AudioCircle
Other Stuff => Archived Circles => Hot off the Press => Topic started by: jtwrace on 1 Oct 2010, 04:02 pm
-
I've PM'd two people on this forum about them. I would like to hear others input that have heard them and definitely if you own them.
What do you think? Give me pros / cons.
And if you happen to be an owner close to NC, I'd like to hear them. Any model is fine.
TIA
-
I've PM'd two people on this forum about them. I would like to hear others input that have heard them and definitely if you own them.
What do you think? Give me pros / cons.
TIA
I love mine, with no desire to do anything different.
Pro
- Effortless and dynamic
- Great image/sound stage without head in vise position needed
- Works well in most "normal" rooms
- Efficient, very easy to drive
- Less fatiguing
- Reasonable cost for very high performance performance (in other words, value)
Con
- Needs at least 1 sub, better yet 3-4 placed around the room
- They are fairly big, but need stout stands like a monitor would
- Not audio jewelry fit and finish, low WAF if it's an issue (not for me)
- Not readily available for auditions
-
I've PM'd two people on this forum about them. I would like to hear others input that have heard them and definitely if you own them.
What do you think? Give me pros / cons.
TIA
I have a pair of Nathans, if you want to hear about them.
-
Actually, I'd say that TomS summed things up pretty well, with the exception of the Nathans not being as physically large.
-
I have a pair of Nathans, if you want to hear about them.
Yes please.
-
Yes please.
They're the best speakers I've heard. I think they are even better than the Orions, which were previously the best I had heard.
They have the dynamics and effortlessness of the best horn systems without any horn sound.
I find it very hard to describe their sound because it just depends on the recording. For instance, I have a number of Telarc recordings of The Cleveland Orchestra in Severance Hall. I can sit and listen to these and it sounds like I'm at a concert, except I didn't have to drive all the way up there. (It's not perfect, but it's astonishingly close.)
I have some recordings that sound pretty bad, and I just don't care to listen to them anymore, but most recordings are very enjoyable with these speakers.
I also listen to rock, blues, and jazz, as well as using these speakers for movies. What I hear seems to be very close to what I have heard onstage and in the recording studio.
It's like using a very good pair of headphones, but with bass you can feel and a sense of openness and a soundstage you don't get with headphones and normal stereo recordings.
When I think of all those adjectives that people use to try to describe the sound of a stereo system, I think of them in terms of recordings now. I think that a recording is dynamic, transparent, detailed, has impact, etc. The speakers just get out of the way and let what's recorded come through.
There are some drawbacks. My wife doesn't really like the way they look. The speakers I had before this looked more like furniture and she prefers that look. However, once I got her to listen to them she "got it," and now she is very fond of them indeed - or at least very fond of listening to them. :)
They really do require that you use subwoofers, and 3 is the recommended number. So it's a more complex system than just a pair of floorstanders or whatever. (The subs don't need to be that expensive. I paid under $400 total for mine.)
I suppose that these speakers have sort of ruined the hobby for me. I no longer have any real desire to check out other speaker systems. I don't want to look into new equipment at all. I just listen to music.
I think I might move up to a pair of Abbeys at some point, but I'm in no hurry to do so.
-
They have the dynamics and effortlessness of the best horn systems without any horn sound.
This is HUGE for me.
I just listen to music.
That's awesome!
Thanks for your feedback. I've never heard the Orions. The best sounding speaker to me so far has been the Kaiser Acoustics but at $40k they're out of my league. They truly did everything right for me.
-
This is HUGE for me.
That's awesome!
Thanks for your feedback. I've never heard the Orions. The best sounding speaker to me so far has been the Kaiser Acoustics but at $40k they're out of my league. They truly did everything right for me.
I'd have to agree the Kaiser's I heard at RMAF were tops for me too. I have no idea what the rest of that system cost, but $40k as a starting point is way out of my league too. The Abbeys at less than 1/10th the cost with subs come darn close to that experience and I don't have nearly the associated gear.
-
I'd have to agree the Kaiser's I heard at RMAF were tops for me too. I have no idea what the rest of that system cost, but $40k as a starting point is way out of my league too. The Abbeys at less than 1/10th the cost with subs come darn close to that experience and I don't have nearly the associated gear.
The gear they were using was about another $25k.
How close? What percentage of the way there do you think?
I think I have a really good front end so I should be OK in that dept.
-
The gear they were using was about another $25k.
How close? What percentage of the way there do you think?
I think I have a really good front end so I should be OK in that dept.
Well, I think that was about 3 years ago and the room at the Hyatt was the size of an elementary school gym :wink:
In percentages, maybe high 90's, whatever that means. The total believability/palpability of human voices, overall harmonic richness, and lack of any kind if upper mid stridency or glare at all were the things that stood out to me. Quick as lightning on plucked strings and percussion too. My speakers are right there, and I'd venture a guess they have much more headroom. I have a sealed GR Servo/Dymaxion and 2 dual GR OB Servo's so bass is, shall we say, more than adequate.
Really, Turkey whispered the only big downer. The Abbeys have sort of ruined the hobby for me. I'm spending time now doing things like fabricating stands for them, not looking to swap out gear.
I do listen to a LOT more music end to end now.
-
The total believability/palpability of human voices, overall harmonic richness, and lack of any kind if upper mid stridency or glare at all were the things that stood out to me. Quick as lightning on plucked strings and percussion too.
YES! They had the electrostatic sound that I love but without the glare. On top of all of this they had oomph.
-
FYI - Stands are discussed here:
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1730-Speaker-stands-for-Geddes-speakers
-
FYI - Stands are discussed here:
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1730-Speaker-stands-for-Geddes-speakers
I'm gluing veneer as we speak...
-
FYI - Stands are discussed here:
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?1730-Speaker-stands-for-Geddes-speakers
Thanks. I found that earlier today.
-
I'm gluing veneer as we speak...
Pics?
-
This quote is from http://gedlee.com/abbey.htm
The recommended listening position is off-axis, which means the on-axis hole is simply not a problem.
What would be the ideal off-axis position?
-
Most loudspeakers have been designed to be facing out with little to no toe in. The GedLee loudspeakers are not like that. They are designed to be placed with very strong toe in, approximately 45 degrees with respect to the side wall, hence minimizing side reflections as well. The ideal seating position for the listener is then at least 2 feet behind where the speakers asymptotes cross. AudioKinesis follows a similar philosophy and setup. Take a look at my systems page for a better idea of what I mean.
Anand.
-
Most loudspeakers have been designed to be facing out with little to no toe in. The GedLee loudspeakers are not like that. They are designed to be placed with very strong toe in, approximately 45 degrees with respect to the side wall, hence minimizing side reflections as well. The ideal seating position for the listener is then at least 2 feet behind where the speakers asymptotes cross. AudioKinesis follows a similar philosophy and setup. Take a look at my systems page for a better idea of what I mean.
Anand.
Yes, I read that and saw that already. That's what Dr. Geddes is speaking about? Did you see the quote that I posted? It seems that he means that the listener would sit off axis. No?
-
The listener is off axis with respect to the center of the loudspeaker (or the 0 degree axis of the speaker).
Anand.
-
The listener is off axis with respect to the center of the loudspeaker (or the 0 degree axis of the speaker).
Anand.
Got it!
-
Hi guys, is there a room reason or other reason people get the Nathan over the Abbey? It seems the only the $300 difference would lead to more Abbey purchases unless there is something Im missing
-
Hi guys, is there a room reason or other reason people get the Nathan over the Abbey? It seems the only the $300 difference would lead to more Abbey purchases unless there is something Im missing
It's a $300 per speaker difference,or $600 speaker pair difference.
The Abbey is superior in all ways however. I've listened to both. It is larger in size and that is what you give up relative to the Nathans.
But make no mistake the larger GedLee loudspeakers are superior in smaller rooms than the smaller ones are. They are superior in maintaining directivity control. I asked this same question to Earl about 1 1/2 years ago.
Anand.
-
TomS ...
Well, I think that was about 3 years ago and the room at the Hyatt was the size of an elementary school gym ...
Tom....yes, it was 2008 RMAF...
Powered by 50W Mastersound Finals 845 SET monoblocks...I really liked those Kaiser's...
.....but....in 2009 in a smaller room....not as good as 2008. :scratch:
(http://www.stereotimes.com/images/RMaF2008-365a.gif)
Show comment... (http://blog.stereophile.com/rmaf2008/101208international/)
Now....back to the Abbey's.... :D
-
Thanks for posting that about the prices as I made that mistake when first ordering my Abbeys (Doh!) which turned into Nathans. My sentiment's about these speakers echo Turkey's, I heard the Abbeys (thanks Doug!) but it was in someone else house with their components but it was enough for me to get the Nathans, wish I got to hear them in all their Earlly glory (I wanted the Abbeys but it was a monetary decision) I also did not know that larger speakers being better in smaller rooms. I have also been looking for stands and the only ones I found to be aesthetically pleasing are the BOSE ones but don't know how good they are (I have white Nathan's and think they are quite beautiful but most to all stands do nothing for my eyes and I have spent far too much time looking for stands). i also have a Danley Sh 95 as a center channel the Danleys I have heard are different then the Gedlee's, they are down in Georgia and may be worth paying them a visit. These speakers have made my speaker journey come to a most pleasant stopping point. I live in Ct a little too far from NC but best of luck with your search.
-
IMO, the Gedlee speakers will NEVER be the bottleneck in your system. If you feed them crappy sources and amps, they will sound OK, maybe even pretty good, because they are so well designed. But, feed them a great source and couple them to a great amp and they sound phenomenal. Of course, a sub or 3 is not just recommended, but absolutely necessary for best performance.
-
I have the Abbeys... purchased them last summer and have been quite content with them. In fact, in a lot of ways, they changed the hobby for me. I'm getting the resolution, dynamics, soundstage, and imaging I expected I'd have to pay a lot more for...and I've just been using an inexpensive receiver recommended by Earl. The Abbeys have clearly shown me that investing in loudspeakers is THE way to go from here on out. I could easily see a lot of people on this forum being happier if they'd sell their expensive electronics, pick up a pair of Abbeys, and just be done with it all for a few years (until something clearly superior arrives).
You certainly don't NEED 3 subs, Earl just recommends three or more subs to ANY setup. The Abbeys don't really require anything special, setup-wise, except you have to be able to fit speakers of that size in your setup.
Compared to some other nice high-end offerings I've heard or used in home, what the Abbeys do better are:
Coherency
Dynamics
Imaging
Resolution
I'll try to be more in depth when I'm not typing a post at near 2 a.m. after a long day.
-
It's a $300 per speaker difference,or $600 speaker pair difference.
The Abbey is superior in all ways however. I've listened to both. It is larger in size and that is what you give up relative to the Nathans.
But make no mistake the larger GedLee loudspeakers are superior in smaller rooms than the smaller ones are. They are superior in maintaining directivity control. I asked this same question to Earl about 1 1/2 years ago.
Anand.
Very interesting...
-
Nice comments - thanks.
As to my speakers ruining your "hobby", I take that as the highest compliment. That because audio "equipment" never was my hobby - it has always been about the music to me. I found that people simply were NOT listening to the music, they were "oogling" the equipment - I find the equipment incredibly boring! Let's not mince words here - if the looks of any part of your system or the room are all that important, then its NOT about the music. Getting past the continual swaping out of equipment and just settling in to listen to "the recordings" (as someone most correctly pointed out) is such a major step in the right direction. There is no looking back once you reach this point.
-
Yes lets not mince words, its all about the music, its all about the music, its all about the music, no one should ever make anything beautiful, ever, or even attempt to, because that's right its all about the music, its all about the music, its all about the music, incredibly ugly women are better at the SEX because its all about the sex, its ALL about the sex!
Please feel free to insert the gender of your choosing in the post. Because it may or may not be all about the inserting :wink:
-
Anyone in Austin with Gedlees? If not then Texas? Very interested
-
Most loudspeakers have been designed to be facing out with little to no toe in. The GedLee loudspeakers are not like that...
Having trouble articulating my thoughts here, but I think you'll know what I mean. When most speakers are toed in hard the soundstage loses width and the imaging becomes adversely affected, so I am in agreement with your opening statement. I understand that a wave guide necessitates strong toe in, but how does that affect the width of soundstage compared to a regular speaker with very little toe in?
I think another good question is every system and design is a compromise of sorts. What in your opinion are the trade offs with the GedLee / Geddes?
-
Having trouble articulating my thoughts here, but I think you'll know what I mean. When most speakers are toed in hard the soundstage loses width and the imaging becomes adversely affected, so I am in agreement with your opening statement. I understand that a wave guide necessitates strong toe in, but how does that affect the width of soundstage compared to a regular speaker with very little toe in?
I think another good question is every system and design is a compromise of sorts. What in your opinion are the trade offs with the GedLee / Geddes?
On top of these questions I have another.
So, I purchase from Dr. Geddes and get the Abbey's and get 'em all setup. I take the measurements and adjust accordingly (to me). Is Dr. Geddes OK with reviewing measurements? What is the after sale service like?
-
When most speakers are toed in hard the soundstage loses width and the imaging becomes adversely affected, so I am in agreement with your opening statement. I understand that a wave guide necessitates strong toe in, but how does that affect the width of soundstage compared to a regular speaker with very little toe in?
I think another good question is every system and design is a compromise of sorts. What in your opinion are the trade offs with the GedLee / Geddes?
CD waveguides do not "necessitates strong toe in" they allow it. A toed in pair of loudspeakers will always have a wider "sweat-spot" than a directly pointed pair for reasons well described on my web site. BUT, you cannot toe-in speakers that do not have CD because then the frequency response at the seating location is no longer satisfactory or stable at different seats. Waveguides allow you to do something which all speakers would like to do, but most cannot.
What are the compromises? Size and appearance. Getting high directivity simply requires large surfaces and the complex shapes of these surfaces and the highly radiused corners does not allow for "classical" looking "boutique" enclosures. You get great sound, but you have to live with the large size and their appearance and construction, because any change towards smaller more fashionable designs will necessitate a lowering of the sound quality.
-
On top of these questions I have another.
So, I purchase from Dr. Geddes and get the Abbey's and get 'em all setup. I take the measurements and adjust accordingly (to me). Is Dr. Geddes OK with reviewing measurements? What is the after sale service like?
I am not sure what "adjust accordingly (to me)" means, or what it would mean for me to "review" those measurements. If you buy a pair of speakers from me then each speakers is measured to insure that it works perfectly - no further measurements are required. I, of course, don't believe in "room correction" above the modal region, so the speakers should be setup in your room unmodified from what they leave my shop as. IN the modal range, if you buy my subs, I will tell your what measurements to take, then I analyze them with my proprietary software and I send you the parameters for a DCX2496 to optimally setup the subs for your particular room. If you choose to buy subs elsewhere then you need to do this setup yourself. But above say 200 Hz. no change to the loudspeakers should ever be done as the direct field has been designed to be flat and should not be changed in any way.
Voicing the speakers is not something that I would ever condon so I guess you would be on your own for that.
-
I am not sure what "adjust accordingly (to me)" means, or what it would mean for me to "review" those measurements. If you buy a pair of speakers from me then each speakers is measured to insure that it works perfectly - no further measurements are required. I, of course, don't believe in "room correction" above the modal region, so the speakers should be setup in your room unmodified from what they leave my shop as. IN the modal range, if you buy my subs, I will tell your what measurements to take, then I analyze them with my proprietary software and I send you the parameters for a DCX2496 to optimally setup the subs for your particular room. If you choose to buy subs elsewhere then you need to do this setup yourself. But above say 200 Hz. no change to the loudspeakers should ever be done as the direct field has been designed to be flat and should not be changed in any way.
Voicing the speakers is not something that I would ever condon so I guess you would be on your own for that.
I'm speaking of setup and tweaking the active crossover. That's it! I don't use a DCX2496 but use something very similar the Ashly 3.24CL. My DCX went bad after one year so I couldn't bring myself to purchase another. I'm speaking of just dialing the Abbey's to the subs...I guess you answered my question though. :(
-
I'm speaking of setup and tweaking the active crossover. That's it! I don't use a DCX2496 but use something very similar the Ashly 3.24CL. My DCX went bad after one year so I couldn't bring myself to purchase another. I'm speaking of just dialing the Abbey's to the subs...I guess you answered my question though. :(
For those of you who are rolling your own with subwoofers (quite a few GedLee owners actually including myself), this article (http://www.hifizine.com/2010/09/subwoofer-equalization-and-integration-with-the-minidsp-2x4/) written by our own John Reekie is a very nice summary on what tools one needs to optimize subwoofers in room.
Many newbies have done it, but it does require you to purchase some equipment for obvious reasons. I have sent measurements I have done on REW to Earl and he has given me some advice, but the advice will be limited because he may not know how to adjust your particular active crossover that YOU are using, he is familiar with his subs and the DCX 2496.
And...above 200Hz is above the Schroeder frequency and above most room modal issues so the GedLee speakers are dominant and of course shouldn't be messed with or modified. Below 200 Hz is a completely different story and that's where one needs to tweak with room placement of subs, crossover frequency, slope, phase, etc...
Anand.
-
I have done on REW to Earl and he has given me some advice, but the advice will be limited because he may not know how to adjust your particular active crossover that YOU are using, he is familiar with his subs and the DCX 2496.
Anand.
That's all I was asking. Would Dr. Geddes look and offer some advice. That's all!
-
I'm speaking of just dialing the Abbey's to the subs...I guess you answered my question though. :(
A point that hasn't been made clear is that Earl does not encourage crossing over the mains; he runs them full range. Also, the subs are not crossed over in a traditional sense. In a multi-sub system, the crossover frequencies can be (usually are) different for each sub, the subs are all mono, and they are distributed throughout the room to average out modal variations.
-
A point that hasn't been made clear is that Earl does not encourage crossing over the mains; he runs them full range. Also, the subs are not crossed over in a traditional sense. In a multi-sub system, the crossover frequencies can be (usually are) different for each sub, the subs are all mono, and they are distributed throughout the room to average out modal variations.
Ahh. I didn't know that. How is placement of the subs decided?
-
Ahh. I didn't know that. How is placement of the subs decided?
http://mehlau.net/audio/multisub_geddes/ (http://mehlau.net/audio/multisub_geddes/)
-
http://mehlau.net/audio/multisub_geddes/ (http://mehlau.net/audio/multisub_geddes/)
Very interesting. So different then what I'm used to.
-
Very interesting. So different that what I'm used to.
It works. Try a variety of subs, not all the same, nor necessarily the same xo's. Use one primary in a corner with some room gain, then the other 2 or 3 scattered about closer to and behind the listening position, but 6-10db down from the primary. You really can't tell they're even there or on at all most of the time, but the overall bass response is much smoother. There is no particular magic or voodoo in this, as averaged measurements around the listening position confirm what's happening.
-
It works. Try a variety of subs, not all the same, nor necessarily the same xo's. Use one primary in a corner with some room gain, then the other 2 or 3 scattered about closer to and behind the listening position, but 6-10db down from the primary. You really can't tell they're even there or on at all most of the time, but the overall bass response is much smoother. There is no particular magic or voodoo in this, as averaged measurements around the listening position confirm what's happening.
What software do you use? REW? What would the feq range be for each sub? Lets say we're using three.
-
I use Room EQ Wizard and ocasionally HOLM acoustics.
My pair of dual GR OB servos' go to about 80 hz. A sealed GR servo serves as primary in a front corner and goes to about 50 hz. I'm still experimenting with placement of the OB's as I was previously using those as stands for the Abbeys. I am building new shorter stands so once those are done I can move the OB subs around. I also have an SVS CS Ultra (ported tube style) that I can throw in for good measure in the back of the room. I've been considering some sort of bigger sealed sub for ULF duty, which is what I'm thinking Anand was doing, 2 U-frames and a ULF or 2.
-
I use Room EQ Wizard and ocasionally HOLM acoustics.
My pair of dual GR OB servos' go to about 80 hz. A sealed GR servo serves as primary in a front corner and goes to about 50 hz.
The pair go to 80Hz from where? The second to 50Hz from where?
Is it 15Hz > 50Hz (pair) then 50Hz > 80Hz (single)?
-
The pair go to 80Hz from where? The second to 50Hz from where?
Is it 15Hz > 50Hz (pair) then 50Hz > 80Hz (single)?
The high passes are just the subsonic filters in the amps. OB's go from about 20-80 low pass, sealed 20-50 low pass. I don't think there are any absolutes on this as it depends on room and other factors. There is a LOT of flexibility in tuning this way, but generally you'd would want to overlap. Earl uses bandpass subs with sharper acoustic rolloffs and I think runs them up higher. Mine sounds quite good so I just quit fussing with it as there are endless possibilities.
-
I use Room EQ Wizard and ocasionally HOLM acoustics.
I've been considering some sort of bigger sealed sub for ULF duty, which is what I'm thinking Anand was doing, 2 U-frames and a ULF or 2.
So Jason, you can see why I was interested in the Rythmik sub to take care of the super low end i.e. <20 Hz to about 50hz was what I was thinking. I don't know what the crossover slope will be, it all depends on measurements, but definitely the sub will be near the corner. My current U-frame subs crossover at 90Hz, Butterworth, 4th order. I tried multiple other crossover points and slopes (even the popular LR) but the Butterworth worked best.
Markus Mehlau's site is a very nice one as well that goes into the specifics of the Geddes asymmetric sub placement. Everybody should read that as well as Todd Welti's/Floyd's symmetric sub placement technique to better educate themselves with subwoofer optimization, not only with Geddes speakers, but literally any speaker. This is pioneering stuff in my opinion.
Anand.
-
Like Anand I am crossing my home brew subs at 90Hz, so they are handling the 20-90Hz frequencies, I also run mine 90 degrees out of phase using L-R slopes and they blend seamlessly with my Abbey 12A's.
-
Like Anand I am crossing my home brew subs at 90Hz, so they are handling the 20-90Hz frequencies, I also run mine 90 degrees out of phase using L-R slopes and they blend seamlessly with my Abbey 12A's.
Welcome to A.C.!!! Post some pics of those Abbey's. :thumb:
-
I guess I'll throw in my 2 cents... I built a pair of Abbeys last year and haven't stopped loving them. They have great imaging, dynamics and a very natural sounding high end (not overly accentuated like so many speakers). I run them full range with two bandpass subs in the mix (no crossover). The subs contribute from ~20 to 110 Hz. I am using a DCX & class D amp to drive the subs. Pics of the speakers and stands in are in this linked thread (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=56687.msg651690#msg651690). Some info on the subs can be found at this link (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/159811-bandpass-sonotubes.html).
-Doug
-
OK JTW here are a couple of pics one at a time I guess, here is a close up of one Abbey.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=36613)
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=36615)
And here is one of the whole system.
-
Very nice! :thumb:
-
I guess I'll throw in my 2 cents... I built a pair of Abbeys last year and haven't stopped loving them. They have great imaging, dynamics and a very natural sounding high end (not overly accentuated like so many speakers). I run them full range with two bandpass subs in the mix (no crossover). The subs contribute from ~20 to 110 Hz. I am using a DCX & class D amp to drive the subs. Pics of the speakers and stands in are in this linked thread (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=56687.msg651690#msg651690). Some info on the subs can be found at this link (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/159811-bandpass-sonotubes.html).
-Doug
Cool. 8)
-
Anyone in the southeast region (FL, GA, AL, SC...) willing to allow an audition of any GedLee model?
TIA.
-
Anyone in the southeast region (FL, GA, AL, SC...) willing to allow an audition of any GedLee model?
TIA.
I'm sure there is one...
-
What is the foam used in the waveguide on the Gedlee speakers? I have a horn loaded coax speaker that I'd like to do some experiments with.
-
I'm sure there is one...
I am in Chattanooga, TN area and would LOVE to find someone close as well that would offer me the opportunity to hear the Abbey's.
Cheers,
James
-
Tyson,
That I believe is proprietary information and also patented by Dr Geddes. I do not believe he is going to put that information out there for public consumption.
-
Anyone in Austin with Gedlees? If not then Texas? Very interested
Ditto, Austin or San Antonio, TX area???
-
Seattle, WA area?
-
Guess I'm curious to hear 'em now too. Anyone in the New Orleans or surrounding area with some of Dr. Geddes' speakers?
-
What is the foam used in the waveguide on the Gedlee speakers? I have a horn loaded coax speaker that I'd like to do some experiments with.
There's plenty of talk about this in various Econowave threads on a few forums. A few members have messed around with 30ppi 4" stuff.
-
Its amazing to see the amount of interest in people wanting to audition or hear these speakers now. There have been a few other threads on different forums and never have I seen this level of interest in hearing the speakers. I think the difficulty in auditioning the speakers is two fold, one there are not that many pairs of the speakers out there, and two the people who own them are spending their time listening to music instead of on the forums looking for better sound.
-
Its amazing to see the amount of interest in people wanting to audition or hear these speakers now. There have been a few other threads on different forums and never have I seen this level of interest in hearing the speakers. I think the difficulty in auditioning the speakers is two fold, one there are not that many pairs of the speakers out there, and two the people who own them are spending their time listening to music instead of on the forums looking for better sound.
One challenge in evaluating them is that for those of us that do have them, the sub configurations and setups are for the most part totally unique and simply make the best of available listening spaces. Bass integration is very important so mileage definitely varies.
I chose to hear them at Earl's place, which demonstrates the whole approach at its best (CD speakers, multi-sub, room design, multi-channel, HT setup). He was very gracious and accommodating, tolerated my eclectic music tastes, and thoughtfully answered every question I fired at him. As someone who typically studies things to death, in this case I made the decision and wrote the deposit check that day.
Really, for less than the cost of a modest set of fancy wires, you may be able to just fly there or take a road trip and experience them for yourself.
-
I heard them years ago at Dr. Geddes's place as well. That day marked a turn in the way I looked at hi-fi.
-
Tom, I think that is the best advise anybody could give on this matter. Even though I live close to Earl I wish I had discovered his speakers long before I did, it would have saved me a whole lot of money. I took a beating selling my previous speakers Linkwitz Orions, that if I had heard Earls speakers before buying them I would have never made that purchase. The value or bargain that I consider the Abbeys to be cannot be overstated, for the sound you get with these speakers the price is almost rediculously low. So maybe you could just figure the cost of getting to Earls to hear them in the price of the speakers.
-
Tom, I think that is the best advise anybody could give on this matter. Even though I live close to Earl I wish I had discovered his speakers long before I did, it would have saved me a whole lot of money. I took a beating selling my previous speakers Linkwitz Orions, that if I had heard Earls speakers before buying them I would have never made that purchase. The value or bargain that I consider the Abbeys to be cannot be overstated, for the sound you get with these speakers the price is almost rediculously low. So maybe you could just figure the cost of getting to Earls to hear them in the price of the speakers.
:notworthy: Amen to that.
Hi dwr, welcome to AC! :wave: I've definitely enjoyed chatting with you on Earl's new forum as well.
Anand.
-
Hi Anand, I have been registered here since March but just never posted until this thread.
-
Hi Anand, I have been registered here since March but just never posted until this thread.
You're welcome! :lol: My mission has been to speak with as many GedLee owners / listeners as possible. The results: 100% positive!
-
You're welcome! :lol: My mission has been to speak with as many GedLee owners / listeners as possible. The results: 100% positive!
Well, if you read my first feedback over on the Gedlee support thread, there is a subtlely different presentation from the way the illusion is created when you listen to the Gedlee's versus an open baffle. That is my only caveat. It's in the original support thread here. (I had demo'd the nathan's and bought the Abbey kits.)
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=56687.0
-Tony
-
jtwrace,
Thanks for starting this thread for those of us w/ a curious nature ...
TomS, dwr, TRADERXFAN, & any other GedLee speaker owners: what amp/ receivers are you using?
As I recall reading, Dr. Geddes had a very modest Pioneer receiver in his listening room. :o
-
jtwrace,
Thanks for starting this thread for those of us w/ a curious nature ...
TomS, dwr, TRADERXFAN, & any other GedLee speaker owners: what amp/ receivers are you using?
As I recall reading, Dr. Geddes had a very modest Pioneer receiver in his listening room. :o
Just click on my systems page.
Anand.
-
Just click on my systems page.
Anand.
Thanks Anand. I really enjoyed your review of the Nathans :thumb::
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=74098.0
vvv Thanks TomS, I see most GedLee owners have system links. 8) vvv
-
jtwrace,
Thanks for starting this thread for those of us w/ a curious nature ...
TomS, dwr, TRADERXFAN, & any other GedLee speaker owners: what amp/ receivers are you using?
As I recall reading, Dr. Geddes had a very modest Pioneer receiver in his listening room. :o
Generally on everyone's systems link...
Atma-Sphere MLS-1 preamp, M60 MK III.1 amplifiers. A DIY FirstWatt F5 25wpc class A also worked quite nicely. Both the M60's and F5 are class A so no crossover distortion, but the speakers are an easy load and fairly efficient.
Note that Earl didn't just pick any old receiver, but one with specific output stage characteristics and probably certain functional things he was looking for. It just happens to be reasonably priced too.
-
jtwrace,
Thanks for starting this thread for those of us w/ a curious nature ...
You're welcome!
I'm more then curious now... :o
-
... Note that Earl didn't just pick any old receiver, but one with specific output stage characteristics and probably certain functional things he was looking for. It just happens to be reasonably priced too.
Understand. Geddes was keen on crossover distortion effects. I don't know Dr. Geddes current system, but here is the reference I knew about. I meant it as a supreme compliment to his speakers & room that so many have raved about his personal set-up w/ such a modest receiver!
"The amp is a Pioneer DSX-V912 - a receiver. The point is that it was on sale at Costco for $150.00. I bought several of them for home theater use. I used my test to measure the amps and they were quite good actually. Especially for chip amps. I was measuring a lot of chip amps (a survey of capability) and most were pretty bad. As a chip amp this unit deffinately stands out. It compared quite favorably to a very well engineered discrete amp that I also use."
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/109147-geddes-distortion-measurements-2.html
-
Last I heard, he's upgraded to the newer Pioneer receiver with HDMI, but same/similar chipamps. It was like $350 :o
-
Last I heard, he's upgraded to the newer Pioneer receiver with HDMI, but same/similar chipamps. It was like $350 :o
Yup, he sure did. I just got thru searching for it, found it, & just saw your post:
"I have upgraded my Pioneer receiver to the VSX-919 AH - I needed the HDMI inputs for Blue-Ray. Its sounds the same."
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=19217309&highlight=pioneer#post19217309
-
jtwrace,
Thanks for starting this thread for those of us w/ a curious nature ...
TomS, dwr, TRADERXFAN, & any other GedLee speaker owners: what amp/ receivers are you using?
I use an Audio by Van Alstine Insight+ preamp and an AVA OmegaStar 440 amp.
-
I am using a Jolida JD-1000P 100 wpc tube amp with a RHB Sound Dezign modified Conrad Johnson PV-14L preamp and an Aural Thrills 274B rectified phono pre. It appears that most of us owners while impressed with Earls system using the receiver, have gone the separates route. While my CJ was out being modified I was using my Rotel 1068 SS prepro as a preamp and also using a Rotel 1075 SS amp. The sound was still very good but I will say it was too bright for me but only when pushed to higher volumes say over 90dB which makes sense as thats where brightness in my opinion shows itself.
-
OK my system is now posted in the systems area.
-
OK my system is now posted in the systems area.
Wow. You have a modified BDP-83SE by Modwright with the tube mod as a source? Must sound REALLY good. Kicks my front end for sure (but not for long :eyebrows:)
I must agree with others, in that the Abbey's are true to what you feed them. They are not the bottleneck and everything else in your system may be upgraded since the system keeps sounding better and better. Be that as it may, Earl's system at his house makes you just sit back, relax and not worry about what the other guy have in his/her system.
Anand.
-
everything else in your system may be upgraded since the system keeps sounding better and better.
Anand.
:scratch: :nono: You're killin' me. Here I was thinking my front end is good. :scratch:
-
phono pre. It appears that most of us owners while impressed with Earls system using the receiver, have gone the separates route. While my CJ was out being
I've had my preamp and amp for longer than I've had my GedLee speakers.
I've done some testing since then, and I'm not sure that at this point I would buy an amp and preamp. I might very well buy something like a Pioneer receiver.
Or I might not. Frank builds very durable equipment and it doesn't seem to be uncommon for it to run 25+ years with no issues.
-
. Be that as it may, Earl's system at his house makes you just sit back, relax and not worry about what the other guy have in his/her system.
Anand.
This simple statement makes me wonder why everyone seems to have taken one step, believing and purchasing Gedlee speakers, without taking the other steps such as receiver, cables, BP subs....
I personally can't really fault much in the way of Earl's logic as it's based in good research.
-
This simple statement makes me wonder why everyone seems to have taken one step, believing and purchasing Gedlee speakers, without taking the other steps such as receiver, cables, BP subs....
I personally can't really fault much in the way of Earl's logic as it's based in good research.
I agree goskers, but you know what?
DIY is such a gas! :duh:
Anand.
-
Hi Goskers
I agree with you 100% about Earls logic. Earl's system is set up as a multi channel system that is what it is lets say maximized to do, and one of the big pieces to the puzzle is the way his room is designed and built it is most certainly a dedicated room. Earl does not put a lot of weight on cables and other shall we say periphirial equipment he puts his money in the speakers,room, and projector. So I don't think it is a matter of following exactly what Earl does but more his philosophies which is what I do. He will tell you that there are any number of subs that will work with his speakers but you need to follow the philosophy. Believe me I have listened to my speakers both through my tube equipment and my SS equipment and I much prefer the sound thru the tube equipment for 2 channel music listening.
-
I agree goskers, but you know what?
DIY is such a gas! :duh:
Anand.
I believe you also said the Class D sounded better then what you are using. Right?
-
Is the Abbey "plus"(utilizing the better performing 15" waveguide) still in development, is it now available? I reading past posts I noticed the "plus" referenced many times, including DR. Geddes himself.
-
Anand you are so right about DIY being a GAS!!!!
-
They are not the bottleneck and everything else in your system may be upgraded since the system keeps sounding better and better.
My take on it is that the recordings, speakers, and listening room are the bottlenecks at this point.
I care about the performances, so I am stuck in terms of recordings. Some are good and some are not so good.
I have to compromise with my listening room because I share it with others and it has to still be multi-purpose. I've improved it, but I could do better if I had a dedicated listening room. (Unlimited funds would be nice too.)
I feel that the GedLee speakers are about as good as you're going to get at this point in time, but speakers still have a way to go yet before they reach perfection.
Most of the electronics I've seen is already good enough, and further increases in measured or theoretical performance are not audible.
I also figure that Earl is able to afford more or less whatever electronics he wants (he could probably even arrange a trade if he wanted). In addition, he's trying to sell speakers, so wouldn't he choose the best electronics to show them off?
-
Hi Bear
I thought Earl put tht rumor to rest quite a while back. There is no such animal as far as I know.
-
Yes, he abandoned it (too large, and not enough value-add compared to the Abbey).
-
I believe you also said the Class D sounded better then what you are using. Right?
Yup. And that still counts as DIY.
Boy is this a fast moving thread. You turn around, and suddenly there are a gazillion replies.
Anand.
-
:scratch: :nono: You're killin' me. Here I was thinking my front end is good. :scratch:
It will only be 'good' when you own a GedLee speaker :green:
Anand.
-
Yup. And that still counts as DIY.
Boy is this a fast moving thread. You turn around, and suddenly there are a gazillion replies.
Anand.
DIY as having fun not b/c it sounded better. Sometimes you do get both for sure.
Yes, it's moving quickly. Maybe that's why Dr. Geddes hasn't responded back to me. His inbox has become inundated with emails that aren't all from me. :D Sorry Dr. Geddes. :oops:
-
The Abbey+ was going to be using an elliptical waveguide. Part of the mold was completed for this design but proto's never were. Earl still feels that this change will probably not warrant enough of an improvement for pursuit.
On the topic of amps and cables, what is good enough?? It should not be much of an argument that speakers are the most inaccurate piece across the whole chain. Rooms are probably the next in line from a detrimental standpoint. There are plenty of reasonable solutions if you work the system.
I have always wondered while switching gear if something is actually better or just different. You typically start trading one flavor for another which puts us on the endless loop. I love value which is why some of the solutions presented are in such favor to me :thumb:
-
I've had my preamp and amp for longer than I've had my GedLee speakers.
I've done some testing since then, and I'm not sure that at this point I would buy an amp and preamp. I might very well buy something like a Pioneer receiver.
Or I might not. Frank builds very durable equipment and it doesn't seem to be uncommon for it to run 25+ years with no issues.
Turkey,
Can you elaborate a little more on the statement about the Pioneer? Why do you think you would go with that over more expensive separates? You mentioned some testing?
Thanks,
James
-
TomS, dwr, TRADERXFAN, & any other GedLee speaker owners: what amp/ receivers are you using?
Not sure if my systems link is up to day. Source is battery hiFace/DIY sabre 32 dac, diy tube preamp, Atma Sphere M60 amps. I sometimes put in the Cyber 211 SET or a McIntosh MC-275 if I want it silly loud. :o
No question the Abbeys are not the bottleneck, but IMO they will allow one to hear the differences between various pieces of upstream gear. As to whether those differences are enough to justify the cost, well that is an age old dilemma. :lol:
I've had my Abbeys for about 2 years, built from one of the first kits. No intention of replacing them unless I win the lotto and can get Earl to build me some Summas.
-
Regarding the Abbey+, I went back and checked, the date on the thread I read is from 2008! In that thread DR. Geddes commented that the 15" waveguide made an audibly significant improvement but the 15" driver was not needed(due to his multiple sub discovery) and that if he could do it over again for his own system he would use the 15" wave guide with the 12" for LF. Hence the Abbey+.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=56687.20
POST #209
Has Dr. Geddes ever considered an open baffle configuration in the LF driver? Does the waveguide portion need to be in a sealed enclosure? Don't know if this idea makes any sense but it could make the need for the sealed box obsolete.
