advertisement


Quad Electrostatic models.

Eoin

Eoin

pfm Member
Hi PFM.

I know there’s various comparisons on Google but for sake of brevity would anyone be able to answer a couple of questions. Background is I’d like to try a pair at some point, I’m not really a box swapper so I’d prefer to know what I’m aiming at.

What’s the rough comparisons or differences between the 63, 989, 2805 & 2807 models? Can’t see myself getting 57s stacked or not.

What’s a good sub setup to add on? I do listen to electronic, so if the bass is missing I do mind that. Is it needed?

Is a pair of subs best?

When people say ‘they don’t go loud’ what’s meant practically.. are we saying eardrum splitting volumes are out? Or that really they only go at mid volumes at a max.

Thanks PFM. 👍
 
I only know the 989s well. In a fairly small room they don’t need sub(s) IMO and go plenty loud. They are very tuneful in the bass but 6dB down at 30Hz.
 
63s, then 988/989, the 2805/2905, then 2812/2912. I have the 2905s, which can go loud in my long double room. The bass is described by a bake-off colleague, who'd been a dealer, as 'first time I've heard ESLs with bass'. They supposedly go down to around 30 Hz (-6 dB?) as above.

I don't believe in subs anyway (extra boxes; get the spkr which does it all !), but I went from massive ProAc Response Fours (@ 133kg each !) to the 2905s without missing bass; it's different when the frequency range is effortlessly distributed in one speaker, in effect. I currently have PMC Twenty .26 transmission line floor-standers, which are great in their own way, but bass plus or minus wasn't sth I am aware of. The plus point of these pure ESLs is not only transparency but a purity and seamless clarity. My 2905s are away for service etc., hence the PMCs as a stop-gap.

My hifi friend has 2812s; we've all heard them (the 10 strong bake-off group) and they're lovely and we don't notice any diminution of bass in those either (though mine are supposedly better); different rooms, different subjective effects. Last thing on big ESLs; they really do scale (a little lacking in my PMCs) as well as sound-staging/imaging. You do need a metre behind them but virtually nothing to the sides. Worth also having decent amplification; I have EAR 100 valved mono's but think s/s are fine too.

Hope this helps.
 
I’ve had 57s - nicest sounding, most impractical, a couple of pairs of 63s - fragile, comparatively slightly “grey” sounding, and now 2812s - Much better than the 63s on which they are based as they reproduce bass so much more cleanly. If quantity of bass is required than the larger models may be better but I found the overall sound less cohesive.

Quads can certainly be improved with a sub and contrary to some opinions it can work very well, but only if a good job is made of the integration. MiniDSP crossovers, used with REW are useful for doing that. The crossover point really depends on how the quads and subs measure in the room, but generally speaking it should be as low as is practical to make use of the Quad base. The quality of Quad bass is very good although by the nature of the design there is a limit to the displacement if the diaphragm so beyond, imo very loud, volumes the volume of the bass will not increase in line with higher frequencies.

For electronic music with deep, prominent bass, crossover to a sub, maybe in the region of 60Hz, would certainly be wise. The stunning clarity and “speed” of stats is great for electronic music.

After my experience of used 63s falling apart, panel by panel, I came to the conclusion that if I bought again I would buy new. They are fragile beasts but once sampled It is all but impossible to go back to conventional box speakers. one final thought; if you are the only listener sitting in the hot spot then Martin Logan hybrids might be better, as in more robust, for electronic music, particularly if played loud.
 
Eoin said:
Hi PFM.

I know there’s various comparisons on Google but for sake of brevity would anyone be able to answer a couple of questions. Background is I’d like to try a pair at some point, I’m not really a box swapper so I’d prefer to know what I’m aiming at.

What’s the rough comparisons or differences between the 63, 989, 2805 & 2807 models? Can’t see myself getting 57s stacked or not.

What’s a good sub setup to add on? I do listen to electronic, so if the bass is missing I do mind that. Is it needed?

Is a pair of subs best?

When people say ‘they don’t go loud’ what’s meant practically.. are we saying eardrum splitting volumes are out? Or that really they only go at mid volumes at a max.

Thanks PFM. 👍
Click to expand...

My advice would be to try without worrying about subs first. See how you get in in your room, with your other equipment. I think there's more than enough bass in the vanilla 63s for most types of music.

63s go as loud as I need in a living room, even for things like cathedral organ recordings.

The problem with a sub is the timing, and that fact that the speakers are dipole and the 63 at least is point source. I tried sealed subs and was unable to make a satisfactory integration -- I wasn't prepared to go down the rabbit hole of miniDSP. I have some passive dipole subs now and an external crossover designed for ESL 63s -- but really you may find it doesn't worry you without any additional bass.

Much much much more important is that you can position them well in your room, and that you can raise them off the floor.
 
I’ve a dedicated music room that’s approx 4x4.5 and am running a Quad 606 for info.
 
I've used three different types. The 63s and one of the later ones at the same size. (Forgotten the model number). To me they both sound much the same - excellent. They beam so you need to get both speakers at the same distance from you. Then use a torch held at about your nose and adjust the directions of the speakers until the reflection of the torch is at the center of both speakers.

Beyond that, adjust positioning as suits the room and your taste. In a good setup like this antiphased mono will either be *very* quiet at your listening position or 'behind you' - or both! If you can get both you're getting the best direct to your ears stereo when playing stereo.

My later models have more (transformer mechanical) hum than the 63s. YMMV on that. And low enough not to notice in normal use.

The panels in all versions deteriorate with time. QUAD did resell refurbishied speakers and I got an exchange in one case so a price discount on the new ones. Still fine and to spec. They are room fussy, but in a different way to conventional speakers. That may be good news or bad, depending on your room. I hang a curtain or rug from a curtain rail on either the wall behind the speakers or behind the listeners to damp 'fore and aft' resonances. I tend to suggest this for ESLs.
 
Eoin said:
I’ve a dedicated music room that’s approx 4x4.5 and am running a Quad 606 for info.
Click to expand...

If you can put them 1m from the front wall and find a way to raise them 12 -18 inches -- go for it! I'm talking about 63s. Quad 606 should be fine!

I didn't know about @Jim Audiomisc 's point about transformer hum -- my 63s are completely silent.
 
Interesting, Jim.

I’d be looking for something that is:
Recently Serviced.
Under a grand

Potentially looking to swap out some (admittedly very very good) Ruarks with upgraded crossovers.

I do have space to put acoustic panels behind, and the room is my own, so I can do whatever I like on positioning.
 
I thought the only proper Quads were the original. Never had issues with how loud mine got.
 
Eoin said:
Interesting, Jim.

I’d be looking for something that is:
Recently Serviced.
Under a grand

Potentially looking to swap out some (admittedly very very good) Ruarks with upgraded crossovers.

I do have space to put acoustic panels behind, and the room is my own, so I can do whatever I like on positioning.
Click to expand...
If you're looking for a pair under a grand then I think it is a lottery as to how soon (not if) they will need further servicing. I would guess that it is unlikely that you would find a pair that has had all panels recently replaced. Another thing to look out for with 63s is a transformer humming along with the music. I think the problem with buying used is knowing how they have been treated; they do need cosseting rather more than any other speaker I have owned.

As an aside I found the 63s needed raising on a stand whereas the later 2805 and 2812 design doesn't.
 
Eoin said:
Interesting, Jim.

I’d be looking for something that is:
Recently Serviced.
Under a grand

Potentially looking to swap out some (admittedly very very good) Ruarks with upgraded crossovers.

I do have space to put acoustic panels behind, and the room is my own, so I can do whatever I like on positioning.
Click to expand...
There's one for sale now here.

pinkfishmedia.net

[FS] - Quad ESL63s

I’m putting my Quad ESL63s up for sale. I have owned these magnificent speakers since 2003, and they have genuinely transformed the way I listen to and understand music, and have been the foundation of many long listening sessions, deep into the night on occasion! Well recorded music can become...
pinkfishmedia.net pinkfishmedia.net
 
mandryka said:
There's one for sale now here.

pinkfishmedia.net

[FS] - Quad ESL63s

I’m putting my Quad ESL63s up for sale. I have owned these magnificent speakers since 2003, and they have genuinely transformed the way I listen to and understand music, and have been the foundation of many long listening sessions, deep into the night on occasion! Well recorded music can become...
pinkfishmedia.net pinkfishmedia.net
Click to expand...
They certainly look worth investigating.
 
Eoin, at the price point you have indicated, if you want a decent / serviced pair of Quad 'stats,, then you are realistically looking at either ESL57s or ESL63s. Either model will produce around 94 / 95 dB which should be sufficient for most people's domestic needs.

Quads do very good, 'additive-free' bass assuming that they in good health and driven by decent amplification I prefer to use high-quality push-pull valve gear to drive my own ESL57s but others may disagree. I've run electrostatics for over 30 years and if you are captivated by their sound, you will probably never want to listen to a 'box' speaker again.
 
Eoin said:
Hi John, are you saying the only ones worth bothering with are the 57s..?
Click to expand...
Not so i.m.o. As an experiment and a cost-effective look at ESLs I bought a good pair of 57s and liked what they did, but one thing they didn't do was scale. Besides, they're not exactly room-friendly. Sar a nearly new pair of 2905s being sold by a Scottish dealer and went for it' no regrets and i like my bass.

Eoin, your room dim's suggest 13 x 17 ' + in old money; for me, that is a bit marginal unless you can have ESLs on the short wall (firing down) with 3 feet behind. you can toe in to sit and best practice is to have 18" or more behind your listening position (that's for all spkrs).
 
Mike Reed said:
Not so i.m.o. As an experiment and a cost-effective look at ESLs I bought a good pair of 57s and liked what they did, but one thing they didn't do was scale. Besides, they're not exactly room-friendly. Sar a nearly new pair of 2905s being sold by a Scottish dealer and went for it' no regrets and i like my bass.

Eoin, your room dim's suggest 13 x 17 ' + in old money; for me, that is a bit marginal unless you can have ESLs on the short wall (firing down) with 3 feet behind. you can toe in to sit and best practice is to have 18" or more behind your listening position (that's for all spkrs).
Click to expand...
Understood. Short wall is a no go, needs to be on the long.
 
Eoin said:
Understood. Short wall is a no go, needs to be on the long.
Click to expand...
Short of using them as headphones, I can't see it, but others may disagree. 13' - 3 =10;-2 (say) for sofa/chair =8'. Doable, I s'pose with them closer together than I would like. Can you knock a wall down as I did? 😁
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top