Quad ESL help appreciated!

[Opti-cal]

Hi guys,

hope everyone is enjoying the run up to Christmas and some cozy nights in with their hifi (especially nice for the tube brigade!).

Anyway, a few weeks ago as a little treat to myself I decided to give my Quad ESL 57's a full service. Both transformers were rebuilt with new boards and all resistors and wires replaced. Both treble panels were replaced and one bass panel also. This was not exactly cheap.

Upon getting them back into my listening room and in their mm perfect positions (marked with tape), I charged them for a few hours and then began listening. Or at least I tried to. The bass output was now completely overwhelming. Boomy and uncontrolled which was killing the dynamics and imaging.

I tried a different amp and on different output taps 8 & 4 ohm but the issue was only slightly rectified using the 4 ohm taps. Plus they sounded great on the 8 ohm ones before.

Now here is my suspicion. Before the service the bass output was extremely low from the speakers enabling me to move them very close to the pitched roof in my loft where they reside. There is probably at least 3 feet of space behind most of the speaker to the back wall but where the pitched roof angles towards the back of the speaker at the top, that clearance is probably only 15-25cm.

Now I believe the now corrected bass output creates a massive standing wave reflected by this pitched roof as the design of the room previously compensated for the weak output of the bass from the speaker (and actually made it sound even more delicate than the 57 is in standard form, it really was "magic").

Does this sound plausible or am I missing something completely here?

I've tried pulling them out a bit more away from the wall but the boomy bass is still quite present but due to the small dimensions of the room I can't pull them out much more as they will be in the middle of the room!

It's at quite a specific frequency around 100-200Hz so most bass notes and drum kicks are very blurred and resonant.

It is also not from one speaker specifically (I could understand if it was from the one new bass panel) so this indicates to me there is no actual issue with the speakers themselves, more my listening environment.


The speakers are dead silent with or without source turned on and at high volume with nothing playing and I can see the new parts inside so I have no reason to suspect anything is amiss there.

Is there anything I can do to "tune", tweak or lower the bass output from the speakers? I don't really want to add an equaliser to the signal path but I will if that is the only option.

Perhaps a different resistor in the speaker somewhere in the crossover?

I've tried putting a lot of sound damping material behind the speakers (cloth panels/pillows etc) but again this only helped a little bit.

Unfortunately I don't have any tone controls on any of my amplifiers either or I'd give that a try.

I was expecting perhaps some extended break-in time for them after the service but they have been playing for the last week (probably 3 hours a day) and there hasn't been any audible improvement to my ears.


I'll be devastated if I can't get them to sound like they used to again having forked out for the service which appears to have actually made them unusable in my environment!

Any comments, help or advice much appreciated.

Cheers,

Chris

[eisenach]

Oh, dear! I'd be pretty fed up, too. Commiserations.

For what it's worth, I use 63s in a loft room and placed in a way that sounds very similar to your set-up, although I have a couple of feet of vertical wall before the roof slope takes over. I put piles of magazines and/or foam packaging behind the speakers. Anything that might help absorb the rear sound radiation. It's worth a try.

[Audio Al]

Did you rebuild them ? or done professionaly , If professionaly get back to the company and seek advice / return them as problematic

[Opti-cal]

Thanks for the reply,

I'd kill for a couple of feet! I have 63's also serviced a few months ago (not as expensive a service mind) . . .

I was surprised how well they worked in such a space actually but it looks like I have wrongly presumed that a service would improve things even further.

It is a small room with a pitched roof after all. Horses for courses as they say.

Seeing as I have tried a lot of absorption material already with minimal improvement it looks like it could be all over for the 57's in the loft . . . .

Not sure I can be bothered to wait a few years for the bass output to drop again!

My options are now, to:

a) sell a mint pair of freshly serviced Quad 57's.
b) move house to facilitate aforementioned speakers.

I think the choice is fairly clear.

[Opti-cal]

I would return (again) if I thought that was the problem Allen! Good call on giving them a ring though and seeing if they have any tips.

They were done by Quad themselves and checked meticulously.

I already returned one of them once because the bass panel was ticking slightly during charging. I'd rather it was an issue with the speakers but I fear it is the room they are in . . .

As I say in the original post as both speakers exhibit the same sound signature (which happens to not fit it with my room dimensions!) I'm fairly sure its a relocate/sell situation.

They sounded pretty decent in my lounge with some room to breath . . . unfortunately with a 7 month old rolling about down there they cannot live there permanently . . .

[Audio Al]

Is your roof 2 , 3 or 4 sided ?

[Firebottle]

I feel for your problem. I have 57's and appreciate what you are saying.

The only thing I can suggest is to have one of the bass panels disconnected to reduce the bass output.

Do not try this yourself unless very confident you know what you are doing.

[Opti-cal]

Is your roof 2 , 3 or 4 sided ?

Ceiling is 3 sided but the pitch of the roof goes nearly all the way to the floor with only a small (2 foot long) flat part in the middle before the pitched slope on the other side starts if that makes sense?

This pic should illustrate things better than my words . . .

[Opti-cal]

2486824868

[Opti-cal]

I feel for your problem. I have 57's and appreciate what you are saying.

The only thing I can suggest is to have one of the bass panels disconnected to reduce the bass output.

Do not try this yourself unless very confident you know what you are doing.

Haha, certainly one for the professionals there Alan!

Great suggestion, it might be worth looking into however I doubt I would ever be able to recreate the exact sound I had with a lower output panel with a disconnected one but its an interesting idea.

