2. speakers
  3. 137772-84601

Is It Possible?

Help!!!

Is it possible for a pair of Quad63 sounds better than a pair of Focal Utopia Scala I?  I am was using the Scala in my system and was very happy with the overall result, except for an occasionally bright sound on certain recordings.  I recently bought a pair of non-working Quad63 at a garage sale for $250, had them serviced for about $650.  I was going to use the quad in my office for background music, but I decided to have a A/B test against my beloved Scala.  I almost fell of my chair when heard what came out of the Quad. The vocals and the instruments just came alive, especially the female's voice.  The only advantage I gave to the Scala was the soundstage, which is wider and a little deeper than the Quad.  How can this be?  What am I doing wrong with the Scala?  How can a pair of $900 speakers sounds much better, in my opinion, than a pair of speakers that cost me almost $25,000?

myaudio168

Showing 2 responses by whart

whart's avatar
whart
3,174 posts
 
I owned a pair of Crosby-modified ’63s which I enjoyed several decades ago, after an even longer love affair with the original, a/k/a the ’57, which I’ve owned since 1973. I had those restored somewhat recently, after languishing in packing crates for years. They are now set up as a second system in our "front parlor." They are extremely forgiving, and despite their obvious limitations, make music in a way that is stunning. They are just so engaging to listen to; i could easily live with them as a main system notwithstanding their limits. They are far different in presentation than my bigger horn based system, but the focus is not on the WOW factor-- they pull you in.
I’ve known many Quad owners over the years who are recidivists--they eventually sell them, only to buy them again. I’m glad I have mine. I enjoy them immensely.
whart's avatar
whart
3,174 posts
 
@prof-- your comments are pretty on the money. Listening to the original Quad is in some ways like sitting in the balcony. I never had double or triple panel set ups, and was never happy with woofer integration on the old Quad; I didn’t even try on the ’63 when I ran them.
The detached experience-- sort of a portrait in miniature--drove me to horns, for a greater ’in the room’ experience, dynamics. But, those posed a similar problem in sub-woofering.
I currently run the restored 57 unadorned-- no special stands, woofers or auxiliary tweeters. They are what they are-- magnificent in some ways, fundamentally flawed in others. Their coherence and their ability to get out of the way of the music is still pretty stunning, though, more than 60 years later. In discussions with other owners on another board after I revitalized this pair, we agreed that though there have been strides in speaker design since the introduction of the original Quad, it’s pretty amazing how good they are this many years later, making you question whether throwing tens of thousands of dollars at the high end really does return value. (It does, but hearing the Quads will make you question it--i hadn’t heard my ’57s for since around 1990, though I have heard other pairs in years since).
Robin Wyatt did a nice job several years ago demo’ing them with tape at the Waldorf show-- It was like old home week for me, I hadn’t been to an audio show in at least 20 years- the elevator doors opened and I saw the same guys I used to see from the NY audio mafia-- just 20 years older! (Me, I’m ageless) :)
More to discover