Hi, Lloydelee21
Did you here them with more modern and dynamic music such
as pop/rock, some electronic or free jazz ?
My understanding is that even the new ones 989/2905 are still not
well suitable for that kind of music. They are the "extension" to ESL63 abilities, but they still pretty limited with their dynamic and impact abilities while playing classic/progressive rock, fusion etc.
Do you share such opinion ? |
Hi,
You listen to a broad music styles.
Did you bought Quads at the end ? :-)
As for ESL2905, they are very expensive speakers.
It is tough to buy such an expensive speaker with no ability to listen to it
in the first place. I do like my ESL63, but it was bought 2nd hand and it is completly different price tag, so while i do like it "sweet spots" and they suits for about 50% of my music taste, i would not buy a 15000$ (or even 5000$) speaker that is not a good all around speaker for me.
Yesterday i heard again the MG1.6 and while they were more dynamic and had a better bass, i just can't compare them to my QUAD ESL63. ESL63s strong and weak sides are almost the same as of 1.6, with MG1.6 being a bit more suitable for "modern" music, but still not great for rock or pop. Still, for the strong sides, i would choose ESL63 any day.
I will try to listen to MG3.7 (some people suggest it might suit me as all around speaker).
There is another option of course. The one that seems to me the most logical to some extent. Have 2 pair of speakers I always thought of it as a non-adequate solution, because i don't have a big room space, hence 2 pair of speakers is not very convenient, but as far as i see buying good all around dynamic speaker (SF, Audio Physics, Dynaudio etc) might be pretty expensive and even then, i'm not sure, they could be compared to ESL63 in what it does well. So buying a moderately good dynamic speaker (even 2nd handed) for all the dynamic music and keeping the ESL63 might be a better (and cheaper) overall solution than going for a very expensive new ESL2905 (given it is still not that good for dynamic music) or going for very expensive dynamic speakers... |
I heard SF Extrema(2nd hand) and was really impressed with the sound. Not sure it good for "cold" electronic music in nature (trances and alike), but otherwise it has very special sound. It is like a good liqueur - many different flavors combine in one delicate sound. Also the wood work is superior.
Being told requires a lot of very clean watts and current. SF is amazing company. Liked it a lot... |
I have missed this specific Extrema by the matters of hours :-)
Somebody bought it :-) I was almost ready with the money :-)
In cash :-) Sad story, but the life goes one :-)
As for "cold" electornic music, i don't listen to it myself very often, but i have a few disks and i take always one with me to test the speaker. It reveals certain abilities (or disabilities) of the speaker. With the extrema the only problem i had was it "warm" or let's say "acoustic" type of sound.
It was perfect with all the rest, but for "cold" electronic music it was a bit
too warm for me, but again - it is a very sensitive speaker. It is of course depends on the cables, electronic equipment and alike. But i've heard the potential with in that speaker... As for its speed, dynamics and bass - i had no problem with trances or anything else... Many sais it is SF best speaker.
Never heard Amati or Stradivari (far above my room space and budget, even second handed). Mementos are of more specific-music-type oriented speakers than Extrema IMHO. Also, living with ESL63, my current equipment simply not good/strong enough to drive the Extrema...
It was my other concern... I'm using moderate powered tube amplifier with ESLs. |
Till recently i was not into HI-FI/Hi-END equipment business.
I like the music, much less the equipment, but you need some level of equipment to enjoy the soul within the music... I am still learning... |
Yesterday, i have listened to Mistral Audio (see separate thread) and was impressed with it sound given its price. It is some Chinese-UK company.
It is presented in US by NAPA acoustic (I am not from the States as you may understand from my english mistakes). I don't know much of this company and it doesn't have any serious reviews on the net, but again, i was pretty impressed with the sound. It is not SF of course. Not in the build quality (it is just average) and not with that sort of multi-flavour sound, but it still was pretty decent. Have you ever heard of Mistral ? |
First i heard it with Ensemble hybrid power-pre and it was just not strong enough to drive the Extrema IMHO, specially in orchestral music etc.
Than, we changed it to Parasound (HALO 2?) POWER. 400watt in 4ohms, high current. Was OK with the power(much better than 100+ watts of high current from Ensemble), but it clearly lack some quality to make SF Extrema to sound up to its potential. Never heard it with the Krell. I heard their FCA(?) 200/250
class A powers should be much better choice.
Yes, SF Extrema is on my list. If i find one, i will buy it and sort out the amplification. It really might be a good candidate for a decent ONE all-around speaker for long time to enjoy the music. |
It sounds logical that Strads or Amatis are better than the ESL63 (and probably 2905) at least "all around".