Thanks,
Shane.
-
Very nice system indeed sir!!!!! And I totally agree with you on the point of the Abbeys letting the difference in components show through. jtwrace take note of this mans subs.
-
Mike (Mgalusha),
We want to see some pics of the beautiful new subs in your system..pics, pics, please. :wink:
Best,
Ed
-
Regarding the Abbey+, I went back and checked, the date on the thread I read is from 2008! In that thread DR. Geddes commented that the 15" waveguide made an audibly significant improvement but the 15" driver was not needed(due to his multiple sub discovery) and that if he could do it over again for his own system he would use the 15" wave guide with the 12" for LF. Hence the Abbey+.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=56687.20
Has Dr. Geddes ever considered an open baffle configuration in the LF driver? Does the waveguide portion need to be in a sealed enclosure? Don't know if this idea makes any sense but it could make the need for the sealed box obsolete.
Thanks,
Shane.
JoshK started to work on an open baffle using the geddes waveguide. I don't know what happened with that, he seemed to start up another project that was more interesting to him.
The abbey12+ was decided to be not worth it to Geddes, I believe.
edit* Here is post about that: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/126586-oblate-spheroid-waveguide-consolidated-construction-thread-24.html#post1723936
-
Thank You Trader.
-
I'm just waiting to see how much of an improvement is to be had when Earl brings out his other waveguide sometime in the future.
-
Turkey,
Can you elaborate a little more on the statement about the Pioneer? Why do you think you would go with that over more expensive separates? You mentioned some testing?
I might choose it because it's less expensive and actually offers more features too.
Some of my friends and I did some controlled tests of amps and preamps not too long ago. We matched levels as best we could (signal generator set to 1KHz and an RMS voltmeter) and had my wife switch things around while we were out of the room. She'd leave the room before we came in, so we didn't get any clues as to what she'd done (or not done).
We played various selections of music, swapped seats around so that we all got to sit in the middle seat, etc. We took notes and then compared them when we were finished for the day. (We didn't talk about what we heard until after the test was done.)
The only thing we listened for was to determine whether or not we heard a difference.
It took an entire day, and then we also wound up doing some shorter sessions at other people's houses.
I'm not claiming this was a really scientific test, or that the results were statistically significant or anything. However, what we found is that we were generally doing no better than random guessing when it came to identifying whether or not a switch had been made.
We wound up comparing my AVA gear, a Pass Labs amp and preamp, a C-J amp, a Krell amp, and a Pioneer receiver that I borrowed from my brother. We did one trial of a couple of other amps too, but I can't conclude anything based on that.
None of us were really that upset with what we learned. For instance, I still like my AVA amp and preamp. (I like the other amps too.) However, I think that we will probably approach things differently when it comes time to buy new equipment though.
One result worth noting is that the Pioneer didn't do that well at one friend's house that owns Maggies. We could tell when it was in use and figured it was because his speakers are quite power-hungry. (We couldn't reliably tell the difference between my AVA amp and the Krell though.)
-
I'm sure there is one...
I've asked before, including Earl.....still waiting. :)
And no, I have no interest in flying to Detroit to listen in Earls room. I would rather it be a "field test" in a typical user living room. Probably much like mine.
Curiously, I had no problem finding an Orion owner willing to demo (back in '03/04). They seem to relish the thought. Ah well...
-
Has Dr. Geddes ever considered an open baffle configuration in the LF driver? Does the waveguide portion need to be in a sealed enclosure? Don't know if this idea makes any sense but it could make the need for the sealed box obsolete.
I don't think that OB would fit in very well with the GedLee speakers. They'd no longer be fully CD, if nothing else.
-
I don't think that OB would fit in very well with the GedLee speakers. They'd no longer be fully CD, if nothing else.
Actually, I use OB for 2 of the 3 subs. Obviously they don't cover much range vs the sealed 12" in the mains.
-
Earl's room is a typical room in some ways...it's in his basement and it has brick walls..but otherwise, there's not exactly anything special about it. His room treatments consist of a diffusor on the ceiling, some of the foam he uses for waveguides behind his AT screen (the bedsheet), and he has a small mattress on the ground covered by a rug. No sidewall treatments, no fancy electronics, no room correction...
-
It will only be 'good' when you own a GedLee speaker :green:
Anand.
Ouch! That hurt!
In my defense, I'm waiting for the audition.
Once I get to hear 'em, then I can make my decision... Dr. Geddes livelihood is in your hands. :lol:
-
I've asked before, including Earl.....still waiting. :)
And no, I have no interest in flying to Detroit to listen in Earls room. I would rather it be a "field test" in a typical user living room. Probably much like mine.
Curiously, I had no problem finding an Orion owner willing to demo (back in '03/04). They seem to relish the thought. Ah well...
AJ,
I don't think that Gedlee owners are not willing to audition but more so that ownership is not widely spread as of yet. Orion's went through a very similar growth before notoriety was gained.
The slow growth trend seen from Geddes is partially associated with the fact that all parts are coming from one guy. Even if you purchased or have purchased a kit, the WG/baffle was done by one source. The Orion left you with the ability to just purchase a pcb and the rest could be done by a number of people.
I would have gladly offered you an audition when I was still in NC.
I think there are now 4 previous orion owners that have switched to Gedlee.
-
I don't think that OB would fit in very well with the GedLee speakers. They'd no longer be fully CD, if nothing else.
ok, got it, I wasn't sure what role the LF driver played in the CD equation.
I would definately follow in the path of others here and use the open baffle servo subs. I am interested in a system that does 2-channel audio very well(performers in the room or listener at the venue with great imaging sort of thing) and doubles as a competent home theatre without having to place my head in a 12" box. And I love good bass and drums when the mood strikes.
For the money I good do a Salk system anchored with HT3's, GR-Research Super V's would be the least expensive, or Abbey's and ob servo subs. I have been following these threads for quite some time and have still not listened to any.
-
Is anyone using GedLee subs? If so, what does one need to power them? Also, what is the size of the cabinet?
-
AJ
I had no problem either in finding an Orion owner willing to let me hear his speakers, I wish there hadn't been, maybe then I wouldn't have made the biggest mistake I've made in my time in the audio hobby. I lost over $2000 when I sold the Orions to get get the Abbeys. Live and learn!
-
JTW I believe DougSmith here uses 4th order bandpass subs that he built but are modeled from Geddes subs. Check with him.
-
Is anyone using GedLee subs? If so, what does one need to power them? Also, what is the size of the cabinet?
Don't know any details, but I found it interesting that Geddes said in one of the forums 1-2 yrs. ago don't spend over $500 for a subwoofer.
His 12" subwoofer is $600... :green:
-
... I'm not claiming this was a really scientific test, or that the results were statistically significant or anything. However, what we found is that we were generally doing no better than random guessing when it came to identifying whether or not a switch had been made.
We wound up comparing my AVA gear, a Pass Labs amp and preamp, a C-J amp, a Krell amp, and a Pioneer receiver that I borrowed from my brother. We did one trial of a couple of other amps too, but I can't conclude anything based on that.
None of us were really that upset with what we learned. For instance, I still like my AVA amp and preamp. (I like the other amps too.) However, I think that we will probably approach things differently when it comes time to buy new equipment though.
turkey,
Thanks for sharing your amp A/B comparisons. :thumb: It validates Geddes argument doesn't it ?
-
Don't know any details, but I found it interesting that Geddes said in one of the forums 1-2 yrs. ago don't spend over $500 for a subwoofer.
His 12" subwoofer is $600... :green:
Yes, I saw and thought that but the man still needs to make a living. I mean, they're probably made by his hands...not overseas. I'm sure he also does it as a service. If he didn't sell them then it would be harder to sell al complete system. Most HT guys shop that way. :dunno:
-
Earl's operation is very small and if the subs are priced too low, that's likely taking up too much time which prevents him from building out the more expensive speakers. They offer value because of the setup expertise you get with them, otherwise they likely wouldn't exist.
I believe the subs were $500 for a long time...I never really paid too much attention to those.
-
sooo.....cabinets are now poly? what does this kit look like? How do the cabs fit together? Is it still flat pack?
-
Yes Bear the cabinets are now poly, it looks just like a sheet of mdf but is a lot more expensive, it is also much stiffer than mdf, it also takes a finish much better than mdf, if you've ever tried to put a finish on mdf you will understand . I can't imagine the kit has changed at all in physical size or shape.
-
Is it still flat pack?
NO. You finish the cabinet with filler, sand and paint or whatever you choose. Assemble crossover and wire.
-
No kidding JTW, are you saying that the enclosure comes already assembled so you just have to finish it and build the crossover??
-
JTW I believe DougSmith here uses 4th order bandpass subs that he built but are modeled from Geddes subs. Check with him.
Mine use the same driver, but are quite different in design and are also tuned lower. I am currently driving them with 125W amps (into 8 ohms). That seems to work fine. I was planning to try bridging the amps someday to see how much difference that makes (that would be 500W into 8 ohms).
-
No kidding JTW, are you saying that the enclosure comes already assembled so you just have to finish it and build the crossover??
That's how it comes!
From Dr. Geddes:
The poly parts of the enclosure comes assembled, but not prepped or primed. You have to prep the enclosure, paint, install the drivers and build the crossover
-
Mine use the same driver, but are quite different in design and are also tuned lower. I am currently driving them with 125W amps (into 8 ohms). That seems to work fine. I was planning to try bridging the amps someday to see how much difference that makes (that would be 500W into 8 ohms).
Can you share which driver?
-
Wow I did not know that. It really makes the kit version an attractive deal!!
-
Can you share which driver?
It's the B&C 12TBX100 (http://www.bcspeakers.com/PDF/PRD/12TBX100.pdf). The same driver used in an Abbey, which is an 8 ohm loudspeaker.
Anand.
-
Mine use the same driver, but are quite different in design and are also tuned lower. I am currently driving them with 125W amps (into 8 ohms). That seems to work fine. I was planning to try bridging the amps someday to see how much difference that makes (that would be 500W into 8 ohms).
I"m thinking of maybe using a Class D for the two subs. I have a case for me! The question is do I go for power or a bit of power but a bit more quality? :scratch:
-
I am using an SDS-254 for the pair. The sound quality is quite good.
-
I am using an SDS-254 for the pair. The sound quality is quite good.
The driver is an 8 ohm driver. Right?
-
Abbey Owners,
Are most of you guys using the Berhinger DCX 2496? If so, why do you feel the need to use it if you have crossovers in your subs? I am new to learning about these Abbey's and the multi-subwoofer configuration, so just want to understand the logic in all of it.
I would prefer to not use the DCX but I am not sure if that is an option?
Cheers,
James
-
Hi James, yes I use a 2496. I use it because I built my subs and the 3 I use with the Abbeys are all different and all passive so I need an amp and management system for them. I use an 18" Malstrom-X in a 7 cu/ft sealed enclosure and a 15" Dayton Titanic MK III in a 6.25 cu/ft sealed enclosure and finally a 12" peerless in a 3cu/ft ported enclosure. I use the dcx-2496 to set the crossover points, delay times, and phase setting for the 3 subs independently. I also have 2 15" Daytons in sono tubes with 18" passive radiators for LFE when listening to movies. All the subs are powered by 3 Behringer EP-4000 amps located in the room behind my system equipment.
-
Does Geddes specify if the subs have to be sealed, or can they be OB. In my room I have had success with OB bass where sealed or ported bass was difficult.
-
Does anyone even make a stand alone OB sub?
-
Nope he doesn't specify any certain type of sub. His subs are 4th order bandpass designs I believe. His theory is one sub in a corner preferably the sub that goes the lowest in frequency, then one away from corners or walls, and at least one up off of the floor. He advocates random placement, and then measuring the room response below 200Hz and adjusting the placement of the subs to optimum measurement results. That is where the 2496 comes in nicely with its ability to add EQ if needed.
-
Nope he doesn't specify any certain type of sub. His subs are 4th order bandpass designs I believe. His theory is one sub in a corner preferably the sub that goes the lowest in frequency, then one away from corners or walls, and at least one up off of the floor. He advocates random placement, and then measuring the room response below 200Hz and adjusting the placement of the subs to optimum measurement results. That is where the 2496 comes in nicely with its ability to add EQ if needed.
I wonder if a sealed sub in the corner for lowest response and OB subs spread elsewhere for best bass quality.
-
I see no reason why that arrangement wouldn't work. Before I had my subs finished I was using 2 lower priced 12" Velodyne HT subs with the 12" peerless and the bass wasn't bad at all, not what I have now mind you but not bad at all. Its all a matter of getting the room response good below 200Hz.
-
I wonder if a sealed sub in the corner for lowest response and OB subs spread elsewhere for best bass quality.
That's exactly what I have - 1 sealed, 2 dual OB's.
-
That's exactly what I have - 1 sealed, 2 dual OB's.
And it's exactly what I will have as well - in a few weeks.
Anand.
-
That's exactly what I have - 1 sealed, 2 dual OB's.
Who makes your OB subs?
-
Hi James, yes I use a 2496. I use it because I built my subs and the 3 I use with the Abbeys are all different and all passive so I need an amp and management system for them. I use an 18" Malstrom-X in a 7 cu/ft sealed enclosure and a 15" Dayton Titanic MK III in a 6.25 cu/ft sealed enclosure and finally a 12" peerless in a 3cu/ft ported enclosure. I use the dcx-2496 to set the crossover points, delay times, and phase setting for the 3 subs independently. I also have 2 15" Daytons in sono tubes with 18" passive radiators for LFE when listening to movies. All the subs are powered by 3 Behringer EP-4000 amps located in the room behind my system equipment.
Well that is a bummer that the DCX 2496 is required! I would love to have a somewhat simpler system. I realize that by it's very nature, the Abbey/Multi-Sub approach is more complex than others I would just like to be able to have fewer "boxes" to deal with.
-
Well that is a bummer that the DCX 2496 is required! I would love to have a somewhat simpler system. I realize that by it's very nature, the Abbey/Multi-Sub approach is more complex than others I would just like to be able to have fewer "boxes" to deal with.
You don't have to use an active crossover. You can use subs that have a plate amp but you will not get the fine tuneability in the system. That last little bit is what you're looking for. With my current setup (not abbey) I still use an active for the tuning aspect. It's really hard to beat a well setup active system. Getting there takes time and a whole lot of patience IMO.
Now if you're able to measure the room and send Dr. Geddes the results that is the ticket. Purchase some subs from him and he'll do it. Now that I think of it, that's another bonus of paying the $600 ea price that we spoke about earlier. There is a service included in the price. Something we all missed earlier. :oops:
-
Who makes your OB subs?
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=78791.0 (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=78791.0)
-
Anyone here ave try TBI subs? I had them with Triangles, Maggies, Ohms, and Regas and they were nearly flawless except for large deep bass impacts.
-
Actually, I use OB for 2 of the 3 subs. Obviously they don't cover much range vs the sealed 12" in the mains.
I was referring to the woofer in the Abbeys (or other models), not the subs.
-
AJ
I had no problem either in finding an Orion owner willing to let me hear his speakers, I wish there hadn't been, maybe then I wouldn't have made the biggest mistake I've made in my time in the audio hobby. I lost over $2000 when I sold the Orions to get get the Abbeys. Live and learn!
I thought the Orions were pretty respectable. I prefer the GedLee speakers obviously, but before I heard the Nathans I thought the Orions were about the best speakers around.
At least you hadn't spent $20, 30, 40 thousand or more on some magazine's flavor-of-the-month speakers.
-
Abbey Owners,
Are most of you guys using the Berhinger DCX 2496? If so, why do you feel the need to use it if you have crossovers in your subs? I am new to learning about these Abbey's and the multi-subwoofer configuration, so just want to understand the logic in all of it.
I'm not an Abbey owner (I have Nathans), but I don't use a DCX 2496. My subs have amps and x-overs built-in. I run the Nathans full-range, and I'm driving one sub from the extra output jacks on my preamp. The other 2 subs are driven at speaker level, one from each channel.
I will probably wind up moving to a more elaborate setup at some point, but I'm quite happy with what I have for now.
-
The driver is an 8 ohm driver. Right?
Yes.
-
Yes.
I wonder if these would work well. http://gr-research.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=156
-
Anyone here ave try TBI subs? I had them with Triangles, Maggies, Ohms, and Regas and they were nearly flawless except for large deep bass impacts.
I had one, can't remember which model but it was pretty discreet both in sound and appearance, looked more like a power amp than a sub. I still prefer OB bass though.
-
It's the B&C 12TBX100 (http://www.bcspeakers.com/PDF/PRD/12TBX100.pdf). The same driver used in an Abbey, which is an 8 ohm loudspeaker.
Anand.
Thanks! Those specs are pretty impressive.
-
I've had my preamp and amp for longer than I've had my GedLee speakers.
I've done some testing since then, and I'm not sure that at this point I would buy an amp and preamp. I might very well buy something like a Pioneer receiver.
Or I might not. Frank builds very durable equipment and it doesn't seem to be uncommon for it to run 25+ years with no issues.
I went for the Pioneer and it sounded as good as my modded DK designs, it does get a little hot though. I have not tried any other amps with the Gedlees but I am happy with the Pioneer.
-
Don't forget this point guys, when you use a 2496 or any active crossover to manage your subs, you sum the input signals (A&B or L&R) to make a mono signal so all the subs receive the same signal, this is one of the aspects that Dr Geddes recommends. Also when you buy subs from Geddes and have him analyze the data he sends you back the parameters to input into the DCX-2496, point being if you do that you will need a 2496.
-
A lot of the new AVRs run hot, I wouldn't worry too much about that. As long as it sounds good and YOU are happy with it, thats what is imortant!
-
and cheap is good too :)
-
Hey Tom,
From what I can see you first had your subs positioned straight ahead and then toed them in; how did this affect the bass?
-
I wonder if these would work well. http://gr-research.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=156
Hard to say (I don't see all the specs). Also, it depends what you plan to drive with them. There are a bunch of good plate amps out there.
FWIW, I use a Yamaha RX-Z7 in my system. It sounds great and has lots of features and does not run hot at all. I'm sure some of the less expensive Yamahas would work well also. I run the mains as large and use the bass management on the receiver to blend the LF signals from the front speakers (<200 Hz) with LFE into the sub output. I have the sub out turned up by +10db to drive the input of the DCX at a level that is closer to that produced by pro sound gear. I set the DCX input at ~0db and adjusted the outputs down to get the right levels (they are in the vicinity of -10db). The DCX is great for adjusting the levels phase & EQ filters of the subs independently on the outputs to get the best overall bass response. I'm glad I went with this recommendation of Earl's.
-
Well that is a bummer that the DCX 2496 is required! I would love to have a somewhat simpler system. I realize that by it's very nature, the Abbey/Multi-Sub approach is more complex than others I would just like to be able to have fewer "boxes" to deal with.
A DCX is absolutely not required. I have the subs using speaker level inputs, both channels to each sub, so they are summed. I used the servo amps with parametric EQ, so I get some additional flexibility in tuning though not as much as the DCX would provide. Of note, I have two dcx's, one stock and one very modified so it's not like I can't go that way. :)
-
I found that using the Dodd buffer "preamp", in front of my integrated amp, helped the multiple subs noticably.
I also use a pair of dual ob servo subs. and I have a sealed servo as well, (but don't use it for this, but can if want some more impact)
-Tony
-
Great explanation Doug, There really is a little more to it than just putting three active subs in the mix and calling it a day. Active subs are fine but the DCX really gives you a serious amount of versatility, for $300.
-
And as Mike points out, there are a number of ways to achieve the proper end result. Thats part of what makes this hobby fun!
-
A DCX is absolutely not required. I have the subs using speaker level inputs, both channels to each sub, so they are summed. I used the servo amps with parametric EQ, so I get some additional flexibility in tuning though not as much as the DCX would provide. Of note, I have two dcx's, one stock and one very modified so it's not like I can't go that way. :)
I use the DCX to drive the Rythmik line level inputs since Brian Ding and Ralph Karsten both advised against routing speaker level inputs from the M60's to the 3 plate amps (1 RCA, 2 XLR versions). The M60's have "floating" balanced outputs and there was concern that connecting to the Rythmik would cause the M60 negative speaker terminal to be grounded at the plate amp shield side.
Have you been able to work around that in your setup or is it not really an issue? I'd prefer to drop out the DCX as well as I'm not using much EQ at all.
Tom
-
AJ,
I don't think that Gedlee owners are not willing to audition but more so that ownership is not widely spread as of yet. Orion's went through a very similar growth before notoriety was gained.
Wasn't my intent to imply that. I realize the Orions have been around longer and are more widespread (which is why I included the date when I heard them). It was just an observation.
I would have gladly offered you an audition when I was still in NC.
Thanks. Would have been a bit of a haul, but better than Detroit I suppose :wink:.
cheers,
AJ
-
I found that using the Dodd buffer "preamp", in front of my integrated amp, helped the multiple subs noticably.
I also use a pair of dual ob servo subs. and I have a sealed servo as well, (but don't use it for this, but can if want some more impact)
-Tony
I guess what I'll do is make a "Y" from the output of my Dodd Buffer and one pair to the mono block amps for the Abbey's and one pair to the active crossover for the four subs.
-
I use the DCX to drive the Rythmik line level inputs since Brian Ding and Ralph Karsten both advised against routing speaker level inputs from the M60's to the 3 plate amps (1 RCA, 2 XLR versions). The M60's have "floating" balanced outputs and there was concern that connecting to the Rythmik would cause the M60 negative speaker terminal to be grounded at the plate amp shield side.
Have you been able to work around that in your setup or is it not really an issue? I'd prefer to drop out the DCX as well as I'm not using much EQ at all.
Tom
Tom, on my servo amps, A370 PEQ, they speaker negatives are not grounded, they are about 100ohms to ground, same as the hot side. I checked them prior to ever hooking them up to a floating amp. I'll check them again to be certain but I'm pretty sure that is the case. If not, it would be easy to build a circuit to do this.
-
It seems as if almost everyone owns the Abbeys or Nathans. Are there any Summa owners out there? I'd love to see some high quality photos of the Summa, both close up and in-room, to get a feel for just how large they are and their fit and finish.
-
How 'bout this one, Brian?
(http://nfp.cba.utulsa.edu/bajaja/FreeAudioReviews/Reviews/AudioMeets/GPAF2005/Images/EarlAndDuke.JPG)
-
How 'bout this one, Brian?
Yep, that was the only image I've seen, which does give a sense of scale (large!). I believe that Earl has changed his cabinet construction and finishing process since then, however, so I'm not sure how similar current versions appear vs. what is shown.
-
Wayne, how old is that picture??
-
2005
Link: http://nfp.cba.utulsa.edu/bajaja/FreeAudioReviews/Reviews/AudioMeets/GPAF2005/ReviewGPAF2005.htm
(I performed a Google image search before I made the initial post, and that was the best of the very few pics that I found.)
-
The only other pair that I have seen pictures of were from a guy on the diyaudio board and they predated this version of the speakers.
Geddes says Summas are better, but cost a lot more and are a lot bigger for small performance advantage.
Anand, didn't you see the summas? I thought you had taken some pictures on your visit as well...
-Tony
-
How long does it usually take Dr. Geddes to reply to email? It was super quick and now it's been 3 days. :(
-
3 days is nothing. If it was weeks, that would be another story.
-
Earl may be in china at the moment.
I have some pics that I can pm of the summas. They are large but only as big as they need to be. That being said, I don't think anyone has ordered summas in some time.
-
To be honest fellas, the Summas are just as big as the pictures above, sans ports! The dimensions are on his website. Truly giants especially if you call them 'monitors.' They are literally control monitors, they keep you captivated in space! Any pictures I have are in my gallery and the only thing I remember there are some very early Nathans.
With the new poly construction, and woofer mounting from the rear which hides the screws, Earl's constructions have gone another step up.
Earl goes to China often but he will reply, I've never waited more than a week.
Anand.
-
The only real issue I see w/the speakers is the whole WAF factor. I wonder if a few small changes could be made to make them a lot better in this area. Maybe make them floor standing by just extending the cabinet down a bit with a solid wood (or solid MDF) extension toward the floor, and a grill cloth to hide those drivers and foam. Then just veneer the sides and back to give a furniture quality look. I bet that would make them much, much more likely to pass the WAF test.
-
The only real issue I see w/the speakers is the whole WAF factor. I wonder if a few small changes could be made to make them a lot better in this area. Maybe make them floor standing by just extending the cabinet down a bit with a solid wood (or solid MDF) extension toward the floor, and a grill cloth to hide those drivers and foam. Then just veneer the sides and back to give a furniture quality look. I bet that would make them much, much more likely to pass the WAF test.
Who needs WAF for the man cave? :lol:
Not me!
-
Yeah, caves rule :thumb:
-
Well said JTW, and grilles are now an option for Geddes speakers. I understand the looks thing to an extent but they are speakers not furniture.
-
They are ugly, but the sound spectacular. IMO, just a couple of small changes can let them be dropped into the living room where more people can enjoy them.
-
They are ugly, but the sound spectacular.
That's ALL I care about anymore.
If I could put a turd in the room and it sound great, I'd do it as long as it didn't stink. :lol:
-
They are ugly, but the sound spectacular. IMO, just a couple of small changes can let them be dropped into the living room where more people can enjoy them.
At one time I thought about cutting a thin kerf all the way around, right behind the roundovers (tops, sides), then veneering behind that to the back of the cabinets. I just couldn't bring myself to take a saw or router to them for vanity's sake :o
I am a cave dweller so it didn't really matter in my case. As you say, it would be easy enough to do from the start and make them look a little nicer. The new baffles and grill options get you half way home.
-
I find they look fine. My Abbeys are in a piano black gloss. Coupled with my cognac finished maple speaker stands, I have no desire to change really anything, honestly. And besides when I turn out the light and watch in the theater room, do I really give a hoot about what they look like?
The WAF factor has always been an issue with Geddes speakers :roll:. It's due to the size :o. Earl has tried to mitigate this issue with mounting the woofer from the inside (see dwr's pic earlier in this thread) and of course now the poly material will take on literally any color with a mirror finish to match. Grilles are an option. It's never ever going to look thin and slender like most audiophile approved speakers. You could make the entire front baffle out of solid wood and veneer the sides and rear but the $$$ go way, way up (like Aether Audio). Some day I'll post a color picture of my speakers but the lighting doesn't do the piano black justice to be honest.
:wink:
Anand.
-
Anand, you are right and I am no Ansel Adams but why are these speakers so hard to get a good picture of?? The Abbeys I have were the first of the new enclosure material and are high gloss black, but as you say I just can't seem to get a picture that does them justice.
-
And besides when I turn out the light and watch in the theater room, do I really give a hoot about what they look like?
Anand.
Ah yes. It reminds me of the days that I used to deal with the guys that were buying Ferraris. They would sit on a waiting list (1 year) and someone would cancel the order. They could get a car about 1 year earlier but they would piss and moan about the color.
My response was simple. When you're sitting in the drivers seat you can't see the color of the car. Why do you REALLY care? You own these cars to drive not to stare at. The look was always :o Priceless!
-
keeping fingers crossed I may have a client that will allow me to take a few abbeys and do something crazy with them for a 7.1 application.. I hope it happens as I have been dying to play with them...
-
HH, certainly keep us updated on that project.
-
I love the way my Abbeys look, to be honest...sure, they're big, but the sound is glorious. What most often makes a speaker look bad... to me... is a gaudy design or things like sharp edges or poor quality materials they reek of 'cheapness'
Sports cars are often bought as status symbols; they're mostly for show. If you bought a super high end speaker and never played it above 75 db, then perhaps you could compare to a Ferrari :lol: I'm just messing around though...I agree that performance is what we're looking for...having both would be great, though.
I've seen the Summas, helped Earl carry one to put back on it's stand after listening to my Abbeys in his home. They're extremely large and from what I gather from Dr. Geddes, they aren't a major leap in quality from the Abbeys. Each has had some crossover tweaking done since his statements comparing them, however.
-
keeping fingers crossed I may have a client that will allow me to take a few abbeys and do something crazy with them for a 7.1 application.. I hope it happens as I have been dying to play with them...
I hope it's Dr. Geddes approved. Other then paint or veneer I can't imagine what he would agree with doing...
-
keeping fingers crossed I may have a client that will allow me to take a few abbeys and do something crazy with them for a 7.1 application.. I hope it happens as I have been dying to play with them...
I bet that if you came up with some cool-looking stands for the GedLee speakers that you'd get quite a few people's attention.
-
I bet that if you came up with some cool-looking stands for the GedLee speakers that you'd get quite a few people's attention.
Now that's a GREAT idea! :thumb:
Please don't try to retire on making stands. :lol:
-
Ah yes. It reminds me of the days that I used to deal with the guys that were buying Ferraris. They would sit on a waiting list (1 year) and someone would cancel the order. They could get a car about 1 year earlier but they would piss and moan about the color.
My response was simple. When you're sitting in the drivers seat you can't see the color of the car. Why do you REALLY care? You own these cars to drive not to stare at. The look was always :o Priceless!
I take it a step farther than that. I can't see what the outside of a car looks like while I'm actually using it. I don't buy a car to admire it while it sits in the driveway either.
So, if I buy a car because of its looks, I'm really buying it for _other people_ to look at.
I'd be perfectly happy buying a car with body by Fisher-Price. That plastic they use is indestructible. I don't need glossy paint or anything like that. In fact, it would cost a lot less to get a fender bender repaired if we didn't worry about matching colors and getting everything all shiny again.
Getting back to speakers, my Nathans are gloss black. To a large extent, I think function forced form with these, and the rest was forced by cost. (The size of the front baffle, shape of the waveguide, radiused edges, and things like that were forced by function, as was the size of the enclosure. Cost governed the shape of the enclosure sides and back.)
I would be just as happy with a matte finish, and in fact for years my main speakers were ones with a matte finish. I built them from plans and drivers, and I really wanted to listen to them, but when I got to painting them the weather was really humid and they took forever to dry. I lost patience and just assembled them and started to use them. I never got around to putting more coats of paint on or anything.
The Nathans are not ugly, but they don't pretend to be furniture or techno-sculpture like some other speakers do. They also don't cost $150K. :)
I think it's a pretty good trade-off.
-
Please don't try to retire on making stands. :lol:
There are some companies that do very well with stands; so there's money in it.
I was thinking more that the only constraint that function places on a stand is that it can't let the speaker fall to the floor. Other than that you're free to experiment with form. You could have everything from a cantilevered stand that can't even be seen while the speakers are in use to a piece of sculpture meant to enhance the looks of the speakers or maybe even be the center of attention itself.
-
There are some companies that do very well with stands; so there's money in it.
Sure are. I didn't mean it that way...I mean't don't charge us too much $$$. :D
-
I hope it's Dr. Geddes approved. Other then paint or veneer I can't imagine what he would agree with doing...
Jay, no matter what I do, I'm sure it will piss Earl off..lol...
As I totally understand that function is a 100% with Earl's offerings, form can be applied without altering function..
And as I totally understand those who could care less on looks.. but there are 30x's more people out there that do and won't give Earl's pieces a second thought because of it... right,wrong or indifferent.. that's the case...
-
The only real issue I see w/the speakers is the whole WAF factor. I wonder if a few small changes could be made to make them a lot better in this area. Maybe make them floor standing by just extending the cabinet down a bit with a solid wood (or solid MDF) extension toward the floor, and a grill cloth to hide those drivers and foam. Then just veneer the sides and back to give a furniture quality look. I bet that would make them much, much more likely to pass the WAF test.
I've had a conversation with Dr G before about how most audiophiles have their system in their living room not a dedicated room. His response was something like his target demographic is those with dedicated theaters. I'd surmise that that isn't actually playing out in practice.
-
As for appearance, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There are some pretty nice looking laminates out there. Gold or copper foil would be at the top of my list, but a 4x8 sheet is can cost well over a $1000 for the most authentic looking stuff.
-
I like makeup on speakers just as much as makeup on women :thumb:
-
Has anyone used the HOLM Acoustics software that Dr. Geddes recommends? I looked at the user guide...what a joke that is. Then I went to DIY and it remined me of REW. You have to spend HOURS looking and posting questions. I just wish someone would write a simple sheet on how to use these packages.
How to:
Calibrate Soundcard
Calibrate Mic or upload Mic file
Simple measurements.
The thought of spending countless hours again makes me sick!
-
Curious. What are you trying to use HOLM for? measuring your own speaker response?
-
Curious. What are you trying to use HOLM for? measuring your own speaker response?
I use REW for that. I was planning ahead (yes, a bit OCD) just in case I purchased some Abbey's and GedLee subs. I would use HOLM and have Dr. Geddes perform his analysis.
-
I've had a conversation with Dr G before about how most audiophiles have their system in their living room not a dedicated room. His response was something like his target demographic is those with dedicated theaters. I'd surmise that that isn't actually playing out in practice.
I suspect you're correct Josh. Sound quality may indeed top the list for anyone considering a Geddes speaker, but not everyone is lucky enough to have a "man cave" or home theater (that may always be dark when listening). Putting a system in a living area usually requires some level of aesthetic compromise, even for those not otherwise inclined.
The cabinet change that now hides the woofer mounting does clean up the look, but I suspect that Tyson's idea of a floor standing model would appeal to many.
-
I think Nathans in a white finish...would work well in most rooms. The Abbeys are where the speakers start REALLY standing out IMHO (due to their size).
-
I really recommend going for the Abbey over the Nathan if at all possible. I demo'd the Nathan, but was a happier with the Abbey choice.
Anyone have pics' of the newer version of the speakers with the woofer mounted from behind the baffle?
-
Someone just posted a pic a few pages back, I believe...looking good :thumb:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=36613)
-
Thanks.
I saw that picture and didn't even notice that change in the woofer.
It looks like mine, except the corners are only rounded over in 2 dimensions instead of 3. Im sure not that significant.
If I could, I would try grill cloth across that woofer (mounted from inside) just to see how that looks.
-Tony
-
Just to spark the creative juices (hebrew hammer take note).
(http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachments/group-buys/190297d1286050213-waveguides-horns-img_3753.jpg)
-
That's incredible!
-
Whoa. What is that? (the white one)
[-nevermind. i know I can't afford them... ]
-
Whoa. What is that? (the white one)
[-nevermind. i know I can't afford them... ]
Actually there is a group buy on diyaudio for those cabinets. $500/pr (cabinets only) + $800 shipping/pallet (4 pairs to a pallet).
-
Those are Abbeys?
-
I don't know what the manuf really intended, but they look like they were a creative version of the abbeys.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/group-buys/166312-waveguides-horns-21.html
-
Those are Abbeys?
Apparently not!! Here is what Dr Geddes thinks of this:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/group-buys/166312-waveguides-horns-6.html#post2185271
-
Apparently not!! Here is what Dr Geddes thinks of this:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/group-buys/166312-waveguides-horns-6.html#post2185271
I think he might be talking about the Peavey WGs there, rather than the ones from Auto-tech.
-
Hi Tony, that is a picture of one of my Abbey 12A speakers. they were the first pair using the new enclosures, if you guys want any different pictures showing different angles of the speaker let me know and I'll see what I can do.
-
And you guys think Geddes speakers are ugly......at least they don't look like something you walk up and pi$$ into.
-
Just to spark the creative juices (hebrew hammer take note).
(http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachments/group-buys/190297d1286050213-waveguides-horns-img_3753.jpg)
IMO, it's cool because it's different... but not cool because it's pleasing to the eye... to me there isn't any style.. but all of which is my opinion and nothing more..
and 500 wouldn't cover my material costs alone.... lol :green:
-
I imagine these Jamos might have been an inspiration:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=36744)
... or these Lyngdorfs:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=36745)
-
Hey thats not too bad only 200 posts to get completely off topic.
-
OK. Back to the GedLee speakers....
-
Ok I've been sitting here thinking about grills for the Abbeys. I asked my wife if she thought they would look good with a grill covering just the woofer. Her exact words were "leave them alone they look cool just the way they are". So not all wives are opposed to the look of speakers in the living room.
-
Ok I've been sitting here thinking about grills for the Abbeys. I asked my wife if she thought they would look good with a grill covering just the woofer. Her exact words were "leave them alone they look cool just the way they are". So not all wives are opposed to the look of speakers in the living room.
:thumb:
-
I'd still like to know what the dimensions of the GedLess subs are. If anyone knows, please share. :thumb:
-
Man JTW when I was there listening to the speakers I was looking at one of the subs and they are not real big as I remember, maybe a 15" cube. Don't hold me to that but thats what I seem to remember.
-
Found it 18x16x14....I wasn't too far off....and 45 lbs.http://forums.soundandvisionmag.com/showthread.php?612025-Bandpass-subwoofers-and-Geddes-design
-
Found it 18x16x14....I wasn't too far off....and 45 lbs.http://forums.soundandvisionmag.com/showthread.php?612025-Bandpass-subwoofers-and-Geddes-design
Thank you sir! :thumb:
-
How 'bout this one, Brian?
Wayne1-
Is it safe to say that you like the GedLee speakers?
-
Wayne1-
Is it safe to say that you like the GedLee speakers?
jtwrace,
What our local Wayne of Bolder thought of the Abbeys against some similar efforts is detailed right here (http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=262345).
Anand.
-
jtwrace,
What our local Wayne of Bolder thought of the Abbeys against some similar efforts is detailed right here (http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=262345).
Anand.
Thanks!
-
The only pair of Abbeys that I have heard are Mike Galusha's set. They are not exactly stock. He has added additional bracing to the cabinet and lined it with No-Rez. I am not sure what wire he used. He was discussing changing the brands of capacitors in the crossover at one point, but I do not know if he has done that yet.
He certainly does not use them with a Pioneer AV receiver. He has three types of tube amps (one pair of SET, one push-pull and a pair of Atma-Sphere OTL) that he uses in rotation. Differences between the amps are readily apparent.
