[[email protected]]

Iv'e said it before and I'll say it again. The ESL 57 reproduces the midran=
ge more realistically tham any other loudspeaker extant. This includes all =
the big boys - Magico q7, Wilson Audio whatever, Martin logan clx et al,all=
other Quads and insert your favourite speaker here. Don't bother to ask =
if I've heard all of the above pretenders to the quads "it's alive" throne.=
Of course I haven't. I've heard Wilsons live(Wamm.Watt puppy 5 or some suc=
h), Martin Logan (some entry level efforts whose model #s I forgit), Magico=
q7 (on youtube along with countless others).=20

This post is not so much to dismiss my opinion as it is to solicitate yours=
.. Specifically, in the context of the complete listening experience have yo=
u found any loudspeaker before or after that clearly betters the quad's abi=
lity to deliver a "the thing sounds alive" reaction from its listeners?=20

ESTG/
A quad esl63 owner..........

[Ed Presson[_2_]]

This post is not so much to dismiss my opinion as it is to solicitate
yours. Specifically, in the context of the complete listening experience
have you found any loudspeaker before or after that clearly betters the
quad's ability to deliver a "the thing sounds alive" reaction from its
listeners?

ESTG/
A quad esl63 owner..........

The Quad 57s were the first stereo pair I owned five decades ago. They were
uncanny with the human voice; indeed, they were the only speakers that
startled me when the FM station announcer spoke unexpectedly-I thought there
was someone in the room. They were also magic with the singing voice.

However, I found the Quad 63s more realistic with the orchestral midrange.

The limited dynamic range and lack of bass (especially in the 57s) were
major deficits because my principle interest was in orchestral music.
Still, each was very special.

Ed Presson

[Audio_Empire[_2_]]

On Friday, October 25, 2013 6:29:33 AM UTC-7, wrote:
Iv'e said it before and I'll say it again. The ESL 57 reproduces the midr=
ange more realistically tham any other loudspeaker extant. This includes al=
l the big boys - Magico q7, Wilson Audio whatever, Martin logan clx et al,a=
ll other Quads and insert your favourite speaker here. Don't bother to as=
k if I've heard all of the above pretenders to the quads "it's alive" thron=
e. Of course I haven't. I've heard Wilsons live(Wamm.Watt puppy 5 or some s=
uch), Martin Logan (some entry level efforts whose model #s I forgit), Magi=
co q7 (on youtube along with countless others).=20
=20
=20
=20
This post is not so much to dismiss my opinion as it is to solicitate you=
rs. Specifically, in the context of the complete listening experience have =
you found any loudspeaker before or after that clearly betters the quad's a=
bility to deliver a "the thing sounds alive" reaction from its listeners?=
=20
=20
=20
=20
ESTG/
=20
A quad esl63 owner..........

First a question: What do you mean when you say that you have listened to t=
hese=20
various speakers on "YouTube"? Do you mean that you use Youtube audio as a =
source
or that you actually listen to these various speakers via YouTube videos of=
them playing?
To tell you the truth, neither explanation makes any real sense. So, if you=
mean something=20
else, I at least, would really like to know what it is.

I had a set of stacked ESL "57's" for about three months one time (I think =
the system was=20
made a by a company called Hartley). The system consisted of two floor-stan=
ding bass=20
enclosures with a frame that stuck-up on either side to hold two pairs of =
ESL57s, mounted=20
bottom-to-bottom. Because both speakers are curved, with the tops sitting f=
urther back=20
than the bottoms, the effect was of a barrel-shaped speaker mounted between=
two=20
stanchions like a free-standing blackboard. Between the two ESL 57's was a =
strip of wood=20
with a Decca ribbon tweeter centered between the two ESL panels.=20

Like you, I thought the midrange was glorious! I was less impressed with ho=
w the woofers
merged with the ESL panels or how the ESL panels merged with the ribbon twe=
eters. I was also
frustrated by the fact that the speakers wouldn't play very loudly before a=
t least one of the 4
ESL panels would arc over with a snap!

As for their place in history, ESL57s were landmark speakers, no doubt abou=
t it, but to=20
compare them favorably with modern electrostatic designs like the Martin Lo=
gan CLS is=20
just very unrealistic. While the ESL57s had marvelous mids, the lower midra=
nge and bass was=20
laughable and and the highs were beamy didn't give much above about 12 KHz.=
OTOH,=20
the CLS have even better mid-range plus the advantage of extending the exce=
llence and=20
coherence of electrostatics down to below 60 Hz and all the way out to well=
beyond 20 KHz.

Also, the M-L CLS will play at realistic volumes, do not beam, and have low=
er overall distortion.
Heck, I suspect that a pair of Martin-Logan Electromotions ($2100/pair) wil=
l outperform a pair
of ESL57s in every way a speaker can be outperformed.

I have no experience (other than hearing them at shows and in Hi-Fi salons)=
with the ESL63s or
newer Quad speakers, but I'll still bet that any modern electrostatic Marti=
n-Logan design=20
will outperform them. And I'll go so far as to make you another bet. If you=
placed a pair of=20
refurbished and perfectly functioning Quad ESL 57s next to a pair of Magnep=
an's SMGs (under=20
$700/pair) and even the SMGs will outperform the ESLs in midrange and every=
where else,=20
including bass and top-end.

[Username1na2]

Decades ago I heard the original CLS and was blown away by the incredible
detail. Disappointingly, however, they were like a high-definition
hologram: sharp detail but no body to the sound. As a symphony attendee,
that lack ruled the CLS out, for me. My memory of that experience is enough
to want to hear the CLX.


__________________
http://www.actualtests.com/exam-70-480.htm
https://www.lpi.org/
http://www.kyoto-u.ac.jp/en
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairn_University
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Or1SG2h_ymw
https://www.facebook.com/accessdata