Hi all electrostatic-ers. I would be most interested to learn of ESL57 owners' experience of, and preference for, the many different sizes and types of driver loading in subs designed specifically for use with these speakers.
In my case, I went for 2x12" Ripole subs. And they make for nice stands for the ESL's too:
My personal experience with different esl's and subs (including the 57) is that an OB is the only type of sub that integrates well. I use a simple OB setup but a ripole is fine as well. Both have pro's and con's, do some reading. Forget about all closed or ported designs. And cross over as low as possible.
Easiest is to use a low level crossover (or a dsp) and seperate amps for esl and sub.
Given the limited output of the 57, you don't need much. A single 10 or 12" long stroke driver per channel will do just fine in OB.
Easiest is to use a low level crossover (or a dsp) and seperate amps for esl and sub.
Given the limited output of the 57, you don't need much. A single 10 or 12" long stroke driver per channel will do just fine in OB.
In my case, I have crossed over at 70Hz because 1) the ESLs do reach down to 50Hz but that's with a lot of effort and the Ripoles have no trouble there, also I didn't want to cross too high because I want to avoid the nasty resonance the Ripoles have around 150-200Hz.
I'm really very satisfied with this combination, it is as if the ESLs reach down effortlessly to 30Hz and below, while they still do their "disappearing act" in the sweet spot with a good recording.
I've used a miniDSP 2x4HD as crossover, the ESLs are powered by a Quad 303 and the subwoofers by an XTZ Class-AP100.
I'm really very satisfied with this combination, it is as if the ESLs reach down effortlessly to 30Hz and below, while they still do their "disappearing act" in the sweet spot with a good recording.
I've used a miniDSP 2x4HD as crossover, the ESLs are powered by a Quad 303 and the subwoofers by an XTZ Class-AP100.
I use and recommend a pair of RiPol subs. My ESLs are homebuilt hybrids but a full-range ESL like the Quad 57 would benefit even more.
Also, I would use a DSP crossover and chop the 57's off sharply at around 80Hz or higher. The 57's play lower but much of the low bass you hear from a full range ESL is the diaphragm's drum-head resonance, which sounds bassy but it's peaky and mostly distortion.
Chopping the 57's off sharply above 80Hz would elminate much of the drum-head resonance and replace it with clean bass from the sub(s).
I highly recommend a pair of 12" RiPol subs, which are dipolar (cardiod, actually) but you would have to build them yourself unless you wanted to spring for the Modal Akustic commercial version from Germany, which is quite expensive.
I'll be happy to give you my CAD drawings and a parts list for a pair of these 12" RiPol subs:
Also, I would use a DSP crossover and chop the 57's off sharply at around 80Hz or higher. The 57's play lower but much of the low bass you hear from a full range ESL is the diaphragm's drum-head resonance, which sounds bassy but it's peaky and mostly distortion.
Chopping the 57's off sharply above 80Hz would elminate much of the drum-head resonance and replace it with clean bass from the sub(s).
I highly recommend a pair of 12" RiPol subs, which are dipolar (cardiod, actually) but you would have to build them yourself unless you wanted to spring for the Modal Akustic commercial version from Germany, which is quite expensive.
I'll be happy to give you my CAD drawings and a parts list for a pair of these 12" RiPol subs:
That's an extremely kind offer which I gladly accept.
I have been building speakers for about 50 years and look forward to trying a new design!
Cheers, Carl.
how much 🙂 well it depends on your room as well 🙂 dipole 2x12 each side was mooooore then enough in my room, but might not in another. an other option might be MFB subs or Servo subs either closed or open baffle. i myself find closed subs to be sounding rather close to open baffle. but then again... open baffle has the same patern as the Quads. so if possible... i would chose that 🙂
When the 57's are eventually put into service, a pre-use inspection of the internals with Grill removed is advisable.
The internals of these speakers can collect large volumes of dust and hairs, some users of 57's have covered the Grill with usual type speaker cover fabric, which might be used to be more than a cosmetic tidy up? The Speaker Fabric would certainly be a preventive to the contamination entering.
I have been a user of 57's from the 90's through to the present, used as single and stacked array.
The Ripole Design is the Sub that has captured my attention the most due to the similarities for the radiation, but in general ESL Sub discussion does have differing opinions on the best way to go.
