Jo-Jo Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 A friend of my family is really into alternative science, and stuff that people would never really normally think of. He said the best speakers he ever heard were flame speakers that actually use a flame inside. They're supposed to sound really clear. Does anyone know anything about them? Does this sound like a backyard/garage project, or do people really sell these things? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 Hi again. See why he likes this board? They were a real product. The most famous example of this type of speaker was the Hill Model 1, made by Hill Plasmatronics, a company founded by laser physicist Alan Hill. Do a web search on him, quite the interesting fellow, has many patents to his credit. Idea was to use a ball of charged plasma as the tweeter for a speaker. Realistic reproduction of high frequencies is very difficult to achieve, and back when these speakers were produced (late seventies, as I recall) the materials industry hadn't come up with the advanced metal oxides and vapor deposit techniques that are used today to produce the drivers for the more exotic speakers. Hill speakers had a tank of helium. Helium was fed into a chamber between to electrodes. High current flowing between electrodes (imagine the amp these things needed...) ionized the helium. Allowing the music signal to modulate the current flowing between the electrodes caused the plasma sphere formed by the ionized helium to pulse. Pulsing ionized plasma sphere was essentially a massless (well, close enough...), omnidirectional, point source tweeter. Supposedly sounded really, really good, though I've never heard them. Drawbacks... took one HELL of an amplifier (pushing great big heaping gobs of current into a virtually zero impedence load), had to keep refilling tanks of helium, tended to be rather unrealible, cost a lot of money, and, well, your speakers had tanks of helium attached to them that created little glowing fireballs of white hot plasma in your living room. Tended to make one's friends and family think one had gone rather over the edge. Ray ------------------ Music is art Audio is engineering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo-Jo Posted June 25, 2001 Author Share Posted June 25, 2001 Were there others that didn't use plasma or helium? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 http://www.sundial.net/~rogerr/ionovac.htm I've heard apocryphal tales of others, but no names I can think of. ------------------ Music is art Audio is engineering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnomore Posted June 25, 2001 Share Posted June 25, 2001 Here is a link to a guy that built his own plasma speaker.. http://members.aol.com/uhaumann/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo-Jo Posted June 26, 2001 Author Share Posted June 26, 2001 Alright, I now have the information I wanted on the flame speakers... actually, flame speakers, electrostatic speakers, and the plasma ones everybody is talking about. A man my "adopted" uncle met owns a pair of the flame speakers. They are powered with a propane bottle to generate the flame (each speaker has a propane bottle), and the flame is placed between two wire mesh screens which are powered with alternating high voltage from the audio source. Because flame is highly ionized and has essentially and infinite bandwidth, all frequencies are clearly projected... the intensity of the high voltage jerking the flame between the two metal screens determines the volume. Since volume is determined by how much air is moved and how fast (frequency(ies))... the output of this flame goes into a resonant echo chamber like an old mans hearing aid- the one with the horn he stuck in his ear, which gathers all the frequencies and focussed them into his ear canal; the idea being to use the properties of the echo chamber to project louder notes. So, here's my new question: I was told nothing about the practicality or efficiency of these speakers yet. Would the propane here make this whole thing a funny idea? This message has been edited by Jo-Jo on 06-26-2001 at 12:33 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted June 26, 2001 Share Posted June 26, 2001 Jo-Jo, Hey! WAY cool! I've never seen those flame speakers, but they sure sound GREAT! I do have a question... seeing as how the degree of ionization is going to be directly proportional to the temperature of the heated gas, isn't there a problem with the phase conherence of the wavefront propagation as the flame rises above the combustion nexus? I mean, it would seem intuitively obvious that as the flame cools, and the ion / electron clouds begin to coalesce into a neutral diatomic or molecular state (depending upon the gas used, I suppose), the force applied to the flamefront, and hence the acceleration of the charged gas, will be non-linear and tend towards a chaotic distribution, which would impair the system's (otherwise excellent) minumum phase amplitude