2. speakers
  3. 129668-10261

Sealed subwoofer for ESL-63

I am looking for owners who have successfully integrated their QUAD ESL 63s with a subwoofer.

I recently bought a used pair of QUAD ESL63 and had them rebuilt, panels and electronics, this is my third pair. I have had several monkey boxes in between - Aerial 10T, B&W, KEF, IMF, Tannoys, Proac, Goldmund, Falcon Acoustics kits, etc - but the 63s are very hard to live without when you know what they can do.

My problem is that I am particularly fond of large-scale symphonic works such as Wagner’s The Ring , Beethoven, Mahler, Strauss, etc. but the 63s are very special and very frustrating used full range, they have limited bass and dynamics.

I am retired now and have a fixed income so I cannot keep doing what I did for fifty years, buy, experiment, trade and sell.

I would like to keep the cost of the sub to $1K max for a good condition, one owner unit.

Best regards,
f456gt
sfall
346 posts
 
The Vandersteen sub would be my first choice, but they sell for about $1500. In your price range maybe a REL or Martin Logan. I would get the smallest one they make, and if you can afford it, get 2 of them. The idea is to get something that will keep up with the speed of your ESL's.
ctsooner
2,480 posts
 
You will eventually probably want a set.  Easier to set up and they sound MUCH better. The ultimate is 4 identical subs as you can play with the room that way.  The new Vandersteen sub with the bass EQ works awesome with the panel speakers.  I've heard that set up numerous times as they are very very fast and set up properly, they take on the same sound as your main amp.  To me, that's the best thing about their integration.  That 12 band EQ has tamed my own room a great deal and smoothed everything out. (I have the Quatro's with built in sub/amp .
audiokinesis
2,737 posts
 

Dipoles have smoother in-room bass than monopoles. In general, it takes two monopole sources (intelligently positioned) to approximate the in-room bass smoothness of one dipole source. And it would take four monopole sources to approximate the in-room bass smoothness of two dipole sources.

You may have noticed that people who try a single sub with their Quads or Maggies go back to no sub about half the time. You may have also noticed that people who try two subs almost always keep them. This trend continues as the number of subs increases. This is because the in-room smoothness improves as the number of subs increases.

And smooth bass = fast bass. I can explain this statement if you would like.

Imo a single equalized sub can work quite well for a single-person sweet spot. The larger the listening area, the less the ability of a single equalized sub to maintain smoothness throughout that area. Multiple subs intelligently positioned do a better job of being consistently smooth throughout the room. I can explain why if you’d like.

So if your sweet spot is small, a single equalized sub may be a good choice. If you want a large sweet spot, consider either two or preferably three or four small subs, and consider assembling kits to expand the buying power of your limited budget.

Best of luck with your quest!

Duke


shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
Subwoofers are not dipoles. At these low frequencies they behave as an omnidirectional source. 

On your budget it will be tough to find anything good enough to match the crystal clear quality of the quad - you also really need a high end sub for bass heavy music like Wagner and as Duke suggests a couple of subs would be much better than one.

Two JL Fathoms would do well but that is beyond your budget. 

DIY might be your only option.
More to discover