that electronics engineers have the greatest difficulty in
grasping" this. Any electronics engineer that has worked on the design
of of small table radios understands this point about musical perception.

Regards,

John Byrns


All right, perhaps I've maligned a subsection of electronics engineers
who have been taught this crucial fact by experience, and to them I
apologize unreservedly.

However, "that the weight of the fundamental is pretty low in
reconstructing the frequency in the ear" should be a crucial fact in
the armory of every audio engineer, yet there is not the slightest
evidence that any of the self-proclaimed audio electronics engineers
(some of them with impressive credentials) on these conferences knows
it, or admits it, or understands the implications. In fact, there is
every indication, for instance in loose talk about bass extension and
even looser talk about the "audio frequency band" that audio
electronics engineers who mouth off here and on related conferences
have never heard this fact before today.

This is weird, if you consider it, because the loudspeaker is the most
important part of the audio chain, and the one where unnecessary
bandwidth extension costs the most.

Andre Jute
Perception is a skill that requires study and careful development over
along period of time. Few have it as a natural gift. -- Iain Churches

  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



Andre Jute wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:

I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are


Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.



Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and


Which don't have very much in the way of bass !

Lord Above.

Graham

  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes, uk.rec.audio
Andre Jute Andre Jute is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,661
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

Eeyore wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:

I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are

Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.



Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and


Which don't have very much in the way of bass !


You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie. And you clearly didn't read
or understand what I said in the rest of my post, which you stupidly
snipped. I repeat the relevant paragraph for your education. When you
understand what I'm talking about, come back here and we'll test your
knowledge. Here we go:

"I might add that as a psychologist I understand perception, including
a point about musical perception that electronics engineers (1) have
the
greatest difficulty in grasping, to wit that the weight of the
fundamental is pretty low in reconstructing the frequency in the ear.
I demonstrated that the other day with regard to 196Hz on a violin in
a letter to Iain Churches which, typically, elicited no discussion
because no-one except he and I are interested, and we already know
about it. It means that the vaunted "audio range" of the engineers,
20Hz to 20kHz, is a joke at both ends, at the top end because most
people never were able to hear that high, at the bottom end because
the lowest note on any musical instrument, 16Hz on some organs, is
more than adequately produced in *any room of correct length* (and
preferably golden ratio proportions) by an amp that goes down to only
32Hz. "

Lord Above.


I'm always here for you, Poopie, because you are the least of us and
therefore need my help more than anyone else.

Tell us, Poopie, how long must a room be for say a Quad ESL-63
adequately to reproduce the lowest frequency of which it is capable.
It is a simple, straighforward question straight out of a high school
science test, so you should be able to give a straighforward answer.
You are permitted to go ask for help from your mates. Look forward to
your answer.

Graham


Andre Jute
Special tolerance for diplomaed quarterwits at Christmas

(1) According to the excellent John Byrns, electronics engineers with
experience in designing small radios have long since grasped the
point. They're excluded from my strictures. But Poopie Stevenson's
response proves my point about electronics engineers in audio in
general.



  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



Andre Jute wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:

I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are

Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.


Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and


Which don't have very much in the way of bass !


You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are bass light. It's
a natural consequence of their very construction.

Graham

  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



Andre Jute wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:

I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are

Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.


Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and


Which don't have very much in the way of bass !


You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.




It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are bass light. It's
a natural consequence of their very construction.

Graham

  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:
You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are bass
light. It's a natural consequence of their very construction.


You'd need to qualify 'bass light'. If an absolute term then the vast
majority of the speakers on the market qualify for that description. The
smooth LF response of an electrostatic makes it seem 'bass light' to many
used to honking cabinets - but that's a different matter. Electrostatics
tend to be more room sensitive too than some 'conventional' designs.

--
*Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are bass
light. It's a natural consequence of their very construction.


You'd need to qualify 'bass light'.


The cancellation of low frequencies as a result of their physical
construction. Unless you know of an IB electrostatic.

Graham

  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



tony sayer wrote:

Eeyore scribeth thus
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:

I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are

Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.


Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and

Which don't have very much in the way of bass !

You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are bass light.
It's


Coloration light you mean...


Electrostatics may indeed have less colouration than most speakers but that has
nothing to do with the bass.

The absence of any meaningful baffle means the electrostatics will always have poor
bass repsponse. It's inherent to the design (the rear radiation cancels the front
radiation more at low frequencies determined by its physical size).

Graham

  #12   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
tony sayer tony sayer is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

In article , Eeyore rabbitsfriendsandrel
scribeth thus


tony sayer wrote:

Eeyore scribeth thus
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:

I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are

Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get

with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout

impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.


Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and

Which don't have very much in the way of bass !

You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.

It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are bass light.
It's


Coloration light you mean...


Electrostatics may indeed have less colouration than most speakers but that has
nothing to do with the bass.


