Bottlehead Forum
Other Gear => Speakers => Topic started by: xcortes on November 08, 2011, 08:40:41 AM
-
A few months ago a friend sent a pic of a pair of speakers he was buying and I saw, on the back, a pair of Quad ESL 57s. I started enquiring and after a few negotiations I bartered them for a McIntosh preamp (that I had also acquired in an exchange) that was ready to be sold. They are in pretty decent cosmetic condition and in stunning operating condition.
The Quads are, to me, a magnificent example of industrial design from the late 50s. You could decorate a house around these (how about a second house, hmm, a beach house?).
They are famous for their transparency and midrange. Supposedly very picky about amplification with an impedance curve going down to 0.5 ohm that some solid state amps see as a short (with the following fireworks show) and that is not benign to SET amps. On the other hand if you feed them with more than 25 watts the internal panels arch and you can kill them.
I tried them with all types of the amps supposed to be good with them: solid state and push pull amps. They seemed to do some things very nice but with every try I would get tired quickily. Very fast and transparent but not musical. So I was about to call the experiment a failure, mark the "already tried" checkbox in my exotic audio list and put them for sale.
But yesterday I decided to try the no-no. I connected them to a pair of Paramours. I decided to give them a break for the first test so I rolled a tape of Cello Suites (JSB by Starker, just amazing) and voil
-
Get a second pair and stack them. Gives you big bass. Also, they seem most happy with about 15 watts - maybe two Paramounts per channel, with secondaries wired in series.
-
Here's a quote I found: "Quad II have a standard output resistance of 1 ohm when set with 16 ohm load matching on the output transformer, but this occurs at a limited frequency range at at high frequencies the output resistance rises enough to cause considerable attenuation at extreme high frequencies. ESL57 have a reputation for being a bit "toppy" when used with a modern amp with low output impedance."
I conclude from this that a no-feedback SET, which has a few ohms output resistance which does NOT increase at high frequencies, might actually have a spectral balance that is pretty close to the original Quad II amplifier.
-
Thanks Paul. That's exactly one of the things that bothered me (not the only one), too much highs. With the SETs the highs are perfectly balanced.
I continued my listening tests yesterday. I have to admit that 3.5 watts are on the low side for these speakers. They definitely need the 15 wtts of Doc's recommendation. Or 2x15 watts stacked.
My main conclusion remain: The midbass and mids are exceptional. The highs are very good but not the best (a little bit on the rough side). The bass is not good with the SET amps. Maybe with the bigger ones it will improve a bit but I wouldn't hold my breath.
On my research I've also found that my idea of using them as mids only with a line level crossover and separate tweeters and bass speakers has already been done. Mark Levinson designed such a system with stacked Quads, "modified" Decca ribbon tweeters and huge 21" (or 24") woofers in sealed boxes. He sold the system with his own active crossovers and, of course, bunch of amps. It was called the Mark Levinson HQD system:
http://www.marklev.com/systems/ (http://www.marklev.com/systems/)
It will be good to figure what crossover slopes and point Levinson used. AndI'll go with plasma tweeters, of course! (http://www.marklev.com/systems/dutch/system/index.html)
-
I hope you will pardon a little reminiscence. Over 30 years ago I was lucky enough to fall in with a group of Audiophiles in Atlanta, one of whom had the HQD system. While it was very impressive, it never stole my heart. That award went to another friend's system using Beveridge 3 speakers with some subs by another company. That was the first time I ever felt like there was a person standing between the speakers singing. But, of course, you can't go home again - 10 years ago I purchased a pair of Beveridge 3s and found that by then most of my friends' current systems sounded better. Enjoy the quads - I have had several friends who found them addictive.
-
My guess is that the "rough" treble is mostly due to the transformer - it is extremely difficult to get a high voltage step-up ratio in the treble. I do wonder whether a separate transformer design for the treble panel would work better. A separate tube amp direct coupled could be stunning, but the voltages involved are also stunning - 1kVrms means the tube(s) must operate at 2-3kV on the plates. The bass panels need three times that.
