Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › DIY (Do-It-Yourself) Discussions › My DIY electrostatic headphones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

My DIY electrostatic headphones - Page 53

post #781 of 1552

I think the the effect of the stators is greatly overestimated on the 009.  They are the reason why the 009's are so expensive so they must be the reason they sound so.... well odd.  The diaphragm is the largest contributor to this though.  Change just the tension slightly and the whole character of the drivers changes completely.

 

The goal of the SR-009 stators is the same as the SR-Omega units, provide the maximum open area possible from a highly stable/strong platform.  The SR-Omega did succeed in this regard but they did cost a fortune to produce and the rejection rate was high.  The resin Stax used as a support for the mesh also has some issues such as it's a bad conductor of heat and the drivers must be kept cold at all times.  Contrary to some people electrostatics do need to dissipate a bit of power and thermal expansion at these tolerances is a big no, no.  The SR-Omegas main problem was with the housing though, metal screws into plastic are never a great idea and that bias connector...  rolleyes.gif

post #782 of 1552

I also read it "all over the place", but nobody ever supported it by something that would make sense. IMHO I think that differences between those two are "hidden" elsewhere.

post #783 of 1552
Only thing I can say is that, theoretically, a thinner stator assembly would add less damping to the diaphragm (viscous damping occurs in the thin DS gap and going through perforated holes in the stator). On the other hand, there clearly are mechanical resonances in the stator that should be avoided (the stator gets the same electrostatic force as the diaphragm), hence the requirement to use rib stiffeners in case the main surface is too thin to provide its own rigidity (which is the case of the 009 afaik from the stax interviews in japanese).

Having said that, as spritzer mentioned, the diaphragm material, thickness and tensioning are just as if not more critical to the voicing so who knows which is the main driving factor for what the 009 sounds like. Stax certainly mentioned you couldn't achieve the low distortion they got with the 009 without going the expensive route they went (the electrode remains expensive and painful to manufacture, even 2 years down the road).
post #784 of 1552
Thread Starter 

I'm not sure if you can get any benefit of having very thin stators.  Open up more open area, on the other hand, does make a difference, IMO.  

 

Wachara C.

post #785 of 1552

It looks like its very practical to get these manufactured in small quantities in stainless. I uploaded the design of the picture I posted to mfg.com, and the best quote I have so far is only $45 per stator, with 1mm overall thickness and 0.1mm thickness in thin areas.

 

I'd of course change the design quite a bit if ordering it in stainless, but it might be worth trying. I wonder what quality it'd come like. Only tolerance I gave was 0.05mm flatness to make it better than 10% the DS spacing.

post #786 of 1552
Thread Starter 

Why do you need the stator to be so thin?  confused_face.gif

 

I can cut the stator out of 0.1 mm copper sheet and glue it to a 1 mm fiberglass frame.  But I really don't see an advantage of that.

 

 

post #787 of 1552
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinsettawong View Post

Why do you need the stator to be so thin?  confused_face.gif

 

I can cut the stator out of 0.1 mm copper sheet and glue it to a 1 mm fiberglass frame.  But I really don't see an advantage of that.

 

 

For no reason other than to see if the world is right that the thinness of the SR009 contributes to its sound quality/sound signature. It sounds like the view of this thread is that its not.

post #788 of 1552
Thread Starter 

I don't think so too.  The brightness of sound comes mainly from the minimal of capacitance of the drivers.  Some people like the sound, but some people don't.

post #789 of 1552
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinsettawong View Post

I don't think so too.  The brightness of sound comes mainly from the minimal of capacitance of the drivers.  Some people like the sound, but some people don't.

It's not simple as that. The electrostats I made for Kuba4 (picture somewhere in this thread) are quite dark, my old SR-3 are bright compared to them, but capacitance of SR-3 driver is larger than that DIY.

Also when I was experimenting a was able to create dark or bright sound with the same driver - only change was enclosure/earcup.

post #790 of 1552
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmarokCZ View Post

It's not simple as that. The electrostats I made for Kuba4 (picture somewhere in this thread) are quite dark, my old SR-3 are bright compared to them, but capacitance of SR-3 driver is larger than that DIY.

Also when I was experimenting a was able to create dark or bright sound with the same driver - only change was enclosure/earcup.


