Quad electrostatics - opinions shared

Hi everyone,

I'm curious to know if anyone owns Quads or have listened to them? Models, driven by which amps, all the gory details/opinions. I've read a lot of good reviews, I'm wondering what the downsides are?

thanks,
Jim

 

I own Quad 63 ESL's, driven by tubed McIntosh C-22 preamp, and MC-275 tubed amp, both original issue. Front end is an AR EB-101 turntable with SME tonearm and Ortofon SPU-GME cartridge. Digital front end is a Pioneer 563A CD/SACD/DVD-A player.

The Quads are one of the most transparent and tonally correct speakers I've ever heard. Their reproduction of most instruments is uncanny, and human voice sounds so real it's spooky.

I never get tired of listening to them, and they're the type os speaker that will keep you up into the early morning playing disc after disc.

Tubed amplification is a must, and you need room to keep them out and away from the back and side walls, but no other speakers sound quite like them. I bought mine used 15 years ago, and while I love my Altec 604's when I want to rock out loud, these babies are keepers (unless I come up with enough dough to buy the QUAD 989's!)

John D

 

I have had my pair of Quad Electrostatic Loudspeakers (aka ESL 57) for the best part of 7 years now. I have never heard anything so mesmerising in all my years......

The mid range is so perfect I doubt there is anything better at reproducing it in existence. The top end is very pure with no artificial boost - again perfect to my ears although if you are used to more top end you might need to get used to the 57s before realising they have it just right. The bottom end is where the 57s get most criticism. However, I have to say that they reproduce the bass very cleanly with no "boxiness" and at lightning speed. Maybe they don't go down as far as a big cone can but they are perfect for my needs. The only problem I have is that I worry about damaging the panels with too much bass information and therefore am a little conservative on the volume for bass heavy material. I may try a subwoofer to aleviate this potential problem but as I say, it would mainly be to protect my 57s from too much bass energy rather than to improve their performance.

I drive then with an Onix OA21 - if anyone else has heard of this amp I'll be impressed! Onix were a local firm (East Sussex, England) and the OA21 delivers 50 Watts comfortably via it's discrete circuits. I've read many reports about needing to match amps carefully with the 57s but I tried my Onix and they sang wonderfully so I am happy for now. However, I am in the market for a pair of Quad IIs if I ever find a pair cheap enough!

I listen mainly to CDs on my SCD-1 and I am constantly amazed at how great the humble CD can sound. Of course, SACD can be even more astounding!

So, if you see a pair of ESL 57s then I say try them - not only are they wonderful sounding, they are extremely groovy objects of 50s design to boot .

 

I've heard of the Onix OA21 - the range was imported into New Zealand for a couple of years in the late 1980s. Wasn't there also the Soap - an add on power supply so called because it, er, cleaned up the sound?

 

Well, Michael, I am indeed impressed!! Especially since you spelled "Onix" correctly - I've edited my other post.....

I never did try the power "Soap" power supply - maybe I should track one down .

Did you ever hear the Onix amp? I'm pretty pleased with it - I got it cheap from a guy who knew an engineer at Onix and it's done me proud over the years. However, I auditioned a pair of valve monoblocks a year or so ago ("gtikon" was the name of the amps - if you've heard of them I really will be impressed ) and they sounded incredible with the Quads. I listened to the DCC gold disc of "Ingredients In A Recipe For Soul" and it was awesome to behold. Had the amps been a little cheaper I would have bought them but it was not to be. I am still holding out for the Quad IIs but maybe I should try the Leak stereo 20 or something just to get into the valve thing.....

 

I believe the company was called Gradiente.

 

I've heard in the past that transmission line subwoofers, having low coloration, are good matches for electrostatics and other planar speakers.

I've never heard Quad's speakers that I can remember, but did the Martin-Logan CLS-II electrostatics I heard back in 1986.

 

This may sound weird, but I can't remember! There have been so many products through my house because of reviewing that I can't remember them all. I do have a vague recollection that my hi-fi mag did review the OA21. I'll see if I can find the review.

BTW, the NZ distributor told me that OA21 stands for "our age 21" - the age of the designers when they first built the amp.

Ya got me there - I haven't heard of gtikon.

Now you've got me jealous - I'd love to hear the DCC of that title.

 

For the most part you're right, but Naim amplification works pretty well with Quads, too. So does Exposure. But you haven't heard anything until you've heard Quads run by an OTL amp!