I do enjoy the sound of the higher efficiency of the Abbeys. The dynamics are some of the best I have heard. The Advents that I modded have a similar overall sound to the Abbeys for a much smaller price. They do need more power and do not have the dynamics, but they do play deeper. They are also quite a bit less expensive if you are into DIY.
Similar sound can also be found in the Audio Kinesis (http://www.audiokinesis.com/akspeakers.html) line of speakers. Duke has worked with Earl Geddes (that is Duke and Earl together in the large picture I posted earlier) His speakers do have a bit more WAF. I know of one friend of Mike Galusha's who bought a pair of Duke's Jazz Modules after hearing the Abbeys. I believe he also loved the sound of the Abbeys but did not want to have to use multiple subs.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10035/042aIMG_1860_%282%29_640x480.jpg)
-
Wayne, you just described a listening session that I've desired for quite a while... the Abbeys and Jazz Modules in a single session with appropriate multiple subs. (That, and a Abbey vs. Summa comparison.)
I somehow missed the Jazz modules the year Duke had them at RMAF (3 years ago?), and the last time I was at Mike's he still had the Blue Heron's.
-
There is something about the Jazz Modules proportion together with the veneer that makes they very attractive.
-
There is something about the Jazz Modules proportion together with the veneer that makes they very attractive.
There is something about the Jazz Modules Abbey's proportion together with the veneer Black Satin Paint that makes they very attractive. :D
-
There is something about the Jazz Modules proportion together with the veneer that makes they very attractive.
Funny, I guess I always thought that, too, without being specifically aware of it. They just look right. It is easy to imagine the woofer has enough volume to work in, without knowing the numbers. That, plus the quality of the drivers Duke uses would make me pre-disposed to expect them to sound good.
I know that's not rational or scientific, but I am sure we are influenced in our purchasing decisions by these sorts of considerations.
(just 17 posts since the last "alert" and we are OT once again :duh:)
-
Dr. Geddes Haiku
Abbeys plus three subs
Makes you dream of gear no more
Its all about sound
Many wish for bling
To place in a living room
Don't forget the foam
-
Dr. Geddes Haiku
Abbeys plus three subs
Makes you dream of gear no more
Its all about sound
Many wish for bling
To place in a living room
Don't forget the foam
Wow, your creative senses are just tingling all over! Great work! Love it! :thankyou:
Anand.
-
Yeah, you may want to TM that. :thumb:
-
There is something about the Jazz Modules Abbey's proportion together with the veneer Black Satin Paint that makes they very attractive. :D
Aesthetics are very personal. What one enjoys, others will not, and that's perfectly fine. Problems only arise when people think that others should always value what they value or appreciate what they appreciate.
Personally, I'm a fan of high quality wood work. (I'm definitely not a fan of "bling", at least not as I connote the word.) An exceptionally well finished gloss black Abbey and wood stand could look quite good in person. That said, my experience with my last pair of speakers has forever dissuaded me from judging the aesthetics and finish quality of even highly regarded speakers via photos. Hopefully I'll get a chance to audition a pair of Gedlee speakers in person at some point, ideally both a Gedlee manufactured pair and a well executed kit pair.
As for being OT, I think the thread is doing pretty well in that department. People always compare the item under discussion to other items with which they are already familiar. Comparing and contrasting against a known reference are a natural part of education and evaluation.
Josh, nice Haiku!
-
i guess it's relative about the appearance of speakers. the abbeys/summas appeal to me a lot; one of the reasons being i think they would be so much less obtrusive than the horn set-up i now have that i am enjoying so much:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=13740)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=13741)
a mullet present
will detract from the looks of
attractive speakers
8)
doug s.
-
I'm sure Audiokinesis stuff sounds fantastic...but, to me, I prefer the look of the Gedlee offerings. I think the sleek roundover and the foam make it look kind of cool. YMMV, obviously.
The whole notion of having to use 3 subs is a little overblown...you can use just one, in fact, I do for most listening sessions.
I do think comparing the thread topic to other offerings is normal; happy, informed customers are repeat customers. They market for you, often enough.
I also think that while some DIY options represent good value, the improvements brought on by going with a Gedlee offering still offers great value. The total cost of the Abbeys, for their performance, is outstanding. What I'd like to see is a pair of Gedlee Abbeys with a cheapo Pioneer receiver compared to a DIY pair of Advents with electronics matching the same cost. And, for most of us, time spent DIY has value...that's always debateable.
-
I think it would be interesting to compare the Audiokinesis to the GedLees and the SP Tech / Aether Audio offerings. There's no right or wrong answer, just preference. Aesthetic merit always comes second to sonic virtue. I would think another part of the equation, for me at least would be which is the easiest to drive. I could be wrong, but it seems speakers that are more efficient have a tendency to be more dynamic.
-
They can be, but it depends. A lot of high-efficiency speakers are single drivers and they aren't the most dynamic speakers around. The woofer used in the Abbeys has a large voicecoil and can take a lot of power so thermal compression is extremely low.
-
I've moved beyond the single driver foray, so although I'm speaking in the broadest sense, in the immediate context of Aether, Audiokinesis and GedLee, it would be interesting to see how they compare. A less demanding speaker is appealing for other reasons also.
-
I want the "best" sounding speakers that I can afford. Looks are completely secondary to me at this point...
I have the benefit of having an understanding wife that doesn't care what I do in my room. If I ask for opinions, she's more then happy to give as she's an interior designer but other then that, not much is said.
-
I have not heard the Abbey speakers but did have the chance to hear the Summa speakers about 2.5 years ago at Dr. Geddes home.
They are large cabinets and have a bulky look to them. The sound is just unreal. I understand the Abbey gets you most of the way there in a smaller cabinet.
One of the best sounds I have ever heard. When I asked and was told about the electronics he used in this system my jaw hit the floor :o.
It was right then and there that I realized how important the speakers are in the system. If they sound that good with modest electronics they will probably never be a bottleneck in any home audio system.
I personally like the idea of using subs to handle the lowest frequencies. I believe this allows the two channel amplifier to excel and not be overburdened with producing the lowest frequencies.
My current system has a very similar philosophy with high efficiency speakers and multiple subs. :thumb:
I think the looks are cool. They are unique but definitely a conversation piece. Once you hear them the looks become unimportant.
I bet that the systems Mike, Tom, and Anand have assembled with the Abbey speakers are near the top of what is possible today.
-Nick
-
When I asked and was told about the electronics he used in this system my jaw hit the floor :o.
It was right then and there that I realized how important the speakers are in the system. If they sound that good with modest electronics they will probably never be a bottleneck in any home audio system.
I discovered a long time ago, however a recent purchase reminded me just how important the amplifiers role is to the end result.
-
I discovered a long time ago, however a recent purchase reminded me just how important the amplifiers role is to the end result.
I would think your Ampino would probably sound pretty sweet with the Abbey speakers.
Not sure if the power would be an ideal match but it may be worth it to try!
-
Amplification is important, but it's more a matter of choosing wisely than spending money IMHO. Just because the Pioneer receiver ($350-ish new currently) sounds really good, doesn't mean that all receivers near that price will be equal. A lot of times I think you're gaining minute levels of sound quality by spending on amplification and a lot more by spending on really high quality speakers. Crossover quality, too...I've only upgraded the caps in the signal path to the comp. driver on my Abbeys and they still have incredible levels of detail.
-
I think it would be interesting to compare the Audiokinesis to the GedLees and the SP Tech / Aether Audio offerings.
I might add Emerald Physics to that list, though I believe they've been moving away from wave guides toward coaxial drivers over the past year or two. Conceptually, I like the active crossover approach they employ, both for the control it gives you and the ability to select amps that best match the properties of the individual drivers they are paired with.
The idea of an Abbey or Summa with an active crossover strikes me as very interesting, though I haven't heard of anyone pursuing that approach.
-
I would think your Ampino would probably sound pretty sweet with the Abbey speakers.
Not sure if the power would be an ideal match but it may be worth it to try!
Until I have the room small stand mounts will have to do.
-
The idea of an Abbey or Summa with an active crossover strikes me as very interesting, though I haven't heard of anyone pursuing that approach.
Earl did several years ago, and rejected it as the costs were higher than the passive but the performance was the same.
Anand.
-
Earl did several years ago, and rejected it as the costs were higher than the passive but the performance was the same.
Thanks, Anand. Do you know what he used? Just like the rest of the audio world, active crossovers vary widely, both in terms of quality and capability. Units like the DEQX are capable of FIR filters, for example, which have no phase shift, whereas the vast majority can only implement IIR filters, which do exhibit some phase shift. (And I do appreciate that while Earl doesn't find much benefit in more expensive audio gear, he is nonetheless thorough enough to select a receiver whose chip amps have properties well suited to his speakers.)
Obviously, kit builders could still experiment with active crossovers on their own if desired, although knowing the crossover point and slopes between the woofer and wave guide mounted tweeter would be helpful starting information.
(Some of us happen to have highly modded active crossovers sitting in a box, yet to be used as the result of plans run awry... *sigh*)
-
Thanks, Anand. Do you know what he used? Just like the rest of the audio world, active crossovers vary widely, both in terms of quality and capability. Units like the DEQX are capable of FIR filters, for example, which have no phase shift, whereas the vast majority can only implement IIR filters, which do exhibit some phase shift. (And I do appreciate that while Earl doesn't find much benefit in more expensive audio gear, he is nonetheless thorough enough to select a receiver whose chip amps have properties well suited to his speakers.)
Obviously, kit builders could still experiment with active crossovers on their own if desired, although knowing the crossover point and slopes between the woofer and wave guide mounted tweeter would be helpful starting information.
(Some of us happen to have highly modded active crossovers sitting in a box, yet to be used as the result of plans run awry... *sigh*)
From a recent post this is what he said:
When we did the active we used a 5k$ pro DSP filter system from England - forgot the name. This unit was programable from a PC. I was able to get the crossover design reasonably close with the parameters that they had and their filter curves looked good on the screen. But alas!!! The actual measured filter was nothing like what they said it would and nothing like what it should have been. We found that the "parameter" definitions that they must have been using were different than what I was using (I thought all this stuff was standard!!) In the end we got it to work but the whole experince was one big PITA. Then to have it all come out as a "well it sounds just about the same" - that did it for me - another couple of weeks work down the drain!
So the software saying it can do the job, and showing you pretty pictures of how well it does this and it actually doing what it says are all TBD at this point.
You are starting to get the picture of the complexity. To get the target design I use highly complex custom and proprietary software, its neither SPICE, nor any other simple approach like that. I can give you the results, what the EQ curve should look like, but I'm not willing to disclose how I got that curve. Thats a trade secret. Make no mistake about it the crossover design is critical to my speakers sound. I have had dozens of people writting me asking about how I do this - I know from all the questions, that what I do is neiter easy nor obvious.
"Plugins", as you suggest, is basically the way .Net, under Windows, works. To a coder, a "class" is a "plugin". There is a whole array of audio capabilities in windows, but almost all of them require programming in C/C++ - not my expertise. But Audio changed completely in VISTA and WIN7 and is not set for a revolution as it no long HAS to be programmed at a very low level. The Soundcard is mapped directly into the application space and use application memory, ... All this is new to VISTA and now makes Pro Audio apps under Windows a possibility. It wasn't easy before, because the sound stream stayed on the sound card in sound card memory which was seperate from, and not owned by, the application - a real potential for interuption and latency.
I think that we will see huge strides in Audio under Win7, but they are not there yet, at least not that I can see.
So you can ask him in a direct e-mail, but I don't know how much he will reveal. I know he is willing to help if you purchase his kit or fully built speaker but to what degree :dunno:
Best,
Anand.
-
The closest I got to hearing a similar speaker was the Sunny Cable Technology Model H2W10. They are almost like glossy Jazz Modules, and have similar traits sonically, but I think they may have been voiced with SS amps...they do like some power to kick those 10 inchers, but the right kind of power can be very rewarding.
Yes.....these...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=28812)
-
IIRC, the first popular Emerald Physics offering (CS2?) I recall hearing of used a cheap, poorly designed waveguide and less than stellar drivers. A lot can obviously be corrected for by being active, but they were not the best implementation of a waveguide.
I might add Emerald Physics to that list, though I believe they've been moving away from wave guides toward coaxial drivers over the past year or two. Conceptually, I like the active crossover approach they employ, both for the control it gives you and the ability to select amps that best match the properties of the individual drivers they are paired with.
The idea of an Abbey or Summa with an active crossover strikes me as very interesting, though I haven't heard of anyone pursuing that approach.
-
Thanks for all the feedback. Next up, the audition. :D
-
For those that have visited Dr. Geddes ---
So does Earl have the Summas set up in a multi-channel system along with the Nathans? If so, how are you guys able to compare this HT setup to a 2 channel with just the Abbeys? Maybe l missed this somewhere?
Thanks,
James
-
When I visited, he had my Abbeys set up in his system with a Summa as center channel (his other two summas were just outside of the room, I helped him move them back into place after the demo but did not listen), and some other brand for rears...didn't really look. His subs were not of his design either, at that time. From what I understand, he now has Harpers for rears and Abbeys up front. He's said that Nathans are generally overkill for rear speakers.
Comparing a multi-channel system to a 2-channel system makes little sense to me, but perhaps you have your own reasoning behind asking.
-
I want 2 channel but thought all he had was an HT situation.
-
I use my Abbeys 90% of the time for 2 channel listening, the HT side of my system is secondary to me. When I auditioned the speakers at Earls I listened the best I could to his system in 2 channel. But this is where I feel the Pioneer AVR may well be fine for the multi channel, you can only put the AVR in the 2 channel bypass mode and it is less than optimal in my opinion for serious 2 channel performance. My 2 channel equipment (all tube) sounds noticeably improved over the Pioneer receiver for 2 channel music listening. So all I can really tell you is that my Abbey sound better by far than any other speakers I've owned by FAR. My last two pairs of speakers were Martin Logan Ascent i with 2 depth subs, and Linkwitz Orion ++ with the Thor subs.
-
So all I can really tell you is that my Abbey sound better by far than any other speakers I've owned by FAR. My last two pairs of speakers were Martin Logan Ascent i with 2 depth subs, and Linkwitz Orion ++ with the Thor subs.
In what respect do you find the Abbeys better than the Orions?
-
The Abbeys image every bit as well as the Orions and the dynamics are better in my opinion and they will play much louder with no detectible distortion. When I had the Orions the sound just fell apart once you got up over 92dB. I thought this may have been a problem with my pair of Orions but when I went back to the mans house that I auditioned the Orions at initially to see if his sounded better at higher volumes, we got them up to 90dB C weighted slow response on the dB meter and he refused to even try to go higher in volume stating that they were not designed to play at those levels. I myself like to turn the volume up on occasions to the 100dB level at the listening seat and the Orions just could not do it. If you listen to Jazz or Classical or prefer to listen at volumes 90dB and below the Orions are a damned good sounding speaker, They just won't do the high volume music.
-
And I am not talking about peaks above 90dB, I am talking about average at 100db with peaks at 108-115dB.
-
And JTW it probably goes without saying but after you audition the Abbeys, please post your thoughts, good, bad, or indifferent.
Dan
-
And JTW it probably goes without saying but after you audition the Abbeys, please post your thoughts, good, bad, or indifferent.
Dan
Yes sir! :thumb:
-
So apart from dynaimics and higher SPLs, there isn't much else to differentiate?
-
So yeah apart from those two MAJOR things. The difference is not small between the Abbeys and the Orions it is big, believe me. I am just saying IF you can listen to your music under 90dB and be happy then the Orions are good speakers for that. On the other hand for what I had into my Orions money wise, for them to not play at the levels I explained is inexcusable for me.
-
Here is what I am trying to say, the Abbeys are a much better bargain. I had almost 7k into my Orion ++ speakers. I have 5k into the Abbeys and they are a better sounding speaker, that makes them a serious bargain in my book.
-
The 5k number also includes 3 diy subs with the sub management DCX-2496 and 3 EP-4000 amps to power the subs.
-
What kind of binding posts are on the Abbeys from GedLee? Also, what is on the GedLee sub?
-
They are a high quality 5 way post that appears to be gold plated. I use banana connections on my speaker cables and they work just fine with the binding posts on the Abbeys. I can't speak for which posts are used on the subs.
-
I'm not considering the Orions, but if I do go with something bigger than a mini monitor, it would most likely be the GR Research V2s, which have been likened to the Orions. My room is the main concern and limitation to what will and won't work. The smaller the better. Anything that can easily be moved in and out of position will work too.
I'm not too concerned about high SPLs, but dynamics are a very important characteristic of music. Also, the more sensitive the speaker, the less demand on the amplifier.
-
What kind of binding posts are on the Abbeys from GedLee? Also, what is on the GedLee sub?
The binding posts are some Chinese off brand you can get from Dayton Audio. They go for about $20/pair.
(http://www.parts-express.com/images/item_standard/091-630_s.jpg)
They are inexpensive, robust and very well built imho. I replaced them with Cardas Rhodium and they made no sonic difference whatsoever. The only difference was that the Cardas "looked" a lot better and beefier. BIG price difference of course. I stuck with the Cardas as I love their looks, I didn't buy them for sonics.
The other post I really like from a functional standpoint are the Cardas patented binding posts that have a single knob to tighten down on the posts. Many manufacturers dislike that three holes need to be drilled to fit these posts, with the center hole awfully close to the side holes. As a DIY'er I have no problems. Again, I use them, cause they look and feel cool.
Anand.
-
Hi Anand
The posts you pictured are not the posts that came on my Abbeys, they are very similar though. The reason I know this is that the posts in your picture are exactly what I used on the subs that I built I was just comparing the two sets of posts, and the ones on my Abbeys are actually a little smaller than the ones in the picture you posted. Also its nice to see somebody post an honest sentence like you did about not hearing any sonic difference in the posts, you did it more for the looks, thanks for the honesty Anand and happy listening!!!
Dan
-
Another question for you Abbey owners; have any of you replaced any of your crossover parts with upgraded parts like caps?? And if so can you post what differences you have achieved by doing so. Thanks.
Dan
-
Another question for you Abbey owners; have any of you replaced any of your crossover parts with upgraded parts like caps?? And if so can you post what differences you have achieved by doing so. Thanks.
Dan
Two people have. Anand (of course) and MGalusha I'd love to see pics of the external boxes that Anand built. :thumb:
-
Thats something you may want to consider too JTW if it makes a noticeable difference to the good, and you decide to go with Abbeys. You may want to consider it right from the start. Hopefully Mike and Anand will post their observations of the changes with upgraded parts.
-
Another question for you Abbey owners; have any of you replaced any of your crossover parts with upgraded parts like caps?? And if so can you post what differences you have achieved by doing so. Thanks.
Dan
Well...I did!
My crossover is now completely outboard. I made sure that the LCR tank networks on the tweeter were exactly the same as Geddes recommended. I also made sure that the DCR for the inductors in the woofer network were exactly the same as well. I changed the series capacitors to the tweeter and on the T-leg of the woofer network. Honestly, I heard about a 20% difference. Smoother upper end, slightly more dynamic, deeper soundstaging, a more live experience. And this is with a mixture of Duelund caps, Duelund resistors, Mundorf Supreme caps, North Creek Inductors.
The stock network is fantastic and sounds good even with Solen capacitors! The new upgraded network I have is better but not a huge global improvement. To be honest, I would recommend two options. IF you are happy with what you have, forget about changing anything. If you are a diy'er who likes tinkering, like I do, just to see if there is a difference, I would change the series capacitor and resistors in the tweeter network. The difference in cost for me was large and not worth it, honestly! The speaker sounds so good stock!
Now I understand that it is all about matching directivity indices between the tweeter and woofer, so every other change in the crossover itself seems to be second rate.
Hope that helps, but everybody's opinion is going to be different. Honestly, I think fooling around with different amp designs, preamp designs, dacs, phonostages is a better option. This is after you can optimize your room as much as you can without losing your family, etc.... :P
When JTW comes over in a few weeks to listen, he can give you guys a more impartial viewpoint.
Anand.
-
If you are a diy'er who likes tinkering, like I do, just to see if there is a difference, I would change the series capacitor and resistors in the tweeter network.
What would you use?
When JTW comes over in a few weeks to listen, he can give you guys a more impartial viewpoint.
:hyper:
-
Thanks for the detailed response Anand, and you described me pretty well about the tinkering thing. I've had my CJ preamp modified by RHB Sound Dezign and am totally happy with those results as well as the Modwright tube mods on my Oppo 83 SE. So hearing the difference good caps can make I may at some point upgrade the caps in the crossover, we'll see. They sound awfully damned good right now the way they are.
-
I only changed the caps in the series part of the CD network. I used Jantzen Z-Superior caps bypassed with Mundorf supreme silver/oil. I also used Mills resistors in that network. All the LCR tanks are as received from Dr. Geddes. I added the Mundorf after a few weeks, they seemed to provide a bit more top end clarity and sense of space. Not huge but since I already had the caps and there was no real investment it was well worth doing.
One of these days I will rebuild them as the 12a but most of the parts are different and I'm happy enough with them that spending the $$ for a box of parts isn't a very high priority.
mike
-
Thank you too Mike, this is something I am not going to rush into for sure if I do it at all, I appreciate the info from both of you guys. Bill Wyman's Rhythm Kings sure sounds good playing right now, his version of Hit the Road Jack is fantastic.
-
I only changed the caps in the series part of the CD network. I used Jantzen Z-Superior caps bypassed with Mundorf supreme silver/oil. I also used Mills resistors in that network. All the LCR tanks are as received from Dr. Geddes. I added the Mundorf after a few weeks, they seemed to provide a bit more top end clarity and sense of space. Not huge but since I already had the caps and there was no real investment it was well worth doing.
One of these days I will rebuild them as the 12a but most of the parts are different and I'm happy enough with them that spending the $$ for a box of parts isn't a very high priority.
mike
Back in Spring 2009 Mike wrote this article for Enjoy The Music.... :thumb:
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/diy/0309/gedlee_abbey.htm
-
About the crossovers, are they first, second, or third order? Just wondering if this plays into the dynamic capacity.
-
About the crossovers, are they first, second, or third order? Just wondering if this plays into the dynamic capacity.
They are not really any of them. That is part of Earl's design that makes it special IMO. On the first gen Abbeys such as mine the CD crossover has a series cap followed by multiple LCR tank circuits. Not really 1st order but not a text book style 2nd order either.
The woofer XO is simper but still not really either 1st or 2nd order. This network has been changed on the 12a version, I don't have the schematic handy but IIRC it still doesn't fit neatly into a standard definition.
I suspect the dynamic capabilities have a lot to do with the high efficiency and high power handling/lack of thermal compression. They also have a fairly benign impedance curve, so don't need a gigawatt amp to come alive. :icon_lol:
-
About the crossovers, are they first, second, or third order? Just wondering if this plays into the dynamic capacity.
Yes, don't worry, the crossover is not choking the speaker at all 8). Rules change when you have drivers that are very efficient. In fact that B&C tweeter is padded down, it's reference sensitivity at 2.83V is about 108dB! The woofer is about 95-96dB in the pass band above 100Hz. The sensitivity below 100 Hz really doesn't matter since you are using subs anyway. The lowest impedance is 6 ohms on the Abbey at about 150Hz . That's why the Atma-Sphere OTL's have little trouble driving them, even the 30 watter.
Anand.
-
I wasn't aware that the original system moved beyond the first generation. I know that there's a relationship between sensitivity and dynamics, but my guess is that some crossovers are more efficient than others, at least this is what Steve Deckert (Decware) and Israel Blume (Coincident) led me to believe.
-
Yes the Abbey 12A has a redesigned crossover and the biggest difference is the enclosure material. It is now a poly material that is much stiffer than MDF, and also much more expensive that MDF. The woofer is also now mounted on the inside of the enclosure so there are now no screws visable on the outside. I have the first pair of Abbey 12A speakers that Earl made, and the other thing about this new enclosure material is the fact that it takes a finish much better than MDF mine are a real nice high gloss black.
-
Yes the Abbey 12A has a redesigned crossover and the biggest difference is the enclosure material. It is now a poly material that is much stiffer than MDF, and also much more expensive that MDF. The woofer is also now mounted on the inside of the enclosure so there are now no screws visable on the outside. I have the first pair of Abbey 12A speakers that Earl made, and the other thing about this new enclosure material is the fact that it takes a finish much better than MDF mine are a real nice high gloss black.
As a fella who has heard both the standard crossover and the redesigned one, its a small difference (both from a measurement and a listening standpoint). The cost is the same, so Earl stuck with the redesigned crossover. Enclosure integrity do make differences and I'm glad the design has evolved to this point, making construction easier for Earl as well.
Anand.
-
That is exactly what Earl told me also Anand that the difference in the crossover in the two was minimal.
-
Abbeys plus three subs
Makes you dream of gear no more
Its all about sound
Josh (or anyone else) - is there an explanation from Dr Geddes of the theory behind the distributed sub recommendation? I understand it conceptually but I have some unanswered questions and want to read Geddes' explanation of it - just don't seem to be able to find it.
Ta :thumb:
-
http://www.gedlee.com/downloads/Philosophy.pdf
Also, I posted a summary of the multiple sub info I gathered over on diyaudio, here on audiocircle on these 2 posts
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=56687.msg513515#msg513515
That is all quotes from Dr. Geddes.
-
http://www.gedlee.com/downloads/Philosophy.pdf
HI, thanks - not sure how I missed that, but it doesn't explain the theory -
In fact, it has been found that, in general, three subs operating in unison with a pair of Summas will yield an acceptably flat frequency response throughout the listening room without the use of any EQ at all. This can, however, only be done with a judicious choice in the parameters of the subs which requires some measurements of the real situation in the actual room.
The details of this procedure are beyond the scope of this article, but are available elsewhere.
What I'm looking for is those details.
[Edit - just saw you added some info - will look at those.]
-
The Abbeys image every bit as well as the Orions and the dynamics are better in my opinion and they will play much louder with no detectible distortion. When I had the Orions the sound just fell apart once you got up over 92dB.
This sums up my feelings on the Orion vs. GedLee speakers too.
-
Here is what I am trying to say, the Abbeys are a much better bargain. I had almost 7k into my Orion ++ speakers. I have 5k into the Abbeys and they are a better sounding speaker, that makes them a serious bargain in my book.
I have a lot less money in my Nathans, and feel they're better than the Orions.
-
Another question for you Abbey owners; have any of you replaced any of your crossover parts with upgraded parts like caps?? And if so can you post what differences you have achieved by doing so. Thanks.
I don't see that "upgraded" parts will do anything good, and they'll cost more money. They will probably worsen performance because they're not going to have the same exact parameters as what Earl used, so they're going to change the crossover. I paid for Earl's design expertise and don't want to throw that away.
-
When I upgraded a few caps, he specified which values to get...changing inductors can be an issue, but for most other things...nothing to worry about. Earl uses his parts because they're the cheapest parts that offer what he desires (quality, long term reliability, etc.)...at least this is what I understand. Eventually, I'd like to get rebuilt external crossovers with the new design for my Abbeys. I've always felt that the Abbeys had such good resolution, upgrading wasn't a huge concern....but I do want them to be up-to-date.
-
Turkey, I totally agree with you, I would buy the Nathans in a heartbeat over the Orions, As for the upgraded parts, cujobobs explanation says it all. It is just a matter of what the cost would be for the parts as opposed to what you will gain from that cost.
-
but my guess is that some crossovers are more efficient than others, at least this is what Steve Deckert (Decware) and Israel Blume (Coincident) led me to believe.
Horses for courses. A crossover is simply something you use to get a final acoustic response. Depending upon the drivers used and the overall speaker design, you will need different crossovers to get the desired result.
You should first look at what you want to accomplish with the speaker design, and then select the parts to get the job done.
It's not very useful to decide on some crossover topology and then try to design speakers around it. (Although there are indeed some that have taken this approach.)
-
Turkey, I totally agree with you, I would buy the Nathans in a heartbeat over the Orions, As for the upgraded parts, cujobobs explanation says it all. It is just a matter of what the cost would be for the parts as opposed to what you will gain from that cost.
While I'm sure I would like the Abbeys better than my Nathans, cost was an issue since I don't have an unlimited budget. :)
As for the crossover parts, I don't see that I would gain anything by switching to boutique parts. I also don't like supporting snake oil, and unfortunately the magic parts industry is rife with this.
-
I wonder what Dr. Geddes response to upgraded crossover parts would be...I still question whether changing a few caps would really net a worthwhile result. :dunno:
-
I wonder what Dr. Geddes response to upgraded crossover parts would be...I still question whether changing a few caps would really net a worthwhile result. :dunno:
He would just say they're not cost-effective.
-
He would just say they're not cost-effective.
Exactly. If you are going to play with crossover parts then you are on your own, as I was. And to be honest, I asked him about tolerances of parts. It didn't have to be 1% or something ridiculous like that as far as he was concerned. He stated that the room would change the response far more than small crossover intolerances. Still, I got 1% tolerances on my parts. And as I have stated earlier, I do not think that the difference in performance was comensurate with the amount of money I spent. It was the first time I have ever had this occur in my system, it just goes to show you that the Abbey is a damn good design stock. Tells you a lot about controlled directivity, waveguide design, and optimization of the directivities between the woofer and tweeter at the crossover point. Earl has got it set.
Anand.
Anand.
-
Exactly. If you are going to play with crossover parts then you are on your own, as I was. And to be honest, I asked him about tolerances of parts. It didn't have to be 1% or something ridiculous like that as far as he was concerned. He stated that the room would change the response far more than small crossover intolerances. Still, I got 1% tolerances on my parts. And as I have stated earlier, I do not think that the difference in performance was comensurate with the amount of money I spent. It was the first time I have ever had this occur in my system, it just goes to show you that the Abbey is a damn good design stock. Tells you a lot about controlled directivity, waveguide design, and optimization of the directivities between the woofer and tweeter at the crossover point. Earl has got it set.
Anand.
Anand.
Methodical approach with science usually doesn't lie. :D
I know you are very aware of that. :thumb:
-
HI, thanks - not sure how I missed that, but it doesn't explain the theory -
What I'm looking for is those details.
[Edit - just saw you added some info - will look at those.]
So the white paper is the "why", the theory.
This is a summary of the "how" ( and it is Geddes approved)
http://mehlau.net/audio/multisub_geddes/
Is that what you are looking for?
-Tony
-
Hi, thanks, but there's no theory in the white paper you linked to... from the procedure it seems to be a very heuristic trial and error approach, where one plonks the next sub down somewhere and fiddles with the gain, phase, and lowpass until the response looks better. I just thought there would be a more precise approach.
-
John, it is probably in his book. Then again there might not be a precise method.
-
John, it is probably in his book. Then again there might not be a precise method.
I wonder if you get the book free with the purchase of some Abbey 12A's. :icon_lol:
-
I think the theory IS there. You are just either expecting to see something that isn't there, or not realizing it...
The key to understanding (accepting?) the whole approach is that it is a statistical problem. It isn't something you can pre-calculate. You have to use the in-room results, and do some trial and error to optimize them. The damping factors and modes are estimated by certain calculations, but anything deviating from the assumption to those calculations will skew the results ( a window, a doorway, a void space behind drywall, a closet, concrete behind your wall, actual rolloff of subs, etc) and therefore you can't computer model an optimum setup -if that is what you seek?
In realtime there are curves and cancelations going on all over the place.
Geddes does have an algorithm where [as a service to his customers if you buy his subs] he will calculate and set a dcx unit for you. But you have to record results of test tones taken in your room with his subs and he will tell you the setting for your subs in the behringer dcx. This is a little less optimal as the sub locations need to be firmly set for that, so you lose that degree of freedom in your optimization. You can't experiment with moving them to new locations to get a little better.
-Tony
-
Is it true that I don't see how it's a statistical problem. Three subs and a few sparsely-distributed modes...
-
Why are you guys trying to make this so difficult. The multiple sub theory is nothing more than this, get your room frequency response as close to flat as possible under 200Hz....thats it, there is no voodoo involved here, using mulitiple subs makes achieving this much much easier,but you do have to take room frequency response readings using software like REW or HOLMPULSE that Earl uses. I agree learning how to use the REW software can be a PIA, once you get your readings you then either move the subs around taking measurements before and after the moves. You also set the phase and delay times and do the same measurements. This multiple sub theory is nothing new Toole believes in the same thing. And I will say that since I went to the multiple sub approach, I have the best bass response I have EVER had in my system and room. The big thing that Geddes stresses in his theory is that EVERY room is different thats what makes the measurements a requirement.
-
Oh yes and the nicest thing about the multiple sub approach is that it works for ALL types of speakers not just Geddes speakers.
-
Oh yes and the nicest thing about the multiple sub approach is that it works for ALL types of speakers not just Geddes speakers.
This is what I think is so great! I come to A.C. to learn and feel that I've learned something no matter what I decide to do. :green: :thumb:
-
Yes, Toole has mentioned similar things, and there is also Welti's paper.
However, Earl hasn't published anything so comprehensive as Welti's paper on his variant of the multi-sub approach.
It would be interesting to see it given the "full treatment," and I assume this is the kind of thing JohnR is asking about.
I've got the impression that Earl's approach is more of a practical thing. He has observed things over the years, knows what _doesn't_ work, and came up with something that does work and can be done inexpensively.
He's given us the basics of it for free, and it does work. I was able to find enough info on it to implement it in my listening room without much effort.
-
Is it true that I don't see how it's a statistical problem. Three subs and a few sparsely-distributed modes...
Well what I am trying to get across is that it is statistical in that you are averaging sound levels in db -as opposed to linear in that 1+1 =2. This may not be your conception, but sometimes people are misunderstanding to think that adding subs is just adding db output (which they are not).
At each frequency, each source (sub) relative to another source will experience constructive and destructive interference from other sources and boundary reflections. You are attempting to flatten average spl at all bass frequencies of all of this interaction by adjusting phase and sub position relative to the listening area [not limited to a "sweet spot"]. Does this part make sense?
Perhaps you could further explain what you see as the issue with the approach?
-
I think thats about as clear as you can make it Traderx, also guys there used to be a white paper written by Dr Geddes available on his website pertaining to the multi sub approach, that white paper is no longer available from his site. I am not sure as to the particulars of why that is but I am sure there is some type of proprietary reasoning behind it. Ticks me off too I had read it when it was still available but never downloaded or printed it (nice job on my part huh).
-
Also may help to think of modes as simply the result of the boundaries rather than some separate entity. Each boundary acts as a "phantom source" in that it is a reflection of the sources. [-But, for some, adding that wrinkle may actually make it more difficult to conceptualize.]
-
I think thats about as clear as you can make it Traderx, also guys there used to be a white paper written by Dr Geddes available on his website pertaining to the multi sub approach, that white paper is no longer available from his site. I am not sure as to the particulars of why that is but I am sure there is some type of proprietary reasoning behind it. Ticks me off too I had read it when it was still available but never downloaded or printed it (nice job on my part huh).
The pdf white paper I linked had been rewritten from one posted earlier. Maybe that is the one you are thinking?
Also there is chapter 4 of the home theater book available for download from his site. That has more info about damping, but not anything to add to the multiple subs concept than what you would see in the other 2 places. I have the book and there isn't any more about it, as far as implementation process, in the book than this.
-Tony
-
Yes, Toole has mentioned similar things, and there is also Welti's paper.
However, Earl hasn't published anything so comprehensive as Welti's paper on his variant of the multi-sub approach.
It would be interesting to see it given the "full treatment," and I assume this is the kind of thing JohnR is asking about.
I've got the impression that Earl's approach is more of a practical thing. He has observed things over the years, knows what _doesn't_ work, and came up with something that does work and can be done inexpensively.
He's given us the basics of it for free, and it does work. I was able to find enough info on it to implement it in my listening room without much effort.
Earl hasn't published something like what Welti has done. I think its just a matter of time to be honest. He has been busy with the new speaker business, etc...so it's low in the priority scale. He will need to answer other questions like, why 3 subs instead of 30, etc...using 3 subs instead of 4 is a savings, and his placement is asymmetrical which can be advantageous in many rooms compared to the symmetrical approach of Todd Welti/Floyd O'Toole. Not all rooms are perfectly square. I respect them both and I am happy they divulge their techniques for us all to enjoy, literally for free. To be honest, Markus Mehlau's description is all one needs to implement the technique. But the theory is yet to be published in a peer reviewed journal to my knowledge. White Papers are getting bad raps, because historically, they seem to be just another avenue for spreading marketing propoganda, although Earl's White Papers are anything but.
Thanks TraderX for the links, it was a nice refresher course for me.
Anand.
-
Yes, Toole has mentioned similar things, and there is also Welti's paper.
However, Earl hasn't published anything so comprehensive as Welti's paper on his variant of the multi-sub approach.
It would be interesting to see it given the "full treatment," and I assume this is the kind of thing JohnR is asking about.
That's about it - thanks ;)
J
-
Here is a little tidbit from Earl about Welti's approach
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/134568-multiple-small-subs-geddes-approach-4.html#post1682014
and another saying fundamentally the same
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/134568-multiple-small-subs-geddes-approach-5.html#post1682242
-
Here is a link to the Harmon International white papers, including relevant multiple subwoofer papers from Welti and Toole that several have referenced:
http://www.harman.com/EN-US/OurCompany/Technologyleadership/Pages/WhitePapers.aspx?CategoryID=White%20papers
DWR, I don't think anyone is trying to complicate things. Many people reading this thread, and AC in general, simply like to know how things work, and many of them have very technical backgrounds. Wanting to understand the math and physics does not in anyway minimize the enjoyment of the end result.
As for modeling the room directly, rather than measuring its acoustic response, the technology exists today to do this surprisingly well. It isn't simple or common, however, and requires, as TRADERXFAN indicates, very accurate physical measurements of all room dimensions and features. Acoustic engineers like Jeff Hedback (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=profile;u=54872) have such modeling tools and have consulted on room design for AC members to roaring success. (Rives might as well, but it has been a while since I looked at their approach.)
