Panel life?

[18000rpm]

Bit of a Bryston fan-boy here. I got a 9B-ST back in 2002, and got hooked. Mostly 4B-STs (and a 4B-NRB, with a smattering of PowerPacs over the years). I'd like to say "I'll go for a 14B-SST when I grow up", but I'm edging closer to 60, and the startup I am working on is not covering the bills, let alone audio addictions! Hope you continue to enjoy your setup!

Me too!

I have a 4B-SST2 driving a pair of Prodigies, and my old 4B-SST driving my Stage X center.

 

[Robert D]

That would when the aging is well-advanced. If that's the case, it should be obvious because they'll be bass-heavy.

(for a hybrid anyway - a pure ES like CLS/CLX then correct - it would be harder to determine)

Well, in my case the speakers sounded good because I ran Audyssey and it boosted the highs and cut out the lows. It was balanced output. I use a sub too, so plenty of bass. In the receiver, the fronts were set +10 and 11 dB after calibration.

I was new to ML, and thought the speakers were just hard to drive.

 

[Robert D]

With my new panels, Audyssey set the fronts to I think it is 0 dB and -1.

 

[18000rpm]

Well, in my case the speakers sounded good because I ran Audyssey and it boosted the highs and cut out the lows. It was balanced output. I use a sub too, so plenty of bass. In the receiver, the fronts were set +10 and 11 dB after calibration.

Before I replaced the panels on my Stage X center and Aeon i rears I had to do that too. It greatly limited headroom for the whole system.

After replacing panels now everything is within +/- 1dB with Audyssey.

The Stage X was interesting because it had two low-end drivers and a tweeter so you think it sounds ok but looking at measurements there was a huge dip in the midrange when the panel was worn.

 

[Robert D]

Before I replaced the panels on my Stage X center and Aeon i rears I had to do that too. It greatly limited headroom for the whole system.

After replacing panels now everything is within +/- 1dB with Audyssey.

The Stage X was interesting because it had two low-end drivers and a tweeter so you think it sounds ok but looking at measurements there was a huge dip in the midrange when the panel was worn.

My Theater i was the same too. I replaced it with a new ML.

 

[amey01]

Before I replaced the panels on my Stage X center and Aeon i rears I had to do that too. It greatly limited headroom for the whole system.

After replacing panels now everything is within +/- 1dB with Audyssey.

The Stage X was interesting because it had two low-end drivers and a tweeter so you think it sounds ok but looking at measurements there was a huge dip in the midrange when the panel was worn.

Stage X?? That would only be 10 years old absolute max, right? That was a short panel life!

 

[zinda]

I now own a set of Aerius, I've done what I could to improve the sound, I won't go into it but they have new woofers and I bypassed the crossover using an active. The sound has improved but I have concluded that the problem is in the design. Curving the panels has destroyed any possibilities of getting the desired imaging and that beautiful sound bubble that flat panels do so well have a set of heavily modified Klipsch Heresy's that sound very much like the Aerius but are way more efficient.

I keep reading about how ML panels need to be replaced after 15 years? What exactly happens to them at that point? What should I be hearing if they are older than 15 years or maybe 30 years?

When I hear need replacing, I have to wonder exactly why that is or what happens to the sound that would be the reason for sut ch a claim?

I have owned JansZem panels form 1959, 1967 and 1971 and they had remarkable sound. I did a DIY build that used 28 JansZen panels and made my own bass integration with them and after much time testing during covid I had a fantastic sounding 2-way set up using an active crossover. What I found was their is a need for the woofers to overlap the panels. My tests showed the little 5x5" panels were able to play as low as 660Hz and I mixed the woofers at 600Hz to 800Hz with fantastic undetecable results.

Overall sound was 24Hz to 24kHz at reference level with less than 3db difference. Unfortunately they were melted in a fire and I've been looking for a replacement. I had about $1300 involved in last set and had to do some power supply repairs, I was fortunate with the woofers since I have a huge amount of drivers that I've stored up over the years.

So I'm familiar with electrostatics and the magic they can do when they're properly set up and configured.

That brings back to the question of this 15 year limitation that's constantly being mentioned. I noticed that ML uses a very basic type design with perforated plates as stators where others use wires strung across the panels. I figured that was to make the curve easier but wires can do that with a bridge like a guitar.

When I'm listening to MLs what signifies their end of life? This has never been explained, it's like it's said as some type of rule that everyone is supposed to take as gospel and needs to be unquestioned without any explanation of exactly why this is?

What if I find a pair that sound fine and they're over 20 years old and never have had anything done to them? What about 30 years old? Should they be considered to be worthless even if they are still working? This confuses me when this rule is in place.

