Magnetic vs electrostatic...which is the better or preferred ??
At the very least, people have no idea, as in "how can that room divider make sound ?"
Some people may know what those flat things are, but mistake one for the other or for the same thing, as in "I heard those Maggie electrostatics."
At the fanatical end of the question ( Hello Mr. Acoustat !)
people have passionate allegiances and run an underground resistance for one side or the other of this war.
Simply put, what tickles your cochlea ?
It boils down to driving force and delegation of duty regarding how the amplified input is handled.
For a stat, the driving force developed by the static charge is low, but the diaphragm is very light and responsive and usually much larger. So the speaker can develop the needed get up and go.
For a Planar magnetic the diaphragm by design must be heavier and not as evenly driven, but the driving force is greater by the nature of the magnetic grid, so it can go just as well as the stat.
This is an issue of power to weight ratio. So on the even playing field of physics it would seem no yardage is gained by either team.
Now throw the unforeseen variable of the human ear/brain interaction into the mix and the fun begins.
The purist will argue the stat handles the entire signal, therefore the un-dissected output reaches our ears intact with a greater sense of realism in the space and time continuum.
I will agree, having owned some great stats, Acoustats, Quads and Sound Labs..the latter to my wife's dismay, and heard a whole bunch of Martin Logans. There was just something inherently right about sitting in that sweet spot.
Well if they were so great, why did I sell them all ?? I guess the short answer for me was the lack of dynamics. The sock of a kick drum or the thwak of a snare, or that complicated mix of attack, mid bass punch, resonance and decay of a bass string seemed lacking a bit to me.
I Loved the glorious mids, and could deal with the treble and dispersion issues, but in the end I was wanting for more.
My foray into the planar magnetics of the day started out innocently enough. I have owned Maggie 2.5R, MG3a and 3.5 as well as listening to a few Apogees. While I felt the bass and dynamics were better than the stats, but I still lusted for that dynamic cone impact and LF spl ability.
The treble dispersion was better, but they lacked that homogenous sound I loved so much with the stats. In particular I thought the gap between the planar woofer and ribbon tweeter was too great, leading to a discontinuity in the midrange.
It seemed that the separate tweeter and woofer panel with ubiquitous crossover giveth one thing, taketh away another.
Being of a tinkering nature, I proceeded to build various DIY Frankenstein's from parts of each with limited success.
That led me to building my own drivers. I believed I could go further with the multi way magnetic planar, as I felt the stat dynamic issue could only be remedied by massive panels that would not be welcome in all but a few homes. I did not want to give up the coherence of the full range xover less electrostatic panel. So after much trial and error I designed a planar magnetic panel that operated full range no xover,direct wired to the driving amp, with a lot more horsepower behind it than any stat could develop for the same size. The fact the panel is directly driven without a transformer as in a stat and the magnetic planar has the advantage of greater excursion and spl ability for its size appealed to me. To this I gently blended a ribbon tweeter of my design with a simple series capacitor to keep it happily singing with the panel. To that add active dynamic cone drivers in a sealed box that could keep up and not step on the toes of its dance partner but do what cones do best, give it the ability to tango with the best of them.