I've done several pairs of headphones, and I know for sure that it's mostly from the capacitance.  Well, the diaphragm material can somewhat affect too, but not as much as the capacitance.

 

Did you etch out the unneeded copper on your stators?  Have you compared the copper area on your DIY phones with SR-3?  How about open areas of the two?

 

P.S. If you cover the back side of your enclosure, the sound can also get brighter.  wink_face.gif


Edited by chinsettawong - 4/11/13 at 8:29am
post #791 of 1552

I also done more than one pair and lots of experimenting and from what I can tell the most influental is the earcup. 

 

Yes, I etched copper on stators (copper left only around area with holes) and it still sounded dark (it's not HD650 dark, but it surely isn't SR-404 bright-star). On the other hand the SR-3 stators are brass (so no etching and hence high capacity) and they sound bright...

post #792 of 1552
The distance from the electrode to the ear, size of the earcup and especially the properties of the earpad all effect the response (the acoustic resonances in the earcup definitely can't be ignored, nor the absorption of the pad. The pad shape and properties affect the low frequency extension (as it is determined by a coupled pad/earcup cavity/tensioned diaphragm resonance).

So to me, nothing is simple in headphone world and estat in particular smily_headphones1.gif.
post #793 of 1552

Made a 'best offer' bid on a Chinese 3020 CNC mill, so I guess I'll be making some stators and diaphragm supports, as I intend to get one of these mills, I'm just trying to get the best price.

 

I was going to make these parts by hand, I've got a scroll saw and a bench drill press, but the milled parts look so good.

 

Mylar is in the post.

 

I've also got some fine stainless steel gauze that I bought, it looks like a piece cut from some grey tights, I've been thinking about some way of making a support for it that will hold it rigid.

 

I never really thought that I'd have a pair of electrostatics, but I recently took an interest in designing an amp over in this thread, http://www.head-fi.org/t/655489/dirt-cheap-stax-amp-diy-new-schematic-updated.Perhaps buying a mill is a bit extravagant, I can't see me buying a pair of Stax phones, but the mill will get use making enclosures and PCBs so that's how I justified it to myself.

 

What I'd like to know is can anybody recommend a pair of phones to cannibalize to put these electrostatic capsules into? I've got a pair of cheap Behringer studio phones here I'm eyeing up, but I can't see how to get them apart, and anyway they're closed back, which I don't think is what's required. Perhaps somebody could comment on that.

 

Anyway, still waiting to see if this guy will accept my offer.

 

Thanks Wachara, I wouldn't have got into this without your thread.

 

w

post #794 of 1552

Maybe a cheap DT880 clone ? something like a Superlux HD-330 ? No idea if it would work alright.

But if you do get the CNC you could build everything from scratch cool.gif

post #795 of 1552
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakibaki View Post

Made a 'best offer' bid on a Chinese 3020 CNC mill, so I guess I'll be making some stators and diaphragm supports, as I intend to get one of these mills, I'm just trying to get the best price.

 

I was going to make these parts by hand, I've got a scroll saw and a bench drill press, but the milled parts look so good.

 

Mylar is in the post.

 

I've also got some fine stainless steel gauze that I bought, it looks like a piece cut from some grey tights, I've been thinking about some way of making a support for it that will hold it rigid.

 

I never really thought that I'd have a pair of electrostatics, but I recently took an interest in designing an amp over in this thread, http://www.head-fi.org/t/655489/dirt-cheap-stax-amp-diy-new-schematic-updated.Perhaps buying a mill is a bit extravagant, I can't see me buying a pair of Stax phones, but the mill will get use making enclosures and PCBs so that's how I justified it to myself.

 

What I'd like to know is can anybody recommend a pair of phones to cannibalize to put these electrostatic capsules into? I've got a pair of cheap Behringer studio phones here I'm eyeing up, but I can't see how to get them apart, and anyway they're closed back, which I don't think is what's required. Perhaps somebody could comment on that.

 

Anyway, still waiting to see if this guy will accept my offer.

 

Thanks Wachara, I wouldn't have got into this without your thread.

 

w

Congratulations on your purchase of the CNC mill.  I hope you'll enjoy making your own headphones like I do.  In fact with the CNC mill, you can also make your own enclosures.  wink_face.gif

 

Wachara C.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › DIY (Do-It-Yourself) Discussions › My DIY electrostatic headphones