An example, in which only physical measurements of this room, not acoustic, were sent to Jeff prior to the design implementation:
- http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=72137.0
- http://hedbackdesignedacoustics.com/Art_Smuck_Listening_Room_Make-Over_Case_Study.pdf
Relevant quote:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=72137.msg726236#msg726236
-
Well for Art's room, I really wanted to see the "after"... he hasn't showed the freq response so I don't really know if it "just sounds really good", or has acheived a flat freq response. [I mean no criticism here. No intent to disparage him in any way. Just wish we could see measurements.]
-
As of a few weeks ago, at least, Jeff hasn't seen the room in person to measure it and neither has Art. I do know, however, that Art hosted one audiophile interested in his system that brought a handheld measurement unit and reported that it was the flattest room he'd ever measured.
(I was lucky enough to spend 3 hours listening to Art's system from the sweet seat several weeks ago during a visit to Fort Worth, and I had heard various "pre-Jeff" incarnations many times before. "Wow" does not even begin to describe it. I've been a firm believer in room treatments as the single biggest impact on a system for a while now, and my interest in waveguides and controlled directivity speaker designs haven't changed that. They definitely help minimize certain room interactions, but do not eliminate them.)
On a related note, the design of Art's room specifically accommodated the radiation pattern of his line arrays. Pseudo point-source or controlled directivity speakers would benefit from some minor tweaks, primarily to the ceiling, I believe. They've also talked about subwoofer placements, as Art plans to experiment with some Rythmik subs. The last I heard, he is testing only two subs at the moment rather than the 3 or more Earl recommends, but I know the discussed placements were asymmetrical to even out room modes along the lines that Earl and others have discussed.
-
... but I know the discussed placements were asymmetrical to even out room modes along the lines that Earl and others have discussed.
The thing is, modes are modes, and they're either excited or not excited. The only way (that I can tell) to reduce excitation of a mode that's already being excited (e.g. by a corner sub) is to excite it at a different phase angle - a different point along the mode, phase shift, delay. It would be interesting to see the settings (and positionings) that people have used on their subs that achieve the flattest response - would anyone be willing to post theirs?
-
There is another paper by Todd Welti and Allan Devantier that is not included in the Harman link above.
I keep adding new white papers as they show up.
Low-Frequency Optimization Using Multiple Subwoofers
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=58304.msg516580#msg516580 (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=58304.msg516580#msg516580)
"At low frequencies the listening environment has a significant impact on the sound quality of an audio system. Standing waves within the room cause large frequency-response variations at the listening locations. Furthermore, the frequency response changes significantly from one listening location to another; therefore the system cannot be equalized effectively. However, through the use of multiple subwoofers the seat-to-seat variation in the frequency response can be reduced significantly, allowing subsequent equalization to be more effective."
Wayne
-
There is another paper by Todd Welti and Allan Devantier that is not included in the Harman link above.
I keep adding new white papers as they show up.
Low-Frequency Optimization Using Multiple Subwoofers
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=58304.msg516580#msg516580 (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=58304.msg516580#msg516580)
Great paper - I'd printed it out last night but only read it today. It actually answers a lot of the questions I had. One thing I wonder about is why subs out from the walls were not considered, as in slide 40 of the earlier "Subwoofers: Optimum Number and Locations" presentation. I don't know whether that's to keep the problem size under control, or whether they feel it's not relevant. Somebody above mentioned use of dipole subs, so out in room would be particularly relevant in that case.
It's occurred to me that a miniDSP would (might?) be a great tool for multiple sub configuration, whether using the Geddes method or trying to emulate manually what the SFM algorithm does in the Welti and Devantier paper. One in, four out, with gain, delay, and eq on each. Here's an article I wrote on eq'ing a single sub - a dedicated unit for subs looks really interesting:
http://www.hifizine.com/2010/09/subwoofer-equalization-and-integration-with-the-minidsp-2x4/
Anyway - thanks, I've learned a lot the last day or so :thumb:
-
Great paper - I'd printed it out last night but only read it today. It actually answers a lot of the questions I had. One thing I wonder about is why subs out from the walls were not considered, as in slide 40 of the earlier "Subwoofers: Optimum Number and Locations" presentation. I don't know whether that's to keep the problem size under control, or whether they feel it's not relevant. Somebody above mentioned use of dipole subs, so out in room would be particularly relevant in that case.
It's occurred to me that a miniDSP would (might?) be a great tool for multiple sub configuration, whether using the Geddes method or trying to emulate manually what the SFM algorithm does in the Welti and Devantier paper. One in, four out, with gain, delay, and eq on each. Here's an article I wrote on eq'ing a single sub - a dedicated unit for subs looks really interesting:
http://www.hifizine.com/2010/09/subwoofer-equalization-and-integration-with-the-minidsp-2x4/
Anyway - thanks, I've learned a lot the last day or so :thumb:
That's why I gave you the positive feedback that I did. I think its an excellent article you wrote and a must read to be honest.
Anand.
-
That's why I gave you the positive feedback that I did. I think its an excellent article you wrote and a must read to be honest.
Anand.
+1
-
Thanks :)
-
It's occurred to me that a miniDSP would (might?) be a great tool for multiple sub configuration, whether using the Geddes method
It could be as long as Dr. Geddes method is followed. The main speakers are run full range (preamp > amp > GedLee Speakers) and the subs are the only items that are eq'd.
If this is done, then the mini DSP can be used to follow the Geddes method. In order to do this you just need to split the signal from the pre output to the amps that are driving the mains and the other to the DSP. :thumb:
-
Do these splitters reduce the sound quality at all? I would think that someone with expensive cables and power cords (this is not me) would not be interested using an inexpensive splitter on the signal. This questions is posed whether talking about the impact on the high frequency OR the low. I know some say the low frequency is not as critical.
Thanks,
James
-
It could be as long as Dr. Geddes method is followed. The main speakers are run full range (preamp > amp > GedLee Speakers) and the subs are the only items that are eq'd.
Won't the measurements tell you whether you need to highpass and/or eq the mains?
-
Earl recommends no EQ on the mains. Personally, I use a little bit - mainly in they modal region below 200Hz.
-
Won't the measurements tell you whether you need to highpass and/or eq the mains?
Not being a GedLee customer / user I can't comment with certainty. I'm sure one of the users will though.
BUT, in reading all of Dr. Geddes papers and emailing him the subs need to be blended in with the mains NOT the other way. Right customers? Aren't I correct in that?
-
Do these splitters reduce the sound quality at all? I would think that someone with expensive cables and power cords (this is not me) would not be interested using an inexpensive splitter on the signal. This questions is posed whether talking about the impact on the high frequency OR the low. I know some say the low frequency is not as critical.
Thanks,
James
Please don't turn this thread into a cable debate. I will say this...
If you believe in science and this speaker approach chances are you are not buying into the 6" (max) cable extension degrading sound quality.
Many cable manufacturers will make you a "high end" Y if you so incline out of your favorite cable. I know my cable guy does.
Also, many preamps and buffers have dual outputs so it's a non issue. :thumb:
-
Also, many preamps and buffers have dual outputs so it's a non issue. :thumb:
Bingo. :thumb:
Anand.
-
Ok- I am not trying to cause a debate at all. So if you have powered subs, you would still need a splitter? Is this not correct? Given more than one sub- ala 3,4 or 5?
I am trying to figure how I can use my receiver to power the mains and then get the signal to the subs or the amp that is powering the subs. The dual outputs would only work when going into a multi-channel amp that is powering the subs, right? Sorry if this is obvious to everyone else but me :duh:
Cheers,
James
-
Ok- I am not trying to cause a debate at all. So if you have powered subs, you would still need a splitter? Is this not correct? Given more than one sub- ala 3,4 or 5?
I am trying to figure how I can use my receiver to power the mains and then get the signal to the subs or the amp that is powering the subs. The dual outputs would only work when going into a multi-channel amp that is powering the subs, right? Sorry if this is obvious to everyone else but me :duh:
Cheers,
James
Dual outputs are outputs. As long as they're stereo it doesn't matter. Post the model # of your unit and we'll get you sorted. How's that?
Are you a GedLee customer? If so, which model speaker?
-
James has been using Panasonic digital receivers being fed an S/PDIF signal so I'm not sure if it even has line level outputs.
I see basically two options if you wish to continue using the current receiver if preamp outputs are not available.
1) run the subs off the speaker terminals, you can daisy chain them. I have my three wired this way, works well for me.
2) build/buy a adapter that converts speaker level output to line level and then use the line level inputs on the subs. Given that you would be taking the signal from the speakers this isn't much different from option 1.
In either case be careful connecting the grounds of the speaker outputs. On some stereo amps the grounds of the speaker terminals float and connecting them together can kill the amp. Some subs have the grounds tied together and some don't. Most sub plate amps have the grounds of the line level inputs tied together, so if you wanted/had to use line inputs it would be best to sum and attenuate the speaker level outputs before connecting them to the plate amp. If they are summed you would only need one input to the sub.
I am trying to figure how I can use my receiver to power the mains and then get the signal to the subs or the amp that is powering the subs. The dual outputs would only work when going into a multi-channel amp that is powering the subs, right? Sorry if this is obvious to everyone else but me :duh:
-
Does anyone know if Dr. Geddes has any speaker stand design suggestion? Is less contact better? I would imagine that he would prefer no sharp corners and as much of it to be round? Yes?
I have a pretty slick design / idea. I think. :green:
I've been putting some thoughts together just in case this happens. I would need to make something for them. :D CAD > Aluminum > CNC 8)
-
This is where Bose makes an unexpected appearance!
-
This is where Bose makes an unexpected appearance!
:?:
-
Mike,
The Panasonic has a subwoofer out (which I assume is line-level?). So I would run that to a powered sub and then connect the remaining subs (2,3,4,etc.) as you suggested in a daisy chain?
If running with non-powered subs I would send this subwoofer out signal to a multi-channel amp that would then of course have the individual connections for each sub? Wouldn't the multi-channel amp need both a l/r input?
-
:?:
Bose has some stands that will evidently work with the Abbeys.
-
here's a link:
http://tinyurl.com/2fa6xnh
and Dr Geddes comment from here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=19217952
"The Bose stands are quite acceptable. I think that they look great as well. And I like the fact that they would have minimal diffraction."
-
Does anyone know if Dr. Geddes has any speaker stand design suggestion? Is less contact better? I would imagine that he would prefer no sharp corners and as much of it to be round? Yes?
They have to be sturdy, because the speakers are pretty hefty. A square top platform would work fine as long as it is smaller than the bottom side of the Abbeys. I don't think it needs to have its edges rounded off as long as it doesn't just out in front. (That's not to say that you couldn't round it off if you wanted to.)
-
Here was an answer to a similar question I had about the multiple subs with a single output that Geddes advised
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=56687.msg524397#msg524397
I decided to use a Dodd buffer as it is perfect device to drive such a situation.
-
Mike,
The Panasonic has a subwoofer out (which I assume is line-level?). So I would run that to a powered sub and then connect the remaining subs (2,3,4,etc.) as you suggested in a daisy chain?
If running with non-powered subs I would send this subwoofer out signal to a multi-channel amp that would then of course have the individual connections for each sub? Wouldn't the multi-channel amp need both a l/r input?
The link TraderXfan posted has a great answer. If you were running passive subs and used a multi channel amp, you would only need 1 input per channel that you were using. If you were using 4 channels, then 4 inputs. If the input impedance is high enough you can use Y splitters to daisy chain them without loading the sub out of your receiver too much. Kinda depends on how high the input impedance of the amp is. If it was 100K on each channel then 4 in parallel would be 25K, an easy load for the sub out.
-
I decided to use a Dodd buffer as it is perfect device to drive such a situation.
Great choice IMO. I couldn't be happier with mine. :thumb:
-
Is this an accurate statement?
Speaker distortion at high volumes can lead to ear fatigue which can cause headaches.
True or False?
-
Is this an accurate statement?
Speaker distortion at high volumes can lead to ear fatigue which can cause headaches.
True or False?
Not understanding what this is doing here... are you asking Geddes, or is this a backdoor question about horn "honk" or something?
Try this
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/121253-geddes-distortion-perception.html
-Tony
-
Not understanding what this is doing here... are you asking Geddes, or is this a backdoor question about horn "honk" or something?
Try this
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/121253-geddes-distortion-perception.html
-Tony
No back door here.
I thought I would ask in this thread as one of the characteristics of the GedLee speakers is the high volume less distortion. Correct? So why not ask here as I may get some answers that have science behind them? :thumb:
Just thought this question would go well with this thread... :oops:
-
"Horn honk", or HOMs, are said to cause irritation, not necessarily distortion. But high sound levels themselves would as well.
-
I find any amount of continual sound even at moderate volumes or low volumes to be fatiguing. There's a time for sound and a time for quite.
-
Have any of you guys heard the Audiokinesis speakers? If so, how do they compare to the Abbeys and what are the differences?
Cheers,
James
-
Have any of you guys heard the Audiokinesis speakers? If so, how do they compare to the Abbeys and what are the differences?
Cheers,
James
I heard the DreamMakers at RMAF a few years back. I haven't heard the Abbey yet. :hyper:
-
How do the Abbey 12 speakers perform in a near-field set-up? I'm considering the speakers for a 16' x 12' room which, right now, uses a long-wall set-up with speakers in the near-field (about 6' from chair). How would the speakers perform in such a set-up? I've avoided, to date, the short-wall set-up due to skewing of the image from sidewall reflections but I guess that I might be able to move to such a model given the Abbey design?
Regards
Zydeco
-
I use Nathans pretty near field and they are great.
-
Does anyone know how Dr. Geddes came up with the name of his speakers?
-
They are named after his children.
-
They are named after his children.
Ahh Cool. :thumb:
-
They are named after his children.
One of his children is named Summa? The others are pretty common names but that one kinda jumped out at me.
-
No.
Summa is what the reference prototype speaker was called and still is his best design - short for Summa Cum Laude.
Nathan and Harper are sons and Nathan is the youngest from what I remember.
Abbey is his daughter and is the eldest from what I remember.
Anand.
-
I can barely contain myself with the wait to listen to the Abbeys.
-
No.
Summa is what the reference prototype speaker was called and still is his best design - short for Summa Cum Laude.
Nathan and Harper are sons and Nathan is the youngest from what I remember.
Abbey is his daughter and is the eldest from what I remember.
Anand.
Gotcha. Like I said the other names are quite common, but Summa just didn't seem to fit.
-
For those that attended RMAF 2010 or have done some recent speaker evaluations:
1) What speakers would you say most resembled the sound of the Abbey's with multi-sub set-up?
2) What speakers were clearly better than the Abbey's with multi-sub set-up?
I am just looking to get some further descriptive comparisons as I have not had a chance to hear the Abbey's.
Cheers,
James
-
Nathan and Harper are sons and Nathan is the youngest from what I remember.
Abbey is his daughter and is the eldest from what I remember.
Anand.
I believe that Harper is actually a niece.
Just a small correction. :wink:
-
For those that attended RMAF 2010 or have done some recent speaker evaluations:
1) What speakers would you say most resembled the sound of the Abbey's with multi-sub set-up?
2) What speakers were clearly better than the Abbey's with multi-sub set-up?
I am just looking to get some further descriptive comparisons as I have not had a chance to hear the Abbey's.
Cheers,
James
Anyone have any input?
-
Anyone have any input?
I didn't hear anything at RMAF that was better than Mike Galusha's setup with the Abbeys and some very nice tubed gear in a very well treated room with 3 servo subs from Rythmik.
-
Would/could you comment on the gr-research super v's in comparison to the abbey's?
thanks
shane
-
I didn't hear anything at RMAF that was better than Mike Galusha's setup with the Abbeys and some very nice tubed gear in a very well treated room with 3 servo subs from Rythmik.
:o WOW Tyson!
Does this mean that you will be getting some Abbey's?
-
Would/could you comment on the gr-research super v's in comparison to the abbey's?
thanks
shane
+1 :thumb:
-
In a well treated room, with great gear, and servo subs...a lot of speakers will sound much better than most RMAF showings. They are hotel rooms, after all.
The Abbeys are pretty amazing, though...haven't lusted after another speaker since purchasing my pair.
You guys have to get out and hear a pair if you haven't. This type of sound quality that can work in literally any room....crazy value.
-
In a well treated room, with great gear, and servo subs...a lot of speakers will sound much better than most RMAF showings. They are hotel rooms, after all.
The Abbeys are pretty amazing, though...haven't lusted after another speaker since purchasing my pair.
You guys have to get out and hear a pair if you haven't. This type of sound quality that can work in literally any room....crazy value.
My time to listen to them is coming....soon!
What did you replace with your Abbeys?
-
I can't help but think that a hotel room would be exactly where the CD nature of the Abbey's would shine. Being such a small environment would naturally require the minimizing of reflections for good imaging. Doing a setup with multiple small subs could easily solve the bass peakiness of a smaller area.
Sounds like we should talk Dr. Geddes into another attempt at a show. Perhaps this time we can make a fancy box that covers up the receiver so people keep their ears open versus their eyes.
-
I can't help but think that a hotel room would be exactly where the CD nature of the Abbey's would shine. Being such a small environment would naturally require the minimizing of reflections for good imaging. Doing a setup with multiple small subs could easily solve the bass peakiness of a smaller area.
Sounds like we should talk Dr. Geddes into another attempt at a show. Perhaps this time we can make a fancy box that covers up the receiver so people keep their ears open versus their eyes.
Maybe Atma-Sphere could supply some M-60's. :thumb:
-
Maybe Atma-Sphere could supply some M-60's. :thumb:
Or he could just get something good.
-
jtwrace: Whats your experience with the M-60s?
-
:o WOW Tyson!
Does this mean that you will be getting some Abbey's?
Nope. As good as they are, they are still box speakers, and thus would not work well in my room.
-
jtwrace: Whats your experience with the M-60s?
zilch
-
thanks, Ed.
-
Well to take things in the other direction from multiple subs.......
I notice several of you guys are having great luck with tube amplifiers, specifically the Atma-Sphere. Is there anything that is particularly unique (maybe not the best word) about the Abbey's that seem to sound better with tube gear? I realize Dr. Geddes uses a Pioneer receiver which is clearly not tubed. Do the tubes tend to roll-off the top end and soften an inherent brightness?
Mind you, I am not sure of all of the things tubes are "supposed" to do to the sound of speakers but there must be something to this desired synergy?
Cheers,
James
-
I have not heard the Abbey speakers but have heard the Summa speakers which are a very similar design.
I would definitely classify the sound of the speaker as neutral. They are very balanced top to bottom and do not need to soften the highs.
Tubes vs solid state seems to be more a matter or what gets you involved in the music.
The Geddes speakers have helped prove to me how important the loudspeakers (and room) are in the overall sound of the system.
They are the real deal to put it simply.
-Nick
-
Well to take things in the other direction from multiple subs.......
I notice several of you guys are having great luck with tube amplifiers, specifically the Atma-Sphere. Is there anything that is particularly unique (maybe not the best word) about the Abbey's that seem to sound better with tube gear? I realize Dr. Geddes uses a Pioneer receiver which is clearly not tubed. Do the tubes tend to roll-off the top end and soften an inherent brightness?
Mind you, I am not sure of all of the things tubes are "supposed" to do to the sound of speakers but there must be something to this desired synergy?
Cheers,
James
James,
Okay, let's stop the misinformation/misunderstandings right here!
Tubes just don't come in one flavor. There are multiple different output stage topologies, i.e. single ended, push pull, etc....and of course OTL (output transformer less). Within the heading of single ended and push pull you've got even more derivatives and mentioning them would be going way off topic. But to answer your question, Atmasphere OTL's are not rolled off whatsoever. They have an extremely wide bandwidth, i.e. 2Hz to 75Khz within 1/2 dB. However, it is recommended that they be paired up with loudspeakers that are reasonably sensitive (i.e. no Thiels), have a benign impedance curve, and no strange dips down to 2 or 3 ohms. That rules out a lot of loudspeakers but not all of them. The Abbeys are quite benign, have a minimum impedance of 5.5 to 6 ohms (with a benign phase angle) and are 96dB sensitive. There are also several other loudspeakers that will pair up with the Atmaspheres quite nicely not just the Abbeys.
The reason many users like the Atmaspheres is because they are output transformer less. Designing an OTL is extremely difficult because you cannot use an output transformer to impedance couple to a loudspeaker! Ralph Karsten has been more successful than most, and hence has removed yet another impasse to high end sound. This topic is something that is debatable as there are now a significant number of output transformers that are far more transparent than they used to be even 10 years ago.
But at the end of the day, it is the sound that counts. Atmaspheres have incredible soundstaging, are extremely neutral and dynamic when coupled to the right speaker. The Abbeys are just one of them and it is that quality that makes the Abbey very flexible and user friendly in that regard.
Okay? :wink:
Anand.
-
Mike let me hear the Abbey's w/the Atma's, but to be honest I preferred the 211 tube monoblocks (18 watts SET!) and his modded MacIntosh to the Atma's. Here's the deal, if you have ANY impedance variations, it will result in Frequency Response changes. As the Impedance rises or drops, so will the OTL driven frequency response rise and fall. I've only heard the Atma's sound great in one setup, the AudioKenesis, and that's probably because Duke specifically designed his speakers to work well with OTL's. The vast majority of speakers will have serious problems when coupled to this type of amp.
-
Mike let me hear the Abbey's w/the Atma's, but to be honest I preferred the 211 tube monoblocks (18 watts SET!) and his modded MacIntosh to the Atma's. Here's the deal, if you have ANY impedance variations, it will result in Frequency Response changes. As the Impedance rises or drops, so will the OTL driven frequency response rise and fall. I've only heard the Atma's sound great in one setup, the AudioKenesis, and that's probably because Duke specifically designed his speakers to work well with OTL's. The vast majority of speakers will have serious problems when coupled to this type of amp.
True. And in the case of the Abbey, a simple LCR trap is all that is needed to flatten out the curve - which is what Duke does with his AK speakers, definitely not rocket science. In fact Mike Galusha was looking into this about a year back, but I bet he never got to it since he'd rather listen to the Abbey than design!
Anand.
-
Mike let me hear the Abbey's w/the Atma's, but to be honest I preferred the 211 tube monoblocks (18 watts SET!) and his modded MacIntosh to the Atma's. Here's the deal, if you have ANY impedance variations, it will result in Frequency Response changes. As the Impedance rises or drops, so will the OTL driven frequency response rise and fall. I've only heard the Atma's sound great in one setup, the AudioKenesis, and that's probably because Duke specifically designed his speakers to work well with OTL's. The vast majority of speakers will have serious problems when coupled to this type of amp.
In your opinion how would high power Class A SS do with the GedLee speakers?
-
Hmm, good question! I think pretty well, actually! I am not an SS kinda guy, but if you are, then I don't think the speakers will be the bottleneck, regardless of what SS amp you put in front of them. I'm speculating here, but I imagine that the dynamics will be even better, but imaging might not be as holographic.
-
In your opinion how would high power Class A SS do with the GedLee speakers?
I've used the DIY Firstwatt F5 which is class A but not high power. For the most part, it sounds great but I suspect it was running out of steam at some point. I do prefer the M60's to the F5, which itself is no slouch. Not because it is a tube amp, because it really doesn't sound like tubes in the typical ways. I also tried the DIY Firstwatt F4's in mono (100 w class A) and felt like they softened the edges a bit too much for my taste compared to the F5 and M60's. The big Claytons certainly should have no problems but it seems like overkill to me.
-
The reason many users like the Atmaspheres is because they are output transformer less.
Pioneer receivers are OTL too. :)
"If amplifiers A and B both have flat frequency response, low noise floor, reasonably low distortion, high input impedance, low output impedance, and are not clipped, they will be indistinguishable in sound at matched levels no matter what’s inside them."
Toob amps almost never have a low output impedance, so they act as tone controls. Some people like the resulting sound effects, others prefer a more neutral presentation.
-
Pioneer receivers are OTL too. :)
"If amplifiers A and B both have flat frequency response, low noise floor, reasonably low distortion, high input impedance, low output impedance, and are not clipped, they will be indistinguishable in sound at matched levels no matter what’s inside them."
Toob amps almost never have a low output impedance, so they act as tone controls. Some people like the resulting sound effects, others prefer a more neutral presentation.
Turkey,
Who are you quoting?
Cheers,
James
-
Peter Aczel.
-
Guys, is there any way to use an Abbey's as a center channel in an ht setup without using an acoustically transparent screen? My screen is 27" from the floor. I'm assuming Dr. Geddes has never made a horizontal version of any of his speakers.
-
I've come to this conclusion - when people say they cannot hear the difference between amps, I believe them!
-
I've come to this conclusion - when people say they cannot hear the difference between amps, I believe them!
That's a rather ad hominem argument...
I used to think I heard a big difference between amps, but when it came time to "put my money where my mouth is," so to speak, I couldn't reliably identify one amp from another. Some of my friends, a couple of our wives, and one of their 20-something kids couldn't do it either.
When faced with something like this, you can either dismiss it and keep on going as you were, or you can change your thinking. I chose to change my thinking.
So now I concentrate on the important things: speakers, listening room, and recordings.
(I'm strongly considering building another amp soon, maybe a Pass design, or Ball, Dean, or Elliot. It will be a lot of fun to play with. However, I'm not going to be doing it because it will sound any better, but because it will be a fun project.)
-
Dr. Geddes has said before a few times that lack of crossover distortion is one of the key elements he looks for in an amp assuming an otherwise competent design. It so happens that the Pioneer receiver is one of the few budget amps that meets this criteria. Class A amps (either SS or tube) are inherently crossover distortion free.
CD is hard to measure but it is audible. Most SS amps are Class A/B and pay little attention to crossover distortion. I feel that this may be the reason why so many object to SS amps. I prefer tube amps but not all, only good ones. Then again, I have no problem with good SS amps, there are just not that many I've come across IMO.
I think there is also the spectrum of the harmonic distortion that is largely ignored but more important IMO than the level of HD distortion assuming we are not talking about gross (>3%) distortion. I'd take an amp with say 1% 2nd Harmonic distortion and immeasurable upper harmonics over an amp with neglible 2nd HD but trace amounts of 5th HD. The later has much better specs but yet its HD is much more audible than the first. THD is a useless measure because it doesn't take into account this feature of how we hear.
Dr. Geddes has published research that basically proves the above point, but in his case he wasn't comparing amps but distorted signals played back with headphones.
-
Guys, is there any way to use an Abbey's as a center channel in an ht setup without using an acoustically transparent screen? My screen is 27" from the floor. I'm assuming Dr. Geddes has never made a horizontal version of any of his speakers.
The Harper might be a good solution for you since it's smaller. It's 19" tall.
I don't know if laying one of the GedLee speakers on its side works well or not.
-
Dr. Geddes has said before a few times that lack of crossover distortion is one of the key elements he looks for in an amp assuming an otherwise competent design. It so happens that the Pioneer receiver is one of the few budget amps that meets this criteria. Class A amps (either SS or tube) are inherently crossover distortion free.
He has also said that much of this isn't audible IIRC. I got the impression that he didn't choose the Pioneer so much because it sounded better, but rather because it measured better.
CD is hard to measure but it is audible. Most SS amps are Class A/B and pay little attention to crossover distortion.
A while back I remember seeing mention of a listening test where the amp that people preferred over the others was Class B. It made me wonder how audible crossover distortion actually is.
I think there is also the spectrum of the harmonic distortion that is largely ignored but more important IMO than the level of HD distortion assuming we are not talking about gross (>3%) distortion. I'd take an amp with say 1% 2nd Harmonic distortion and immeasurable upper harmonics over an amp with neglible 2nd HD but trace amounts of 5th HD.
What you say is true, but at what point does it actually become audible? I think we once discussed a Parasound amp that had upper harmonics. You said you wouldn't want it for that reason, while I wondered if distortion that's 100 dB down or more is audible.
THD is a useless measure because it doesn't take into account this feature of how we hear.
It is probably useless for loudspeakers, but it can still give a reasonable indication of when an amp performs well. I'd say that if an amp (that Parasound A 21) has less than 0.03% THD broadband at normal listening levels, we're good to go.
On the other hand, if we're looking at a SET amp with several orders of magnitude higher THD, it is worth looking at the distortion spectrum.
Some amps at, say, 3% THD will be truly noxious, while others may be more benign, or even in some cases pleasurable. (Euphonic distortion.)
-
Well I remember reading a thread on diyaudio where Dr. Geddes was describing how he chose his amps. I think his point was that is was audible especially with hi-eff speakers, but that it wasn't nearly as important as speakers. I agree with this.
I, personally, believe amps and all the rest are audibly different but that the magnitude of the differences is small relative to that with speakers. I get a lot of push back from audiophiles on that one and I think there are many reasons why, but mostly years of conditioning. Changing speakers all the time is mostly impractical so audiophiles change gear instead, thus they begin to believe that that is more important.
I don't believe I have all the answers to why some amps sound different than others. I don't think I'd pass a blind test on comparing two Class A/B SS amps, but I could probably tell the difference between a good tube amp versus a good SS amp and I'd prefer the prior more than likely. I don't think its as easy as euphonic distortion. In Geddes's tests many couldn't detect the presence of 10% 2nd HD, so 0.5% isn't likely to be audible for better or worse. There is just a lot more going on than we get.
I disagree with you on the THD for amps point, but I can understand why you think the way you do. It isn't really worthwhile to argue about it because I don't have the answers.
Take a look at the distortion versus power graph for your Parasound. Chances are that distortion rises as power drops below a few watts. Why? This is the effect of feedback and IMD which raises the spectrum of HD. The problem is this is where we spend the majority of our time listening and I suspect this is audible.
-
Take a look at the distortion versus power graph for your Parasound. Chances are that distortion rises as power drops below a few watts. Why? This is the effect of feedback and IMD which raises the spectrum of HD. The problem is this is where we spend the majority of our time listening and I suspect this is audible.
It actually isn't my Parasound. I've used it as an example because it's readily available, pretty well-respected, and the measurements are available on the web.
I just looked at the graph of THD+N vs. power, and while it does rise slightly at low power, it's roughly 75 dB down. I think that's going to still be inaudible, particularly with a complex signal like music.
http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index.php?op=ViewArticle&articleId=18&blogId=1
I see your point, and I don't disagree with most of what you say. We just don't see eye-to-eye on the audibility of some things. :)
-
The Harper might be a good solution for you since it's smaller. It's 19" tall.
I don't know if laying one of the GedLee speakers on its side works well or not.
He offers a crossover change for a speaker to be used as a center on its side...
-
He offers a crossover change for a speaker to be used as a center on its side...
I thought that was just for use as a center, and the crossover change reduced the on-axis hole in the response?
-
Question for you GedLee owners.
Do you have satin or gloss black speakers?
-
Gloss Black.
Anand.
-
Question for you GedLee owners.
Do you have satin or gloss black speakers?
Gloss black.
-
Is it safe to say that you all GedLee owners have CLD or No Rez inside the cabinets? I know Dr. Geddes thoughts on it already...
The only two options seem to be Piano finish and CLD. Gloss is N/C I'm a bit confused as I would've thought Gloss and Piano are the same but :dunno:
-
He offers a crossover change for a speaker to be used as a center on its side...
Good deal. Thanks for that info.
-
Is it safe to say that you all GedLee owners have CLD or No Rez inside the cabinets? I know Dr. Geddes thoughts on it already...
The only two options seem to be Piano finish and CLD. Gloss is N/C I'm a bit confused as I would've thought Gloss and Piano are the same but :dunno:
Mine are the older MDF cabinets in the satin finish. It is also very slightly textured with a extremely fine bead like material Earl uses in the paint. CLD was standard at the time. With Mike Galusha's suggestion of additional hardwood strips placed on the cabinet walls, Earl added those for my pair. I haven't done the No-Rez yet but may do that when I upgrade the crossovers. I also had him put Cardas Patented Binding Posts on instead of the standard posts, just because I love them. I bought those from Sonicraft and had them shipped direct to him.
The new poly cabinets may be entirely different so no idea on those.
-
Is it safe to say that you all GedLee owners have CLD or No Rez inside the cabinets? I know Dr. Geddes thoughts on it already...
No No Rez here. :)
They have the stock (front and back) CLD and that's it.
-
Mine are the older MDF cabinets
Mine have the oldest MDF cabinets. :wink:
-
Mine are the gloss black, the picture on his website of the Abbey is actually one of my speakers, and I do believe that the gloss black is an extra charge now.
-
Mine are the gloss black, the picture on his website of the Abbey is actually one of my speakers, and I do believe that the gloss black is an extra charge now.
from my email:
I can now offer gloss black at no cost premium (polished Piano finish is still extra).
Dr. Geddes
-
from my email:
I can now offer gloss black at no cost premium (polished Piano finish is still extra).
Dr. Geddes
:singing: :inlove: :eyebrows: :banana piano:
Great, since I'll be ordering an Abbey center and 4 Harpers when the house is done.
Anand.
-
This is where my confusion is. What's the difference between Gloss Black and Piano Black? I thought that was the same. :scratch:
I just hate to keep asking Dr. Geddes these questions...
Man I wish I could hear these speakers soon. :cry:
-
JW I'm going to send you an email.
-
JW I'm going to send you an email.
OK. I like emails. :lol: The 100 or so I get isn't enough.
-
LOL....sent it thru a-gon.
-
Gloss is sprayed and that's it. Piano is actually polished to a smooth finish.
-
Gloss is sprayed and that's it. Piano is actually polished to a smooth finish.
I think its different depending on each finisher to be honest. With my speakers, he called it gloss, but it was very apparent that he had buffed it by hand tons of times. He said that it wasn't buffed to the extent of piano black gloss, although to me, I can see a reflection of our floor which is good enough to be honest.
Anand.
-
That describes exactly how mine were done also Anand.
-
I think its different depending on each finisher to be honest. With my speakers, he called it gloss, but it was very apparent that he had buffed it by hand tons of times. He said that it wasn't buffed to the extent of piano black gloss, although to me, I can see a reflection of our floor which is good enough to be honest.
Anand.
OK. :thumb:
-
I have the white, which is really nice though on one of my speakers it is bubbling around the foam. I don't know if this a rarity or not.
-
I have the white, which is really nice though on one of my speakers it is bubbling around the foam. I don't know if this a rarity or not.
Depends on if you had the MDF built version or the new version made out of a poly material. The poly material is superior and the finish is more permanent. MDF is tough to work with. I think this move to poly on Earl's part is going to solve a lot of problems, is structurally more inert, and lighter. A win, win situation, with the exception of cost. Earl needs to export these speakers, so the lighter they are, the better, regardless of the usual audiophool dogma ("heavier is better").
Anand.
-
That describes exactly how mine were done also Anand.
Same here.
-
Thanks, Anand. I got my right before the switch to poly. Good thing for me as the polys are out of my price range (but knowing what I know now!).
-
If I remember right, I think Earl said that MDF actually has better damping properties than the poly, although the difference is probably not very great. The main reason for the switch was the superior dimensional stability of the poly (hence its ability to support a higher quality painted finish). From the looks of the new design it seems to me that it would be straightforward to veneer the sides as well if one wanted to do that.
-
Sorry if I'm a little late in this notification, but if Anand, TomS, Tyson, goskers, turkey, doug s., Bear, cujobob, sts9fan, et al are looking for their subwoofer posts, by popular demand they have their own thread here:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=87428.0
-
I should be in queue this week...
-
I assume this means you're just a little on the excited and anxious side?
-
I assume this means you're just a little on the excited and anxious side?
To hear them, yes! I will be able to listen to them next month. In the meantime I'll be sending funds so I'm in queue as Dr. Geddes gets booked quickly and I'd rather be on the list than not.
-
I have the white, which is really nice
I'd like to see some pictures of white Abbeys. :thumb:
-
Question for you Abbey owners.
Do you find with the gloss black that you get TV reflections in them?
-
Your install will determine the finish in my opinion. If the speakers are to be shown then go ahead and do any finish you like. If you are building an ht room then I would go with a flat finish as you will most definitely get reflections which annoy me greatly.
-
Your install will determine the finish in my opinion. If the speakers are to be shown then go ahead and do any finish you like. If you are building an ht room then I would go with a flat finish as you will most definitely get reflections which annoy me greatly.
My wife brought up a good point though. In my setup the speakers are placed in front of the TV. She mentioned that if the TV is on and the speakers are gloss you'll see the reflections. For that reason she has recommended satin...
-
I personally think that flat black/dark gray is an understated color choice. Your wife is placing you on the right track :thumb:
-
Question for you Abbey owners.
Do you find with the gloss black that you get TV reflections in them?
I don't have any problems with this. I suppose there are some reflections off of the front of the speaker, but most of the front is either foam or woofer cone, so it's not really an issue.
The side of the speakers that is towards the TV is not visible from my seating area, so reflections aren't an issue with the sides either.
I think I'd be just as happy with a matte finish as with gloss, so I don't think I'd recommend one over the other.
Maybe you should get some cardboard and some cans of spray paint and mock up a pair of Abbeys? You could try different colors and finishes and see what you like best. Have a small piece with a 12" hole cut in it so that, whatever color or finish you use for the rest of the box, you can spray some matte black on last to represent the woofer and the foam in the waveguide.
I think that you'll find that it's the size and the color that are more important than whether the finish is shiny or not.
I wonder how Candy Apple Red would look? :)
-
I wonder how Candy Apple Red would look? :)
Earl recently e-mailed me and said that he had built a pair of Nathan 10A's in that very color. He said it came out real nice and he will be posting it on his site.
I've thought that blue metallic would be real cool as well. He really should be able to do any automotive finish out there with the new poly material.
Anand.
-
I personally think that flat black/dark gray is an understated color choice. Your wife is placing you on the right track :thumb:
I'm glad you agree. With her. :)
Come Saturday when Dr. Geddes has my check, I'll officially be in queue. That is when I hear them and I like them and want to continue this journey...
