"Jim Lesurf"
Phil Allison

The 63 was, however, a technically improved design - it was much
easier to manufacture, far more consistent sample to sample, protected
itself from overpowering, presented a benign load to the amplifier,

Erm... word of caution here. The early issues of ESL63's actually have a
quite 'difficult' load characteristic.


** Where is your evidence of this ???????


Later issues are somewhat better due
to revised circuitry.


** See above.


I would not personally describe early issues of the
63's as 'presenting a benign load' as people might find that misleading.



** Your above mysterious piece of posturing is far worse than misleading.


Maybe you think the ESL57 was released in 1966 too ???????





................ Phil

Eiron wrote:

Fleetie wrote:
Peter Walker's ES:57 is simply the best-sounding loudspeaker ever made. Anyone
who doesn't agree has some kind of odd requirement or prejudice, which should
be stated when reporting hearsay.


So why the '63 then?

The '63 is for people with friends.

Indeed, the '57 does have great imaging, but only for
one person, unless sitting
right behind one's friend, or infront of them
leads to furtheration of the friendship.

So it is implied that '57 purchesors had few if any friends,
or that they had a busy wife.

I have never heard of a woman who ever purchased a pair of '57.

Patrick Turner.



--
Eiron.

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 01:37:06 GMT, "Fleetie"
wrote:

Peter Walker's ES:57 is simply the best-sounding loudspeaker ever made. Anyone
who doesn't agree has some kind of odd requirement or prejudice, which should
be stated when reporting hearsay.

So why the '63 then?

Come on! You're welcome to your opinion, but....

It was nearly 50 years ago.

And it's revealing that Walker had already started work on the '63
three years before the '57 even went on sale in 1966. An interesting
coincidence is the price of the '57 when it was launched - £57.

In 1957, average wages was about 3 quid a week in Oz, and i forget
how much more the pomme quid was worth more than the Oz quid
which is what we had before about 1966, when went all yank
and invented the Oz dollar, and ppl ever since have had trouble
with a price of a banana.

So a pair of Quads cost 19 weeks of pay,
or about $16,000 by today's figures.

A valve operated b&w TV also cost about the same as
a huge plasma screen does now.

The graziers, doctors, lawyers, dentists and a few plumbers had no trouble
affording Quad gear.

The lower orders, ie, everyone else, made do with attrocious gear
unless you studied a bit and made your own amps and speakers,
and then you were the first real audiophiles.
Some even built their own TV sets.
There was still a lot of WW2 surplus 807 around.
But boxed speakers in 1957 were mostly the finest
crap money could be wasted upon.

But most ppl now in their 50s and 60s kept their parents
too poor, distracted, distressed and worried if not depressed to ever
allow them the luxury of spending more than 5 minutes
of uninterupted pleasure listening to the new wonders of recorded
music in stereo, and hi-fi, let alone hours of tinkering time.

Patrick Turner.


--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Patrick Turner"


So it is implied that '57 purchesors had few if any friends,
or that they had a busy wife.

I have never heard of a woman who ever purchased a pair of '57.



** I have never heard of any blatantly criminal, maliciously libelling,
incorrigibly lying, artistically mentally defective, pig ignorant
bricklayer and tone deaf ****WIT who ever bought a pair either.

What a VILE piece of sub human ****e like Pat Turner has **NOT** heard of
could fill the known universe ten times.


**** the hell off Turneroid - you ARE a stinking criminal arsehole
!!!!!!!!







............. Phil

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:
In 1957, average wages was about 3 quid a week in Oz, and i forget
how much more the pomme quid was worth more than the Oz quid
which is what we had before about 1966, when went all yank
and invented the Oz dollar, and ppl ever since have had trouble
with a price of a banana.

Average wage in the UK would have been about 10 gbp.

--
*Could it be that "I do " is the longest sentence? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
writes
In article TO6NLSQA38424.7975694444@anonymous,
Andre Jute wrote:
There is no problem in making up a pair. They are numbered in sequence.
Many were sold in pairs originally. In any event, they were built to
ferocious quality

Matched pairs referred to the wood trims - not the performance.


Well FWIW I was over at the Quad factory some years ago and saw a demo
of taking any stat off the production line and comparing it with an
early sample and the resultant display of a square wave replayed 'thro
it and the phase cancellation when the wave was switched out of phase.

