When we first began bringing the new Quad to the U.S.,and yes we picked the first 20 pairs of speakers directly from the U.K.. We had no idea that there was going to be the problems that existed. After selling numerous pairs, and replacing a number at our expence ,we became suspicious of the qc. We started to sell the electronics, particularly the tube pieces, and had further breakdown and this is when we said what is up here. During this time we modified and replaced binding post and tried to make the speaker more appealing to new customers and one's who were owners Quad who might want the new product if it was superior to the original. Not once did I claim it was the superior to the 57 and was only different from the 63. We never carried ProAc ,still recommend Dunlavy and haven't sold Merlin since the middle 80's. We held great hope for the new Quad but it failed to meet our expectations. I would still reccommend a Quad for certain types of listening or for environmental reasons over others we sell but it is a case to case basis. This is why we have 63's on constant display in our showrooms.
Quad 988 / 989 reliability ??
It's well known that the old Quads (57 and 63) had some reliability problems, and that repairing them can be expensive. Is there enough data our there on the 988 / 989 to say anything about their robustness and reliability ? Have any of the 988 / 989 users who are reading this had any problems ?
- ...
- 42 posts total
- 42 posts total