I prefer buying an person rather online and i am far from US/UK.
I have SF on my mind, so i will continue to look for opportunity to buy an Extrema. From time to time they've been seen on the 2nd hand market here as well. |
There is SF Electa Amator2 on sale now, but i think it is much more conventional bookshelf than Extrema, so not sure it is a good choice for me.
Didn't hear them. |
Did you hear the old SF Concerto Grand Piano ? |
Hi,
I think it shouldn't be a problem to find a place to listen to Amati here. With some homework i should find it at dealer's or somewhere else.
I didn't read the MG3.7 review, i will read it and i most probably find a way to listen to them as well.
Ppl say it is much more refine and generally better than 1.6 |
Hi, haven't been here for a while...
Busy at work...
I read some reviews and i will try to listen to Magnepan 3.7 and Martin Logans.
They presented here by the same dealer.
That's for a moment. Also trying to negotiate with Quad dealer a 2905/989 presentation. It's a pitty they don't have one on display, but they said not many ppl buying this speakers today, so it is not economically wise for them to have one on display. From time to time there are certain trade-ins and then its the time they can offer a presentation. Should call me back with info as for whenever there is one now... I guess most of all he wants to be sure i am seriously about buying one. But i can't really tell till i listen... :-)
Anyway, i will continue and update here from time to time as for my findings.
It is very helpful to share an opinion with other people. It is difficult to buy something, based solely on other ppl opinions though...
Thanks. |
I hope the importer would be able to arrange me a listening...
I am not sure though...
I liked ESL63 a lot, specially for they musicality.
I mean, it's amaizing... I wouldn' tell "it's the best speaker on the planet" or something alike.
After all, it's an equipment, it's a technology. It is always have its own pros and cons. But after all, when i listen to the music - i do notify some "problems", but even then, i so emotionally involved with the music it presents. Amazingly musical speaker. The only area i really felt its limitations (i.e. i couldn't enjoy the music) was rock (specially with distortion) and lack some bass/dynamics either in rock or high scale classic. Sometimes i had a certain a moment of discomfort with the treble, but that's it. If those are improved with new Quads i don't think i need a better speaker :-) |
You make me want to listen to those speakers :-)
I start to think of possibility going abroad for a small trip to listen the Quads
and enjoy let's say... Spain... May be i can do it within a month or so.
Just need to hold myself tight and not to buy something till then.
It's not easy once you start listening to a speakers :-) |
I have another 2 speakers on the list. Never heard them, but they might be interesting to listen to:
Vandersteen and Klipsch horn speakers (La Scala or Klipcsh horn).
Did you ever heard them and what are your perspective on them for the type of music i am listening to ?
From the horn speakers i only heard some simple Zingallis.
They had a horn tweeter. It suited some music very well, but for some other music (specially voices) i felt it was not really suitable. May be just a first time experience. |
Hi,
tomorrow i am going to listen to SF Grand Piano.
I have a chance to buy them second hand and it could be an "addition" to ESL63 to solve the issues of more dynamical music.
Otherwise, on Friday i am going to meet the Magnepan and Martin Logan dealer.
I plan to listen to Magnepan 1.7/3.7(mostly) and some Martin Logan (i was recomended to listen to Summit X).
Will keep you posted. :-)
Thanks. |
I felt that ESL63 doesn't have enough bass and not enough slam/dynamic range to play the rock to my satisfaction. And i am not talking about crazy SPLs or hard metal rock. That is the reason i am prompting to bigger (hopefully more dynamically and more bass oriented) 989/2905; The difference in price tag between 2905 and 989 is huge. It seems a common ground that 2905 is a better speaker than 989 (more refine, yet better slam and better bass), but it is difficult to measure whenever it worth the additional 3-4K$
That's why i want to start from auditioning the 989 and see if this direction will lead me somewhere. Probably i will found out that even with additional bass panels the results with rock are less to my test and that the difference with ESL63 is not that huge... |
QUAD reliability problem is indeed an important point... |
So here is the bottom line - I am still in search for a speaker after this weekend.
SF Grand Piano - I couldn't really "evaluate" this speaker despite of all good reviews and opinions it got.
The room was very small (about 7-8 sq m) the speakers were about 50cm, they were driving by some digital Akai amplifier, so it was not a set and a room to enjoy them. Tonally and temporally they were OK, but the bass wasn't punchy and they were not revealing. I suppose the setup has a major role in all this, but since i didn't hear this speaker before i couldn't really form any impression.