Define bass

The absence of any meaningful baffle means the electrostatics will always have
poor
bass repsponse. It's inherent to the design (the rear radiation cancels the
front

radiation more at low frequencies determined by its physical size).


So I wonder how I'm hearing that Organ recording I made 't other week?..

Humm.....

Graham


--
Tony Sayer


  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:
The cancellation of low frequencies as a result of their physical
construction. Unless you know of an IB electrostatic.


Do you have true infinite baffle moving coil speakers? I doubt it.

Of course they will cancel at a certain frequency and below. That's why
they are so large. But the cutoff frequency is lower than perhaps most
conventional designs - if you set a realistic attenuation as a cutoff.

--
*I can see your point, but I still think you're full of ****.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #14   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



tony sayer wrote:

Eeyore scribeth thus

The absence of any meaningful baffle means the electrostatics will always have
poor bass repsponse. It's inherent to the design (the rear radiation cancels the
front

radiation more at low frequencies determined by its physical size).


So I wonder how I'm hearing that Organ recording I made 't other week?..


You'll still hear it of course. The lower frequencies will simply be attenuated
somewhat..

Graham

  #15   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

The cancellation of low frequencies as a result of their physical
construction. Unless you know of an IB electrostatic.


Do you have true infinite baffle moving coil speakers? I doubt it.


My EV Sentry IVs are not only horn loaded but have 100% isolation of the
rear radaition.


Of course they will cancel at a certain frequency and below. That's why
they are so large. But the cutoff frequency is lower than perhaps most
conventional designs - if you set a realistic attenuation as a cutoff.


IBs don't *have* to be huge to avoid the cancellation issue. Acoustic
labyrinth designs like PMCs effectively avoid the problem entirely.

Graham



  #16   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



Bob Latham wrote:

tony sayer wrote:
Eeyore scribeth thus


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are
bass light. It's

Coloration light you mean...

Electrostatics may indeed have less colouration than most speakers but
that has nothing to do with the bass.


Define bass

The absence of any meaningful baffle means the electrostatics will
always have poor bass repsponse. It's inherent to the design (the rear
radiation cancels the front

radiation more at low frequencies determined by its physical size).


So I wonder how I'm hearing that Organ recording I made 't other week?..


Harmonics?

Okay, that was unfair but you're not going to get deep bass from an open
backed speaker unless its huge. Anyone know the -3db point on Quad
electros? I think my KEFS (TEB) are -2db at 38Hz.

I'll go along with low coloration but it is well accepted that electro
statics of moderate size suffer the two weaknesses of poor l/f extension
and lower spl than TEBs, reflex or transmission lines. Of all the speakers
made in the world which one is most common to see two pairs stacked
together in an attempt to get some extension out of them. Wasn't the guy
who started SME famous for having stacked Quads in his listening room?


I've heard stacked Quads. Very nice but the owner still eventually added some
subs.

Graham

  #17   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eiron Eiron is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 109
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

Bob Latham wrote:
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Eeyore rabbitsfriendsandrel
scribeth thus


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are
bass light. It's
Coloration light you mean...
Electrostatics may indeed have less colouration than most speakers but
that has nothing to do with the bass.


Define bass
The absence of any meaningful baffle means the electrostatics will
always have poor bass repsponse. It's inherent to the design (the rear
radiation cancels the front

radiation more at low frequencies determined by its physical size).


So I wonder how I'm hearing that Organ recording I made 't other week?..


Harmonics?

Okay, that was unfair but you're not going to get deep bass from an open
backed speaker unless its huge. Anyone know the -3db point on Quad
electros? I think my KEFS (TEB) are -2db at 38Hz.


http://www.quad-hifi.co.uk/model.php...n t=3#details
"Axis band limits -6dB at 35Hz (3rd Order)"
Not much different to your KEFs.

I'll go along with low coloration but it is well accepted that electro
statics of moderate size suffer the two weaknesses of poor l/f extension
and lower spl than TEBs, reflex or transmission lines.


How loud do you need in your lounge? I wouldn't use ESLs for parties
but they are adequate for normal domestic use.

--
Eiron.
  #18   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



Eiron wrote:

How loud do you need in your lounge? I wouldn't use ESLs for parties
but they are adequate for normal domestic use.


Generally true, yes.

Graham

  #19   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes, uk.rec.audio
Andre Jute Andre Jute is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,661
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

On Dec 24, 6:15*am, Eeyore
wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore *wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore *wrote:


Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:


I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are


Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.


Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and


Which don't have very much in the way of bass !


You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.