Very impressive
--
Tony Sayer

"tony sayer"


** He says - posting totally out of CONTEXT !!!!!!!


Well FWIW I was over at the Quad factory some years ago and saw a demo
of taking any stat off the production line and comparing it with an
early sample and the resultant display of a square wave replayed 'thro
it and the phase cancellation when the wave was switched out of phase.



** The context is the old ESL57 - dick wad.

Not the ESL63 !!!



............. Phil

In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
Well FWIW I was over at the Quad factory some years ago and saw a demo
of taking any stat off the production line and comparing it with an
early sample and the resultant display of a square wave replayed 'thro
it and the phase cancellation when the wave was switched out of phase.



** The context is the old ESL57 - dick wad.

I was talking about the '57.

--
*Why does the sun lighten our hair, but darken our skin?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Below we have Phil in wind-up toy mode,
and like a wind up toy beating its lill drum it noisily
paddle walks to the edge of the table.
Caaaaareful Phil!, don't go over the edge!

Anyone would think I suggested you had not a friend in the world Phil
by implying subtly that buyers of Quad 57 were the nutter-friendless types
because the image was only available to one person.

But it wasn't my intention to portray buyers in any particularly poor light.
But I have heard a litany of claims from my generation ...
"Daddy, why were you not there for us..."
"Mummy, why didn't you understand me..."
and "My dad didn't seem to have any real friends..."

All mostly BS of course.


In fact what Phil says about the ESL imaging from Quad is fairly correct, ie,
the image is very precise, and the sense of being there is very real.
But unfortunately, and i make no apologies for the "buts" i refer to,
many folks think such pin-point accurate imaging is entirely unatural, because
like
last time I heard some '57, when one moves 1 foot
side to side, a singer in the centre appears to whiz across the stage in the
opposite? direction.
This does not occur at a concert, where the image is about as real as could be
hoped for, and any greater sense
of sound stage and performer placement is quite unreal, and therefore need not
be reproduced, as long as that sense "of being in a theatre and not at home"
was clearly preserved in a replay.

People say, " I listen to my system and I can point to where
mu aunt is signing in her choir"
Yeah?
Anyone believe that?

Blind folded, i reckon they'd have buckley's chance of knowing where
their aunt Mildred was positioned at a concert, unless she was
a solo special and up front.
Somewhere out in front of us is all most people really know
where things are, but many try to posture by saying thay percieve
more than someone else.
Some do, some don't.
But there is a difference surely between the soundstage produced
by an orchestra and scattered artists compared to sound from
two speakers 8 feet apart.
An image or illusion is a fragile creation, hence movement
when listening to a good image destroys the image, because it is but just an
image,
not like the real waves one hears at a concert.

But with some systems, some movement of ourselves does not produce the same
amount
of false artist movement experienced with '57, yet I have heard ppl say the
imaging is fine.
Are such systems worse, or better? I thought all that depended on
subjective personal preferences.

Patrick Turner.










Phil Allison wrote:

"Patrick Turner"


So it is implied that '57 purchesors had few if any friends,
or that they had a busy wife.

I have never heard of a woman who ever purchased a pair of '57.

** I have never heard of any blatantly criminal, maliciously libelling,
incorrigibly lying, artistically mentally defective, pig ignorant
bricklayer and tone deaf ****WIT who ever bought a pair either.

What a VILE piece of sub human ****e like Pat Turner has **NOT** heard of
could fill the known universe ten times.

**** the hell off Turneroid - you ARE a stinking criminal arsehole
!!!!!!!!

............ Phil

"Dave Plowman (News)"
Phil Allison

Well FWIW I was over at the Quad factory some years ago and saw a demo
of taking any stat off the production line and comparing it with an
early sample and the resultant display of a square wave replayed 'thro
it and the phase cancellation when the wave was switched out of phase.


** The context is the old ESL57 - dick wad.

I was talking about the '57.



** That test was only done routinely with the ESL63 - manufactured since
1982.

ESL 57s were never so consistent .

Your story is fake.




................. Phil

** Snip all the Turneroid psychotic, criminal **** !!








............... Phil

In article , Phil Allison
writes

"tony sayer"


** He says - posting totally out of CONTEXT !!!!!!!


Well FWIW I was over at the Quad factory some years ago and saw a demo
of taking any stat off the production line and comparing it with an
early sample and the resultant display of a square wave replayed 'thro
it and the phase cancellation when the wave was switched out of phase.



