Posted by Lew on November 21, 2002 at 14:26:46:
In Reply to: ESL is a Capacitor...Not a.... OHM posted by Terry Koehn on November 20, 2002 at 16:30:28:
Your point is well taken that the notion of "critical damping" is based on the assumption that the spkr is a cone type, which has predominantly an inductive character, whereas our spkrs are giant capacitors. But then you changed the subject. Can you tell me why the Crowhurst notion of the proper amount of damping does not apply to an ESL? I've frequently wondered about this. (After all, absent your direct-drive hi-voltage tube amplifier, which I am waiting for anxiously, conventional amps driving ESLs are really seeing the audio transformer as a load interface, and the transformer does have inductive properties, although I agree that an ESL cum transformer is best modeled as a capacitor.) But your reminder that an ESL needs a large voltage swing is neither here nor there in relation to the subject at hand. It does tell me why one might not want to use a ss amplifier, though. And still, I say that one need not be too concerned about a low amplifier damping factor when considering the bass response of a SL full-range spkr. The Carver is a nice solution for driving the bass transformer in bi-amping because of cost, heat, and price, but not because it has any inherent advantage vs a fine quality tube amp with a higher damping factor.