• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Renovating ESL-57 Speakers

T

tmblack

Well-Known Member
Picked up a pair of old ESL-57 speakers that are partly functioning.
The bass panels on one speaker is very low or not working at all.
The other speaker has a sputtering treble unit and bass from one panel.

From what I read so far the HV power supplies go bad after 20 years and I need to rebuild that. Probably why the bass panels don't work right.

Anyone else try rebuilding them?
They seem to be the ultimate speakers for transparency and midrange smoothness, even bettering the Apogee full range ribbon speakers. Box speakers are no longer in the equation even though these are half working units.
 
Register to hide this ad
I have a set of ESS super Quads that need some help (basically a ESL with a tweeter array) I would LOVE to find someone local to make work right.

381265655_vv53p-M.jpg
 
...They seem to be the ultimate speakers for transparency and midrange smoothness, even bettering the Apogee full range ribbon speakers. Box speakers are no longer in the equation even though these are half working units.
Click to expand...
The Apogee Grands in my opinion are much better than the ESL-57. I know quite a few owners who still use boxes, some who went back to boxes after the quad-whine wore off for them. ESLs aren't the last word in neutrality (hands over the mouth sound of the 63s and sizzle corona arcing in the highest highs) and there is little that has advanced in electrostatic speaker technology in the past 40 years, that's why box speakers run with a strong market share. here is where you can get your Quad's serviced- QS&D. Ask for my friends Randy Stringer or Mike Grubb.
 
Last edited:
JonVH said:
The Apogee Grands in my opinion are much better than the ESL-57. I know quite a few owners who still use boxes, some who went back to boxes after the quad-whine wore off for them. ESLs aren't the last word in neutrality (hands over the mouth sound of the 63s and sizzle corona arcing in the highest highs) and there is little that has advanced in electrostatic speaker technology in the past 40 years, that's why box speakers run with a strong market share.
Click to expand...
The ESL-57 was voted the product of the century bu HiFi News and is more transparent than the ESL-63.
They are big and complicated to manufacture to high standards.
The sound of a female voice is utterly amazing.

Maybe you can recommend some good box speakers, There are some good box speakers but I don't see anything for $1500 that offers more musicality.
 
JonVH said:
(hands over the mouth sound of the 63s and sizzle corona arcing in the highest highs) .
Click to expand...

And now a word from somebody who owns the monitor version of the 63. They don't sound like that at all. The sound, in fact, is entirely dependent on what you're driving them with. If you have or have had a hands over mouth sound, I suggest you get a better amp or run versions of them like the American Monitor or PRO that you can safely feed high power.
 
JohnVF said:
And now a word from somebody who owns the monitor version of the 63. They don't sound like that at all. The sound, in fact, is entirely dependent on what you're driving them with. If you have or have had a hands over mouth sound, I suggest you get a better amp or run versions of them like the American Monitor or PRO that you can safely feed high power.
Click to expand...


Hey Jon, is this "JonVH" stalking you? Secret admirer?
 
Doubt it, seems he came into this thread after I posted.

And actually the 63s do sound like that, and numerous others on the web have descibed exactly what I've heard even with different gear. The sound follows the speaker because it is the speakers. It's not perfect. I just don't buy the internet hype anymore, I've used them with Bryston and Quad gear and they're good but not what the hype claims.
The "top 10 most influential speakers of all time" was a shill that was flogged all over the net. At the ESL-57s used price of $1000 or less, there isn't anything less that I can recommend that is better but if one is willing to go beyond that price range they should take a listen to ATC's SCM-150 Anniversary with active crossovers and Rockport Technologies' Antares.
 
Fair enough. It's your opinion. I disagree completely. Life goes on.

I think some people forget that there's no 'right' answer to this stuff. And what one person wants or loves is not universal.
 
I don't think the dominance of box speakers has nothing to do with the quality or lack of quality of ESLs or dipoles in general -- it has to do with the difficulty of getting any deep bass from a dipole that isn't so large as to be domestically unacceptable to the vast majority of consumers. And dipoles need to be positioned very carefully, a task most consumers aren't interested in, and a requirement that makes them take up much more space than box speakers.
But the comparison to the success of the box speaker was actually just a side argument of the poster, who clearly likes other speakers more than Quads. Fair enough -- but how we percieve sounds differs, and clearly for a lot of us the Quad 57 has some sort of magic that our ear latches onto, that overwhelms the deficiencies, which are perfectly audible. I find I have a similar sort of ability to overlook the downside of Lowthers and my Altec Valencias in favor of their good aspects.
Having said that, in response to the original poster, whose question kind of got lost in the hubbub -- Sheldon Stokes has (what seems to me) an excellent and lengthy explanation of how to restore Quads which can be found at his website.
 
There is a two or three part article by Art Dudley in Stereophile on his adventures in DIY restoration of a pair. Google will turn up the online version from Stereophile's website with alacrity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom