- This topic has 29 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 18 hours, 55 minutes ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
-
JW – nice set up. I like how you put the panels lower to the floor with your DIY frames. That way you can get those monster 945’s in your room. Yeah, I was thinking that too much dampening with sand/shot may not be a good thing. I think that I’m just going to pour some viscoelastic vibration damping compound (paint) into the vertical tubes to coat the inside walls of the steel tubing and then shove a “noodle” in each tube.
Ernestov – I’ve attached a hand drawn diagram of my clamping idea for clamping my panels to my metal frames. -
Yep, I try and control my audiophile buffoonery, but sometimes I just can’t help myself. Honestly, that’s part of the fun of the hobby for me and others. I don’t know how long you have been following SL and the old SL forums, but there were some crazy cats, back in the day, that were doing some crazy stuff and that craziness has been implemented into the latest and greatest SL speakers. The steel frames, the transformers and other changes were the outcome of audio buffoonery.
-
I diyed a steel frame years ago and am still using it. In my experience, I filled the vertical steel square tube with sand about 1/3 of its height. Initially, I filled 1/2, but the sound wasn’t to my liking. I recommend filling 1/3.
I have modified my 945 with everything I could think about. I think I am done now.
-
-
-
-
-
@ keithmundy
the analogy with ‘Brilliance Control’ was ironic, BC has nothing to do with frames. The two things are connected as soon as we put an audiophile in the middle 🙂
Regards,
Massimo -
-
Sorry for the slow follow up. I appreciate everyone’s input. Ernestov, I have designed a way to clamp the panels into the frames now, as well. I will post a picture or diagram some time soon. I’m still very interested in seeing what you have done.
Where, why, how did the topic of the brilliance control have anything to do with dampening of the steel tubes? That’s a topic worth discussing but maybe start another tread for that.
Yeah, I knew Roger would not think that any dampening would be needed.
Tailspn, you are a wild man!
John v – yes, I just ordered the 845 panels. I am making my own frames. Very similar to the stock frames – only better – IMO.
The steel framed Ultimate’s have not been around for 30 years. Huh?
-
-
-
-
-
Dr West believes that his electrostatic panels on their own are rigid enough without the need of a frame or damping of any kind. Which, to a certain extent, the construction quality of his panels is very good, they are definitely well build. Because he feels confident that the structure of his panels is good enough for them to stand on their own he sells them with frames predominantly as a cosmetic feature.
-
I agree. I have five 86″ 845’s free standing in a ITU alignment arc for 5.0 channel surround listening. Each panel has a two inch wide woven nylon strap fastened to the panel center top, and attached to the ceiling one inch above to prevent tipping. The panel bases are sitting on two inch blacks under the panel vertical side members. There is no perceivable or measureable structural resonance. The membrane resonances are spectrally well distributed and dampened, and far exceed any structural resonance.
I highly recommend this approach if one is fortunate enough to have a room ceiling height just a few inches higher than the panel’s length. According to Dr West, this has the acoustical effect of extending the panel’s dispersion length to much greater effective length.
Tom
-
-
Ernestov, I’m very anxious to see what you have done. I am actively building my frames right now. My panels will be shipped anytime now. So, the sooner that you get the pictures posted, the better for me! Thank you. You’ve got me really thinking now about how to clamp the panels in place now.
As far as rdiirio’s comment on whether, or not, Roger took into account resonance of the panels/frames…. I do not think that Roger necessarily cares about such trivial “audiophile” ideas.
-
Hi Robert,
I’s been a while since we’ve made contact. Things are going well. The
Ultimate series uses a 3″ diameter steel tube except for the smaller
U-545 which uses a 2″ diameter tube. In both cases, the thickness of
the tube is about 1/8″. The tubes, as you would expect, are quite
massive and have a mass resonance far below human perception. The tube
is normally empty and is capped on both ends such that an acoustic wave
cannot enter and resonate. We have some owners that have filled the
tube with sand or other material to eliminate cavity resonance, but this is not necessary. Even at the highest audio levels the acoustic energy isn’t sufficient to penetrate the tubes and filling them makes no difference. I hope that this adequately answers your question.Hope all is well with you.
Best regards,Roger
Sound Lab, Inc.
-
-
-
I have my own thoughts about removing a potentiometer from circuit but what were the reasons for bypassing the brilliance control from other users, do you know??
-
Hi!
Even among SL users there are some who like to take an active role in modifying and “upgrading” their system.
I suppose they are more audiophiles than music lovers, as they usually listen to a limited number of discs and prefer to give up the flexibility offered by controls such as ‘Brilliance’ to achieve greater transparency.
I think that’s the reason.Regards, Massimo
-
-
-
-
I sure will be sharing more information about my design in the days ahead. It is a very sturdy frame which keeps the electrostatic panel very rigid. I will first post some pictures after the frames come back from getting a black powder coat finish.
-
-
Ernestov that is a great idea! and something that I have been considering. I am actually making the steel frames myself. I am going off of Roger’s design, but you are right – there has got to be a better way to secure the panel to the steel tubes. I do not have the panels yet so I do not have a clear idea of what I might be able to do with them. Would you mind sharing your idea/experience on what you did. Maybe we could discuss this over the phone. You input would be greatly appreciated.
-
-
Hey John, thank you for taking the time to respond. These are brand new panels with steel frames.They are the full height and they will fit in my room. Yes, I considered the “noodles” and may run those. I’m also considering applying a viscoelastic coating on the inside of the steel tubes – then the noodles. Thanks again for taking your time to respond. I appreciate your input.
-
Congrats on your soon to be received 845s!
Is this a new pair of U845s or are you updating the cores from an earlier/smaller Ultimate version?
Also, how tall will the speakers be as some 845 versions are slightly taller than 8Ft. which can be problematic installing them in an average height room?
As to damping the tubing, rapping the tubing with my knuckles on my U890s barely elicits any noise which quickly dies out so I didn’t feel it was worth the effort. The thought just occurred to me that instead of using sandbags on a string, as some have done, you could try using a few pool noodles inserted into the tubes. The noodles are available with a diameter of 2.75″ which should match the ID of the 3″ steel tubing. Although the pool noodles would not have the mass the sand would have, they would still help to improve the damping of the tube with little effort or expense, worth a try.John
-
Hello, I’m very excited to say that I will be receiving my new 845 panels real soon – I’m pumped. I’m wondering what others have done for dampening in the vertical steel tubing of the Ultimate’s? I’ve heard of people putting sand bags with stings attached to them to help dampen unwanted resonance in the steel tubing. I’ve used Dynamat, to good effect, on other audio projects to absorb energy, but I don’t want to put that on the outside of the tubes – obviously. What have some of you done to help with dampening unwanted resonance in the steel tubing of the Ultimates? Thank you
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.