I truly didn't realise the synergy between components and room albeit with some of the components running at less than optimal to provide that sound.

It was genuinely spine tingly with proper 3D images. Probably a bit coloured and overly warm but everything was there for me. Even slam which is difficult to get out of 57's.

[Audio Al]

Can you put them on the right hand wall ?

[Opti-cal]

Can you put them on the right hand wall ?

Unfortunately not as the entrance to the room extends into the room about 3 foot to meet fire regulations so I would be sitting in front of the door . . .

Also corner sofa's have been chosen, bought and assembled to fit the room in that configuration and I'd be getting into serious trouble if I started dismantling that. She's barely recovered from them being in the room at all and occupying the space a TV used to fill . . . not that she liked that much better . . .

Thanks for the suggestion though, appreciated.

Cheers

[Audio Al]

Unfortunately not as the entrance to the room extends into the room about 3 foot to meet fire regulations so I would be sitting in front of the door . . .

Also corner sofa's have been chosen, bought and assembled to fit the room in that configuration and I'd be getting into serious trouble if I started dismantling that. She's barely recovered from them being in the room at all and occupying the space a TV used to fill . . . not that she liked that much better . . .

Thanks for the suggestion though, appreciated.

Cheers

Only remaining option is a loft conversion :D:lol:

[Opti-cal]

Only remaining option is a loft conversion :D:lol:

Probably less than what I've spent on these . . . .

[Barry]

https://theartofsound.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=24868&d=1544614770

I'm not surprised you are getting a boomy dominant bass. Your 57's are far too close to the sloping wall/ceiling. If you can't move them forward by at least a metre then I would suggest experimenting with some sound absorbing material to surpress reflections from the wall/ceiling.

[Light Dependant Resistor]

I have a very similar room and have 57's raised on brackets off the wall leading up to sloping roof.
they work well, just 10- 20cm from the wall. I have no absorbing material installed in them .
Another pair below presently sit on their original feet - these need to be raised though about 17cm to meet the
top pair.

So it can be done using 57's effectively without any rear reflection - they do not seem to lose anything with reproduction,
or for that matter gain bass response. If on the other hand I do move them out into the room - and I have tried this
the shape of the room urges you to put them back. I also appreciate they work well located away from boundaries in better
shaped rooms, particularly when raised about 30cm, but rear wall mounting is also quite OK

I would recommend you raise them up about 30cm, above their existing feet and slope them slightly more forward like being straighter,
as this makes a huge difference. Try some suitably dimensioned pieces of wood under the original feet, with the third back leg
about 6cm higher than the front pieces of wood. A slab of wood under each - maybe black would suit the decor, once you have
them sorted with how much height and slope forward.

[Opti-cal]

https://theartofsound.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=24868&d=1544614770

I'm not surprised you are getting a boomy dominant bass. Your 57's are far too close to the sloping wall/ceiling. If you can't move them forward by at least a metre then I would suggest experimenting with some sound absorbing material to surpress reflections from the wall/ceiling.

The picture is a tad misleading, in the dark area behind the speakers there is probably 1.5 meters plus quite a lot of sound absorbing material. There is actually an LP12 (just visible) on top of the rack behind the speakers which has enough clearance to play open lid (just).

I completely agree it's still not ideal and from the top of the speakers working back there is certainly not enough space to let them breath properly and do their thing.

But this is my point, with the un-serviced speakers in this configuration the bass output was such that it was just right for the conditions of the room and the resonance from the rear wall actually helped enforce the light bass. Now that I'm starting with more bass to begin with from the serviced pair its just way too much.

The next pic may give a better perspective but as you suggest Barry it's still probably not enough now that the speakers have higher bass output.

Seeing as I can't really pull them out too much further (I will a bit) the only thing left to try is indeed more absorbing material as you suggest.

I suspect I may just have to accept this is no longer the room for them!

Thanks for your comments.

Chris

[Opti-cal]

24869

You can see what I mean about the pitched roof going nearly all the way to the floor now.

Unfortunately this means the speakers only have enough clearance from the rear wall until you get to about half way up the speaker.

[Opti-cal]

I have a very similar room and have 57's raised on brackets off the wall leading up to sloping roof.
they work well, just 10- 20cm from the wall. I have no absorbing material installed in them .
Another pair below presently sit on their original feet - these need to be raised though about 17cm to meet the
top pair.

So it can be done using 57's effectively without any rear reflection - they do not seem to lose anything with reproduction,
or for that matter gain bass response. If on the other hand I do move them out into the room - and I have tried this
the shape of the room urges you to put them back. I also appreciate they work well located away from boundaries in better
shaped rooms, particularly when raised about 30cm, but rear wall mounting is also quite OK

I would recommend you raise them up about 30cm, and slope them slightly more forward as this makes a huge difference.

Interesting, I will look into this and think about experimentation.

I may come back to you on this when I've had a little experimentation.

Thanks

[Barry]

https://theartofsound.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=24869&d=1544629845

That looks 'better', but the problem is still the 'trapped' space behind the speakers. This is exacerbated with the right-hand speaker being adjacent to the wall. What kind of absorbing material are you using. I have read of Quad 57s being used in corners each side of a chimney breast, using papier maché egg boxes as absorbing material, stuck to the wall behind the speakers. How close are the speakers to your listening position?

Have you spoken to Quad describing the phenomenon and asking for their advice? The people at Huntingdon are very helpful - give them a call.



My 57s are 2 metres in front of highly reflective patio doors, are adjacent to the side walls and are situated in a 'live' area of the room, but there is no bass bloom.