It also failed the most important "emotional test", that is much more important for me than an "audiophile" test.
May be i did a mistake and should rely solely on all those reviews. After all, it shouldn't be very hard to sell a SF speaker.
Magnepan 1.7/3.6 - I couldn't hear the 3.7, but i heard the 1.7 and 3.6;
The 1.7 is tonally better than 1.6, i think it is more balanced.
Of course 3.6 is much a better speaker. It is more refined etc, but it still fails with the rock and everything alike.
So, it is still very similar to Quad in its problematic areas while i strongly prefer Quad in what both of them do well. Quad is amaizingly musical speaker with tons of emotions. Never knew how good is it in what it does...
The only better points for Magnepan 3.6 are: reliability and a better slam/big orchestral music.
Martin Logan - I heard the more simple Vantage model.
Despite it is also an electrostatic (hybrid) speaker its sound is very different to Quads. Even the electrostatic panels sound differently. Much more colored and sound-oriented IMHO. For what Quad does, it does much better, BUT Martin Logan is definitely better as all around speaker.
Actually better then Magnepan 1.6/1.7/3.6 as well (if you like its tonal coloration). The dynamic woofer gives a lot of slam. It is not just a bass, it is the whole slam that is missing in those planar speakers. Suddenly the rock is solid, electronic music sounds better etc.
Still... i feel this model is to "colored" for me and not as musical and emotional as Quad. As i said, never realized how REALLY GOOD QUAD IS in what it does... Unfortunately it still limited to some specific sort of music.
Then, i heard a Martin Logan Ethos. It was a big improvement over Vantage. Less colored, better punch, stage, everything... Probably a candidate...
Still want to listen to Summit X... Probably ML highest series are less colored for a sound and more true like.
Everything IMHO of course... |
Hi,
I am still trying to arrange the audition for 2905/989...
I also heard a very good things about apogee, and while testing some videos on the youtube i was very impressed with the clarity of sound... Unfortunately it is quite complicated to import them, since they are not in the business anymore...
Is your impressions of ML/Magnepan/SF Grand Piano comply with mine, or was it some kind of equipment mismatch. It is always tough to talk about a component from one specific listening.
Thanks. |
Well... here are some good news.
I finally got a permission from the local importer and they are sending a new speaker to the local dealer for audition. It will be a cheaper Quad ESL989.
So, by the end of next week i should form first impressions of newer Quads with bass panel.
Also, the same place has Dynaudio Contour and Naim Ovator speakers on display for about the same price as 989.
Unfortunately, Wilson Audio Sophia (2nd hand around the same price tag as new ESL989) was sold a few weeks ago, so can't listen to that one at the moment.
Anyway, this place is a serious one, it is actualy a recording studio running from the old 70s. They were using the old ESL57 back then... They supported me a lot while negotiating the demonstration with the dealer. Surely, they hope to sell... but still it was very kind of them.
P.S. Your post seems to be truncated.
P.P.S Apogee and more high level SF as well as Vandersteens are still on my list, but let's hear the Quad first :-) |
Hi, for some reason i didn't try the sub woofers yet.
Probably a pre-judgement and some negative opinions around.
After i heard the ML hybrids this idea came back to mind.
Are all those active sub woofers ?
Because otherwise i guess i will need a bi-amping...
It might be the way to go if newer Quads don't have what i am looking for. You're right. I should try it regardless of prejudgements. |
Do you feel like the ESL2805 have enough bass ?
I would expect it to be very similar to 988 and theoretically to 63 in the low end because they still use 4 panels (no extra bass panels, those only added to ESL2905 or 989) |
Hi, ppl
I am going to listen to SF Guarneri (i think it is an older homage) speaker this week.
Yesterday i was listening to the very basic Vandersteen Model 1 and some DIY horn based on full range Fostex FE206E driver.
In Vandersteen i could clearly see a potential of this Model 1/2/3 line, but i should certainly look into 2 or even 3. Model 1 is simply too basic. Nice, excellent VFM specially at 2nd hand, but at more objective level simply not good enough. You definitely need to invest more money into the speaker.
Considering the horn... it is really difficult to form an impression...
It certainly has its own magic with some type of music. A "big box" gives some volume, substance to the sound. Jazz sounds very sweet and even classic rock is good. Some pieces were a true magic... But on more instrumental and heavy music it becomes a mess... and there are certain "parts" of the spectrum that are simply not presented well... Some voices were heavily distorted.
