Current feeling on stacked quads?

How do stacked Quad ESL 56's compare to full range Soundlabs? I thought this might be a difficult question?

Chris

Chris,
With the full range Sound Labs you have the same lack of coloration, the immediacy, the impeccable rendition of transients, the wonderful midrange of the Quads. It is all there. Furthermore you can play much louder, have a wider sweet spot and a far better bass rendition. Placement of instruments is dead right, the soundstage huge with the right kind of software. Also you will have to do much less fiddling around to get the proper coherency between bass, middle and highs, compared to the stacked 57s, with say, super-tweeters and added low end woofers. However to make the sound Labs shine, you have to invest more into good amplification. For both speakers I would say, SS is a no no for good sound. The big Sound Labs are not all that easy to drive. They thrive on OTLs, like the 220watt Atmas or -more conventionally - on the VTL Siegfrieds in pentode mode with their huge power reserves. I also used a 60watter on them with good effect, but then you would lose some of the dynamics this speaker is capable of. Another advantage by the way, over the 57: Dynamics wasn't their strong point, although stacking them did bring noticeable improvement also there.

Detlof, in my experience stacked ESL 57's have better dynamics than Maggie MG II or III's. It's not that the Quads could play as loud as the Maggies: they don't. But the Quads have a bigger dynamic range and are better in reproducing tiny dynamic swings. Do you agree with this? That was one of the reasons I chose the Soundlab over Maggie MG 20.1. If solid state amplifiers are not first choice with the Soundlabs, why do I see many pictures from home audio systems and systems at shows in where big Soundlabs are being matched with... (the very solid state) Parasound JC-1's? Is this an exception to the rule?

Chris

Chris, I have no real experience with the Maggies, only with their bass-panels a long time ago, but from what I have heard other tell, it is as you say. What I do know however is, that the Quads are right in premier league in reproducing tiny dynamic swings as you so rightly point out.
On the other hand I have no experience with the JC-1's, but I do have my doubts, whether they really would hold their ground compared to the Atmas. Reason being that the big Sound Labs, except for the panels, are not voltage driven. What they need is constant power as the impedance varies. I don't know what the impedance of the big Sound Labs is in the bass region, but it is probably fairly high, which will severely curtail power with most SS-amps. So you would probably need 500 watts and more to let them sing there. Not so with the Atmas, if I understand the literature right. But then, that is theory and though doubtful, I'm always ready to be surprised. The more so, because the specs of the Parasound are truly impressive and the reviews glowing. But then, none of the reviewers used stators, as far as I could see. So sceptic I remain.
Apologies to Mothra, because this subject is certainly off-topic now. Would be interesting to see and probably help him, to start a discussion about what kind and make of amp would be deemed suitable for the stacked 57s.....MrTennis where are you????
Cheers,
Detlof

oh it's all interesting. i have a lot of nice speakers and my pair of quads are quite nice. i suppose i have wondered about getting a larger throw area and somewhat higher spl. i have also thought of martin logan cls, or acoustat 2+2's. never heard the sound labs. he big apogees have always been tempting but hoonestly, i dont think i could afford to power them!