ESL-57s (newcomer Qs)

[chartz]

ESL 57s sound fantastic with an EL34 valve amp. I have a Yaqin MC10, it's outstanding with them. The best midrange I have *ever* heard. Anywhere.

Exactly. EL34 here too.
But Quad transistor amps (any of them) sound good on Quad ‘statics.
Honestly I can’t tell them apart.
They must produce correct sounds after a few minutes, period.
Otherwise they need service.

On axis, mine are quite bright with the correct material.
I am a bass player, and on the right bass note, they also do make a few pieces of furniture rattle. Oh, and the drum set flare makes itself known too
Out of axis they sound dull.

About positioning: mine are about two and a half metres off the back wall, which lets 4 metres to the other end of the room.
.

 

[chiily]

Which raises an interesting question: what would drive the ESL57's better?

I (and will) also try out an NAC 62/NAP 90 and report back!

Krell KSA50

 

[Stuart Frazer]

Says it all, the comments above. You could happily offer your friend the £700 provided he pays for a total refurb. (one way out of a dilemma?). Although Naits have been used to feed 57s, they are not going to do them justice. If you're going down this route AND have at least 1 metre space behind (and preferably a bit of width as well), factor in amplification in due course which will be more synergistic.

I read somewhere that a Nait 2 was a good match for the Quad 57s and a recommended amplifier for them.

Edit, found it and Quad 57 amplifiers discussion and recommendations:

http://www.quadesl.org/index.php/hard-core/amplifiers/christian-steingruber

 

[chartz]

I wouldn’t use a Naim because of the switch-in thump which WILL be harmful in the long run – as I’ve said before.
Drive your ‘57’s gently and they will last.

 

[brecklandboy]

If you're looking to purchase amplification for ESL57s, I would go for a high-quality pull=pull / ultra-linear valve amplifier with excellent output transformers (preferably with an additional cathode winding). I would also recommend choosing an amplifier with a 15 ohm tap, as this will best match the speaker's nominal impedance. If you listen at low(ish) volumes 'near field', or in a smallish room, then you can probably get away with 12 watts per channel but if you want to avoid clipping on musical peaks, anything between 15 and 40 watts will do the job. Quad advised 15 watts as a minimum requirement b.t.w.

Although in 30 years of listening, i have never known a valve amp to damage a treble panel, it's advisable to have protection circuits fitted to the speakers, especially if you're going down the transistor route.

Partner the 'right' amp with an A1 set of 'stats and that's two-thirds of your system sorted, possibly for the rest of your life. HI-Fi made simple - well almost !

 

[ducatiman]

Dear PFM forum,

A friend has offered to sell me his father's old ESL-57s, bought new in the 70's. I have set them up with a CB Nait ii and and Arcam CD player. When they work, they sound heavenly.

The issue is they are sometimes silent or noisy-- so noisy that there is little actual signal. Also, sometimes one is brighter or more bassy than the other. Turning the balance from one speaker to the other reveals these differences some more (assuming that this is not causing a problem itself!).

I got new speaker cables yesterday and they sounded great all afternoon (5-6 hours). Today, they started off noisy and not making a full spectrum sound, but improved a bit. (Yes, I had the power off overnight. Perhaps, I should leave them on all the time and today's problem was that they were cold...)

The friend wants £700 for them. I feel like getting someone in London (Graham's?) to check them out and see if all the bits are working or at least give me an idea what might be involved in servicing them (ie cost). The friend doesn't want them moved from my place. = Dilemma.

If they sounded great all the time, I would go for it. I dont want to end up with large non-functional radiator look-alikes.

Thoughts gratefully received!

- Birksworks

£700 is well over the top I’m afraid £500 absolute max and they would need to be cosmetically perfect to justify that.
You’ll need to budget another At least £400 for Service to bring back to there stunning best.

 

[sq225917]

I paid 325 for 63s with one clicky panel.

 

[Colinb]

Paid £400 for an absolutely pristine pair of 63s at the beginning of the year

 

[cctaylor]

I wouldn’t use a Naim because of the switch-in thump which WILL be harmful in the long run – as I’ve said before.
Drive your ‘57’s gently and they will last.

I don't remember there being much if any of a switch on thump with my NAC12/NAP160 combination. I was very happy with the setup for many years.

 

[misterdog]

it's advisable to have protection circuits fitted to the speakers, especially if you're going down the transistor route.

OTA Widget is the Capacitor/resistor fitted to the > ESL 63, stops the amplifier from seeing the near 0 Ohm impedance at 12.5 kHz IMO...

My 989 ESL's like the lowest distortion possible.
I use solid state with Total Harmonic Distortion + Noise 0.00051% 1 kHz, 110 W, 4 ", 20 kHz BW

As one of the lowest distortion speakers available it makes sense to me. Though I have no experience with the 57's.

 

[BIrksworks]

Yes, there is always a turn-on thump with the Nait II. I have not yet hooked the speakers up to my (new-old) NAC 62/ NAP 90, but will report back.

Have not yet spoken to the seller. He probably won't react favourably! Spending £600-700 on servicing them rather takes out the budget. They sound good when they work. Wonder what that is worth! ;-)

Not enough space to position them 1m from the wal behind them, but the bas seem pretty good on most recordings-- that already have decent bass. I presume moving them away from the was for bass reasons, right?

Thanks for everyone's help!

