advertisement


Quad ESL63's Vs Pro Version

I think there may be confusion between the Quad Pro version, and the Pro upgrade offered by OTA.

From Stereophile.

The speaker's structural rigidity was increased for the launch of the ESL-63 USA Monitor in 1988. This evolved from a special "pro" version used by Philips' European recording division for location recording. Quad replaced the '63's aluminum frame with steel, and put handles on the sides and rubber kick pleats at the base. Philips was delighted, and soon other studios requested the "pro" version. Quad decided that the improved structural rigidity made it the best version for export, even though it increased the speaker's weight by 30%.
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content...static-loudspeaker-page-2#ieG86WQOEuLfT8Rh.99
 
misterdog said:
I think there may be confusion between the Quad Pro version, and the Pro upgrade offered by OTA.

From Stereophile.

The speaker's structural rigidity was increased for the launch of the ESL-63 USA Monitor in 1988. This evolved from a special "pro" version used by Philips' European recording division for location recording. Quad replaced the '63's aluminum frame with steel, and put handles on the sides and rubber kick pleats at the base. Philips was delighted, and soon other studios requested the "pro" version. Quad decided that the improved structural rigidity made it the best version for export, even though it increased the speaker's weight by 30%.
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content...static-loudspeaker-page-2#ieG86WQOEuLfT8Rh.99
Click to expand...

Ah ok so OTA are not mimicking this work. I have seen photos' of your naked 989's I couldn't contemplate that with two cabinets behind my speakers. Far too dangerous with dog and variety of people in and out of the house.
 
misterdog said:
Funny given that the main failure of Quad ESL's is the failure of the hot melt glue used by Quad.
Click to expand...

Yes I remember talking to ÔTA years ago and they said that the main advantage of using them is the quality of their glue, I didn’t speak to Quad. (I like that circumflex which autocorrect put in!)
 
misterdog said:
Funny given that the main failure of Quad ESL's is the failure of the hot melt glue used by Quad.
Click to expand...

Tell me more; I only know what Quad told me, so I've got a one-sided viewpoint. Is OTA's method any different?

EDIT: Just saw the last post, but I'm still interested to know more; we just seem to have two sides claiming they have better glue!
 
sq225917 said:
When OTA have 30+ years on the clock ill believe them...
Click to expand...

Quite - it’s clear Quad glue does not last, but we don’t know about OTAs yet? Same as I don’t know about the glue I used on all my 63 panels...well, nearly all, still need to dive into 2nd one again...hateful task
 
mandryka said:
Yes I remember talking to ÔTA years ago and they said that the main advantage of using them is the quality of their glue, I didn’t speak to Quad. (I like that circumflex which autocorrect put in!)
Click to expand...
It's formal French for "removed", the word without the accent doesn't exist, it seems. Past historic tense, no less.
 
sq225917 said:
When OTA have 30+ years on the clock ill believe them...
Click to expand...
Tongue in cheek I presume as they ain't too far away from that. On their glues Robert of this parish had a bad experience I think years ago and has always posted about it. As I outlined above I had no problems with my 57's. Panels had all been done by OTA and they were previously owned by Montesquieu and Rabski. The oldest panels had survived over 10yrs before I sold them. In that time they had been moved around, loaned to friends locally.

Guessing as I often do :) from reading lots of threads I wonder are some of the problems due to over driving speakers, inadvertently handling them badly, getting panels done one by one, expecting very olds to sound like brand new.
 
To be honest I think the issue in the way they are glued, in shear. The panel literally vibrates in the worst direction pulling apart membrane and glue layer.

If they'd glued them 90 degrees around the corner with a radiused edge they last forever. Obviously harder to tension though.

There's no free lunch I guess
 
sq225917 said:
To be honest I think the issue in the way they are glued, in shear. The panel literally vibrates in the worst direction pulling apart membrane and glue layer.

If they'd glued them 90 degrees around the corner with a radiused edge they last forever. Obviously harder to tension though.

There's no free lunch I guess
Click to expand...

There's a business opportunity for you :)
 
An adhesive formulator has to understand how variables like cross-link density, chain length, molecular building blocks and number of functional groups influence the mechanical properties of the PUR. The challenge for a good structural adhesive is to achieve a shear modulus as high as possible with sufficient elongation at break, shifting the position of the adhesive towards the upper right corner in Fig. 3.2. Basic information on how to formulate PUR adhesives can be read in, for example, Meier-Westhues (2007).
 
I rang OTA recently to ask if a service/check over on my OTA 57's was advisable, they were inundated with work, with weeks of lead time so I suggest that they must be doing something right they have had to open another workshop, whether it is as unique as the original I do not know however that was almost full as well.
 
Big John said:
I rang OTA recently to ask if a service/check over on my OTA 57's was advisable, they were inundated with work, with weeks of lead time so I suggest that they must be doing something right they have had to open another workshop, whether it is as unique as the original I do not know however that was almost full as well.
Click to expand...

Why would you want a 'service' John? If they are working ok and sound grand just keep going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top