Final-Audio New Series electrostatics

Excellent, it was an analogy meant to reflect different flavors of sound!

Sense of humor varies by the individual as always!

@pindac 

Recommend contacting FINAL directly at final-audio.com for audition opportunities,

I know FINAL has multiple customers including very recent buyers in UK,

Cheers! 

@madtrader Arcing is one of the common problems with electrostatic speakers and modern designs, including Final Audio, typically include various protective measures to prevent that.  In the case of my M35s one of those protections is a fast blow fuse that is designed to blow when the speaker is being overdriven.  Unfortunately, my M35 was shipped with the wrong fuse.  Instead of the 1 amp fuse that apparently went into subsequent speakers, my speaker had a 3.15 amp fuse that permitted me to overdrive the speaker.  I only experienced arcing on two tracks played well above my normal listening levels and that was when I had the incorrect fuse installed.  Final has told me it shouldn't be a problem now that I am using a 1 amp fuse.  I generally listen around 75-85 dBC and at those levels I have never had a problem with arcing.  And I occasionally listen with peaks going into the mid 90's without any issue.  But if you are trying to achieve truly deafening levels I suspect no electrostatic speaker would be the ideal choice.  At Axpona two years ago I was listening to the $250K Borresen speakers after hours and they cranked those up to 105 dBC on a sustained level.  That was impressive but also fairly painful and I would never recommend listening at those levels LOL.

Unfortunately people do not really understand that electrostatic speakers are very different than boxes with dynamic drivers in one critical area. That is the level of detail that an electrostatic can produce can be done at much lower listening levels (high efficiency horns being an exception). It’s not uncommon for people to try to drive ESLs as hard as they may drive  dynamic drivers given those dynamic drivers need the power to produce the same level of detail. That’s a recipe for disaster whether the ESL has a protection circuit or not.

The original Quad ESL was limited to a 35V maximum, but I have experienced many trying to drive them with amplifiers with much higher voltage ratings. The original Quad II designed for the ESLs was rated at 17 watts per channel. The Music Reference RM-10 was double that but met the 35V demand the bass panels would tolerate before arcing. It just so happened that Roger Modjeski owned Quad ESLs and so had the opportunity to  research the effects his amplifier had with these speakers. Building an amp that worked well with his Quads was not his intent, but he got lucky (the amp was built to work well with Vandersteen 2s, a dynamic driver speaker). Fused, clamp boards, what have you in terms of protection, what is important is understanding how the ESL speaker can best be driven to provide the best sound and what type of amplification and sound levels are required to do that. 

@clio09 I agree that the M35s don't need to be played as loud as my Magnepan 20.7s in order to open up, but that doesn't mean that they don't sound good at higher volumes or can't play loud.

I think you need to be careful extrapolating from the older technology in brands like Quad or Soundlab or Martin Logan when you are talking about Final or Popori speakers.  Both of those brands have been specifically designed to overcome the limitations in dynamics, frequency response, and dispersion that have historically been a problem with electrostatics.  All you need to do is look underneath the socks on new Quads or Soundlab to see that they are fundamentally the same technology that was used 30 or 40 years ago.  And Martin Logan continues to rely on curved panels to widen the sweet spot.and woofers to extend the bass response.

@pinwa I think you misunderstood my post but no problem. Personally, new technology or old, my interest is ultimately how it sounds. For Quad and Sound Lab, if something is working well why change it. For those developing new methods of designing ESLs that's great, but to the point @pindac made, these speakers cost quite a bit more, so the new technology should deliver the equivalent value to cost ratio and be reliable designs.

Both my ESLs can be played louder than my room can handle. I have heard lots of ESLs and I just prefer my Quads, their limitations and all. My other set is based on older technology with a few new twists. The biggest difference though is using direct drive amplifiers. Why none of the newer ESL manufacturers are designing their speakers to be used with direct drive amps is something I am curious about.