It's a well known fact


That's what I said, Poopie, that all the idiots think they know this
for a fact because the other idiots on their street corner said so. I
prefer to trust my own experience. I actually have several pairs of
electrostats, and horns, and IBs, and vented speaks.

you complete idiot


Oh, I wouldn't claim the perfection of completion. I probably have
another thirty years to live, at least part of which I shall spend
polishing my idiocy to a gloss that will give apoplectic fits to zero-
imagination clowns like you at a hundred paces.

that electrostatics are bass light. It's
a natural consequence of their very construction.


Nope, it's not. First of all, electrostats are not inherently bass
light. Like every other speakers, their bass depends on their size and
their positioning in the room, not to mention the length of the room.
Your *opinion* that they are bass light merely reflects your lack of
imagination and perhaps the limitations of your accommodation, and
probably a lack of experience with electrostats.

First of all, you can put the edge of an ESL right up against the
wall, then on one side the wavelength to cancellation becomes the
entire length of wall to the other ESL against the opposite wall.

Second, you can stack ESL to get any amount of bass that a headbanger
like you considers necessary. All it takes is imagination, a certain
minimum of engineering skill, and money. If your room is around 45
feet or longer, a pair of ESL to each wall will be good, with each
pair together at one edge and angled to put about 12in between the
centrepoints, the open end of the triangle hard up against the wall.
If the room is long enough put the two triangles of ESL about halfway
along the long walls. Try it. Wherever you are in the room, the sound
will follow you like the Mona Lisa's eyes, and you will have bass down
to Tannoy horn levels (and there is nothing but nothing more
authoritative than the bass a big horn attaches to the floor and the
walls and the ceiling, to your very skin). If you're high enough on
bad dope to want to ruin your ears, stack another pair of ESL on top
of each pair already against the wall. It isn't even necessary to
angle them because this is just higher quality bass reinforcement than
you get with a sub (subs for dipoles and particularly for electrostats
are a pain because they can't match that ultra-clean quality of the
midrange).

Third, a dipole isn't a problem, it is an opportunity. Consider your
older type of grand house, built to have an enfilade of rooms all
connected to each other in a row, like an art gallery. Now consider
the opportunity of a Bessel array, which becomes domestically feasible
with ESL in rooms around 40 feet long. All you do to get all the bass
of electrostats is to set up a Bessel array of as few as five or seven
electrostats in a row in the space between the two rooms, fill in the
holes, and Bob's your uncle, for less cost than the 2x or 4x pyramid
of drivers per wall (8 or 16 for two rooms) you have two rooms full of
point source sound following you wherever you go, including excellent
clean bass down to the mid-20s. Don't give me bull about box speakers
being able to match that sort of quality; everyone with the slightest
experience knows it isn't true. You can learn about Bessel arrays on
my netsite at: at:http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/JUTE%20on
%20BESSEL.htm
Of course, Bessel is an engineering solution for cheapskates wanting
quality sound, and ESL are not exactly for cheapskates but, hey, let a
thousand flowers bloom.

Graham


You should put your mind in gear sometime, Poopie. You will find the
new experience exhilarating. You might even want to do it again.

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review
  #20   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes, uk.rec.audio
Andre Jute Andre Jute is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,661
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

On Dec 24, 10:26*am, Eeyore
wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
*Eeyore wrote:


You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are bass
light. It's a natural consequence of their very construction.


You'd need to qualify 'bass light'.


The cancellation of low frequencies as a result of their physical
construction. Unless you know of an IB electrostatic.

Graham


Aw, hell, Poopie, do you have zero imagination? I've built ESL into
the walls between rooms. That makes each room an IB electrostatic. You
get *very* convincing bass living *inside* your speakers.

Andre Jute
Perception is a skill that requires study and careful development over
along period of time. Few have it as a natural gift. -- Iain Churches



  #21   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes, uk.rec.audio
Andre Jute Andre Jute is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,661
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

On Dec 24, 11:24*am, Eeyore
wrote:
tony sayer wrote:
Eeyore *scribeth thus
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore *wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore *wrote:


Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:


I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are


Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.


Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now.. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and


Which don't have very much in the way of bass !


You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are bass light.
It's


Coloration light you mean...


Electrostatics may indeed have less colouration than most speakers but that has
nothing to do with the bass.


It has everything to do with the bass. Because the bass of an
electrostat is so clean, you can turn it up higher. Most of what
people like you call bass on little box speakers is simply distortion.

The absence of any meaningful baffle means the electrostatics will always have poor
bass repsponse.


This is the nonsense of someone who doesn't have his mind in gear, who
has always simply accepted the lowest common denominator cheap ****
the mass marketers peddle. Yo, Poopie, open your ears and eyes: the
wall is the electrostat's baffle: you just put the thin edge hard up
against the wall. Or you build the electrostat into the wall between
two rooms.

It's inherent to the design (the rear radiation cancels the front
radiation more at low frequencies determined by its physical size).


