Andre Jute wrote:

I don't have to go to the Quad site to know Pinko is wrong again. I bought
a pair of ESL57 in 1963 with the thousand pound sterling prize put up by an
accounting firm for doing the impossible (get 100% at matriculation for both
the bookkeeping and math papers--I spent the rest on a Jaguar for my 18th birthday.
My mother made me sell the Jag and gave me an underpowered Lancia Fulvia instead.
How even the mighty are oppressed!).

What sort of Jaguar could you buy for less than a grand in 1963?

--
Eiron.

"Andre Jute" ...


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.

Pinkerton is an idiot who owes me and Phil Allison an apology. I'm not
holding
my breath. I'm sure Phil knows better too than to expect either truth or
good
manners from Pinkerton.



* One of the ESL57s I owned until recently was s/n 00246.

Do you expect it was made in 1957 ???




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

Eiron wrote:

Andre Jute wrote:

I don't have to go to the Quad site to know Pinko is wrong again. I bought
a pair of ESL57 in 1963 with the thousand pound sterling prize put up by an
accounting firm for doing the impossible (get 100% at matriculation for both
the bookkeeping and math papers--I spent the rest on a Jaguar for my 18th birthday.
My mother made me sell the Jag and gave me an underpowered Lancia Fulvia instead.
How even the mighty are oppressed!).

What sort of Jaguar could you buy for less than a grand in 1963?

Something 25 years old?

Maybe his mama feared for his safety, and the Lancia Vulva was an appropriate solution.

Patrick Turner.





--
Eiron.

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 00:14:52 +0000, Paul Dormer
wrote:

Well said.. :-)

Typical dormouse, waking up when all the fun is over..........

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On 14 Mar 2005 23:34:42 -0000, Andre Jute
wrote:

Quad ESLs - 57 or 63? Pinkerton's lies debunked

Try to tell the difference between lies and an honest mistake. Oh, I
forgot, you're so far gone that you don't know the difference between
lies and reality.

I'm not inclinded to be so tolerant, Mike.

No ****!

Pinko got this dumb misunderstanding from the Quad site where they say that
from 1957 to 1966 PJW developed electrostats. That's all it says; it can mean
anything or nothing but in fact is specifically intended to mean nothing without
being challenged. Pinko was just tripped up by a copywriter who probably the
day before wrote about soap and the day after about salad cream.

It wasn't some old Yarpie hack who normally writes potboiler
'thrillers', was it?

The blustering fool Pinkerton doesn't just tell a lie, he uses the lie to malign
an audio designer, Peter Walker, whose feet he isn't fit to lick:

Just another typical lie from the sad Jute sack.

And it's revealing that Walker had already started work on the '63

three years before the '57 even went on sale in 1966.

In other words, the useless poseur Pinkerton claims Walker sold the 57 while
knowing it wasn't good enough.

The '63 is an *entirely* different speaker, and if the tired old hack
Jute knew anything about industry, he'd be well aware that you use
sales from existing products to develop better ones. The '57 was the
best that PJW could make in 1957, but he knew that more was possible,
and he took a *long* time to get the '63 ready for production, during
which time the '57 kept the cash flowing.

This is the speaker that was voted the greatest
audiophile invention of the 20th century! But Pinkerton---a failed salaryman,
an "engineer" who for a living essentially cleans up the computers of more
creative people!---thinks its creator was a fool and a crook. What a pluperfect
****** this Pinkerton is.

What a pathetic liar Jute is - but evertone on RAT already knows this.

Pinko starts hurling insults every time we catch him out in these silly mistakes
and lies. He calls Phil Allison "a cretin" for correcting his (Pinkerton's)
ignorance.

Allison *is* a foul-mouthed cretin - as are you.

On this occasion, I was wrong. Some of us accept being wrong, add the
truth to our memory banks, and move on. You however, are a sad and
bitter old hack, crying into his Guinness about the god old days when
you could have black kids shot at dawn.

Pinkerton gets it grotesquely wrong and then screeches at me "you're
too used to writing pot-boiler fiction".

You are, that's obvious with every one of your pathetic self-pitying
posts.

I can't be bothered to straighten
out this poor moron Pinkerton who cannot even distinguish engineering texts
and other professional handbooks from literary fiction. There doesn't seem
to be anything of value in Pinkerton's life, just spiteful lies about more
creative men. He's worthless.

As worthless as 'Andrew McCoy'? I think not.......................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:45:10 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:

On 14 Mar 2005 23:34:42 -0000, Andre Jute
wrote:

Quad ESLs - 57 or 63? Pinkerton's lies debunked

Try to tell the difference between lies and an honest mistake. Oh, I
forgot, you're so far gone that you don't know the difference between
lies and reality.

