Just connected up an old friend, Radford STA25 III

[Barry]

Very nice Alex.

Although I'm predominately a solid-state user (Quad, Mark Levinson), I wouldn't part with my Radford STA15 Mk. III. It's a lovely match with the Quad 57 ESLs.

(By the way, I corrected a typo in the title of your thread.)

[spendorman]

Very nice Alex.

Although I'm predominately a solid-state user (Quad, Mark Levinson), I wouldn't part with my Radford STA15 Mk. III. It's a lovely match with the Quad 57 ESLs.

(By the way, I corrected a typo in the title of your thread.)

Me too, usually, disconnected a Quad 303 to put the Radford on. There is a difference in sound. Prefer the Radford. My 57's may need some attention. I did some work on them about 27 years ago, new treble panels and various components on the underside of the audio transformers.

Thanks for correcting the typo, I'm quite good at those.

[Barry]

One day I'll have to A-B the Radford with a 303 using my Quads.

[spendorman]

One day I'll have to A-B the Radford with a 303 using my Quads.

Many years ago I tried that, to me the difference was not that much, with the other speakers the difference seemed greater. These Rogers speaker things are very revealing, in some respects, more so than the 57's.

[Barry]

Many years ago I tried that, to me the difference was not that much, with the other speakers the difference seemed greater. These Rogers speaker things are very revealing, in some respects, more so than the 57's.

I once compared the Rogers 'BBC Studio Monitors' (a spin-off of the LS3/6s; I believe we've had this discussion before) with the Quad 57s. Very close in sound quality, but I still prefer the Quads.