 

My bet is that it's an amp by GT Audio called a TRON. If not, maybe an earlier Graham Tricker design

Brian

 

in the seventies and eighties, I had a pair of stacked quads a-la the HQD system. they were supplemented with a homemade Fried Model H woofer system and a pair of ribbon tweeters (but not the Deccas). They were driven a variety of amps over time, the best of which was the Bedini 25/25 Phase II dual mono amp.

Later I tried the 63, but... I traded these in on a pair of Beveridge electrostats, but had to spend a fortune in repairs on them.

 

It's true - you learn something new every day!

You need to get it - I have never heard a CD sound better than this one .

They were going for very little (<$20) on ebay a year or so ago - I guess since Ray passed away prices may have gone up. Still worth every penny at any price though.

 

Interesting - these amps were definitely called "gtikon" but the owner pronounced the name as "G T Ikon". They had a sticker on the back of each monoblock that said "Vintage Radio Restorations" but that was all that was on the back. was/is Graham Tricker based in the UK?

 

It depends on what you mean by "dynamic drive"....

I think you are limited in volume level somewhat by the delicate nature of the membranes in the panels. This means that you can't really get dynamics that you can feel like you can with say a large cone driver. However, the dynamics within the levels you can listen at are superb. Also, the Quads have a great ability to sound loud without moving that much air since they produce very pure flat wavefronts that carry their energy very efficiently to the listener unlike a cone which disperses much of the energy it produces over a wide angle. I supppose the downside of this is that the sweetspot is relatively small for the Quads but if you are in that sweetspot you are magically transported to wherever the music was recorded .

sgb already mentioned the stacked pair configuration with optional subwoofer - I guess those would solve the lack of dynamic drive you refer to.....

 

Remember I talked about using those drums at the end of "Born To Be Blue" to audition the valve monoblocks with the Quads a while back? The result was simply awe inspiring! I guess Electrostatics have different dynamic performance characteristics to cone drivers since electrostatics are voltage driven while cones are current driven. Could that have something to do with the VU meter test yielding different results?

 

I traded in a pair of Dayton Wright XG-8 mK3's for a pair of 63's going on a decade ago. The 63's were a bugger to match up properly but very worth the hassle when all was said and done. In the end they sounded best with Moscode 300 maxi amplification (yes I did bathe in sea salts and wore my special robe and sipped brandy), Joule Electra LA100 Pre and AR PH-3 phono with LP12 front end. Very musical!

I have listened to 63's with Futterman OTL's and it was awesome. I had Counterpoint stuff involved at one time, and it sounded very nice with them, but the Counterpoint stuff broke down a ton. As for SS. I hear the top end Sugden stuff works well with them. As does the older Exposure and the bigger YBA's.

 

Speaking of matching subs to planars ...... it took me about 2 years but I finally got a pair of Maggie Tympani bass panels to integrate with my CLSes. I ended up having to custom build a special room and I ended up having to supply a ton of current to pull it off but the end result is something to behold.

 

Maggies barely turn on unless you have an arc welder for an amp. But when they do turn on they can be magical. As addictive to some as tubes are to others.

 

If I were closer and had more free time, that's something I'd like to hear: a good system set up properly vs. a store demo.

 

I’ve owned Quad 57’s (powered by a pair of Quad II amps) and was very impressed with the sound, albeit within the limitations of the speakers. Those limitations are well documented – ultimate lack of volume for rock music or even full scale orchestra, lack of dynamic shading, narrow listening window, the need to place the speakers well away from the rear and side walls, etc. However, if you can accept those limitations what you do get is one of the best, most natural midranges in the business. Where these speakers really shine is at lower volumes, where the frequency range still sounds balanced and focussed, and the low level detail and ambient cues are still preserved. For the reproduction of things like acoustic guitar, solo cello or female voice for instance, I don’t think I’ve heard anything better, it’s simply a magical sound.

Ultimately, I sold my pair because of those trade-offs and the type of music I usually listened to at the time, but I’m very interested in hearing a tweaked pair of 63’s or the newer 989’s, which attempt to address the major issues with the 57’s, as candidates for new speakers. What I’d really like is a second sound system based around a rebuilt pair of the original speakers, which with some refurbishment and upgrading of parts can sound far superior to a stock pair. The idea is to buy a pair of clapped out originals that are fine cosmetically, and take them to their full potential using new panels, better spec transformers, dedicated stands and so on. Have a look at what these guys can do to breathe new life into older Quads. Not bad at all for a speaker design that appeared almost 50 years ago.