A short synopsis, for those who don't know this clown:

Born 1945 in Oudtshoorn, South Africa, Andre Jute McCoy was educated
at the Universities of Stellenbosch (South Africa) and Adelaide. He
has had a variety of occupations and interests, including advertising
(he became a partner in an advertising company at the age of 23 and
retired at 26), intelligence officer, racing driver, big game hunter,
actor, critic of theatre, music and art, magazine editor, public
relations officer and professional gambler.....

Also wrote some potboilers under the name Andrew McCoy, between 1978
and 1988. This sad old clown leaves Walter Mitty in the dust, and you
can judge his basic character from his self-admitted time as an
'intelligence officer' - ever read about the lovely boys of BOSS?

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...

A short synopsis, for those who don't know this clown:

Born 1945 in Oudtshoorn, South Africa, Andre Jute McCoy was educated
at the Universities of Stellenbosch (South Africa) and Adelaide. He
has had a variety of occupations and interests, including advertising
(he became a partner in an advertising company at the age of 23 and
retired at 26), intelligence officer, racing driver, big game hunter,
actor, critic of theatre, music and art, magazine editor, public
relations officer and professional gambler.....

Also wrote some potboilers under the name Andrew McCoy, between 1978
and 1988.

Maybe Andre's next novel will feature SP as the leading character?
Could be a best seller:-))

Iain

"Andre Jute"
Phil Allison

** One of the ESL57s I owned until recently was s/n 00246.

Do you expect it was made in 1957 ???

I don't know, Phil.


** Ah - such simple honesty is genuine rarity !!


But I don't see how such a low serial number could be of
later manufacture.


** That is my assessment too - but I am not sure what month in 1957 the
esl57 " train " got a head of full steam going.



It seems to me very unlikely that fewer than 246 speakers were sold
in the first year; many multiples of 246 sounds more like it. After all
this
wasn't some marginal technology sneaking in by the back door from an
unknown
company, this was a long-awaited, much-discussed, earthshaking new
technology
from Acoustical, already back then a widely-known leading manufacturer
with
a Rolls-Royce reputation, which furthermore had the stamp of approval of
the
world's most competent broadcast house, the BBC, all over it. Which leads
me
to another point: it seems very likely that orders from the BBC in the
first
year far exceeded 246.


** The "Quad Electrostatic Loudspeaker " s/n 00246 I owned was privately
imported into Australia by someone I never actually met - but obviously,
he was a "man of wealth and taste " ( apologies to Jagger and Richards).

I picked it up for AU$80 in 1974 - " I call that a bargain, the best I
ever had " ( apologies to P Townshend )



Simply for interest: On a really good product there is a smaller but very
noticeable
peak again when it is replaced as people stock up or take the plunge
before
it is too late (1). In the case of the ESL57 this particular peak must
have
been strong enough to persuade PJW, an outstanding businessman, to keep
the
ESL57 going after the launch of the ESL63.


** Not to mention that the ESL57 was a good deal cheaper than the '63 and
the component parts were still in strong demand for spares - Acoustical
did sell over 60,000 of **them** after all !!



............ regards, Phil

Phil Allison wrote:

** That is my assessment too - but I am not sure what month in 1957 the
esl57 " train " got a head of full steam going.

This is what Mike Coatham wrote in uk.rec.audio on Jan. 2nd:

Production dates(sourced from an ex Quad employee) are as follows:

Number Year of Manufacture
1-2000 1958
2001-4000 1959
4001-6000 1960
6001-8000 1961
8001-10000 1962
10001-12000 1963
12001-14000 1964
14001-16000 1965
16001-18000 1966
18001-20000 1967
20001-22000 1968
22001-24000 1969
24001-26000 1970
26001-28000 1971
28001-30000 1972
30001-32000 1973
32001-35000 1974
35001-38500 1975
38501-41000 1976
41001-44000 1977
44001-47400 1978
47401-50300 1979
50301-52100 1980
52101-52800 1981
52801-53000 1982
53001-53150 1983
53151 - end 1984

"Phil Allison" wrote in message ...
"Andre Jute"
Phil Allison

** One of the ESL57s I owned until recently was s/n 00246.

Do you expect it was made in 1957 ???

I don't know, Phil.


** Ah - such simple honesty is genuine rarity !!


But I don't see how such a low serial number could be of
later manufacture.