[Puffin]

WARNING: I am fully certified as clinically insane, but I have altered the phase on one speaker's LF in order to smooth out/cancel bass boom to good effect. Worth a try and won't cost anything. If it sounds rubbish/weird/like a Bose Wave Radio....remember the disclaimer made at the start of this post.

[Opti-cal]

https://theartofsound.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=24869&d=1544629845

That looks 'better', but the problem is still the 'trapped' space behind the speakers. This is exacerbated with the right-hand speaker being adjacent to the wall. What kind of absorbing material are you using. I have read of Quad 57s being used in corners each side of a chimney breast, using papier maché egg boxes as absorbing material, stuck to the wall behind the speakers. How close are the speakers to your listening position?

Have you spoken to Quad describing the phenomenon and asking for their advice? The people at Huntingdon are very helpful - give them a call.



My 57s are 2 metres in front of highly reflective patio doors, are adjacent to the side walls and are situated in a 'live' area of the room, but there is no bass bloom.

I have some proper studio style stuff (its actually just what expensive parts at my work turn up in for protection) foam squares with pointy foam triangles all along the back wall at the bottom with a pillow stuffed in the corner. As I was setting it up I could actually hear the differences each additional piece was making to the image. It was basically the more I piled up the better the sound became.

I have a suspicion if a fair amount was required then to deal with the bass boom before the bass output was "improved" by the service, I would need significantly more now. Which would probably end up being so much it would be piling up behind the speaker and likely counteract the positives of having space around the back in the first place.

The speakers are approximately 4 meters from my ears.

I will certainly speak to Quad to see if they have any advice or solutions.

Thanks for the suggestion, ideally I'd take everything out of the room, put up absorption panels and pull them out another meter as you suggest. Unfortunately I'm unlikely to retain this particular house to do so when she leaves me sighting hifi addiction as one of the many reasons . . . .

I'm in enough trouble already as this used to be our "TV/Film/Family room" . . . .

[Opti-cal]

WARNING: I am fully certified as clinically insane, but I have altered the phase on one speaker's LF in order to smooth out/cancel bass boom to good effect. Worth a try and won't cost anything. If it sounds rubbish/weird/like a Bose Wave Radio....remember the disclaimer made at the start of this post.

"A plan so crazy it just might work . . . "

I like it.

Does it do the job and retain the kind of signature sound??

Might be worth a try if I do my homework on where and how (on the speaker) . . .

[Puffin]

"A plan so crazy it just might work . . . "

I like it.

Does it do the job and retain the kind of signature sound??

Might be worth a try if I do my homework on where and how (on the speaker) . . .

Just stick the BLACK lead in the RED socket and the RED lead in the BLACK socket, ONE SPEAKER ONLY Left or Right...you chooooose

[Barry]

Just stick the BLACK lead in the RED socket and the RED lead in the BLACK socket, ONE SPEAKER ONLY Left or Right...you chooooose

That will put the speakers out of phase with one another and will destroy stereo imaging.

[Opti-cal]

Just stick the BLACK lead in the RED socket and the RED lead in the BLACK socket, ONE SPEAKER ONLY Left or Right...you chooooose

Ah right I thought you meant invert the bass panels inside the speaker so the treble panel would still be correct . . .

Might be worth a try.

Cheers.

[Opti-cal]

That will put the speakers out of phase with one another and will destroy stereo imaging.

Yes I've connected speakers out of phase accidentally before . . . does sound very weird but just as an exercise I might try it although as you say the image will suffer.

Cheers

[Barry]

Ah right I thought you meant invert the bass panels inside the speaker so the treble panel would still be correct . . .

Might be worth a try.

Cheers.

It might work, but the bass panels are sufficiently close together (they are separated by only about 3") you may get almost complete cancellation.

[Opti-cal]

It might work, but the bass panels are sufficiently close together (they are separated by only about 3") you may get almost complete cancellation.

Hmmm . . . sounds like I wouldn't get near a true representation of the sound, which is what I fell for with them in the first place . . . .

I'll go and have a think about what I can do - cheers for input so far all.

[walpurgis]

Reversing the polarity on the bass section of one speaker will almost certainly cause cancellation and reduce the perceived bass quantity, but I'm pretty sure you'll also get weird phase effects that'll mess the sound up.

[sq225917]

You could always add a small sub and run it out of phase. One with parametric eq should allow quite accurate nulling.

[sq225917]

Or build a Helmholtz resonator to do the same.

[Barry]

Reversing the polarity on the bass section of one speaker will almost certainly cause cancellation and reduce the perceived bass quantity, but I'm pretty sure you'll also get weird phase effects that'll mess the sound up.

One of the design features of the Quad 57 is that all the panels are time-aligned. Certainly inverting the phase of one of the bass panels will mess all that up.

[Opti-cal]

You could always add a small sub and run it out of phase. One with parametric eq should allow quite accurate nulling.

Excellent suggestion, I have a small REL with a phase switch which could do the job. Cheers

[Opti-cal]

Or build a Helmholtz resonator to do the same.

Just noticed your kit there Simon, looks like a lot of stuff I like. Paradise stage and NS1000's. Great stuff.

[Pigmy Pony]

Why can't ESL's be sited close to the rear wall? Is the problem to do with sound reflections? If so, surely you could place something super-absorbent as close behind the speakers as you like, as the sound won't be reflected back. Something like large picture frames with something thick and woolly attached. Then you can hide as much absorbent stuff behind those panels as you want - it's just a dead space anyway. Should be cheap and easy enough to do, then try an A/B comparison with the out-of-phase thing.

[Opti-cal]

So after a heavy experimentation session last night . . . .

Swapped in some different speakers to test the bass resonance in the room. They are 12" drivers in Tannoy cabs with Tannoy HPD's on top in separate enclosures with a custom crossover letting the 12" take care of lows and the HPD's the mid/highs.

Even poked right into the corners of the room I was getting very little resonance compared to the quads - I assume because nearly all of the sound from these speakers is projected forward, including from the front firing bass port.

They sounded pretty good and even better when pulled out a bit and given some room.

This indicated to me that the room could facilitate the quads with some further damping behind and given some more clearance to the rear wall (as suggested).

So back in went the quads, I rejigged the various foam tiles/pillows/blankets I had back there to provide a "thicker" spread of absorbing material as well as pulling the quads forward a couple more inches or as much as possible before they started to occupy coffee table position (middle of the room!).


Improvements were obvious but still not where I wanted them. Still the boom was there at medium volumes but the imaging and delicacy of the detail was back to as good as I can remember.


Then I decided to try them with a cheap (but has served me superbly) EL34 amp I had laying around. I also specifically put output tubes in it that I felt were bass-light before as hopefully they would be just the ticket to reduce the bass output.

The result of doing this was extremely positive. I'd forgotten just how nice this little amplifier could sound. The tubes I had found superb for midrange before and were extremely "airy" but were so light on the bass I rarely used them.

Now with the exaggerated bass output in my room they sounded very good indeed. They are a bit on the "chimey" side but this I can live with compared to boomy bass.


Using the 4ohm taps really helped clean up the bass from this amp too, much more so than on my 2a3 amp.


My room is a complete mess now with amps and speakers all over the place but I managed to end up somewhere near the sound I was missing.

With a bit more tweaking and experimentation I think I will get there.


Thanks for all the ideas and input guys, your responses and ideas have been superb.

Can't wait to get home tonight and continue tweaking and I don't have to sell my favorite speaker of all time!!

It just reiterated to me how damn good a speaker these are. I know its said a lot but I've yet to hear strings, wind instruments and female vocals on acoustic recordings, recreated in the way the 57's do.

Cheers

Chris

[Opti-cal]

Why can't ESL's be sited close to the rear wall? Is the problem to do with sound reflections? If so, surely you could place something super-absorbent as close behind the speakers as you like, as the sound won't be reflected back. Something like large picture frames with something thick and woolly attached. Then you can hide as much absorbent stuff behind those panels as you want - it's just a dead space anyway. Should be cheap and easy enough to do, then try an A/B comparison with the out-of-phase thing.

I did try some large canvas panels behind the speakers and also on the wall directly behind. It did dampen the bass somewhat but it also messed with the imaging. The rear panels reflect the sound intentionally so if you take that away to my ears it loses something. Layering and depth of soundstage are certainly reduced.

I reckon the answer is in increasing the amount of absorbing material in the corners and along the walls of the room so the sound can exit from the rear of the speaker but the bass will be dampened by this material. That seems to be working so far anyway.

I have also tried them close to a flat rear wall in my lounge and they went a bit dull and flat. Maybe I'm getting a bit of a reverb effect in my loft from the pitched roof also which I've grown a custom to and tweaked the system and speaker positioning to suit. It might have lost some accuracy but I do get a really 3D effect which I believe is partly to do with reflections from the rear panels into the space behind which is then projected back by the pitched roof.

To me with an all tube setup it sounds incredible. Like I say possibly colored and inaccurate but harmonically very pleasing.

Cheers

[Macca]

You could try swapping the speaker cable for some really thin stuff, bell wire type. That will reduce bass output. I don't think you have enough space to build a bass trap large enough to absorb the problem frequencies.

[walpurgis]

Just bung a graphic equaliser in! :eek:

[jandl100]

Just bung a graphic equaliser in! :eek:

Yep, forget your purist faith, if any.
These are neat and effective - not totally transparent, pretty damn good, though - this is the cheapest you'll find, I think (you can pay a LOT more!)
https://www.dv247.com/en_GB/GBP/Behringer-MINIFBQ-FBQ800-Ultra-Compact-Graphic-Equalizer/art-PAH0004617-000

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=https://i.imgur.com/dvjQIpw.png&key=b097d44d369cc941ae599dabbbb39535535757ded60040 b229bfab26d61bbc7f

Behringer FBQ800
I use one in my 2nd system to cure a bass-light tendency.
Even better is a Behringer DEQ2496 - a full 31 frequency bins to really hit the spot. Just on totally transparent if used in pure digital mode.

[Light Dependant Resistor]

I did try some large canvas panels behind the speakers and also on the wall directly behind. It did dampen the bass somewhat but it also messed with the imaging. The rear panels reflect the sound intentionally so if you take that away to my ears it loses something. Layering and depth of soundstage are certainly reduced.

I reckon the answer is in increasing the amount of absorbing material in the corners and along the walls of the room so the sound can exit from the rear of the speaker but the bass will be dampened by this material. That seems to be working so far anyway.

I have also tried them close to a flat rear wall in my lounge and they went a bit dull and flat. Maybe I'm getting a bit of a reverb effect in my loft from the pitched roof also which I've grown a custom to and tweaked the system and speaker positioning to suit. It might have lost some accuracy but I do get a really 3D effect which I believe is partly to do with reflections from the rear panels into the space behind which is then projected back by the pitched roof.

To me with an all tube setup it sounds incredible. Like I say possibly colored and inaccurate but harmonically very pleasing.

