Apogee vs Electrostatic

[morricab]

I saw some once years ago at a London hi-fi show. Only heard them at very low levels no real clues as to how good they really were. Rare over here.

They did look cool - no fabric the drivers were bare.

Despite having used ESLs (MLs) for many years I know I'll never go back. I've genuinely gone off them. I could live with Neolith, though. That's probably my fave one these days. It's a hybrid, though, and that's cheating.

"Gayle Sanders, renowned speaker designer and cofounder of MartinLogan, today announced the launch of a new speaker company, Gayle Sanders Eikon. "

It seems that Roger Sanders did get a patent for a curved panel but he never commercialized it. His first commercial speakers, to my knowledge, were the Innersound speakers that were flat.

He was never directly associated with ML as far as I can see. His current speakers are also flat...so clearly he thinks the curved concept was too flawed or difficult to do right to pursue. He also doesn't seem to like the approach from Soundlab.

Interestingly, the first Acoustats were "curved" as well but with three or four flat panels arranged in an arc. These date from the early 70s and still work perfectly to this day without refurbishment.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Apparently my visit to henks Grand apogee. Is cancellend , i was in the neighbourhood for a project , but besides the amp there are problems with. The dac as well unfortunately

 

[Zero000]

Apparently my visit to henks Grand apogee. Is cancellend , i was in the neighbourhood for a project , but besides the amp there are problems with. The dac as well unfortunately

Bummer. I wouldn't mind hearing those Grands.

 

[microstrip]

"Gayle Sanders, renowned speaker designer and cofounder of MartinLogan, today announced the launch of a new speaker company, Gayle Sanders Eikon. "

It seems that Roger Sanders did get a patent for a curved panel but he never commercialized it. His first commercial speakers, to my knowledge, were the Innersound speakers that were flat.

He was never directly associated with ML as far as I can see. His current speakers are also flat...so clearly he thinks the curved concept was too flawed or difficult to do right to pursue. He also doesn't seem to like the approach from Soundlab.

Interestingly, the first Acoustats were "curved" as well but with three or four flat panels arranged in an arc. These date from the early 70s and still work perfectly to this day without refurbishment.

A typical case of different objectives and targeting different types of listeners. Roget Sanders designs systems with narrow dispersion, having an extremely small sweet spot - I remember seeing a photo of a show where in order to have two people listening one listener seat behind the other ... Although some people can listen to music with the head in a vice, I hate it - I like sitting around 10 feet and moving in the room without the feeling that the soundstage and tonal balance collapse - Soundlab's and XLF's were great in this aspect.

In principle, low resistivity electrostatics are more stable and robust than high resistivity ones, as the conductive layer can be metallic.

 

[Zero000]

A typical case of different objectives and targeting different types of listeners. Roget Sanders designs systems with narrow dispersion, having an extremely small sweet spot - I remember seeing a photo of a show where in order to have two people listening one listener seat behind the other ... Although some people can listen to music with the head in a vice, I hate it - I like sitting around 10 feet and moving in the room without the feeling that the soundstage and tonal balance collapse - Soundlab's and XLF's were great in this aspect.

In principle, low resistivity electrostatics are more stable and robust than high resistivity ones, as the conductive layer can be metallic.

This "head in a vice" issue is exactly the problem with the curvelinear design. In the smaller ML panels, Summit and below, it is seriously pronounced.

You might think the dispersion is even, but the reality is only a very, very narrow part of the panel is directly radiating sound towards your ear. You can see that by using a flashlight from the listening position, and this is how ML recommend you set them up.

The rest of the sound is bounced around all over the place, and the only way you can get even output is to have your ears precisely align with where the two super narrow slits of driver from each speaker are actually facing directly towards you ear.

The problem, I believe, is much more pronounced in rooms where the side walls are very close to the speaker. The curvelinear design is actually firing directly into the side walls all the way up the room (pretty much). That's why ML owners put acoustic treatment panels on the side walls and claim big improvements.

