Perhaps your problem might be due to the equipment upstream?
Can you tell us what you are using?
FWIW, I lusted for the Quads for years, but never had the chance/money to buy them.
Bob
Will rebuilt Quad ESL 57s take the place on a great $30K dynamic speaker?
In the ‘90s I lived joyfully with Quad 57s for 10 years. Have always missed them.
Especially since Electrostatic Solutions rebuilds came to light, I have looked for a used pair. My system today is far better than what I had back then.
I was very curious to hear what they would sound like now.
I love my current speakers, but have experienced some fatigue in loud, full passages. And I realized that most of what I listened to was acoustic Jazz and Classical. But with a good amount of Pop singer/songwriter.
The Quads beautifully reproduce solo or otherwise “gentle” music. They are magical with voices. Eg.: Opera that I never got into much is now sublime. And voices in general.
But on something like Peter Gabriel, the fall apart. “So” which was a favorite recording is problematic at best.
I am leaning toward the Quads since they do “moderate” unlike almost any.
But I do miss the dynamics. Bass and treble.
28 responses Add your response
Okay, I saw your equipment on the Virtual system list. One thing that I see is that the AGD amps are only 85 watts and I think the Quads would appreciate a bit more power, especially for loud playing. Second, is the Class D architecture of the amp. I have heard from some designers that Class D can 'smear' the signal- which might be what you are hearing. As you have an Atma preamp, why not call Ralph Karsten and discuss what is happening. He knows a lot, and can give you some guidance that we mortals here on Audiogon can't. And, he has built his own Class D amp and should know what might be going on. B |
I have owned ’57s since 1973 and recently had them rebuilt by Kent at Electrostatic Solutions. I’m now using my old Quad II amps with really good glass, instead of more powerful ARC tube amps in the 60-75 watt range and think they sound better with the little Quad amps- rated at what, 15 watts? You don’t need a lot of power to drive them, but the impedance curve is daunting for some amps. As to whether they are better than your dynamic speaker system, why be forced to make a choice? I run two systems- when I’m in the mood for the Quads, I use them- when I want bigger, louder, more bass, I fire up my horn-based system (which also uses relatively low powered amps). The old Quad is one of those speakers that people regret selling and buy again for pretty much the reason you explained. If you are ever in Austin, you can have a listen here to both. (Not a dealer). :) |
I first heard the 57's back in 1978. They were powered by a pair of Futterman H3AA OTL mono tube amps. The rest was a Marantz 7 tube preamp, Thorens TD125/Rabco ST7 linear track arm/Panasonic strain gauge cartridge. Superb SQ! This experience set me off on the road to put together a similar system. Which by now I have accomplished! Even now owning the same pair of Futterman amps from 1978, along with two pairs of 57's! |
I bought my first pair of 57’s in 1981, along with a pair of Futterman OTL amps (111AB) plus a Bedini 25/25 Class A amp. I alternated between the two amps. I sold this Futtermans in 1992, the 57’s in 2000. Financial trouble forced the sales! Now, decades later I could again afford more gear. So a few years ago I bought on eBay a pair of 57’s from Rhode Island and another pair from a seller in England. The pair of Futterman amps came from NYC - restored/recapped/retubed by the eBay seller. In fact, they were the same serial numbered pair (55,56) I had listened to in Harrison, NY in 1978! |
I had 57s in the 80s but they vibrated and resonated. I traded them in for Spendors and immediately missed the crystal clear midrange. Decades later, I bought an immaculate, consecutive serial number pair of black 57s. I run them with the front grills removed and they are simply perfect. 35 watts of push-pull vintage tube monoblocs make them sing. |
Just put a First Watt M3 on line. It’s not as pretty as the AGDs but sounds good, Can’t stand it. The bass is horrible! Can’t listen to that with these. Thought I would have relief with Nate King Cole. He was sublime with the AGDs. But, again, the bass is thumping and terrible. And sublime is gone. The AGD Audions are a different world.
|
@mglik A local dealer friend completed an impressive 100% restore of Quad 57s, down to every single little wood block, part, and component about a year ago. It seemed to be a more intricate restore project. He felt it was worth doing well. After decades of exposure with all sorts of different amps and power ranges in a variety of different systems, and various speakers, he is overly familiar and has access to most anything. He has been running the 57s with low-watt 8wpc SET tube amps and fell in love with the sound except for the bass/dynamics, as I recall. Last time I was there and saw the system, he later built custom subwoofers to cover any gaps, and seems to like them very much. He is so impressed with the midrange, enough to do whatever it took to keep these restored speakers in play on his main system. Interesting after seeing other capable speakers there, and he prefers his fully restored 57s now. Matching up ultra-fast subs would be key to-do, imo. You can reach him on Facebook, Marihart Audio. He’s semi-retired now, so go please go easy on him if you contact him there. See link, scroll down to see them. Scroll through gallery >> to see the later restored versions in Black, they look really nice in person. I need to get back up there to go hear them again! https://www.facebook.com/pages/category/Audio-Visual-Equipment-Store/Marihart-Audio-745299465580983/
|
My best result with Quad 57's was as follows - Remove steel grils Put them on stands about 18" off the floor Tilt the panels up to more vertical and angle in slightly Amps - tried a few best by miles was Quicksiver 8417's - could go loud without arcing, plenty of punch, dynamic and massive soundstage. For reference I had also traded pair of stacked Quads - awful in my view. An audio buddy had the 57's set up with Decca Ribbon tweeter & Sequerra subwoofers - great system - biggest difference was the ribbon tweeter. Don't need subwoofers when driven by the Quicksilvers. Hope this helps.
