Quad 2805 v. Quad 57


I recently heard, at the San Francisco audio show, the Quad 2805 and I liked them very much.

How do you compare them to the Quad 57? I've read quite a bit comparing the Quad 57 to the Quad 63. Some like the 57 for its more immediacy and midrange and other like the 63 for sacrificing a smidgeon of those traits to obtain more extension of range and the ability to rock. Rebuilt 57's or 63's run quite a bit less dough than the 2805.

If you have heard this line up, I'd love to hear your assessment of the characteristics of the 2805 compared to its older 57 and 63 siblings.

Last, my amps are the Air Tight 211's. I understand they can power the older siblings, but how about the 2805? I understand the impedance load is irregular, but that a good SET does fine with the 57 or 63.

Thanks for the help.
jj2468

Showing 3 responses by jj2468

Great responses. Thank you.

Msomers88: For me, I would not want to go back to an amp that uses feedback. It sounds like the high end roll off is perhaps an impedance matching issue that I need to consider.

Asa: Yes, I've got the GE211 tubes in the Air Tights. It seems that perhaps you and Msomers88 have differing reactions to Quads and SET. In various threads some people seem to prefer more power and others SET.

Kantaja: Thanks for the thoughtful response. It appears you are with Msomers88 on the SET matching issue. I was unaware that the Quad2805 was so similar to the Quad 63. A rebuilt Quad 63 certainly costs less than a new Quad 2805.

Setting sonics aside, I am a bit confused by whether it is best to use higher power amps with the Quads and risk damage due to over-driving the speaker; or use less power and risk sonic under performance.

Cosmetically, I certainly prefer the 57.

Does anybody demo the Quad 63 or 57 in the Bay Area?