I speak as a very long time user.

At least with the Soundlab design, you get a few inches of flat panel facing your ears. That should be a bit better, I reckon. But I can't comment due to no experience of them. Or indeed the Sanders. But I have heard plenty of flat panel ESLs and they do fare better with respect to sweetspot width.

Even the Soundlab design should vary in output as you walk from side to side, I reckon. But it will also have the side wall issue.

Other speakers will also reflect sound off of sidewalls, of course, but many don't fire directly into them all the way up the length.

 

[microstrip]

This "head in a vice" issue is exactly the problem with the curvelinear design. In the smaller ML panels, Summit and below, it is seriously pronounced.

You might think the dispersion is even, but the reality is only a very, very narrow part of the panel is directly radiating sound towards your ear. You can see that by using a flashlight from the listening position, and this is how ML recommend you set them up.

The rest of the sound is bounced around all over the place, and the only way you can get even output is to have your ears precisely align with where the two super narrow slits of driver from each speaker are actually facing directly towards you ear.

The problem, I believe, is much more pronounced in rooms where the side walls are very close to the speaker. The curvelinear design is actually firing directly into the side walls all the way up the room (pretty much). That's why ML owners put acoustic treatment panels on the side walls and claim big improvements.

I speak as a very long time user.

At least with the Soundlab design, you get a few inches of flat panel facing your ears. That should be a bit better, I reckon. But I can't comment due to no experience of them. Or indeed the Sanders. But I have heard plenty of flat panel ESLs and they do fare better with respect to sweetspot width.

Even the Soundlab design should vary in output as you walk from side to side, I reckon. But it will also have the side wall issue.

Other speakers will also reflect sound off of sidewalls, of course, but many don't fire directly into them all the way up the length.

I am addressing reasonable size electrostatics, as you say some smaller curved panels suffer from this sweetspot problem. But I owned Martin Logan Prodigy's and ReQuest, and they had a large listening area, as well as a friend Monolith III. IMHO it is also a question of reflected versus direct sound and the way the sound response is varying when we move - avoiding abrupt changes helps us accept what I feel as a "natural" sound.

The old SoundLab "flat" speakers (A2 and A4) had a flat unit for bass middle and a separate curved segmented section for treble.

And as you say, room size matters.

 

[morricab]

This "head in a vice" issue is exactly the problem with the curvelinear design. In the smaller ML panels, Summit and below, it is seriously pronounced.

You might think the dispersion is even, but the reality is only a very, very narrow part of the panel is directly radiating sound towards your ear. You can see that by using a flashlight from the listening position, and this is how ML recommend you set them up.

The rest of the sound is bounced around all over the place, and the only way you can get even output is to have your ears precisely align with where the two super narrow slits of driver from each speaker are actually facing directly towards you ear.

The problem, I believe, is much more pronounced in rooms where the side walls are very close to the speaker. The curvelinear design is actually firing directly into the side walls all the way up the room (pretty much). That's why ML owners put acoustic treatment panels on the side walls and claim big improvements.

I speak as a very long time user.

At least with the Soundlab design, you get a few inches of flat panel facing your ears. That should be a bit better, I reckon. But I can't comment due to no experience of them. Or indeed the Sanders. But I have heard plenty of flat panel ESLs and they do fare better with respect to sweetspot width.

Even the Soundlab design should vary in output as you walk from side to side, I reckon. But it will also have the side wall issue.

Other speakers will also reflect sound off of sidewalls, of course, but many don't fire directly into them all the way up the length.

You are correct. Add to that the restriction in motion the curving gives and it is not clear what the real advantage of a curved panel is.

There is a solution to high frequency dispersion that Stax and Acoustat found. Stax electrically divided their panel on the ELS-F81 into three segments where the two outside were time delayed relative to the middle, which simulated a cylindrical sound wave and the segments being relatively narrow would beam less.

