robbyd
pfm Member
Thanks for posting that image..Here is Quad's own recipe for stacking ESL57...
I do find it strange that the original 57s basically fire at an upwards angle, and the lower panel here is shooting down with the upper one level!
Stacked 57s
- Thread starter robbyd
- Start date
I do find it strange that the original 57s basically fire at an upwards angle, and the lower panel here is shooting down with the upper one level!
david ellwood
Kirabosi Kognoscente
I’ve never been a fan of 57s but must admit that the positive attributes they do have get diluted with stacking.
They lose focus and sound vague.
They lose focus and sound vague.
david ellwood
Kirabosi Kognoscente
That is a huge question.
Id need to meet up and compare notes whilst listening.
Id need to meet up and compare notes whilst listening.
brecklandboy
pfm Member
I have to say that my experience seems to contradict yours. Reverting, on occasions to a single pair, is (relatively) a retrograde step. Incidentally what amplification did you audition 'your' stacked pair with ?
brecklandboy
pfm Member
I think that the inversion of the lower panel has more to do with facilitating shorter cable connections than bringing sonic benefits . However, my technical knowledge on the physics of sound reproduction is fairly minimal !
misterdog
Not the canine kind
I have only owned Quad 989's but.
When I first acquired them they were as smooth as silk but totally uninspiring in terms of dynamics.
I fed them initially with a Yamaha AS 2000 amp and Audiolab MDac.
Various moves have led me to a Benchmark AHB2 amp and SMSL M400 DAC with a signal source of 0.00007 % Distortion and noise. This has led to the speakers opening up immensely, giving a much greater sense of dynamics and soundstage.
The soundstage is basically the size of the room, and that is probably their current limiting factor.
The other large increase in SQ. was from removing the flimsy stock frames and fitting the panels into steel box section frames and raising them off the floor.
I can switch off the 2 subs and supertweeters and they still sound great, the subs are only needed for the last octave on synth bass, but do give that kick which 'feels' so good.
Maybe I should bring them to Kegworth for a compare and contrast.
martin clark
pinko bodger
@stevec67 runs a stacked pair of esl57s with a socking-great amp.
He's busy at present, but can answer the OP on theme directly...
My view (and I owned & loved esl57s for sm yrs up to c. a decade ago) is a comparable experience to @misterdog - serviced 989s: mine run from a pair of amps with exemplary low-distortion/low output impedance via feedback taken from the speaker input: the result is riveting even at low total volume.
He's busy at present, but can answer the OP on theme directly...
My view (and I owned & loved esl57s for sm yrs up to c. a decade ago) is a comparable experience to @misterdog - serviced 989s: mine run from a pair of amps with exemplary low-distortion/low output impedance via feedback taken from the speaker input: the result is riveting even at low total volume.
david ellwood
Kirabosi Kognoscente
989s are a totally different ball game to 57s, I much much prefer them.
First time I heard stacked 57s they were driven by a pair of 303s.
First time I heard stacked 57s they were driven by a pair of 303s.
brecklandboy
pfm Member
Yes , David, the earlier and later generation Quad 'stats do 'present' differently although I don't wish to start a 'bun fight' regarding the sonic merits of the different variants. I could live happily with either flavour.
Personally, I would always go down the route of using high quality valve amplification with the ESL57s.
Personally, I would always go down the route of using high quality valve amplification with the ESL57s.
poco a poco
I'm Jim
I remember hearing the Dayton-Wright XG-8's in both singles and stacked pairs. John Farlowe used to import them into the UK many years ago. No problems with volume, dynamics and bass extension especially in stacked pairs, but difficult to drive and need a lot of power. I think not that reliable either?Fantasyland, or, the old ''La Grotto' restaurant in Toronto, containing a custom 14 foot wide curved 'panoramic' electrostatic install by one Mike Wright, later of Dayton-Wright Group.
Mike W. complained on his blog about having "to spend at least an hour and a half each day replacing cells" after one of the restaurant partners decided to run a disco post dining hours. I suspect that this was instrumental in Mike's decision to later enclose his cells within a sealed inert gas filled bag which allowed them to be driven much higher before arching set in.
http://www.dayton-wright.com/XG-8-Mk3.html
david ellwood
Kirabosi Kognoscente
They seem to have their mig and tig confused.
Craig B
Re:trophile
You're welcome, Robby,
If you look again, you'll see that both are at the same slight angle, only inverted wrt one another. They have to be so, as they are mounted using the same holes as the wooden side rails were fastened into.
tones
Tones deaf
Not stacked, but perhaps of interest - Manfred Stein has a little video on the Quad Musikwiedergabe website (leider nur auf Deutsch):
https://www.quad-musik.de/index.php/en/
https://www.quad-musik.de/index.php/en/
786
Another day, another box!
I can vouch for Brecklandboy's stacked quads, I have had the pleasure of listening to them...INCREDIBLE. We are just playing with toys really, compare it to these stacked Quads with the classic beast Sansui tube amp, and you will know what i mean.
My long term experience was quite different to yours.
I stacked my 57s using Quad’s recommended frame as posted above. The stacked pair was, overall, an improvement over a single pair. I used it from ‘76 to ‘81 when I took delivery of the ESL 63. I do recall that the stacked pair had a prominence around 150-250 Hz compared to a single pair which I eq’ed using an analogue equaliser.
Today I’d recommend a single pair of 57s plus woofers in a 2.2 configuration.
I stacked my 57s using Quad’s recommended frame as posted above. The stacked pair was, overall, an improvement over a single pair. I used it from ‘76 to ‘81 when I took delivery of the ESL 63. I do recall that the stacked pair had a prominence around 150-250 Hz compared to a single pair which I eq’ed using an analogue equaliser.
Today I’d recommend a single pair of 57s plus woofers in a 2.2 configuration.