** The context is the old ESL57 - dick wad.

Not the ESL63 !!!



............ Phil



Sorry Mr Allison sir;( most 'umble apologies meant the 63!, how should I
do me penance ?, grill cloth and ashes fer a week will that be OK?, or
do you need some further appeasement?.

--
Tony Sayer

In article , Phil Allison
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" Phil Allison

The 63 was, however, a technically improved design - it was much
easier to manufacture, far more consistent sample to sample,
protected itself from overpowering, presented a benign load to the
amplifier,

Erm... word of caution here. The early issues of ESL63's actually have
a quite 'difficult' load characteristic.


** Where is your evidence of this ???????


1) In the early reviews. For example, in MC's reviews in 'Hi Fi Choice'
number 26, 1981. This shows a dip down to about 3 Ohms in the 10-15kHz
region, and also at 50Hz and below. He comments in that review that the 63
isn't as easy a load as Quad implied. Rated the load in his summary as
"fairly difficult". IIRC In another article he also pointed out that at LF the
early 63's had an impedance that was level dependent.

2) I do have an early pair which I bought new. I did measure them at the
time and got results that seemed consistent with the reviews

Above said, it is fair enough that what is 'difficult' is a matter of
circumstances. However I would not personally rate a speaker that dips down
to about 3 Ohms as described above as a 'benign load'. So a word of caution
seems appropriate to me. Particularly in the context of amps like the 303
or some other amps which may become current limited by the impedance dips
and hence not enable the full output implied by a given voltage ability.

Later issues are somewhat better due to revised circuitry.


** See above.


See above. :-)

See also the service manuals for the ESL63s. If you examine the circuitry
you will see the changes from one issue to another. IIRC some later reviews
also show impedances that don't dip so low and are less reactive around the
dips.


I would not personally describe early issues of the 63's as
'presenting a benign load' as people might find that misleading.



** Your above mysterious piece of posturing is far worse than
misleading.

Alternatively, if you check the references I cite you may find that what I
said is based on evidence. :-)


It may be the case that you have only seen, or recall, the details of the
later issues of ESL63 boards, etc. For the reasons outlined above these
can show an easier impedance.


Maybe you think the ESL57 was released in 1966 too ???????

Afraid I can't recall when it first went on sale. The precise date may
be listed in KK's book on QUAD, but I'm afraid my copy of that is
currently shelved at work by the anechoic chamber, so I can't check it
immediately.

My copy of the 1957 "Hi Fi Yearbook" has an article on the ESL which
describes it in terms like "when such units eventually become available."
However the speaker was reviewed by Ralph West in the November 1957
issue of Hi Fi News and that indicates it was on sale. Hence I assume
that the yearbook was published early in the year, and the 'ESL57' went
on sale sometime during 1957. However as I say, I can't recall a date,
and I haven't checked in detail.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

All this ping-pong about Quads prompts, cajoles me to ask:
Whatever became of the Shackman ELS, each about the size of a door? Now,
they sounded punchy and OK in the early '70s.
And around then, there was another exotic, gas- or plasma-driven speaker
thing, really, but I can't recollect its make.

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:00:19 +0000, Eiron wrote:

Fleetie wrote:
Peter Walker's ES:57 is simply the best-sounding loudspeaker ever made. Anyone
who doesn't agree has some kind of odd requirement or prejudice, which should
be stated when reporting hearsay.


So why the '63 then?

The '63 is for people with friends.

LOL! Beautifully put! Succinct, accurate, and very much to the
'point'.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:22:02 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton"

And it's revealing that Walker had already started work on the '63
three years before the '57 even went on sale in 1966.

** The ESL 57 first went on sale in 1957 - you silly ass.

Hence the name ........

No, you ignorant cretin, the *design* process started in 1957, hence
the name. The '63 didn't go on *sale* until 1981.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 19:30:19 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton"

No one in their right mind would use them professionally - they have a
ragged frequency response, no bass, and very limited loudness. BTW, no
ESL57 is half a century old, it first went on sale in 1966 - you're
too used to writing pot-boiler fiction.

** What a ****ing MORON !!!!

http://www.quad-musik.de/Products_/ESL57/esl57.html

WTF has that to do with professional use, you ignorant cretin?

