advertisement


Your loudspeaker holy grail

Probably the passing of time added to my fond memories of hearing these so raising them to the status of 'holy grail'. They all large require a big room to work in and suitable amplification to drive them.
Magnapan Tympani IVA
Sound Lab A3
Beverage Model 2SW
Dayton Wright XG8 (stacked pair)
Apogee Scintilla (1 Ohm version).
At the time I would have the bought the Scintilla's. I spent quite a bit of time listening to pairs of them, but there was no way they would have worked in my room. :(
 
All I want is something that sounds like Quad ESLs but with more extension top and bottom, with the dynamics and sensitivity of a Klipschorn. Is that really too much to ask?
Probably yes. ;)
I’d like that too, of course.
 
All I want is something that sounds like Quad ESLs but with more extension top and bottom, with the dynamics and sensitivity of a Klipschorn. Is that really too much to ask?

If one contemplates the theoretical ideal loudspeaker design I suspect you’d end up with a single driver point source with a ruler flat frequency response from 20Hz to 20kHz with close to zero mass and close to 100% efficiency (we can debate whether the point source should be a sphere or front-firing, both have merit). It is clear loudspeaker design, even the absolute state of the art best of it, is still in kindergarten compared to the rest of audio. The closest we’ve ever got to this ideal to my mind is likely the Quad ESL 63, but they are clearly inefficient and lacking in dynamic range.

You hit the current dilemma right on the head. So many of the very best speakers in existence excel at one area at the expense of another. The ones that don’t just tend to do nothing exceptionally well. All speakers are obviously compromised, so it is a matter of finding a compromise that doesn’t impede your musical taste in your room. This being why no one will ever agree on speakers, nor what to drive them with as much of the time they need some priority assisting or even some fault-masking. I describe this as ‘system synergy’!
 
All I want is something that sounds like Quad ESLs but with more extension top and bottom, with the dynamics and sensitivity of a Klipschorn. Is that really too much to ask?

I have a pair of '57s with Townshend super-tweeters and REL subs, so the extension and dynamics are there if not the sensitivity. But I still wonder occasionally if 2905s wouldn't be an improvement. Or even Martin Logans - a faulty pair had to go back years ago but even with one dodgy panel I could hear how great they should have been. Yet to scratch the Tannoy or Klipschorn itch and probably won't get there now. Most fun so far? Probably still the Lx-minis.
 
I'd love to hear a pair of Celestion Ditton 88 to compare to my 66. I was a whisker away from owning a pair around 10 years ago but was outbid in the dying seconds, which is probably just as well as I would have been a huge punt. I've only seen one pair for sale since and those too went for more than I'd be comfortably paying. TBH almost all of speaker purchases have been 'educated punts' as in most cases I did not have the means of auditioning before buying. That's part of the fun, or at least it was in the early days when I loved to box swap and hopefully earn a small profit along the way. I don't have the motivation or stamina for that these days, and it's becoming increasingly difficult to re-home big ugly boxes. I've learned to be content with what I've got, which is what some would probably consider a speaker collection vast enough to open a small shop! :D
 
Last edited:
I'd love to hear a pair of Celestion Ditton 88 to compare to my 66.

That’s another new one on me, though looking at pics it wouldn’t surprise me if it wasn’t a cost cutting exercise as it doesn’t replicate the 66s dome mid, which I suspect is where much of the magic lies. It would be interesting to hear the differences. If anything the 88 looks more like a 44 with a passive radiator.
 
I have a pair of '57s with Townshend super-tweeters and REL subs, so the extension and dynamics are there if not the sensitivity. But I still wonder occasionally if 2905s wouldn't be an improvement. Or even Martin Logans - a faulty pair had to go back years ago but even with one dodgy panel I could hear how great they should have been. Yet to scratch the Tannoy or Klipschorn itch and probably won't get there now. Most fun so far? Probably still the Lx-minis.

Sorry, but a single snare drum strike at levels the K-horns would take in stride would have the Quads shooting sparks. There's no way anything using Quad 57s as a component could approach realistic dynamics.
 
The closest we’ve ever got to this ideal to my mind is likely the Quad ESL 63, but they are clearly inefficient and lacking in dynamic range.

Why do you say they are lacking in dynamic range? With the Krell (only 50W pc) they do loud and they do quiet.

They may not be so inefficient either, there's quite a bit of discussion about this. I can drive mine with a 25W Radford valve amp.
 
When set up "correctly" I have had very positive experiences with LINN Aktiv -w/NAXO- DMS. ...Passive too.
 
I'd be very interested to here the genelec dual concentrics https://www.genelec.com/8351b
Never heard any maggies or quads. Heard some MLs but they seemed very vague.
Would also like to hear some big Audio Physics since they have such a good reputation for disappearing.
 


advertisement


Back
Top