-
I've had Decca ribbons and Ionovacs and I think the Ionovacs will be a more interesting match with the QUADs. I really liked my Beveridge system II...Pete Riggle has it now. And I always thought the QUAD treble sounded like plastic.
-
Xavier,
Electrostatics are capacitors. They need to be formed. Keep them turned on all the time. The sound will change for a few weeks.
-
Sure wish I had a mountain of money to pursue all things audio. The Quads do sound sublime!
-
I've got a pair of Quad ESL-57's and I agree with pretty much everything said here. They look great, I think, in a retro-modern kind of way. They look like space-heaters for a Swedish moon base. I love the look with original bronze grills.
I got mine off ebay pretty cheap, picked up locally from a guy whose uncle died and left the speakers. I had to have the treble panels rebuilt, Wayne Picquet supplied the magic there. I also use his voltage multipliers; mine were shot. I also have his zener protection boards.
I've used a zillion amps with these. I find that they like some power; I use a Soderburg-modded Forte 4a with them, best amp I've heard with them. Also I have a Citation II with the McShane stuff, but I prefer the bass and mids from the Forte. I sometimes use an 845 SET which is OK. I tried a Stereo 70, nice mids but lacked detail. An AMC hybrid MOSFET-EL34 amp sounds really nice on the Quads but lacks oomph. With the Forte the bass is fantastic, and the mids are quite liquid. Highs are almost tube-like. Highs from the Forte are a little clinical, but not grainy or harsh like many solid state amps.
The Quad's highs do not sound state-of-the-art. I don't know if I'd go quite so far as to describe the upper registers as "plastic" but they are certainly not as textured as the better ribbons. (I've never heard an ion tweeter. Some day!) There is no lack of treble response but the sound is kind of lifeless. My Magneplanar 3.6's have much nicer treble, but the upper bass / lower mids and mids of the Quad are so coherent it's easy to forgive their somewhat dated treble sound. The other issue, of course, is very narrow treble dispersion.
But they are wonderful speakers, overall.
-
During the weekend I connected a Sex amp to the Quads just for fun. Unbelievable. Can't believe how good they sounded. Of course two watts is not enough for loud volumes but cm'on! I always assumed I'd need a push pull amp and even brought a nice EAR down to Mexico for them. With my BH amps lying around! I didn't loose control which was what I feared most.
So the project is now officially brought back to life. I've started to put the parts together to build three pairs of 300Bs. Sort of Paramount/Parabees. I'll take the nice MQ iron from the HT (exo 050 Ni) Paramours. Three pairs in series will be 12 ohms, not bad. And about 18 watts with the 5k opts. And the Ionovacs are off the main system now.
-
New try. I was able to get a hold of a Bedini 25 25. Yes, solid state :o. This amp is supposed to be "the peach" with ESL 57s. Guess what. It works very nicely. And so far I can't hear the transistors or a push pull after taste. According tho Bedini these amps are "constant source current". Does he mean what we knos as CCS? No idea. At one fifth the market price of the EAR (both used) they hold very well.
-
It was at least 30 years ago that I stepped into an audio shop that had a set of Quads playing. Interestingly, it was a sound that I immediately knew was right. Couldn't tell you another thing about the equipment, but I will never forget the sound.
-
Well, the Bedini didn't cut it after all so I brought one of the Quads to my office. The only thing I have here is the Sex amp for which I'm supposed buy a pair of Orcas and my super cassette walkman. So what the heck, I connected them. First I wasn't getting much since the WM output is around 1/4 volt. So I found an aligator clipped wire and connected the output of one channel to the input of the other, basically using one side of the Sex as a pre. Now we're talking. Of course not loud but niiiice. So back to SETs again. I should have listened to Doc when he said: "Get a second pair and stack them. Gives you big bass. Also, they seem most happy with about 15 watts - maybe two Paramounts per channel, with secondaries wired in series" almost a year and a half ago. But I take pride in never listening to his advice the first time you know?