Besides, I challenge that dating:

http://www.quad-hifi.co.uk/history2.htm
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message . BTW, no
ESL57 is half a century old, it first went on sale in 1966 - you're
too used to writing pot-boiler fiction.

The Quad Electrostatic was on sale in 1957 - and I have numerous original
Quad brochures from that time which clearly show that it was on sale in
1957.
It also appears in the HiFi Year Book of 1958 , this being the earliest one
I have. I don't know where your 1966 date came from but it isn't correct.

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:38:16 +1300, "Mike Coatham"
wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message . BTW, no
ESL57 is half a century old, it first went on sale in 1966 - you're
too used to writing pot-boiler fiction.

The Quad Electrostatic was on sale in 1957 - and I have numerous original
Quad brochures from that time which clearly show that it was on sale in
1957.
It also appears in the HiFi Year Book of 1958 , this being the earliest one
I have. I don't know where your 1966 date came from but it isn't correct.

OK, I can't hardly argue with the Hi-Fi Yearbook, although that jibes
with the Quad site, and shows inconsistency between the naming of 57,
63, and 98x.

Ohhhhh, boogggger! :-(
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
ESL57 is half a century old, it first went on sale in 1966 - you're
too used to writing pot-boiler fiction.

The Quad Electrostatic was on sale in 1957 - and I have numerous
original Quad brochures from that time which clearly show that it was
on sale in 1957. It also appears in the HiFi Year Book of 1958 , this
being the earliest one I have. I don't know where your 1966 date
came from but it isn't correct.

OK, I can't hardly argue with the Hi-Fi Yearbook, although that jibes
with the Quad site, and shows inconsistency between the naming of 57,
63, and 98x.

Ohhhhh, boogggger! :-(

I'd just put it down to the creature. More water with it is the answer. ;-)

--
*It IS as bad as you think, and they ARE out to get you.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
Well FWIW I was over at the Quad factory some years ago and saw a
demo of taking any stat off the production line and comparing it
with an early sample and the resultant display of a square wave
replayed 'thro it and the phase cancellation when the wave was
switched out of phase.


** The context is the old ESL57 - dick wad.

I was talking about the '57.



** That test was only done routinely with the ESL63 - manufactured
since 1982.

ESL 57s were never so consistent .

Well, apart from those before and after the power supply mods, Walker said
they were. And I've had wildly varying serial numbers sent back for
overhaul and had them come back sounding the same. And *he* told me
matching pairs referred to the woodwork.

YMMV.

--
*Never miss a good chance to shut up.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)"


** That test was only done routinely with the ESL63 - manufactured
since 1982.

ESL 57s were never so consistent .

Well, apart from those before and after the power supply mods, Walker said
they were.


** Got a tape recording of that have you ???

Even if you did - it does not constitute information about ESL 57s.



And I've had wildly varying serial numbers sent back for
overhaul and had them come back sounding the same.


** Yawn - more unsupported assertions involving you.


And *he* told me matching pairs referred to the woodwork.


** Got a tape recording of that have you too ???





............... Phil

"Stewart Pinkerton" ...


The '63 is for people with friends.

LOL! Beautifully put! Succinct, accurate, and very much to the
'point'.



** It was nothing more than a piece of smartarse bull****.

Just like Pinko himself.



Stewart Pinkerton | Massive Fart - All the rest is Bull****





............... Phil

"Stewart Pinkerton"
"Phil Allison"


And it's revealing that Walker had already started work on the '63
three years before the '57 even went on sale in 1966.

** The ESL 57 first went on sale in 1957 - you silly ass.

Hence the name ........

No, you ignorant cretin, the *design* process started in 1957,


** No - you PIG IGNORANT **** - again you are 100 % WRONG !!!!!

The design process started in 1948 - the first prototype displayed in 1955
and the famous ESL 57 was on sale in 1957.

Quad called it the "Quad Electrostatic Speaker" - the name ESL57 was
applied by others later.

The speaker pre-dates the era of stereo.



Stewart Pinkerton | Massive Fart - All the rest is ****ing Bull****



............. Phil

"Stewart Pinkerton"
"Phil Allison"

No one in their right mind would use them professionally - they have a
ragged frequency response, no bass, and very limited loudness. BTW, no
ESL57 is half a century old, it first went on sale in 1966 - you're
too used to writing pot-boiler fiction.