** That is my assessment too - but I am not sure what month in 1957 the
esl57 " train " got a head of full steam going.


Hi! Here's a little clue. If your speaker still has the original epoxy
EHT block, remove it (will require a bit of soldering job) and look at
the back (the surface that cannot be seen when properly assembled).
There is a small metal tag stating the month and year of manufacture
of the EHT block, but still the best approximation to overall speaker
manufacturing date.

I have seen this happen in all 6 samples I have refurbished. Oddly,
the date shown and serial number do not correlate exactly to the list
that circulates around about Serial # and Yr Manufacturing.

Best regards

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:45:10 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:

On 14 Mar 2005 23:34:42 -0000, Andre Jute
wrote:

Quad ESLs - 57 or 63? Pinkerton's lies debunked

Try to tell the difference between lies and an honest mistake. Oh, I
forgot, you're so far gone that you don't know the difference between
lies and reality.

A short synopsis, for those who don't know this clown:

Born 1945 in Oudtshoorn, South Africa, Andre Jute McCoy was educated
at the Universities of Stellenbosch (South Africa) and Adelaide. He
has had a variety of occupations and interests, including advertising
(he became a partner in an advertising company at the age of 23 and
retired at 26), intelligence officer, racing driver, big game hunter,
actor, critic of theatre, music and art, magazine editor, public
relations officer and professional gambler.....

Also wrote some potboilers under the name Andrew McCoy, between 1978
and 1988. This sad old clown leaves Walter Mitty in the dust, and you
can judge his basic character from his self-admitted time as an
'intelligence officer' - ever read about the lovely boys of BOSS?

What is the point of a character assassination?

Pinky, this is SHEER UNADULTERATED BS.

You call this man but you provide no real evidence.

But even if it is the ides of march, there is simply no need to
stab someone in the back.

Patrick Turner.



--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

But Pinkerton---a failed salaryman,
an "engineer" who for a living essentially cleans up the computers of more
creative people!---thinks its creator was a fool and a crook. What a
pluperfect
****** this Pinkerton is.


Obviously Pinkerton is a ******, as is any fool that thinks solid state
sounds better than tubes. Not just a mis-informed ******, but a ****** with
defective hearing!

Perhaps he had to work in a loud British factory as a child or something,
possibly using a high speed saw that prematurely destroyed his hearing??
poor pathetic bloke!


Now, my only remaining question in life is:

WTF is salad cream?????

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 12:00:10 +0200, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
.. .

A short synopsis, for those who don't know this clown:

Born 1945 in Oudtshoorn, South Africa, Andre Jute McCoy was educated
at the Universities of Stellenbosch (South Africa) and Adelaide. He
has had a variety of occupations and interests, including advertising
(he became a partner in an advertising company at the age of 23 and
retired at 26), intelligence officer, racing driver, big game hunter,
actor, critic of theatre, music and art, magazine editor, public
relations officer and professional gambler.....

Also wrote some potboilers under the name Andrew McCoy, between 1978
and 1988.

Maybe Andre's next novel will feature SP as the leading character?
Could be a best seller:-))

He already wrote that one. This is a synopsis of his first novel -
Atrocity Week:

"Imagine you're wealthy enough to do just about any damn thing you
want. Imagine you've bought all the kicks you can think of. Except
maybe one. The ultimate thrill. The thrill of hunting down and killing
the biggest, most dangerous game of all: MAN. "

Who do you suppose Andre would like to see in the reticle of a 9x40
Leopold? :-)

Mind you, it's a tired old plot, and has been filmed several times.
Seems like originality is not Andy's long suit...................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 02:24:14 +1100, Patrick Turner
wrote:



Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:45:10 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:

On 14 Mar 2005 23:34:42 -0000, Andre Jute
wrote:

Quad ESLs - 57 or 63? Pinkerton's lies debunked

Try to tell the difference between lies and an honest mistake. Oh, I
forgot, you're so far gone that you don't know the difference between
lies and reality.

A short synopsis, for those who don't know this clown:

Born 1945 in Oudtshoorn, South Africa, Andre Jute McCoy was educated
at the Universities of Stellenbosch (South Africa) and Adelaide. He
has had a variety of occupations and interests, including advertising
(he became a partner in an advertising company at the age of 23 and
retired at 26), intelligence officer, racing driver, big game hunter,
actor, critic of theatre, music and art, magazine editor, public
relations officer and professional gambler.....

Also wrote some potboilers under the name Andrew McCoy, between 1978
and 1988. This sad old clown leaves Walter Mitty in the dust, and you
can judge his basic character from his self-admitted time as an
'intelligence officer' - ever read about the lovely boys of BOSS?

What is the point of a character assassination?

Pinky, this is SHEER UNADULTERATED BS.

