I feel the same, just can’t see/hear what the fuss is about just compromised I suppose back in 1957 they were something special.
Keith
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Vintage Speakers are back in style
- Thread starter BigVU's
- Start date
Keith
They certainly were back then. Cone in a box design has moved on a lot since though.
DanielT
Master Contributor
My friend bought my SVS SB12-NSD subwoofer and uses it with his Quad ESL 57. I listened to that combo in his basement hifi man cave and I have to say I thought it sounded really nice. 
The subwoofer has a line out with HP filter set at 80 Hz. That probably help ease the bass struggle for the Quad ESL 57. Or rather I think they do. We tried them with and without the subwoofer and I really preferred those speakers with the subwoofer. If I had to guess, two stereo bass modules that operated up to 200-300 Hz would be even better. That is assuming good integration bass modules - ESL 57.
Which, by the way, is not a unique new idea. It already exists together with electrostats. I took a couple of electrostats at random. Martin Logan Renaissance ESL 15A. Two bass modules, crossover point for them 300Hz:
The subwoofer has a line out with HP filter set at 80 Hz. That probably help ease the bass struggle for the Quad ESL 57. Or rather I think they do. We tried them with and without the subwoofer and I really preferred those speakers with the subwoofer. If I had to guess, two stereo bass modules that operated up to 200-300 Hz would be even better. That is assuming good integration bass modules - ESL 57.
Which, by the way, is not a unique new idea. It already exists together with electrostats. I took a couple of electrostats at random. Martin Logan Renaissance ESL 15A. Two bass modules, crossover point for them 300Hz:
Last edited:
Cool. I want them just for the looks. Though my wife would likely finally divorce me.
I miss my KEF 105s Mk 1. They were the coolest speakers I ever owned and none of my 'modern' speakers can compete with that bass. Sigh.
Well - all I can say is that in the 15 years I owned them, and in the homes and systems in which I ran them, they never lacked for loudness
Low bass yes - but like anything it depends on your priorities.
The transparency and midrange purity is far beyond what the vast majority of speakers can achieve... not to mention that distortion is also substantialy beyond (below) what most standard speakers are capable of... (which is probably part of the transparency and purity recipe!)
And yes - they need to be positioned right, in the right kind of room, etc, etc, (but that is like any speaker!)
If you want an even better midrange, with even more extreme limitations in other ways - the earlier ESL57's do that - more limited bass, more limited highs, much more limited SPL's - but the most lifelike midrange I have ever heard - no exceptions.
There is no such thing as a perfect speaker - you have to choose the limitations you are willing to live with.
To many people, bass slam is king, often along with high SPL's.
To me a true to life midrange, and the ability to reproduce acoustic instruments (recorded right... which is itself rare!), as if they are there.... I find very few speakers can achieve that, and that is my #1 criteria.... I listen at typically 72db at my listening seat - so peaks of circa 92db are what needs to be achieved - and the Quad 63's achieved that with ease. (the later 989's that I also owned, filled out the bass a bit more...)
To be clear - the world is divided (at the extremes) between the lovers of Klipschorns (and similar "style" speakers) and the lovers of Electrostatics (and their ilk)
Seldom do you find speakers that can achieve the best of both extremes - and typically when they do, the cost is stratospheric.... (but used, you might get lucky!)
So within the reasonably afordable (at MSRP pricing) high end - we are talking speakers under say (arbitrarily!) $30,000 - you have to choose the flaws you are willing to live with, and the advantages you absolutely must have.
That's also why speakers remain the most interesting of all the devices we use.... because they are the most imperfect... the ones most subject to compromise - and the ones where we have to decide which compromise we can most live with.
Another aspect seldom discussed - is that the optimal speaker for a solid brick or concrete, European style appartment (relatively small) - will differ markedly from one for a room limited by drywall construction. Size of room, building type, as well as furnishings and treatment all factor into picking the "right" speaker.
A speaker that sounds great in an American style large room with drywall frame construction, is like to sound bassy, bloated and overdone, in a smaller solid brick or concrete room (it takes a heck of a lot more soundpower to fill a drywall frame room, whereas a smaller brick/concrete room can be energised relatively easily!)
To some degree the traditional vintage designs of different regions, reflect the most common home construction methods of those regions...
Globalisation of many speaker companies has somewhat diluted this... but it remains part of the secret of what sounds really great in particular rooms.
P.S. my Quad ESL's were played mostly in smaller, solid brick construction homes.... and by the time you move them 1.5m to 2m out from the walls - there is not much room left... but the room does not require a heap of bass to energise it... it was a contained space and not very bass leaky.
Seldom do you find speakers that can achieve the best of both extremes - and typically when they do, the cost is stratospheric.... (but used, you might get lucky!)
So within the reasonably afordable (at MSRP pricing) high end - we are talking speakers under say (arbitrarily!) $30,000 - you have to choose the flaws you are willing to live with, and the advantages you absolutely must have.
That's also why speakers remain the most interesting of all the devices we use.... because they are the most imperfect... the ones most subject to compromise - and the ones where we have to decide which compromise we can most live with.
Another aspect seldom discussed - is that the optimal speaker for a solid brick or concrete, European style appartment (relatively small) - will differ markedly from one for a room limited by drywall construction. Size of room, building type, as well as furnishings and treatment all factor into picking the "right" speaker.
A speaker that sounds great in an American style large room with drywall frame construction, is like to sound bassy, bloated and overdone, in a smaller solid brick or concrete room (it takes a heck of a lot more soundpower to fill a drywall frame room, whereas a smaller brick/concrete room can be energised relatively easily!)