Cheers

Did you try raising them up off the floor 30cm using supports under the the existing legs and tilt the top forward by having the third rear leg about 6cm higher than the front two legs ? .

[Light Dependant Resistor]

Yep, forget your purist faith, if any.
These are neat and effective - not totally transparent, pretty damn good, though - this is the cheapest you'll find, I think (you can pay a LOT more!)
https://www.dv247.com/en_GB/GBP/Behringer-MINIFBQ-FBQ800-Ultra-Compact-Graphic-Equalizer/art-PAH0004617-000

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=https://i.imgur.com/dvjQIpw.png&key=b097d44d369cc941ae599dabbbb39535535757ded60040 b229bfab26d61bbc7f

Behringer FBQ800
I use one in my 2nd system to cure a bass-light tendency.

ESL57's are so transparent and unforgiving they will tell you straight away why an equalizer cheap or expensive is totally the wrong thing to use.

Talking of amps, a valve amp is a good choice with the 57 because of its rather strange impedance curve and valve amps exhibiting higher output
into higher impedance loads , Likewise the Quad 303 or 50E is a good choice. Running monoblocks with shorter speaker leads is yet another advantage.

Also ESL57's demand the best volume attenuation... :);)

[Opti-cal]

You could try swapping the speaker cable for some really thin stuff, bell wire type. That will reduce bass output. I don't think you have enough space to build a bass trap large enough to absorb the problem frequencies.

Worth a go Martin. I haven't found using more expensive speaker cable to give any advantage with the Quads to be fair so this is an easy idea to try.

Cheers

[Opti-cal]

You could try swapping the speaker cable for some really thin stuff, bell wire type. That will reduce bass output. I don't think you have enough space to build a bass trap large enough to absorb the problem frequencies.

Worth a try Martin. I haven't found any real sonic differences using more expensive speaker cable with the Quads anyway so this will be an easy one to try.

Thanks.

[jandl100]

ESL57's are so transparent and unforgiving they will tell you straight away why an equalizer cheap or expensive is totally the wrong thing to use.

Don't agree. I know what a transparent speakers sounds like and decent equalisers can be quite transparent. ;)
Sure, there will some degradation.

But the OP seems to have a choice between equalisation (tone controls) or selling the Quads.
For £40 it's worth a try, imho.

Faffing around with cables or extra padding material isn't going to get him anywhere.

[Opti-cal]

Yep, forget your purist faith, if any.
These are neat and effective - not totally transparent, pretty damn good, though - this is the cheapest you'll find, I think (you can pay a LOT more!)
https://www.dv247.com/en_GB/GBP/Behringer-MINIFBQ-FBQ800-Ultra-Compact-Graphic-Equalizer/art-PAH0004617-000

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=https://i.imgur.com/dvjQIpw.png&key=b097d44d369cc941ae599dabbbb39535535757ded60040 b229bfab26d61bbc7f

Behringer FBQ800
I use one in my 2nd system to cure a bass-light tendency.
Even better is a Behringer DEQ2496 - a full 31 frequency bins to really hit the spot. Just on totally transparent if used in pure digital mode.

Yes I was trying to avoid using anything else in the signal path but if the absorption efforts don't provide the desired effect its certainly one to consider.

Nice bit of kit by the looks of it and like you say can pay a lot more.

Nice one.

[Opti-cal]

ESL57's are so transparent and unforgiving they will tell you straight away why an equalizer cheap or expensive is totally the wrong thing to use.

Talking of amps, a valve amp is a good choice with the 57 because of its rather strange impedance curve and valve amps exhibiting higher output
into higher impedance loads , Likewise the Quad 303 or 50E is a good choice. Running monoblocks with shorter speaker leads is yet another advantage.

Also ESL57's demand the best volume attenuation... :);)

Wouldn't use anything apart from a valve amp with the 57's (apart from possibly the Quad you mention or possibly 606 or similar).

Indeed the impedance at high frequencies is something to look out for.

I do use an SS with my 63's sometimes but nothing compares to the 57's with tubes :)

[Opti-cal]

Did you try raising them up off the floor 30cm using supports under the the existing legs and tilt the top forward by having the third rear leg about 6cm higher than the front two legs ? .

I'm going to give this a go tonight too. I have some wooden blocks about 20cm in height to put under all the legs. The rear legs already have 4cm extra height on them to help tilt them forward a bit.

Hopefully the clearance to the ceiling won't hamper how high I can get them if I pull them out a bit more.

They are probably a good 10" forward from where they are in the pictures and its helped a lot.

Cheers Chris

[Light Dependant Resistor]

Don't agree. I know what a transparent speakers sounds like and decent equalisers can be quite transparent. ;)
Sure, there will some degradation.

But the OP seems to have a choice between equalisation (tone controls) or selling the Quads.
For £40 it's worth a try, imho.

Faffing around with cables or extra padding material isn't going to get him anywhere.

ESL57's one of their main features is a lack of time domain errors.To quote David Blackmer "conventional speakers turn time into a pretzel"
Inserting a equalizer regardless of cost, involves emphasis or de-emphasis, as well as extensive series circuitry- all inviting time domain errors
which are then tied in as part of the source equipment, which the ESL57 will indeed faithfully reproduce as error, vs much less error without equalization.

[mikmas]

Just a thought, but if an equaliser is a bridge too far you could bung a Quad 34 in front of the valve amp. The 34 has a very good (and transparent..) bass control that might take any remaining bloom off the speakers.