But, as with every other loudspeaker, your argument simply resolves to
the question of "How much does the customer wish to pay for the best
sound?" If he truly wants the best, he simply buys the biggest Quad
electrostats, and for more of that sound, he buys more of them to
stack, and for even more, he breaks a wall out between two rooms in
his house.

Graham


It's simple when you define the problem correctly, see, Poopie?

Andre Jute
Thumbs well clear of the bricks

  #22   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes, uk.rec.audio
Andre Jute Andre Jute is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,661
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

On Dec 24, 12:13*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Eeyore rabbitsfriendsandrel
scribeth thus





tony sayer wrote:


Eeyore *scribeth thus
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore *wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore *wrote:


Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:


I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are


Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get

with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout

impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.


Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and


Which don't have very much in the way of bass !


You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are bass light.
It's


Coloration light you mean...


Electrostatics may indeed have less colouration than most speakers but that has
nothing to do with the bass.


Define bass



The absence of any meaningful baffle means the electrostatics will always have
poor
bass repsponse. It's inherent to the design (the rear radiation cancels the
front


radiation more at low frequencies determined by its physical size).


So I wonder how I'm hearing that Organ recording I made 't other week?..

Humm.....



Graham


--
Tony Sayer


This is probably episode 48754 in The Continuing Saga of the Fruitless
Efforts of an Entire Hobbyist Community to Educate Poopie Stevenson.
It started when Poopie interjected himself into a lighthearted
conversation between Patrick Turner and me about damping factors in
big transmitting tube amps. The key paragraph in my original letter
which refers to what you hear from the organ is the one starting "I
might add that as a psychologist I understand perception".

******
Eeyore wrote:

Andre Jute wrote [to Patrick Turner]:

I have never been as impressed with ultra-low silicon-
level Rout as you are


Yeah, you're probably impressed by the phoney low end boost you get with
moving coil loudspeakers when driving them from a high outout impedance
(underdamped resonance). The phrase 'single note bass' comes to mind.

Graham


Nah. I have been going to live concerts and thinking seriously about
the music so as to be able to write about it for five decades now. I
know what reproduced music should sound like. If you want to know,
perhaps it is time for a guy your age, my dear Graham, to stop
pretending you're some kind of overage hipster, and replace those
boomboxes of yours with
a) a set of Mr Walker's marvellously precise electrostatic speakers
(ESL) and
b) buy or build a pair of horns with Lowther driver and make my HWAF
mods to them, which are simple enough even for your limited dexterity
to achieve. You can see here how (relatively) simple it can be if you
start out with the factory-sawn wood: http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/K...20T91HWAF3.jpg

If QUAD ESL are beyond your budget, and my T91 HWAF Lowther horns
beyond your woodworking skills or budget, you might consider that it
is not difficult to align a speaker to whatever bass is required and
to match it the DF of the amp. My Impresario speaker at
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/K...Impresario.jpg
can be built for under £250 per pair, are simple straightsided boxes
with only one brace the same size as a top or bottom panel, therefore
can be built even by the tenthumbed, and work with an inexpensive SE
amp for which I also provide a design, my SEntry amp using trioded
EL34, a cheap taste of Nirvana for those on student budgets:
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/Jute-EL34-SEntry.jpg

I might add that as a psychologist I understand perception, including
a point about musical perception that electronics engineers have the
greatest difficulty in grasping, to wit that the weight of the
fundamental is pretty low in reconstructing the frequency in the ear.
I demonstrated that the other day with regard to 196Hz on a violin in
a letter to Iain Churches which, typically, elicited no discussion
because no-one except he and I are interested, and we already know
about it. It means that the vaunted "audio range" of the engineers,
20Hz to 20kHz, is a joke at both ends, at the top end because most
people never were able to hear that high, at the bottom end because
the lowest note on any musical instrument, 16Hz on some organs, is
more than adequately produced in *any room of correct length* (and
preferably golden ratio proportions) by an amp that goes down to only
32Hz. That is one reason why my T39 KISS Amp
http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/T...trafi-crct.jpg
is rolled off at 32Hz. (The other reason for rolling off an amp for
use with horns precisely right, or on the high side of precisely right
if you cannot achieve precision, is that a horn unloads the driver
right suddenly under Fs and you don't want the cone flapping around
pointlessly, a tricky special-instance consideration with horns).

So, to summarize, no "phoney low end boost" chez Jute (except for when
I deliberately do it as a joke, as for instance on my "Christmas
Pipes" for playing Gregorian Chant with *extra ambiance*). Quite the
contrary. I have put in the thought and spent the money to match my
amps and rooms precisely to the best speakers I could buy or build. It
is a method you might consider seriously now that you have outgrown
boomboxes, if indeed you have. I make no moral judgement about vented
speakers, you understand; I am merely more interested in making the
music sound like the concert hall than in the sound in isolation.

