Location: Granes - Haut Vallee de l'aude - EU
Posts: 2,831
I'm Richard.
Not much, if we're brutally honest. But they are perhaps a bit less fussy about being shoved near a wall. And often available at a more reasonable price. As Alan observed a good sub used judiciously really takes them to the next level, and mitigates the usual criticism of them. Particularly the 63's take a bit of getting used to for some - because they are NOT bright - which can sound dull. The exercise of switching them out, then putting them back makes you realise how "real" and not "dull" they are.
'Course - two more mains leads, 2 more foo fuses to get anything worth listening to
Location: Dagenham Essex
Posts: 11,215
I'm Allen.
I have said it before and will say it again
57 or 63 quads are a MUST OWN at some point in any hifi enthusiast journey ,
They are
Fortunately I have both
[
The Quad ESL are a lot bigger in reality than they appear in photographs. Not sure why that is.
Current Lash Up:
TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.
The radiating area of the Quad 57 is 870mm wide by 730mm high. To the height one needs to add the height of the legs or stand. The problem with the 'size' is that Quads, being a dipole design, must be situated no closer than say 2m from a rear wall, unless sound absorbing material is used.
Barry
Thanks Barry.
Not much good for my current listening room then.
The WAF factor is also pretty low on these.
Kevin
Too busy enjoying the music....
European loan coordinator for Graham Slee HiFi system components..
How strange, Ronnie says that my nephew, who thought he was next in line, will have to prise them out of her cold, dead hands. She always complains when I am playing with other speakers in the system. The 57s are much more tolerant about space behind than I keep being told. Mine are 1 metre from the back wall now and they have been closer, although it did help that there were books behind.
Location: Granes - Haut Vallee de l'aude - EU
Posts: 2,831
I'm Richard.
That is of course absolutely true, and at the heart of the banter Gordon and I have had for over a year. But even with the "confused" result of being close to a wall, particularly if angled in just a bit, they make a surprisingly good noise. It may not be "right" it may not be what I knew and loved, it may present some serious challenges in the context of an AV setup, but they do alright. Better than alright. I compromise by leaving them tucked up about 0.5m from the wall when not in use or doing AV duty, and pulling them into the room for "proper" 2 channel. Here in sunny Yalding they can only come in a meter. In sunny Granes - probably 2 metres (and a good metre, maybe 1.5 either side too - and listener 2m from speakers). But even at 0,5m, they're ok.
Location: Granes - Haut Vallee de l'aude - EU
Posts: 2,831
I'm Richard.
Well - I took the Quads out yesterday having burned a hole in the rear dustcover of the left speaker. Not worth running them like that and frying the drivers. So I put back in the "big ugly speakers" - the Pink Triangle Ventricals
First - Mrs S has eaten her words about "big ugly speakers". They look tiny after the Quads. We both had the same thought (confessed to each other after about 3 hours) "I hope he/she likes them enough - they look so much better"
He/she didn't like them as much. We may have consistently preferred them over all other speakers we had tried prior to the Quads, and goodness only knows most of the time we leave the Quads too close to the wall and so they are operating way below optimum, but
MY GOODNESS WE MISS EM! So I left them to discharge and rushed out for some 25mm gorilla tape, and patched the holes (yes 2 of the bastards) with insulating tape, and I think they are going back in tonight.
They may be proper big and ugly, but they sure are hard to give up once you've had 'em