The internals of these speakers can collect large volumes of dust and hairs, some users of 57's have covered the Grill with usual type speaker cover fabric, which might be used to be more than a cosmetic tidy up? The Speaker Fabric would certainly be a preventive to the contamination entering.
I have been a user of 57's from the 90's through to the present, used as single and stacked array.
The Ripole Design is the Sub that has captured my attention the most due to the similarities for the radiation, but in general ESL Sub discussion does have differing opinions on the best way to go.
It certainly has my attention too despite my preference for sealed subs, however RiPols are so easy to build that I would be foolish not to try them!
Given your long-term experience, would you think that a 14" high sub would be too tall to double up as a stand for the 57s?
In the above picture, the subs are about 15 1/2" high (39cm and a little because I put felt "feet" under them). For a normal sitting height on the couch, about 3,5 meters from between the speakers "ear height" is about 3/4 of the ESL. Mind you, the ESL's are then almost vertical. Basically I took off the little stands and sat the ESL's on top of the subs.
The original idea was for them to emulate a window from the balcony looking out over the orchestra. For modern use, it is said Peter Walker recommended to "put them on a beer crate".
I really don't think I could get any better response than this.
Heights selected to mount a ESL 57 varies when one searches out images for their set up configurations.
The 57 can be seen suspended from the Ceiling, the speaker base is approx' 1500mm above the floor.
I have also seen the 57 as a Triple Stacked Array.
The OTA Rupert Stands, which I own, raises the Single Array Speaker approx' 250mm above the floor.
I have worked with a Single Array up to 1000mm and tilted them forwards to good effect, but a Speaker needs a secure base fastened when doing this as they become precariously off balanced.
The stacked array used by myself has the the lowest Speaker 550mm above the floor, I also have the option the change the Vertical Tilt of both lower and upper Speaker.
The Stacked array used by a friend has the lowest speaker on the floor using original feet, but does have a packer under for rear most foot to produce a more vertical orientation for the lowest speaker only.
Maybe user preference or room interfaces issues, decides on how the end positioning governs the design for mounting to be utilised.
The Individual who introduced me to stacked 57's was intending to produce a design where the Panels of Two Speakers were rebuilt into One support Frame which was to be a very rigid structure as a design. The Speaker was to use a Single Xover and Power Supply. This individual felt very confident this is where real improvement was to be discovered
The 57 can be seen suspended from the Ceiling, the speaker base is approx' 1500mm above the floor.
I have also seen the 57 as a Triple Stacked Array.
The OTA Rupert Stands, which I own, raises the Single Array Speaker approx' 250mm above the floor.
I have worked with a Single Array up to 1000mm and tilted them forwards to good effect, but a Speaker needs a secure base fastened when doing this as they become precariously off balanced.
The stacked array used by myself has the the lowest Speaker 550mm above the floor, I also have the option the change the Vertical Tilt of both lower and upper Speaker.
The Stacked array used by a friend has the lowest speaker on the floor using original feet, but does have a packer under for rear most foot to produce a more vertical orientation for the lowest speaker only.
Maybe user preference or room interfaces issues, decides on how the end positioning governs the design for mounting to be utilised.
The Individual who introduced me to stacked 57's was intending to produce a design where the Panels of Two Speakers were rebuilt into One support Frame which was to be a very rigid structure as a design. The Speaker was to use a Single Xover and Power Supply. This individual felt very confident this is where real improvement was to be discovered
This was the setup used for monitoring at PolyGram and Polyhymnia when I worked there second half of the 70's.
I can really recommend experimenting with the setup, the angle of the speaker kan make a lot of difference!! You can try a lot with a stack of coasters under the rear leg, in my case when they were still on the floor they were much better with about 4" of "tilt forward" stacking.
Last edited:
You aren't kidding, the original quads are very beamy in the treble. Aim the middle of the treble panel right at your ears for best frequency extension. I use a pair of little aluminum Disks that are about 5/8" high for under the back foot on the original quads for my particular listening position and speaker distance.
Sheldon
Sheldon
The use of a small light or laser pencil aimed at the speaker will show you
each speakers orientation to you at your seating position.
I do this this on the 988 as well as the 57 right off the center of each panel
The reflection off the mylar becomes distinct and more accurate overall
each speakers orientation to you at your seating position.
I do this this on the 988 as well as the 57 right off the center of each panel
The reflection off the mylar becomes distinct and more accurate overall