The reality is they shouldn't wear out, especially when there's nothing that's moving enough to cause wear and wear would appear as a tear in the membrane. Since they don't use wires there's no arcing possibilities or burnt wires causing an open circuit.

The only other thing that could happen is the membrane glue would break down or allow slippage? But why aren't others having these problems with glue especially from 1959? You'd think that glues now will be far more advanced.

Please explain this so it makes sense? Is it simply something that ML has thrown out there so owners will buy new panels, is this ever mentioned at time of purchase?
It seems that ML is the only one that's putting a time limit on their panels.

Are panels even available for older stuff? When did they discover that the panels only last 15 years? There has to be a bunch of obvious problems for owners to report a problem and what were they reporting? It's hard to recognize a slow loss in overall sound and without obvious popping or vibrations I doubt people would be able to tell if the sound has made much change. This is typically only noticed when something has a drastic change in a very short time. Like its no working at all. (Power supply) or a rattling noise at certain frequencies or a dramatic loss in sound volume yet I don't see anything posted as symptoms to look for.

Ty for reading and I'll come back to see what you all have to say on this.

I want to thank everyone for their thoughts. I now own a set of Aerius, they seem to be in proper working order but I wasn't getting what I expected from them after assembling my own electrostatic speakers using 28 JansZen panels. I did extensive testing with them and created an amazing sounding set using panels made in 1959, 1967 and 1971. I fixed power supplies and all panels has the same output regardless of age. They tested flat from 660Hz to 24kHz with a slight bump at 6KHz which was corrected easily.

I have already swapped out new woofers and removed some filler, bypassed the crossovers and am using an active crossover with to matched amps as I was using with the JansZen before they were melted in a fire.

When I built my last speakers I tried a bunch of ideas and set them up in a curved configuration but found it to lose their magic when I did that. It's something to do with crossing the rear waves before they reflect off the rear wall. The best I could do was to aim the outer most panels (4 panels across in a 14 panels array) so they were turned outward towards the side wall while toeing the speakers at my ears or even more. That would have made a more difficult build and it did not add to the sound.

So I made mine with all panels on a flat plane and moved them back to match the woofers cone motor attachment. About an inch set back from the front edge. The sound was like stepping inside a music bubble like huge headphones that shook the floor and had a sound that was inside your head. Right up til when you stood up and started to leave the living room. Then it would disappear. But that's what makes ESLs so awesome. You just can't get that sound from anything else.

Trying to spread it out just doesn't work, the rear waves cross each other before the reflection off the rear wall and side walls. Even though I got the Aerius to sound good they're no better than my heavenly modified Heresy's.

The sound is almost identical except the Heresys are way more efficient and lack deep bass. I was able to corect the Aerius bass by changing out woofers and removing half the fiber fill. But I can't get that desired sound that makes an ESL so desirable.

I just don't see what ML is thinking, if you've only owned ML ESLs then you need to listen to what a simple flat panels can do and you'll understand that you're giving up the entire draw of ESLs for a wider off access response. It makes no sense. Let regular speakers handle that. My Herseys side by side with the Aerius are nearly identical and my Herseys are 40 years old and survived a fire and still sound fine.

My conclusion is I'll be reworking my Heresy's and selling the Aerius. They're a fine speaker but not a true ESL from what I've known to be the sound of ESLs. There's no way to achieve the desired sound that I know an ESL can do. I've done everything I can do short of flatten out the panel, I'm sure if I could do it they'd be perfect.

I got them for next to nothing and had them delivered before I paid for them so I'm not complaining about the deal. MLs are just not able to do what an ESL does best. They do sound fine but they aren't magical in any sense. I can't get that lost in sound feeling. They sound like really good regular speakers. I'll be looking again for a set of Acustats like I planned on before I found the Aerius.

I guess if you haven't heard the magic that an ESL does you'd be ok with MLs. I'm not saying they're a bad speaker, they sound great but they're the same as any great speaker just not on the level of a true flat panels ESL set up properly.

Buying a new set of panels is insane to me, I would suggest looking around and seeing what you're missing with MLs it will shock you, might even anger you.

 

[Robert Perry]

Interesting. I have Aerius and I think they're amazing. Great sound stage. Detailed. Full sound. Great bass. I have a lot of other speakers (DQ-10, JBL L26, some Allisons) and these are fuller than the others. Yes, the JBL are 2 way so great at the high and low, less so in the middle. Anyway, different tastes for different people for sure. I wouldn't suggest people who like MLs just don't know enough. Many here have plenty of experience.

 

[Jazzman53]

I want to thank everyone for their thoughts. I now own a set of Aerius, they seem to be in proper working order but I wasn't getting what I expected from them after assembling my own electrostatic speakers using 28 JansZen panels. I did extensive testing with them and created an amazing sounding set using panels made in 1959, 1967 and 1971. I fixed power supplies and all panels has the same output regardless of age. They tested flat from 660Hz to 24kHz with a slight bump at 6KHz which was corrected easily.

