Considering Beveridge, your opinion please.

As you seem to be sold on electrostats (mid-range purity & sense of speed...), I assume you have the amplification for them & are aware of their shortcomings.

The short story:
So...if you are ready to sink 2.5 grand into an electrostatic experience, just get the Bevs esp. if they are active.

The long story
I have no opinion on the JansZen or the Sanders (but the JansZen look good on paper!) The latter are from the Innersound designer, I understand.

Back to the Beveridges.

Which model are you referring to? I have only listened to an active vintage Beveridge model: wide baffled, narrow acoustic panel. It had a super OTL amp at the base.

It would not play very loud, nor would it go very high in frequency for some odd reason. In fact, we never did crank it up loud because, purportedly, it would blow fuses (or worse).

Anyway, when it did work, the sound was pure magic! This means, very realistic strings, and wind instruments, and tenor, baritone, & soprano voices. As usual with panels, mid-range purity & dynamics were superb.

Lest you think that classical quartets were the limit of what we listened to, Paranoid (i.e. Black Sabbath) also sounded phantasmagorical through these speakers! (OK, so the bass was "discreet").

OTOH, Mahler 8 was less convincing: not bad at all but it was just very low amplitudes so the orchestral dynamics were lost (and so were some of the cellos, possibly due to the amplitude levels...).

All of this doesn't help much with advice, does it?

I can't reliably recommend that you purchase 20 yrs old electrostatic speakers; I sold all of mine years ago.

However, if you are ready to sink 2.5 grand into an electrostatic experience, just get the Bevs esp. if they are the active ones.

IMO, dynamic speakers today (and yesterday) can overall outperform vintage electrostats; but those will certainly not cost 2.5k -- more like 25-125k !)
Regards

****All of this doesn't help much with advice, does it?****

I will let the OP decide, but I think this is all very good advice.

****IMO, dynamic speakers today (and yesterday) can overall outperform vintage electrostats****

Well, yes, kinda/sorta.

****Anyway, when it did work, the sound was pure magic****

Exactly! How much is one willing to give up for those moments of magic that IMO only an electrostat can give you; when all the stars and planets are aligned? That is why I keep my Stax F-81's after all these years. Frustrating as they are (little bass, little volume), there are times when I listen to well recorded vocals or acoustic instruments that scare me with the realism. I have never heard that kind of realism from a dynamic speaker.

Good news! Rick Beveridge is about to get back in the business if rebuilding transducers . He was able to get back his original mer stretching equipment. This should make Beveridge's able to be repaired to last another 40 years!

The Beveridge speakers were hardly world beaters when they came out, to say nothing of how they'd stack up to the best now. Original, yes. Great, no. Let it, and them, go.

You are entitled to your opinion but there are many audiophiles that would disagree with your assessment of the Beveridges.

Many years ago I heard a pair of the large Beveridge tower stats driven with a modest HK Citation 11 tube amp that my friend sold to the fellow with the Beveridges.
At that time I had only heard Acoustat 3's,so my experience with stats was still limited.

I remember being very impressed with the sound,but that could be due to the fact that the amp was sold for 75 bucks,my friend had never even tried the Citation with his rig for fear it would self destruct.He got it for about 25 bucks.

I think it's worth the effort.
There's something about stat sound that time doesn't diminish.
You have to spend some big bucks to get close to this type of sound with cones.
Ever notice how many comparisons are made to Quad 57 from cone speaker manufacturers and reviewers?
Also, you can upgrade them with better parts than they had available back then.