response. This, in turn, would result in "time-smearing" of the signal, the degree of smearing, of course, being in direct proportion to the point density of the gas in the expansion chamber's throat cavity. I think. How'd he avoid that? Oh, also, are they UL-approved for use in the US of A? Ray ------------------ Music is art Audio is engineering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougdrake2 Posted June 26, 2001 Share Posted June 26, 2001 Or, in other words: Non li ho visti mai quegli altoparlanti della fiamma, ma GRANDE sano sicuro! Io avere una domanda... che vedo come come il grado di ionizzazione sta andando essere direttamente proporzionale alla temperatura del gas riscaldato, non è là un problema con il conherence di fase della propagazione di fronte d'onda poichè gli aumenti della fiamma sopra il nesso di combustione? **time-out** io signific, esso sembr intuitivo evidente che come fiamma raffredd, e ione / elettrone nube cominci per un un neutro diatomic o molecolare condizione (dipend gas us, io suppor), forza applic flamefront, e quindi accelerazione caric gas, essere non lineare e tend verso un caotico distribuzione, che alter sistema (al contrario eccellente) minumum fase ampiezza risposta. Ciò, a sua volta, provocherebbe " tempo-time-smearing " del segnale, il grado di spalmare, naturalmente, essendo in rapporto alla densità del punto del gas nella cavità della gola della camera di Wilson. Penso. How'd evita quello? k? Doug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo-Jo Posted June 26, 2001 Author Share Posted June 26, 2001 Okay, I grew up with english and I've had a year of latin and french, so if you could perhaps answer one question... what?!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dougdrake2 Posted June 26, 2001 Share Posted June 26, 2001 Jo-Jo - Should've taken that Italian class Translation: I've never seen those flame speakers, but they sure sound GREAT! I do have a question... seeing as how the degree of ionization is going to be directly proportional to the temperature of the heated gas, isn't there a problem with the phase conherence of the wavefront propagation as the flame rises above the combustion nexus? I mean, it would seem intuitively obvious that as the flame cools, and the ion / electron clouds begin to coalesce into a neutral diatomic or molecular state (depending upon the gas used, I suppose), the force applied to the flamefront, and hence the acceleration of the charged gas, will be non-linear and tend towards a chaotic distribution, which would impair the system's (otherwise excellent) minumum phase amplitude response. This, in turn, would result in "time-smearing" of the signal, the degree of smearing, of course, being in direct proportion to the point density of the gas in the expansion chamber's throat cavity. I think. How'd he avoid that? Just messin' with y'all... Doug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwK Posted June 26, 2001 Share Posted June 26, 2001 good one doug ------------------ Living Room: Yamaha Natural Sound A-500 Stereo Amplifier 2 Klipsch Heresys on A switch 2 Fisher STV-873 on B switch My Room: Klipsch Pro Medias 2 Fisher Surrounds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo-Jo Posted June 26, 2001 Author Share Posted June 26, 2001 Doug... DwK... you monkeez... I actually would take Italian if it was offered, but who needs to take the class when you can find online translators, huh Doug? Ray, I'm just learning about these speakers too, but I'm working on a response. Something else I found out, going back to the plasma speakers... some people actually believe that the 'burning bush' was highly ionized plasma which was modulated to produce sound. So, while considered miraculous by masses, it could've been well understood by those in the 'arcane/occult' (hidden) sciences... the same thing is said about the Ark of the Covenant. There were supposedly two cherubim or seraphim- one on each side that faced each other to produce a standing wave in the middle consisting of high voltage ionized air which was modulated at audio rates It was also supposed to be a radio. Likewise, there were tons of arks in use in Persia and other countries at that time, but this one just happened to be consecrated to the Jews god Jehovah... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted June 27, 2001 Share Posted June 27, 2001 Jo, To get that Ark to work without Arcing (I crack me up...) you'd need to be careful with the input phase splitters, assuming of course that this is an output transformerless Covenant. I'm assuming that because metallurgy was in its infancy, and drawing the wire would have challenged the local smithies most direly. Anywho, using something like this (see attachment)... ought to cover it... note that this only works with matched pairs of cherubim (2 wings) - indicated by the A&B pairs of V7 and V8 - the use of seraphim (6 wings) would cause unpredictable oscillations in the driver stages. As to the burning bush, I always figured it was just a cluster of Red Hot Pokers (Kniphofia caulescens, or possbily K. triangularis) Ray ------------------ Music is art Audio is engineering Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo-Jo Posted June 28, 2001 Author Share Posted June 28, 2001 Ok Ray, I'm getting back to all the questions you had earlier... Sorry it took awhile, but I had to translate first I'm going to go line-by-line. 1) "isn't there a problem with the phase conherence of the wavefront propagation as the flame rises above the combustion nexus?" Assuming you mean frequencies that would bounce back and forth to cause interference, what would they bounce off of? The ion charges push the air to produce the sound- just like an electrostatic speaker. 2) "I mean, it would seem intuitively obvious that as the flame cools, and the ion / electron clouds begin to coalesce into a neutral diatomic or molecular state (depending upon the gas used, I suppose), the force applied to the flamefront, and hence the acceleration of the charged gas, will be non-linear and tend towards a chaotic distribution, which would impair the system's (otherwise excellent) minumum phase amplitude response." What I'm told is that it is non-linear: it's audio which means acoustic in the general sense. 3) "This, in turn, would result in "time-smearing" of the signal" Basically... huh? It doesn't matter. The signal drives the flame, and it takes a bit before you hear it anyway. What physics book did you get "time-smearing" from? 4) "...the degree of smearing, of course, being in direct proportion to the point density of the gas in the expansion chamber's throat cavity. I think. How'd he avoid that?" The point density is irrelevant as the frequencies modulate the entire envelope of the gas as one discrete multiple frequency signal that varies as determined by the complexity of the music. 5) "Oh, also, are they UL-approved for use in the US of A?" Actually, that's a question I'd like the answer to as well. They were mostly available between 1960 and 1970. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BobG Posted June 30, 2001 Share Posted June 30, 2001 I have had a couple of chances to hear the Hill Plasmatronic speakers. Was at CES shows a long time ago. The plasma driver had a wonderful and unique character, but the LF system could never match. Also, the ionization caused massive amounts of ozone to be produced and ozone is bad for most everthing it contacts, like fabric and lungs. The windows had to be kept open in the demo room to minimize the concentration of ozone. You could smell it way down the hall. The ionovac driver shown in the link above is also a very cool piece of work. Needs a horn to couple it to the room, and lots of wacky electronics to make it work, but I've heard it and been quite impressed. Last time was at a hi-fi show in Warsaw a couple of years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo-Jo Posted July 1, 2001 Author Share Posted July 1, 2001 To tell the truth, I'm not much interested in the plasma speakers... lots of downsides as many have pointed out already. Yesterday, DwK pointed out some electrostatic speakers after hearing the Velodyne subwoofer and the RF3s, but it was on our way out. I'd really like to know more about the actual flame speakers, and the electrostatics. Downsides to them? I find it odd that only "apocryphal tales" have been told of these speakers if they're so old... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwK Posted July 1, 2001 Share Posted July 1, 2001 Many Electrostaic speakers are said to be.. Airy sounding. But I think they are kinda cool sound from both sides... ------------------ Living Room: Yamaha Natural Sound A-500 Stereo Amplifier 2 Klipsch Heresys on A switch 2 Fisher STV-873 on B switch My Room: Klipsch Pro Medias 2 Fisher Surrounds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rowooo Posted July 2, 2001 Share Posted July 2, 2001 Electrostatics can be extremely difficult to live with. Placement is really crucial with a large room a must since the speakers need to be placed far into the room for desired sound. Also there extreme fluctuating impedances can make matching a power amps a never ending circus. For the high prices most electrostatics go for and the fact that my house already has enough dust collectors I'll stick with Klipsch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jo-Jo Posted July 3, 2001 Author Share Posted July 3, 2001 What do average electrostatics go for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwK Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 Some of the Larger Martin Logans go for about.. 6,000$ apiece. They were in the room, across from the on we were in. Where the people were with the Door closed. I'd say. To much. ------------------ Living Room: Yamaha Natural Sound A-500 Stereo Amplifier 2 Klipsch Heresys on A switch 2 Fisher STV-873 on B switch My Room: Klipsch Pro Medias 2 Fisher Surrounds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.