Electrostatic vs. Boxed vs. Ribbon?

Sorry, correction, Page 5 of the second link begins discussing transducer types. But the "loudspeaker evaluation" on page 2 may still be worth reading (I didn't read it though so be careful-although ava is credible). He also discusses piezoelectric drivers that get overlooked often and I thought it was interesting 'cause I always forget about those. (I *did* read that transducer section though and saw nothing wrong). But all the articles address what your interested in. Each technology comes down to how well the designer did it as others have rightfully said.

Audiokinesis is right that some designers have worked with some of the "general" disadvantages of e-stats with sucess; but by reading Dunlavy's article it you'll at least be aware of what a designer is faced with and know when a design may have not dealt with these issues-or how it did. Quad and Soundlab are certainly better than Final (I have not heard good things about those--one person described their sound as "nails on a blackboard").

There's oddballs too like open-baffle (dipole by default) electromagnetic systems (Rives' #2) that are free from cabinet resonances and internal standing waves and share the same dispersion pattern just like the e-stats (and they have a loyal, although small, following). In fact, transmission lines generally don't have as nasty a backwave reflection (or cabinet resonance for that matter) as the other "boxed" types which is one more on the list.

I have spent most of my adult life listening to electrostatic speakers. I fell in love with the Achostats? in the mid sixties but could not afford them.In the mid seventies i got a pair of esl quads which I loved and stil keep in my office.By the end of the seventies I bought a Pair of dayton wrights great when they worked.In the mid eighties I bought the martin logan monolith I,and replaced these with the ML Prodigies when they came out.Through the years I spent a fortune on tweeks trying to get these speakers to sound right for orchestral music.I listen primarily to classica lmusic.Last year I finaly gave up and got the JM Utopias and I have been happy ever since.
Good luck
ramy

I own the Infinity Renaissance 80's which have the Emit ribbon tweeters and the Emin ribbon midranges. They sound delightful. They do need about 150w/channel. (The Renaissance 90's need much more power.) They are absolutely transparent. Yet, the sweet spot is very narrow. They are very room dependent. I recently moved and didn't recognize their sound in my new place. I had to change speaker cable and speaker placement considerably to 'dial them in'.

I also own Final 0.4 electrostatics. They need lots of power. They are very amplifier dependent. I hooked them up to a Krell KSA 100. They sounded horrible (as Ezmeralda said 'like nails on a blackboard'). But, I have them powered by a Carver Lightstar Reference and they sound as sweet and as mellow as can be. They are also speaker cable dependent.

As to which I like better, Renaissance 80 ribbons or Final 0.4 esl's, I can't say. They both sound great. I suppose it depends on what type of music I'm listening to. It's an adventure.

Seems strange no one has mentioned Apogee. Ramy, I think your generalizations of the four groups is well...generally right. As has been pointed out their are always cross dressers.

I don't quite agree with the idea ribbons have a small sweet spot. the first time I heard an Apogee, I couldn't even tell what I was listening to came from the speakers the stage they project is so holographic. That goes for the big Apogees.