Acoustat had two equal panels side-by-side and both panels did bass, the inside panel did mids and only a narrow strip on the inside did highs. They could divide electrically because they used wires rather than a coated punched metal screen for stators. Great even dispersion and no head in a vice. Note, only Spectra series had this tech.

Final note, Acoustat was the most stable estat design. They don't die unless physically damaged...most are going strong on original panels 40+ years later...

 

[Zero000]

On a lighter note...

 

[marty]

The world is changing in so many ways before our very eyes. Audio reproduction is no different. The Sanders Eikon speaker is an interesting project and I suspect a timely one that has great potential commercial success when one realizes that it is not designed for us. It is quite clearly designed for the millennial crowd. This is the MP3 digital iphone crowd that has neither the time, money, space or interest in enter the world of audio reproduction that we know and love. Nothing notes this demarcation more clearly than opening up the inside of this month's Stereophile to look at the contents page. On the left, the 25K Eikon system. On the right the 57K (+ 9K stand) Magico M2 speaker which, with cables and electronics comprise a nominal 100K system. Is there anyone reading this that doesn't know which is the better system, even without hearing the Eikon? My point is, it doesn't matter. The intended market for the Eikon just ain't us. And frankly, neither the millennials or Gayle Sanders care. I honestly wish him every success because I have to reluctantly acknowledge the future belongs to them, not us.

 

[kach22i]

The problem, I believe, is much more pronounced in rooms where the side walls are very close to the speaker. The curvelinear design is actually firing directly into the side walls all the way up the room (pretty much). That's why ML owners put acoustic treatment panels on the side walls and claim big improvements.

Until I recently set my system up in my new room I would have had no idea what you are talking about.

A few days ago I took my stack of CD's in boxes off my right wall first reflection point (at and above ear level) and put the Cd's in their proper wall rack.

The amount of new information coming from that side was eye opening.


No more lopsided soundstage, and I had been blaming my vintage amp for going on the fritz.

 

[marmota]

@marty Is not that drastic, I'm 27 and if I had the money, I wouldn't touch the Eikon with a 10 foot pole. I would look for custom speakers or some kind of ugly horn and a turntable that weights more than me.
There's always "different" people, even if the majority has a different taste, so there's always place for a niche market.
Also, magazines are more or less dead, millenials search forums and online communities...as long as someone is talking about it, they'll know it when typing "high end audio" or "expensive audio", etc.

 

[kach22i]

......... I wouldn't touch the Eikon with a 10 foot pole.......

What's the turn off, looks, size, technology, or maybe price?

 

[marmota]

What's the turn off, looks, size, technology, or maybe price?

DSP, Class D amps, small woofers, AMT, abnormally long distance between mid and bass drivers, ugly, expensive...how can someone like that? LOL
In a more serious note, what they did is perfect for their target market, just not for an eccentric weirdo like me.

 

[Gregadd]

"Gayle Sanders, renowned speaker designer and cofounder of MartinLogan, today announced the launch of a new speaker company, Gayle Sanders Eikon. "

It seems that Roger Sanders did get a patent for a curved panel but he never commercialized it. His first commercial speakers, to my knowledge, were the Innersound speakers that were flat.

He was never directly associated with ML as far as I can see. His current speakers are also flat...so clearly he thinks the curved concept was too flawed or difficult to do right to pursue. He also doesn't seem to like the approach from Soundlab.

Interestingly, the first Acoustats were "curved" as well but with three or four flat panels arranged in an arc. These date from the early 70s and still work perfectly to this day without refurbishment.

Gayle worried the curved panel would collapse on itself.

 

[microstrip]

The world is changing in so many ways before our very eyes. Audio reproduction is no different. The Sanders Eikon speaker is an interesting project and I suspect a timely one that has great potential commercial success when one realizes that it is not designed for us. It is quite clearly designed for the millennial crowd. (...)