** What a ****ing MORON !!!!

http://www.quad-musik.de/Products_/ESL57/esl57.html

WTF has that to do with professional use, you ignorant cretin?


** It has to do with their age - you DUMB ****ING POMMY **** !!!


Besides, I challenge that dating:


** You are a ****ING ASS Pinkerton.


http://www.quad-hifi.co.uk/history2.htm


** Ha, ha - some masturbating jerk off working for another company that
bought the Quad name has got it wrong.



Stewart Pinkerton | Massive Fart - All the rest is Bull****




............. Phil

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:17:59 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:

It's certainly possible to rig a safety screen which will
not affect the sound so badly as does the original grille.

Also, the high voltage charge appears on the moving
diaphragm, not on the stators. These have significant
signal voltage, but *not* Kilojolts.

Chris Hornbeck
"I just don't think it's right to have a club like this.
It ain't in the Bible," said Gary Colwell, 18, a brick mason
who grew up in the area. "We see them walking around holding
hands, and it makes everybody feel uncomfortable."

"Chris Hornbeck = congenital ****wit.
Stewart Pinkerton = criminal liar

It's certainly possible to rig a safety screen which will
not affect the sound so badly as does the original grille.

Also, the high voltage charge appears on the moving
diaphragm, not on the stators.


** There is no shock risk from the diaphragms of an ESL 63 or 57 - the
DC supply voltage is fed from a very high impedance source and the Mylar
film has a coating that is only very weakly conductive.


These have significant signal voltage, but *not* Kilojolts.


** The middle unit's stator panels of the ESL63 or 57 *ARE* capable of
delivering a serious shock - since the AC drive voltage ranges up into
the kilovolt region and the source impedance from the step up transformers
is quite low.

The stators are coated with a paint that provides a measure of insulation
but there are exposed metal contact areas too.

There is good reason to be wary.




.............. Phil

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:38:16 +1300, "Mike Coatham"
wrote:

The Quad Electrostatic was on sale in 1957 - and I have numerous
original
Quad brochures from that time which clearly show that it was on sale in
1957.
It also appears in the HiFi Year Book of 1958 , this being the earliest
one
I have. I don't know where your 1966 date came from but it isn't
correct.

OK, I can't hardly argue with the Hi-Fi Yearbook, although that jibes
with the Quad site, and shows inconsistency between the naming of 57,
63, and 98x.

Ohhhhh, boogggger! :-(
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

No worries.......just thought that in the interests of accuracy etc. etc.
Wouldn't want to try & re-write history would we .
The ESL '57 was in production from 1957 to 1985
The ESL'63 was manufactured from 1981 to 1999
(The '63 bit related to the year in which serious development work started )

I'll be paying a visit to the UK in about 6 weeks time and as luck would
have it, one of my relatives live about 5 miles from Quad in Huntingdon . I
might just have to call in and say gidday ..
Having emigrated to NZ in 1963 and having never travelled since, I expect I
might just notice one or two changes to the 'old country' when I get back :0

Cheers Mike

"Jim Lesurf"


If you avoid early issues, the 63 is also a much easier load for the amp
than the 57.



** Where is your evidence of "early issues" (what serial numbers ?)
being very different in relation to the load impedance and not presenting a
"benign" load to the amp as I claimed and YOU contradicted here ???

Look - I'll even make it **real ** easy for you - this URL has
response, impedance and full schematics dating from the first units in 1981
.. ( Look under "Technical" )


http://www.euronet.nl/users/temagm/audio/esl63.htm


I await your reply or apology.




............. Phil

"Mike Coatham" wrote in message
...

Having emigrated to NZ in 1963 and having never travelled since, I expect
I
might just notice one or two changes to the 'old country' when I get back
:0

You can say that again!! You will find it unrecogniseable. Try and get hold
of Peter Hitchens book "The Abolition of Britain" as some preparatory
reading for the shock you will experience if you have anything other than
childhood memories of the place.
I left England in 1983 and have been in NZ for 12 years. I went back last
March and found it so GHASTLY I couldn't wait to get on a plane and come
home again. I arrived Saturday morning and flew out on the following
Thursday. I won't go again.
Hope you have a good trip nonetheless.

D.

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:06:35 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
ESL57 is half a century old, it first went on sale in 1966 - you're
too used to writing pot-boiler fiction.

