Attachments
Last edited:
Thanks for your comments, yes it's a "sin" not have a pair of HARTLEY 24 INCHES WOOFERS, but the creator himself always said of his "creature":
" Another thing people do is to use two of our panels, one above the other.This is quite reasonable because it is really a strip source, you can extend the strip source without deteriorating anything. All you do is add 6dB at the bottom end and 3dB everywhere else.If gives you a louder sound, a more impressive sound. That's all right. Adding woofers HAS NEVER BEEN VERY GOOD" - Peter J.Walker ( Audio Amateur, 3/78)
These words should be read in the context of PJW beliefs about loudspeaker bandwidth. As far as I remember PJW considered that there was an equilibrium between bass and treble roll off - if you extended one of them you should also extend the other. IMHO it is partially why he disagreed with using subwoofers with his electrostatics. The HQD system did not violate this rule, as it extended treble and bass.
A good friend of mine living less than half mile from me assembled such system in the 80's, using the Mark Levinson crossovers at 100 and 7000 Hz. He owned a very large room and it was easily the best bass reproduction I have ever listened to. As far as I remember each sub was over 1000 pounds - the space between the double wall boxes was filled wit a special sand!
These days I would add a pair of good modern servo subs to complement the panels. Those Hartley's were a bit of a bear to drive... There are lots of fine subwoofers available now that are much easier to integrate with the mains.
I never heard the renowned HQD system but how did a 24 inch woofer ever match the speed of the electrostatic? I'd have to imagine that 24-inch driver was pretty slow in the day? Like the bass driver would say to the midrange driver don't wait up for me, I'll be along later?
And we're not even talking about all the different dispersion patterns? Seems like a great exercise in building a full range speaker back then, but more like a choosing from a Chinese menu. Just because you pick the three "best" drivers in the day doesn't make a great speaker. Like I often wondered what you could do with an electrostatic midrange and Maggie bass panel and ribbon tweeters. Kind of like the old QRS/1D. But alas Magnepan won't sell their parts separately.
another esl-57 fan [hand raised]. mine are packed and put away for future appreciation. tell us more about your amps, they look superficially like futterman OTL-3s.
Thanks Mr agave for your comments: yes, but if you can, "unpack" yours... The Transcendent T-8 monos ( from respected american designer Bruce Rozenblit) are very good OTL amps based on ancient Futterman designs, and performs very well with only ONE PAIR of the 57's, BUT with the ESL's 57 STACKED ( one pair or even 3 speakers per side) they performed much much better ( just my opinion) with "little" CROFT 7 R stereo amp. ( a "hybrid" design by Mr Glenn Croft with 12AU7/AX7 input plus output mosfets - 55W/channel). This amp drives the "panels" with more ease and surprisingly autority and clarity.
I think history belongs in the past. These fantastic old multi driver type systems (IRS, RS1Bs, HQDs, QRS 1Ds) can be very convincing on select program material but they lack the integration of todays' systems such as Magico S/Q 3s or 5s, YG Sonja, Wilson Alexia or XLF. Perhaps I have heard too many discombobulated systems over the years and now that I have heard the new better integrated technologies I can't go back.
Myles,
Although many of our members dislike the idea of "slow bass" I must say that if you ever saw the 24" Hartley woofer and taped its cone you would understand why it could sound fast. We should also remember that it was used in a 500 litter box.
Surely most modern systems will show more coherence, less coloration and perhaps better microdynamics. But if you valuate having a real big band in your room in all its scale, the HQD system will make the modern great mesuring speakers sound like a band of miniatures.
Really?--Interesting
BruceD
Really?--Interesting
BruceD
English language not beeing my native language, I understand that according to
Thesaurus Legend: Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
discombobulated - having self-possession upset; thrown into confusion; "the hecklers pelted the discombobulated speaker with anything that came to hand"; "looked at each other dumbly, quite disconcerted"- G.B.Shaw
disconcerted
discomposed - having your composure disturbed; "looked about with a wandering and discomposed air"
There is some electronic misunderstanding but the truth is that the Quad 57 is a three way. It has two large bass panels each with three sections. These flank the centre panel which has three section, the outer two are mid section and the centre section is the tweeter section. Many people mistake this panel as three tweeter sections which it is not.
Design these things in 1955 (…) specially the center section ( two middle ( midrange) and one center ( tweeter) and make them work properly with the bass panels, is quite remarkable.
Coherent, in speaker terms, (IMO) basically means clear, concise, well-defined, and seamless, with no detachment of the woofer/s from the mids and tweeters. Not blurred at all. The Quad ESL 57 is a good example of a "coherent-sounding" speaker.
With all due respect, I can assure that the ESL-57 ( one pair or double-stacked) of course is/are not up the very finest American speakers mentioned by him, BUT “discombobulated” ( confused “per se “ or confusing the listener…) they aren’t. Nevertheless, mine panels are "naked", without frontal or back grilles. A little "discomposed" then...
Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |