Who remembers the Dahlquist DQ-10's?

John Dahlquist was a frequent guest back in the Early 70's at the New York audiophile club. He frequently explained and demonstrated  his Dq10 pre and post product model for us.
having said that, the loudspeaker was theoretically supposed to be a moving coil proximity of the quad 57. While it became the rave of Harry Pearson, the speaker was indeed colored and a touch stringent; nothing like a quad by any means. The Spendor BC1 made it look sound like a toy. 
John lives on Long Island at present.

I have had my DQ10s since the middle 80’s and have been working on them every since. The crossovers were completely redone: boards and all as well as the wiring. Eventually I even did some by-pass caps with some well-known name brands used for their individual characteristics. I also did some customized wool felt baffle damping. In recent times I added a Fountek NeoX 1.0 Ribbon Tweeter with its own crossover board. Finally I bought a DBX DriveTrack PA2 to adjust the drivers to work with room acoustics and to fine tune any frequency to my hearing preferences. The detail and the imaging, not to mention the timbre of music is to me quite extraordinary, but like all audiophiles, I do like to experiment “carefully” and do so over time with a lot of research before doing so.

I am at a crossroads in my decision making with regard to the drivers. Technology has come a long way, and there are a lot of very good drivers out there with which to experiment. The original boards and drivers can be kept to fall back upon; however, working on the premise that the original design layout has a lot to do with the width and depth of the imaging, I still feel there is a lot for the design to offer and compete with the newer models . . . after all the crossover is the heart of any speaker.

The DBX has allowed the double subs (DQ1-Ws) to be totally controlled as a active system, and the subs blend completely into the main speakers quite well. The DQ10s have always been criticized for lacking bass; however, in this treatment, it has been remarked how good the bass on these really are. I got a demo disk from Legacy, which has a double bass going down into the basement . . . and the fullness, extension, and detail without distortion cannot be denied. Of course, I had the 13" Seas woofers (no longer made) re-coned and rebuilt. The DQ10s bass unit I did myself.

The neat thing about the DBX is its ability to wirelessly allow the operator to not only view real time frequency responses . . . but to have so many tools to fine tune the sound. The subtle nuances and the finer details like the tell-tail sound that audibly cue one's ears to the sound of real brass cymbals, not to mention the harmonics and decay of the piano strings, really catch one’s ears when one hears these finer details being reproduced from recordings that were not seemingly there before.

The final question is: just how much more can one invest to improve these classics, and how much of a competitive edge do these “ole boys” still have with these young whipper snappers? Perhaps my quest for these classics to shine even more, will provide the answer to that question as this “ole boy” still enjoys his DQ10s!

It was 'Harmony House II' and they were on the upper west side, definitely on York Ave., can't remember how far up, but pretty sure in the 60's. It was pure high end audio.  It was the first time I saw listening rooms in a hifi store.  It was 1975.  NY in its hi-f hay day.  You walked the streets of Canal street with Scott tuners being displayed on the sidewalk...

for the last 20 years you could pick up a pair for  between $150 and  $350.  now all of a sudden i see on the bay everybody wants $1,000 for a pair.  what the hell happened???????.  they are a nice pair of speakers and by this point should be rebuilt but $1,000.  really now