Clarity, soundstaging, natural tonal balance, imaging

Not for head banging playback levels

These are big, black monoliths that dominate a room visually and sonically. They throw a huge, deep and incredibly detailed soundtsge. You hear absolutely everything in a recording - the subtlest of sounds you never imagined were there, are there. Superb in all regards - a worthy successor to the ESL-63.

The biggest challenge with full range electrostats is bass - the 989's have it to about 30 Hz in my room, and it is every bit as "fast" (if bass can be "fast") and coherent as the rest of the speaker. Subs need not apply, unless you really want to shake the floor.

With proper room treatment (I put some cheap poly-fill pillows on vertical dowel rods behind the speaker to absorb some of the upper midrange and treble back wave), the highs and upper mids are extraordinarily sweet and smooth. Instruments are reproduced with no hint of stridency, just complete naturalness. Overtones are effortless, clear, natural.

Imaging is the best I've heard. Depth of the image is wonderful, and height is completely natural. Vocals are unstrained and natural - real voices hanging in real spaces. Simple acoustic instruments float in space. Complex electronic or fusion pieces have every detail laid bare and clear. Even CD reissues of old rock recordings (e.g., Genesis’s Fox Trot) are listenable and show layers of sound never heard before.

The sound is coherent from bottom to top. There is no sense of multiple drivers or split spectra (though the bass panels don’t produce the highs, the center panels - the ones that act like annular rings on a delay line - reproduce the full spectrum; so the whole diaphragm does not all reproduce the full signal). You just hear music hanging in space. The speakers don’t disappear (visually they are too big for that!), but at no point do you feel like the sound is coming from them, it’s just hanging there in space. Dynamics are unforced and natural – there is no sense of any overhang or smearing of transient details.

The hardest thing about these speakers is to stop listening to them. They beg you to go into your recording collection and pull out things you haven’t heard in years. They beg you to get a decent antenna hooked to your FM tuner and go exploring college stations playing new, interesting stuff.

They do not appear to be hard to drive. I have a late-80’s McIntosh solid state amp with autoformers on the output, and on the 8 ohm tap the sound is as sweet and smooth as I’ve heard. The meters never go above 3 watts, even at quite high listening levels. (Being conservative and careful – I actually bought these speakers! – I have ¾ amp fast blow fuses in the speaker lines, and they have yet to blow even at quite healthy levels.) I have never felt that the Quads couldn’t go as loud as I wanted them to, though I am no headbanger.

In summary, these are the most totally satisfying speaker I have ever heard. They are more coherent and better balanced than any Magnepan (including the MG-20). They have a smoothness and crystalline clarity the Martin Logan has yet to touch (and bass the CLS IIz can only dream of). Unlike any dynamic speaker I have heard (including such vaunted designs like the Avalon Eidelon), the Quad 989’s are of one cloth from the lowest fundamentals to the very highest overtones. They are revealing of what’s on the recording without being overly strident or bright, and without adding their own particular flavor to whatever passes through them (a flaw, in my book, of both the Eidelons and any Sonus Faber I’ve heard).

Wonderfully listenable. Hour after hour. They are my new reference. I haven’t heard the AvantGarde horn designs, the PipeDreams or the Dynaudio Evidence, but to my ears, the Quad 989’s beat the B&W Nautilus 801, the Avalon Eidelon, and any Martin Logan or Magneplanar, for sheer naturalness and listenability, for clarity and coherence, for overall pleasure in just closing my eyes and letting the music sweep over me. They are that good. And, even at their newly increased price of $9,000 a pair, that makes them still a bargain.

Similar Products Used:

Quad ESL-63, Quad ESL-57, Martin Logan CLS IIz

Balanced sound even in the lower end-exceptional midrange

Plastic endcaps and size

If you can get away with the size of these in your room than these are the speakers for you. They bring out the music better than any speaker period that I have heard. The non-fatigue is so satisfying tha with the right amp and source you will stop your quest for the right speakers. A tube amp with some muscle helps bring it to its fullest appreciation of what it can sound like. The bottom end is definitely here with the 989 and all Quad users can appreciate that effort without the need for a booming sub. Check them out.

Similar Products Used:

Legacy whispers - Martin Logan Quests Z

Everything!!!

What else do I need to say! It's QUAD! Even though some
people are aruging about "tonal balance". I just enjoy every
minute with my Quad 989.

These speakers are very amp friendly. I tried both solid state
and tube amp, and I like my tube amp better. Just one suggestion: match your front ends and cables carefully.
Quad 989 sounds a little bright on the top end.