 

[Eyebroughty]

Which raises an interesting question: what would drive the ESL57's better?

I (and will) also try out an NAC 62/NAP 90 and report back!

When I had my 57's I used a Leak Stereo 20, then Quad II's then a Naim 160, all amazing.

Best speaker ever made, maybe not for rock music, but anything else amazing, nothing comes close.

Of course you need the right room and a bit of space to let them work properly.

 

[Mike Reed]

Not enough space to position them 1m from the wal behind them, but the bas seem pretty good on most recordings-- that already have decent bass. I presume moving them away from the was for bass reasons, right?

Wouldn't have thought so. As a dipole, they need to see a space behind (bit like rear-ported m/coil speakers in that respect) and I'd think it would affect all sonic aspects if you can't oblige. I'm no guru, but I'm sure the technical reasons will be forthcoming, this being pfm !

I wouldn't dream of having my 2905s, or indeed the 57s beforehand, if I couldn't accommodate them properly. Despite all the eulogies for the 57s, they don't do scale (as a pair; stacked is an improvement), which is why I went directly to Quad's largest; they do scale in spades.

 

[ducatiman]

Wouldn't have thought so. As a dipole, they need to see a space behind (bit like rear-ported m/coil speakers in that respect) and I'd think it would affect all sonic aspects if you can't oblige. I'm no guru, but I'm sure the technical reasons will be forthcoming, this being pfm !

I wouldn't dream of having my 2905s, or indeed the 57s beforehand, if I couldn't accommodate them properly. Despite all the eulogies for the 57s, they don't do scale (as a pair; stacked is an improvement), which is why I went directly to Quad's largest; they do scale in spades.

Interesting having owned your speakers and the smaller 2805’s I went the other way, stacked one thing 57’s. I didn’t regret it Can’t say my wife agreed with me back then.

 

[david ellwood]

For the sake of balance and in the face of all the positive comments i'd just add that the 57 is one of the worst speakers ive ever had the misfortune to hear.
At what they do well (midrange clarity, apparent transient speed) they are very good, they just fall down so badly in so many other areas.

If you must go for statics, for £700 i'd be much more attracted to 63's which are less compromised.
Or better still a decent moving coil speaker.

 

[tonerei]

Interesting having owned your speakers and the smaller 2805’s I went the other way, stacked one thing 57’s. I didn’t regret it Can’t say my wife agreed with me back then.

Oh that is an itch that I would definitely seriously investigate if I lived relatively near to Coventry. Had a pair of OTA 57's and it is still on the bucket list to go stacked. Feel I will wimp out and go for 989's. 57's with a Jadis 30W Class A valve amp were sublime and did scale to point but like Mike has outlined above they run out of steam. Nevertheless in most listening environments they go as loud as you would ever need. They just need have all the work done by OTA or Quad. There is no point buying a duff pair and then giving out about how dreadful they are.

 

[stevec67]

If you must go for statics, for £700 i'd be much more attracted to 63's which are less compromised.
.

63s are not as good as 57s. Stacked 57s knock them into a cocked hat. I've owned both. The 63s were recently Quad serviced, I found them disappointing. Swapped them for an LP12/Ittok/Lingo that I used for a few years and sold on so all was well.

 

[ducatiman]

Oh that is an itch that I would definitely seriously investigate if I lived relatively near to Coventry. Had a pair of OTA 57's and it is still on the bucket list to go stacked. Feel I will wimp out and go for 989's. 57's with a Jadis 30W Class A valve amp were sublime and did scale to point but like Mike has outlined above they run out of steam. Nevertheless in most listening environments they go as loud as you would ever need. They just need have all the work done by OTA or Quad. There is no point buying a duff pair and then giving out about how dreadful they are.

A perfectly fettled pair of 57’s on proper stands are Simply breathtaking.

 

[herb]

In the end I found my 57s too revealing. You got to hear all of the mistakes and quirks of the recording engineers (like polarity and mic placement). I well remember the shock of hearing my new Mission 7000DAD CD player in 1983ish. It sounded brash with no atmosphere, sounds decayed in a series of distinct steps. The Mission was dismissed entirely and I went back to LPs and Radio 3, Which sounded superb. I think that the early CDs were not the best and people are obviously playing modern CDs into ESLs without problems.

The 57s had to go when I moved into a bedsit way back in 1988. I am very happy with Harbeths in a dedicated room these days and use nothing but CDs.

 

[tonerei]

63s are not as good as 57s. Stacked 57s knock them into a cocked hat. I've owned both. The 63s were recently Quad serviced, I found them disappointing. Swapped them for an LP12/Ittok/Lingo that I used for a few years and sold on so all was well.

Interesting the diverging views Steve. I have 63's recent Quad service and OTA 57's recently done at one point. For a few years I kept both and swapped them around. I ended up moving on the 57's and happily living with the 63's. There is definitely a magic mid range thing with the 57's but I think the 63's are more accurate. But I get your view and can see how listening at low levels with certain music types the 57's are just beguiling. The stacked route is probably going to give the scale etc but it is not an easy off the shelf option. On an Irish forum a Canadian member who often posted had an amazing stacked pair. Completely fettled with supertweeters and in a dedicated basement room with huge treatment. The wooden frames were mad gothic typical North American( Giant redwood cut down to make it). A friend visited him and was blown away by the sound. This man has really expensive power amps /pre. He also has a range of entreq products