The Quad Electrostatic was on sale in 1957 - and I have numerous
original Quad brochures from that time which clearly show that it was
on sale in 1957. It also appears in the HiFi Year Book of 1958 , this
being the earliest one I have. I don't know where your 1966 date
came from but it isn't correct.

OK, I can't hardly argue with the Hi-Fi Yearbook, although that jibes
with the Quad site, and shows inconsistency between the naming of 57,
63, and 98x.

Ohhhhh, boogggger! :-(

I'd just put it down to the creature. More water with it is the answer. ;-)

I mostly drink wine these days, so that's not good advice!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

In article , Mike Coatham

wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message . BTW, no
ESL57 is half a century old, it first went on sale in 1966 - you're
too used to writing pot-boiler fiction.

The Quad Electrostatic was on sale in 1957 - and I have numerous
original Quad brochures from that time which clearly show that it was
on sale in 1957. It also appears in the HiFi Year Book of 1958 , this
being the earliest one I have. I don't know where your 1966 date came
from but it isn't correct.

The speaker is featured in an article in the 1957 yearbook, and described
in terms that indicated that at the time the article was written it was not
yet one sale. I think the yearbooks were written and published 'early' so
as to have a long life as being for the 'current' year.

The first review of the ESL57 I'm aware of at the moment is in the November
1957 issue of HFN, and that implies it was then on sale.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In article , Mike Coatham
writes

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:38:16 +1300, "Mike Coatham"
wrote:

The Quad Electrostatic was on sale in 1957 - and I have numerous
original
Quad brochures from that time which clearly show that it was on sale in
1957.
It also appears in the HiFi Year Book of 1958 , this being the earliest
one
I have. I don't know where your 1966 date came from but it isn't
correct.

OK, I can't hardly argue with the Hi-Fi Yearbook, although that jibes
with the Quad site, and shows inconsistency between the naming of 57,
63, and 98x.

Ohhhhh, boogggger! :-(
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

No worries.......just thought that in the interests of accuracy etc. etc.
Wouldn't want to try & re-write history would we .
The ESL '57 was in production from 1957 to 1985
The ESL'63 was manufactured from 1981 to 1999
(The '63 bit related to the year in which serious development work started )

I'll be paying a visit to the UK in about 6 weeks time and as luck would
have it, one of my relatives live about 5 miles from Quad in Huntingdon . I
might just have to call in and say gidday ..
Having emigrated to NZ in 1963 and having never travelled since, I expect I
might just notice one or two changes to the 'old country' when I get back :0

Cheers Mike



Yes, I take it you know they moved from St Peters road somewhile ago
--
Tony Sayer

In article , Phil Allison
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf"


If you avoid early issues, the 63 is also a much easier load for the
amp than the 57.



** Where is your evidence of "early issues" (what serial numbers ?)

See a reply I wrote and posted a little while ago. :-)

Look - I'll even make it **real ** easy for you - this URL has
response, impedance and full schematics dating from the first units in
1981 . ( Look under "Technical" )


http://www.euronet.nl/users/temagm/audio/esl63.htm

OK, I'll have a look when I get a chance and compare it with the service
manuals and reviews I have from the relevant periods. Thanks for the URL.
May be useful as another source of data if accurate.


I await your reply or apology.


You should find that I have already posted a message giving a reply to
your orginal questions and providing some references. So your wait may
be shorter than you expected. ;-

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

"Jim Lesurf"
Phil Allison

The 63 was, however, a technically improved design - it was much
easier to manufacture, far more consistent sample to sample,
protected itself from overpowering, presented a benign load to the
amplifier,

Erm... word of caution here. The early issues of ESL63's actually have
a quite 'difficult' load characteristic.


** Where is your evidence of this ???????


1) In the early reviews. For example, in MC's reviews in 'Hi Fi Choice'
number 26, 1981. This shows a dip down to about 3 Ohms in the 10-15kHz
region, and also at 50Hz and below.


** In reality, it never falls below 4 ohms - as shown by innumerable
reviews by others.

I asked for EVIDENCE - NOT ****ing dumb errors.


He comments in that review that the 63
isn't as easy a load as Quad implied.


** So you have no evidence that the load other than benign at all.



Rated the load in his summary as "fairly difficult".


** Based on erroneous data.


IIRC In another article he also pointed out that at LF the
early 63's had an impedance that was level dependent.


