Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
24.141.69.24
I'm on to my third rebuild of the ESLs. I had an opportunity to sell my other two sets earlier this year to fund some other projects and did so.
I had multiple sets of transformers, EHT units a pair of frames and lots of panels... I began to dig out what I had in order to put together one final set.
Resprayed the cans, rebuilt the power supplies and transformers and sand and re-finish the frames and rails.
I have a set of new original screens and am waiting for the panels to come back from Florida after a rebuild.
I'm listening to Beveridges now ... which are phenomenal but I just had to put together one more set of ESLs.
These seem a lot more work than the other 2 pair that I rebuilt... but then that might of been 10years ago and I'm not getting as enthusiastic about DIY as I used to..
I will try the confounding Bedini amp on these when I'm done.. it is one sweet amp but it was need of a major overhaul with the incredible heat it produces for its pure Class A 25w per channel. It proved to be a challenge to rebuild but runs rock solid now.
I don't think the Quads will knock out the Beveridges - especially since I am direct driving them now... but the ESLs do so much well especially with new panels I have to have another set. Stay tuned....
Follow Ups:
I have gone through many iterations of the stacked Quads. Including Decca ribbons, OTLs and admittedly non-hartley woofers. My feelings were that the presentation did not sound appropriate more of a wall of sound- it was a highly complex balance of multiple components that required much fine tuning and attention.
In the end, when I took things down for a renovation, and listened to the simple Quad set up I wondered why I subjected myself to years of painstaking torture. YMMV . I did this with full realisation of the Quad's imperfections of which there are many---- but those imperfections were less than I would tolerate from any other dynamic speaker within my priorities.
Arguably, the Soundlabs are probably the most complete statement ESL available today.
As to the Dayton Wrights, like the Quads, lots of opportunity with their design, Mike Wright is a genius but really could not get past the artisan production limitations of the day and the highly complicated tolerances and demands of his design. They were manufactured just down the road from me and I had many jaw dropping auditions with various iterations of that speaker. I think they are still amazing in many ways.
The Beveridge suffered many of the same challenges of the Dayton-Wrights: complexity, expense and limits price/performance low volume production crying for better materials and technology than available or affordable in the day.
We could build better Acoustat Xs, Beveridge or DW's today but we could also buy a couple of Range Rovers for what they would cost.
The DW, Beveridge and Acoustat X models were the ones that put me in a daze back then in terms of what was possible... some of those initial listening impressions are still so memorable that they are difficult to sweep away from memory even with today's technology- has it gotten that much better in the past 30-40years? certainly more expense for this level of performance.
I had one short demo of a Beveridge over 30 years ago and it was shockingly good spatial performance and tonal fidelity. Only problem was that it did not really do "loud".Though I don't really see how those would fit my listening habits I would want them anyways. Jealous.
Did you ever stack your quads when you had 2 sets?
Hi thanks,
What I've done with the current Beveridge speakers is to eliminate the internal step up transformer and crossover of the Model 3's and now direct drive them with a custom Roger Modjeski made amp.
It eliminates the step-down in my tube amp and the step up drive transformer in the Beveridges lots more drive and detail for a very complex reactive load of the panels.
I drive the panels directly from the plates of the direct drive amp which has a simple 1st order cap filter to feed the panels everything at about 130hz and up...still a work in progress but sounding very very good.
I eliminated the weakest link... the subs.... and use a pair of dedicated REL S2 10" subs. This solves for almost everything with these speakers. My room is about 17x40 and is plenty loud 100db on peaks if I want -but I never listen that loud. The presentation of the Beveridge is quite haunting with the ability to hang instruments and voices in space.
On the ESLs i did stack them.. IMO overrated for the complexity introduced... certainly louder I used a futterman OTL on this set up.
The originals when refurbed are so coherent and have such a midrange purity it is hard to complain about some of their shortfalls.
Refurbished, they do excellent bass and play very loud. I venture that most people that complain never have listened to a properly refurbished pair.
Thanks.
AJ
I see you have an HK Citation 2.If that is rebuilt using the McShane upgrades,that is a fantastic amp to power the model 3s. I rebuilt one a guy up in upstate NY and he put new Plitron Vanderveen torroids in the crossover and he is Awe Struck at how good it is..The amp is only working from 200hz up so and he uses a pair Auriel subs and he had given me an update about six months ago on them.
You also have that nice Wyetech 845 SET amp that work well too. I need to get out my Acoustat Servos again but I may have a hard time hooking them to the CLXs.The Monoliths were easy because they were a single panel speaker.
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong" H. L. Mencken
Didn't some of the beveridge designs come with their own built in OTL?
The transformer elimination trick is wonderful. Bet it does kick up performance another notch, particularly in dynamics and clarity. But I do listen to music with peaks well above 100 db very often.
How is the blending of the subs with the speakers? The beveridge were so quick, even at 130hz I have my doubts about smooth blending.
I didn't get a chance to hear stacked quads but it was always intriguing to me ever since I read about the concoction Levinson built out of stacked quads a Decca ribbon and a hartley sub. You are the first I found to have done the deed and come away disappointed.
Yes, the Model 2 Beveridges came with a direct drive OTL amp in the base-
Those are the Beveridges that I am familiar with...
Happy Listening
And it just so happens that Roger designed and built the direct drive amps for the Beveridges too!
I didn't get a chance to hear stacked quads but it was always intriguing to me ever since I read about the concoction Levinson built out of stacked quads a Decca ribbon and a hartley sub. You are the first I found to have done the deed and come away disappointed.
I heard an HQD system back in the 70s. Through the Atlanta Audio Society, JWC heard of a guy in Macon who had an HQD setup. I rode with him one Saturday to hear them. For me, stacking addressed the "iistening down" to them issue with respect to delivering a realistic image size. The ML class A amps were only 25 watts each so it really wasn't a case of their producing high output levels. I confess that in the end, I still preferred JWC's Dayton-Wrights overall.
Like my Sound Labs, the Beveridge is a tall line source that can produce very nice sound indeed via their unique aperature. I heard a pair of them at JWC's during a review period.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: