In praise of Quad Electrostatics

[Gordon Steadman]

So, how much smaller are 57's?

To me they are much less intrusive, not so high and about 900mm wide. Richard of course will disagree but they also sound better, especially with open stands like these

[Oldpinkman]

So, how much smaller are 57's?

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

[Audio Al]

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

[Macca]

The Quad ESL are a lot bigger in reality than they appear in photographs. Not sure why that is.

[Barry]

The Quad ESL are a lot bigger in reality than they appear in photographs. Not sure why that is.

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.

[CageyH]

Thanks Barry.
Not much good for my current listening room then.
The WAF factor is also pretty low on these.

[Gordon Steadman]

Thanks Barry.
Not much good for my current listening room then.
The WAF factor is also pretty low on these.

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.

[Oldpinkman]

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.

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.

[Oldpinkman]

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

[Firebottle]

They may be proper big and ugly, but they sure are hard to give up once you've had 'em

Yes...yes...and yes.
I've used magic tape to cover holes burnt in the dustcovers, sticks well and doesn't go hard and dry up.