I agree with Jim's review from June 28, 1999. I used Quad's 303 power amp. to drive my original pair for two years and then my stacked
pairs for several more. I found the vertical HF dispersion much better
than the horizontal. I used them in six different rooms and found them
fairly independent of the room's acoustics as long as they were far enough from the rear wall; this may be the result of their dipolar design.

I had a chance to make lengthy comparisons with the Magneplanars of that era: the Quads' maximum SPL and bass output were much lower; the image was more recessed, and the amount of detail was quite a bit greater. As I remember, the Maggies used a heavier plastic diaphragm with interwoven aluminum wires suspended by bar magnets. The Quads' diaphragms had a coating of colloidal graphite and floated in a much stronger multi-kilovolt field between charged plates.

My only problem was reliability: even though I never played them very loudly, arcing damaged four bass modules through the years requiring time-consuming and rather costly replacement. The ESL 63s could play more loudly, had more bass and higher reliability, but lacked the transparency of the 57s. A fortiori, the Dahlquist DQ-10. The ambitious attempts that I heard to extend their frequency range with Decca-Kelly ribbons and sub-woofers were never very successful. One of the most interesting aspects of this classic speaker is that despite all the hyperbole, self-delusion, equipment and room differences, and subjective variability among audio-equipment reviewers, practically every review of the 57s that I've ever read agrees on their virtues, their shortcomings, and their status as a benchmark of transparency.

Ultimate detail; transparency; air; rock solid imaging and realism.

Virtually Nil, except it doesn't do deep bass (sub 50Hz).

I can't believe the rather subdued reviews on the Quad ESL57's ! which prompts me to add my comments. Call me excitable, but these are a fantastic speaker, probably the best ever made - bar none.

My 'first contact' with the ESL's were a revelatory experience. That moment when everything I heard in hi-fi for 23 years went out the proverbial 'open window' (Quad's slogan by the way). The Quads reproduce the most realistic rendition of the human voice and acoustic instruments you will ever hear; a perfect midrange; the best speed and transient response; clarity; unparalleled air and transparency with a plentiful and natural treble without equal.

The ESL's best party trick is their imaging...absolutely rock solid with a clear delineation between vocals and instruments... each instrument plays in front of you separated from any other instrument. And this my friends, is the difference between real music and hi-fi. IMAGING IS EVERYTHING, when a speaker images properly everything falls into place.

The retrieval of detail doesn't necessarily occur when you have more treble or more midrange or more bass...you get ultimate detail and nuance from pin-point sharp imaging. With the Quads everything separates out, backing vocals suddenly stand out from the mix; guitars strum to the very end point; cymbals(the ultimate test)sound defined with a crisp edge rather than a splash. The Quad has no box colouration whatsoever...they just sing !

Now all of this doesn't come cheap. The ESL's sound good on most good amps(even a NAD 3020 works well on them), but the better the amp/pre the better they get. Generally, a clean 30 watts of Class A push-pull valve power is what they need.
I once owned Jadis JA30 valve monoblocs which were excellent on the Quads.

My current system consists of :

-Quad ESL57 speakers Serial No 54,898 with protection
circuits and wadding removed,on350mm steel stands toed in
-N.E.W DCA33 Pure Class A, battery powered transistor amp
(simply the cleanest/sharpest amp I've heard)
-Customed Transformer Coupled Single Ended Triode Valve
preamp using 6SN7 valves.
-Sansui CDX711 CD Player, $1800, 12 kg job, with G&D
clock mod; and dedicated valve stage(the latter
essentially a Single Ended high-gain valve pre connected
to the CD circuits prior to the signal being degraded by
op-amps)
-Luxman PD444 Turntable(30kg), Rega RB300 Arm, Denon
DL103 cartridge, Grace 707/Audio Technica AT30E cart,
Bill Beard Phono preamp.
-Luxman T300V analogue tuner, XLO Reference One
interconnects and double strands Nordost Flatline Gold
spkr cable
-transmission line sub with Focal 5412 8" driver and 150W
amp module(this sub measures down to 13Hz @ -3dB)

Consider this, I am that impressed with the ESL57 that I own three pairs of them...for stacking later or just in case I need spare parts to keep them going during my life time at least.

As a final point, I have about 150 hi-fi magazines collected
between 1979 to 2000. I can point to about 80 articles in these magazines that refer to the Quad ESL57 or ESL63 as a benchmark for some part of the audio spectrum...what other speaker do you know has these sort of credentials ????

And to all you detractors of the Quad ESL's, you either haven't heard them driven properly or maybe you are trying to justify your hi-end purchases, or perhaps your ears just don't work !

I would be interested in hearing some feedback on this article through this forum(especially from Quad fans).

Similar Products Used:

Proac Response 2.5; Spendor S100; Yamaha NS1000/NS1200; BMW 801's; Original Linn Kans.

Pellucidity, indescribably brilliant midrange

Hardly any bass

Having sold High End Audio for 10+ years and having had access to deep discounts on just about anything and hearing most of what is out there and having spent (albiet foolishly) the majority of what I earned on this obsessive compulsive hobby of ours, I feel qualified to make the following statement.

The Beverage sounded better overall, the Stax headphones sounded marginally more detailed. Short of this, no speaker I have ever heard even comes close to what the Quad does well. "Best Hi Fi Product of All Time"? Probably so!

If you have a pair refurbished and the price is right, I'll buy them.

Similar Products Used:

Beverage, Stax

Midrange.

Base, Upper Treble, Size, Cost of constantly plugging them in. Very expensive to repair. Very directional - Beaming.

I've owned these speakers and got rid of them because they only did 1 thing right. A decent pair of box speakers with the right gear sounds way better in my opinion. Box speakers also look better. These things are pretty big. They also need to be plugged in all the time.

Similar Products Used:

Dunlavy SCIV

Depth of Image, Mid range detail, smoothness of delivery.

A little light on deep bass

I have owned a pair of fully refurbished ESL57s now for over a year. I bought them and had Quad refurbish them, in the factory in Huntingdon.

I have access to a pair B&W P6 speakers, I aslo have some B&W DM602s and some Heybrook HB1s. I have listened to many fine loudspeakers, and I use a pair of Quad II valve amps to drive them.

Nothing I have ever heard delivers detail and imagery in the music as these speakers. The sound is directional, but in the sweet spot the music envelopes you and caresses your ears in a way that has to be heard to be understood. A speaker in box can't even come close. I have 1000+ albums and these speakers had me running to play them all as if they were new again. Each album was a new experience all over again when played on these speakers. Vocals and accoustic instruments sound like the musician or singer is standing in front of you.

The detail, imagery and transparency is unsurpassed, you haven't heard any recording properly until you've heard it played through these.

I would however recommend the use of a very high quality sub woofer to compensate for the light bass below 42 Hz.

Similar Products Used:

ESL63