-
JTW I find the same as Turkey, my speakers are also out in front of the TV by about 3 feet so the reflection from the TV is a non issue, remember the speakers are toed in at about 45 degrees so there is no surface on the speaker that could reflect back from the TV and be seen at the viewing/listening position. As for the gloss or satin finish that is completely a personal choice. Myself I like the gloss much more than the satin, and if I could do the finish over on mine I too would get them done in a dark dark red candy apple type finish. But I am completely happy with the high gloss black that Earl put on mine, they are beautiful.
-
JTW I find the same as Turkey, my speakers are also out in front of the TV by about 3 feet so the reflection from the TV is a non issue, remember the speakers are toed in at about 45 degrees so there is no surface on the speaker that could reflect back from the TV and be seen at the viewing/listening position. As for the gloss or satin finish that is completely a personal choice. Myself I like the gloss much more than the satin, and if I could do the finish over on mine I too would get them done in a dark dark red candy apple type finish. But I am completely happy with the high gloss black that Earl put on mine, they are beautiful.
:thumb:
-
6 wks until I meet Abbey (the speaker). :hyper:
-
Is this something you're going to listen to, or are you planning on having sex with it? :wink:
Seriously though, I understand the anticipation factor.
-
Is this something you're going to listen to, or are you planning on having sex with it? :wink:
Seriously though, I understand the anticipation factor.
Well it's going to be at my house, and I'm still looking for a large enough prophylactic to protect my Abbey's :lol:
Anand.
-
I have the Abbeys... purchased them last summer and have been quite content with them. In fact, in a lot of ways, they changed the hobby for me. I'm getting the resolution, dynamics, soundstage, and imaging I expected I'd have to pay a lot more for...and I've just been using an inexpensive receiver recommended by Earl. The Abbeys have clearly shown me that investing in loudspeakers is THE way to go from here on out. I could easily see a lot of people on this forum being happier if they'd sell their expensive electronics, pick up a pair of Abbeys, and just be done with it all for a few years (until something clearly superior arrives).
You certainly don't NEED 3 subs, Earl just recommends three or more subs to ANY setup. The Abbeys don't really require anything special, setup-wise, except you have to be able to fit speakers of that size in your setup.
Compared to some other nice high-end offerings I've heard or used in home, what the Abbeys do better are:
Coherency
Dynamics
Imaging
Resolution
I'll try to be more in depth when I'm not typing a post at near 2 a.m. after a long day.
I don't know how I missed this post but that's great. :thumb: Do you mind telling us what they replaced in your house?
-
Well it's going to be at my house, and I'm still looking for a large enough prophylactic to protect my Abbey's :lol:
Anand.
:nono:
-
I don't know how I missed this post but that's great. :thumb: Do you mind telling us what they replaced in your house?
Cujobob was a previous owner of the Neo2X (which he sold for reasons other than sound quality), and is a current owner of the OB7 in addition to the Abbeys if I am not mistaken.
Anand.
-
That's all true. My favorite extreme value speakers before the Abbeys were the GR-Research models. I feel the Abbeys are better in most ways, but that shouldn't take away from the fact that Danny's offerings are outstanding and worth checking out.
-
Yep......depends on the GR model your comparing it to also....all the ones mentioned are well under a grand.
Have you heard the V series?......seems they are more in line cost wise with the GedLee offerings.
-
GR bla bla bla. Gedlee? I have had both and Gedlee is way better.
-
Yep......depends on the GR model your comparing it to also....all the ones mentioned are well under a grand.
Have you heard the V series?......seems they are more in line cost wise with the GedLee offerings.
I've heard the GR SuperV's at RMAF and they indeed sound very good. I live with the bottom half myself :thumb:
The Abbey 12A's are $3800 fully assembled now, plus at least 1 sub. The kit prices for the GR SuperV's are about $2.5k, so what was the fully assembled price for the cool looking yellow RMAF show pair, maybe about $6-7k?
-
GR bla bla bla. Gedlee? I have had both and Gedlee is way better.
Which GR vs. which Gedlee? Kind of makes a difference.
-Jim
-
I've heard the GR SuperV's at RMAF and they indeed sound very good. I live with the bottom half myself :thumb:
The Abbey 12A's are $3800 fully assembled now, plus at least 1 sub. The kit prices for the GR SuperV's are about $2.5k, so what was the fully assembled price for the cool looking yellow RMAF show pair, maybe about $6-7k?
Don't the Abbey 12As need at least 3 subs to perform as advertised?
-Roy
-
Not sure what the total price for the bells and whistles yellow jobs were......my V-1s were about $2300 finished.
Unless yellow makes it sound better.....thats your call.
$3800....+ one sub of decent value.....or 3 subs=$??
Sts.....thats great....happy for you!!....but both of what??....$ to $ I'm talking.
Was just saying .....cant compare a $800 speak to a $4k speak....Volkswagan and porche.....theres a difference.
I dont want to start a flame war....like Orion and GR... :nono:
Just saying.....if your going to compare.....make it oranges to oranges......
I'm sure the GedLee offerings sound fantastic........As do the GRs.....just no 4K kits offered.....and they come with OB servo subs for that price.......something to consider.....if we are making comparisons
-
GR bla bla bla. Gedlee? I have had both and Gedlee is way better.
Have you listened to both the Abbey and the Super V in the same room in an A-B comparison? I'm interested in both speakers but I'm sure that it would difficult set up that kind of audition/comparison. So unless that situation is available it's only speculation as to which is actually the best performer.
-Roy
-
Have you listened to both the Abbey and the Super V in the same room in an A-B comparison? I'm interested in both speakers but I'm sure that it would difficult set up that kind of audition/comparison. So unless that situation is available it's only speculation as to which is actually the best performer.
-Roy
Roy is right. You will likely never be able to audition them at the same venue. GedLee speakers require a different level of setup with the multiple subs,etc... (although 3 aren't required per se, it's just ideal and that is discussed in a different thread).
It's best not to speculate obviously, although you can theoretically which does nobody any favors on a public forum to be honest.
The comparison should stop right here. If you want to know, go listen to both speakers, that's what I have advised many AC'ers to do. I only mentioned what cujobob currently has, and what he had owned as a point of fact, not as a point of comparison. And on top of that you really can't compare the prices too literally. One speaker kit comes with the enclosure, the other doesn't. Both can come fully built, however the GedLee is a set price while the GR Research offerings are very variable as different third party builders/finishers charge different prices. As for the sound, go listen to both, and if you can't - I feel bad for you. I'm pretty sure you will have one set liking one type of speaker while another set liking another - kind of like the wide range of opinions at RMAF.
Let's keep it peaceful here...
Anand.
-
WOW. I sit on a plane for 5 hrs and this happens?
My original plan was to purchase Super V's and the Abbeys. The issue I had with the Super V's is simple. If I make my own cabinets they will cost me waay more than the $3800 for the Abbeys. There is no economical way to do it. If I pay someone else they will be $6k +. I will hear the Super V's....
-
If I make my own cabinets they will cost me waay more than the $3800 for the Abbeys.
Why would they cost you more than the Abbeys if you DIY? My understanding is the Super V's (V-1) is about 2K for the kit.
-
Again, multiple subs are not necessary for the Abbeys...just recommended. People add the price of three+ subs into any imaginary budget when they're just like any other speaker. The designer recommends crossing them around 100 hz (well, any speaker for that matter IIRC) and his logic is sound. OB subs are awesome..and likely one of the biggest reasons the Super V sounds so sweet. Obviously, open baffle will sound different from a closed monopole design, but not necessarily better. The Super V is likely a sweet sounding speaker...one I'd love to hear. I think the Abbeys will work better in more rooms. Very few placement restrictions.
FWIW, Earl was using some very inexpensive subs when I demoed his system last year...(before his designs were available). It doesn't have to cost much to achieve his recommended sound.
-
Why would they cost you more than the Abbeys if you DIY? My understanding is the Super V's (V-1) is about 2K for the kit.
I put a price on my time.
-
If you are looking for new speakers and you have your search boiled down I am not sure how you can have the V and the Geddes both as the front runners. Unless you are just listening to the AC hype. They may both be awsome speakers but they are also very very different. OB with subs locked in one (hopefully good place) or CD with separate subs needed.
-
Unless you are just listening to the AC hype.
The GedLee is it for me.
-
I put a price on my time.
You must be a lawyer.
-
I was just putting the real costs in perspective. Danny estimated it last year at RMAF for a very nice custom build, so $6-7k has always been what's in my head. The driver/xo kit alone is $2495.
Enclosures fininshed out like these are $3,500. (from Denny). The Super V kit is $2,495. My assembly is $500. So you are looking at about $6,500. plus some shipping cost.
The Abbeys (fully assembled) paired with GR OB subs (DIY) worked out to well under $4.5k for me at the time and represent great value all around IMHO. I could easily build the SuperV for the tops if I had a burning hankerin' to do so, but just don't right now because I like my Abbey/OB setup a ton.
I think Jason has the right approach. Go listen to as many as you can, preferably set up decently somewhere, and make your choice based on what works for your ears and your budget. It's all good :thumb:
-
There's really no way to know for sure which is the best one without hearing them both in the same room with the same gear. Either way I'm sure they are both fantastic and you couldn't go wrong either way.
I do like OBs and OB bass though.
-
You must be a lawyer.
:nono:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=79617.0
but a few in my family are.
-
Tyson been turning back flips over his GR V2s which are only $1000-1200 which seems like a very good deal to me. I don't know how they would stack up to the Abbeys? :scratch: Maybe the Nathans would be a better comparison. You don't hear much about the Nathans though. I'm curious how much better the Abbeys are when compared to the Nathans.
-
Tyson been turning back flips over his GR V2s which are only $1000-1200 which seems like a very good deal to me. I don't know how they would stack up to the Abbeys? :scratch: Maybe the Nathans would be a better comparison. You don't hear much about the Nathans though. I'm curious how much better the Abbeys are when compared to the Nathans.
I've heard both and the Abbeys are better which is why I own them! Besides the prices of the Nathan and Abbey are way too close to not consider the Abbey instead. Not unless you have size issues, etc...as the Abbey is a bigger speaker.
I asked Earl about the prices being so close and he said that his own cost to build the Nathan and Abbey are very much the same, the only difference is in the price of the woofers. So there you go. You hear about the Abbey more because it is his best selling speaker.
Best,
Anand.
-
Are the Abbeys really that much better than the Nathans? My understanding is that the difference is there, but not spectacular.
-
I'd agree w/Anand, I think the Geddes are still the best speaker I've heard, but in a dedicated room with world class amps and source. In a more difficult room like mine, the Geddes will still have the same issues with upper bass (up to 200hz), that any other box speaker would. Open Baffle bass is a god send for these types of difficult rooms (like mine). Multiple subs won't address the 100hz to 200hz range, for obvious reasons, and that's actually where I have my biggest bass issues. Personally I was just happy to find and OB solution that was pretty compact, went very deep in the bass (ie, no subs needed), and were a true point source for mids/highs (something I seem to be uniquely sensitive to). I was telling a friend of mine the other day - I don't really even think about "the system" anymore, mainly I just sit back and listen to the music nowadays. Even my wife is telling me "turn it up" instead of "turn it down". Maybe someday I'll drag my V2's over to Mike's place and see how they sound in a more acoustically perfect room. But that's a ways off....
-
The abbys are CD lower then the Nathans and will work better in a bigger room. That said they both use the same brand of driver, wave guide technology and the crossover was deigned by the same person. I would doubt the difference would be night and day.
Do the new cabs have more right angles then the old MDF ones?
-
The abbys are CD lower then the Nathans and will work better in a bigger room. That said they both use the same brand of driver, wave guide technology and the crossover was deigned by the same person. I would doubt the difference would be night and day.
Do the new cabs have more right angles then the old MDF ones?
When you say the Nathans are CD lower does that mean that the directionality is more tightly controlled or that they plumb lower frequencies? If the main difference is that they go lower it seems that the Nathans with some OB subs crossed over high would be a pleasing combination.
I think I read somewhere that the Abbeys have a slight hole in what would be the normal sweet spot and they actually sound better slightly off to one side. :scratch:
Thanks,
Roy
-
Maybe someday I'll drag my V2's over to Mike's place and see how they sound in a more acoustically perfect room. But that's a ways off....
If you're ever serious about that Tyson, I'd happily help you move the gear, because that would be a fun listening session!
-
When you say the Nathans are CD lower does that mean that the directionality is more tightly controlled or that they plumb lower frequencies? If the main difference is that they go lower it seems that the Nathans with some OB subs crossed over high would be a pleasing combination.
I think I read somewhere that the Abbeys have a slight hole in what would be the normal sweet spot and they actually sound better slightly off to one side. :scratch:
Thanks,
Roy
Roy,
All the GedLee speakers have a dip when measured on axis (at 0 degrees) due to diffraction at the lip/mouth of the waveguide itself. This has been compensated electrically in the crossover. But you don't ever listen to any GedLee speaker at 0 degrees (except center channels and he compensates for this as well in the crossover). But for 2 channel audio, his speakers are toed in HEAVILY to 45 degrees for precisely this reason. Earl explains it well earlier in this thread (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=86403.msg843958#msg843958).The off axis response is linear as can be, and it's optimized that way. Directivity control *is* enhanced as you go up in his designs. Although the Abbeys will be able to play louder because of greater piston area, etc...that's not the point. The point is *directivity control*...which the Abbey has down to a lower frequency. If you look at the AES studies you will see that controlling directivity over a 30-40 degree arc from 500 Hz to 20khz is a very desirable characteristic in order to limit reflections, etc...it is what makes this speaker a soundstaging champion and tonality is the most neutral I have heard, on par with Quads in the midrange. Now the Abbey and Nathan do not control directivity all the way down to 500hz. That would take a massive waveguide larger than the 15 inch one on the Summa. But I will tell you that you can understand a lot about the *degree* of directivity control in each of these designs by looking at Earl's graphs on his website. The Summas are clearly the best, next Abbey, followed by Nathan. Again, I will say that the Abbey is better than the Nathan as I have heard both designs. The difference isn't night and day. But if it were my wallet, I would spend it on the Abbey only because the price difference between them to me is small. Just my opinion.
The Summas are just amazing.
The new cabinets are rounded over well - both around the waveguide itself and on the front baffle. You wouldn't expect anything less from Earl Geddes. Minimizing diffraction is paramount to his and any speaker design. Those who don't do so are ignoring that aspect of speaker design. The ear has a *non-linear* sensitivity when detecting diffraction levels at higher spl's - minimizing distortion caused by diffraction is key.
Reread his white papers fellas, it's all in there :wink:
Anand.
-
Reread his white papers fellas, it's all in there :wink:
I don't think it is, a lot of what showed up in Google searches recently turned out to be non-existent. Specific links would help :dunno:
-
Arnand,
Thanks for the detailed explanation. I'll wade through the white papers.
-Roy
-
I don't think it is, a lot of what showed up in Google searches recently turned out to be non-existent. Specific links would help :dunno:
GedLee White Paper #1 (http://gedlee.com/downloads/Philosophy.pdf)
GedLee White Paper #2 (http://gedlee.com/downloads/directivity.pdf)
Anand.
-
Anand, once again I totally agree with everything you said in your post to Roy. I also have listened to the Summa, Abbey and Nathan, and your remarks about the Abbey and Nathan with respect to the differences and prices are spot on. Also on the dip at 0 degrees, I took my Abbey12As back over to Earls place so he could photo them for his website and so he could run frequency sweeps on both speakers after a month of use and "break in". It was very interesting watching Earl do the sweeps and you can actually see the on axis dip disappear in the measurements as the measurements are taken. He measures starting from 0 degrees at 16 degree intervals to 180 degrees. You can see the dip begin to lessen at 16 degrees and is almost gone at 32 degrees then at 48 degrees is completely gone. I was very impressed with Earls procedure for measuring the speakers and I learned a few things too on how to perform the measurements and what they mean. He also measured the two speakers output compared to each other and they were within less than 1/2 of 1dB of each other which was as low as the measurement program would measure in the mode he was testing in, so needless to say I am very impressed with the science behind as well as Earls attention to detail with the way he designs and manufactures his speakers.
Dan
-
Of course, toeing the speakers in at 45º does not mean you are listening at 45º off the speakers' axes, if the set up is the usual equilateral triangle - more like 15º.
-
If you're ever serious about that Tyson, I'd happily help you move the gear, because that would be a fun listening session!
Heck yeah! Of course, it might be nice if I actually asked Mike, before inviting myself over ;)
I should be finished building the V2's this weekend, I'm pretty stoked to see how the final product turns out. Once it's done, I'm ready/willing/able to do a listening session.
-
You are correct in theory Russel, in my particular setup it works out to 22 degrees which is what Earls dedicated theater is setup at also.
-
Of course, toeing the speakers in at 45º does not mean you are listening at 45º off the speakers' axes, if the set up is the usual equilateral triangle - more like 15º.
My Nathans are toed-in so the axes cross in front of the listening position. The outside front corners of the enclosures point at the listening position. I'm listening at roughly 22.5 degrees off axis.
-
You sure it's not roughly 22.3 degrees off axis? :P
-
You sure it's not roughly 22.3 degrees off axis? :P
:)
But seriously, 1/2 of 45 is 22.5, and I said "roughly 22.5" because I didn't measure the exact angle that's in use in my listening room. It could well be off by a few degrees plus or minus.
-
Oh I get it, I just thought it was funny on face value. Plus I kinda ribbed you a bit harder on the Directional cables thread. I'm just in a bit of a sarcastic mood this morning, and you just happened to have posted most recently ;)
Mainly I'm just putting off getting the final veneering work done on my V2's!
-
Oh I get it, I just thought it was funny on face value. Plus I kinda ribbed you a bit harder on the Directional cables thread. I'm just in a bit of a sarcastic mood this morning, and you just happened to have posted most recently ;)
I kind of figured you did get it, but I agree that what I initially wrote was funny. :)
-
This post just in from Earl:
Just finished the "new" Harpers a few days ago - built and tested the first prototype. I will ship the first ones on my return.
Next up - maybe an Abbey Supreme - a solid wood cabinet - I figured out how to do this at a reasonable cost - still much more than the standard, but much less than having to have individual baffles cut on a CNC machine.
A solid wood Abbey! WAF, here we come! I'm figuring the Harpers are being upgraded to the 'A' version with the poly enclosure. Harper 8A.
Anand.
-
Next up - maybe an Abbey Supreme - a solid wood cabinet - I figured out how to do this at a reasonable cost - still much more than the standard, but much less than having to have individual baffles cut on a CNC machine.[/b]
Anand.
:o
-
Anyone heard any more about the wood Abbey cabinets?
Exactly one month until I lsten to them. :hyper:
I've never been this patient. :D
-
Earl told me that they are not an option any longer as it is too difficult to do.
I am looking forward to your report. Have you sent in money?
Cheers,
James
-
Earl told me that they are not an option any longer as it is too difficult to do.
Oh, that was a quick turn from what Anand posted. :scratch:
I am looking forward to your report. Have you sent in money?
I have sent funds to secure my spot in queue...just in case. It's a process so every month counts.
-
Great product but a process for sure.
-
Yep it is quite a process, but you know what......it really is all worth it as I sit here jamming to Savoy Brown and it sounds like they are right in front of me on stage!!
Dan
-
Yep it is quite a process, but you know what......it really is all worth it as I sit here jamming to Savoy Brown and it sounds like they are right in front of me on stage!!
Dan
That's awesome! Wish I was there...
-
Yeah, Dave Matthews and Tim Reynolds are helping me with my power conditioner right now :thumb:
-
Yeah, Dave Matthews and Tim Reynolds are helping me with my power conditioner right now :thumb:
:cry: Couple of my favorites...
-
I went to the GedLee site to get the sub specs and they seem to be removed. Can anyone help me out with them?
:thumb:
-
Gloss Red
(http://)
-
Why is that? He's simply saying that HE hasn't heard a speaker that costs < $50k that is better. Right?
Correct.
-
Right, but I am pretty sure you could get Earl to build you a custom one off beast with 21" waveguides etc. I stand by my statement.
-
Right, but I am pretty sure you could get Earl to build you a custom one off beast with 21" waveguides etc. I stand by my statement.
His statement (how I took it) was speakers that are currently made. Not going to Dr. Geddes and dumping $50k in his lap and asking for the "best" that he can build. I would go out on a limb and say that Dr. Geddes would say that the Summa is 95% the best that he can build.
Maybe? :dunno:
-
That's ridiculous
I would go out on a limb and say that Dr. Geddes would say that the Summa is 95% the best that he can build.
I would say "Earl, I want 100%"
Anyway, I digress...
-
That's ridiculous
I would say "Earl, I want 100%"
Anyway, I digress...
Oops. I left out an important part though. The best that Dr. Geddes can build and keep the prices reasonable.
Also, what speaker have YOU heard that's < $50k that you would prefer?
Seriously.
-
In a perfect room, there are better speakers than the Summa probably...but in a typical room, I think these CD designs are pretty amazing.
And Earl can certainly build out a much better speaker than the Summa...maybe. He mentions on his forum about various ideas he has...active crossover, bigger waveguide (previously he's said that 18" should be the best), custom drivers of his own design, eliptical OS...in theory, these could be big improvements, hard to say currently how audible of an improvement they would be.
These designs still offer amazing sound quality. I wouldn't take a Salk HT2 or HT3 over my Abbeys...for $4000, I don't know a speaker I'd prefer.
-
Maybe he should offer his old MDF kits at the original price as an option. :idea: :)
-
I am a little slow. What does this mean?
Cheers,
James
Well, as Jason said, surprise, but x2 to one-up him :) But... still, it does seem curious to raise prices to stop people buying your product. Not criticising, just... surprised.
-
That's ridiculous
I would say "Earl, I want 100%"
Anyway, I digress...
I am very, very happy with my Nathans.
They're the first pair Earl built, so they're unique. I suppose I might trade them for a pair of Abbeys or Summas. Or I might not. Earl did me a big favor by selling them to me, especially at the price I paid.
My Nathans are probably the best purchase I have ever made in terms of audio gear, and they changed my entire outlook on home audio.
I see all these megabuck speakers in the magazines, and I've heard some of them at shows, dealers, and people's houses. None of them hold a candle to my Nathans.
Maybe Earl could make a pair of speakers for $50K that would be fantastic, or maybe not. (It seemed to me that he's been saying that 15" is about optimum for a waveguide and 12" is optimum for the woofer.) They don't exist though, and I was talking about speakers that I've heard.
-
IMO the price rise would be reasonable if instead offering the speaker as semi kits, they were offered fully assembled and of similar quality to the Salk speakers.
I've heard Salk speakers and the GedLee Nathans sound better. I'll gladly give up fancy veneer for better sound.
I was interested in these speakers but now I've taken them off the list. There are competitive alternatives
at much lower prices especially if you don't mind a little DIY. The Econo Waveguide project has got my attention as well the GR Research V series.
The Econo Waveguide speakers and Danny's speakers are not competitive alternatives.
I like a little DIY but to pay the new prices for a knockdown kit is too much. Now if Dr. Geddes would offer all the parts except the enclosure and especially the waveguides :green: at a reasonable price, I might change my mind. :)
"The Abbey has a 12" High Performance 12TBX100 B&C woofer and a 12" waveguide and the same 1" compression driver as the Summa (DE250 B&C)."
The waveguide is OS.
Start building.
-
Hi all. Just saw this.
IS the Summa the "ultimate"? I don't know. Does it sound better than any other speaker out there? Well that's an impossible question to answer. But I do know this and I stand by this statement, the Summa measures better than any other speaker that I have ever seen. This is also supported by the Princton University study which found the older Nathan to be the best measured speaker in their test. Do measurements tell the whole story? No, not exactly, but they are certainly a minimum requirement. All researchers in this field have found this. The speaker that measures better is rated in blind tests as the better sounding. But when two speakers measure very similar they will still sound different. This just means that we do not do enough tests or the right tests. It does not mean that measurements are not a critical factor. Looking at axial frequency response for example tells you nothing about the sound, and a spec in a table that says 20Hz - 20 kHz tells you even less.
Given this position, I do find very little that I can do to improve on the Summa, and nothing that I can do without custom drivers (which B&C will not do for me because the volume is too low). So the bottom line here is that I have done all that I can do within the business model that I am forced to live with due to market conditions.
Going back to MDF cabinets would not reduce the price. It's just as time consuming to use MDF as poly, but it is far inferior. I do sell baffles with waveguides only, but you have to understand that the waveguide contains ALL of my intellectual property, patents and trade secrets. So this single part is where all of my value-added is and hence where all of my profit lies. As pointed out, everything else is just purchased. So baffles are 1/2 the cost of the entire kit, but then I do get great prices on all the parts, so in the end it is very hard for the end consumer to build the kits any cheaper than what I sell them for. I do not advertise this because quite honestly its not a very good deal, but it is what I have to do to make this option even remotely attractive to me.
One last thing. Kits have become a very small part of my business, as I think they should. I test each speaker that I build and there are things that I know how to do better than can be explained or taught. So the fact is that you are likely to get a better speaker from me than you can build yourself. If you want 100% then you certainly do not want to buy a kit. Bottom line here is that I suspect that kits will go away completely in another year or so. I do it now only as a courtesy to the few people who want to do this task.
In conclusion I will say this - If you can find a better speaker than mine for the money, then buy it.
-
I've heard Salk speakers and the GedLee Nathans sound better. I'll gladly give up fancy veneer for better sound.
The Econo Waveguide speakers and Danny's speakers are not competitive alternatives.
"The Abbey has a 12" High Performance 12TBX100 B&C woofer and a 12" waveguide and the same 1" compression driver as the Summa (DE250 B&C)."
The waveguide is OS.
Start building.
How do you know that your Nathans sound better than "the best" of the Econo Wave options. Have you heard them all? Same with the GR Research V series. I realize that you now have the Nathans so I'm sure that you'll be pumping them and dissing the competitors, but without full knowledge it's just hot air IMO.
I'm sure that your Nathans sound great but now I'm interested in pursuing other options. The GR V series especially the V1 and the Super Vs have been very well received. As you know you'll need some subs for your Nathans. That will be more $$$. The V1 includes 2 pairs of 12" OB servo subs so extra money is not required for them to sound flat down to 20hz or so.
Alternatively, I can do the Econo Wave Delux and assemble them with the very best parts for $500 using MDF however I'd probably go with solid hardwood with perhaps a constrained layer sandwiched in between two layers. I'd need subs too of course. Oh well....musings on a freezing day in the NW. I'm in no rush. My present speakers actually sound very good. :D
-
Oops. I left out an important part though. The best that Dr. Geddes can build and keep the prices reasonable.
Also, what speaker have YOU heard that's < $50k that you would prefer?
Seriously.
Yes, this would be an interesting list. What have people heard that they think is superior to the Abbey or Summa at a price up to 50k?
Cheers,
James
-
How do you know that your Nathans sound better than "the best" of the Econo Wave options. Have you heard them all? Same with the GR Research V series. I realize that you now have the Nathans so I'm sure that you'll be pumping them and dissing the competitors, but without full knowledge it's just hot air IMO.
I've seen the Econo Waves discussed in various places and they're just not in the same league as the speakers Earl designs. As for GR Research, let's just say I'm not satisfied with the technical skills of the designer.
received. As you know you'll need some subs for your Nathans. That will be more $$$. The V1 includes 2 pairs of 12" OB servo subs so extra money is not required for them to sound flat down to 20hz or so.
I've already got subs. There's nothing worth listening to below about 40 Hz in most recordings, and even if there were you're not going to do more than make flatulent noises with a few 12" OB servo subs that you can't even locate in the best places in the room for them.
BTW, my 3 subs cost me about $400. I'm sure you'll get a big laugh out of that.
Alternatively, I can do the Econo Wave Delux and assemble them with the very best parts for $500 using MDF however I'd probably go with solid hardwood with perhaps a constrained layer sandwiched in between two layers. I'd need subs too of course.
On the other hand, you could just pay Earl to do it properly.
I feel the Linkwitz Orions are done pretty well. I prefer the Nathans, but I can see why people like the Orions too. (I suspect the Plutos are also respectable.) Harman has some reasonable speakers in their Revel line, with Infinity being good budget speakers. Paul Barton is doing some decent things at the lower price levels.
Then there's a ton of dreck out there.
-
How do you know that your Nathans sound better than "the best" of the Econo Wave options. Have you heard them all? Same with the GR Research V series. I realize that you now have the Nathans so I'm sure that you'll be pumping them and dissing the competitors, but without full knowledge it's just hot air IMO.
I'm sure that your Nathans sound great but now I'm interested in pursuing other options. The GR V series especially the V1 and the Super Vs have been very well received. As you know you'll need some subs for your Nathans. That will be more $$$. The V1 includes 2 pairs of 12" OB servo subs so extra money is not required for them to sound flat down to 20hz or so.
Alternatively, I can do the Econo Wave Delux and assemble them with the very best parts for $500 using MDF however I'd probably go with solid hardwood with perhaps a constrained layer sandwiched in between two layers. I'd need subs too of course. Oh well....musings on a freezing day in the NW. I'm in no rush. My present speakers actually sound very good. :D
Even the econowave deluxe is a compromised version of what Earl is doing in his speakers. Excellent value? Absolutely, but not the same.
The V Series do not have the directivity control that Earl's designs have, I'm sure they sound excellent but they ignore some of the points this design takes into account. Personally, I love the OB servo subs.
-
you're not going to do more than make flatulent noises with a few 12" OB servo subs that you can't even locate in the best places in the room for them.
You are sadly mistaken. This comment about the ob servo subs is COMPLETELY false. I own them. And feel they pair excellent with the Abbey's (and so does TomS...) There is nothing REMOTELY flatulent about the bass from an ob servo sub.
-
If you had to have full range to be apples to apples, you could do what many do, and port it. Geddes sees that as a compromise, but you could make them "full range" with a port.... the original summa had one, but he changed that for what he determined to be a more optimum approach.
-
But they are certainly not for everyone, and have their own idiosyncracies.
Hi Anand
Hoping you could explain what you mean. Just trying to learn more.
Thanks
-
I've seen the Econo Waves discussed in various places and they're just not in the same league as the speakers Earl designs.
Do you have any data to support that claim?
A while back Dr. Geddes performed measurement of Econowave and ESP12 (Abbey?). I'll let the data speak for themselves.
ECONOWAVE:
(http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z72/widhibrata/audio/Econowave.jpg)
ESP12 (ABBEY?)
(http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z72/widhibrata/audio/ESP12.jpg)
I have neither of the speakers.
-
Do you have any data to support that claim?
A while back Dr. Geddes performed measurement of Econowave and ESP12 (Abbey?). I'll let the data speak for themselves.
ECONOWAVE:
(http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z72/widhibrata/audio/Econowave.jpg)
ESP12 (ABBEY?)
(http://i188.photobucket.com/albums/z72/widhibrata/audio/ESP12.jpg)
I have neither of the speakers.
The latest measurements of the Abbey are on his website, but you seem to have illustrated the differences nicely here. First, ignore the on axis (0 degree) response curve of the ESP12, it is completely irrelevant as the speaker is firing at you in a 45 degree angle. Start looking at the green curve and go on down. Each curve I believe represents 7.5 degrees off axis relative to the 0 degree/top dark blue curve (correct me if I am wrong). Notice how as you move off axis, the curves are nearly identical. The one thing that is not illustrated here is the directivity index - read Toole's Sound Reproduction text for a full description. The ESP12's will be much higher and to a lower frequency relative to the Econowave. But how low is beneficial? There are some thoughts and authorities on that, but 500 Hz is ideal, but nearly impossible to achieve in a reasonably sized enclosure. In other words, you would have to go to an 18 inch waveguide. The Summa and Abbey seem to achieve it to just under 1Khz, the Summas being better obviously.
Hi Anand
Hoping you could explain what you mean. Just trying to learn more.
Thanks
What I meant was that in order to get a very smooth in room response (without EQ and minimal to no room treatment) below the Schroeder frequency (which is about 200Hz in my room) I had to use 3 subs in an asymmetrical distribution (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=87428.msg868396#msg868396). It didn't matter if it was at one seated position or multiple seated positions, the 3 sub technique works great. Of course that increases costs (but you don't have to splurge on your subs), and it takes some more real estate in your room. Those are some idiosyncracies that may be hard to handle. Not impossible, just that it places more priorities on your music system and less on WAF, etc...The funny thing is, the smaller the room, and the more the bass sources, the smoother bass response. A larger room needs more piston area to pressurize the room anyway, so more bass sources are also ideal. Can you get by with just one sub? Sure, but you are no different from any body else who has a monitor with a sub (you will most likely need EQ or lots of bass room treatments or both), except that you have a speaker with phenomenal directivity control. It makes a massive difference in imaging, soundstaging and neutrality as your 1st reflection points in your room, are nearly irrelevant. The multiple bass sources also help in literally 'swelling' your soundstage. Everything starts out with a 'foundation' and the speaker doesn't sound shrill or tipped up at the top. It's very hard to describe but very easy to experience. Those who have more conventional loudspeakers but with multiple bass sources know what I mean already.
I hope that helps,
Anand.
-
First, ignore the on axis (0 degree) response curve of the ESP12, it is completely irrelevant as the speaker is firing at you in a 45 degree angle.
Anand.
...but your listening position is not 45º off the speakers' axes, is it? I know the speakers are toed it at 45º
-
...but your listening position is not 45º off the speakers' axes, is it? I know the speakers are toed it at 45º
Your ears should be at about 22 degrees relative to the speaker not 0 degrees, think about it. If you look at how the Abbeys have been optimized it is specifically over a 22-30 degree arc. You don't tilt your head right or left, you listen with your ears facing towards the side wall. This was discussed a few pages ago, give it a look. When you set up the GedLee speakers you don't sit right where the 2 speakers cross, you sit about 2-3 feet back from that cross, so the angle is somewhat less than 45 degrees.
A drawing would probably be easier to understand.
Anand.
-
I think you are confusing the angle of incidence to the ears with the angle off the speakers axis - and I have thought about this!
If you were to sit right where the speakers' axes cross and the speakers were toed in at 45º the speakers would be ±45º to your frontal axis, 45º in front of your lateral axis and you would be on the 0º axis of each speaker, By sitting 2-3 feet back from this position you would be, depending on the size of the array, as you say - perhaps 15-25º off the speakers' axis. The fact that the response slopes off axis happens to work in our favour in the tonality of the central phantom image, because at these angles the speaker's response curve is not that far off what it would be at the ear for a frontal sound after it had been affected by its path around the head.
-
I think you are confusing the angle of incidence to the ears with the angle off the speakers axis - and I have thought about this!
If you were to sit right where the speakers' axes cross and the speakers were toed in at 45º the speakers would be ±45º to your frontal axis, 45º in front of your lateral axis and you would be on the 0º axis of each speaker, By sitting 2-3 feet back from this position you would be, depending on the size of the array, as you say - perhaps 15-25º off the speakers' axis. The fact that the response slopes off axis happens to work in our favour in the tonality of the central phantom image, because at these angles the speaker's response curve is not that far off what it would be at the ear for a frontal sound after it had been affected by its path around the head.
Yup. You worded it much better than I did, thanks!
Anand.
-
If you think that this is in any way "unfair" or that I have "no business sense" then I am sorry. You said something about "If Dr. Geddes is happy with his business, then that is fine". This is precisely the point, and yes I am. In business you can't please everyone - the price is always to high to someone, no matter what it is.
So darn true...
-
OK lets take this in a little different direction here. Anand I have a question for you about your amps. I see you use a gainclone and a class D. I am going to build my first gainclone here in the next few weeks/months? I am going to build a dual mono design around the 3886 chip. My question for you is about how much power does your chip amp put out per channel and how do you like it with the Abbeys? Also if you can describe the differences between the chip amp and the class D amp I would appreciate it. Now I have ordered the kit for the amp and power supply but am holding off on the transformers for now. I noticed you went for the Lundahl transformers can you explain what it was that made you decide to go with those over say the transformers I can get at parts express for about half the cost. I am not opposed to spending the extra coin if the results are worth it, I just want to hear the advantages from someone who owns and uses them.
Dan
-
OK lets take this in a little different direction here. Anand I have a question for you about your amps. I see you use a gainclone and a class D. I am going to build my first gainclone here in the next few weeks/months? I am going to build a dual mono design around the 3886 chip. My question for you is about how much power does your chip amp put out per channel and how do you like it with the Abbeys? Also if you can describe the differences between the chip amp and the class D amp I would appreciate it. Now I have ordered the kit for the amp and power supply but am holding off on the transformers for now. I noticed you went for the Lundahl transformers can you explain what it was that made you decide to go with those over say the transformers I can get at parts express for about half the cost. I am not opposed to spending the extra coin if the results are worth it, I just want to hear the advantages from someone who owns and uses them.
Dan
Dan
I loaned him my Class D that I built and he has now built one for himself. I will let him chime in here...
Post #102 here http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=65332.100
-
OK lets take this in a little different direction here. Anand I have a question for you about your amps. I see you use a gainclone and a class D. I am going to build my first gainclone here in the next few weeks/months? I am going to build a dual mono design around the 3886 chip. My question for you is about how much power does your chip amp put out per channel and how do you like it with the Abbeys? Also if you can describe the differences between the chip amp and the class D amp I would appreciate it. Now I have ordered the kit for the amp and power supply but am holding off on the transformers for now. I noticed you went for the Lundahl transformers can you explain what it was that made you decide to go with those over say the transformers I can get at parts express for about half the cost. I am not opposed to spending the extra coin if the results are worth it, I just want to hear the advantages from someone who owns and uses them.
Dan
Lots of questions but I will try to answer them one by one.
My gainclones are based on the LM3875 chip, and they are dual mono in build with 2 toroidal transformers from Plitron. They put out about 40 watts/8 ohms and 100 watts instantaneous. They will blow me out of the room with GedLee Abbeys.
