[b]Living with legends; Rogers LS3/5a and Quad ESL57[/b] I originally put this on PFM's classic hi-fi section, but just in case anyone here is interested, here it is: I have the good fortune to have both of these classic speakers, which I use with No.2 system. The Rogers I've had since new, bought in 1981. In all of that time, they have performed wonderfully well in combination with a variety of subwoofers (latest is a Linn Sizmik). At one point, thinking they must surely be out of date, I thought to replace them with a pair of small, rear-ported B&Ws, sitting unwanted and unloved on a dealer's shelf in Rheinfelden in Germany, but after a listen, guess what ended up in the attic… I remain amazed that such wee boxes can produce such sound. I'm sure that there are better wee boxes out there, but not being much of an audiophile, I've no particular interest in going out and finding these better boxes. The ESLs are something I've hankered after, ever since I was warned against them by a Quadophile in the 1970s – they ruthlessly show up every imperfection in your records, he said. And there's the appearance, like big, old-fashioned firescreens, only uglier. I've never forgotten that, and perversely it made me want a pair, just to hear what the fuss was about. So I finally scored a pair on eBay Deutschland, and I sent them off to ESL specialist Quad Musikwiedergabe GmbH in Koblenz for a minor refurbishing. Herr Manfred Stein does a great job, and the ESLs came back looking and sounding great. “Stereovile†has said that the LS3/5a gives most of the ESL performance at a considerably reduced price. I was keen to try this out, and I have to say that the little Rogers are by no means shamed by their distinguished company. The contrast in appearance couldn't be greater, the tiny Rogers (30.5cm x 19cm.) and the enormous Quad panels (87cm.x 82.5cm.). Because of the nature of the room in which No.2 hi-fi system lives (relatively small and quite square), and the fact that it is used for other things (sewing room, computer room), the Quads have to be parked by the wall and brought out into listening position (easy enough to do as they're quite flat). And this is where the problems start – they are very fussy about placement. If not placed correctly, you get two loudspeakers playing – there is no melding into one to give a stereo image. I had this two-speaker effect sitting in my listening chair – and then I leaned forward and bingo! there was my missing stereo. Quad expert Lilolee once recommended that the optimal position be marked on the floor for future reference. I can now see the wisdom of this recommendation, but unfortunately it's not practical on carpet (and The Boss wouldn't see it as practical on any surface). I'd heard about the problems with Quads and amplification, how it was easy to wreck them (and/or the amps) because of the strange load they present to the amp. However, these have the “clamp†overload protection and they seemed happy with both No.2 amplifier setups (Quad 44/303, EAR834/Quad 606). In any case, I don't play things very loud. Well, I thought I didn't until I found myself with a slight headache. The things are so clear that I was playing them much louder than usual, without realising that's what I was doing. They suck you in and you crank up a bit more volume to hear more. So what do they sound like? In a word, marvellous. If I had to characterise the sound in a word, the word I'd use would be “effortlessâ€Â. You get this open, clean, clear sound, which, as previously mentioned, sucks you in and invites you to play it louder. The ESL effect seems to be more marked with small groups and soloists. In orchestral and choral works, the sound from the Quads is superior to that of the Rogers, but, to my ears, not that much superior. In my beloved Monteverdi's Vespers, the impression of space in San Marco was captured nicely, but the Rogers were by no means shamed. However, with well-recorded small groups and soloists, and with correct positioning, the Quads become startlingly alive in a way that the Rogers never did (of course, perhaps I just didn't position them well enough). In “In the wee small hoursâ€Â, Ol' Blue Eyes was not only there, but there. At the moment, I'm running the Quads through the Sizmik (I simply swapped over the speaker cables from one speaker to the other), so I've no idea what their actual bass performance is like (their Achilles's heel, I've heard), but I may experiment without the Sizmik to hear what happens*. Now here's a curious thing – the Rogers + Sizmik appear to have more bass than do the Quads + Sizmik. Or is it that Q+S have more midrange, which gives the impression of less bass? I haven't worked that one out yet. Certainly there is more midrange. Listening to the two combinations, it's as if, in the case of the Rogers, the treble knob in an old-fashioned amp had been turned well down. As a result, with the Quads, low-level things I'd never heard before kept manifesting themselves, such as little bits of previously-undetected percussion in the “Riverdance†soundtrack. Another feature of the ESLs is their revelation of poor recordings. For example, an old favourite, Kenny Rogers's “Ruby, don't take your love to townâ€Â, which always sounded OK on the LS3/5as, was exposed for the muffled mess that it is. Pity, I'll never be able to listen to it in quite the same way ever again. In the end, when we compare the ESLs with the LS3/5as, it is not a matter of good and bad, but good and better. The two have their own character, and I intend to keep both and keep them operating, using the Rogers for quick listens but setting up the Quads for longer listening sessions. So, as I said somewhere before, I've reached the end of my hi-fi road. I know there are better set-ups than mine. I've been privileged to hear Titian's system, which remains my [i]ne plus ultra[/i], but that level is as attainable for me as is a holiday on Pluto. But with both No.1 and No.2 systems making (subjectively) such a joyous noise, who needs more? (Apart from a complete set of Gardiner cantatas of course). * I subsequently did this, and I found the bass, while not measurable on the Richter scale, to sound so natural and unforced that I throttled back the Sizmik to match. The ESLs are currently being run directly from a Nait 2 without sub and they sound great.