** Errr - what is the relevance ???


2) I do have an early pair which I bought new. I did measure them at the
time and got results that seemed consistent with the reviews


** " Well your worship - he would say that now, wouldn't he ????
"



Above said, it is fair enough that what is 'difficult' is a matter of
circumstances. However I would not personally rate a speaker that dips
down
to about 3 Ohms as described above as a 'benign load'.


** But the clear evidence is that it does not dip below 4 ohms in the audio
band or beyond.

Where is your evidence of "early issues" (what serial numbers ?)
being very different in relation to the load impedance and not presenting a
"benign" load to the amp as I claimed and YOU contradicted here ???

Look - I'll even make it **real ** easy for you - this URL has
response, impedance and full schematics dating from the first units in 1981
( Look under "Technical" )

http://www.euronet.nl/users/temagm/audio/esl63.htm

I await your reply or apology.



See also the service manuals for the ESL63s. If you examine the circuitry
you will see the changes from one issue to another.


** Grrrrrrrrrrrr :

Where is your evidence of "early issues" (what serial numbers ?)
being very different in relation to the load impedance and not presenting a
"benign" load to the amp as I claimed and YOU contradicted here ???

Look - I'll even make it **real ** easy for you - this URL has
response, impedance and full schematics dating from the first units in 1981
( Look under "Technical" )

http://www.euronet.nl/users/temagm/audio/esl63.htm

I await your reply or apology.




IIRC some later reviews
also show impedances that don't dip so low and are less reactive around
the
dips.


** Oh really .................................................. ..........

Case dismissed your honour .....



I would not personally describe early issues of the 63's as
'presenting a benign load' as people might find that misleading.


** Your above mysterious piece of posturing is far worse than
misleading.

Alternatively, if you check the references I cite ....


** That is a *** bloody outrage*** Mr Lesurf - you quoted the
unsupported words of a notorious audiophool and an outright bloody criminal.

Martin Colloms is a criminal charlatan - just like you .



It may be the case that you have only seen, or recall, the details of the
later issues of ESL63 boards, etc. For the reasons outlined above these
can show an easier impedance.


** Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr :


Where is your evidence of "early issues" (what serial numbers ?)
being very different in relation to the load impedance and not presenting a
"benign" load to the amp as I claimed and YOU contradicted here ???

Look - I'll even make it **real ** easy for you - this URL has
response, impedance and full schematics dating from the first units in 1981
( Look under "Technical" )

http://www.euronet.nl/users/temagm/audio/esl63.htm

I await your reply or apology.


Maybe you think the ESL57 was released in 1966 too ???????

Afraid I can't recall when it first went on sale.



** Just like every other bloody thing !!!!

" The witness is excused as no sane person would believe a single thing he
said . "





................ Phil

"dersu" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coatham" wrote in message
...

Having emigrated to NZ in 1963 and having never travelled since, I expect
I
might just notice one or two changes to the 'old country' when I get back
:0

You can say that again!! You will find it unrecogniseable. Try and get
hold of Peter Hitchens book "The Abolition of Britain" as some preparatory
reading for the shock you will experience if you have anything other than
childhood memories of the place.
I left England in 1983 and have been in NZ for 12 years. I went back last
March and found it so GHASTLY I couldn't wait to get on a plane and come
home again. I arrived Saturday morning and flew out on the following
Thursday. I won't go again.
Hope you have a good trip nonetheless.

D.


As a Swedish pal of mine puts it:
"The UK is a great place to be *from*

Iain

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:57:39 +0200, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


"dersu" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coatham" wrote in message
...

Having emigrated to NZ in 1963 and having never travelled since, I expect
I
might just notice one or two changes to the 'old country' when I get back
:0

You can say that again!! You will find it unrecogniseable. Try and get
hold of Peter Hitchens book "The Abolition of Britain" as some preparatory
reading for the shock you will experience if you have anything other than
childhood memories of the place.
I left England in 1983 and have been in NZ for 12 years. I went back last
March and found it so GHASTLY I couldn't wait to get on a plane and come
home again. I arrived Saturday morning and flew out on the following
Thursday. I won't go again.
Hope you have a good trip nonetheless.

D.