My review on the Class D amp (original design, not my latest build) is right here (http://classdaudio.com/index.php/review/product/view/id/739/). The primary difference\ is that the Class D amp image outlines are sharper, the soundstage is deeper,tonality is smooth while being extended on top. Overall at least a 20% improvement over my gainclone for less coin. My gainclone with the diyenclosures chassis cost me about $700 to build. My Class D as posted on the Lab forum cost me about $550.
The input transformer on the gainclone was an attempt by me to make the unit like the Gill Audio Lissa (http://www.jamnaudio.com/gillaudiolissa.html) which uses a Lundahl input transformer. After consultation with Kevin Carter, the U.S. Lundahl distributor, he gave me the thumbs up and I went ahead with the design. I have found Lundahl input transformers to be very transparent and have also tried Jensen in this application. The Lundahls were superior in my honest opinion. I've also used Magnequest, Electraprint, One-Electron, and O-Netics, and of course Lundahl however NOT in this application (in tube amps - they are all quite good actually!). The Lundahl input transformer provides galvanic isolation, a balanced/differential input and the ability to have 1:1 or 2:1 step down ratios, making the overall gain of the amp variable from 24dB or 30dB.
With the Class D SDS254 design, we have a differential input stage designed by Bill Whitlock (designer of Jensen transformers) and a variable input gain from 18dB to 32dB, so no input transformers are needed obviously.
I hope that helps. I enjoy them both, but the SDS254 is more transparent and a better value since it is a cheaper build. It's my reference to compare with solid state amps < $1K and beyond. Any amp that comes through here must have at least the fidelity of the SDS254 to pass for high end. Or else it's out!
Anand.
-
Excellent thank you both for the replies, I am going to build the gainclone first and see how I like it, I should get about 60 wpc out of it and if you are getting 40 wpc and its fine Ishould have plenty of power. I'll let you guys know how it sounds when I get it finishe, probably won't be till after the holidays though. Thanks again.
Dan
-
Playlist is made for the 18th... :D
-
Watcha going to listen to???
-
Watcha going to listen to???
Umm. Music. :lol:
Seriously, all kinds of stuff. I did a playlist on my Mini and it quickly became 50 songs. I will not be able to listen to all of them but at least they're all in one spot.
The very kind host will have to approve my selections though. :lol: I'm stoked!
-
Don't forget to crank it :guitar: if it suits you (and Anand). The speakers don't really care. In fact, the mo' the betta. Clapton Live at Earl's place was terrific :thumb:
-
Don't forget to crank it :guitar: if it suits you (and Anand). The speakers don't really care. In fact, the mo' the betta. Clapton Live at Earl's place was terrific :thumb:
Anand isn't affraid to crank it. In fact, he listens a bit loud for me....I found out when he came to my house and handed him the remote. :o
-
Yeah, tell me about it :lol:
-
Yeah, tell me about it :lol:
Glad to know it wasn't just me...at first, I thought he was really trying to blow something up. I did ask "do you always listen this loud"? Answer: "Yes". :o :o
-
Way to go Anand you sound like my kind of listener!! I have a MFSL vinyl copy of the Alan Parsons Project I Robot on the way, so yesterday I pulled out the "standard" copy I have now and let it rip, can't wait to get this MFSL copy.
Dan
-
Here are some of the tracks...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39607)
-
Oh yes you have some really tasty choices there. Thick as a Brick is an excellent choice, very dynamic, you will see how easily these speakers handle it. The whole Keep it Simple album is an excellent one. You have a real good variety of tunes for the evaluation of the speakers, can't wait to hear your impressions.
-
Thanks!
The others...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39612)
-
If anyone has the Abbey 12a with the solid polyurethane cabinets, could you please post a picture of the front and rear panels.
Also if any Abbey owner has a picture of it's pulse response, I'd love to see it.
Thanks.
-
If anyone has the Abbey 12a with the solid polyurethane cabinets, could you please post a picture of the front and rear panels.
Also if any Abbey owner has a picture of it's pulse response, I'd love to see it.
Thanks.
I think all the info you need is here http://gedlee.com/ and http://gedlee.com/abbey.htm
-
I think all the info you need is here http://gedlee.com/ and http://gedlee.com/abbey.htm
No back panel picture or pulse response in those links.
-
No back panel picture or pulse response in those links.
Egeddes@gedlee.com
-
No back panel picture or pulse response in those links.
I'm not sure I've seen impulse other than what I've done myself, which is crude at best. Earl would probably be more inclined to point you to the polar plots that come with each individually measured pair.
-
jhm, go on my gallery I put some shots of the front and back of the Abbey 12A speakers. For some reason I see no way of attaching a picture to my post.
Dan
-
jhm, go on my gallery I put some shots of the front and back of the Abbey 12A speakers. For some reason I see no way of attaching a picture to my post.
Dan
Use the button that looks like a picture on the second row 1st position. You can attach from there. :thumb:
jhm Also, why do you want to see pictures of the back? Just curious.
-
Thanks man :o
-
Like this?
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39683)
-
OK got it! :thumb:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39684)
-
Use the button that looks like a picture on the second row 1st position. You can attach from there. :thumb:
jhm Also, why do you want to see pictures of the back? Just curious.
Dan- Thanks.
jtwrace - I wanted to see how the back panel is attached on the solid polyurethane cabinets.
-
That looks pretty much like my MDF ones...
-
Yes as far as that goes I believe the back panel is MDF, as for attachment I had these speakers back over at Earl's about a month ago to remeasure and do frequency sweeps on them after a couple months of play time on them. We opened up one of the speakers and that back panel is extremely secure and sealed very well onto the Poly cabinet, and the crossover is a thing of beauty, sorry no pics of that, you'll have to buy your own pair to see that.
Dan
-
The big advantage to the upgrade to 12A is the fact that you don't see the mounting screws on the woofer as it is mounted from the back, and the fact that the poly is much easier to put a finish on as well as supposedly being less resonant than MDF. It really is a neat material, I was looking at it at Earl's place and he even offered to sell me a 4x8 sheet of it for my subwoofer cabinet that I was building but the cost was crazy high, like 10x the price of mdf.
Dan
-
you'll have to buy your own pair to see that.
Dan
Good on you! :thumb:
-
Excellent thank you both for the replies, I am going to build the gainclone first and see how I like it, I should get about 60 wpc out of it and if you are getting 40 wpc and its fine Ishould have plenty of power. I'll let you guys know how it sounds when I get it finishe, probably won't be till after the holidays though. Thanks again.
I would suggest a chip amp also. Most of the work has already been done, and they're pretty easy to get good results out of.
It appears to be much harder to get good results out of a Class D design, and some of the cheap Chinese designs are really awful.
-
It appears to be much harder to get good results out of a Class D design
Are you speaking from experience? Anand seemed to be happy enough to build one for his Abbey setup.
-
Turkey the gainclone that I am planning to build is a chip amp I believe, it is a dual mono design based on the LM3886 chip.
Dan
-
I can't believe it's almost here...this Saturday I get to listen to the patented GedLee Technology.
-
Excellent!!! Enjoy your listening session. Also on a side note, the class D amp that you built was it by chance based on the SDS-254 kit from classdaudio ? I have been looking at that kit with quite a bit of interest.
Dan
-
Excellent!!! Enjoy your listening session. Also on a side note, the class D amp that you built was it by chance based on the SDS-254 kit from classdaudio ? I have been looking at that kit with quite a bit of interest.
Dan
Yes it was.
-
OK one more question on that, did you use the transformer that comes with the kit or did you go with another? If so which one?
Dan
-
OK one more question on that, did you use the transformer that comes with the kit or did you go with another? If so which one?
Dan
I used the stock kit. Anand did a custom build.
-
Thank you sir!!
-
TWO days...
:dance:
The wait is slooooowly coming to an end for Phase I.
-
Have you any confidence about remaining objective for the session? Seriously, you know yourself better than anyone here, can you still evaluate without bias? Regardless of the outcome, I hope you have a great time. Enjoy!
-
I'm just glad to see that there is no build-up of anticipation before the audition :)
When I made my trip to Detroit for an audition I had extremely high hopes. Anyone who states that they make the 'World's Best Loudspeakers' better set a high standard. I was not disappointed as most of my scientific questions just melted away with each passing song played.
If I were still in the area I would join you guys.
-
No matter what he will hear the best speakers ever.
-
Have you any confidence about remaining objective for the session? Seriously, you know yourself better than anyone here, can you still evaluate without bias? Regardless of the outcome, I hope you have a great time. Enjoy!
I find it pretty easy to walk away. If I like them, I buy them, if I don't, I walk away very thankful for the experience.
I'm pretty happy with what I have so they need to obliterate what I have for me to make the investment that I'm looking at.
Am I excited? Yes! Will emotion sway judement? Hell NO! Money is involved and I haven't spent any.
-
If I were still in the area I would join you guys.
:nono:
I'm glad that you're not there..it's harder to really listen with the more people that are present. sorry. :oops:
-
Jason have fun and keep in mind Anand spent mega bucks upgrading the XO's. Look forward to hearing your impressions, heard the Nathons a while but still looking to hear the Abbys.
-
Jason have fun and keep in mind Anand spent mega bucks upgrading the XO's. Look forward to hearing your impressions, heard the Nathons a while but still looking to hear the Abbys.
Yes, I'm fully aware. If I got crazy like him, I could always built 'em too.
I'm tame though.
-
I am sure I read somewhere(possibly another forum) that the Nathans had a tour. Is the tour still active? Are they available for in home audition? How, what, when, where does one get on the list?
-
I am sure I read somewhere(possibly another forum) that the Nathans had a tour. Is the tour still active? Are they available for in home audition? How, what, when, where does one get on the list?
I highly doubt that's the case anymore...if it was, I would be disappointed that I didn't know or have been told about it. I would've done that in a NYC minute.
-
I am sure I read somewhere(possibly another forum) that the Nathans had a tour. Is the tour still active? Are they available for in home audition? How, what, when, where does one get on the list?
I suppose you could say the tour is still active. They made it all the way to my house and they've been there ever since. :)
I don't know if Earl built another pair for a demo tour or not.
-
I suppose you could say the tour is still active. They made it all the way to my house and they've been there ever since. :)
I don't know if Earl built another pair for a demo tour or not.
Were you the first on the tour?
-
I suppose you could say the tour is still active. They made it all the way to my house and they've been there ever since. :)
I don't know if Earl built another pair for a demo tour or not.
Ah, ha. the culprit steps forward. I emailed Dr. Geddes a few days ago inquiring about the tour but have yet to recieve a response.
-
Were you the first on the tour?
No, other people had them first. Also, I've had them for almost 2 years now, so maybe Earl had a tour after that. I was sort of keeping up on the various threads over on diyaudio, but threads over there always get so long that it's hard to read everything. (Right now I'm reading one thread where I'm on page 156 of 1156, and it's starting to all blend together.) :)
-
16 hrs...
-
Oh really? Didn't hear.
-
15.5 hours!!!
-
:lol:
-
JW,
I hope you will be exceptionally critical of the Geddes speakers. I have not seen a review that addressed the quick hf roll-off of the Abbey. Based on the graphs the Harper would have the most extended HF response while the Nathan has the flattest/smoothest midrange. Considering that all the designs require subs where is the advantage in the larger higher cost designs? Another issue with this design is the implementation of the multiple sub protocol. According to Dr. Geddes nearly any sub will do. If those subs produces a one-note/peak or dip FR respons e then the result will be......one note bass and drums etc.? Perhaps I missed something in his multiple sub approach that addressed the need and subsequent requirements for his sub recommendations. I would seem a bit arrogant or damaging in the realm of credibility to dismiss the need for quality low FR reproduction and how to achieve/optimize for this. It would be interesting to hear the waveguides in exclusively without the low FR driver and subs. It would appear that the midrange in this design has been isolated/focused and all frequencies that fall outside this isolated/focused range are muddied and therefore cause the midrange to be perceived as very clear.
Playing the role of devils advocate a bit. Looking forward to your reviews of these speakers and hope that you are able to hear the abbeys(left and right/2channel only) with no subs at low/mid/mid-high/high volumes with music that displays music beyond the range of the speakers capabilities at both ends of the spectrum and then again with the subs alone and then adding the L/R channels back in.
Please be critical and inform us of speakers you have spent a good deal of time with and how they compare in relation to the Geddes design. :sleep:
-
5.5 hrs
I was sleeping well....
-
5.5 hrs
I was sleeping well....
Tell Anand to show you the pics I sent him this morning :wink:
-
Tell Anand to show you the pics I sent him this morning :wink:
will do. :thumb:
-
< 3 hrs....
Car is loaded and ready!!!
-
JW,
I hope you will be exceptionally critical of the Geddes speakers. I have not seen a review that addressed the quick hf roll-off of the Abbey. Based on the graphs the Harper would have the most extended HF response while the Nathan has the flattest/smoothest midrange. Considering that all the designs require subs where is the advantage in the larger higher cost designs? Another issue with this design is the implementation of the multiple sub protocol. According to Dr. Geddes nearly any sub will do. If those subs produces a one-note/peak or dip FR respons e then the result will be......one note bass and drums etc.? Perhaps I missed something in his multiple sub approach that addressed the need and subsequent requirements for his sub recommendations. I would seem a bit arrogant or damaging in the realm of credibility to dismiss the need for quality low FR reproduction and how to achieve/optimize for this. It would be interesting to hear the waveguides in exclusively without the low FR driver and subs. It would appear that the midrange in this design has been isolated/focused and all frequencies that fall outside this isolated/focused range are muddied and therefore cause the midrange to be perceived as very clear.
Playing the role of devils advocate a bit. Looking forward to your reviews of these speakers and hope that you are able to hear the abbeys(left and right/2channel only) with no subs at low/mid/mid-high/high volumes with music that displays music beyond the range of the speakers capabilities at both ends of the spectrum and then again with the subs alone and then adding the L/R channels back in.
Please be critical and inform us of speakers you have spent a good deal of time with and how they compare in relation to the Geddes design. :sleep:
From a person who had the same questions and who is as new to this CD technology as you, here's what I've learned. The more expensive designs go lower in frequency with CD, thus more effectively meet the design goals. The multi subs have to be different in design and frequency response, and then are placed in different types of locations (e.g. one low in a corner, another high on a wall, etc.) in order to spread out and normalize the phase and frequency errors. Thus there is not a requirement for expensive subs, just different ones. There's more in this thread:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=87428.0
As for the other questions, I'm waiting on answers for those as well.
-
... I have not seen a review that addressed the quick hf roll-off of the Abbey. Based on the graphs the Harper would have the most extended HF response while the Nathan has the flattest/smoothest midrange...
The Abbey has a gradual roll-off amounting to about 3 db from 2-15 kHz or so. This actually makes for a more natural sound field than having it absolutely flat out to 15kHz. I know because I have played around with EQ on mine to achieve both. The sensitivity of the (adult) ear to frequencies over 12kHz is so poor that I really don't think the response curve above that frequency makes any difference (maybe it does if you are still under 30 and haven't attended too many rock concerts). The high end response can be adjusted, however, by changing one of the capacitors in the crossover.
There isn't much point in listening to the Abbeys without one or more subs if you enjoy full bass response below 100 Hz or so. Nevertheless, I did that with mine for the first 6 months I had them until I got around to adding a pair of subs. I liked the sound, but didn't know what I was missing until I heard the system with subs included. One needs to figure in the cost of at least one sub to be comparing apples to apples against other full range speakers. Just my 2 cents.
-
Thanks Doug,
your 2 cents are much appreciated. I am really interested in system a that can deliver articulate musical bass and drum resolution along with a great midrange. Who isn't right? I get the feeling that the Geddes approach discounts the possibility of achieving this in a typical listening enviroment and says the heck with chasing after the elusive/impossible(which it may be) and focuses only on midrange. This may be my misunderstanding the approach. In my mind, with little to no understanding of the acousitcs and math, tells me that the multi-sub approach is the way to go but would be better served by starting with subs that deliver quality low FR reproduction focusing on fast articulation and smooth response. As opposed to a many and any subs will do implementation. Is there just no benefit to attempting to maximize the bass quality(ie. 3 to 4 ob servo subs) or is it a waste of money spent on subs?
-
Thank you Doug, I was glad to see someone post what you just did. It amazes me what people who have never heard a particular speaker will say about them without any facts to back them up. Your comments on the Abbey are spot on and from experience thank you. Your comments about the HF hearing especially ring true...the vast majority of the people on this forum haven't heard anywhere near 20kHz in 10 years or more. Thanks again Doug for your comments based on real experience,and like you said thats just my 2 cents.
Dan
i hear quite well to 21khz, and then it drops off a cliff. I should have been more clear in statement about the quick rolloff...it is a gradual slope to a point. There is not much info up their anyway..other than harmonics. I am not attempting to bash the speaker by any means, I am interested, otherwise I would bother probing those that know more than I do.
-
Bear,
I obviously own a pair of Abbeys and also employ the multi subs (3) with them. On your question of quality subs, I somewhat disagree with Earl on the any sub will do part of it. I used originally 2 (cheapie) subs with a 12" that I built, they were a Velodyne cht-10 and a Yamaha 10" that cost like $100 new. While I saw the big improvement in the overall bass response using these three subs, it became very obvious to me when I built my sealed 15" and 18" subs and put them in place of the Velodyne and Yamaha, the bass response in my room was then as good as I have ever had. So in "my opinion" having quality subs does make a difference.
Dan
-
Thanks Doug,
your 2 cents are much appreciated. I am really interested in system a that can deliver articulate musical bass and drum resolution along with a great midrange. Who isn't right? I get the feeling that the Geddes approach discounts the possibility of achieving this in a typical listening enviroment and says the heck with chasing after the elusive/impossible(which it may be) and focuses only on midrange. This may be my misunderstanding the approach. In my mind, with little to no understanding of the acousitcs and math, tells me that the multi-sub approach is the way to go but would be better served by starting with subs that deliver quality low FR reproduction focusing on fast articulation and smooth response. As opposed to a many and any subs will do implementation. Is there just no benefit to attempting to maximize the bass quality(ie. 3 to 4 ob servo subs) or is it a waste of money spent on subs?
There are many sub options available. I would definitely be picky in that department. An IB with multiple manifolds might be the best option if you can do it. Otherwise I would recommend two or three bandpass subs. I built a pair of bandpass subs based on Earl's recommendations (and some of my own research) and am very happy with their performance. I know someone who has a pair of GR OB servos in his HT who has not been totally happy. For the best experience, you want something that can effectively pressurize the room. That narrows it down to sealed (requires heavy duty drivers with lots of power - but many folks seem happy with the Rythmic options), bandpass (high efficiency and low distortion in the passband), tapped horns (loud and large), or IB (best low end with low distortion, but think twice about the back wave).
-
i hear quite well to 21khz, and then it drops off a cliff. I should have been more clear in statement about the quick rolloff...it is a gradual slope to a point. There is not much info up their anyway..other than harmonics. I am not attempting to bash the speaker by any means, I am interested, otherwise I would bother probing those that know more than I do.
Hi,
I thought the frequency range of human hearing is from 20Hz - 20KHz?
-
Rave you are correct, also if you look at Dr Geddes research and especially that dealing with headphones and hearing aids you will see that his research indicates that most people never do hear up to that 20kHz upper limit. Whenever a limit is put on something like that though there will always be some that go above the limit and some that stay below the limit.
-
Hi,
I thought the frequency range of human hearing is from 20Hz - 20KHz?
Take a hearing test and find out what your range is. There are lots of research articles out there that conclude that most people don't hear much > 15 kHz (like this one) (http://www.ispub.com/journal/the_internet_journal_of_otorhinolaryngology/volume_10_number_2_8/article/early-detection-of-noise-induced-hearing-loss-by-using-ultra-high-frequency-audiometry.html).
-
Rave you are correct, also if you look at Dr Geddes research and especially that dealing with headphones and hearing aids you will see that his research indicates that most people never do hear up to that 20kHz upper limit. Whenever a limit is put on something like that though there will always be some that go above the limit and some that stay below the limit.
You can go to a costco that has a hearing aid kiosk/booth in it and if the technician is not busy you may be able to get them to do a quick informal test for you as I did. The tech commented on my excellent hearing capacity but jokingly noted that most adults she tests are seeing her for reason.
-
Take a hearing test and find out what your range is. There are lots of research articles out there that conclude that most people don't hear much > 15 kHz.
+1 there. I assumed most people on this circle have run frequency plots on their speakers? However, although I don't hear 20Khz, I can detect it by feeling the pressure wave in my head. Similar to feeling 20hz bass, but much higher in the body. In any case, neither extreme has a lot to do with musical notes.
-
I would add that I had a spot between 16.5-17.5khz I think where I could not hear anything. Also I don't have any idea how accurate the equipment they use is.
Great info and suggestions regarding your sub experiences.
Very much appreciated.
-
Hi,
I noticed some people posted their speakers on earlier threads. Here's mine:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=40180)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=40182)
Cheers,
Ian
-
Very nice Ian !!!!
-
Yes, very nice setup. You may want to try elevating the speaker height by 6 inches or so and also reducing the height of that equipment rack. By the way, what receiver/preamp is that?
-
Rave,
Are you the same Ian that bought the 12A baffles from Earl and had them shipped over to England and finished them yourself??
Dan
-
Hey Geddes owners,
I have been reading about Dr. Geddes and his speakers for some time now. I'm very interested in listening to a pair.
Are there any Geddes owners in the NJ , NY, Eastern PA, DE, MD, DC area who would be kind enough to help me out?
The Cleveland area, may also be a possibility. I get out there every so often to visit some family.
I live in South Jersey (08087) and will drive up to a few hours away for a listen.
Question : How many watts are needed to drive these puppies ?
My system is all tube, with an 8w 300b amp. Enough power?
Thanks,
Chris
-
Question : How many watts are needed to drive these puppies ?
My system is all tube, with an 8w 300b amp. Enough power?
I'm in Denver, so that doesn't help. As for 8W being enough, depends on how loud you like to listen. I have a pair of 211 SET's that will manage 16W and those do quite a nice job but they will run out of power if you want to crank it. Last week a friend brought over the new Eastern Electric M88 integrated, I believe it's rated for 40WPC. That drove them nicely but he asked me to crank up ZZ Top La Grange and we did mange to get it sounding strained. My McIntosh MC275 is about 85WPC and it never ran out of power with the Abbey's, no matter if we turned it up to 11. :)
-
Hi Mike,
If I ever get to Denver I'll be sure to look you up. I don't listen too loud, but like most of us I do crank it up now and then.
I guess if I decide to go the Geddes route I'll be looking for some extra power.
Thanks,
Chris
-
I'm in Detroit which is a bit closer but still too far to drive, but I have wondered about the sound with low wattage SET amps for a while now. Thanks for answering that Mike, they wouldn't work for me as I like cranking it up every once in a while myself and La Grange is one of the ones I let fly at about 101dB at the listening seat, I use a Jolida 1000P, 100 watts ultra linear and it never runs out of gas at all. That Mac has got to sound real sweet with these speakers.
Dan
-
Very nice Ian !!!!
Thanks Dwr!
:thumb:
-
Yes, very nice setup. You may want to try elevating the speaker height by 6 inches or so and also reducing the height of that equipment rack. By the way, what receiver/preamp is that?
Yeah, I need better stands. I live in an apartment, so I guess I'm gonna have to go with a custom builder or something. I have nothing fancy as far as preamp. I gave my Ava TSLR 7 to my brother. I'm currently using Integra Research RDC 7 as pre. It works well! LOL.
-
Rave,
Are you the same Ian that bought the 12A baffles from Earl and had them shipped over to England and finished them yourself??
Dan
No, I'm not. I just got mine at the end of August. I bought mine already built.
-
What a day!
First and foremost, a HUGE thank you to Anand and his family for opening their doors and allowing me in for hours of Anand's time away from his familiy. :thumb:
The first thing that struck me upon entering the listening room was the size. They're not nearly as big as I thought. Actually they're smaller than the 3-way I use now. I could really care less about aesthetics anyway at this point. I like a clean professional look and they accomplish that. Performance is everything to me. It's taken awhile but I've reached it.
Anand had a playlist ready for me that he made so we first started with some tracks of his that he thinks show off the speaker. Music selection was all over the place which I really liked. He played a track from Celtic Woman that was just in your face with female vocals. It was absolutely superb in every way.
After coming home and listening what really strikes me is the soundstage. It is just awesome! The best part is that it doesn't stop there...
Some quick points in no particular order:
Volume-WOW!!!! These things will crank the music at concert levels with NO distortion. I've read the comments from all the other owners but really couldn't grasp it until I heard it. Anand says it best: "You are row 1 at a concert. You're not at it, you're in it." Truly an experience. Wish I had brought my SPL meter. :o
Dynamics-A very dynamic speaker that just does most right.
The tone of this speaker is different but in a good way. Still extrememly musical, non fatiguing and FUN. I'm sure I've heard speakers with an incredible amount of engineering applied to them but I highly doubt that I've heard a speaker that not only had engineering applied to them but the listener was also considered (i.e. hearing and psychoacoustics). Dr. Geddes has truly immersed himself in the "behind the scenes" part of audio.
This is where Dr. Geddes and others will probably disagree: electronics do make a difference. First let me say that Anand is a very talented diy'er. Really, just great work. I wish I had his talent. :(
Fortunetely I've been able to purchase some great equipment. :D When we switched to my front end it opened the sound up to another level. I even think that Anand was surprised. Now, the cost to do that we'll leave out. :duh: The cost for that much performance gain VS the speaker suddenly makes the speaker, subs and crossover look like an absolute bargain. No joke! The Abbey with 2x GedLee subs and two Rythmik subs is still less than my dac. Yes, it's true but we will not go there. Crazy? Yes, it sure is but the last bit is always tough no matter what you're doing. Right?
So I came home, hooked my equipment back up and pressed play on a couple of tracks that I was in awe over on the Abbeys. The first track was from the Manger test cd. It sounded really good and clear but so darn compressed. The sound stage seemed 5' narrower. It just doesn't have the same "feel". Next track was Igor "Poker Face". Absolutely no comparison on the Abbeys. I've always thought this was insane at my house...until I drove 1 hr north. This track REALLY brings out everything of the Abbey. It's truly a winner!
It was asked above to listen to the Abbey and subs....This speaker requires a minimum of three subs. No question about it. Further, I completely disagree with Dr. Geddes (sorry) that any sub can be used for best sound. The Abbey is quick, very quick. The two subs that you would use closest to the Abbey freq in my opionion should be the GedLee subs. This is my thought. Why should the speaker not be from the same family as the Abbey? It just makes sense to me. The third and fourth sub can be whatever you choose that can go low but it also must be fast. I really do think speed is important here. The Rythmik does just fine in this department.
What my rambling above means is that if you're not willing or able to have any of the GedLee speakers with at least three subs you will not get optimal sound.
If you're willing to make the investment this is a speaker that may be hard to beat without spending tens of thousands of dollars. Even with that, I'm not sure you'll get better rather that just different. With that said, my order will continue for a pari of Abbey 12A's and two GedLee subs (they need a name btw).
**NOTE**
It was mentioned that I must be careful about the external crossovers that Anand had built as they are much better than the stock. My response to this is that I'd bet money that my electronics had a larger overall impact than the crossovers. Only Anand can answer this and I welcome his thoughts.
-
Hey Geddes owners,
I have been reading about Dr. Geddes and his speakers for some time now. I'm very interested in listening to a pair.
Are there any Geddes owners in the NJ , NY, Eastern PA, DE, MD, DC area who would be kind enough to help me out?
The Cleveland area, may also be a possibility. I get out there every so often to visit some family.
I live in South Jersey (08087) and will drive up to a few hours away for a listen.
Question : How many watts are needed to drive these puppies ?
My system is all tube, with an 8w 300b amp. Enough power?
Thanks,
Chris
I'm in north Jersey, Chris.
Ian
:)
-
I found this hearing test, too:
http://www.noiseaddicts.com/2009/03/can-you-hear-this-hearing-test/
I'm not sure if it is thorough enough, though. :scratch:
I could hear all the way to 20 KHz, but would have to turn up the volume a bit (I'm 29, turning 30 soon).
-
Hi Jason,
Glad you enjoyed your listening session with these speakers, your thoughts and impressions pretty much mirrored mine when I went and listened to them at Earl's place. Now you understand how difficult it is to put into words how good these speakers sound to someone. You really have to hear them for yourself, like you the speakers I had when I went and listened to the Geddes speakers were no slouch at all, they were highly respected O.B. speakers with subs but when I heard the Geddes speakers and then went back home and listened to my system I ordered my Abbey 12As immediately.
Dan
-
One other thing Jason, what you said about the multiple subs is spot on, and I am in agreement with you on the quality equipment also. The thing I have come to realize about the multiple sub system is this. The Abbeys may not be the last pair of speakers I ever own, maybe somewhere down the line I will find something I like better (I doubt it though) but I will always use the multiple sub set up no matter what primary speakers may be.
Dan
-
Jason,
Sounds like you had a great day at Anand's. Your comments pretty much sum up my feelings exactly after living with the Abbeys for a year and a half now. I'm using a new front end today as I type, Alix/Linux USB server, Audiphilleo 1 USB->S/PDIF, Bryston BDA-1. I always thought my Empirical Audio PaceCar2/Transporter/Bryston was pretty darn good, but this setup is several major clicks better in every way. The imaging and inner detail I'm getting are mind boggling. The Abbeys just let it all flow forth.
Oh, and they do crank as you found out, but a db meter might scare you. I keep one next to me just to check once in awhile. It is always way more than you think, but it's just so clean and distortion free you can't resist.
Anyway, I'm listening to Genesis Firth of Fifth with the volume at 11 and it just rocks. Pure pleasure.
I'm guessing the Crimson and those Clayton Class A's are going to be terrific with them.
Tom
-
I will always use the multiple sub set up no matter what primary speakers may be.
Dan
Yes, after hearing this approach first hand, it just makes sense and sounds like it too.
-
Jason,
Sounds like you had a great day at Anand's. Your comments pretty much sum up my feelings exactly after living with the Abbeys for a year and a half now.
I'm glad that you and Dan seem to think that I was able to describe it well enough. I don't claim to be a writer. :oops:
I'm using a new front end today as I type, Alix/Linux USB server, Audiphilleo 1 USB->S/PDIF, Bryston BDA-1. I always thought my Empirical Audio PaceCar2/Transporter/Bryston was pretty darn good, but this setup is several major clicks better in every way. The imaging and inner detail I'm getting are mind boggling. The Abbeys just let it all flow forth.
Glad to hear that you're happy. I know that you struggles with the direction a bit. This technology is moving so quick it's crazy.
Oh, and they do crank as you found out, but a db meter might scare you. I keep one next to me just to check once in awhile. It is always way more than you think, but it's just so clean and distortion free you can't resist.
:o The only way (as you know) that I can describe it is remember being at a live concert that you say "this is too loud"? Imagine if it was loud but crystal clear. All of a sudden it doesn't seem so loud because of the lack of distortion.
-
I am like Tom, I keep my dB meter right in the drawer next to my listening seat to check the level every once in a while. When you have such low distortion you can get the volume level up to hearing damaging levels without realizing it, makes you realize how much the distortion in other speakers contributes to the overall perceived sound. On another note I picked up a mint copy of The Alan Parsons Project - I Robot on MFSL half speed mastered vinyl......it sounds mind boggling at higher volumes.
-
Thank you jtwrace
Very cool of you to share your experience. Do you plan on an aluminum Abbey to match your current subs?
If you don't mind, may I ask what your current system consists of?
-
Hi,
I thought the frequency range of human hearing is from 20Hz - 20KHz?
I think that is a common misunderstanding. It is extrmeley rare, even in young people, to find someone with hearing (by this I mean within 6 dB of flat) to 20 kHz. By the time you are 40 thats dropped to a likely max of about 10 kHz. But all of that aside, studies have shown that few people will detect a LP filter at about 8-10 kHz. In nature anything above about 8 kHz is attenuated at a very high rate with distance. This means that there is very little in nature above these frequencies and so there would be very little natural reinforcement for our hearing to develop that high. Smaller animals (cats, mice), that operate on much shorter distance scales, have very highly developed hearing above 10 kHz. But we don't. The fact is that frequencies above 10 Khz really have almost nothing to do with sound quality.
-
I would add that I had a spot between 16.5-17.5khz I think where I could not hear anything. Also I don't have any idea how accurate the equipment they use is.
Bear - there isn't a piece of audiological equipment made that tests above 8 kHz. So whatever you are talking about was certainly not done by a professional. Lidia teachs audiology and she laughs when people talk about hearing above 10 kHz. She points out that qualified test equipment for this frequency range does not exist, so anyone making such a claim is guessing - at best.
-
Do you plan on an aluminum Abbey to match your current subs?
Bear - why the sarchasm?
-
Bear - why the sarchasm?
no sarchasm intended :scratch:
I feel it is a valid question. The guy built some amazing sub enclosures using aluminum.
refer to the variations portion on wikipedia link below(it mentions high frequency audiometry):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_tone_audiometry
Also you can find audiometry equipment that exceeds 20khz on the web with a quick google search. Just FYI
I originally made the statement concerning the hf roll off in jest and find myself to be incorrect, soooooo can we keep our hubris in check and keep the thread on topic please. :thumb:
Dr. Geddes, I appreciate you taking the time to answer questions and share information, I am but a casual listener and music enthusiast, I am not an expert in sound reproduction, heck im not even a novice, and am in no way disparaging you or your design, so with all do respect, don't take any of my comments personal, lighten up.:thumb:
A touring pair would be a cool idea, most people will invite their friends and fellow audiophiles over for group listening sessions. fwiw. Glad to hear business is brisk for you. As an aside, based on your endorsement on your Gedlee Forum I should have a pair of Ultimate Ear 10's by tuesday.
Thank You
-
Ya know jwtrace, in some cases, things just really are better :) That's the case with the Abbeys, they really are better than most anything out there. I'm amazed that they are so inexpensive, honestly.
-
Do you plan on an aluminum Abbey to match your current subs?
A big NO.
If you don't mind, may I ask what your current system consists of?
Mac Mini with Amarra (8GB RAM & SSD) > Wavelength Crimson (Denominator) > Dodd Buffer > Ashly 3.24CL (active crossover) > Copland DRC > Clayton M-300 > my diy'er 3 way (Scan Speak woofer, Accuton C-79 mid with Fountek Ribbon) with two Rythmik subs. All DH Labs Revelation interconnects, Q-10 speaker wire and DH Power cords. All powered using the PI Audio MuthaBuss which is powered from a dedicated line. And most importantly room treatments by GIK.
-
I think that is a common misunderstanding. It is extrmeley rare, even in young people, to find someone with hearing (by this I mean within 6 dB of flat) to 20 kHz. By the time you are 40 thats dropped to a likely max of about 10 kHz. But all of that aside, studies have shown that few people will detect a LP filter at about 8-10 kHz. In nature anything above about 8 kHz is attenuated at a very high rate with distance. This means that there is very little in nature above these frequencies and so there would be very little natural reinforcement for our hearing to develop that high. Smaller animals (cats, mice), that operate on much shorter distance scales, have very highly developed hearing above 10 kHz. But we don't. The fact is that frequencies above 10 Khz really have almost nothing to do with sound quality.
I don't know about that range for over 40; I'm over 40 and my hearing didn't test that poorly. On the other hand, my niece had a telephone "ring" that was a high frequency, and I had to be within a few feet of the phone to hear it, while our 2 yo old daughter and niece could hear it from many feet away.
As for the tour, I have to admit that I wouldn't buy these speakers unless I heard them first. I've never heard small speakers that come close to full range. Plus, having to buy 3-4 subs -- and spending the time to tune them -- means that the speakers would have to be stellar. I have two subs and don't have the time to tune both of them, let alone tune another 1-2 subs.
These speakers have so many positive reviews that I'd consider them, but having to fork out 6k just to try them isn't what I'd like to do.
-
Ya know jwtrace, in some cases, things just really are better :) That's the case with the Abbeys, they really are better than most anything out there. I'm amazed that they are so inexpensive, honestly.
Yes they are. If anyone is looking at speakers they should at least try to give them a listen. As for cost, yes, they're a bargain considering they come built, ready to go. I really don't see the benefit to buying the kit. The engineering behind them is very intense.
-
I don't know about that range for over 40; I'm over 40 and my hearing didn't test that poorly. On the other hand, my niece had a telephone "ring" that was a high frequency, and I had to be within a few feet of the phone to hear it, while our 2 yo old daughter and niece could hear it from many feet away.
As for the tour, I have to admit that I wouldn't buy these speakers unless I heard them first. I've never heard small speakers that come close to full range. Plus, having to buy 3-4 subs -- and spending the time to tune them -- means that the speakers would have to be stellar. I have two subs and don't have the time to tune both of them, let alone tune another 1-2 subs.
These speakers have so many positive reviews that I'd consider them, but having to fork out 6k just to try them isn't what I'd like to do.
The good news is that you take the measurements with HOLMpulse and send the file to Dr. Geddes and he will send the tuning required for the active crossover. You can do that or you can just do it the REW way. If you purchase speakers and subs from him that's a service that he provides to make it easier.
-
A big NO.
Mac Mini with Amarra (8GB RAM & SSD) > Wavelength Crimson (Denominator) > Dodd Buffer > Ashly 3.24CL (active crossover) > Copland DRC > Clayton M-300 > my diy'er 3 way (Scan Speak woofer, Accuton C-79 mid with Fountek Ribbon) with two Rythmik subs. All DH Labs Revelation interconnects, Q-10 speaker wire and DH Power cords. All powered using the PI Audio MuthaBuss which is powered from a dedicated line. And most importantly room treatments by GIK.