Nope, it's a synopsis cut and pasted straight from an Australian
literary website.

You call this man but you provide no real evidence.

He's already boasted about putting some kid in front of a firing
squad.

But even if it is the ides of march, there is simply no need to
stab someone in the back.

So it is! Coincidence, or something darker? :-)

Besides, I'm hardly stabbing him in the *back*, now am I? Do you see
him denying any of it?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"izozaya"
"Phil Allison"

** One of the ESL57s I owned until recently was s/n 00246.

Do you expect it was made in 1957 ???

I don't know, Phil.


** Ah - such simple honesty is genuine rarity !!


But I don't see how such a low serial number could be of
later manufacture.


** That is my assessment too - but I am not sure what month in 1957 the
esl57 " train " got a head of full steam going.


Hi! Here's a little clue. If your speaker still has the original epoxy
EHT block,


** The original EHT rectifier in s/n 00264 was NOT an epoxy block - that
came along later in the production of ESL57s.

Instead of a neat block, there was a bundle of (selenium ?) stick
rectifiers looking very much like a bundle of red fire crackers - each
about 3 inches long and 1/2 inch diameter.

I contacted the Sydney agent for Quad (a firm called " British Merchandising
" in those days) and spoke to a gentleman who sounded exactly like a
graduate from Eton College. He was able to supply me a new EHT block and
also advised that I carry out a modification to the passive network under
the audio input transformer for which he could supply a diagram. When I
delicately enquired if this modification involved any expensive
omponents - he replied :

" Nooooooh - not at aaalllll - should only cost you a few *pence* !!
"



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

cowboy wrote:

But Pinkerton---a failed salaryman,
an "engineer" who for a living essentially cleans up the computers of more
creative people!---thinks its creator was a fool and a crook. What a
pluperfect
****** this Pinkerton is.


Obviously Pinkerton is a ******, as is any fool that thinks solid state
sounds better than tubes. Not just a mis-informed ******, but a ****** with
defective hearing!

Perhaps he had to work in a loud British factory as a child or something,
possibly using a high speed saw that prematurely destroyed his hearing??
poor pathetic bloke!

Now, my only remaining question in life is:

WTF is salad cream?????

The product of a man's self love, afaik.

Patrick Turner.

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 22:48:34 +1100, Patrick Turner
wrote:

cowboy wrote:

Now, my only remaining question in life is:

WTF is salad cream?????

The product of a man's self love, afaik.

Wow! Andre better look out, he's likely to drown in the stuff! I
nerver came across anyone who loved himself so much. Heck, he even
creates sockpuppets like 'Frank B' just so he can post about how
wonderful he is! Sad, sad old man...............................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Andre Jute in
.au:

: If Pinko had done his homework instead of pontificating--on a subject of which
: he knows nothing--after a quick glance at the net, or if he were a real audiophile
: instead of a fashion-victim, he would have known that Peter Walker displayed
: a recognizable version of the ESL57 as early as 1955. Gilbert Briggs, founder
: of Wharfedale, in his book Loudspeakers clearly describes it next to the photograph,
: p236 of the 1958 edition, as "Designed by P. J. Walker in 1955." He even cracks

I don't know that I would describe it as "a recognisable version" at all
; - it's clearly (fully) described as an " Early electrostatic speaker
covering the full audio range of 40 to 14,000 c/s. Designed by P. J.
Walker in 1955. Height 5' overall." Looks like an early prototype IMO.

I've posted "Briggs Loudspeakers ESL p236.jpg" at a.b.p.r.
news:alt.binaries.pictures.radio for reference. Good sturdy ESL though!

: a joke about it: "I remember meeting Stanley Kelly...at the first demonstration
: of a full range ESL at the Waldorf in 1955, when we solemnly agreed to change
: into black and meet in due course in the workhouse" as moving cone and ribbon
: loudspeaker manufacturers made redundant by electrostats.

True;- and it's interesting enough IMO to post p235 (the start of Ch.11)
as well, which is where it occurs. That chapter is so short (4 more
pages) that I may scan and post them as well if there is any interest.

Interestingly and oddly on reviewing this I discover that my copy (5th
Ed 1958 1968 reprint) has a flaw; Ch 22 is entirely missing, with no
coresponding gap anywhere else. I wonder what was in it?

Ross Matheson

: True;- and it's interesting enough IMO to post p235 (the start of Ch.11)

Oops; it was the start of Ch. 21, and I've posted it as a followup, with
Briggs Loudspeakers Ch11 p235 as subject and jpg.

"RdM"

I don't know that I would describe it as "a recognisable version" at all
; - it's clearly (fully) described as an " Early electrostatic speaker
covering the full audio range of 40 to 14,000 c/s. Designed by P. J.
Walker in 1955. Height 5' overall." Looks like an early prototype IMO.



** There is no contradiction nor even a clear distinction between the
phrases " recognisable ( early) version " and " an early prototype " -
but a pedant will invariably attempt to invent one.

The story I recall reading is that the 1955 prototype of what later became
known as the ESL57 was judged by most to be rather too large for the average
British loungeroom - particularly when two would be needed for stereo
reproduction that was just around the corner. So Peter Walker elected to
scale down his new design and release a the Quad ESL in a more practical
size.

Poms are renowned for preferring neat, natty and compact items - unlike
the Yanks where the original larger version would have very likely been far
preferred as the Quad 989 is now.




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

In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
Poms are renowned for preferring neat, natty and compact items -
unlike the Yanks where the original larger version would have very
likely been far preferred as the Quad 989 is now.

The size was and is still a problem for most. Considering that a box
design can produce the same sort of level and response from something a
fraction of the size.
In practice they take up just too much space for the average UK living
room. So only likely to be bought by dedicated enthusiasts with a meek
spouse.

--
*Not all men are annoying. Some are dead.

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

RdM wrote:
Andre Jute in
.au:

: If Pinko had done his homework instead of pontificating--on a
subject of which
: he knows nothing--after a quick glance at the net, or if he were a
real audiophile
: instead of a fashion-victim, he would have known that Peter Walker
displayed
: a recognizable version of the ESL57 as early as 1955. Gilbert
Briggs, founder
: of Wharfedale, in his book Loudspeakers clearly describes it next
to the photograph,
: p236 of the 1958 edition, as "Designed by P. J. Walker in 1955." He
even cracks

I don't know that I would describe it as "a recognisable version" at
all
; - it's clearly (fully) described as an " Early electrostatic
speaker
covering the full audio range of 40 to 14,000 c/s. Designed by P. J.
Walker in 1955. Height 5' overall." Looks like an early prototype
IMO.

Oily Moses! Now I have seen every picayune mendacity. How do you get a
razorblade of distinction between s "a recognisable version" and "an
early prototype"? Don't bother to explain; I haven't time to waste on
teenage word-paring.

I've posted "Briggs Loudspeakers ESL p236.jpg" at a.b.p.r.
news:alt.binaries.pictures.radio for reference. Good sturdy ESL
though!

: a joke about it: "I remember meeting Stanley Kelly...at the first
demonstration
: of a full range ESL at the Waldorf in 1955, when we solemnly agreed
to change
: into black and meet in due course in the workhouse" as moving cone
and ribbon
: loudspeaker manufacturers made redundant by electrostats.

True;- and it's interesting enough IMO to post p235 (the start of
Ch.11)
as well, which is where it occurs. That chapter is so short (4 more
pages) that I may scan and post them as well if there is any
interest.

Interestingly and oddly on reviewing this I discover that my copy
(5th
Ed 1958 1968 reprint) has a flaw; Ch 22 is entirely missing, with no
coresponding gap anywhere else. I wonder what was in it?

Networks, in my reprint of 1970, possibly restored, though without
comparing your edition and mine I cannot quite see how. The chapter
does not constitute an entire signature missing, that's for sure. (A
"signature" is a large sheet of paper printed both side, folded a
certain way, sewn into a book with other signatures, then guillotined
on three edges, after which the pages appear maginally to be printed
right way up, page and verso. A signature is theoretically any multiple
of 4pp-- thnk about it--but in practice in book printing by 1968
already very rarely less than 32pp.)

Ross Matheson

Smart idea, posting the photograph. It seems to me "fair dealing".
Don't post the entire chapter, however short; that would definitely be
viewed in some quarter as an infringement precisely because it is the
whole of a self-contained unit.

Andre Jute

Andre Jute wrote::

: If Pinko had done his homework instead of pontificating--on a subject
of which
: he knows nothing--after a quick glance at the net, or if he were a
real audiophile
: instead of a fashion-victim, he would have known that Peter Walker
displayed
: a recognizable version of the ESL57 as early as 1955. Gilbert Briggs,
founder
: of Wharfedale, in his book Loudspeakers clearly describes it next to
the photograph,
: p236 of the 1958 edition, as "Designed by P. J. Walker in 1955." He
even cracks
: a joke about it: "I remember meeting Stanley Kelly...at the first
demonstration
: of a full range ESL at the Waldorf in 1955, when we solemnly agreed
to change
: into black and meet in due course in the workhouse" as moving cone
and ribbon
: loudspeaker manufacturers made redundant by electrostats.

Ross Matheson wrote:
I don't know that I would describe it as "a recognisable version" at
all
; - it's clearly (fully) described as an " Early electrostatic
speaker
covering the full audio range of 40 to 14,000 c/s. Designed by P.
J.
Walker in 1955. Height 5' overall." Looks like an early prototype
IMO.


Phil Allison wrote:
** There is no contradiction nor even a clear distinction between
the
phrases " recognisable ( early) version " and " an early prototype
" -
but a pedant will invariably attempt to invent one.

Andre Jute:
Oh, I see you already straightend out the Kiwi. Shoulda saved my
breath.

Phil Allison wrote:
The story I recall reading is that the 1955 prototype of what later
became
known as the ESL57 was judged by most to be rather too large for the
average
British loungeroom - particularly when two would be needed for
stereo
reproduction that was just around the corner. So Peter Walker
elected to
scale down his new design and release a the Quad ESL in a more
practical
size.

I have often heard and read the same story. I wonder if it makes sense
though. Why should Walker, a brilliant businessman, have come to
believe that squat wide speaker would be mroe acceptable than a tall,
fiarly narrow one. It is true that average topclass speaker at the time
was a squat corener horn, with doors folding open as wings to the side
in many cases, but it was not short, it was the height of a table or
taller. In addition, Walker himself had already made a tower-type of
speaker such as is now common, though he called it a pipe. (Ross will
give us the reference, also in the Briggs book he has.) So why should
he believe a very wide speaker would be more acceptable than a very
tall one?

Dinna make sense. I think there were technical reasons, possibly to do
with the very substantial high frequency improvement betwen the proto
and the finished article. it is interesting that the proto seems to be
in fact two ESL57,on top of each other but with narrower panels. The
question that jumps instantly into my mind is, Did he find that
full-height panels on the proto gave rise to uncontrolled resonances?
We will probably never know, but we are so far off the original
poster's question here that we may as well indulge ourselves in a
little speculation.

Phil Allison wrote:
Poms are renowned for preferring neat, natty and compact items -
unlike
the Yanks where the original larger version would have very likely
been far
preferred as the Quad 989 is now.
............ Phil

I think the tall proto is "neat, natty and compact", Phil, much more
attractive (and still modern) than the ESL57 which stylistically was a
throwback to the 1920s. In the fifties, Britain had no style; it was
utterly frumpish. The appearance of the 57 was acceptable because it
rose above the wretched style of the period by being so thoroughly 20s,
but then it wasn't difficult to rise above the swamp of dejection that
was Britain in the 50s. (That is why Mary Quant and Carnaby Street and
the Beatles burst out like a boil exuberance at the beginning of the
1960s.)

Andre Jute

wrote:

Andre Jute wrote::

: If Pinko had done his homework instead of pontificating--on a subject
of which
: he knows nothing--after a quick glance at the net, or if he were a
real audiophile
: instead of a fashion-victim, he would have known that Peter Walker
displayed
: a recognizable version of the ESL57 as early as 1955. Gilbert Briggs,
founder
: of Wharfedale, in his book Loudspeakers clearly describes it next to
the photograph,
: p236 of the 1958 edition, as "Designed by P. J. Walker in 1955." He
even cracks
: a joke about it: "I remember meeting Stanley Kelly...at the first
demonstration
: of a full range ESL at the Waldorf in 1955, when we solemnly agreed
to change
: into black and meet in due course in the workhouse" as moving cone
and ribbon
: loudspeaker manufacturers made redundant by electrostats.

Ross Matheson wrote:
I don't know that I would describe it as "a recognisable version" at
all
; - it's clearly (fully) described as an " Early electrostatic
speaker
covering the full audio range of 40 to 14,000 c/s. Designed by P.
J.
Walker in 1955. Height 5' overall." Looks like an early prototype
IMO.

Phil Allison wrote:
** There is no contradiction nor even a clear distinction between
the
phrases " recognisable ( early) version " and " an early prototype
" -
but a pedant will invariably attempt to invent one.

Andre Jute:
Oh, I see you already straightend out the Kiwi. Shoulda saved my
breath.

Phil Allison wrote:
The story I recall reading is that the 1955 prototype of what later
became
known as the ESL57 was judged by most to be rather too large for the
average
British loungeroom - particularly when two would be needed for
stereo
reproduction that was just around the corner. So Peter Walker
elected to
scale down his new design and release a the Quad ESL in a more
practical
size.