Andre Jute
For more visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review

*****
  #23   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



Andre Jute wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:


You must have heard that on the street corner where engineers who
cannot afford electrostats gather, Poopie.


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are bass
light. It's a natural consequence of their very construction.


You'd need to qualify 'bass light'.


The cancellation of low frequencies as a result of their physical
construction. Unless you know of an IB electrostatic.



Aw, hell, Poopie, do you have zero imagination? I've built ESL into
the walls between rooms. That makes each room an IB electrostatic. You
get *very* convincing bass living *inside* your speakers.


That's not very practical for most people.

Graham

  #24   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



Andre Jute wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

Electrostatics may indeed have less colouration than most speakers but that has
nothing to do with the bass.


It has everything to do with the bass. Because the bass of an
electrostat is so clean, you can turn it up higher.


And then they arc !

Graham

  #25   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Dave Plowman (News) Dave Plowman (News) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 767
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

In article ,
Bob Latham wrote:
Okay, that was unfair but you're not going to get deep bass from an open
backed speaker unless its huge. Anyone know the -3db point on Quad
electros? I think my KEFS (TEB) are -2db at 38Hz.



IIRC with the '57s 42 Hz springs to mind. Low enough for the lowest
fundamental from most traditional musical instruments except for some
organs and bass drums.

FWIW what most thing of as deep bass is nothing of the sort but centred
around 100 Hz.

--
*Some days you're the dog, some days the hydrant.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.


  #26   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
tony sayer tony sayer is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

In article , Bob Latham bob@sick-
of-spam.invalid scribeth thus
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Eeyore rabbitsfriendsandrel
scribeth thus


It's a well known fact you complete idiot that electrostatics are
bass light. It's

Coloration light you mean...

Electrostatics may indeed have less colouration than most speakers but
that has nothing to do with the bass.


Define bass

The absence of any meaningful baffle means the electrostatics will
always have poor bass repsponse. It's inherent to the design (the rear
radiation cancels the front

radiation more at low frequencies determined by its physical size).


So I wonder how I'm hearing that Organ recording I made 't other week?..


Harmonics?

Okay, that was unfair but you're not going to get deep bass from an open
backed speaker unless its huge. Anyone know the -3db point on Quad
electros? I think my KEFS (TEB) are -2db at 38Hz.

I'll go along with low coloration but it is well accepted that electro
statics of moderate size suffer the two weaknesses of poor l/f extension
and lower spl than TEBs, reflex or transmission lines. Of all the speakers
made in the world which one is most common to see two pairs stacked
together in an attempt to get some extension out of them. Wasn't the guy
who started SME famous for having stacked Quads in his listening room?


Yes but that was the ESL57 series and quite well that worked, but the
modern designs are sufficient for purpose if you want to hear what
really went on...

For making -pleasant sounds- I've got some boxed speakers in another
room...

--
Tony Sayer


  #27   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
tony sayer tony sayer is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

In article , Bob Latham bob@sick-
of-spam.invalid scribeth thus
In article ,
Eiron wrote:
Bob Latham wrote:
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:


Okay, that was unfair but you're not going to get deep bass from an
open backed speaker unless its huge. Anyone know the -3db point on
Quad electros? I think my KEFS (TEB) are -2db at 38Hz.


http://www.quad-hifi.co.uk/model.php...id=1&conten t

=3#details
"Axis band limits -6dB at 35Hz (3rd Order)" Not much different to your
KEFs.


Oh I think they are different. Its not only the roll off, its also how
much spl they can provide that gives the overall impression of bass I
think. Certainly, I found Quads (admittedly not recent) a bit thin and
most surprisingly to me a bit dull too though I'm sure they don't measure
badly at the top.


Yes of course .. chose your sound and flavour;!...

I'll go along with low coloration but it is well accepted that electro
statics of moderate size suffer the two weaknesses of poor l/f
extension and lower spl than TEBs, reflex or transmission lines.


How loud do you need in your lounge? I wouldn't use ESLs for parties but
they are adequate for normal domestic use.


I don't think I could agree with that for some types of music but I could
for others.


Cheers,

Bob.


--
Tony Sayer
  #30   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio, rec.audio.tubes
Andre Jute Andre Jute is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,661
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

On Dec 26, 12:00*pm, tony sayer wrote:
In article , Bob Latham bob@sick-
of-spam.invalid scribeth thus



In article ,
* Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Eeyore
wrote:


On the ESL63 the resulting LF roll-off is -6dB at about 35 Hz, roughly
second order IIRC. This, of course, is the nominal 'free space' value.
In the room I use for the main hifi system the last time I measured it
was only about -3dB at 30-35Hz. The result does not sound 'bass light'
to me. But this will of course depend on the room, etc, and the absence
of a box boom may make other speakers seem to have 'more bass'... *:-)


It may be more significant that the sound pressure level you can get at
low frequencies is perhaps more restricted than a good conventional
speaker of similar price. But that is a question of sound power, not
frequency response.