I have already swapped out new woofers and removed some filler, bypassed the crossovers and am using an active crossover with to matched amps as I was using with the JansZen before they were melted in a fire.

When I built my last speakers I tried a bunch of ideas and set them up in a curved configuration but found it to lose their magic when I did that. It's something to do with crossing the rear waves before they reflect off the rear wall. The best I could do was to aim the outer most panels (4 panels across in a 14 panels array) so they were turned outward towards the side wall while toeing the speakers at my ears or even more. That would have made a more difficult build and it did not add to the sound.

So I made mine with all panels on a flat plane and moved them back to match the woofers cone motor attachment. About an inch set back from the front edge. The sound was like stepping inside a music bubble like huge headphones that shook the floor and had a sound that was inside your head. Right up til when you stood up and started to leave the living room. Then it would disappear. But that's what makes ESLs so awesome. You just can't get that sound from anything else.

Trying to spread it out just doesn't work, the rear waves cross each other before the reflection off the rear wall and side walls. Even though I got the Aerius to sound good they're no better than my heavenly modified Heresy's.

The sound is almost identical except the Heresys are way more efficient and lack deep bass. I was able to corect the Aerius bass by changing out woofers and removing half the fiber fill. But I can't get that desired sound that makes an ESL so desirable.

I just don't see what ML is thinking, if you've only owned ML ESLs then you need to listen to what a simple flat panels can do and you'll understand that you're giving up the entire draw of ESLs for a wider off access response. It makes no sense. Let regular speakers handle that. My Herseys side by side with the Aerius are nearly identical and my Herseys are 40 years old and survived a fire and still sound fine.

My conclusion is I'll be reworking my Heresy's and selling the Aerius. They're a fine speaker but not a true ESL from what I've known to be the sound of ESLs. There's no way to achieve the desired sound that I know an ESL can do. I've done everything I can do short of flatten out the panel, I'm sure if I could do it they'd be perfect.

I got them for next to nothing and had them delivered before I paid for them so I'm not complaining about the deal. MLs are just not able to do what an ESL does best. They do sound fine but they aren't magical in any sense. I can't get that lost in sound feeling. They sound like really good regular speakers. I'll be looking again for a set of Acustats like I planned on before I found the Aerius.

I guess if you haven't heard the magic that an ESL does you'd be ok with MLs. I'm not saying they're a bad speaker, they sound great but they're the same as any great speaker just not on the level of a true flat panels ESL set up properly.

Buying a new set of panels is insane to me, I would suggest looking around and seeing what you're missing with MLs it will shock you, might even anger you.

Having built and experienced flat-panel ESLs, I have to agree that [within their tightly focused sweet spot] flat panels give magical imaging and slam that you just can't get from a curved or segmented panel. A friend once described my flat panels as 'remote headphones'.

There's also the downside, which is often described as putting your "head in a vice". Anyone who hasn't sat in the focal point of a pair of big flat panels really can't imagine how directional they are-- great for solo listening but not so good for entertaining guests (unless they are sitting in your lap).

Some years ago I built a flat-panel ESL with switch-selectable wide and narrow dispersion modes. Yes; this is possible, and it worked perfectly but my implmentation of it proved to be rather impractical.

To explain how it worked, I must first explain how electrical segmentation works to curve the wavefront. This is explained in depth on my website here:
https://jazzman-esl-page.blogspot.com/

The wide/narrow-mode panel was a segmented flat panel with a switch installed to selectively enable or disable the segmentation resistor network. The switches (2) were lovely Soviet military eight-pole rotary types with pure silver contacts purchased for $4 on Ebay from Belarus.

In narrow mode (switch ON), connected jumpers defeated the segmentation network, and the panel then functioned as an unsegmented flat panel beaming sound to a tightly focused sweet spot.

In wide mode (switch OFF) the enabled segmentation network progressively attenuated frequencies and phasing, from the panel centerline outward, to curve the wave front-- giving wide, smooth-trending dispersion (better than a curved panel, actually).

The impractical part was having to power down to switch modes (lest high voltage arcing destroy the switch) and then re-EQ'ing the panel each time because the separate modes had unique response curves. I could recall EQ curves stored in my DSP's memory but it was still pain to change it every time.

The switch mode panel was aesthetically butt-ugly too. In the end, I gave away those switch mode panels and built the lovely segmented wire panels that I now use.

For the curious; here's a backpage on my website showing the switch mode panel build:
http://jazzman-esl-page.blogspot.com/2008/03/a-segmented-wire-stator-esl-with.html