WOW! :drool:
-
Thats one nice system you have put together Jason, but now the fun really begins, the WAIT until you get the speakers in that room, and believe me when I tell you the days will feel like weeks :lol:
Dan
-
Jason,
Anad made a statement that it is a first row presentation. Is the sound forward say in front of the speaker plane ? Does the soundstage have any depth ? Image size meaning life sized. Was the presentation thin or dry ? Rich ? Was there controlled sibilance with female and male vocals ? Was the top end crisp or natural ?
I know an in home demo with my gear will be the only true test. A general discription of the questions would be appreciated.
thanks
charles
-
Hi Charles,
I am not going to try and answer any of your questions here, I'll let Jason try that. What I will say is that your last two sentences say it all, until you hear these speakers in person you will not get a firm grasp of how they perform by someone writing in words how they sound, maybe Jason can speak to that point as he has now heard the speakers after getting all the spoken word description attempts before hearing them.
Dan
-
BTW Charles, that is an awesome looking system you have there!!!!!
Dan
-
Jason,
Anad made a statement that it is a first row presentation. Is the sound forward say in front of the speaker plane ? Does the soudstage have any depth ? Image size meaning life sized. Was the presentation thin or dry ? Rich ? Was there controlled sibilance with female and male vocals ? Was the top end crisp or natural ?
I know an in home demo with my gear will be the only true test. A general discription of the questions would be appreciated.
thanks
charles
My thoughts exactly. With the caveat that Jason has stated numerous times writing is not his first passion (I think he does quite well), I'd like to see an expansion of his impressions vis a vis more traditional audio reviews. Yes, I know it's called purple prose but we all understand the terminology, soundstage width and height, imaging, tonality, macro and micro-dynamics, voicing, frequency response, coherency, etc. In other words, MORE!
-
Jason,
Anad made a statement that it is a first row presentation. Is the sound forward say in front of the speaker plane ? Does the soudstage have any depth ? Image size meaning life sized. Was the presentation thin or dry ? Rich ? Was there controlled sibilance with female and male vocals ? Was the top end crisp or natural ?
I know an in home demo with my gear will be the only true test. A general discription of the questions would be appreciated.
thanks
charles
Charles,
That statement in my opinion is that you are there in a LIVE SET. The sound isn't fake. The width, height, depth is real. It really is. Like any speaker the recording quality will dictate how good it comes across. This is not to say that poor quality recordings can't be enjoyed, I personally found them very much enjoyable and fun to listen to. The good ones though will knock you on your a$$ from giggling so much because it's real.
As for the top end, for me it's just right. I'm very top end sensitive and the Abbeys just do it right. The overall tone and balance is so darn good it's scary.
Like any speaker, I urge you to go listen to these properly setup. If you do, you will hear what I'm attempting to say. I always find these things difficult to type so it reads like I hear. If that makes any sense.... These speakers are different and unlike anything I've heard at all price points. I've made it clear in other postings that the Kaiser Speaker from Germany was something that I seriously considered. Then I got smart. :D I have no doubt that those speakers would NOT sound as good as I heard them in my room. The great thing about the GedLee speakers is that they don't require massive amounts of space around them in a large room. In fact, they are suited for a "normal" listening space. Of course, if you have a large ballroom, you'll be in heaven becuase they can still fill that space as they love to be cranked. The driver doesn't move...
Does this help you any?
EDIT:
I was a long time electostat owner. From ML's to Final Sound. It was said to me "these are like stats with balls". I didn't really understand what that meant until I heard them. Now it makes sense but I'll add that they have the great things about stats but without the negatives.
-
Jason, from another former electrostatic owner, I agree with your last statement 100%.
Dan
-
With the caveat that Jason has stated numerous times writing is not his first passion (I think he does quite well
:lol: I haven't forgotten. :nono:
I find it funny because I write technical reports at work very often. The difference is that I'm explaining real data and not my opinion. I love data!
OK. Back to Abbey.
I'm wondering if Anand will chime in here or if he is just shaking his head reading all of this. :oops:
-
One more addition to the listening room supplied from Anand.
The width of the room is about 11.5 feet and the speakers are a 1/2 foot away from the side walls (!) and about 3 feet in front of the front wall. The height of the ceiling varies from 7.5 to 8 feet in the room. There are these giant cross beams behind you on the ceiling that muck things up. Your ears are about 2 feet behind where the speakers cross which is roughly ten feet from each speaker.
What he doesn't mention is that the listening position has a sofa next to a wall this is about 4' to your right. So the right speaker is in front of the wall 10' away. The HVAC system also have ducting through the ceiling so the height varries due to that.
It's a very odd layout but it works and works very well. When Anand told me that his room was not good this made me want to hear them more in his setting. If they sound like that in his place I can't imagine what they'll do in a purpose built room like he's planning (that I got to see and plan to live in). :P
-
It was said to me "these are like stats with balls". I didn't really understand what that meant until I heard them. Now it makes sense but I'll add that they have the great things about stats but without the negatives.
Funny, the first time my audio buddy Jerry heard mine he made that very statement and he's owned several stat's and other planar speakers.
Glad you enjoyed your visit with Anand, I have no doubt the system sounded as you describe.
-
To the Abbey owners what height stands do you use?
I'm 5' 9" with typical height proportion (i.e. not super long torso). If I could only say the same on width...
-
Jason, my stands are 19 1/2" I built my own. I came about that size because I wanted the center of the waveguide at the same level as my ears when in the listening seat. In my chair my ears are 41" off the floor thus the 19 1/2" stand puts the center of the waveguide 41" off the floor. I played around with different size stands from 18 - 21" high. In my room when I get above the 19 1/2" mark the image gets too high for my preference. When you were listening yesterday did you notice if the image was at waveguide level or above or below that level at all. In my room the image appears about 4 -6" above the plane of the waveguides.
-
Jason, my stands are 19 1/2" I built my own. I came about that size because I wanted the center of the waveguide at the same level as my ears when in the listening seat. In my chair my ears are 41" off the floor thus the 19 1/2" stand puts the center of the waveguide 41" off the floor. I played around with different size stands from 18 - 21" high. In my room when I get above the 19 1/2" mark the image gets too high for my preference. When you were listening yesterday did you notice if the image was at waveguide level or above or below that level at all. In my room the image appears about 4 -6" above the plane of the waveguides.
OK. I know that Anands stands are 14" tall. I would say that the image was below. I would prefer it to be a bit higher. :dunno: :scratch: It was really good.
-
One thing you can do when you get the speakers is pick up a pair of the little stand/table that Ikea sells for like $12 a piece they are exactly 18" tall and the Abbeys fit well in them, you can raise them by shimming them to try different and find the size that suits your needs.
Dan
-
One thing you can do when you get the speakers is pick up a pair of the little stand/table that Ikea sells for like $12 a piece they are exactly 18" tall and the Abbeys fit well in them, you can raise them by shimming them to try different and find the size that suits your needs.
Dan
That's good to know. :thumb:
I was going to get nuts and make an aluminum version that I was able to easily change the height. I had the design all done in my head but it will be way to expensive. I can't justify 30% cost of the Abbey in the stand. :duh:
-
Yeah I don't remember the damned name of the Ikea piece but here is a pic of one, and no they don't come in that lovely yellow, my wife painted them that color she uses them in her photography room.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=40228)
-
My stands are about 18" and like Dan, configured them put the center of the WG at about my ear level. I originally had them at 24", which put the midpoint of the speakers about ear level. I found the images a bit high for my liking as well.
-
Okay, I'm feeling a bit better about this now.
My stands are about 15 inches. But when you measure my ear to the floor and measure the center of the waveguide to the floor, they measure about the same. Still a couple inches taller will probably tweak the soundstage a little better. I'm about 5ft 9 inches tall. I know that Mike and Tom are big 6 footers right?
Anand.
-
I know that Mike and Tom are big 6 footers right?
I'm 6'2" and I suspect Tom is about the same. I'm one of those long torso types but my listening throne is not real high, works out well for me. :)
-
Yes I am 6'1" so yeah you sound like you are doing about the same Anand, the measurement that matters is the one to where YOUR ears are from the floor. As Mike did I had mine higher initially as it was recommended that the center point of the front baffle be at ear level and that put the image too high for my liking.
Dan
-
20" stands here.
-
Wow! I feel like a midget :P
Anand.
-
Nah Anand, once we are all sitting in our respective chairs its all a moot point!! :thumb:
Dan
-
Based on all of this I'd say 17" or maybe 18" with the spikes and decouplers from stand to Abbey would be sweet.
My ears are ~37" at the listening position.
-
One thing you can do when you get the speakers is pick up a pair of the little stand/table that Ikea sells for like $12 a piece they are exactly 18" tall and the Abbeys fit well in them, you can raise them by shimming them to try different and find the size that suits your needs.
Dan
Dan, what are the top dimensions?
Jim
-
Hi Jim, the top dimensions are 13 3/4" front to back and 14" across. They will take a good amount of weight too. It held all of my 230 lb lard butt with no trouble.
Dan
-
My new stands are at about 20". Floor to my ears is 39". I am 6'2" and my Ekornes sits a bit low so it all works out just right for me.
-
My new stands are at about 20". Floor to my ears is 39". I am 6'2" and my Ekornes sits a bit low so it all works out just right for me.
I'm curious, which Ekornes do you have?
Anand.
-
I'm curious, which Ekornes do you have?
Anand.
Vegas, cuz I'm a big guy, with the Royalin leather. Expensive but worth every penny... Don't know why I waited so long.
-
I'm curious, which Ekornes do you have?
Anand.
Hi Anand
All too often people do not get the right furniture for their listening room. I have two stories to highlight how significant this can be.
First was when I was at Ford. We had a problem in a car that just sounded very boomy. It didn't measure bad, but sounded terrible. One day I was listening and got up out of the seat for some reason - the boom went away. We traced the problem to a seat resonance which was excited by the sound system.
Second was in Thailand, in AI's listening room. We had identical speakers to mine, but the room sounded boomy. Again it measured fine. Problem, a cheap Thai sofa that just resonated like crazy. We did as much as we could to stiffen it and it improved, but I always felt that the sofa had a ring to it.
The point of this is that from what I have seen the Eikornes chairs would be the best possible listening seat. Very solid, leather, so not too soft and absorbent. In my theater I have a sofa (2 actually), but they are both made in Scandinavia and both use solid oak for the framing with leather seating surfaces. Both are minimal stuctures which do not go to the floor. I simply have not seen furniture made in the US that satisfies me. Sure the Scandinavian stiff is expensive, but it lasts forever and is built like no other. One of the sofas is about twenty years old and still looks and feel great.
-
I simply have not seen furniture made in the US that satisfies me.
Hmm. Come to NC and my wonderful wife (degreed interior designer) will educate you on some. :D
-
no sarchasm intended :scratch:
I feel it is a valid question. The guy built some amazing sub enclosures using aluminum.
refer to the variations portion on wikipedia link below(it mentions high frequency audiometry):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_tone_audiometry
Also you can find audiometry equipment that exceeds 20khz on the web with a quick google search. Just FYI
A touring pair would be a cool idea, most people will invite their friends and fellow audiophiles over for group listening sessions. fwiw. Glad to hear business is brisk for you. As an aside, based on your endorsement on your Gedlee Forum I should have a pair of Ultimate Ear 10's by tuesday.
Thank You
Hi Bear
Sorry, but the alluminium comment just sounded odd since the speakers could not be made in alluminium and that seemed obvious to me.
I read the Wiki link, but there is only a sketchy statement about above 8 kHz. I did a search on Google and came up with nothing that goes above 8 kHz. I asked Lidia and she knew of no equipment that tests above 8 kHz nor any standards defined that high. Maybe there are tests like this, but they are not at all commonplace. The main point being that above 8 kHz is generally believed by professionals to be inconsequential.
-
I have not seen a review that addressed the quick hf roll-off of the Abbey.
Speakers that are flat in the hf are normally perceived to be too bright. Also, there really isn't a whole lot happening at high frequencies in most recordings, and even if there is, it won't make it to the listening position.
Considering that all the designs require subs where is the advantage in the larger higher cost designs?
Better control of directivity and higher power handling.
Another issue with this design is the implementation of the multiple sub protocol. According to Dr. Geddes nearly any sub will do. If those subs produces a one-note/peak or dip FR respons e then the result will be......one note bass and drums etc.?
I am using inexpensive subs, and I'm getting bass that is better than anything else I've ever had in my listening room. It's also better than what I've heard with far more expensive speaker systems at other's houses or at dealers.
It would appear that the midrange in this design has been isolated/focused and all frequencies that fall outside this isolated/focused range are muddied and therefore cause the midrange to be perceived as very clear.
Nothing muddied here. :)
-
Sorry, but the alluminium comment just sounded odd since the speakers could not be made in alluminium and that seemed obvious to me.
I wouldn't say it can't be done...if one has the (bucket) money, I'll take the challenge. And the money! :wink:
-
Hi,
I thought the frequency range of human hearing is from 20Hz - 20KHz?
On average that's correct. However, you also need to look at equal loudness contours and what's actually present in recordings and at live venues.
You may very well be able to hear a 20 KHz tone during a hearing test, but that doesn't mean you will ever hear anything that high while listening to music.
-
The Cleveland area, may also be a possibility. I get out there every so often to visit some family.
That might work. I'm pretty close to there.
-
That statement in my opinion is that you are there in a LIVE SET. The sound isn't fake. The width, height, depth is real. It really is. Like any speaker the recording quality will dictate how good it comes across. This is not to say that poor quality recordings can't be enjoyed, I personally found them very much enjoyable and fun to listen to. The good ones though will knock you on your a$$ from giggling so much because it's real.
As for the top end, for me it's just right. I'm very top end sensitive and the Abbeys just do it right. The overall tone and balance is so darn good it's scary.
Like any speaker, I urge you to go listen to these properly setup. If you do, you will hear what I'm attempting to say. I always find these things difficult to type so it reads like I hear. If that makes any sense.... These speakers are different and unlike anything I've heard at all price points. I've made it clear in other postings that the Kaiser Speaker from Germany was something that I seriously considered. Then I got smart. :D I have no doubt that those speakers would NOT sound as good as I heard them in my room. The great thing about the GedLee speakers is that they don't require massive amounts of space around them in a large room. In fact, they are suited for a "normal" listening space. Of course, if you have a large ballroom, you'll be in heaven becuase they can still fill that space as they love to be cranked. The driver doesn't move...
Does this help you any?
EDIT:
I was a long time electostat owner. From ML's to Final Sound. It was said to me "these are like stats with balls". I didn't really understand what that meant until I heard them. Now it makes sense but I'll add that they have the great things about stats but without the negatives.
Thanks for the comments. They helped. I'm very critical of the topend myself. It cannot be thin, crisp, bright or over detailed. That is my first criteria.
As good as the sound is for me with the pipedreams my room is only 17x20 is niether a true rectangle or square. Lots of angled walls. Clg is very low a 7ft. Its odd like me. 8). Anyways it appears my goal of a dedicated new room has to wait. So I'm thinking buy the Geddes and store the Pipes for now.
My issue is that I require an audition first. The purchase I ever made without an audition in my home was the Cyber 211 amp. Although pleased its just not my style.
Anad you may have more visitors.
charles
-
Ok $2000 for main speakers, three subs $1800 a Berhinger say $400. Say $4200 total is that correct ? Without stands. I guess a good 14ga solid core speaker wire would suffice, no need for exotics here. Another perk.
Very impressed that Geddes sends you the settings for the EQ after one submits measurements. I really like that service. Brilliant!!
Next question SS or tubes [ subjective I realize]. What amp does the good ol doctor use for voicing ? If it was mentioned before I didn't notice.
I gotta hear these thingies.
charles
-
Ok $2000 for main speakers, three subs $1800 a Berhinger say $400. Say $4200 total is that correct ? Without stands. I guess a good 14ga solid core speaker wire would suffice, no need for exotics here. Another perk.
Very impressed that Geddes sends you the settings for the EQ after one submits measurements. I really like that service. Brilliant!!
Next question SS or tubes [ subjective I realize]. What amp does the good ol doctor use for voicing ? If it was mentioned before I didn't notice.
I gotta hear these thingies.
charles
It's $4000 for the Abbeys (per pair) plus subs, sub amps, and Behringer. Earl uses a Pioneer receiver in his everyday HT setup.
-
Ok $2000 for main speakers, three subs $1800 a Berhinger say $400. Say $4200 total is that correct ? Without stands. I guess a good 14ga solid core speaker wire would suffice, no need for exotics here. Another perk.
Very impressed that Geddes sends you the settings for the EQ after one submits measurements. I really like that service. Brilliant!!
Next question SS or tubes [ subjective I realize]. What amp does the good ol doctor use for voicing ? If it was mentioned before I didn't notice.
I gotta hear these thingies.
charles
Charles,
As Tom noted it's $4k total ($2k each speaker) as Dr. Geddes does that due to the HT systems that he also does.
When Anand finishes his system it will be a 7.3 8)
Subs are so open as turkey here says his system sounds great using three inexpensive subs and Anand as I mentioned has no slouch of a multi sub system either. One Rythmik and two U Frame subs. I'm choosing to go with two GedLee bandpass subs and use my two current Rythmik subs.
If it's worth doing it's worth doing right. :green: :oops:
-
Thanks for the comments. They helped. I'm very critical of the topend myself. It cannot be thin, crisp, bright or over detailed. That is my first criteria.
As good as the sound is for me with the pipedreams my room is only 17x20 is niether a true rectangle or square. Lots of angled walls. Clg is very low a 7ft. Its odd like me. 8). Anyways it appears my goal of a dedicated new room has to wait. So I'm thinking buy the Geddes and store the Pipes for now.
My issue is that I require an audition first. The purchase I ever made without an audition in my home was the Cyber 211 amp. Although pleased its just not my style.
Anad you may have more visitors.
charles
I'm glad that my rambling was able to help you some. I highly doubt that your room is as tough as Anand's. Not only is he fighting a tough room but also an old house. If I were blind folded before entering, and removed the blind fold after listening I would've soiled my pants.
Proper setup & speakers...that's all it is. In Anand's case, it can only get better...and it will in about 8 months. :thumb:
-
Sorry, but the alluminium comment just sounded odd since the speakers could not be made in alluminium and that seemed obvious to me.
jtwrace...
I wouldn't say it can't be done...if one has the (bucket) money, I'll take the challenge. And the money!
For $65,000.00 you can get..... :?
"The Krell Modulari Duo Reference is a blatantly original, thoroughly masculine design; but at 44 inches tall, 11 wide and 29 deep, it can still fit in average-sized rooms. Each speaker weighs 345 pounds.
It’s fair to assume the bulk of the weight can be attributed to its thick-walled aluminum construction. If the goal was to make an absolutely dead cabinet, I’d say D’Agostino’s done it."
(http://www.hemagazine.com/files/u3/Clipboard03.jpg)
Krell had them at RMAF...few year ago.
-
Abbey To Do
Decide on Abbey order. Check
Decide on GedLee Bandpass sub order. Check
Decide on amp(s) for subs. :scratch:
Work on stand for Abbeys. Check (in process)
New active for system.
send lots of email, PM's and post here :oops: Check... :thumb:
Thank Anand again. :thumb:
-
Hey Jason,
What is the impedance of Earls sub 4 or 8 ohm??
Dan
-
Hey Jason,
What is the impedance of Earls sub 4 or 8 ohm??
Dan
8
-
OK good then bridging amps is still a possibility for your Geddes subs.
Dan
-
Back to topic.
Has anyone here tried to use foam in the bandpass sub ports for tuning?
-
Back to topic.
Has anyone here tried to use foam in the bandpass sub ports for tuning?
I don't have Earl's subs, but can tell you it is not recommended.
-
Thanks.
Also, I notice in your system profile that you have SDS Class D. Do you drive your band pass subs with them? How do they do? SQ?
-
Bear - there isn't a piece of audiological equipment made that tests above 8 kHz. So whatever you are talking about was certainly not done by a professional. Lidia teachs audiology and she laughs when people talk about hearing above 10 kHz. She points out that qualified test equipment for this frequency range does not exist, so anyone making such a claim is guessing - at best.
:scratch: If there is no test equip available then i am not sure how the definitive assertions can be made like the ones in your previous posts.
-
Thanks.
Also, I notice in your system profile that you have SDS Class D. Do you drive your band pass subs with them? How do they do? SQ?
Yes I do. I am using one for each sub in bridged mode (500W each), but previously I was running both subs from one amp in stereo mode (125W). The sound is very good either way, but they sound is a bit more authoritative with the additional power. These are great little amps; very powerful, low distortion, dead quiet and they run cool. I am completely satisfied with them.
-
Yes I do. I am using one for each sub in bridged mode (500W each), but previously I was running both subs from one amp in stereo mode (125W). The sound is very good either way, but they sound is a bit more authoritative with the additional power. These are great little amps; very powerful, low distortion, dead quiet and they run cool. I am completely satisfied with them.
That's great news that you are happy with it on the bandpass subs. I've been going back and fourth with it but I have a case and all the parts sitting here so I might as well use it. Also, Class D is coming out with a hgih power (500wpc) amp soon so it will be perfect. :thumb:
-
Two weeks until my pair starts getting made. :hyper:
-
Two weeks?
That's not till next year.
-
Two weeks?
That's not till next year.
That is correct!
-
Will you be making them yourself Jason or will you be having GedLee make them up for ya? Thanks.
Cheers,
Robin
-
Will you be making them yourself Jason or will you be having GedLee make them up for ya? Thanks.
Cheers,
Robin
Dr. Geddes will be making them and measuring them like every pair he builds.
-
Dr. Geddes will be making them and measuring them like every pair he builds.
Then you'll be getting his best. I'll be looking forward to the pictures. :thumb:
Cheers,
Robin
-
I'll be looking forward to the pictures. :thumb:
Cheers,
Robin
I can do it!
-
More progress today.
Got an amp for the bandpass subs and have the Abbey stands in progress. :thumb:
-
More progress today.
Got an amp for the bandpass subs and have the Abbey stands in progress. :thumb:
Did you decide on the Behringer?
-
Did you decide on the Behringer?
Actually went with a Samsom 700wpc @ 8ohm
-
my pair of Abbey 12s for sale on Audiogon
http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cl.pl?spkrfull&1298839748&/Geddes-Abbey-12-Loudspeakers
-
my pair of Abbey 12s for sale on Audiogon
http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cl.pl?spkrfull&1298839748&/Geddes-Abbey-12-Loudspeakers
It's too bad you have to sell them, but you'll be back for them someday I'm sure. Sometimes you have to make priorities on what is more important, your audio system or family! The Abbey can make you listen for hours on end so I can see where you are coming from! Good luck on your sale and somebody is going to get a great deal on a pair of these. A furniture craftsmen can put on an excellent finish on these :thumb:
Anand.
-
my pair of Abbey 12s for sale on Audiogon
http://cgi.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cl.pl?spkrfull&1298839748&/Geddes-Abbey-12-Loudspeakers
I would list them here in the classified section too. It's FREE! :thumb:
-
Sometimes you have to make priorities on what is more important, your audio system or family! The Abbey can make you listen for hours on end so I can see where you are coming from!
To paraphrase an old joke, "Family and Gedlee Abby speakers missing. Reward for speakers."
-
I pickup the stands for the Abbeys tomorrow. :dance:
-
Lets us know how they sound. :lol:
-
I pickup the stands for the Abbeys tomorrow. :dance:
Didn't happen unless there are pics
-
Lets us know how they sound. :lol:
They should according to the design, sound invisible.
-
Didn't happen unless there are pics
Stay tuned....< 12hrs. :green:
-
Abbey Stands...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41013)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41014)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41015)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41016)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41017)
Thanks to "Randall Kepley"! :thumb:
-
Oh those are really sweet Jason, the speakers will look very good perched on those :thumb:
Dan
-
Abbey Stands...
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41013)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41014)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41015)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41016)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41017)
Thanks to "Randall Kepley"! :thumb:
Looks really slick...
Is there a tilt to it? Is that adjustable?
-Tony
-
Looks really slick...
Is there a tilt to it? Is that adjustable?
-Tony
No tilt. Perfectly flat...they're playing games with me too. I checked when I got home and they're perfect.
-
Jason when are the Abbey's due?? You must be so pumped!!!!
-
Sure, send them over here and I'll snap some shots for those who just can't wait to see them with Abbeys on board :green:
-
Jason when are the Abbey's due?? You must be so pumped!!!!
First shipment of the Abbeys should be end of the month and the second shipment of the two bandpass subs should follow a week after or less.
Pumped? You have no idea...
-
Sure, send them over here and I'll snap some shots for those who just can't wait to see them with Abbeys on board :green:
Be careful what you wish for...you don't know me very well. Well, you might as I've offered to send you plenty of goods. :lol:
-
Be careful what you wish for...you don't know me very well. Well, you might as I've offered to send you plenty of goods. :lol:
Yes, be very careful with JT. He was willing to leave $10K worth of equipment at my place no questions asked. Except, he kept asking, "Are you sure?" And I always answered with..."the wife..." :duh: :thumb:
Anand.
-
Very cool......I like the way you say "first shipment" like your getting a warehouse full or a trailer load....LOL....The stands are awesome by the way. :thumb: :thumb:
-
Very cool......I like the way you say "first shipment" like your getting a warehouse full or a trailer load....LOL....The stands are awesome by the way. :thumb: :thumb:
His neighbors have NO IDEA what is about to happen.
(http://metropolitician.blogs.com/scribblings_of_the_metrop/_images_maninchair.jpg)
Anand.
-
Very cool......I like the way you say "first shipment" like your getting a warehouse full or a trailer load....LOL....The stands are awesome by the way. :thumb: :thumb:
Well, I'm getting two shipments of audio related stuff. 8)
-
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=41027)
I'm pretty sure I'm a sick pup as I have had to start stacking JBL's......Anand see the Maxell guy on the lower right, waiting on a frame...!!!
-
I don't know if Jason mentioned it, but those are the stands that I made for myself - they are my design.
Just spent a day at the Hi-End show at the Venitian. All I can say is that there are a lot of really bad speakers out there, and it is amazing how many companies make tube amps and turntables. When I go through shows like this all I think is "Are we trying to do the same thing?"
Listened to some Avantgardes and wow, were they bad. I know that they HAD TO BE setup wrong because they were really bad! The speakers that impressed me as actually sound good were the YG Acoustics. Just remember that they were "tollerable" is a sea of junk, but they were astronomically priced. Again I had to ask myself "Are we trying to do the same thing?"
I have to ask what this whole business is about. I just seem to be completely unconnected with these people. I listened to a guy talk about how these cables had a center core and a shield that were polarized to "align the grains" of the insulator. This "increased coherency and lowered noise for better transparency"! Are we on the same planet?
But then I read an advertisement in a mag about a local sauna that offered a hot oil drip on your forhead which "reduced stress, improved circulation" and probably cured cancer along with a whole host of other magical health benifits. I came to realize that its all part of one big mysical world of magic that marketing offers to the masses to comfort their soles in a time of mass hysteria.
Now it makes sense!!!
-
they are my design.
No doubt about that. Very much appreciated. :thumb:
Just spent a day at the Hi-End show at the Venitian. All I can say is that there are a lot of really bad speakers out there, and it is amazing how many companies make tube amps and turntables. When I go through shows like this all I think is "Are we trying to do the same thing?"
Listened to some Avantgardes and wow, were they bad. I know that they HAD TO BE setup wrong because they were really bad! The speakers that impressed me as actually sound good were the YG Acoustics. Just remember that they were "tollerable" is a sea of junk, but they were astronomically priced. Again I had to ask myself "Are we trying to do the same thing?"
I have to ask what this whole business is about. I just seem to be completely unconnected with these people. I listened to a guy talk about how these cables had a center core and a shield that were polarized to "align the grains" of the insulator. This "increased coherency and lowered noise for better transparency"! Are we on the same planet?
But then I read an advertisement in a mag about a local sauna that offered a hot oil drip on your forhead which "reduced stress, improved circulation" and probably cured cancer along with a whole host of other magical health benifits. I came to realize that its all part of one big mysical world of magic that marketing offers to the masses to comfort their soles in a time of mass hysteria.
Now it makes sense!!!
:rotflmao:
-
And I hope the the time I spent building them is up to your standard, Im glad Jason is pleased w/ them. Thanks for all the nice comments. R.K.
[quote author=gedlee link=topic=86403.msg887613#msg887613 date=1294369364
I don't know if Jason mentioned it, but those are the stands that I made for myself - they are my design.
-
Earl,
What are you doing at the High End Show? Is there anything you are looking for or were you in Vegas for another reason and just decided to stop by? I am just curious what you would see interesting there since you are not displaying your wonderful speakers?
Thanks,
James
-
Those are some very nice stands Earl. Are you considering offering them for sale on a regular basis? I thought I read something about that elsewhere.
New Abbey owner here, still finishing up my first review, and waiting on my Nathan for the center channel (it got damaged in shipping). Overall I'm super pleased. I've never heard imaging and detail like this before, let alone soundstage depth. Can't wait to finish replacing all the rears with CD speakers.
Full review to follow shortly.
Best,
Darren
-
Those are some very nice stands Earl. Are you considering offering them for sale on a regular basis? I thought I read something about that elsewhere.
New Abbey owner here, still finishing up my first review, and waiting on my Nathan for the center channel (it got damaged in shipping). Overall I'm super pleased. I've never heard imaging and detail like this before, let alone soundstage depth. Can't wait to finish replacing all the rears with CD speakers.
Full review to follow shortly.
Best,
Darren
I look forward to your review. :thumb:
-
I look forward to your review. :thumb:
Make that two of us.
Anand.
-
Abbey To Do
Decide on Abbey order. Check
Decide on GedLee Bandpass sub order. Check
Decide on amp(s) for subs. :scratch:
Work on stand for Abbeys. Check (in process)
New active for system.
All complete!
Just waiting on the goods now. :hyper:
Thanks to Anand again. :thumb:
-
Jason when do you get your speaks? Is there a countdown timer somewhere? :lol:
-
Jason when do you get your speaks? Is there a countdown timer somewhere? :lol:
Abbeys should arrive by months end and the subs shortly after. :green:
-
Jason I'm curious as to how one connects the subs, EQ, preamp, ampor amps, etc for a two channel system. Are the subs connected in mono ? Multiple amps ? What sort of preamp does one use ? It appears to be a involving set up. Cabling must be a bitch. thanks.
charles
-
Jason I'm curious as to how one connects the subs, EQ, preamp, ampor amps, etc for a two channel system. Are the subs connected in mono ? Multiple amps ? What sort of preamp does one use ? It appears to be a involving set up. Cabling must be a bitch. thanks.
charles
Charles,
Actually a few of us just connect the sub inputs to the speaker terminals if the mains amp permits it. Pretty simple that way. I'm using 3 GR/Rythmik sub amps and it works great. The sub amps just sum the L+R to mono.
I have also used a Behringer DCX2496 which has 2 in, 6 outputs. Just run a second set of the preamp outputs (or a "Y") to the DCX, then let the DCX drive each of the sub amps. L+R are summed to mono in the DCX instead of the sub amps.
Tom
-
Thanks Tom, I was unaware that the Berhinger has 4 outputs. I get it now.
-
Thanks Tom, I was unaware that the Berhinger has 4 outputs. I get it now.
Yes, it is actually possible to run as many as 6 individual mono outputs from the DCX. Each output can be set to receive L, R, or summed L+R if you want to do it.
-
Just as Tom has said...
My Dodd Buffer has two outputs so one of them directly to main amps then the other to the DCX. DCX output to four subs. Two subs are Rythmik (self powered) and the other two are passive that will run off another amp.
That's it! :thumb:
-
I was doing well but the suspense is starting to get to me. :duh:
-
Tick, tick, tick, tick.... :lol:
-
Got word that they're in progress and still on schedule for the end of the month. :hyper: :dance:
-
Got word that they're in progress and still on schedule for the end of the month. :hyper: :dance:
We are all anxiously awaitng your review... oh, and pictures. :D
Dave
-
Are there any GedLee owners in Salt Lake City or Las Vegas?
Thanks,
James
-
I was finally able to sit down and do some serious listening to my Abbeys. I've been holding off on this review, hoping my center channel Nathan would get here, but decided not to wait any longer. I'll just do a 2
channel review for now, and come back later to add in my comments on the center and theater experience later. So for now, I'll limit myself to music and 2 channel listening. Here is a shot of my dedicated home theater:
(http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm39/dguarnaccia/New%20Gedlee%20speakers/IMG_1015.jpg)
First lets start with where I'm comming from. I've always enjoyed a neutral, uncolored speaker. In the 90's and early 2000's, I was a staunch Paradigm fan. I've never liked bright speakers, and horns have in the
past really turned me off. About 4 years ago, I was looking to upgrade and found the AV123 products, and bought into the RS1000's. After lots of reseach, they seemed to compete well with the upper end of the paradigm line, for a fraction of the cost.
As is always the case with us Audio junkies, good was still not good enough. I loved the midbass slam of the Rockets, and they did have decent imaging, but I wanted more. I've always been a imaging slut, and while I loved some of the open baffle designs, I also love home theater. I'm probably 60/40 HT to 2 channel mix and I wanted the best of both worlds. Incredible imaging, and the ability to kick me in the chest in movies and certain kinds of music. I wanted my cake, and to be able to eat it too as they say.
So, I started out on my quest. I looked at a lot of the OB designs as well as the Line Source arrays. I was ready to spend up to 8k on a set of speakers that would hopefully last me a good 10+ years. After a lot of research, I kept hearing about these speakers Earl Geddes was making, and read through all his research. Needless to say, I had to listen to them. I found a local guy who had the Summas near me and gave a listen.
They were very good, but the space and setup was horrible. I took a leap of faith really, thinking if they could sound that good in those conditions, they'd be great in mine. So I plunked down my deposit and settled in for the wait. About 3 months later, they were ready. I picked the Red option, because my theater is Red. Hindsight, I should have done black, but oh well. They are unique. The new Abbey pic on Gedlee.com is actually one of my Abbeys.
When I finally got home from a 5 week trip overseas, I tore into the boxes. Sadly, the Nathan's driver came loose in shipping and had to be returned to be repaired. Still waiting for that to come back 2 months later. :whip:
Anyhow, that's the preable, here is the review.
I'm no reviewer, so I'm not going to try to use all the fancy adjectives some folks use. Instead, I'll try to explain what I mean through the tracks I've listen to and what I think I hear. I've got about a 150 hours on them all now.
Gear wise, I'm using the Marantz 7002,and an Acurus 200x3 to drive the abbeys. I'm using an old crumby Sony 300 disk changer as the deck, but using the dacs in the Marantz. Nothing fancy really.
I do have the Abbeys integrated with a Chase Home Theater 18.2 Sub. The Abbeys and sub integated very well. Here is a shot of the FR I took with XTZ:
(http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm39/dguarnaccia/New%20Gedlee%20speakers/12-19-10LRSubFR.jpg)
So, as I settled into listening, I wanted to listen to a wide variety of music to see where these speakers shine.
First up, Manheim Steamroller Classical Gas. Great accoustic / instrumentals, and lots of subtle detail, plus well recorded. Wow! Amazing soundstage, I've never heard it this wide before. Probably triple the width of the Rockets. It feels like the players are about 5-6 feet in front of me. I almost want to reach out to touch them like you do in a good 3d movie.
Next I put on Classics of the Silver Screen by the Cininati Pops Orchestra. I figured I'd see how an orchestra sounds. What struck me immediately was how I could tell appart the various instruments. I could hear the violins off to the left, the cellos to the right. I've never been able to really do that before. While my previous speakers presented a nice image in the center, this went well beyond that by precisely locating where the various instruments were located. Very cool.
Ok, let's try some Jazz. Quincy Jones, back on the block. Very well recorded disk, great for testing out suble detail in speakers. Again, very wide and deep sounds stage. The vocals really surprised me at how some reverberant some of them were. Vibrate your chest kind of feeling. Did I mention these guys like to play loud? Of course, as a pro design with high efficency, I expected that, but it was fun to turn in us and not loose any detail. The midbass was really punchy, with excellent attack and decay. My room is well treated behind the speakers, and in all the corners, and that certainly helps, but the Abbeys blow the rockets away here. I'm sure it has to do with the CD design. Bottom line, Jazz sounds awesome, and with the dynamics of these speakers you can hear Quincy wispering while the trupets are screaming, and nothing is lost.
Let's move on to folk music. I picked Indigo Girls, Strange Fire. Lots of accoustic guitar, and harmony. I wanted to see how these guys did with female vocals. I had never realized the singer wasn't in the center of the sound stage before. She's actually just to the right of center, and the harmony singer is just to the left. It was fun to hear their harmony blend back and forth. Never had heard that before. I'm hearing lots of subtle designs, sighs, intakes of breath that were lost to me before. Again, pretty neat.
Now for some good old rock and roll. I'm a child of the 80's, so I like to listen to some good, if not well recorded tunes pretty often. I threw in Heart's Greatest hits. I wasn't expecting much, since most of these mainstream CD's were poorly recorded. Sure enough, I notice in the Intro to Crazy on You, there are actually 2 different accoustical guitars in there, not just one...sneaky.
Then I threw in Bon Jovi (I know, guilty pleasure) and listen to some of his greatest hits. It had that rock concert, first row, kick you in the chest kind of feeling. I could hear some of the weaknesses in the recording studio, but not so much that it distracted me from my enjoyment. On a few songs like Wanted Dead of Alive, you could even hear where they mixed it right to give you some spacial presence.
I popped in Seal because I love that guy's Baritone vocals,but the recording was really bad, and I could hear it. One issue you could find is that it makes your poor recordings unlistenable.
I also tried Roger Waters Pro's and Cons of Hitchhiking. They did a lot of spacial mixing to give you an enhanced sense of soundstage depth and width. I was pretty phenomenal. It's also laced with a tremendous amount of wispers and comments I hadn't actually heard before.
