Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
73.4.255.141
In Reply to: RE: With these observations... posted by E-Stat on November 11, 2021 at 11:36:44
I've noticed similar differences in soundstage. In fact, the first planars I'd heard, a pair of KLH-9's that a friend scored when we were in college, blew me away -- I'd never heard much of a soundstage at all! That, and the transparency, is what got me into planars. Even that was never quite right, though -- by today's standards, the driver arrangement on the KLH-9's is clumsy.
Follow Ups:
I'd never heard much of a soundstage at all!
That's a concept that has many facets. What I find important is for the harmonics of an instrument to sound like it's coming from the same place as the fundamentals. Which is where consistent directivity comes into play.
...the driver arrangement on the KLH-9's is clumsy.
In that regard, I confess a decided preference for truly full range designs. The 9 is an electrostat that runs full range, but is not a full range electrostat as it has multiple frequency specific drivers. Hearing the Dayton-Wrights in '76 introduced me to that distinction. It had eight panels, but they were identical and covered the same range. And mounted in a slight arc to improve dispersion.
I'm still waiting for someone to make a line source version of the ESL-63. It could have an essentially perfect line source dipole pattern, something that short of a speaker the size of the Sound Labs you can only approximate with facets or a curved driver since they remain directional only where the wavelength is short.
Click here for pics.
Interesting! It looks like it's still a point source, though -- a line source has some advantages such as immunity from the ill effects of floor and ceiling reflections (which in a line source just extend the line acoustically).
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: