Local stacked ESL demo night....

[DimitryZ]

So you haven’t owned either an 05 or 12 model. I actually asked if you had heard them; if you had you would know that the 63 and models up until the 2805 were not perfect (albeit very good indeed) insofar as they have been improved. I doubt that they are perfect now (what speaker is?) and maybe they will be improved, but your statement that the changes are a waste is erm, how can I put this politely, curious!

BTW I did consider the Eminent speaker but at the time they were represented in the UK by one person and getting a dem at home involved a fee although this would have been taken off the price if I had bought a pair. They did look promising but impossible to judge them without a decent listen.

My statement is well aligned with PW's sentiment.

Why would he not come up with ESL-73 or ESL-83?

If you study the circuit, there is nothing else that can be added or changed within the confines of the design space. Except, perhaps better capacitor here or there. It is, for all intents and purposes, perfect. It remains the one and only speaker that utilizes technology of phased array radars in the audio realm to generate a spherical waveform - a holy grail of audio reproduction.

And, regardless, Quad has long lost the corporate knowledge anyway, so all they can do is double up on bass panels and add sticks. Do they bypass the electrolytic input cap in those newer models or not? That is the first thing one would do...

 

[Tony L]

My statement is well aligned with PW's sentiment.

Why would he not come up with ESL-73 or ESL-83?

I’m sure he would have, but it wouldn’t have just been a slight nip and tuck variation on an existing design, it would have contained radical thinking, e.g. he was working on omni-directional point-sources etc. He was a fascinating designer as he only seemed interested in original design ideas, market them for at least a decade, then move on to the next one. Quad’s history was never one of tiny incremental improvements with a Mk II, III, IV or whatever coming out every year or two. Once it was done it was done unless he had something genuinely new and innovative to say design-wise e.g. II to 303, 303 to 405, ESL to 63 etc. Since his leadership Quad have only really made variations on the current dumping amp and the ESL63 and relaunched the valve amp plus marketed a few traditional box speakers. I have no issue with IAG, they are caring for the brand far better than most later owners would, but no one could mistake Quad today for the truly radical cutting-edge forward-looking design that the company represented in its heyday. I’d love to have seen Walker realise his omnidirectional point-source, I suspect that could have been a total game-changer of the level of both the other ESLs.

 

[Dowser]

Regarding the naming of 57s and 63s - I thought these were the years the two designs started? With the 63 taking a little longer to complete

 

[camverton]

Regarding the naming of 57s and 63s - I thought these were the years the two designs started? With the 63 taking a little longer to complete

I think that’s true. The later models use the year of introduction as in ‘05 and ‘12.

Walker’s ideas for a iirc spherical electrostatic point source could have been a real game changer. We can only guess at what changes Peter Walker might have made to the 63; probably not much as he was thinking of a radically new design. As Tony has pointed out he didn’t make incremental changes but brought out new models with something new to offer. It is also worth noting that he appeared to be engineering, rather than listening, led although happily that resulted in excellent sounding products.

Reverence to Walker as an engineer is entirely justified but that doesn’t mean that any of his designs were perfect; we wouldn’t have got past the 303 or 57 otherwise. Some think that his earlier designs were perfect, to which I would say listen to the later, including IAG, models.

I wonder if Walker heard Alastair Robertson-Aikman’s system, stacked with brass weights and if so would he have revised his comment about raising 63s on beer crates!

 

[Tony L]

Regarding the naming of 57s and 63s - I thought these were the years the two designs started? With the 63 taking a little longer to complete

The 57 was never called the 57 by Quad, it was just the Electrostatic Loudspeaker and was released in 1957. I don’t know exactly when Peter Walker started work on it, but he certainly had a working prototype in 1955. The ESL63 was certainly called that (and FRED: full range electrostatic dipole), and it relates to the date work started. It wasn’t released until 1981.

 

[DimitryZ]

I’m sure he would have, but it wouldn’t have just been a slight nip and tuck variation on an existing design, it would have contained radical thinking, e.g. he was working on omni-directional point-sources etc. He was a fascinating designer as he only seemed interested in original design ideas, market them for at least a decade, then move on to the next one. Quad’s history was never one of tiny incremental improvements with a Mk II, III, IV or whatever coming out every year or two. Once it was done it was done unless he had something genuinely new and innovative to say design-wise e.g. II to 303, 303 to 405, ESL to 63 etc. Since his leadership Quad have only really made variations on the current dumping amp and the ESL63 and relaunched the valve amp plus marketed a few traditional box speakers. I have no issue with IAG, they are caring for the brand far better than most later owners would, but no one could mistake Quad today for the truly radical cutting-edge forward-looking design that the company represented in its heyday. I’d love to have seen Walker realise his omnidirectional point-source, I suspect that could have been a total game-changer of the level of both the other ESLs.

He did release a 63 update, called the US Monitors. It was the same speaker with slightly more rigid structure.

 

[Tony L]

He did release a 63 update, called the US Monitors. It was the same speaker with slightly more rigid structure.

I thought that was just to make them more physically robust for the pro environment. Similarly there were pro versions of some of the amps, e.g. the active versions of the 303 and 405 for the BBC (LS5/8s etc). The 405-2 breaks the rule too, but again that was introduced to meet a specific market requirement brought about by a load of low-impedance 1980s ported speakers that the original version struggled with (as does the 303).

 

[DimitryZ]

I thought that was just to make them more physically robust for the pro environment. Similarly there were pro versions of some of the amps, e.g. the active versions of the 303 and 405 for the BBC (LS5/8s etc). The 405-2 breaks the rule too, but again that was introduced to meet a specific market requirement brought about by a load of low-impedance 1980s ported speakers that the original version struggled with (as does the 303).

Perhaps.

PW is also quoted as being less than kind to his previous design - "I should have just built the 63," or something close to that.

 

[Zombie]

I’m sure he would have, but it wouldn’t have just been a slight nip and tuck variation on an existing design, it would have contained radical thinking, e.g. he was working on omni-directional point-sources etc. - - - I’d love to have seen Walker realise his omnidirectional point-source, I suspect that could have been a total game-changer of the level of both the other ESLs.

Do you mean "walker's balls", spherical esls?

 

[Tony L]

Yes, I even saw a picture of said items somewhere, so they definitely got beyond the idea stage and into a prototype form. I think there is some mention of them in Ken Kessler’s Quad book, I’ll dig it out and have a look at some point.

 

[Zombie]

Yes, I even saw a picture of said items somewhere.

Clever search terms will show the pic on the net, but it's also in the book you mention.