2. speakers
  3. 135912-2227

Have You Ever Owned QUADS?


I’m curious how many members here have owned any model of Quad Electrostatic speakers at any point.

I ask because I’d just been watching the video of John Atkinson’s presentation about his life in music and audio, and of course at one point early on he’d owned the original Quad ESL 57s.

When I got back into high end audio in the mid 90’s, back then it was still something of a badge of honour, or an audiophile rite, to have owned Quads at some point. The cliche was that you either still owned them, or you loved them, but became too cognisent of their deficiencies, and moved on....though always at the price of trying to get what the Quads did...but more....an elusive journey. The Quads always "haunt" you in the background.

Here’s my old Quads story:

I’d grown up listening to my Dad’s Kef 105.2 speakers and Carver Holographic amps, so I was well versed in high end sound, great imaging etc.

But like many it was my encounter with a Pal’s set of Quad ESL speakers - the 63s paired with a Dynaco ST-70 tube amp - that re-opened my mind to the possibilities in high end audio. That completely clear window, transparency, detail, lack of any box artifacts!

So inevitably my first "real" high end set up started with the ESL-63s (with a Conrad Johnson MV55 tube amp). Eventually I paired them with the Gradient di-pole subwoofers specially built for the ESL 63s, which were about as seamless a subwoofer/panel match as I’ve ever heard. I’ll never forget the huge wall of transparent sound that system produced.

But they were in a fairly small living room and the back monoliths, especially sitting on the Gradient subs, looked like huge room dividers. So aesthetics was one reason to start looking at other speakers.

Another was that, I’d sometimes bring up my old pair of little Thiel 02 speakers and set them up, and when I did I found I was getting something that I was missing from the Quads that I really liked. One was a more open, warm tone. For all their transparency, the Quads actually sounded just tad toward the "dark, rich" side, and a tiny bit in the charcoalish tone for instruments and voices. The box speakers (and some others I’d listened to) seemed to have a bit more "rightness" in the upper frequencies and "woody, organic" tone.

The other thing was that that really separated the box speaker from the Quads was the sheer palability and aliveness of the sound coming from the box speaker. The Quads presented amazing apparitions of vocalists and instruments, but they tended to sound as if in another room from me, not really moving the air so much, like viewing through a glass window. Whereas instruments like trumpets, bongos, drums, strummed guitar just rippled the air of the room coming from the little Thiels. I felt more connected and moved by what was going on through the Thiels.

So I ended up looking for a dynamic speaker replacement. I ended up replacing my Quad/Gradients with Von Schweikert VR-4 Gen 2 speakers, which were full range, and sounded big and rich in the midrange like the quads, and projected as huge and boxless a soundstage as I’d ever heard. They were as close to the "Quads in a box speaker, but doing all the things I want dynamically" as I found at the time.

Naturally, being an audiophile I moved on from the VR speakers as well.

But I have to say, even though I’ve had many great speakers pass through my home, I’m not sure I’ve ever truly surpassed or equaled the sound of the ESL-63s/Gradient combo. Maybe it’s a bit of memory distortion as well over time, but it was such a BIG wall of sound, and so hugely midrange oriented.

I’d never go back to ESLs as I know they don’t in the end satisfy me.

Still, the Quads still haunt me - but more the ESL 57s. I actually prefer the tone of the 57s to the 63s, finding them a bit more warm, golden toned and a bit more dense sounding. If I could fit the 57s anywhere in my home I’d have them as a second system.

How ’bout you folks?

Time has moved on, so I doubt the Quads still feature as much as a right of passage for audiophiles. But I’m curious about their status at this point in the journey of people on this forum.
prof
yashu
184 posts
 
I’ve been into audio for just over 50 years.  Music and reproduction of accurate sound is one of my life passions.  I have had numerous systems over the years, and have settled for some time on my beloved refurbished Quad ESL57’s.  They are absolutely wonderful.

I alternate between these and my Harbeth Super SLH5 plus.  I tend to use the Harbeth’s when I want a little more from Fusion, Rock, etc.......But the Quads are in about 80% of the time.

They are run by a Jeff Roland Concentra 2 integrated.  I stream Tidal, but mostly still spin cd’s through an ARC cd9.

My system is complete based around the Quads, and I could not be more satisfied.  Every vocalist is performing just for me right in my room!
whart's avatar
whart
1,930 posts
 
Bought my first pair in 1973 and had them restored last year after they were sitting for years in crates. In the meantime, I had used a pair of Crosby-modded '63s, from roughly 1990 to 2005 or so. 
My old 57s with a fresh restoration sound fabulous-- matched with a pair of old Quad II amps that were sympathetically restored and re-glassed with GEC KT 66s.
Yep, they definitely have limitations. But, what's there is glorious. 
Over the years I had used subs, ribbon tweets, etc. Now, no ancillary speakers. Small-ish room (a front parlor in an old Victorian Queen Anne house). They aren't my main system, so when I play them, I'm doing it purely for the enjoyment of those speakers. There is something uncanny about the midrange which, to my knowledge, has never been duplicated. (A reason why I prefer the 57 to the later Quad models, which are better all around speakers in terms of usability, bandwidth, dispersion, etc, but don't have the magic of the 57). 
thaluza's avatar
thaluza
172 posts
 
My main speaker progression since 2000:

ESL-63 - loved them, my first big boy speakers. If I knew what I know now, I would have kept them and saved tons of money chasing its sound. Alas, I traded them in for a new pair of ESL-988's.

Apogee Stage - Had these at the same time as the ESL-63s. An almost perfect speaker for me (went down to 25hz and could play fairly loud), except it had a small sweet spot that required staying seated. Much better lower bass than the 63's.

ESL-988 - frustrating, as the protection circuit kicked in when the volume reached peaks of 82db. Traded them in to the same dealer for another pair. Same thing, the protection circuit would turn off the speakers right when the music was getting good. I sold them and got a pair of Merlins.

Merlin VSM-MXe - The designer modeled the sound of the VSM's after the 63s. That appealed to me. Not quite as full bodied and tonally saturated as the Quads, but they disappeared better in my smallish room, with improved imaging and soundstaging. Held onto these for 8 years.

ESL-57 - beautiful midrange tone and transparency, especially with my OTL amp. Picked these up locally for a good price and alternated them with the Merlins. A panel went bad and I chose to sell the speakers and move on.

Magnepan IIIa - another nice pair of speakers I had at the same time as the Merlins and 57s. My wife did not like the look of the white grill cloth - she called them the Abominable Snowmen - so off they went.

Von Schweikert db99 - they disappear and do the imaging and soundstaging thing like my Merlins but with more meat on the bones. These go down to 21hz, -3db. Having now gone full range, I am not going back. But I still daydream occasionally about the tonally rich, clear, and transparent sound of the ESL-57s and ESL-63s.

trelja
3,215 posts
 
People, including my speaker savant buddy, told me for a very, very long time the Quad ESL57s represented the antithesis of my sort of sound.  People consider me a head banger, with a serious penchant for volume and some battleship gun low frequencies.

Wanted to hear them for a very long time due to the supposed otherworldly synergy with OTL amplifiers, which I used to favor, along with that famed speed, openness, and clarity.  Had a couple of opportunities to try them, but they evaporated whenever I went for it.  Fast forward a few years later, and Robin Wyatt pairs the ESL57s with Miyajima OTL amps at the NY Audio Show, and I hear a sense of sheer palpability, naturalness, and ultimate realness I couldn't remember ever experiencing in many years of audio.

Well, here I am the proud owner of a pair of ESL57.  Folks knocked them for decades for the lack of volume and low frequencies, everyone knows that.  EVERY loudspeaker, indeed EVERY audio component is flawed.  Now, if me listening to them at 95 dB at the listening chair represents a loudness handicap, so be it.  True, they don't deliver blow you back or sledgehammer bass, but they go down to 40 Hz, and how many loudspeakers actually do the bottom octave correctly?  What the Quads do is sound more like real life and real music than any other loudspeaker ever created.

For what it's worth, I've spent a lot of time with the ESL63 and the iterations thereafter.  Just don't do it for me.  As The Doctor labeled it, pipe and slippers sound
prof OP
1,741 posts
 
These are great Quad stories! 

I'm getting very envious of those who own, or who have owned, the 57s.

A few years ago I was actually offered a pair of beautiful quality 57s FOR FREE!  (A fellow audiophile, aging, realizing he wasn't listening enough to them these days do them justice).

But try as I might I couldn't figure out a way to fit them in the house.  They are too wide to sit permanently in my listening/viewing room.  And I have nowhere to store them due to their awkward shape.

That really sucked having to let those go.
More to discover