advertisement


Inexpensive power amps for ESL57?

I use beam echo mono amps with my stacked 57s but for a change now and again I throw my quad 303 in and I can easily live with that.
I am toying with the idea of obtaining another 303 amp and mono blocking them.
 
stevec67 said:
I never heard anythng like clipping on my EL34 valve amp. I now have an Amcron PSA2, it sounds similar, just a bit more of everything, at 200+ wpc I think we can all be confident that's unlikely to be clipping.
Click to expand...
I think with a tube amp you won't 'hear' clipping in the same way that a solid state one gets actively unpleasant. Until it's gone, when perhaps you get more of everything.

And a 15W Quad II on its 16R tap into the moderate impedance of the 57 over the mid range (which is all that was available back in the days that combination was current) likely makes way more than the notional voltage that would give 15W into an 8R resistor. Now with full range sources and more diverse recordings, unless you have a strong preference for string quartets on 50s vinyl/shellac, the Quad II will be a limiting factor in most modern environments, before the loudspeakers themselves which will play anything.

Voltage is the key, Quad specify a maximum of (IIRC) 32v, which is equivalent to 62W into 8R. The rest follows.

And Scalford isn't typical.

As I said, IMO, but with supporting facts...
 
IIIR ESLs have an 84db sensitivity for 1 Watt. Two speakers in room +3db, so 87db in real terms. As such 15 Watts should give a headroom of just over 99db, which I suspect is more than any sensible ESL owner would ever want. They have never been a heavy metal speaker!

PS I drive my similar efficiency 149s with a ten Watt Leak and they go as loud as I’d want with exceptional clarity. I do listen mainly to jazz and string quartets though, but they are great on electronica etc too. My listening position is near-field which helps, though that is how ESLs give their best too.
 
BTW just to clarify, I think the Nait 2 does a splendid job of driving them, it's just that it has reduced two systems down into one which wasn't the plan (as my main system was previously active). If there's no real risk of damaging the Nait 2 when driving the ESLs, it might be that the second system becomes the ESL system and the Adams come back into the main system. I think the ESL is in many respects the superior of the Adams or the ATC100s that I had before (except in volume/bass extension terms) so I've learnt a few surprising things about my preferences in the process....
 
Tony L said:
IIIR ESLs have an 84db sensitivity for 1 Watt. Two speakers in room +3db, so 87db in real terms. As such 15 Watts should give a headroom of just over 99db, which I suspect is more than any sensible ESL owner would ever want. They have never been a heavy metal speaker!

PS I drive my similar efficiency 149s with a ten Watt Leak and they go as loud as I’d want with exceptional clarity. I do listen mainly to jazz and string quartets though, but they are great on electronica etc too. My listening position is near-field which helps, though that is how ESLs give their best too.
Click to expand...

When I listen to my Quads from 19 feet away, the dB meter rarely gets past 80 dB for most of my listening sessions. When I’m playing them loud the meter gets to around 86 dB so I assume I’m using less than a watt most of the time, with my Tannoy’s it must be a fraction of that!
 
Tony L said:
IIIR ESLs have an 84db sensitivity for 1 Watt. Two speakers in room +3db, so 87db in real terms. As such 15 Watts should give a headroom of just over 99db, which I suspect is more than any sensible ESL owner would ever want. They have never been a heavy metal speaker!

PS I drive my similar efficiency 149s with a ten Watt Leak and they go as loud as I’d want with exceptional clarity. I do listen mainly to jazz and string quartets though, but they are great on electronica etc too. My listening position is near-field which helps, though that is how ESLs give their best too.
Click to expand...
Subjectively it is less than that, probably because of the way they drive the room, or don't drive the room.

I don't understand why so many are so keen to put a bottleneck before one of the best loudspeakers ever created. Especially when unlimited solutions are so practical, like the Quad amps mentioned upthread.

Anyway, it's a free world, for the moment.

FWIW because of the directionality the 'near field' extends rather farther than usual. You probably need to be in the next room to get the full far field experience...
 
Just to add another amp in the mix (although not beer budget cheap despite being excellent value) the Croft range from Glenn is likley to be an excellent choice - seeings as Glenn's favourite loudspeaker is the ESL 57 and he has used his amps to drive them 'stacked'.
 
JTC said:
Right now I’m using a Nait 2 but although I’m pleased with the sound, many claim that it might not be bringing out the best in the ESLs. Also, it’s been pinched from the second system and my wife wants it back! Also, I’ve read that driving ESLs with Naim amps can accelerate the need for recaps etc., which may or may not be nonsense, but if that were the case it would be good to know.

I’m just wondering: do any inexpensive power amps exist that would drive the ESLs safely, and ideally better than the Nait 2? And is that recap concern bollocks, or a real issue?
Click to expand...



I posted the below following post 12.2.17 with regard to amps for 57s. Easier to cut/paste than rewrite.

Another point I’ve written elsewhere is that 57s are both extremely audio discerning and electrically demanding ... which means that the amp/57 interface impacts the audio sound perceived more than many/most other loudspeakers.

The Nait 2/Quad 57 is a great, classic combo. Since you like that combo, consider a flier with a modest tube push pull tube integrated; or acquire a beater/cheap Nait 3 or Nait 5 ... which will keep you in general NAIT neighborhood sound wise.

PS IMO, 57s deserve the best amp possible ... not an inexpensive compromise. Also IMO, the Nait 2 fits the bill.

WTS




Quad 57s, IME, sound significantly different with different amps. I would guess that this experience is common ... which is why there is so much commentary on the subject. Quad 63s, IME, present less variability, but require a significantly more powerful amplifier to sound 'big' without compression.

Quad 57s in order of preference: Citation II (in triode mode), Quad IIs, Avondale 260, Nait II or Nait V, Quad Elite Integrated.

I could live with either the Nait II or the Quad IIs driving the 57s, but not with the 63s, for lack of power in my open 20' x 24' x 18" living room.
 
serviced correctly not modded 303 .run 57s for decade , then went to 405 early 80s , upgraded boards to mk 2 and found it better.. soon after went to 63s . go for good 303
 
I had 57's for about 10 years and played with all the usual suspects mentioned in this thread, ended up with preferring the Radford 15 and given the name is now well supported it is as good as it gets
 
There was a Radford STA 15 on eBay for about £1400 (starting) - got no bids. I really don't need another power amp, but I've always wanted a Radford, as I think they probably just edge out the Leak ST20 as my favourite classic valve amp... wonder what a fair price would be for one?
 
Ear 869, EAR 509, EAR 516. All of them sound good with the Quad ESL 57.
If I were to arrange them in some sort of pecking order, it would not be because of power. it would be according to the sweetness of sound:
EAR 516 - may sound a tad sweeter than the 509s.
EAR 509 - the EAR 509s were more than up to the task. Quite nutral.
EAR 869 - its valves may have been on their last legs. The buyer of my unit changed the valves and got a major increase in power. The power amp section used alone is far better than using it as an integrated amp. The sound was still good. Sounded closer to the 516 than the 509s.

Just realised that these are NOT inexpensive as per the thread title. OOPS.
 
Last edited:
JemHayward said:
I've always wanted a Radford, as I think they probably just edge out the Leak ST20 as my favourite classic valve amp... wonder what a fair price would be for one?
Click to expand...
Whatever you or the other guy in the auction are prepared to pay, I'd say. Quad 2s and ST20s are, what, £800-1k these days? About that then, plus a bit for rarity value. But clearly not as much as £1400.
 
Radford's are in a different league from ST20's or Quad II's in sound quality as well as measured performance. Whilst TBH it shocks me that St20's and QII's go for as much as they do, if we accept that as the going rate then a Radford is easily worth £1400+ IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top