Associated equipments:
Digital Front End: Sony SCD-1
Pre-amp: Transcendent Sound Grounded Grid
Power-amp: Krell KST-100, McIntosh Mc-275 II
Cables: FMS microwave all the way

Similar Products Used:

Martin Logan SL-3.

Ruthless exposure of recorded material.

Ruthless exposure of recorded material.

I wrote a few comments about my 989's when they were very
new. I felt that an update was necessary after more than a
year because things have changed in that time.

I've also read on a number of discussion pages that some
people have had bad demos of this product and I now know
why this may happen.

Let me say from the outset that I'm extremely happy with my
989's, (delerious) for the most part, I find them to be
absolutely wonderful.

My esl 63's had, after 18 years, developed a tick coming from one of the panels and that prompted me to make the change to the 989's. Switching immediately from the 63's to brand new 989's I noticed a slight decrease in volume coupled with a very slight shift in tonal balance toward
the upper spectrum. The upper treble sounded much more brilliant than in the 63's.

Over the year the speakers have become fully run in. I'm not
exactly sure what components have a bearing, whether they be the electronics, the panels, or all that low oxygen copper wire; however the end result after the burning in process is a loudspeaker that exhibits very low colouration, complete tonal nutrality, huge dollops of mid range presence and a velvety sweet and authoritarian top end that on the right programme material is absolutely sublime. They have great control over the relative loudness of differing instruments and can produce, say a saxophone, from the softest deepest
whisper right up to the loudest euphoric squeal with all the
shades of emotion and volume in between. They also have an uncanny ability to hold on to each and every instrument so that no matter how loud or soft the music, or how complex and frantic the music becomes you can always follow the viola line, for example, or a tinkling piano or softly strummed harp. That is where these speakers excell. Good recordings, familiar from past experience on other hi-fi systems, reveal a wealth of almost subliminal
detail that can astound and mesmorise. Repeated auditions of the same track over and over again brings a new surprise each time as you realised you hadn't payed attention to all the differing layers that make up the music.

It is a completely different animal from the ESL 63. Going back to the 63 now; I'm aware of the comparitive grainy presentation and closed-in mid range. The 989 has been accused of being too bright by some, but I suspect they hadn't heard a fully run in speaker or were hearing a badly
set up system. The speaker plays all frequencies much more
cleanly than the ESL 63, so much so that it's like having
an ESL 57, but with that magical mid-range stretched right
across the entire spectrum, from the deepest rumbling lows right up to the highest echo of the ambiance around an orchestra.

Owning the 989's has been frustrating too. I had to upgrade my CD player and pre-amp because the speakers revealed jitter between the CD transport and the DAC. I sourced a new pre-amp from Tag McLaren with the DAC inside the pre-amp. This has a special analogue link back to the CD player which controls the CD player clock, eliminating jitter between the
two boxes. The improvement in sound quality revealed by the
989's after this change was ravishing. I have also gained
significant improvements in sound quality by buying very
very good digital and analogue interconnects.

In summary. The 989's do require a long burning in period during which time they come from being very good to stunning. They will reveal source equipment and recording source material limitations ruthlessly. A bad recording will sound bad, an ok recording will sound ok and a good recording will sound good. They are very very unkind to poorly balanced material and recording flaws. Much more so than the 988 or the 63. On the good stuff though, they are a dream.

I listen to classical music CD's and vinyl, films and show soundtracks, popular song, big band, and jazz.
I have my 989's 12' apart, angled in to form a listening triangle and listen on axis with the speakers about 10 feet away.

I listen to digital radio as well as CD's and records and on live broadcast of BBC Radio 3 concerts the loudspeakers really do give a 'window onto the concert hall stage'.

Jazz FM on digital radio, especially the easy going 'Dinner Jazz' between 8 and 10 pm is sheer heaven through the Quads. I can't imagine music at home sounding any better.

Similar Products Used:

Quad esl 63's

Ability to disappear, effortless detail.

Big and heavy.