I have often heard and read the same story. I wonder if it makes sense
though. Why should Walker, a brilliant businessman, have come to
believe that squat wide speaker would be mroe acceptable than a tall,
fiarly narrow one. It is true that average topclass speaker at the time
was a squat corener horn, with doors folding open as wings to the side
in many cases, but it was not short, it was the height of a table or
taller. In addition, Walker himself had already made a tower-type of
speaker such as is now common, though he called it a pipe. (Ross will
give us the reference, also in the Briggs book he has.) So why should
he believe a very wide speaker would be more acceptable than a very
tall one?

Dinna make sense. I think there were technical reasons, possibly to do
with the very substantial high frequency improvement betwen the proto
and the finished article. it is interesting that the proto seems to be
in fact two ESL57,on top of each other but with narrower panels. The
question that jumps instantly into my mind is, Did he find that
full-height panels on the proto gave rise to uncontrolled resonances?
We will probably never know, but we are so far off the original
poster's question here that we may as well indulge ourselves in a
little speculation.

Phil Allison wrote:
Poms are renowned for preferring neat, natty and compact items -
unlike
the Yanks where the original larger version would have very likely
been far
preferred as the Quad 989 is now.
............ Phil

I think the tall proto is "neat, natty and compact", Phil, much more
attractive (and still modern) than the ESL57 which stylistically was a
throwback to the 1920s. In the fifties, Britain had no style; it was
utterly frumpish. The appearance of the 57 was acceptable because it
rose above the wretched style of the period by being so thoroughly 20s,
but then it wasn't difficult to rise above the swamp of dejection that
was Britain in the 50s. (That is why Mary Quant and Carnaby Street and
the Beatles burst out like a boil exuberance at the beginning of the
1960s.)

Andre Jute

One should remember that the vast majority of poms could not afford
Quad gear at all in 1955, and only the well heeled could,
and they had bigger rooms than the average Mr Poor, and his definately
frumpatious wife.
Poms were used to pretty atrocious nightime diversions.
For those who could afford such a frivolous waste of money
as a real hi-fi system, the size and cost didn't matter, as long as the
gear did the business.
I reckon Walker knew all that.
But there were a lot of Poms, and Walker only had to get a small %
of them to buy his stuff, and he'd do alright.

The last home I went to in Oz with ESL57 within had the pair set up in a
corner
of a small lounge, with a single padded arm chair in front,
and the room was then looked about right for normal living as far
as the over 80 couple were concerned.

Not everyone is concerned about imaging, or
a flat response above 3 kHz.

I read Lynn Olson's dissertation on speakers that I eventually found
after tracking several references and links via Google.
ESL are not without resonance problems, he says.

I'm visiting a dude with ESL63 next weekend, to see if I hear anything
special.

Patrick Turner.

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:
I read Lynn Olson's dissertation on speakers that I eventually found
after tracking several references and links via Google.
ESL are not without resonance problems, he says.

How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?

--
*A nest isn't empty until all their stuff is out of the attic

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

In article ,
François Yves Le Gal wrote:
How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?

Well, from the frame, the diaphragm, the stator, nearly everything. You
don't need a box in order to get resonances: how does a tuning fork work?

A tuning fork is designed to resonate. Box speaker makers hopefully try
and get rid of the natural resonances that these have.

You'd have to try very hard to get resonances within the audio band with
the panels fitted to the Quad design.

--
*If they arrest the Energizer Bunny, would they charge it with battery? *

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

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 16:32:23 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?

All vibrating things have a fundamental resonance of their
mass and the suspension's compliance. This is actually one
of the more important issues building low-mass drivers
like electrostats.

Chris Hornbeck

"Dave Plowman (News)"

How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?


** Boxes will have internal sound pressure reflections between the sides -
this is one source of resonances. The materials the box is made from
resonate as well - just tap one of the panels with your knuckle to hear
them. The materials the drivers cones and domes are made from ( paper,
plastic and metal) have audible resonances. All these resonances operate
simultaneously with a conventional box speaker system, they "colour" the
sound heard and are impossible to completely eliminate.

However, a sheet of plastic film with barely any mass ( so no ability to
store energy) which is driven by a coherent (electrostatic) force that is
spread evenly all over its surface is virtually resonance free.

A simple demo, used by Peter Walker, is to hold a frame with a sheet of such
plastic film in front of someone's face when they speak and note that the
sound is quite unaffected.




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

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 16:32:23 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:
I read Lynn Olson's dissertation on speakers that I eventually found
after tracking several references and links via Google.
ESL are not without resonance problems, he says.

How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?

The same way you get resonances in any drumskin, plus the frame isn't
too rigid.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 18:10:35 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
François Yves Le Gal wrote:
How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?