|
I have them on 20" stands, grilles off, vertical and toed in. Monoblocs under each speaker with 2’ of UP-OCC copper in Teflon. I find the toe-in to ear position critical. The "head-in-a-vice" gives the best imaging and detail. |
The Quad 57s are astonishingly good in their areas of strength, exactly as the OP describes. They are definitely improved by being placed on stands and, properly serviced, they sound much better than a lot of people's experience of tired pairs with panel damage, failing EHT units etc. In particular, a good pair on stands have much better bass response, albeit limited in slam and extension. They are fussy when it comes to amplification and they don't like high powered amplifiers. They have limited loudness and playing outside of their performance envelope will only arc them and exacerbate any rattles, panel resonances etc. A lot of the owners I know go through periods of "can't live with them", can't live without them" angst but nearly always come back to the '57. Personally, I'm in the school of would love to live with them but unfortunately for the wide spectrum of music I listen to, I find them too limiting. But, I really appreciate them for their intrinsic qualities and as a landmark in audio design - and not beaten by the 63 of the subsequent IAG era iterations. |
Unlike some here, my direct experience with ESL 57s is limited…I heard them at Victor’s in Chicago in 1972. He played a Decca cart and Int’l TA into ARC electronics. A Mozart chamber ensemble on Phillips…probably Raymond Leppard…it was divine. Next he played a Tympani by Magnepan. Bigger sound but that ethereal detail was absent. Today, big Maggies have ribbon tweeters which bring the detail. For large scale scope, dynamic slam, no box coloration, with musically correct detail, aren’t 20.7s a legitimate comparison? Anyone lived with both? |
I have ESL 57s since 1975 and ESL 63s since 2000. The 63s are in my audio system with two JL E112 subs. The 57s are in my video system with two 15" woofers, not currently connected as I need to build a crossover. One must be careful with the amp for the 57s, maximum voltage is 33V. To integrate the JL subs I use a single order passive high pass filter for the 63's amp and for low pass to the subs I use the crossover in the JL. |
Learned a lesson once more: don’t judge a component until it has a chance to warm up and open up. The First Watt M3 is much better today now that it went from dead cold to warm after about 10 hours. And the Quads have now also opened up. Interesting, moderate volume recordings which are so, so on my big dynamic speakers sound good and interesting on the Quads. They are seducing. Very soft. Very lovely. Still not really a good recording, but it takes you in. Uniquely offers insight into the soul of the music that is only offered by Quad 57. And a cool 3D soundstage. Feel I am hearing Crosby for the first time. I definitely understand why people use tweeters. And to a lessor extent, subs. This record absolutely was not very good on the dynamic speakers. Now, it goes into the best recordings file. And, wow, clarinet trio-beautiful! It definitely takes a bit of time to “accept” the sound of Quad’s instruments and voices. They are very different than dynamic speakers. Dare I say more real? And I, mostly, take back what I said yesterday about Peter Gabriel’s “So”. Just put on the first minute of that disc. The booming bass was tamed. And the overall SQ is acceptable and good. But it still is not the kind of content with which the Quads excel. Quiet is lovely. Yes, sublime. Elizabeth Swartzkopf and orchestra beautiful balance and tone. A main difference with the AGD Audions is that the phrasing is clearly heard. The subtitle beginning and end of phrases is not as clear with the First Watt. This is a good example of how something relatively small can make a big difference. But still, I am engaged with the music which is not so with the big dynamic speakers. Walker’s Wonders? I get it.
|
Hello mglik! Adding a subwoofer will give you dynamics in the lower musical spectrum. All the panel speakers lack dynamic fireworks (but they sing so clear and detailed!). I've used mono and stereo subs with Maggies of verious kinds since the late 80's. Cross it over somewhere between 80 an 300 Hz. Enjoy! |
I am always surprised when I haven’t used a piece of equipment for a while and it goes through breakin over again… the weirdest is a power cord moved.. requires a few days to settle down. How can this be? But it is reproducible. Ok, I had to accept breakin of new stuff… but I hate to admit “rebreakin”… but no question… it is real. No wonder everyone considers us crazy. |
I’ve been running my 57’s with an EL34 integrated and they sound great with that. Do not feel I am missing out on dynamics. Just finished building a Hiraga 30 watt Class A amp. As soon as the transformer arrives, I will be setting up the 57’s again (Currently listening to a 10 Watt Pass VFet amp through Cornwalls).
Built the amp after reading the success people had running the amp w these speakers. I should have it finished next week, and will post my findings. Very curious how 30 watts of EL34 compares with 30 watts of SS. Looking forward to hearing differences first hand!
|
@mglik You correctly observe the 57s are missing some punch on gutsy material. This has always been the case and there is nothing to be done. Peter Walker conceived them for operation with quieter music such as chamber groups and voices not backed with a big orchestra. They excel on that. But on rock and large orchestras on powerful pieces 57s won't satisfy many people. This kind of issue is why many of us have more than one system. Horses for courses and you just have to choose which way to go. It's always a compromise.
|
Wonderful speakers, I've owned two pairs over the years, the last pair about a year ago. For my tastes, I could only keep the Quads if I maintained two systems. They're just not suited to about half of what I enjoy - Genesis, Rush, etc, played at realistic volumes. But for smaller-scale music, jazz, some classical, folk, etc, they're hard to beat. |
