The Shure V15 V with a Jico SAS/B stylus VS The Soundsmith Hyperion MR and Lyra Atlas SL

Anyone remember Sonus Blue??   

What is so interesting is that Mijostyn and I arrived at the same speakers (full range ESLs) driven by the same brand of amplifier (Atmasphere) completely independent of one another and before we ever met on this forum, and yet we differ emphatically on every other aspect: on the absolute necessity of subwoofers (I think the idea is good but I am living without in favor of simplicity; whereas in Mijo's case subwoofers are a must, and it must be a specific design of subwoofer), on the indispensability of digital processing (I wouldn't have that crap in my house), on the necessity to equalize (for me, not even in the analog domain), and in general to allow anything digital into the analog listening chain.  (I don't hate digital, but if I want digital, I would use a digital source.)  I'd love to hear his system and to have him hear mine.

@richardbrand In relation to the Quad ESL Speakers, I am a user of Stacked 57's that are completely refurbished and are also incorporating a replacement Treble Panel that creates + 3dB lift to the Upper Frequency.

Within my Local Audio Group there are Fully Original 57's, Fully Original Stacked 57's, there have been 63's, both very early production models and later models, 2812 and 2912's.

My experiences had within the Audio Group, is that out of all the listening experiences had, there is only the Later production ESL 63's that did not impress in the same capacity that the other models have.

This same experience of the 63 model has extended to my hearing it in use outside of the Audio Group, when the 63 is heard and not enjoyed the likely hood is a Later Production Model is in use.

There are a Group of individuals in the UK who carry out modifications to the 63, there are suggestions a structural change was made to the later produced models  production techniques. Maybe the changes by the Group of individuals is to create the sonic that is capable of being created. Which has much closer similarities to the one that has been discovered in the earliest run of the production models.    

@richardbrand What is so special about the 10th row is that is where we use to sit, I can vouch for that location. The presentation may be better elsewhere, but I can not say.

You obviously do not under stand how lines sources work. The best are continuous such as ribbons and ESLs. Separate dynamic drivers works OK in a concert system, but not so much in a home system. If the drivers are less than 1/2 wavelength of the highest frequency they are to reproduce apart the drivers function acoustically as one driver and if the combination of drivers is longer than the lowest wavelength then they function as a line source, a one driver line source. What you talk about does not happen. Another way to look at it is you are only listening to the portion of the line source that is closest to your ear, the size of that portion increasing as the frequency drops. There is no cancelation or reinforcement. What you do get is more powerful projection by an order of magnitude and a unique radiation pattern that limits early reflections to the front wall only, very easy to control. The virtual point source you are touting is the exact opposite. It is the weakest radiator with the maximal amount of room interaction. Peter Walker blew it on that one. It was Jim Strickland of Acoustat who finally got it right when he came out with the "+" series. For a line source to function as one down to 1 Hz the line has to terminate at barriers, floors and ceilings or be 50 feet long. If you think that square wave test works you are smoking some good stuff. That is a fairy tail or marketing drivel. No two speakers are exactly alike and music is not square waves. In ESLs just the variance between transformers is enough to throw things off forgetting about stator distances and flatness. I was involved in the testing and formatting of the HQD system back in the late 70's. I have blown up more quads than you have listened to. I have also been using ESLs since then with a few short interruptions. All have been line sources since 1981.   You should get a CD or computer program with Sine Sweeps and you can measure your system's frequency response. Very informative. 

    @pindac  That is what the HQD system was, Stacked 57s with a Decca Ribbon Tweeter between the two and 30" Hartley subwoofers. It was amazing...when working. We blew 57s and ribbons almost every day. They were so much cleaner than anything else of the day that it was easy to turn them up above their handling capability, except for the woofers. Those were indestructible. The Quads would blow before they distorted. Sound Labs speakers will saturate transformers before the panels suffer any damage and their dispersion is more controlled than stacked 57s. If you are not using subwoofers you can actually rap the diaphragm against the stators without doing any damage. Later Quads lacked the magic of the 57s, with all their weaknesses the 57's did something no other loudspeaker did, make the midrange sound real.

@lewm  Ditto

@stringreen No

I have installed the capacitors in my XLR to RCA adapters which are in line with my phono cables. The harshness is gone, a big plus. I have to listen more before I can make any definitive comments other than for $480 this is some cartridge. I do have a slight noise issue I have to conquer, probably a grounding issue. 

Pindac, you’ve risen in my esteem. Stacked 57s are among the finest sounding speakers I’ve ever heard. I’ve a local friend who even runs 3 pairs! Dave Slagle (EMIA) built for him tube amplifiers that direct drive the panels via a single transformer that couples the output stage of the amplifiers to the panels. Thus he bypasses the Quad transformer and complex input electronics, which helps too. That sound is divine. One of the few instances where I experience audiophilia enviosa.