ER Audio Electrostatics - QUAD ESL beaters.

[Toppsy]

I have been asked by a new member to this forum to pen this new thread, so before I start, welcome to our little world MICHAELPAGE26.

As older members of this forum will know I have built the ESLIII kit and Acorn Kit and have a pair of One Thing Audio refurbished Quad57ÃÂ*s. Now the ER Audio Acorn ESL versus the older kit ESLIII, (that is still available), is it a better sounding speaker than the older kit, the ESLIII. In a nutshell I have to say YES I think it is and to my ears both better the 57ÃÂ*s.

Before I progress to sound differences I think a little on the design of each speaker might be of interest.

For those not familiar with these electrostatic speakers they come in kit form from ER Audio in Perth Australia. Rob Mackinlay (a UK expat) has been designing ESL speakers for around 10-years now and has produced several designs in kit form for the DIY builder.

The Acorn consists of a stacked pair of panels with discreet bass, midrange and treble sections to each panel. Each Acorn panel measures 925mm high x 450mm wide. One panel is stacked vertically above the other, thus making then 1850mm high! Low frequencies are bled from the mid and treble sections by discreet inline resistors from the audio transformer. Similarly high frequencies are bled from the bass panels. The Acorn is the front pairing speakers to a full 5.1 surround sound ESL system. The rear effect speakers consist of a single panel version of the mains. There is also a curved front ESL in the pipeline.

The ESLIII consists of 2 x 225mm wide full range panels with a 75mm wide treble panel between. The panels measure 1200mm high. Each panel is fed the full frequency range through the audio transformer. The 2 bass/full range panels are angled to give larger dispersion of soundstage.

Now to sound comparison:

To my ears of the three pairs of electrostatic speakers I own, the Acorns are by far the best sounding of the three. One does not loose ambience of soundstage whether sitting or standing. They throw a big convincing soundstage with fantastic transient attack and produce good deep, accurate and low bass. I think those attending the last EggFest would agree these speakers can deliver bass? These are the best sounding ESLs I have heard to date and well worth the extra cost over that of the ESLIII kit. As a comparison the ESLIIIs are a little lacking of convincing bass, but match the Acorns in the midrange and nearly match them in the high frequencies. They benefit from a subwoofer. They do not throw quite as large a soundstage as the Acorns and one looses ambience if standing. But they are still better sounding than the Quad 57s to my ears and both the ER Audio kits do not suffer the single directionality of the Quads. Move a little from the sweet spot of the Quads and you loose one speaker, not so ERs. In fairness to the ESLIII these were designed around high power solid state class ëAÃÂ* amps and seem to be more amp dependant than the Acorns. I have heard mine driven by a Sugden A21a amp and this gave amazing bass in comparison to my WAD 6550 amp but lost out to the better midrange from the 6550.

So Michael:

NO the Acorns do not need a subwoofer for normal hifi use.

YES I think they do justify the price difference over the ESLIII, especially if you consider the cost of adding a decent sub woofer this speaker will take you to the cost and above that of the Acorn kit that doesnÃÂ*t need one. Especially if you go the active sub route I experimented with. And then there are the issues of getting the sub(s) to react as fast as the panels which IÃÂ*ve not yet convincingly achieved.

These IÃÂ*m sure are QUAD beaters and represent value for money. I doubt they would be outperformed by the new Quad 2805 and 2905 speakers that retail in UK for £4500 and £6000 respectively. The Acorn speaker kit will cost from around £1550 in the UK which is less than a third the cost of the new 2905ÃÂ*s! And remember QUAD GMBH in Germany are making new 57ÃÂ*s for the princely sum of £6,300 or if you want a pair of new 63ÃÂ*s these will set you back £7,500!! What more can I say.

Presently IÃÂ*m enjoying listening to the Acorns through the Yarland 845SE amp featured elsewhere on this forum. I have done the same upgrade mods as posted by GLOBAL. With this amp they sound simply stunning and only delivers around 16W per channel.

By-the-way, thanks GLOBAL for all your help in modding the Yarland.