Would be handy if there was an AoS member in the neighbourhood who had one (or something equivalent) to try ....

[walpurgis]

Yes I was trying to avoid using anything else in the signal path but if the absorption efforts don't provide the desired effect its certainly one to consider.

Nice bit of kit by the looks of it and like you say can pay a lot more.

Nice one.


If you should wish to experiment with some form of equalisation, you may find a multiband equaliser with spectrum analyser handy as you will get a visual idea of where the bass excess is occurring.

Alternatively, the Musical Fidelity X-Tone is one of the least intrusive ways of altering the tonal balance and offers +/- 9db adjustment, which should be enough. They are hard to come by though, people hang onto them.

[spendorman]

If you should wish to experiment with some form of equalisation, you may find a multiband equaliser with spectrum analyser handy as you will get a visual idea of where the bass excess is occurring.

Alternatively, the Musical Fidelity X-Tone is one of the least intrusive ways of altering the tonal balance and offers +/- 9db adjustment, which should be enough. They are hard to come by though, people hang onto them.

I rebuilt my ESL's about 30 years ago, no expert, but I think a critical thing for sound balance is the EHT going to the bass units and treble unit. A bit difficult (and dangerous) to measure, I used a GEC high voltage probe.

[Opti-cal]

I rebuilt my ESL's about 30 years ago, no expert, but I think a critical thing for sound balance is the EHT going to the bass units and treble unit. A bit difficult (and dangerous) to measure, I used a GEC high voltage probe.

Hopefully they are working perfectly having been rebuilt/replaced by Quad a few weeks ago! I assume there is no way to lower the output from them? Certainly without messing about inside them adding resistors etc . . .

[Macca]

If you should wish to experiment with some form of equalisation, you may find a multiband equaliser with spectrum analyser handy as you will get a visual idea of where the bass excess is occurring.

.

Not unless you hook it up to a microphone - it's only going to show the spectrum coming from the recording along with whatever EQ is set.

EQing digitally will not degrade the signal at all so that would also be worth a try, it does mean buying a unit to do it though.

[southall-1998_mk2]

EQ belongs in the trash bin. I fecking hate them.

S.

[Macca]

I'd only use digital EQ if there was no option but in this case I suspect there might be no option. It's not purist I agree but it won't degrade sound quality and it will get rid of the bass boom. Bass boom is worse than a bit of digital EQ surely?

[Opti-cal]

Bass boom is worse than a bit of digital EQ surely?

Yup . . . deffo.

[Macca]

I have heard ESLs in an a attic room pretty much identical to yours except a bit smaller and they did sound very good. But they were sat in the middle of the room...

[Opti-cal]

I have heard ESLs in an a attic room pretty much identical to yours except a bit smaller and they did sound very good. But they were sat in the middle of the room...

Mine sounded sublime up there pre-service . . . but I got greedy and assumed the service would improve upon that yardstick . . . .

Oh well kids just goes to show, grass aint always greener . . .

They still do sound fantastic, except when a sub 200Hz bass note comes in and messes everything up.

I did try a few things last night - more absorption material - raised 20 cm - moved forward - moved back . . . but still the boom is there.

Might give that EQ a try as a last resort otherwise I might well be looking for speaker recommendations . . .

But, where do you go from a good sounding pair of 57's?! . . . .

I've had horns up there too quite successfully (Loth X) but something tells me its likely to have to be a compromise . . .

[wee tee cee]

Have you tried a t amp?

My 57s and 63s both sounded really good with them in my room, which is compromised in shape.

When you mentioned the bass boom i thought maybe a mini t or temple audio bantum may suit.

I have run 57s on a kel84 power amp and mono blocks both sounded too bass heavy to me.

t amps work fine with statics-great midrange and imaging.

[wee tee cee]

bright speaker cable may also help-i ran silver plated fisual stuff with the 57s worked well in my room.

[jandl100]

Shame you're on t'other side of the country from me - otherwise I'd be happy to bring my Behringer DEQ2496 equaliser over for a play.
I'd post it but they tend to be a bit on the fragile side.

Go on - spill £40 on one of those little Behringers. ;) It's GOT to be worth a try!

[Macca]

Might give that EQ a try as a last resort otherwise I might well be looking for speaker recommendations . . .

But, where do you go from a good sounding pair of 57's?! . . . .

I've had horns up there too quite successfully (Loth X) but something tells me its likely to have to be a compromise . . .

You can get conventional box speakers that come close to the ESL for midrange clarity nowadays. But you could just be getting into a different set of room-related problems. The digital EQ will work but it is going to involve a fair bit of trial and error.

[jandl100]

I replaced my Quad 63 stats (of 7 years ownership and well maintained by Quad) with the then-new ProAc Response 2 speakers. The ProAcs beat them in every way, imo.
People get latched onto one particular thing - "oh, I could never go back to XYZ" - but in reality there's usually a lot of choices that may even beat your favourites.

[Opti-cal]

Have you tried a t amp?

My 57s and 63s both sounded really good with them in my room, which is compromised in shape.

When you mentioned the bass boom i thought maybe a mini t or temple audio bantum may suit.

I have run 57s on a kel84 power amp and mono blocks both sounded too bass heavy to me.

t amps work fine with statics-great midrange and imaging.

I must admit I haven't heard or know anything about T-amps. I'm just reading about them now actually and the Temple Audio Bantam looks superb value. Correct wattage for the ESL's too.

I would be reserved about moving away from tubes for them as I've not heard anything SS or digital get close harmonically. However if you've tried them with 57's and 63's and been happy they must be decent.