My initial impression after switching from the Quad ESL63's was, for the first hour, one of disappointment and I thought "What have I done?", but my dealer had warned me that they would require burning in. Sure enough, after a few hours they were equalling the sound of the 63's and continued to get better as the hours passed.
Those that are used to the 63's will be pleasantly surprised by the 989s as there are many improvements to the sound. The thing which has struck me most of all is the return to a mid range clarity even better than that offered by the original and electronically simple Quad 57 speaker. They are that good!
The presentation of music is wonderful, the speakers adding nothing to the sound and there isn't a hint of compression throughout the frequency range.
I was going to say that it's like listening to music through
two wide open windows, the sound is that clear, but it's even better than that, it's as though there's nothing between the listner and the music.
If there is a criticism then it must be said that the speakers will reveal faults and problems in recordings that were glossed over by the 63s. Already I'm realising that the quality of some of my classic recordings leaves a lot to be desired, yet at the same time on other recordings I'm hearing wonderful subtle detail that I didn't know was there.
I won't talk about the tonal qualities or balance of the speakers because they are so transparent that what you hear is what the recording engineer had in mind. Some recordings still sound as though they have thin and light bass, while on others the bass is dynamic, rich and powerful. Likewise the top end seems to be without character. On some recordings the speakers sound extremely sharp while on others the roll off in the trebble is noticeable. It's very much a case of put garbage in and get garbage out versus magic in and getting magic out. These speakers are no longer the limiting factor to the overall sound quality of a system.
The speakers are driven by TAGMcLaren Monoblocks fed via an Audiolab 8000Q pre-amp and TAGMcLaren CDM and DAC. As a final note the Quad ESL63s would shut down if an excessive transient came from the rather gutsy amplifiers. The 989s are able to handle much more power and go very significantly louder with ease.

Similar Products Used:

Quad ESL 63.

Take a Quad ESL 63, increase the clarity and "cleanness" of the sound, add wall shaking bass and R & R volume levels, extend the high frequencies, add even better soundstaging and you have...the 989.

Large; more analytical and less forgiving thanESL 63

This is a landmark product. The Quad 989 is a stunning achievement at any price, but at a lits of $8000 it simply embarrasses the various monstrosities that come in boxes, employ 15 drivers, and weigh 300 lbs. and cost $35-$100,000+. The clarity and realism is phenomenal. When my 14 year old son sits down immobilized, his jaw open, and says with a goofy grin, "Wow! It sounds like they are right here!", well, you know you have something special. Usually, he couldn't care less.

Anything you want ina speaker, if you love music, is here:
* Chest pounding, hammering BASS, full of airy clarity
* Redefinition of the cliche, "seamless"
* The cleanest, clearest sound on the market with
virtually NO character of its own
* Midrange that is utterly "free", neutral and uncolored
* DYNAMICS in A QUAD??? In spades, ands loud
* Microdynamics that make music seem real
* Highs that go on forever
* Sounds good no matter where you sit
* Sounds like a religious experience in the sweet spot
* Enormous soundstage, wall to wall and deep, plus
pinpoint imaging
* Easily fills my 27 X 16 1/2 X 12 room--easily
* Plays loud on 60-100 watts, loudser than I can stand
* Very easy drive for amps
* Never stops being fun to listen to

I could go on, but surely you get the point. Unless you are deeply into status symbols, let the big box boys steal someone else's money. This speaker is not "in the same league", it's BETTER! and at a fraction of the price. With the silly low used prices on the internet, wake up and treat yourself.

A truly magnificent, state of the art product.

System:
VPI HW 19 Mk III
Acoustech PH-1 Phono preamp
Sny SCD-1
Coda 04R buffered passive line stage (a sleeping
giant)
Pass Labs X150
Cables: Silver Audio and Analysis Plus
Quad 989

Enjoy, I do.
Jeffrey

Similar Products Used:

Every panel and box ever made

Top to bottom coherence (bass is as fast and seamless as the mids and highs, something NO dynamic driver speaker can do) Timbre is perfect, walk-in holographic imaging, etc, etc, I can't praise the sound enough.

This is a big one. In humid climates, like Singapore, the panels deteriorate. You need 24 hour air-conditioning or the sounds slowly degrades without your noticing it at first. It's like living with Alzeimers ('Has it actually gotten worse? Will it improve if I change the panels? Did it sound better when I first bought it? I don't remember).

Also, I wish it were more sensitive. Then it would be able to be driven by single-ended tube amps.

I don't own these beauties, although I'm seriously considering this (for me here in Singapore) heartbreaking purchase. (see what I have to say about weaknesses).

The problem with reproduced music is that the electrical signal being fed into the mechanical device (i.e, the speaker) needs to be broken up. This introduces a crossover, or several crossovers, and no matter what they say, this device deteriorates the sound. Even if it doesn't (and it does), all the drivers (tweeter, midrange, woofer) are physically NOT the same, so at some point, there WILL be phase anomalies.

The Quad ESL 989 has, IMHO, solved these problems. All the sound comes from identical mylar panels which are fed just ONE unbroken signal. Real music and reproduced music become more similair with the Quads. When you come to think of it, that's all that really needs to be said of its strengths.