Sorry, what is really different from other active speakers that did not have exceptional success in the past all over the world? For example, Meridian has been selling similar speakers since long.

For the millennial crowd Devialet is selling their Phantoms at euro 1900 each.

 

[kach22i]

DSP, Class D amps, small woofers, AMT, abnormally long distance between mid and bass drivers, ugly, expensive...how can someone like that? LOL
In a more serious note, what they did is perfect for their target market, just not for an eccentric weirdo like me.

Okay, I understand more after watching the video in link below.

https://eikonaudio.com/

I cannot judge what he's done with Class D amps and other technology unless I hear it myself.

Looks are subjective, and I would rather look at Eikons than anything from Wilson, and Wilson is embraced by many.

Seems to me the majority of people (including self-professed audiophiles) do not find the full potential of their stereo system because of room acoustics, proper amplification, accessory equipment and layout.

Heck, I've had my Martin Logan's for a quarter century and only last night experienced The Dave Brubeck Quartet's Colombia LP Time Further Out (side 2) in a realistic tactile way I've not heard on any system at any price before. The drums were drums, the hand clapping was hand clapping.....................and all because I finally set the speakers up (including subwoofer) properly with few compromises, and had just tweaked the system.

FYI: there are still compromises in my system, more potential to unlock.

The neurotic audiophile intent on cleaning and spinning records, getting his room just right and finding that last piece to the sonic jigsaw puzzle isn't going to take kindly to a "plug and play" system....................or will they?

25 freaking years, never heard drums and hand clapping like last night.

Who wants to wait 25 years?

I'm not sure there is another 25 years left in me.

 

[Big Dog RJ]

ML owners placing things, such as acoustic panelling on the sides and claiming there systems sound great, well that's great! Others use subs to great effect and are beginning to hear things they've never heard before, that's also good to know.
Marty raises an important point with today's price points and how the new buyer views all this great stuff. Which makes me ponder, so where does it end or begin. 30 - 60 grand spent on speakers alone obviously for the majority is just insane. Add the electronics and ancillary gear, the total hovers around 200 - 300grand or more. And it's still not enough, keep pushing that audiophile reference point, whatever that is and most of us get lost in the gear, instead we begin to compare systems... I know a few who just live for that and nothing else! Constantly changing, upgrading chasing the ultimate, it simply doesn't exist! Regardless of how much you spend.

I've heard them myself, probably the best by far was my experience with the ML Statements driven by Dan D's Relentless monoblocks using the Momentum preamp and Momentum phonostage, Superb!

Then there was another equally superb system that allowed the music to freely flow, Alsyvox driven by CJ's top of the line ART300's (won amplifier of the year) partnered with the GATS2 preamp, superb! at nearly half that cost of the previous system. Hot damn, those Alsyvox ribbons go for around 80grand a pair and that's their entry level...?!

Then there's this one below, which at a fraction of that cost along with no side wall acoustic panelling and absolutely no subwoofer (will never use one), sounds equally superb. Or shall say, at least I'm enjoying the music to the fullest! I cannot possibly think of changing anything, unless I wanted to upgrade the Rega RP8 to a RP10 or some other massive analog rig that weighs more than a couple line backers... Perhaps I should upgrade all the Nordost cables and interconnects to Odin Supremes, then maybe there might be a slight chance of improvement... 30-35% in my experience.

What the heck for? Why even bother to make some other chaps ego soar... Constantly changing and upgrading to me is a sign of insecurity. If your system has reached a level of pristine quality, high definition and a level of realism effortlessly, without the artificial enhancements, then that's about as good as it gets! Tip your hat to yourself, stop complaining and just enjoy the music.

As I've always believed, just enjoy your music in whatever shape size or form that you can afford. There's no reason to go overboard, just like those folks panic buying due to an alien virus...

Just sit back, relax... be satisfied with what you've got. Pour that scotch and light that cigar.
Cheers, RJ
Btw Norah Jones is playing tonight... Superb!