Greetings Artofsounders!

[Opti-cal]

Hi all, long time reader and appreciator of this forum so certainly time I took a more active approach to my learning curve about our wonderful hobby!

I have to say the forums are a refreshing approach to lively discussion, opinions and advice without threads descending into somewhat menial and often ill informed opinions.
Don't get me wrong some laughs and jokes (and drinks and smokes) - one for the Knopfler fans there - are welcome but it always amazes me how people are so quick to treat others opinions and experiences with disdain rather than consider what they are saying and possibly learn something in the process!

If there is one thing I've learned in "all" my years in hifi (I'm only in my 30's but started early!!) its that all systems are different and what has been a life changing upgrade or tweak for one person may not work at all for another. Having said that I also believe that system matching and synergy, no matter the budget, has the biggest effect on our hifi enjoyment.

Big budget or small, there are hifi bargains to be had if you know what you're after and where you want to get to.

God knows I've wasted my fair share on wholly inappropriate purchases but that doesn't mean they are necessarily bad products, just not right in my system at that time.

For me its all about getting value from your hifi. If it makes the hairs on the back of your neck stand up and brings a tear to your eye, 100k speakers are good value. Same goes if you can get there for £100!

As far as my current kit goes I'm just coming out of a SET amp, high efficiency/horn/single driver speaker approach from which I have found bliss. However, I have recently been a convert to the Quad ESL fraternity . . . the 57's specifically. If there's a more magical and rewarding speaker this side of 5k I can't wait to find it.

I do a lot of my listening late at night at low(ish) volume in a loft conversion, so low level detail retrieval is important for me whilst retaining warmth. The Quads do this on level unrivaled by anything I've heard. At the moment I'm actually running them with a low watt SET amp (surprise surprise) which in theory isn't the best match for them, BUT, it works. It just does. I have a theory that they enjoy some of the feedback from the amp and the fact the voltage is tube rectified rather than solid state. Granted, this gives a slightly bloated bottom end but the "bloom" it allows the Quads to throw out into my room is spine tingling.

Also the shape of the room has a lot to do with the sound of my gear. It is a gradually rising pitched roof that falls at the opposite end and so logically it amplifies if not somewhat compresses the sound. However I liken the effect to a giant pair of headphones giving a totally immersive experience. In short, its like nothing else I've heard. Its probably quite colored and inaccurate but I don't care. The immediacy of the presentation from the Quads along with the magical tube bloom more than outweighs any shortcomings they may have. They do have some well documented limitations.

Anyway, apologies for the War & Peace but hopefully that gives some idea about my system.

My musical preferences are aimed towards well recorded folk/rock/acoustic with some electronic notes (I was young once . . . ). Think Dire Straits, Eagles, The Doors, London Grammar, LAMB, Nils Frahm, Jon Hopkins kind of stuff.

As noted by many, a female vocal coming through the Quads with tube amplification is as close to the live performance as one can really get.

My sources include an LP12 (dad hand me down, thank you dad!) boosted by a lovely Mark Travis phono stage and a simple Pioneer streamer going into a Musical Paradise MP-D1. At least that is one of my systems . . . .


Looking forward to getting to know the community with some relatively intelligent questions and answers along with some stupid ones it almost goes without saying!

Speak to you soon,

Opti-cal

[prestonchipfryer]

Hello Chris. Plenty of interesting threads worth reading on the AoS.

[Barry]

Welcome to AoS Chris,

Nice introduction and an interesting back story to your audio voyage. Don't worry about the length of your first post - it gives us something to get our teeth into!

We have several Quad 57 enthusiasts here (I've been one for the last 45 years!), so we would be interested to learn a little more about the SET amp you use. And yes, the shape of the room and the positioning of the speakers within it, has a major effect on the overall sound.

Enjoy the Forum
Barry

[Opti-cal]

Thanks guys, that's great to hear.

I always come across buried threads from AoS and can easily (and happily) lose an afternoon or two if not an entire weekend!

So much knowledge here.

Anyway re my SET amps I've tried the Quads with a Minute EL34 offering from Asia but due to its zero negative feedback design it can sound a little lean with them. I've had a lot more pleasure listening to them via a super cheap (but actually well respected) Gemtune/Nobsound/-Insert Chinese re-badged generic design name here- EL34 amp with some tube rolling which has been a revelation. As previously mentioned it shouldn't work particularly well but in my room with my system it really does. Only 8wpc but for my listening levels its more than adequate.