In an attempt to improve both the LF extension and spl stacking is
sometimes used and I can see that that would be fine with the 57 variety.
What about your 63s? Presumably you would have to arrange them such that
they form part of an outer circle otherwise their concentric rings and
imaginary point source behind the speakers will be rendered useless?


Cheers,


Bob.


Unless you must have it louder there wouldn't be any point and as said
the point source will be sodded up....
--
Tony Sayer


It depends what you're doing whether "the point source will be sodded
up". For instance, Bessel is a form of stacking in which the point
source, far from being "sodded up" is enhanced. For another, several
of the stacking schemes for ESL63 and similar (for which it becomes
even less necessary, but I'm just humouring Poopie because it is
Christmas) I explained are for very grand or even public rooms, in
which a tiny loss in potential quality will not be noticed because no
one will sit down to listen for it, and the overwhelming quality of
the stats *will* be noticed. For yet another, it is easy to stack the
ESL63 and derivatives in pairs so that the point source of one
precisely meets the point of origin of the other, which is only
notionally possible, and only at one listening point, for any other
type of speakers (especially multiple cones!), the upshot being that
ESL-63 is probably the most stackable speaker there is...

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review


  #31   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
Fleetie Fleetie is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 20
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

"tony sayer" wrote
Yes but that was the ESL57 series and quite well that worked, but the
modern designs are sufficient for purpose if you want to hear what
really went on...


Not according to the "Hi-Fi Choice" article I read in the late 80s.
It had a picture of his room, and in it were (at least) 2 pairs
of stripped-down (grilles removed) ESL-63s, arranged so that for
each channel there were 2 speakers right next to each other, but
set at 90 degrees to each other.

I forget his name right now but I know it's still somewhere in my
memory. Oh yes, "ARA", I think. Alastair Robertson-Aikman or something?


Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=fleetie


  #32   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tubes
Eiron Eiron is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 109
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

Andre Jute wrote:

... For yet another, it is easy to stack the
ESL63 and derivatives in pairs so that the point source of one
precisely meets the point of origin of the other, which is only
notionally possible, and only at one listening point, for any other
type of speakers (especially multiple cones!), the upshot being that
ESL-63 is probably the most stackable speaker there is...


Do please elaborate, Andre. We could do with some education today.

--
Eiron.
  #33   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio, rec.audio.tubes
Andre Jute Andre Jute is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,661
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

Hey, Jim, this is my thread which I started and shared with UKRA for
edification and laughter. It's a bit mean of you, in this season too,
to grab it all for yourself by editing the distribution list, thereby
depriving us of your great wisdom and knowledge, especially when
you're in agreement with me, thereby affirming your great wisdom and
knowledge.

On Dec 24, 12:05 pm, Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Eeyore

wrote:
Electrostatics may indeed have less colouration than most speakers but
that has nothing to do with the bass.
The absence of any meaningful baffle means the electrostatics will
always have poor bass repsponse. It's inherent to the design (the rear
radiation cancels the front radiation more at low frequencies determined
by its physical size).


On the ESL63 the resulting LF roll-off is -6dB at about 35 Hz, roughly
second order IIRC. This, of course, is the nominal 'free space' value. In
the room I use for the main hifi system the last time I measured it was
only about -3dB at 30-35Hz. The result does not sound 'bass light' to me.
But this will of course depend on the room, etc, and the absence of a box
boom may make other speakers seem to have 'more bass'... :-)


I am always amazed (and entertained by their stupidity, er,,, on
Christmas day I mean chutzpuh) of people whose own speakers bottom out
around 100Hz lecturing me on how my Quad ESL-63 are "bass light"
because they heard some other clown say it. (Dave Plowman already made
the point about most people's idea of bass being around 100Hz. Gordon
Rankin, the American amp designer, once made the point in a discussion
of designing boxes for Diatech speakers that the cleanest sound is by
rolling them off at about 60Hz rather than the 10 or even 15Hz lower
that was then the mode. I tried it. Wonderful sound for box speakers;
made the more normal designs sound wretched. On another occasion I was
trying a crossover point on 57s to woofers of 110Hz and somehow in a
listening session, the woofer wasn't operating -- I swear I didn't do
it on purpose -- and none of my panel of self-declared audiophiles,
though none of them with electrostats at home, noticed a thing...)

It may be more significant that the sound pressure level you can get at low
frequencies is perhaps more restricted than a good conventional speaker of
similar price. But that is a question of sound power, not frequency
response.


