After reading several of the above posts I have come to the conclusion that a lot of people have either never heard ESLs and are guessing or if they did indeed hear them,they were placed poorly,the room was wrong, the electronics were wrong or they are all smoking crack.
I mean no disrespect to anyone.
I own both Acoustat 2s and Snell Es. The Snells are lovely 2-ways with great extension,flat frequency response and good sound staging.Just look for the Audio Note E and you will see the Snell.They are direct replicas with "updated" woofer material,expensive wood,and very expensive outboard crossovers.And because they are Audio Note,they are outrageously priced.
Art Dudley for one raves about them.
They don't even come close to the Acoustats in ANY catagory.
Why would anyone think that planers don't image? Dipolar radiation vs. forward firing woofers and domes or ribbons.
Fast? Planers,espcially electrostatics are the fastest and therefore bring articulation and details.
A 1-way plainer of mylar moves less than a millimeter where a dynamic driver sometimes moves inches.
And they have no crossover to color the signal.
The usual take on Acoustats is:
1.no bass
I can assure you that everyone in our audiophile club that has heard mine just shakes their head at that one.
2.Not loud.
You have got to be kidding!I use a 115w rms amp and a passive Preamp! If they didn't play loud could I use a passive?
3.Difficult loads.
I have been driving mine with a 30 year old hafler 220.
Not a Krell, nor a Levinson (too much money) and they sound great! Mine only go down to 3.0 ohms; not much of a problem for most amps.
I feel that there has been so much BS written about EVERYTHING in audio that we have all swallowed a lot of bad kool aid.
I have been listening for over 30 years and I have learned that reading about music and listening are two different things.
You can listen as a musician,a fan, or a audiophile.
The musician listens for nuance,tempo,stylistic treatment,and pitch or intonation.
A fan listens on a ipod and doesn't care what it sounds like.
A audiophile listens for everything that he can find wrong with the cheapest link in the chain.And then trys to convince his wife that he needs a new phono cartridge,and a new set of $3000.00 power cords.
(mostly joking)
I would say that the Acoustats are more room reactive.I would also say that wives,girlfriends and sweethearts hate them.My aunt used to make fun of mine by calling them "mattresses".
Now to address the original post.
I am a professional choirister and have been singing in elite choirs since I was 8.
I listen to lots and lots of choral,symphonic,organ,chamber
music.
I listen to some jazz, and classic rock too.
The Acoustats are very detailed, artuculate and smooth when called on. They can produce a 32 foot organ note better than most cone speakers.They have "Prat" in spades. They image better than any speaker I have EVER heard. Trust me when I tell you that I have heard a lot of systems, including some VERY expensive ones.These babys will image wide and deep and tall.
Go on Audiogon and look for a set of Acoustats. You can find them dirt cheap,around $1000.00. They may be old, but they are also indestructible.(I have read in forums here that they needed rebuilding periodicly,this is TOTAL BS!)
I have had mine almost 30 years.I have hauled them in a car across the country twice.Set them up and played without a hitch.
Whoever said that they need subs is also wrong.In fact subs NEVER work with them.They are too fast for subs and don't need them anyway.
disclaimer: I hate sub woofers. I have heard several,they never work.They always sound like a add on.
I don't mean to sound condescending or elitist,but I really am confused as to why people say the things they say and I have never experienced.
I guess that if you only listen to really loud heavy pounding Led Zeppelin or the like, you may think they were all wrong for you.So be it, but they don't suck at this either. They even thump some.
If you listen to classical, or acoustic music in general you can't go wrong with Acoustat.
I mean no disrespect to anyone.
I own both Acoustat 2s and Snell Es. The Snells are lovely 2-ways with great extension,flat frequency response and good sound staging.Just look for the Audio Note E and you will see the Snell.They are direct replicas with "updated" woofer material,expensive wood,and very expensive outboard crossovers.And because they are Audio Note,they are outrageously priced.
Art Dudley for one raves about them.
They don't even come close to the Acoustats in ANY catagory.
Why would anyone think that planers don't image? Dipolar radiation vs. forward firing woofers and domes or ribbons.
Fast? Planers,espcially electrostatics are the fastest and therefore bring articulation and details.
A 1-way plainer of mylar moves less than a millimeter where a dynamic driver sometimes moves inches.
And they have no crossover to color the signal.
The usual take on Acoustats is:
1.no bass
I can assure you that everyone in our audiophile club that has heard mine just shakes their head at that one.
2.Not loud.
You have got to be kidding!I use a 115w rms amp and a passive Preamp! If they didn't play loud could I use a passive?
3.Difficult loads.
I have been driving mine with a 30 year old hafler 220.
Not a Krell, nor a Levinson (too much money) and they sound great! Mine only go down to 3.0 ohms; not much of a problem for most amps.
I feel that there has been so much BS written about EVERYTHING in audio that we have all swallowed a lot of bad kool aid.
I have been listening for over 30 years and I have learned that reading about music and listening are two different things.
You can listen as a musician,a fan, or a audiophile.
The musician listens for nuance,tempo,stylistic treatment,and pitch or intonation.
A fan listens on a ipod and doesn't care what it sounds like.
A audiophile listens for everything that he can find wrong with the cheapest link in the chain.And then trys to convince his wife that he needs a new phono cartridge,and a new set of $3000.00 power cords.
(mostly joking)
I would say that the Acoustats are more room reactive.I would also say that wives,girlfriends and sweethearts hate them.My aunt used to make fun of mine by calling them "mattresses".
Now to address the original post.
I am a professional choirister and have been singing in elite choirs since I was 8.
I listen to lots and lots of choral,symphonic,organ,chamber
music.
I listen to some jazz, and classic rock too.
The Acoustats are very detailed, artuculate and smooth when called on. They can produce a 32 foot organ note better than most cone speakers.They have "Prat" in spades. They image better than any speaker I have EVER heard. Trust me when I tell you that I have heard a lot of systems, including some VERY expensive ones.These babys will image wide and deep and tall.
Go on Audiogon and look for a set of Acoustats. You can find them dirt cheap,around $1000.00. They may be old, but they are also indestructible.(I have read in forums here that they needed rebuilding periodicly,this is TOTAL BS!)
I have had mine almost 30 years.I have hauled them in a car across the country twice.Set them up and played without a hitch.
Whoever said that they need subs is also wrong.In fact subs NEVER work with them.They are too fast for subs and don't need them anyway.
disclaimer: I hate sub woofers. I have heard several,they never work.They always sound like a add on.
I don't mean to sound condescending or elitist,but I really am confused as to why people say the things they say and I have never experienced.
I guess that if you only listen to really loud heavy pounding Led Zeppelin or the like, you may think they were all wrong for you.So be it, but they don't suck at this either. They even thump some.
If you listen to classical, or acoustic music in general you can't go wrong with Acoustat.