To some degree the traditional vintage designs of different regions, reflect the most common home construction methods of those regions...
Globalisation of many speaker companies has somewhat diluted this... but it remains part of the secret of what sounds really great in particular rooms.
P.S. my Quad ESL's were played mostly in smaller, solid brick construction homes.... and by the time you move them 1.5m to 2m out from the walls - there is not much room left... but the room does not require a heap of bass to energise it... it was a contained space and not very bass leaky.
Because I can get big damn speakers for comparatively little prices.
This is the way.
and a few that *might*..... infinity and kef might for instance...A lot of ASR members seem to be pining big ole loudspeakers that wouldn’t test all that well these days.
A lot of companies back in the day did in fact do extensive anechoic testing back in the 70s in immensely expensive, enormous anechoic chambers.A lot of ASR members seem to be pining big ole loudspeakers that wouldn’t test all that well these days.
DanielT
Master Contributor
Speaking of classic vintage looks. Here's a Danish brand that has jumped on that bandwagon. The design of Vestlyd is heavily inspired by vintage speakers from the 70s,....
I think you can agree with that:
Their high power capability, SPL seems to be their USP in addition to their looks, plus the advantage of the coax design. That's what Vestlyd themselves emphasize.We call this special speaker type: Power Monitor. We identified three key areas to make these speakers a success: even dispersion,
...high SPL and low distortion.
The 12 inch coax, in the picture above, with 93 dB sensitivity and Max. rec. amplifier power: 500 watts can have potential for the high SPL play that is marketed.
vestlyd.com
I think you can agree with that:
Their high power capability, SPL seems to be their USP in addition to their looks, plus the advantage of the coax design. That's what Vestlyd themselves emphasize.We call this special speaker type: Power Monitor. We identified three key areas to make these speakers a success: even dispersion,
...high SPL and low distortion.
The 12 inch coax, in the picture above, with 93 dB sensitivity and Max. rec. amplifier power: 500 watts can have potential for the high SPL play that is marketed.
Deep Dive | Power monitors - technical details
The design of Vestlyd is heavily inspired by vintage speakers from the 70s, with added inspiration from classic power speakers. However, compared to conventional power speakers, a Vestlyd speaker has far more detail, musicality, and control, bringing it closer to classical studio monitors.
vestlyd.com
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2019
- Messages
- 14,457
- Likes
- 32,523
I like big horns and I cannot lie...
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 10,168
- Likes
- 17,504
My friend bought my SVS SB12-NSD subwoofer and uses it with his Quad ESL 57. I listened to that combo in his basement hifi man cave and I have to say I thought it sounded really nice.
The subwoofer has a line out with HP filter set at 80 Hz. That probably help ease the bass struggle for the Quad ESL 57. Or rather I think they do. We tried them with and without the subwoofer and I really preferred those speakers with the subwoofer. If I had to guess, two stereo bass modules that operated up to 200-300 Hz would be even better. That is assuming good integration bass modules - ESL 57.
Which, by the way, is not a unique new idea. It already exists together with electrostats. I took a couple of electrostats at random. Martin Logan Renaissance ESL 15A. Two bass modules, crossover point for them 300Hz:
View attachment 447978View attachment 447979
I have never heard a panel and subwoofer combo the sounded fully coherent to me.
That includes all the Martin Logan hybrids I’ve heard. There seems to be a different quality to the sound coming out of the woofer from the panels.
The most seamless blend I’ve heard came from my old quad 63s with the gradient dipole subwoofers that were made for the 63s. Even then, not perfect. But pretty good.
DanielT
Master Contributor
It is always a challenge to achieve good integration of subwoofers. Perhaps more so with electrostats? In any case, my friend had worked very hard on that integration aspect, including good placement and EQ as well.That was probably the main reason why I thought it sounded good.
That includes all the Martin Logan hybrids I’ve heard. There seems to be a different quality to the sound coming out of the woofer from the panels.
I don't know how these work. Do you set the volume of the bass boxes and the electrostats separately? Are they powered by separate amplifiers? It can be a bit tricky to get really good, even levels of volume then. But maybe something else caused it in a bad way? I've never heard such hybrids so I can't say more than that.
Audionaut
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2025
- Messages
- 865
- Likes
- 3,434
You do need a RiPol Sub for that
DanielT
Master Contributor
There are a lot more interesting videos from that channel where the history of Hifi manufacturers is told:Here is a video that covers Quality Unit Amplifier Domestic's electrostatic speakers. Starting at 3:16 with the ESL 57 model.
If you want to get a taste of the history of QUAD watch from the beginning of the video. QUAD classic tube amps are addressed. Peter Walker, QUAD, did NOT have as a design principle that the tube amplifiers would "color" the sound. Quite the opposite in fact.
Multimedium
I’m a former news editor and writer for one of the largest AV technology magazines in Eastern Europe. When times got tough, I decided to start this channel to share captivating stories about companies in the industry. Here, you’ll find deep dives into the successes, failures, and fascinating...
www.youtube.com
Last edited:
A very hard match to make. The panels being very detailed (fast?) with low distortion, the subwoofers not so much.
I ran into the same issue trying to match sub's to my La Scalas, which offered much of the same strengths but added the ability
to go really loud. Ended up with 2 7' tall HSU subs and big amp power.
Ditto here - tried for years to mate various SW's to my 63's and later 989's.... never sounded coherent...
And the only ML's I really liked were the CLS - which was a full range electrostatic design and NOT a hybrid with a built in SW.
Having said that, in this day and age of DSP's, it might be easier to match an ESL to a Sub... I have not tried it in about 15 years, and there has been plenty of progress in that space over the last 15 years.
Similar threads