Well, from the frame, the diaphragm, the stator, nearly everything. You
don't need a box in order to get resonances: how does a tuning fork work?

A tuning fork is designed to resonate. Box speaker makers hopefully try
and get rid of the natural resonances that these have.

You'd have to try very hard to get resonances within the audio band with
the panels fitted to the Quad design.

Not at all, in fact there are noticeable resonances in the bass region
from the diaphragms, plus mid-treble frame resonances.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Stewart Pinkerton"
Dave Plowman

You'd have to try very hard to get resonances within the audio band with
the panels fitted to the Quad design.

Not at all, in fact there are noticeable resonances in the bass region
from the diaphragms, plus mid-treble frame resonances.



** And this Vile Pommy Nazi claims he does NOT *posture* here as a Quad
ESL expert ???


Puke, puke, puke .....


Stewart Pinkerton | Massive Fart - All else is Bull****.



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

"Stewart Pinkerton"


How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?

The same way you get resonances in any drumskin, plus the frame isn't
too rigid.


** More utter bull**** from a know nothing ******.



Stewart Pinkerton | Massive Fart - All else is Bull****




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

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 17:40:48 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton"
Dave Plowman

You'd have to try very hard to get resonances within the audio band with
the panels fitted to the Quad design.

Not at all, in fact there are noticeable resonances in the bass region
from the diaphragms, plus mid-treble frame resonances.


** And this Vile Pommy Nazi claims he does NOT *posture* here as a Quad
ESL expert ???

And this ignorant dozy ocker doesn't agree with what I said?

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 17:43:17 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton"

How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?

The same way you get resonances in any drumskin, plus the frame isn't
too rigid.


** More utter bull**** from a know nothing ******.

You really are a dumb ****, aren't you Phil? Care to explain why an
ELS diaphragm is *not* like a drumskin? Or how the typically skinny
frame can be totally rigid? Too many tinnies again?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Stewart Pinkerton"


You'd have to try very hard to get resonances within the audio band with
the panels fitted to the Quad design.

Not at all, in fact there are noticeable resonances in the bass region
from the diaphragms, plus mid-treble frame resonances.


** And this Vile Pommy Nazi claims he does NOT *posture* here as a Quad
ESL expert ???

And this ignorant dozy ocker doesn't agree with what I said?


** The Vile Pommy Nazi did not say anything specific - he merely and
as usual regurgitated opinionated ****e from some audiophool's review,
website or usenet forum.



" Stewart Pinkerton | Massive Fart - All else is Bull**** "'



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

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 17:43:17 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote:

"Stewart Pinkerton"

How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?

The same way you get resonances in any drumskin, plus the frame isn't
too rigid.


** More utter bull**** from a know nothing ******.

You really are a dumb ****, aren't you Phil? Care to explain why an
ELS diaphragm is *not* like a drumskin?


** One does not hit it with a stick for a start.

Even the dumbest of Vile Pommy Cretins can figure that one out.


Or how the typically skinny
frame can be totally rigid


** No need to be.




" Stewart Pinkerton | Massive Fart - All else is Bull**** "




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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Patrick Turner wrote:
I read Lynn Olson's dissertation on speakers that I eventually found
after tracking several references and links via Google.
ESL are not without resonance problems, he says.

How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?

Cone speakers have notoriously bad resonances in their cones, and
ESL have resonances in their panel diaphragms.

Boxed speakers have the box to worry about as well as the cone.
Track down the article by Lynn Olson, like I did, and read it, and sorry,
I
didn't bookmark the URL.

Patrick Turner.



--
*A nest isn't empty until all their stuff is out of the attic

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
François Yves Le Gal wrote:
How do you get 'resonances' in a speaker without, effectively, a box?

Well, from the frame, the diaphragm, the stator, nearly everything. You
don't need a box in order to get resonances: how does a tuning fork work?

A tuning fork is designed to resonate. Box speaker makers hopefully try
and get rid of the natural resonances that these have.

You'd have to try very hard to get resonances within the audio band with
the panels fitted to the Quad design.

Lynn Olson says Quad speakers, along with many others have considerable
resonances.

What is a tightly stretched diaghragm?
Its a kind of drum without body of air concealed nearby.
It will have resonances.

Patrick Turner.




--
*If they arrest the Energizer Bunny, would they charge it with battery? *

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

"Patrick Turner"


Lynn Olson says Quad speakers, along with many others have considerable
resonances.



** He is a liar - just like the ****ing, asinine Turneroid.




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

"Patrick Turner"


Cone speakers have notoriously bad resonances in their cones, and
ESL have resonances in their panel diaphragms.


** Massive lie.





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