As a Swedish pal of mine puts it:
"The UK is a great place to be *from*

Iain


That works with or without the final word. London has just been voted
the city with the best food in the world - can't remember the source
but it wasn't UK.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

On 15 Mar, wrote:
In article , Phil Allison
wrote:
[snip]

Look - I'll even make it **real ** easy for you - this URL has
response, impedance and full schematics dating from the first units in
1981 . ( Look under "Technical" )


http://www.euronet.nl/users/temagm/audio/esl63.htm

OK, I'll have a look when I get a chance and compare it with the service
manuals and reviews I have from the relevant periods. Thanks for the
URL. May be useful as another source of data if accurate.


I've now had a chance to have a brief look at the material on the above
website. What I've seen seems mostly to duplicate or copy material I
already have. However it was useful for me in two ways. One was that the
'late' 63 circuit diagram does remind me of that for the 988 rather than
the circuit for the 'early' 63. However the diagrams seem to agree with
those I have, and confirm my understanding that the circuit, and the input
impedance, of the 63 did change from early to later issues.

The second point was from seeing the excerpts from TA's review of the 63
in HFN (Oct 1981 issue as the second part of his review has most of the
measured results). I could not recall off-hand where I'd seen the
measurements of the level-dependency of the impedance of (some?) of the
63's. However the excerpt on the above website reminded me that this was
in TA's review. Apart from that, though, his results seem broadly
consistent with MC's which I referenced in a previous posting. However it
may be worth noting that TA's impedance plots look like a hand or
flexicurve drawing through some data, whereas the data shown by MC seems
to be a copy of a pen-chart plot, so may be more precise by avoiding
redrawing errors.

If we refer back to the OP's comments:

On 11 Mar in uk.rec.audio, John Smith wrote:
I'm thinking of buying some Quad ESLs and I've been reading a lot on the
net trying to decide what I want. The more I read the more I understand
(I think) but also the more confused I get.

I would appreciate some info from those who own or have long term
knowledge of these speakers.

I'm planning to use a pair of Quad IIs as the main amp (I do also have a
Quad 33/303 setup but for now I want to use the Quad IIs).

The relevant point here is the wish to use either a 303 or a pair of II's
as the power amps. The 63 has an impedance that drops below 4 Ohms at some
frequencies and maybe down to about 3 Ohms in some board issues in some
circumstances. Taking the 303 and an example: If the power amp which it is
intended to use can only provide the order of 3 A then it means that this
may at times mean the signal becomes current limited to be around 12V or
less.

This is somewhat below the 30V implied by what the 303 is nominally able to
deliver into higher impedance loads. The real values won't be exactly as
described here, but the point is that the amps the OP proposed to use might
not find the 63 - particularly in some issues - a benign load in this
respect. Afraid I can't recall the values for the II, but can check these
if someone wishes. However I suspect that is also limited in its current
capability and might have a similar effect to take into account.

The above does not mean you can't use 63's with a 303 or II's quite
happily. Depends on the levels, etc, required by the user. I'd expect the
amps to be quite stable and work fine within their current/voltage limits.
But some other amp may well be able to make better use of the 63's in terms
of exploiting their power handling and not being restricted by the
impedance dips. Also the output impedances of the 303 or II may well
interact with the speaker impedance to slightly alter the response. Again,
depends on the user, etc, if this matters or not.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:57:39 +0200, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


As a Swedish pal of mine puts it:
"The UK is a great place to be *from*

Iain


That works with or without the final word. London has just been voted
the city with the best food in the world - can't remember the source
but it wasn't UK.

d


Yes indeed. I visit London often. Lunch at the Savoy Grill is one
of the highlights. It's a fantastic city. I lived there for many years.
But now I am always glad to get away from the 12 million people -
that's more than the entire population of Sweden:-)

Iain

In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
Well, apart from those before and after the power supply mods, Walker
said they were.

** Got a tape recording of that have you ???

No - it was an off the record conversation after an IBS meeting he'd been
invited to.

Even if you did - it does not constitute information about ESL 57s.

It's good enough for me.

And I've had wildly varying serial numbers sent back for
overhaul and had them come back sounding the same.

** Yawn - more unsupported assertions involving you.

Considering each and every one was quality checked after repair I don't
find it unsupported? Have you ever visited the Quad factory and had
speakers repaired while you waited? Because I have, on more than one
occasion, when they offered that service.

And *he* told me matching pairs referred to the woodwork.

** Got a tape recording of that have you too ???

See above.

Wonder what it is about this group that attracts some of the rudest
people on the net?

--
*Laugh alone and the world thinks you're an idiot.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.