How much money do you want to waste?

Steve and Sean re Electrostatic Speakers
I have built a dozen or so conventional speakers and make no claim to have expertise with ESLs but from what I understand speaker wire is critical with ESLs.

Generally the load presented to an amplifier is completely different for an ESL. ESLs act more like a capacitor in the line while traditional magnetic speakers act like a resistor/inductor.

All cables have inductance, capacitance and impedance and, of course, the amount can be changed by design of the wire. An ESL is driven by a high voltage step up transformer INSIDE THE SPEAKER and it "leaks" inductance. This interacts with the capacitance of the ESL to form what is called L/C (inductance/capacitance) resonant circuit and this will cause a high frequency peak if it is not controlled(kept out of the hearing frequency). They spend a lot of time trying to build great transformers that do not "leak" much. Because inductance is such a big problem due to the L/C problem it is especially important that cables have low inductance too.

To sum it up: If your ESLs' seem to have an unattractive peak in the highs (are "bright") one thing to look at is the design of the cables.

This may seem to some to contradict my prior posts but it does not because well designed cables for ESL's can be had or made for chump change once you know what you are looking for.

as noted, I'm not a big ESL person and if my understanding is off base please give me an e-mail.
CK

Natalie, as far as Harmonic Technology is concerned, I can assure you they do not get stock cable from anywhere else, the single crystal wire is made in California for them exclusively using a proprietary process. I'm not 100% sure, but I think the same can be said of Acoustic Zen.

Excellent point, Mvwine. Looking to objective evidence does not make you an objectivist; the attachment to the assumption that objective observations are the only way to validly derive truth makes you an objectivist. Interestingly, it are not only his assumptions that the objectivist is attached to (specifically, these assumptions derive from Bacon [knowledge of matter = truth], Galileo [knowledge of matter can be enhanced by seeing reality as a mathematical machine, or linear matix, decribed by quantifiable data, ie size, etc.] and Descartes [reducing matter into progressively smaller parts gives greater truth]. Rather, the objectivist is also attached to his fear of his assumptions absense, or a denial of knowledge that is beyond scientific thinking (labeled with the abstraction "ratio-empiric, hypothetico-deductive formal operational cognition", presently recognized by psychology as the end-point in cognitive development). This is why science categorizes all knowledge that is not "scientific" as irrational; it must be, otherwise, science would be forced to examine its own premises, and why traditional psychology, allied as a rubber stamp for science, denies any level of cognition beyond the abstraction above (even though 5 million years of progressive cognitive development argues, empirically, the opposite future potential...). It is the attachment to the assumptions outlined above, and the recoil from a possibilty beyond them, that makes someone an "objectivist" (which, at its base, is an attachment to matter, or objects).

I would point out to you, however, that your assumption that more quantitative data necessarily will reveal greater truth is based upon the above assumptions. In this century - and something, characteristically, objectivists don't know, or choose to ignore - is that these assumptions have been thoroughly deconstructed. That's another discussion if someone wants to have it.

......of all the numerous, overly-simplistic and tired posts I've read on cable pricing, this is one of them. Sheesh, again.

alan m. kafton

Alan, when you make conclusions, you must state reasons for your conclusions and, specifically, which conclusions you are referring to. It is important that when you reject something - and claim that the arguments made are insufficient - that you say WHY they are insufficient. Otherwise, you are contributing nothing other than your own unsubstantiated charges - which then, of course, become part of the tired-ness that you supposedly decry.