At the moment i am mostly waiting for the Quads and trying to listen to some interesting "pivots" in terms of alternatives in the design or some well-regarded dynamic speakers like SF. With the Guarneri my only concern a priori is its lack of bass... It seems to match the Quad ESL63 and it is not enough... but may be it is a bit punchier because SF is a dynamic speaker... Let's wait and see...
I still would like to listen to
Viena Acoustic Beethoven Grand
Audio Physics Scorpio
Wilson Audio Sofia.
SF
What else would you recommend ?
Did someone knows the Duevel ? |
to Bwcanuck:
Yes, it is EXACTLY what i mean. It has nothing to do with SPL.
My room is small, about 15-16sq. m, so i don't have the SPL problem with ESL63
My problem is that dynamic range, or contrast, or bit-depth. It is like an .jpeg artifact due to quantization. On "easy", more acoustic type of music this isn't really a problem, but with more intensive music like orchestra or progressive rock (King Crimson for example) with all its distortion, effects etc the problem kicks in and makes this music almost unlistenable. And i am still not talking about the lack of bass and slam.
Unfortunately, as i understand, the problem of reliability is not limited only to older 63/57, but even the completely new speakers and models had many failures. Some are of an electronic type and some are due to panels.
So, even if you buy a new 989/2905 you still should pray your pair of speakers is on lucky side of the road... So yes, reliability is my big concern...
But first, i need to listen to this speaker and see how the additional bass panels help a better bass, certain slam and dynamic range increase... if any...
Tempted to find out.
Thanks for support. |
No news so far.
I took a "vacation" from speaker listening :-)
Quads are at the shop being break in by the dealer.
Didn't make it to listen to SF Guarnieri so far.
Probably do it over this weekend or during next week.
Bottom line, lazy "kid" messing up his home work :-) |
This weekend i was finally able to listen to Quad 989
The setup included Quad2-40 mono blocks and Quad99CDP - basic cd+preamp from Quad. The speakers were just few days old, so those are definitely "first" impressions.
First of all - the look. I did like the look of those.
Read a lot of negative feedbacks, in my opinion they are surely not the prettiest speakers around, but i had no problem with their looks. The white-blue finish is pretty nice overall. They are pretty solid-standing too, although i felt this aspect still could be improved. (ESL2905 :-)
As for the sound...
Here i have some mixed feelings compared to ESL63.
First, i have to say again:
a) These speakers were just few days old
b) There was no critical placement done for the speakers and during the listening session i felt it is a must with those. They were "generally placed as suggested", but without critical fine tuning.
c) I don't like the Quad 99CDP. I have had several opportunities to listen to this preamp-cd and i think it is not very musical, somewhat harsh, not too revealing - in one word very basic and not a match for 989 (even the 63).
Having said that i was depressed not to hear the magic of ESL63 mid-range - their unmatched musicality, acoustic sound being slowly decayed etc. It exhibit little magic i remember from ESL63. On the positive side, i somehow felt it might be improved, since my feeling was those speakers ARE MUCH MORE SENSITIVE to a-b-c above (break in, placement, source/pre amp and the recordings).
Other impressions: bass was much better, still not very deep or dynamic-like bass (no "wooo", no air movement), but significantly improves the contra-bass and organ pieces.
Much more presence and substance then ESL63 - they were almost "flat" and had zero bass.
Also the slam and general presence/substance - MUCH better then ESL63.
Certainly less compressed than ESL63.
More sonically neutral than already neutral ESL63
More precise (better resolution), less directional in treble.
It seems like 989 bass has some hole. The transition from mid-bass to a deeper bass in not always flat.
Generally, my impression was: Those speakers while being more neutral, more precise (still not greatest precision around), having better frequency response and dispersion, being better dynamically had become closer to "traditional" speakers sound wise and have lost much of old ESLs magic.
Again, my feeling is that at least some of this magic may be gained back, by breaking-in, positioning and matching the equipment. Those are much more revealing and sensitive speakers than ESL63. Less forgiving. Up to a complete dissatisfaction !
Music types.
Bottom line, they were better with rock than 63.
Rock became listenable on some minimalistic level, but
still far from being good enough or even satisfying.
By rock i mean Led Zeppelin, Queen, King Crimson.
Not the heavy rock.
On other types of music - classic (easy classic, organ music, Beethoven's 9 symphony) - much better result than 63. Image, presence, absolutely listenable and enjoyable.
Acoustic rock - Also, better presence, more substance.