Compared to other speakers, the only thing I would put in its league is an Avant Garde Duo (possibly a Trio, which I haven't heard). From the midrange on up, they run neck-and-neck. The Avant Gardes benefit from the use of single-ended tube amps, and sometimes, vocals are a touch more palpable and rich. The Quads are better at scale and holographic imaging. Both are lightning fast and timbre-ly perfect.

Down below, though, the 989s pull in front. As well as the good folks at Avant Garde have made the subwoofer, you can still hear the break in the crossover. It's a sound that's cut from different sonic cloths, both because amps are different (the horns are driven by single-ended tubes, the subwoofer by a built-in solid state amp) and the drivers and subwoofers are COMPLETELY different. It's not unpleasant, but it's there.

In comparison, the Quads sound completely seamless. While this seems like a minor nitpick, it isn't. Because what happens is that the overall impression is that the Quads sound like real music and the Avant Gardes sound like very, very pleasant re-produced music.

It sounds best driven by medium powered tube amps, but then again, all speakers sound better with tubes.

If SOUND is all you care about, or if you live in the deserts of Arizona, then I can think of no other.

Similar Products Used:

Proac Response 3. B&W Matrix 802. Martin Logan SL3, ReQuest. Rear loaded horn speakers with Lowther drivers. Avant Garde Duo with upgraded subwoofers.

Fast, detailed, full frequency range at lower volumes, amplifier-friendly, musical, completely uncoloured, quite simply, the best speaker I've ever heard.

Except for looks, none. But I'll address what people consider 'weaknesses' in my review below.

As a decade-long Quad ESL 63 user, I nearly wept tears of joy when I heard the new ESL 989s. For years, I (and many like me) had dreamt of a mythical speaker, crossover-less and full-range, while retaining ALL the virtues of the original 63s. I do believe the 989 is that speaker.

All the reviews of the ESL 63 in Audioreview.com will apply to this, but there are 3 notable areas of improvement, and (rare in top-end hi-fi nowadays), absolutely no sonic trade-offs for these improvements. Fistly, it plays much louder, to the point of actually hurting, without arching. Secondly, it produces bass that's as deep as any room will support. Thirdly, the midrange is clearer and more detailed as the midrange panels are freed of upper bass duties by the inclusion of 2 bass panels.

The first and second areas of improvement address the areas that were most criticized in the old 63s. Despite the efforts of Gradient et al, my conviction still remains that it is NOT possible to mate an electrostatic panel with a dynamic driver convincingly. With the 989s, the audio spectrum is seamless and complete, and of the same sonic fabric. Kick drums and pipe organs (and who listens to those, please?) go as low as even a large living room will support. Stereophile will probably not give this a full class A rating because it doesn't go down to 20 Hz. To me, this ludicrous argument is only valid if you live in Buckingham Palace, which doubtless has halls where a 20 Hz wave that's maybe 30 metres long and 5 metres high can unfold without interference from walls and ceilings.

The next point I wish to raise is one of volume. All audiophiles I know (and know of) are urbanites who live in close proximity with others. While the new Quads play much louder, I feel that it is far more important to find a speaker that plays the entire audio spectrum at lower, more civilised volumes. This is where box speakers, like the new B&W Nautilus 801s, and horn speakers, like the Avant Gardes, fail so dismally. They sound quite full and seamless at high volumes, but at lower volumes (i.e volumes that won't have the neighbours calling the police), they sound compressed, boxy and closed-in (and in the case of horns, 'echo-y'). Worse, each individual driver can be heard, and cross-over frequencies are mercilessly revealed. But not the Quads. At all but the lowest volumes, they reveal the sheer scale, breadth and depth of a concert hall, with all instruments appearing in space as they should.

Finally, a Quad is an amplifier-friendly speaker. This is a boon for all tube lovers. In spite of a 86 dB rating, it is perfectly driven by 40 watt tube amps (the new Quad 2s!!!). I personally use the McIntosh MC 275 (75 watts), and it has never, NEVER clipped or strained, even at insane volume levels. Lovers of medium powered Conrad Johnson and Audio Research or Luxman tube amps can buy this speaker without fear. Strip them of their sock for a touch more clarity, or leave them on for a slightly fuller sound. I cannot praise them enough.


Hand on heart, I can honestly say that, were I a billionaire, and I could afford anything at all without feeling the pinch at all, I might upgrade some cables, even the amp (to a McIntosh MC 2000 and no more), but not the Quads. Money-no-object, I honestly think there are no better speakers available, anywhere, at any price.

Similar Products Used:

If by 'used' you mean 'owned', then the Quad ESL 63. If it means 'heard extensively', then too many to name, but mainly B&W Matrix and Nautilus 800 series and Proac Response series.