Regards

Colin (aka TOPPSY)

[Global]

Very welcome Colin!

Glad the Yarland is pushing the electrostatics in a satsifactory manner.

Mark

[Toppsy]

Out of interest does any member living within travel distance from Rossendale, Lancs. have a pair of Quad 988 or 989 or Martin Logan's that they would be interested in me bringing over my Acorns for a comparison listen? Could be interesting as I've never heard either of these quads and would love to know how the OZ DIY kit compares.

[michaelpage26]

I would like to thank Toppsy for opening this thread for me, as it was a little bit difficult to be with you in Eggfest3 (I don't live in UK) to make up my own opinion regarding the Er-audio Acorns.
Also the idea of a comparison between his Acorns and commercial designs like Martin Logan Vantages,Aeons,Ascents etc, and Quads 989,988,2805 and 2905 , would really help future owners including me. Also comparision between Acorn and conventional designs would help much, too.
I would like to thank everybody in this forum for his interest to my request, and I hope that this thread will gather as much as possible information and many opinions about the Acorns.
Any opinions about advantages but especially shortcomings of Acorns are really appreciated.

Best Regards
Michael

[Toppsy]

HI Micheal,

glad you got your postings issue sorted and welcome.

I have one of the forum members coming around to my house tonight for a listen to the acorns. Surprisingly he only lives down the road from me.

He has listened to Quad 989's before, through the WAD 6650 amp at the Bristol Show, I think, and is eager for a comparison listen, though he will be comparing from memory. I have a WAD KaT6550 as well as my 845SE amp.

I will ask him to post his opinions so you have an independant assessment.

I'm sure some of the guys who attended the last eggfest may wish to post their own opinions?

Regards
Colin

[Stratmangler]

Hi Colin (Toppsy)

Very many thanks for the listening session around at your place last night - I enjoyed myself immensely !

I would first like to say that I applaud the standards of construction and finish you have attained with your Acorns - I have seen commercially made products that do not come near to your efforts for presentation.

As for the sonics of the Acorns, I can honestly say that it is a pleasure to listen to such a wide bandwidth design.

A lot of folks reckon that electrostats need to be bolstered up with subwoofers and things - that relates only to inferior transducers, and although revolutionary in their time I am of course thinking of the Quads.
And that also relates to the current Quad product (although I haven't heard the stuff they've just released the same probably still applies)!

I've rarely heard a "stat" equal the lower register power of a box design - the Acorns do just that.
And then you've just got a beautiful seamless journey up to the limits of the audible frequency range.
And the Acorns image well - you're not as tied to the "hot spot" anything like as much as the Quads.

Of your two amps the Yarland gets better results with these speakers - the WAD design seems to be a little bit uptight and proper in comparison.

The Yarland/Acorn combo cuts the mustard, and that's a fact !

The only downside, as far as I can make out, is that one becomes accutely aware of things such as poor vocal mic techniques used in the studio - it takes a little mental readjustment to filter poor engineering techniques out and concentrate on the overall recording and performance(s).

Once again, thanks for a great evening.

Chris

[Dont]

Hi

Nearly finished a set of Acorns -- it has been a bit of a long row -- mostly due to not doing this sort of thing for the last 30 years.

Much of the way through my favorite music -- and hearing things and timbres to voices that I did not know were there -- even though I do not have bad equipment -- albeit it long in the tooth -- the original Kef 105's

[Ali Tait]

Yes, they are rather good aren't they. A friend is building me a pair of direct coupled amps using GM70's to drive them. I've heard the prototype and it was the best I've yet heard from these speakers.

[pet-240]

Originally Posted by Ali Tait

Yes, they are rather good aren't they. A friend is building me a pair of direct coupled amps using GM70's to drive them. I've heard the prototype and it was the best I've yet heard from these speakers.

Hey Ali,

Any further news on these amps at all?

Is there a thread for them?

Chuz,

Drew.

[pet-240]

Whoops......better subscribe....

Chuz,

Drew.