Thanks for the recommendation Tony, I will look more into this.

[Opti-cal]

Shame you're on t'other side of the country from me - otherwise I'd be happy to bring my Behringer DEQ2496 equaliser over for a play.
I'd post it but they tend to be a bit on the fragile side.

Go on - spill £40 on one of those little Behringers. ;) It's GOT to be worth a try!

Really kind offer Jerry but as you say, for the money might be worth a shot to just get one!

Might be the only solution to keep my tube amps and the 57's in the loft . . .

[Opti-cal]

bright speaker cable may also help-i ran silver plated fisual stuff with the 57s worked well in my room.

I did try some old western electric stuff to see if it made much difference as well as some chord rumour 2. No difference really. Maybe I will see if there's any thin silver plated I can try.

Cheers Tony.

[walpurgis]

T Amps and other Class D amps can object to low impedances, so best to check specs against anticipated loads before use.

[Opti-cal]

You can get conventional box speakers that come close to the ESL for midrange clarity nowadays. But you could just be getting into a different set of room-related problems. The digital EQ will work but it is going to involve a fair bit of trial and error.

I did try some more conventional box speakers in their place and the boom was gone. It must be the rear output from the Quads causing most of it I reckon.

I know some box speakers can sound very good up there actually its just when the Quads were running pre-service they were so significantly better than anything that I had to completely reevaluate my perception of hifi.

I wish I wasn't compelled to go to the length of rearranging loads of pillows/blankets etc behind them, moving them a couple of mm every 2 minutes and lugging heavy amps up and down stairs all the time for three evenings straight. But this is the hold they do have on me.

I've never sat in front of another pair of speakers and thought, thats it. Apart from them.

[Opti-cal]

I replaced my Quad 63 stats (of 7 years ownership and well maintained by Quad) with the then-new ProAc Response 2 speakers. The ProAcs beat them in every way, imo.
People get latched onto one particular thing - "oh, I could never go back to XYZ" - but in reality there's usually a lot of choices that may even beat your favourites.

Yes I agree it can be easy to get set in your ways a bit. The ProAc's look really nice.

If I cannot sort this issue I have, they'd certainly warrant an audition.

Cheers Jerry

[wee tee cee]

I echo Jerrys position....i retired the statics when i took delivery of reiver acoustic eddingdale sr.

Colin Topps that builds them sold me my 57s years ago, he knew what the do well but the big eddies do everything better sonically with no positioning problems and lovely efficiency.

I found with the 57s i would tailor my music choices to their strengths-the eddies do everything you throw at them with aplomb IMHO.

[Opti-cal]

I echo Jerrys position....i retired the statics when i took delivery of reiver acoustic eddingdale sr.

Colin Topps that builds them sold me my 57s years ago, he knew what the do well but the big eddies do everything better sonically with no positioning problems and lovely efficiency.

I found with the 57s i would tailor my music choices to their strengths-the eddies do everything you throw at them with aplomb IMHO.

Spot on Tony, choosing specific albums, genres and even individual tracks to flatter the speakers is something I've just come to accept as necessary with the 57's, in return for the transparency and midrange.

If, as you say, this is obtainable elsewhere maybe its time to reconsider. Those Reiver Acoustic's look incredible actually and if they do what you say are well priced.

[Barry]

Utter nonsense!

I've been using Quad 57s for over forty years, and I play everything through them: classical; choral; jazz; blues; folk; "world" music; pop; rock and punk.

[wee tee cee]

I love my 57s but have to be realistic as to what they can and cant do.

Last time i plumbed them in i was shocked...sadly it sounded like a duvet had been thrown over the hi fi.

I had considered stacked 57s but just felt it was a losing battle.

[Opti-cal]

Utter nonsense!

I've been using Quad 57s for over forty years, and I play everything through them: classical; choral; jazz; blues; folk; "world" music; pop; rock and punk.

I play everything through mine too but they just shine more with some material than others. This will also be amp and crucially for me, room dependent.

Like I say its probably due to the limitations of my amp and room but they do tend to fall apart a bit with rock and larger scale music for me.

I think to play classical properly you have to be at the top end of their input limit (unless you have protection boards and clamps which I don't).

Interestingly I find them unbelievably good with electronic synth and keyboard/piano music.

I'm far too worried to put anything over 25w through them with all the scare stories . . .

[Opti-cal]

Here's an interesting little product if I do decide to go the EQ route. As suggested by Jerry and others. (Not Shane haha).

I quite like the idea of wide(ish) band EQ manipulation. In my mind it would be smoother than "cutting" into the spectrum with more precise sliders.

It also has a bypass mode.

Would prefer it to be integrated into my tube amp though . . .

https://schiit.eu.com/loki

[Macca]

No you don't want that, you want the one Jerry linked to, do the EQ digitally.

[Opti-cal]

No you don't want that, you want the one Jerry linked to, do the EQ digitally.

Will do Macca, thanks. Never dabbled in EQing with hifi before . . .

[jandl100]

Actually, the £40 one I linked to is analog.
I have one in my 2nd system and have been impressed by it.

The full monty EQ I suggested is the Behringer DEQ2496, that's capable of doing it all digitally. And it would give you full flexibility for whatever equalisation curves you want - it's a very flexible device indeed. Typically £150 used.
But to take best advantage of that you need to be using digital-only sources - and did I notice a turntable in those photos?
- in which case you'd be using the Behringer DEQ2496's onboard ADC (and maybe DAC, if you haven't one of your own), which are pretty good, imo!

