Some feel the ESL-67 had a better midrange but I've come to find they feel this way because of the lack of low frequency reproduction. Having little bass, and accentuated midrange, there nothing else to draw their attention away from it. It's the masking affect, a natural occurrence in which a sound covers another over, as perceived by a listener. Personally I prefer the 2805 by a margin. Bass is important for my listening. Without it, there is no foundation.
Quad 989/2905 all around qualities
Hi,
I would like to ask how newer versions of QUAD ESL with additional
bass panels perform in other styles of music rather traditional QUAD ESL
ultimate - jazz, classic, vocals and acoustic in general. Are they a way better then ESL63 let's say in progressive rock, pop of 80's psychedelic, fusion, or modern free jazz with some touch of electronic ?
I am not talking about hard rock, trance/house/excessive electronic or dynamic music.
Unfortunately, I can't listen to the new QUADS ESL in my area, so all i can do is trust some reviews and ask for people opinions.
I liked a lot ESL63 for what they do, but they were almost unlistenable while I was feeding them with LED ZEPPELIN or BoneyM for example.
So how are the new ones ?
Thank you.
I would like to ask how newer versions of QUAD ESL with additional
bass panels perform in other styles of music rather traditional QUAD ESL
ultimate - jazz, classic, vocals and acoustic in general. Are they a way better then ESL63 let's say in progressive rock, pop of 80's psychedelic, fusion, or modern free jazz with some touch of electronic ?
I am not talking about hard rock, trance/house/excessive electronic or dynamic music.
Unfortunately, I can't listen to the new QUADS ESL in my area, so all i can do is trust some reviews and ask for people opinions.
I liked a lot ESL63 for what they do, but they were almost unlistenable while I was feeding them with LED ZEPPELIN or BoneyM for example.
So how are the new ones ?
Thank you.
- ...
- 65 posts total
- 65 posts total