Current tubes are:

Psvane EL34B's (I have some 6CA7 TII's to try soon also!) - The ones that came with the amp are the black base version but I have a matched pair of brown base ones.
Tung Sol 6SL7 pre amp tubes (I have some NOS Tung Sol's on the way!)
Svetlana Winged C 5U4G rectifier tube (I have a NOS RCA one to try as well)

Just a little note on the Psvanes - it might just be in my system but to me after 20 hours or so they sound absolutely majestic. Superb tight bass, slightly forward but magical mids and some nice sparkle in the highs, I'm not sure why they don't have more of a following. This in comparison to Gold Lion KT77's, Svetlana's, Groove Tubes, even some NOS Siemens and Tesla's I've tried. Admittedly I've not pulled the trigger on a NOS pair of Mullards but have to draw the line somewhere!

I should quantify I'm also using a Rel T3 subwoofer in the setup just on low settings with the crossover around 70Hz just to underpin the low end of the Quads. You hardly know its on, until you turn it off that is. Unless I have a truly huge full range speaker I don't think I could listen to a setup without a well implemented sub now!

I've tried the same setup with two T3's, one for each channel but the improvement was not really audible at my listening levels. Also I think it "excited" the room too much which messed with the imaging a bit.

Of course its not perfect, depending on the recording the volume and "slam" of the sub can be too much/too little but its a compromise like a lot of things.

I would actually like to get a REL with remote control for this purpose one day . . .

Regarding amps I'd love to try an old Radford in my setup.

(Apologies if my posts are a little long or in the wrong place, I'm not quite up to speed with the online etiquette as of yet!)

Cheers

[walpurgis]

Hello Chris. Welcome to AOS.

Looks as though you've been having fun developing your system.

Please join in any chat that interests you or start your own threads.


Enjoy the forum,
Geoff.

[Barry]

I've never got on with supplementing the Quad 57s with a sub: it's either been too intrusive or had no effect at all. It might have been room positioning that was the fault, as I know of other 57 users who successfully augment their speakers with a sub-woofer. IMO the only way to extend the bass (if not in frequency, but in weight) is to stack them.

Regarding Radford valve amps, they are indeed a very good match with Quad 57s. I occasionally use an STA 15 Mk.III with mine.

[walpurgis]

I agree with Barry. I've owned 57's, but not used a sub with them. But, I have heard them used with a subwoofer a few times and did not like it.

[Opti-cal]

Thanks for the replies.

In regards to the subwoofer it probably is room dependent. I can certainly listen to them without it but for me it fills the gap until I can afford to do it "properly".

I would love to go for a stacked pair but I'd need to significantly upgrade my amplification. I have a fair amount of other hifi to sell as I think I will concentrate purely on the 57's. Like many have noted after living with them for a while there is no real going back.

Sounds like you fellas have really heard them at their best, something admittedly I'm probably yet to experience.

It has been said that a stacked pair can lose some of the subtlety many adore but the trade-off is real and accurate bass. Is that towards your experience?

Or is it possible to have it all as they say??!!

I was also looking into a pair of Leak TL12's for them in the future plus a suitable preamp . . . . What do you chaps have/recommend?

[Barry]

Thanks for the replies.

In regards to the subwoofer it probably is room dependent. I can certainly listen to them without it but for me it fills the gap until I can afford to do it "properly".

I would love to go for a stacked pair but I'd need to significantly upgrade my amplification. I have a fair amount of other hifi to sell as I think I will concentrate purely on the 57's. Like many have noted after living with them for a while there is no real going back.

Sounds like you fellas have really heard them at their best, something admittedly I'm probably yet to experience.

It has been said that a stacked pair can lose some of the subtlety many adore but the trade-off is real and accurate bass. Is that towards your experience?

Or is it possible to have it all as they say??!!

I was also looking into a pair of Leak TL12's for them in the future plus a suitable preamp . . . . What do you chaps have/recommend?