Jazz/Vocals - good.
So, this speakers are still not good for rock. Not even try.
Additional bass panels do improve presence, substance and make low octaves listenable.
Could the magic of ESL63 be regained ?
That's the question....
If yes, clearly an improvement over ESL63.
Otherwise... you have a more traditional like, magic-less sound from the electrostatic speaker...
What is other people's impression of 989 ?
How it compares to 2905 ? |
Comparing to Martin Logan combos i think a better dynamics/bass could be obtained by matching 988/63 with a woofer then having 989. Not sure how they will work together. Never tried it. |
Also, for a moment esl63 seems to be easier on my ears then a 989 at the store.
Again, probably the break-in issue... |
My impressions of JBL L300 were very positive.
I understand why some people fall for them.
They are musical and have very sweet vintage(still quite refine and not exceptionally over colored) sound that suits classic rock and jazz. Easy on ears. Big box speakers with deep rich sound.
Overall for me they were nice - very good for classic rock and jazz; OK with modern music and classic. Not as huge bass as one might expect. Need a room space and an SPL volume to reach saturation. Not as refine as today speakers. Different sound from most modern speakers.
Still couldn't call it "a sound i am looking for".
Will continue with the search :-)
SF Guarneri, KEF 107 and Vandersteen 3A seems to be next on my list. Probably Von Shweikert.
As for planar speakers, still looking for some 2nd hand Apogees to listen to... |
Thanks, Lloydelee21.
Good points.
I don't know exactly what you mean by linearity, but i guess it is an uniform ability to be precise over all of the frequency range.
For some reason many people from some point on with their equipment prefer "precise" over "magic" for a long run.
I never felt like this before, but now, i start little by little understand them.
I guess, "magic" is good if you listen to very specific type of music (where the magic of equipment is) or for some second or relatively "low cost" (not to confuse with low quality) system. Like with the ESL63. You agree to live with the magic for certain kind of music at certain payoff at all the rest.
On other side, musicality is still very important to me, actually it is most important to me.
What do you mean by
"You may find with different electronics (which allow the newer model to shine where it is great)...that you find a different way to msuicality. just a thought. " ? |
One of the problems is to get know the equipment.
It is almost impossible from one-time listening.
To know the characeter of the speaker, you need to listen to it with different cables and amplifiers at least.
It is not rare that dealer pairs one type of equipment he's selling with other type of equipment he's selling for the only reason he's selling them both, but it is seldom a perfect match. I am not talking about the 989, i heard it in "appropriate" setup consisting of Quad mono blocks and Quad pre. If you are buying second hand your situation may be worst. You have one specific setup (sometimes owner is transition to another setup, so the amplifier he has is not exactly the one that matches the speaker he is selling etc).
Of course, i am not expecting a dealer to have each and every equipment and do any pairing i want. Actually i spend quite some dealer-time with no significant decision yet.
All i am trying is to emphasize the point that unless you familiar with the equipment through different combinations, it is very difficult to see whenever this particular speaker will blend with some yet unknown equipment in the future to form a sound that subjectively good for me.
This is the reason i try to find a speaker that i like, that would sound approximately close to my subjective "perfect" and then i can buy this speaker and build a set around him sooner or later.
At least, i have a reference set to start playing with...
May be i am wrong with my approach. But how else can i "distinguish" a speaker ? I should either listen to it in many different sets (music types) - problematic, or i should find a set at some "sane" budget that will play the speaker the way i want it to...
As for a precise equipment.
Again, i tend to agree with you, although i, myself, still don't feel this way :-) But my recent searches show the more precise equipment is, the more different music types it is able to play.
The problem, it starts to lack magic and becomes more analytical (and fatigue) to listen to. On the other side, SF and Quad never sounds too analytical and probably SF being a dynamic speaker is not bad as all around.
Guarnieri Homage is probably my next homework... |
Correction:
===========
This is the reason i try to find a SPEAKER IN A SET that i like, that would sound approximately close to my subjective "perfect" and then i can buy this speaker and build a set around him sooner or later. At least, i know there is one certain set that i basically liked the sound of my speaker in and i know exactly what this set was...
Given general room resemblance, budget "sanity" of the set and future fine tuning of sources/cables - it brings some hope in the mess :-) |
Hi, do you have any expirience with HPS-938 (Hyperion) spekers ? Do they need a large room to breathe ?
How good they are for classical music ? |
After a while coming back to speaker listening
This time i am going to listen to vintage JBL L300.
Never heard this speaker before.
Any opinions ? |
