Anything more resolving than 65 year-old speakers?

Listen to MBL omni directional speakers they have Everythung in spades 

with far more dynamics and fantastic micro,macro details even their entry level 126 monitors ,btw their tweeter,and midrange driver are the same on all of their speakers .I am hoping that I can afford a pair in the next 2 years you hear into the record lost on any other speakers I have heard especially their big 101.which is a true full range.

If I were looking for speakers today these are the ones I would purchase.

Dynamikks - cannot be beat especially for the price.

..and the side aside about the Walsh in the MBL comment is why I play about with my diys’....*S*

So far...I’ve only blown up One. And it was one of the first 4 I made.....a long while ago....

They may not be ’perfect’....but I’ve yet (and, apparently neither have y’all) to hear such anyway. Which, I’d suppose, is why sites like AG exist.

Enjoy the warts as well as the nuance, Nevill...;)

Yes, the 57s were great in resolving lightweight programme, ideally chamber music and especially the female voice in recital.  But for other music they had poor dynamics, no 'slam' at all.

Few will disagree that if resolution is your first priority then electrostatic is the way to go.  But since 1957 other companies as well as Quad have moved the game a long way along.  I have used Martin Logan CLX Anniversaries for nearly 10 years now.  Resolution just as good but with some muscle behind it.  Still 3dB down at 56Hz though.

The 57's still ring in my memory whenever I listen to a "stereo". I had subs, tweeters and even tri-amplification but ultimately... sold mine 20 years ago for "more dynamics". At one point recently, I had Eminent Technology LFT 8's, Martin Logan ESL's and Quad 63's all at the same time, in various forms of "stock" and "modified" configurations, The 57's kinda ruined me...ah well... the search continues.