[Barry]

I love my 57s but have to be realistic as to what they can and cant do.

Last time i plumbed them in i was shocked...sadly it sounded like a duvet had been thrown over the hi fi.

I had considered stacked 57s but just felt it was a losing battle.

If they sound like someone has thrown a duvet over them, then either they are faulty, or there is something wrong with the rest of your system.

Stacking Quad 57s has to be carefully considered. It is not the panacea that some claim. But if done properly you will be rewarded with a palpable sense of presence that is uncanny, and once heard is hard to live without. Other bonuses are a better sense of scale and dynamics (but only +6dB) and a perceived extension to the lower bass. The disadvantages are the sheer volume and visual intrusion of a stacked pair, and if wired in parallel the exacerbated load they present to the driving amplifier.

[Opti-cal]

Hi guys, so I hooked up the sub after initially presuming this would exacerbate the current issues.

It's just a tiny REL T3 but works well in small rooms just to underpin the main speakers, nothing earth shaking.

Took a while to dial the correct setting with roll off and volume level but I've managed to get somewhere close to no boom. It still occurs on acoustic basslines (guitar, double bass etc) but only on certain tracks and at a touch above average listening levels. I can't actually see the back of the sub as its tucked around the corner behind my vinyl but I think the phase is set to 180 so I'm guessing this is having a cancelling effect to some of the standing waves and room modes.

It's really letting the midrange of the quads shine through again and I reckon with a few more strategically placed pillows/books along the back and side walls I could well achieve zero boom.

I may also move the sub around a bit to see if the cancellation effect can be improved.

Thanks for all the suggestion and help I'm pretty humbled so many were willing to give their opinions and advice.

Will update with any further findings anyway.

Cheers,

Chris

[Barry]

Good news Chris! :)

Can you show us where you have positioned the sub and give us the setting. I ask because I experimented with a KEF sub-woofer and couldn't get on with it at all.

But it's good to hear it is working out well for you. Once a Quad lover - always a Quad lover!

Cheers
Barry

[Opti-cal]

Good news Chris! :)

Can you show us where you have positioned the sub and give us the setting. I ask because I experimented with a KEF sub-woofer and couldn't get on with it at all.

But it's good to hear it is working out well for you. Once a Quad lover - always a Quad lover!

Cheers
Barry

No problem Barry I will get behind there and check all the settings when I can as I'm just out until tomorrow morning. From memory the roll off is set to around 55hz and the volume is low (about 4 out of 20) and I believe the phase is set to 180. I'll check all of this along with some pics for you when I'm back tomorrow.

Too right on the quads, I'd be devastated to let them go especially after forking out for the service.

Cheers

[Opti-cal]

24898

Barry, here is a pic of the rear of my subwoofer with the settings. As I thought the roll off seems set to around 50-60Hz (why don't they mark it properly!!) and the volume is 5 steps out of 20. Hopefully that will give you some indication of where to start.

Interestingly the phase switch is set to 0, I had assumed that inverting it would have the cancellation effect but if I do flick it to 180 the bass boom is back and actually worse!

In the next picture you can see where the subwoofer is placed. Far from optimal in theory but with different speakers (that roll off quite sharply around 80Hz) it provided a real underpinning to the bass and drum kicks without ever being boomy or overhanging. If my room was a perfect rectangle or just normal dimensions I'm sure there is a better place for it but tucked away around the corner provides the best results for me.

Also I think it helps that its only a small 8" driver so doesn't plumb the depths but is quite responsive.

I know people have had success with dipole subs and other custom setups with Quads but this sounds good. Not perfect by any stretch I must admit and like subs in most setups what sounds great on one track might be way off for another depending on the mastering/mixing of the recording. I really can't be dealing with changing the settings all the time so this is a kind of half way house. I was going to get one of those REL's with a remote but this will suffice for now.

Best of luck,

Chris

[Opti-cal]

I'm very sorry about the quality of these pictures I can't get the flash on my camera to work properly, I'll see if I can clean it up a bit. Hopefully you get the idea.

The sub is situated roughly 5 feet to the left of the left speaker between the pitched roof and my vinyl shelves. This probably acts as a kind of rubbish resonance chamber anyway but it sounds decent with the right settings.

I know its hap hazard but its all I can do in the room given its weird dimensions!

24900

[Macca]

The optimal place for a sub is often somewhere bizarre. I read an article about experimenting with dipole subs where they found the best place for the sub was right next to the listening position and nowhere near the main speakers. Low bass is a funny thing.

Good to hear that you have found a solution to the problem!

[Opti-cal]

The optimal place for a sub is often somewhere bizarre. I read an article about experimenting with dipole subs where they found the best place for the sub was right next to the listening position and nowhere near the main speakers. Low bass is a funny thing.

Good to hear that you have found a solution to the problem!

Cheers Macca,

I don't think I'll ever really understand acoustics properly but another example was when I had vinyl stacked about with other speakers and amps all around the room there was no bass boom at all and the speakers sounded wonderful. Then I tidied up and it appeared . . .

Must have been interrupting the waves and taming the bass response with all my crap laying around without realising it.

Moral of the story being - collect loads of hifi in an untidy mess and keep playing around. Oh and never tidy up . . .

[Firebottle]

I underpin my 57's with a REL copy, the turnover is set to 40Hz.
It never draws attention to itself but fills in the bottom octave beautifully.
I did have it set to a higher frequency for a few years but upon revisiting the he setting it woks better with a lower frequency but a bit more gain.

[wee tee cee]

delighted you are finding a solution...