I did briefly experiment with stacked pairs. I wouldn't say subtlety was compromised at all - in fact the sense of 'presence' was palpable, immediate and enough to make the hairs on the back of your neck stand up. But they do take up a lot or room and are visually imposing: sadly too much for me in my listening/living room.

I would strongly encourage you to try a stacked pair, if you have the room. Also if you do have a go with stacking, I would experiment with the actual geometry: don't just follow Quad's suggestion of stacking them so the curvature of the two speakers forms an unbroken arc. The beamwidth of Quad 57s in the vertical plane is only about 15 degrees (hence the commonly reported complaint of 'beaming'); stacking them as recommended by Quad will make this worse, reducing the vertical beamwidth to less than 10 degrees.

Regarding valve amplification, IMO you really do need a minimum of 10 Watts to drive Quad 57s. For a while I ran mine with a Sugden A21 (a 12.5W/channel Class A solid state design) and found the amp could run out of headroom. Interestingly, I didn't have this problem when using the Quad II valve amps (rated as 15W), and as I have mentioned the Radford 15W design: the STA 15, is perfect.

[Barry]

Further to the above, if you really want to investigate Leak valve amplification, I would recommend the 'Stereo 20' using EL84 output valves. On paper only 10W/channel, but in practice it offers more than that. It has a high sensitivity (100mV for full output), so you have the option to experiment with passive volume controls.

Also be careful to distinguish between the TL12 and the TL12+, they are not the same.

[Opti-cal]

Hi Barry,

advice most welcome. I think the stacked project is going to take some serious planning. Plus no small part will be the convincing of the mother of my 3 month old son that I need to move out of my current listening environment (which I am most grateful for in the first place, should she ever read this . . . ). Its probably easier to simply move to a bigger house!

Anyway, good things come to those who wait . . .

I've heard the same on the amps, unfortunately I purchased most of my amps before the relatively recent acquisition of the Quads. Had it been the other way around I would be using more appropriate amplification. Interesting re the TL12 and TL12+ - I shall go and educate myself and have a look at the Stereo 20 also. I used to have a lovely CR Developments 15wpc EL84 amp. It was one of the sweetest sounds I've ever heard. Even with relatively modest equipment it managed to make humble speakers sing so I would be interested to hear the Quads driven by EL84's.

Thank you for your responses.

[Barry]

Further to my comments on stacking Quad 57s, the usual ‘obvious’ method I criticised, is as shown here:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/31/1d/10/311d10f12de3088e8fd8aaa669678194.jpg


I erroneously ascribed this as the method recommended by Quad. Apologies to Quad; their recommended arrangement is as shown below:

http://www.quadesl.com/graphics/quadGraphics/quadstkd.gif
(taken from Quad Information sheet 201)

This is better, though I would still like to see both speakers arranged that the axis of the two treble beams are parallel, so they merge at a point 4.8m distant and 0.75m in height.



You might also want to consider this arrangement:

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4594/38744952534_8722912977_b.jpg

Though I would raise the rear leg of the lower speakers, so the treble beam doesn’t ‘fire’ over your head. (The Quads were designed at a time when people sat in taller seats than the do today, so these days the Quads have to be more vertical, so the beam is lowered and ideally be aimed at the listener’s ears.) Likewise, the upper speaker should be tilted so both beams merge at the listener’s ears.)

[Opti-cal]

Hi Barry,

thanks for going into such detail with your responses.

The last image is one I have stumbled across a few times whilst searching for threads regarding the 57's. The angle of the panels is a technique employed by some of the most expensive and exotic speakers available. Not that the expense or exclusivity makes them automatically superior, but with the amount they cost you would like to think they gained some accurate insight from the R&D of such projects.

Logic would also suggest that any slightly "grey" or weak areas of the listening experience with a single pair would be alleviated by the addition of the stacked pair without any loss in clarity or timing, assuming the beams cross at the listening position as you suggest.

I also have small plinths placed underneath the rear legs in order to tilt the speakers toward my listening height when sat in my listening position. I have considered making a new set of legs to do this properly but for now it works. As the speakers are currently on carpet I know I would likely benefit from having them properly spiked but again this may be a job for another time.

At the moment I'm just breaking in a completely new set of tubes with my new "upgraded" amplifier.

For the first time since I started critically and analytically listening to hifi, I am wholly satisfied.