It is worth saying that Quad stats, in a room say smaller than 3000
cubic feet, *will* damage your ears, and the more so if you stack them
correctly to enhance the bass, because the bass is enhanced more than
the mid- and high-frequencies. What happens on a stat is that bass is
so clean that you think there is less of it, you turn it up, there
isn't the grunge expected from boomboxes which also acts as a level-
signal, you keep turning it up, and the actual sound energy reaching
your ears is much higher than you would permit with a boombox. I
became very aware of this when I bought a STAX electrostatic earphone
as a gift for myself last Christmas. In test, trying to level-match
B&O, Sennheiser and STAX headphones, I discovered that I used the STAX
consistently 2dB and more above the level of the conventional driver
headphones. I don't have a dummy measuring head, so my numbers may be
a bit of a kludge, but the tendency is clear, and the reason is the
clean bass, the absence of warning signals included in lower quality
bass.

Slainte,


****ing outside in the green and beloved island. I was planning a ride
on my bike this afternoon. Oh well...

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html


May you never come to the notice of the authorities!

Andre Jute
Visit Jute on Amps at http://members.lycos.co.uk/fiultra/
"wonderfully well written and reasoned information
for the tube audio constructor"
John Broskie TubeCAD & GlassWare
"an unbelievably comprehensive web site
containing vital gems of wisdom"
Stuart Perry Hi-Fi News & Record Review



  #34   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tubes
Eeyore Eeyore is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,474
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music



Andre Jute wrote:

Hey, Jim, this is my thread


Usenet is public not private.

It's NOT 'your thread'.

Graham

  #35   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tubes
Jon Yaeger Jon Yaeger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 645
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music




On 12/26/07 11:50 AM, in article , "Eeyore"
wrote:



Andre Jute wrote:

Hey, Jim, this is my thread


Usenet is public not private.

It's NOT 'your thread'.

Graham


Graham,

If you are a narcissist, it is . . . .

;-)



  #36   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tubes
tony sayer tony sayer is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

Bob.

Unless you must have it louder there wouldn't be any point and as said
the point source will be sodded up....
--
Tony Sayer


It depends what you're doing whether "the point source will be sodded
up". For instance, Bessel is a form of stacking in which the point
source, far from being "sodded up" is enhanced. For another, several
of the stacking schemes for ESL63 and similar (for which it becomes
even less necessary, but I'm just humouring Poopie because it is
Christmas) I explained are for very grand or even public rooms, in
which a tiny loss in potential quality will not be noticed because no
one will sit down to listen for it, and the overwhelming quality of
the stats *will* be noticed. For yet another, it is easy to stack the
ESL63 and derivatives in pairs so that the point source of one
precisely meets the point of origin of the other, which is only
notionally possible, and only at one listening point, for any other
type of speakers (especially multiple cones!), the upshot being that
ESL-63 is probably the most stackable speaker there is...


Yeabut how can you have more than the one -point- source?....


Its physically impossible unless there is another dimension your keeping
from us;?...

--
Tony Sayer


  #37   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.tubes,uk.rec.audio
tony sayer tony sayer is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

In article , Fleetie
scribeth thus
"tony sayer" wrote
Yes but that was the ESL57 series and quite well that worked, but the
modern designs are sufficient for purpose if you want to hear what
really went on...


Not according to the "Hi-Fi Choice" article I read in the late 80s.
It had a picture of his room, and in it were (at least) 2 pairs
of stripped-down (grilles removed) ESL-63s, arranged so that for
each channel there were 2 speakers right next to each other, but
set at 90 degrees to each other.

I forget his name right now but I know it's still somewhere in my
memory. Oh yes, "ARA", I think. Alastair Robertson-Aikman or something?


Hi-fi jurno was he then?....

Martin


--
Tony Sayer


  #38   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tubes
Eiron Eiron is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 109
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

tony sayer wrote:
Bob.
Unless you must have it louder there wouldn't be any point and as said
the point source will be sodded up....
--
Tony Sayer

It depends what you're doing whether "the point source will be sodded
up". For instance, Bessel is a form of stacking in which the point
source, far from being "sodded up" is enhanced. For another, several
of the stacking schemes for ESL63 and similar (for which it becomes
even less necessary, but I'm just humouring Poopie because it is
Christmas) I explained are for very grand or even public rooms, in
which a tiny loss in potential quality will not be noticed because no
one will sit down to listen for it, and the overwhelming quality of
the stats *will* be noticed. For yet another, it is easy to stack the
ESL63 and derivatives in pairs so that the point source of one
precisely meets the point of origin of the other, which is only
notionally possible, and only at one listening point, for any other
type of speakers (especially multiple cones!), the upshot being that
ESL-63 is probably the most stackable speaker there is...


Yeabut how can you have more than the one -point- source?....


Its physically impossible unless there is another dimension your keeping
from us;?...