-
I have a crazy Quad hybrid idea.... using 3 (!) sets of Quads and a Magnepan MG 3.6 ribbon tweeter....
The idea works like this: you disassemble the Quads. You use the power supply and step-up transformer, connecting to panels as original. Good idea to add zener clamp board, too.
You re-assemble the panels in a different way- treble panel, then the two mid/bass panels but put them ONE BEHIND THE OTHER (is this acoustically in series? I don't think so, really) - the same way Martin Logan does on the CLX woofer panel.
You stack three of these panel assemblies vertically. Next to the tweeter panel vertical stack you position a Magenpan MG 3.6 type ribbon tweeter, in a bit of a baffle the way it is mounted in the 3.6. You use one amp per Quad, and an amp for the ribbon tweeter. Crossover and correction you use a DEQX. Cross over to the tweeter maybe around 3~4 kHz (you could go lower, the ribbon is usable down to 1,200~1,500 Hz) - so, for stereo you need EIGHT amplifiers.... but you're getting treble from the ribbon, and mids and bass from the Quads. If you needed a subwoofer, you could use a pair of 12" GR Research open-baffle servo subs, crossed over at 45 Hz using the DEQX, around 90 dB / octave. These open-baffle subs have the closest thing to "panel speaker" sound I've heard from a sub, and they will get you useful low distortion sound down to 10~15 Hz.
(https://forum.bottlehead.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flf.org%2Fmilosz%2Ftemp%2F3q.png&hash=26966ad89321f96c9718b16d513ee7471f34f77d)
-
The DEQX http://www.deqx.com/ (http://www.deqx.com/) is a very, very nice unit, which I don't own ($$$) but have played with on a 3 way tri-amped OB design. I ended up going here and used a http://www.minidsp.com/products/minidsp-in-a-box/minidsp-4x10-hd (http://www.minidsp.com/products/minidsp-in-a-box/minidsp-4x10-hd) ($)
Not quite as out of the box PnP, but their devices work real well when used with an inexpensive calibrated mic, True RTA http://www.trueaudio.com/rta_selection_guide.htm (http://www.trueaudio.com/rta_selection_guide.htm), and REW (Room EQ Wizard) http://www.hometheatershack.com/roomeq/ (http://www.hometheatershack.com/roomeq/)
Cost effective DIY, hands on, instructive. I only had to overcome my bias about putting a digital device in my otherwise all tube audio chain ...... well, except for a DAC or two ....
-
In the past, I had tried the DEQX also, but like you said, the money, wowo. I then went back to a a passive design, which for me was the answer. In a 3 way digital set-up, there were a LOT of connections to be made. I try to keep things simple for my own sake.
-
Xavier,
I am not sure I'm following. What feeds the Quad tweeter panels?
I'm pretty familiar with multi-amped electrostatic set ups. I still have a (broken of course) Infinity Servo-Statik system.
-
I've not posted in this thread for some time! The Quads are not being used now.
-
Xavier,
Did you by any chance try these with a Firstwatt Aleph J? According to some, this is a spectacular amp for the quads and cannot be damaged by any known speaker load (according to NP himself) These are single ended class A SS amps (though with some feedback) and a 2nd order distortion characteristic. Many low power SET lovers have adored this amp.
I'm collecting parts to build a couple of monoblocks -- got matched sets of FETs and JFETs and BJTs on the way, plus pc boards, and mega heat sinks. A longer term project, but something I'm very curious to hear for myself.
Hope things are well with you, my friend,
Jim
-
Hi Jim,
I have not. I had a first watt amp (f5?) a while ago and did not like it.
Right now the plan is to build two pairs of 300Bs with tfa 2004s Ni and pgp 8.1s . I have most parts including original Paramount driver boards. Hopefully next year I find the time!
Saludos
-
Xavier,
Understood, but the Aleph J is a very far cry from the F5 -- the F5 is by far my least favorite FW amp -- sounds very typical class ab transistor to me.
Anyway, maybe when you're ready to pick up on the quad experiments and if I have my alephs done, I can ship them to you for a try.
-- Jim
-
Deal!