Mating Quad 2905's with crossover and subs?

I love the 2905's, but I can't take their dynamic or bass limitations. Has anyone got any experience with crossing the quads say with a pair of REL's and a crossover (a Bryston Xover is what I'm thinking)? If so, what were your impressions, and at what frequency did you Xover to the subs?
I'm thinking I could get the dynamics out of the quads, if I were to pass the lows to the subs, and let the subs handle the bottom.
Any thoughts, remarks, impressions, or advice would be greatly appreciated :-) !
Undougtedley you'll get more pronounced bass if that is what you want. The amps in subs are optimized to funct within a certain frequency gain. I have heard your speakers but only for an audition in a store. It would be very easy to overwhelm the Quad's out put in the in the mids and highs. I found them to be a very polite speaker, youll have to dial in the subs ver carefully not to blow the rest of the music away.
I should have said at the outset that using an external crossover will work in dividing the signal for the subs.
One of the problems with sub's and Quads is the speed issue. Quads are very fast and clean. Dynamic subs, no so much, unless you have small cone drivers properly implemented and even then the frequencies handled by the cross over slopes will lose some clarity. So if you are at all fussy about sound quality, and I assume you are for chosing Quads in the first place, I would not go there. I tried it and never go it close to right.

But all is not lost! First lots of folks put the Quads on stands. This can put a hole in the upper bass and make them sound thin in the upper bass/midrange. The were originally designed to be on the floor! And, with very careful positioning, on the floor you can get relatively flat FR to 35hz. And, once you have heard good electrostatic (or planer) bass you will have a hard time listening to dynamic woofers. :-)

I went back to dynamic speakers some years ago, but not because of any issues I had with the bass part of the FR.

If you must have loud sub 60hz bass, be sure to get a high quality cross over which has a steep slope roll off of the sub's FR above 60 hz and run the Quads full range.

Good luck.
Wilson Benesch Torus sub is the best match I've heard. Unfortunately, rather expensive and hard to find. The Torus has the speed without the big box woofer bloat.

That said, I've always liked Quads without a sub in a medium sized room. I've owned at least five different subs used in conjunction with my box/cone speakers, and in the end, never kept any of them. Perfect integration is almost impossible to my ear. Another idea might be to try some Martin Logans that have the sub already built in.
I goofed - I was referring to smaller Quads. Sorry 'bout that.
Thanks for the responses. I have tried the ML's (Summit X's). They played LOUD, clean and deep, but I didn't hear the magic that I hear with the Quads.
I used to own Maggie 3.6's, with a REL Storm III (no xover, I ran the Maggies full range) I didn't have a problem integrating the sub with the panels, so I think I can integrate a REL with the Quads.
What I'm trying to accomplish, is being able to play music (with that Quad magic) at Spl's higher than 90db. I'm not a headbanger, but I do like my music at realistic levels. I was hoping that if I could relieve the Quads from the bass frequencies, that I could get more volume.
I'm in the same boat as you, owning 2905's and loving their clarity, delicacy, speed and timbrel purity - yet missing the visceral physical impact put out by dynamic speakers during orchestral and operatic peaks. Like you, I'm considering a sub, knowing that believable integration with Quads may be impossible.

The REL Gibraltor series is a candidate, as their published specs look great in terms of speed. Problem is, they are designed to let the main speakers run full-range, while integration apparently is achieved only through tweaking the sub's volume and low-pass level. The connection is via Speak-on units.

This arrangement seems to me a big trade-off: one the one hand, by omitting a Xover, the sub's presence in the system will not degrade the signal received by the Quads; on the other, because there is no Xover to attenuate the high-pass signal to the Quads, their panels will not be relieved of any mid-to-low bass duties that, in theory, might be restricting their overall dynamics.

However, I'm not convinced such "relief" will allow the Quad panels to play louder, because what restricts their ability to do so is simply the limitation of their membranes' excursions before smacking into the stators - the source of distortion, arcing, and shutdown. Which, by the way, I've not witnessed.

There are two expensive solutions to our dilemma: (1) set up a separate listening room with big Rockport, TAD, Evolution or Magico speakers for rock and opera, or (2) add another set of Quads to move more air, thus fulfilling their namesake's suggestion. OK, back to reality:

Larry Greenhill reviewed a JL Audio Fathom f212, mating it to Quad ESl 989's through a Bryston 10B SUB Xover, using a complex setup to calibrate the sub:

Keep us posted on your experiments.
I have had a pair of 2905s for 5+ years with a steady progression of REL subs, starting with the 305s, tried a single B1, and then a pair of 505s. I recently added a G1 with a second one on its way. IMHO 2905s with a pair of REL G1s is a pretty awesome combo and a match made in heaven. You get a holographic midrange and the transparency only a ESL can provide with a visceral bottom end. Don't believe all the theoretical nonsense about the problems integrating ESLs and subs. Been there, done it and its magic.
I set the X cross over at 30 hz on the RELs. Be careful regd phase setting: 0 or 180 makes a big difference. The G1 has a remote so its a breeze to set up.
Whether its a Bach organ piece, Dire Straits or Patricia Barber, opening the window below 30hz all the way down to 20hz or lower is something to be heard to believe.
I prefer not to mess with an X crossover and have moved up the REL chain. Am really excited about the arrival of the 2nd G1.
Be happy to share more info by mail.
2905s plus REL HUGELY recommended.
Sunnyboy -

Your REL G1 is very encouraging news. I will soon be auditioning a couple of box speakers as possible replacements for my 2905's, but will also ask for a G1/2905 setup for comparison.

My dealer warns me about the impossibility of finding Quad magic in box speakers under astro sums of money, so I'm inclined to keep 'em.

Still, I do wish the Quads were more, ah, visually inspiring...
Your dealer is a wise man. It's not easy to replace the Quads. Sadly I am also in the process of selling my 2905s . It's a long story and no reflection on the Quads. The integration with a sub, preferably a pair ,is pretty simple. I can't think of many speakers incl the upper end Wilson Audios that can match the deep and musically satisfying bass a Rel G1 can provide.
fwiw, I have heard many a system with subwoofers over the years and never heard one I like.
Just too amorphous for me.
The same goes for equalizers/tone controls.
It's nice in theory, but my ears tell me something is always off or unnatural.

This even happens where the manufacturer makes the speaker and the sub. Case in point (all for speakers I owned):
Kharma 3.2, Wilson Watt Puppies, Apogee Stages.