All the tubes are barely broken in but its already a dramatic improvement.

Regarding the upgrades I followed quite a logical path. I simply looked to improve upon the current characteristics which I believe gives the system its sound. I was actually relatively satisfied with the current sound from my system so if the new parts didn't work I would happily revert to the previous configuration and put the new bits to use somewhere else.

I replaced the amp with the "2018 upgraded" version which has some nice caps, some silver point to point wiring and a much improved potentiometer.

Ideally I would (as advised) like a bit more power but the characteristics of my amplifier more than make up for this for now.
Combined with the fact this amplifier costs about 1/10th of the outlay I would have to spend on a "significant" upgrade, I think its a great stop-gap.

I replaced some new (Russian) reissue Tung Sol 6SL7GT's (which are actually surprisingly good and a few of my guitar friends absolutely swear by them) with some NOS 70's Tung Sol's (USA made).

Then swapped my Svetlana Winged C 5U4G rectifier for a NOS RCA 5U4GB. Nothing wrong with the Svetlana but apparently the RCA is slightly better and getting rare so thought I should snap one up now.

Finally I replaced some brown base Psvane EL34B's (another very good tube in my system) with some Psvane 6CA7's T MKII's.


Normally I don't like replacing more than one element at a time so I can truly make an accurate evaluation as to whether the change has been an improvement or not. However as I know the other combination of tubes works very well, I couldn't resist throwing all of these in at once. If it proved to be a disappointment I would have then tried different combinations until I was happy again, but considering the improvement and the fact the new tubes have barely 3 hours on them I am keeping it the way it is.

Quite often I have found that changing something within the system yields a false improvement. By that I mean that the human ear reacts to something that is new or different and initially evaluates it to be a positive. However I have found after considered and prolonged listening that in fact, quite often something has actually been removed.

My evaluation of the new tubes and amplifier so far would be that everything is more full bodied, extended and generally more coherent. The bottom end is definitely tighter and less bloated but the "bloom" I find so addictive is still present and probably more so.

Dynamic passages of music have improved, so quieter parts seem softer yet more detailed and volume swings within a piece are more dramatic.

With vinyl the above mentioned effects are further enhanced.

I cannot wait to get home and continue to listen to the new tubes and amplifier break in. I think this is my favorite stage of hifi ownership.

[Barry]

Hi Barry,

thanks for going into such detail with your responses.

The last image is one I have stumbled across a few times whilst searching for threads regarding the 57's. The angle of the panels is a technique employed by some of the most expensive and exotic speakers available. Not that the expense or exclusivity makes them automatically superior, but with the amount they cost you would like to think they gained some accurate insight from the R&D of such projects.

Logic would also suggest that any slightly "grey" or weak areas of the listening experience with a single pair would be alleviated by the addition of the stacked pair without any loss in clarity or timing, assuming the beams cross at the listening position as you suggest.

I also have small plinths placed underneath the rear legs in order to tilt the speakers toward my listening height when sat in my listening position. I have considered making a new set of legs to do this properly but for now it works. As the speakers are currently on carpet I know I would likely benefit from having them properly spiked but again this may be a job for another time.

At the moment I'm just breaking in a completely new set of tubes with my new "upgraded" amplifier.

For the first time since I started critically and analytically listening to hifi, I am wholly satisfied.

All the tubes are barely broken in but its already a dramatic improvement.

Regarding the upgrades I followed quite a logical path. I simply looked to improve upon the current characteristics which I believe gives the system its sound. I was actually relatively satisfied with the current sound from my system so if the new parts didn't work I would happily revert to the previous configuration and put the new bits to use somewhere else.

I replaced the amp with the "2018 upgraded" version which has some nice caps, some silver point to point wiring and a much improved potentiometer.

Ideally I would (as advised) like a bit more power but the characteristics of my amplifier more than make up for this for now.
Combined with the fact this amplifier costs about 1/10th of the outlay I would have to spend on a "significant" upgrade, I think its a great stop-gap.

I replaced some new (Russian) reissue Tung Sol 6SL7GT's (which are actually surprisingly good and a few of my guitar friends absolutely swear by them) with some NOS 70's Tung Sol's (USA made).

Then swapped my Svetlana Winged C 5U4G rectifier for a NOS RCA 5U4GB. Nothing wrong with the Svetlana but apparently the RCA is slightly better and getting rare so thought I should snap one up now.

Finally I replaced some brown base Psvane EL34B's (another very good tube in my system) with some Psvane 6CA7's T MKII's.


Normally I don't like replacing more than one element at a time so I can truly make an accurate evaluation as to whether the change has been an improvement or not. However as I know the other combination of tubes works very well, I couldn't resist throwing all of these in at once. If it proved to be a disappointment I would have then tried different combinations until I was happy again, but considering the improvement and the fact the new tubes have barely 3 hours on them I am keeping it the way it is.

Quite often I have found that changing something within the system yields a false improvement. By that I mean that the human ear reacts to something that is new or different and initially evaluates it to be a positive. However I have found after considered and prolonged listening that in fact, quite often something has actually been removed.

My evaluation of the new tubes and amplifier so far would be that everything is more full bodied, extended and generally more coherent. The bottom end is definitely tighter and less bloated but the "bloom" I find so addictive is still present and probably more so.

Dynamic passages of music have improved, so quieter parts seem softer yet more detailed and volume swings within a piece are more dramatic.

With vinyl the above mentioned effects are further enhanced.

I cannot wait to get home and continue to listen to the new tubes and amplifier break in. I think this is my favorite stage of hifi ownership.


Hello Chris,

Oh that is so true. I'm often amused by enthusiasts who upon making a change to their system will report that the difference is "night and day" or some other form of hyperbole. Quite often there is a difference, even a marked difference, but a difference is not necessarily the same as an improvement. I too have been caught out by this expectation bias (especially if the change made has been expensive). So now I will make a change, and if I think the change has made an improvement I will live with it for a week or more, then I will revert back to the situation before the change. Quite often the perceived improvement was false, or not an actual improvement, but simply different.

Regarding your 'tube rolling', it all sounds like fun. I have to confess that I'm not really a tube enthusiast, though a couple of sets of Quad II amps passed through my system, and I do have a Radford valve amp as a spare. But I have never spent much time with trying out different valves made by different manufacturers; I just took it for granted that whatever brand the amplifier manufacturer had chosen was the best for that amp. To that end, the Quads used GEC MO valve company KT66s with Mullard EF86s, and now the Radford uses Mullard (Blackburn Road) EL34s with either Mullard, Telefunken or Siemens & Halske small signal valves and a Mullard GZ34 rectifier.

What is the valve amp you are using? I'm sure there are other valve users here, better qualified than I am, who could advise you re tube rolling. It might be a good idea to start a separate thread to discuss this; that way it will receive more attention than leaving discussion in the Welcome thread.

Regards
Barry

[Spectral Morn]

Welcome to AoS Chris :cool:

[Opti-cal]

Hi Barry,

and thanks for the welcome Neil!

Indeed, it would be a good idea to post my experiences in more appropriate places. Also my apologies to you for having to read my elongated explanations of a somewhat indulgent exercise, although it is quite liberating documenting and discussing my findings.

Just to answer your question Barry the amplifier is just a simple Gemtune/Nobsound/Yaqin (generic chinese manufacturer) EL34 SET. Although this particular model has just been revamped with better caps and some silver wiring etc as mentioned.

I have had a few amplifiers over the past decade or so, from super cheap to mid-end and this one (falling at the super cheap end of the scale) beats them all hands down.

It doesn't just represent good value compared to more expensive offerings, it is just plain good full stop. Other amps give me a bigger soundstage or have superior imaging but nothing plays music like this amp. It passes the toe tap test every single time.

Being a single input SET there is hardly any circuit to speak of. It's just an input connected to some tubes, connected to some output terminals via a potentiometer. I know that's describing any SET amp but this one is as bare bones as you can get. Therefore I believe that to be another reason it is so responsive to tube rolling.

I must point out that to get the kind of performance I'm describing from this amp you must upgrade ALL the tubes at a cost well over the purchase price of the amplifier. Possibly one of the reasons people may have overlooked it.

Here is a pic of the circuit illustrating its simplicity.

[Opti-cal]

23960

[Opti-cal]

Wow Neil . . . . I'd better start writing up my gear sig ey! Love the detail in there.