Jute knows more about ESL63s than any man alive.
"You can get wonderfully inflated readings from the ESL63 by
measuring dead centre and 12 inches in front of it, where it has a faux
point source. Of course, that would be the same as measuring *behind*
the speaker, for the ESL63 is a dipole which has the faux point source
each side, and the sound at the listening position is from the cone
with its point behind the speaker."
( http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...27f901c4507c3d )

So I guess he is stacking his ESLs one in front of the other, 2 feet apart.
You either like the sound of a comb filter or you don't....

--
Eiron.
  #39   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio, rec.audio.tubes
Andre Jute Andre Jute is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,661
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

On Dec 26, 9:37*pm, tony sayer wrote:
Bob.


Unless you must have it louder there wouldn't be any point and as said
the point source will be sodded up....
--
Tony Sayer


It depends what you're doing whether "the point source will be sodded
up". For instance, Bessel is a form of stacking in which the point
source, far from being "sodded up" is enhanced. For another, several
of the stacking schemes for ESL63 and similar (for which it becomes
even less necessary, but I'm just humouring Poopie because it is
Christmas) I explained are for very grand or even public rooms, in
which a tiny loss in potential quality will not be noticed because no
one will sit down to listen for it, and the overwhelming quality of
the stats *will* be noticed. For yet another, it is easy to stack the
ESL63 and derivatives in pairs so that the point source of one
precisely meets the point of origin of the other, which is only
notionally possible, and only at one listening point, for any other
type of speakers (especially multiple cones!), the upshot being that
ESL-63 is probably the most stackable speaker there is...


Yeabut how can you have more than the one -point- source?....

Its physically impossible unless there is another dimension your keeping
from us;?...

--
Tony Sayer


Put a single ESL63 or derivative -- minimum case, yeah? one speaker
only, okay? -- in the middle of an empty room. Play music. Stand in
front of the speaker. Hear the point source. Walk around the music.
Hear the point source on the other side of the speaker. So what do you
have? One speaker, two point sources.

Now put two -63s there parallel to each other and about twelve inches
apart. Play music. Hear the point source. Walk around the music. Hear
the point source on the other side of the speaker. So what do you
have? One "combined" speaker, two point sources.

The laws of physics remain intact; I won't be messing with them until
the phone company manages to repair my blue callbox...

Andre Jute
"I was at a board meeting for the LA Chapter of the Audio Engineering
Society last night on XM Satellite radio audio and data transmission.
Sadly, we missed you there, and at the SMPTE and Acoustical Society
recent meetings as well. Everyone was asking, 'Where is that wonderful
Andre Jute? The world just doesn't rotate without him...'" -- John
Mayberry, Emmaco
  #40   Report Post  
Posted to uk.rec.audio,rec.audio.tubes
tony sayer tony sayer is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 108
Default The damping factor and the sound of real music

In article
s.com, Andre Jute scribeth thus
On Dec 26, 9:37*pm, tony sayer wrote:
Bob.


Unless you must have it louder there wouldn't be any point and as said
the point source will be sodded up....
--
Tony Sayer


It depends what you're doing whether "the point source will be sodded
up". For instance, Bessel is a form of stacking in which the point
source, far from being "sodded up" is enhanced. For another, several
of the stacking schemes for ESL63 and similar (for which it becomes
even less necessary, but I'm just humouring Poopie because it is
Christmas) I explained are for very grand or even public rooms, in
which a tiny loss in potential quality will not be noticed because no
one will sit down to listen for it, and the overwhelming quality of
the stats *will* be noticed. For yet another, it is easy to stack the
ESL63 and derivatives in pairs so that the point source of one
precisely meets the point of origin of the other, which is only
notionally possible, and only at one listening point, for any other
type of speakers (especially multiple cones!), the upshot being that
ESL-63 is probably the most stackable speaker there is...


Yeabut how can you have more than the one -point- source?....

Its physically impossible unless there is another dimension your keeping
from us;?...

--
Tony Sayer


Put a single ESL63 or derivative -- minimum case, yeah? one speaker
only, okay? -- in the middle of an empty room. Play music. Stand in
front of the speaker. Hear the point source. Walk around the music.
Hear the point source on the other side of the speaker. So what do you
have? One speaker, two point sources.


Yeabut which point source are you on about PW only ever mentioned One
point source;!.,..

--
Tony Sayer

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vibration Damping and Sound Absorbing CatalystX Car Audio 3 January 26th 04 09:01 PM
Damping factor - tubes versus solid state? Scott Gardner Vacuum Tubes 8 December 5th 03 04:25 PM
Real instrument based music on its way back!! Dark Muscle Pro Audio 14 August 26th 03 10:15 PM
Music biz don't get it, the real world numbers, 2nd try [email protected] Pro Audio 4 July 4th 03 03:31 AM
Music biz don't get it, the real world numbers [email protected] Pro Audio 0 July 1st 03 06:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:50 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"