So, overall, from a 2 channel persepctive, I think these are incredibly revealing speakers. They paint a sonic picture that makes me feel like I'm really a part of the music, and that I could almost reach out and touch the musicians. The sound stage is both very wide, and very deep, and provides a level of separation that I've never heard before. To say I'm happy with my purchase is an understantment at best. I do want to point out thought that it's important to realize Earl is a small operation. It's either just him by himself of he has some parttime help. You'll likely be waiting some time to get your speakers (mine took 3 months) and if there are issues, it could be a while before they are addressed (still waiting 2 months later for my Nathan to be returned). Earl is responsive to questions, and such, but his bandwidth is limited. Better to be aware, and go into it eye wide open. The speakers are well worth the wait, but instant gratification types should look elsewhere.
Here a few more shots of the Abbbeys up close.
(http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm39/dguarnaccia/New%20Gedlee%20speakers/IMG_1027.jpg)
(http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm39/dguarnaccia/New%20Gedlee%20speakers/IMG_1029.jpg)
(http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm39/dguarnaccia/New%20Gedlee%20speakers/IMG_1028.jpg)
Edit: Trying to get rid of weird line breaks
-
Thanks for your thoughts!
I'm so looking to my delivery in a couple of weeks. :thumb:
-
Jason...I commend you for the patience, I would be friggin nuts, you might be in fact but either way Good Luck!!!!!!!!!!! Pictures of course right???
-
I commend you for the patience, I would be friggin nuts, you might be in fact but either way Good Luck!!!!!!!!!!! Pictures of course right???
:thumb:
-
Darren, nice review of the Abbeys! If you were disappointed, I'd feel like a heel for recommending them haha...
I, too, have noticed they can make poor recordings sound quite awful, but it's not consistent... I'm not sure if there are certain characteristics of bad recordings they amplify or what exactly. There is some material I listen to (a lot of times underground hip-hop stuff)...from Youtube or wherever, that sounds quite good...and then there's also the reaaaally bad. BluRays just sound out-of-this-world.
Earl, this hobby...like everything else, is still ruled by the almighty dollar. When hobbyists demand more for their money, they'll see improvements.
-
On poor recordings, try reversing the phase. Many times this is the culprit, and it's why a recording might sound good on one system and not another.
-
Most recordings sound great. The ones that sound poor is generally noise in the recording that is revealed, or annoying clicks and pops, and things like that. On the Seal disk, I could hear the some reverb or echo from the studio they were recording in. It was just distracting. I had never heard that kind of thing before.
-
Darren, nice review of the Abbeys! If you were disappointed, I'd feel like a heel for recommending them haha...
So you have GedLee speakers?
-
Yeah, I think I've talked about mine earlier in this thread...I can't remember, there's a few threads discussing them. I've had Abbeys for a while now. It will be a while before something else entices me.
-
Well JTW any more news?, Monday is the last day of the month. I just got that Wyred 4 Sound amp this morning and have had it in the system for a few hours now and the Abbeys seem to like it just fine. It sounds real good, real good bass response, with just the Abbeys on, no subs. I pretty much have to shut the subs off to compare amps powering the Abbeys, and this one sounds real good.
Dan
-
Well JTW any more news?, Monday is the last day of the month. I just got that Wyred 4 Sound amp this morning and have had it in the system for a few hours now and the Abbeys seem to like it just fine. It sounds real good, real good bass response, with just the Abbeys on, no subs. I pretty much have to shut the subs off to compare amps powering the Abbeys, and this one sounds real good.
Dan
Glad you're liking the amp.
As for my delivery, I've heard nothing.
-
Yeah, I think I've talked about mine earlier in this thread...I can't remember, there's a few threads discussing them. I've had Abbeys for a while now. It will be a while before something else entices me.
Not that I'm obsessing or anything but thought I'd help you out. :wink:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=86403.msg843382#msg843382
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=86403.msg845783#msg845783
-
Just got word that the speakers and subs will be shipping in several days.
They're being painted.
:green:
-
Hoping my Center will ship today as well. He needed to wait several days for my paint to dry before shipping, and I'm hoping I'll get it before my superbowl party next weekend.
-
Hoping my Center will ship today as well. He needed to wait several days for my paint to dry before shipping, and I'm hoping I'll get it before my superbowl party next weekend.
Good Luck! If I were a bettin' man, I would say that he's going to ship our together. Let us know when you get yours. :thumb:
-
Looks like Earl says Monday for mine. Hoping yours ships then as well. :thumb:
-
Looks like Earl says Monday for mine. Hoping yours ships then as well. :thumb:
That would be fantastic! :green: :thumb:
-
Hey if those get shipped Monday you may very well have them singing in your room by Wednesday night :icon_lol: Now what color did you get again???
-
Hey if those get shipped Monday you may very well have them singing in your room by Wednesday night :icon_lol: Now what color did you get again???
Umm. I doubt it. Black (satin).
-
Really what service will they get shipped via?
-
Really what service will they get shipped via?
Not due to shipping...I work! Also, it's going to take a bit to get everything setup and dialed in. Poseidonsvoice is even going to help. :thumb:
-
Hahahahaha...sounds like you will be taking the set up very seriously....good for you!!!!
-
Hahahahaha...sounds like you will be taking the set up very seriously....good for you!!!!
Nothing is not serious. :wink:
-
When my Abbeys shipped in November, he used Fedex Ground, so likely the same. Took about 4 days to get to Oregon.
-
When my Abbeys shipped in November, he used Fedex Ground, so likely the same. Took about 4 days to get to Oregon.
Yes, he's using FedEx. That much I do know.
-
I, too, have been thinking about getting a pair of the Abbey speakers in an effort to address room interaction issues in my small(ish) room. Another speaker that seems to have a similar set of objectives is the JBL LSR6332 (http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/general/Product.aspx?PId=26&MId=5). Is this correct? And has anyone had the chance to compare these two speakers?
Zydeco
-
Zydeco,
I'm really not sure if anybody on this forum has, in fact, I doubt it. However, you might want to ask Patrick Bateman (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/members/patrick-bateman.html), who owns a pair of Summas and has played with JBL controlled directivity speakers.
All the best,
Anand.
-
I, too, have been thinking about getting a pair of the Abbey speakers in an effort to address room interaction issues in my small(ish) room. Another speaker that seems to have a similar set of objectives is the JBL LSR6332 (http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/general/Product.aspx?PId=26&MId=5). Is this correct? And has anyone had the chance to compare these two speakers?
Zydeco
If I were you, I'd try to go listen to some Abbeys.
-
If I were you, I'd try to go listen to some Abbeys.
Good idea but I'd guess that the nearest pair is somewhere between 3,500 to 10,000 miles from home as I'm in South Western Australia. The two speakers are both "controlled directivitity" with the essential difference seeming to be the width It might be different in a large room but for my small room I'm thinking the Abbey is the best bet at minimising the negative impact of short-duration sidewall reflections due to it's having the steeper off-axis decrease. That said, it's all supposition and hence the request for feedback from people who've heard the various speakers.
Zydeco
-
I, too, have been thinking about getting a pair of the Abbey speakers in an effort to address room interaction issues in my small(ish) room. Another speaker that seems to have a similar set of objectives is the JBL LSR6332 (http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/general/Product.aspx?PId=26&MId=5). Is this correct? And has anyone had the chance to compare these two speakers?
No, the JBL LSR6332 is designed for wide dispersion. You might be interested to read Robert E Greene's thoughts on it here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/regsaudioforum/message/32604
If you want a JBL product with more directivity, you should pick one with a narrower coverage pattern horn/waveguide (either Bi-Radial or Progressive Transition).
Different horses for different courses.
[edit] I should add that the JBL LSR6332 does seem to be a spectacular embodiment of all that is held to be positive in Floyd Toole's book "Sound Reproduction." It's used in the Harman reference listening room.
-
Good idea but I'd guess that the nearest pair is somewhere between 3,500 to 10,000 miles from home as I'm in South Western Australia.
Zydeco
Would a flight to listen to Dr. Geddes or one of our systems be out of the question? When mine is up and running you're more then welcome to come hear mine but at that point you might as well go to the Doctors.
-
Woot, shipping notice on my Nathan today...can't wait to have the center channel up and running.
-
Woot, shipping notice on my Nathan today...can't wait to have the center channel up and running.
You lucky dog you.
-
Woot, shipping notice on my Nathan today...can't wait to have the center channel up and running.
...oh man, I'd be toast right about now after reading this post...hang in Jason!!!!!!! Everyday they get a little closer..
-
...oh man, I'd be toast right about now after reading this post...hang in Jason!!!!!!! Everyday they get a little closer..
:lol:
-
Just a quick update on the 3 month anniversary.
The snow in the mid west has slowed down parts being delivered to complete the Abbeys so it will be at least another week now. :(
I've been told that good things come to those who wait. :green: So, I'm almost patiently waiting. :thumb:
-
Sorry to hear about the delay, im going stir crazy just having to wait 2 weeks for my new dac. :duh:
-
Sorry to hear about the delay, im going stir crazy just having to wait 2 weeks for my new dac. :duh:
No worries. There are much worse things to be waiting for...I'm cool. 8)
-
Well, as long as there are no snags today, the Abbeys and subs are shipping today. I'll update when I have the tracking info. :thumb:
-
Shipping info just arrived in my inbox. I can't believe it!!!!!
-
Shipping info just arrived in my inbox. I can't believe it!!!!!
Can you post the tracking #s so that we might follow the progress to your doorstep?
-Jim
-
Can you post the tracking #s so that we might follow the progress to your doorstep?
-Jim
:rotflmao:
-
Yes please list all the stops it makes
arrived at xxxx
we are on the edge of our seats
-
Shipping info just arrived in my inbox. I can't believe it!!!!!
Congrats!
My Nathan arrived today as well. Got it put all back together (didn't ship the woofer or back panel back) and it's breaking in now. Can't wait to fire up some movie scenes tongiht :drool:
-
Yes please list all the stops it makes
arrived at xxxx
we are on the edge of our seats
If you don't care then don't look. It's really that simple.
-
I would note that this thread has less and less to do with "GedLee Abbey's Feedback Wanted!" as the pages go on. I've tried to be patient waiting for Jason to get his speakers and comment on their sound, which would be back on topic. If the self serving posts and backbitting continue I will be forced to lock the thread. Thanks for your cooperation.
-
GedLee Bandpass Subs
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=42545)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=42546)
-
Sorry but what is the purpose of a band pass sub, is that the only driver exposure is those small holes?
-
GedLee Abbey 12A
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=42549)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=42553)
The walls are not red as they appear... :o
-
Sorry but what is the purpose of a band pass sub, is that the only driver exposure is those small holes?
Yes, the driver's only exposure to the outside world is through the ports. A well designed bandpass sub can be a good thing because it only has acoustic output in a certain band. This is advantageous because it acoustically filters higher-order harmonics (non-linear distortion) that a conventional design using only an electronic crossover cannot do. Decreasing the non-linear distortion also decreases the localizability of the sub.
-
Nice explanation of the bandpass subs, and spot on too! The speakers look just great Jason!!
Dan
-
Those look really great on those stands!
-
Those look really great on those stands!
Thanks!
-
Congrats Jason!
I look forward to reading your thoughts after you spend some time with the setup.
BTW, how big is your room?
George
-
Congratulatons Jason. I hope they are everything you expect. Looking forward to your feedback.
Best,
Ed
-
I look forward to reading your thoughts after you spend some time with the setup.
The heck with that, we want to know how they sound NOW! You can refine your review later and all, but initial impressions are everything in my book. Everyone understands set up and break in tidy up the SQ, but nothing like that first burst of sound to color subsequent opinion.
-
Maybe he hasn't "come up for air" yet, I know when I brought mine home and set them up and turned on the tunes, I sat and listened for about 10 hours straight. So yes Jason what are your initial impressions???? :D
-
+++1 on how they sound now. I am dying to get the feedback and views
come on Jason....spill the beans
-
GedLee Abbey 12A
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=42549)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=42553)
The walls are not red as they appear... :o
Very nice....congrats on your new arrivals..... :beer:
Wave guides rule !! :rock:
-
A few thoughts:
My 300wpc Class A amps definitely have enough power. :lol:
C-L-A-R-I-T-Y
I don't ever plan on building a speaker again. :duh:
I'm looking forward to having all four subs dialed in this Saturday...
Until then, turn it up! :dance:
-
jtwrace, How about giving your impressions of the fit and finish of the speakers?
-
Jason, man I'm glad you finally got them in! They do look great on those stands if I do say so my self :green: if you ever have a few minutes I'd like to stop by and get a demo from you and the old adage usually holds true " That good things come to those who wait"! Congrats buddy. Randall Kepley
-
So, do you like them ? How did the sub setup work out ? Curious minds need to know.
charles
-
Jason
dont go silent!!!! dying to hear your impressions of the Abbeys. I will be buying speakers soon and would value your impressions from the last few weeks :thumb:
PS they look really nice and I love the stands
-
Jason
dont go silent!!!!
He may have injured himself with 95dB speakers and 300W/channel amplification !
Steve
-
What a nice way to go! or perhaps he can't make time for the computer as there are better things to do .....like listen to music!
-
He's had his modulations suppressed.
-
Thanks for all the interest. :thumb:
I'll get to more in depth response when I have them setup and I think it's time. As all of you know swithching speakers isn't always easy. When you have your room setup and everything just so, making a switch with something as major as a speaker takes a bit of time. I've been measuring like mad (100 +). I think I'm making some major improvements but need more time. The past week has just been nutty as I haven't done anything but work and tinker with the setup.
The one thing I can say is that bad recordings are REALLY noticeable. The Abbeys really make you appreciate a great recording that much more.
I'll slowly start getting to all the questions.
-
Congrats Jason!
I look forward to reading your thoughts after you spend some time with the setup.
BTW, how big is your room?
George
It's an odd room. 12' x 26' behind the listener it opens up to about 16'
-
jtwrace, How about giving your impressions of the fit and finish of the speakers?
They're good. You buy these for the sound not for the aesthetics. I will say that my wife actually likes the way they look. :kiss:
-
So, do you like them ? How did the sub setup work out ? Curious minds need to know.
charles
Yes, I like them! The sub integration is still in process due to my tweaking of the room but it will not be an issue. I will have a flat LFR to 15 Hz.
-
Jason
dont go silent!!!! dying to hear your impressions of the Abbeys. I will be buying speakers soon and would value your impressions from the last few weeks :thumb:
PS they look really nice and I love the stands
Only silent as I haven't had much to report...I'm serious when I said above I've taken 100+ measurements. HOLMImpulse and I have an incredible relationship now.
My plan is to get over this big hump and then I can do little things here and there but the first setup is always big for me. Throw in change and my retentiveness and this is what you get. :duh:
-
He may have injured himself with 95dB speakers and 300W/channel amplification !
Steve
There is no doubt that I could do some serious damage to my ears if I'm not careful. The one crazy thing about the Abbeys is the volume. Since they will keep playing as loud as you can take it the volume is something that I've been paying attention to very carefully. There is absolutely no distortion whatsoever with high volume. The room becomes the issue.
-
Jason, man I'm glad you finally got them in! They do look great on those stands if I do say so my self :green: if you ever have a few minutes I'd like to stop by and get a demo from you and the old adage usually holds true " That good things come to those who wait"! Congrats buddy. Randall Kepley
When they're done, you are most certainly welcome to have a listen.
Yes, the Dr. Geddes designed stands that you made are awesome! :thumb:
-
If anyone cares, when I'm closer to having the setup complete I'll post my in room FR with pictures of the setup.
-
There is no doubt that I could do some serious damage to my ears if I'm not careful. The one crazy thing about the Abbeys is the volume. Since they will keep playing as loud as you can take it the volume is something that I've been paying attention to very carefully. There is absolutely no distortion whatsoever with high volume. The room becomes the issue.
I keep a RS SPL meter on my table full time, just to make sure I don't overdo it. Occasionally I'll look and am kind of shocked. They enable the volume to go to at least 11, maybe 12 if you're inclined :green:
-
I keep a RS SPL meter on my table full time, just to make sure I don't overdo it. Occasionally I'll look and am kind of shocked. They enable the volume to go to at least 11, maybe 12 if you're inclined :green:
That's to much work! I put a piece of fine-line tape on the knob to set the max on my buffer. Now I know that anything past vertical is to loud to keep healthy ears.
-
Yes, I like them! The sub integration is still in process due to my tweaking of the room but it will not be an issue. I will have a flat LFR to 15 Hz.
Cool 8), :thumb:I was hoping that was the result as we did not hear from you. Enjoy every moment. :green:
charles
-
Cool 8), :thumb:I was hoping that was the result as we did not hear from you. Enjoy every moment. :green:
charles
Thanks! I'm enjoying almost every moment...I'm learning a TON which is awesome. In fact, this was worth it just for the small education I've gotten. OTOH, it's been frustrating at times but I can actually see it coming to an end at some point. :green: I've decided that I like listening more then tinkering.
-
I've decided that I like listening more then tinkering.
Amen to that!
George
-
Are they in your house Jason?? Sorry, I have been kinda laid up...is it soup yet!!
-
Are they in your house Jason?? Sorry, I have been kinda laid up...is it soup yet!!
Welcome back Ed!
See pics here http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=86403.msg903233#msg903233
-
Thanks JASON!!! and CONGRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They look incredible, and I bet sound even better...Jason I'm not sure your a Radiohead fan or not but if so the new CD-hi rez release they have will sound incredible...I can hear it already!!!
PM me and I'll fill you in...
-
Thanks JASON!!! and CONGRATS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They look incredible, and I bet sound even better...Jason I'm not sure your a Radiohead fan or not but if so the new CD-hi rez release they have will sound incredible...I can hear it already!!!
PM me and I'll fill you in...
Hi-rez Radiohead release??? Didn't know that was available - where can that be gotten?
George
-
Here ya go George:
http://thekingoflimbs.com/
-
Made a lot of progress with sub integration tonight. Tomorrow night are some more measurements and next week is some more room tuning. Then some more measurments.
Tonight is the best it has sounded by far! It's actually pretty freakin' awesome!
-
So what kinds of things are you doing to "tune" your room?
-
So what kinds of things are you doing to "tune" your room?
Absorption, Diffusion, Seating position...
-
Absorption, Diffusion, Seating position...
Shoot me some graphs to my regular e-mail account when you have time...
Anand.
-
Shoot me some graphs to my regular e-mail account when you have time...
Anand.
Sent.
-
Well, I made another step in sound today. I tweaked with the Phase and delay of the subs.
The system is sound really good! :drool:
The best I've ever had in my room regardless of price. Just awesome!
-
Dude I may just throw my walker in the car and travel your way someday to hear these babies. I bet with your knowledge you got it sounding so good I'd probably wet myself...LOL. My Dad is 93 and lives in Montgomery so maybe I travel by your crib on the way sometime next summer.....i wanna hear what good sounds like to you.
Jason enjoy them, play, place, add, subtract, its the fun of this whole deal...
-
Dude I may just throw my walker in the car and travel your way someday to hear these babies. I bet with your knowledge you got it sounding so good I'd probably wet myself...LOL. My Dad is 93 and lives in Montgomery so maybe I travel by your crib on the way sometime next summer.....i wanna hear what good sounds like to you.
Jason enjoy them, play, place, add, subtract, its the fun of this whole deal...
Just let me know....
-
Jtwrace
What does your current system consist of? What did the abbeys replace?
-
Jtwrace
What does your current system consist of? What did the abbeys replace?
Your question was answered here: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=86403.msg878932#msg878932
-
Right before the Abbeys I had a custom 3 way. Ribbon tweeter, Accuton Mid and Scan Speak woofer.
Sounds like a take on the Salk soundscape.....if you don't mind, could you share a brief history of the speakers you have owned and how long?
-
Sounds like a take on the Salk soundscape.....if you don't mind, could you share a brief history of the speakers you have owned and how long?
Actually the SS would've been a take on mine as it was much sooner then the SS. :wink:
Martin Logans for 10 years then a pair of Final Electrostats, custom 3 way and GedLee.
-
Your question was answered here: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=86403.msg878932#msg878932
Yes, was curious if anything other than your speaker/woofers had changed.
Thanks.
-
Yes, was curious if anything other than your speaker/woofers had changed.
Thanks.
Along with the Abbeys?
-
Yes, along with or since. Looks like just the dcx and subs. Awesome gear btw. :thumb:
-
Yes, along with or since. Looks like just the dcx and subs. Awesome gear btw. :thumb:
I added the Abbeys with stands, 2 GedLee bandpass subs, Samson pro audio amp for bandpass subs and the DCX to replace my loved Ashly 3.24 because it didn't have a phase adjustment (which I didn't need). :duh:
Oh, and a bunch more music. I uploaded 80 cd's since Friday night. :thumb:
-
Hi Jason. This is one of the few threads I've found with Geddes speakers. I have an order too.
Do you mind sharing your frequency response? And perhaps also an ETC or impulsresponse zoomed in at the first 20-30ms?
-
Hi Jason. This is one of the few threads I've found with Geddes speakers. I have an order too.
Do you mind sharing your frequency response? And perhaps also an ETC or impulsresponse zoomed in at the first 20-30ms?
Welcome to A.C.!
There are others GedLee threads here on A.C. but they're just older.
Here is my in room FR with Impulse as you requested. This is with the system as I would listen with the mic at 40" off the ground centered to the waveguide and mic at 0* (not tilted up or down) at the listening position. As you can see this is a raw response. Also very important to point out that I'm NOT using any EQ whatsoever.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=43485)
This is as real as it gets! I'm currently working on getting some of the reflections tamed as seen in the impulse. This is by far the best overall measurement I've ever had in my room.
Test Equipment Used:
Compaq Computer Running Windows 7
HOLMImpulse
Behringer ECM8000 (Cross Spectrum Calibrated)
M-Audio MobilePre
Mic Boom
Standard XLR Cable for Mic
Standard RCA Cables from output of M-Audio with 1/4" adapter
Smoothed Response:
1/6
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=43490)
1/3
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=43491)
-
Here are some more measurements.
The first one is from Dr. Geddes as he measures every speaker that he makes.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=43547)
These are the pictures of the setup of me measuring the pictures below.
Center of Waveguide at 1m
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=43548)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=43549)
Center of woofer 6" back from cone
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=43550)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=43551)
-
As someone who's traveled a similar path, I have to say those are awesome results! Many people might look at that and say to themselves "Well, the anechoic graphs I see on review sites are a lot smoother than that!". What they don't realize is that the graphs they see are extremely smoothed (usually 1/3rd octave), and that the room makes a massive change in sound (especially below 500hz). To get results like you have gotten here takes a lot of time and effort, the right know-how, and the right tools.
Nice job!
-
I like the raw data as well, but my understanding is that 1/3 octave smoothing approximates the actual frequency response resolution that most people are able to distinguish from mid-bass region and higher. 1/6 octave smoothing is apparently more representative for low frequencies. When not looking at the raw data, I tend to use 1/6 octave smoothing for everything just for simplicity.
-
I like the raw data as well, but my understanding is that 1/3 octave smoothing approximates the actual frequency response resolution that most people are able to distinguish from mid-bass region and higher. 1/6 octave smoothing is apparently more representative for low frequencies. When not looking at the raw data, I tend to use 1/6 octave smoothing for everything just for simplicity.
I've added (page 42) the smoothed response just for you. :wink:
-
Amazing results, indeed!
-
Excellent results, it seems all your hard work has paid off and then some. Having gotten there without the use of EQ is all the more impressive. Also, the measurements at the low end are indeed a testament to the multi-sub approach. But equally eye opening is the response from the low mids on up.
Would you care to elaborate a bit on how you got to this point? Is it moving the mains around, playing with toe-in angles, trying out different positions of acoustic panels (if any)? I know it was mostly perspiration that got you here, but some account of the inspiration part would be appreciated.
-
WOW! so how does it sound? :thumb:
-
Excellent results, it seems all your hard work has paid off and then some. Having gotten there without the use of EQ is all the more impressive. Also, the measurements at the low end are indeed a testament to the multi-sub approach. But equally eye opening is the response from the low mids on up.
Would you care to elaborate a bit on how you got to this point? Is it moving the mains around, playing with toe-in angles, trying out different positions of acoustic panels (if any)? I know it was mostly perspiration that got you here, but some account of the inspiration part would be appreciated.
The bottom end is by far the best I've ever heard. It's that good! I'm really loving the sound now. It was a very tough road to get to this point but I'm really close. I'm going to try a couple more things but we'll see. If it didn't get any better I'd still be happy.
It sounds awesome!
The measurement process although is "easy" it takes a lot of time and most importantly patience. It's just non stop measuring and pressing and twisting buttons. :duh:
-
The bottom end is by far the best I've ever heard. It's that good! I'm really loving the sound now. It was a very tough road to get to this point but I'm really close. I'm going to try a couple more things but we'll see. If it didn't get any better I'd still be happy.
It sounds awesome!
The measurement process although is "easy" it takes a lot of time and most importantly patience. It's just non stop measuring and pressing and twisting buttons. :duh:
Very nice! :thumb: These are curves that any one would be happy with in any room. The LF response is just awesome as measured. I'm sure that there is plenty of body there. The mids through the highs are very, very good, too.
My compliments.
Dave
-
I've just added some more measurement data on page 42.
Here is the direct link: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=86403.msg913124#msg913124
-
I've just added some more measurement data on page 42.
Here is the direct link: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=86403.msg913124#msg913124
Jason, a couple of observations pursuant to our continuing discussion. The minor suckouts that you see in the listening position shots from 400-500 and 600-700 are comb filtering effects, for sure. The 600-700 dip corresponds and is related to the little suckout an octave above that from 1.2K to 1.4K. These are more than likely path length related with an approximate WL discrepancy of 6" either side of the 550Hz bump.
Knowing your attention to detail, I'm sure that you have absorbent panels at the first reflection point on the side walls so I'm wondering if the minor bump isn't floor bounce. The carpet and pad will help above about 1K or so, but you need about a 1/6 WL absorbent depth to really be effective. I don't "think" (much at all really, but I'm trying here) that the 550Hz is a ceiling reflection. Then again, I've been wrong before. I'm still trying to wrap my head around this one. :scratch:
Do you have any pictures of the side walls and the ceiling?
Hmmmmmmm... still thinking :scratch: :duh: Ouch!
Overall the room response is exemplary. You are within +/-5dB which is extremely hard to do - great job! :thumb:
Dave
-
Knowing your attention to detail, I'm sure that you have absorbent panels at the first reflection point on the side walls
Do you have any pictures of the side walls and the ceiling?
Dave
This will show you guys that CD Speakers work.
This is my actual listening room...this CAD drawing was done before I had two subs but it should give you an idea.
It's far from the ideal dedicated room but it's what I got. :oops:
GIK Bass Elite in the front corners, GIK 242 on the front wall and GIK 242 on the angled ceiling slightly forward of the 1st reflection point. That's it!
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=43562)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=43563)
-
Couldn't be happier for ya. Enjoy every minute it was a major investment that paid off in spades. Now, when is the Rave ?
charles
-
Couldn't be happier for ya. Enjoy every minute it was a major investment that paid off in spades. Now, when is the Rave ?
charles
Thanks! I have a rave at least twice a week. :thumb:
I tell you what, I"m sitting here in awe. These speakers are just fantastic. I'm enjoying the music. It's just here!!!
-
Thanks! I have a rave at least twice a week. :thumb:
I tell you what, I"m sitting here in awe. These speakers are just fantastic. I'm enjoying the music. It's just here!!!
There is nothing better than that kind of total immersion, huh? When we transtion from the "you are there" experience to the "they are here" thing is what the quest is all about, my friend. Sounds like you scored BIG! Awesome. :thumb:
Dave
-
Thanks! I have a rave at least twice a week. :thumb:
I tell you what, I"m sitting here in awe. These speakers are just fantastic. I'm enjoying the music. It's just here!!!
Congrats Jason!
I know the feeling you are describing.
George
-
Beethoven and Greg Brown just visited for a long time. Odd combo but I'm odd and that's what I requested. :D
-
Thanks for sharing measurements. Took me a while to see it, haven't figured out how to subscribe threads here.......
Don't quite understand what you're speaking about. If you click the "Notify" button on the thread you will be notified on every time there is a new post.
It's a bit difficult to compare to my own since you are using a Holm Impulse. I'm using REW5. Tried to do I measurement here with Holm, but something isn't right.
Well, I"m not using REW so don't ask. :P
Was going to share some printscreens of my measurements, but doesn't seem it's possbile to upload images here. Unless I've overlooked something,
Yes, I'd say you overlooked something. All that is needed is to properly size the image (I use PixResizer which is free) then select the first button on the lef of the second row and browse for the image then select upload. It's very easy. In fact, I find this site the best out of the others that I visit.
Also, if you're going to share your measurements you are probably best of doing that in a new thread of your own.
this forum needs some upgrade....
Actually it's the latest version
When showing impulse response or ETC, you need to measure for each speaker in case you didn't.
I've done much more measurements then I'm showing.
-
Jason,
It seems like you have done an awesome job with your speakers and the measurements. I have the Abbey's on order but I REALLY WORRY that I am not smart enough to do the extensive set-up and calibration that you have done. How critical is it to do all of this? Am I in for a rude awakening in that I will never get great sound out of these unless I do all of this? It is way above my head, I must admit!
Unrelated question now that you have everything settled in- Do you feel that Earl's statement that the speakers are 85% of the equation is accurate? He does not put a whole lot of emphasis on the electronics, as you probably know. How revolutionary are the Abbey speakers?
Cheers,
James
-
now that you have everything settled in-
Cheers,
James
That's the best thing I heard all day...I've just changed some sub locations so I'm getting ready for some more fun!
-
Jason,
It seems like you have done an awesome job with your speakers and the measurements. I have the Abbey's on order but I REALLY WORRY that I am not smart enough to do the extensive set-up and calibration that you have done. How critical is it to do all of this? Am I in for a rude awakening in that I will never get great sound out of these unless I do all of this? It is way above my head, I must admit!
Unrelated question now that you have everything settled in- Do you feel that Earl's statement that the speakers are 85% of the equation is accurate? He does not put a whole lot of emphasis on the electronics, as you probably know. How revolutionary are the Abbey speakers?
Cheers,
James
It will take some time and patience to get it right. EVERY speaker does though if you want to get it "right". There is no such thing as plop them in the room and they'll be set. Once you start to measure and know the truth, the chase is on!
-
Rave,
Are you the same Ian that bought the 12A baffles from Earl and had them shipped over to England and finished them yourself??
Dan
No Dan that would be me :-) The cabinets are finished and painted / lacquered. I'll post some pics at some point. The crossovers are next, just deciding how exotic to go when choosing the components. (I'd welcome comments on this - I read somewhere that Anand seriously upgraded the XOs - Anand?)
I have a DCX 2496 for the subs, which will be 4 IBs set in the ceiling and wall of an adjoining room.
As regards amps I have a pair of F4s but am seriously considering a J2 as everyone says its the best First Watt yet. Anyone heard a J2 driving the Abbeys? TomS I've seen your comments on the F5.
-
Hi Studley,
Glad to hear you are making serious progress, put some pics up when you get everything set.
Dan
-
No Dan that would be me :-) The cabinets are finished and painted / lacquered. I'll post some pics at some point. The crossovers are next, just deciding how exotic to go when choosing the components. (I'd welcome comments on this - I read somewhere that Anand seriously upgraded the XOs - Anand?)
See here. (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=86403.msg847616#msg847616) I'm still sticking with my story. The Abbey stock is a phenomenal speaker. The Abbey with the upgraded crossover (in my case Duelund caps/resistors, Mundorf Supreme Caps and North Creek Inductors in specific areas) amounted to about a 20% difference in improvement (Yeah, that's mucho expensive but I got everything at about 30% off a good 1.5 years ago). Even if you didn't upgrade anything in the Abbey, it is thoroughly enjoyable. Many audiophiles' crappy rooms I am sure swamp out the differences or maybe...there really isn't a difference! I wouldn't argue with you if you said that you would rather spend the money on more vinyl or downloads for your music server. In fact, I'm curious about the owners who DIDN'T throw money at it like I did and see if they perceived any differences at all.
My advice? Listen to it stock first. Make sure your entire system with subs is fully optimized. And then, if you are truly wanting to dump $$$...go ahead. I think many Abbey owners are so caught up with the listening experience that they throw their hat in and say forget it, there is really no need, Solen warts and all.
Cheers,
Anand.
-
... My advice? Listen to it stock first. Make sure your entire system with subs is fully optimized. And then, if you are truly wanting to dump $$$...go ahead.
I agree 110%
-
I've enjoyed reading all the great feedback, but still don't have a handle on how far from the backwall the Abbeys must/should be....and how critical. I have maybe 22"before it becomes an issue. Thoughts?
-
I've enjoyed reading all the great feedback, but still don't have a handle on how far from the backwall the Abbeys must/should be....and how critical. I have maybe 22"before it becomes an issue. Thoughts?
Certainly being out further will be a benefit. What's the size of your room and how will they fit? Can you take a picture or post a drawing?
-
I've enjoyed reading all the great feedback, but still don't have a handle on how far from the backwall the Abbeys must/should be....and how critical. I have maybe 22"before it becomes an issue. Thoughts?
That shouldn't be too much of an issue IMHO. Any speaker will do better away from the wall, but the Abbeys are sealed and sound pretty darn good the times I've had them close to my wall.
-
Jason now that you've had some time with them were they worth the wait? and I mean that honestly not trying to smart or anything I just noticed the thread again and was wondering how your liking them??
an aside--I got some Sleek Audio SA-1 IEM's...now I understand..LOL
-
Jason now that you've had some time with them were they worth the wait? and I mean that honestly not trying to smart or anything I just noticed the thread again and was wondering how your liking them??
an aside--I got some Sleek Audio SA-1 IEM's...now I understand..LOL
You're kidding right?
-
Nope--I haven't read the whole thread, did I miss something??
-
Nope--I haven't read the whole thread, did I miss something??
OK. I really like them. The wall of sound is truly amazing. :thumb: It takes time and effort to get it all setup...
So yes, enjoying them very much! If I wasn't, they would be listed.
-
Sorry guys about my previous comments. There's was a line I couldn't see for some reason.
About your measurements. I think they look very good over all. They're far from outstanding. You do have a difference of about 27 dB in the frequency response. I know that's unsmoothed and that your room isn't heavily treated. I've seen unsmoothed graphs with only 5 dB of deviation, but that's been rooms with large amounts of treatment. Very difficult to get something like that in a living room.
The impulse response doesn't tell me very much, though it looks good from what I can see. I'm not used to read the graph in Holm Impulse. An ETC graph shows reflections a more readible way, but it's not important. The spike at about 5ms and 7ms is something you can probably easily address.
I'ver ordered a pair Abbey, Harpers and two bandpass subs myself. Looking forward to it.
-
I've enjoyed reading all the great feedback, but still don't have a handle on how far from the backwall the Abbeys must/should be....and how critical. I have maybe 22"before it becomes an issue. Thoughts?
Per your request, here is my room. I have an ADS Sat7 Sub12 setup from 1992(with Frogdesign stands). I trying to see if upgrading is worth it and feasible. I'm thinking about Abbeys or the Emerald Physics C3, and keeping my sub. The sub's specs are 15--100Hz, < 1% THD, 350 watt amp with 12" cone. I have no idea if it would be called a "quick" sub. I do love its volume control. My listening chair is about 10' from equipment. I don't want to be bothered by having to move the speakers each time I listen. Thanks. :D :D
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=44624)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=44625)
-
Sorry guys about my previous comments. There's was a line a couldn't see for some reason.
About your measurements. I think they look very good over all. They're far from outstanding. You do have a difference of about 27 dB in the frequency response. I know that's unsmoothed and that your room isn't heavily treated. I've seen unsmoothed graphs with only 5 dB of deviation, but that's been rooms with large amounts of treatment. Very difficult to get something like that in a living room.
The impulse response doesn't tell me very much, though it looks good from what I can see. I'm not used to read the graph in Holm Impulse. An ETC graph shows reflections a more readible way, but it's not important. The spike at about 5ms and 7ms is something you can probably easily address.
I'ver ordered a pair Abbey, Harpers and two bandpass subs myself. Looking forward to it.
Great! I look forward to your whole thread with measurements and learning what I did wrong. :thumb:
-
Per your request, here is my room. I have an ADS Sat7 Sub12 setup from 1992(with Frogdesign stands). I trying to see if upgrading is worth it and feasible. I'm thinking about Abbeys or the Emerald Physics C3, and keeping my sub. The sub's specs are 15--100Hz, < 1% THD, 350 watt amp with 12" cone. I have no idea if it would be called a "quick" sub. I do love its volume control. My listening chair is about 10' from equipment. I don't want to be bothered by having to move the speakers each time I listen. Thanks. :D :D
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=44624)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=44625)
It's going to be tight in there with three subs. I think it will work but obviously will not give the max potential. I have my speakers 51" from the front wall and think that 3' is about the least that I'd go. If you were able and willing to bring them to front of the stand, you might be getting somewhere IMO.
-
Great! I look forward to your whole thread with measurements and learning what I did wrong. :thumb:
Not saying you did something wrong. Just stating that there are rooms for improvements.
-
I always think about Geddy Lee when I see this thread on the home page.
:D
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=44676)
-
Not saying you did something wrong. Just stating that there are rooms fro improvements.
I suppose you have measurements for your room, so are you going to post them? I'm always willing to learn. I think that every day that passes without a new nugget of wisdom is a bad day. 8)
Dave
-
I suppose you have measurements for your room, so are you going to post them? I'm always willing to learn. I think that every day that passes without a new nugget of wisdom is a bad day. 8)
Dave
jtwrace told me not to and I will respect that. And what's the point?
Seems like people are getting upset because I'm not following the stream and saying the measurements are great. It all depends what it's compared to. Compared to many typical box speakers in the marked, they measure very good. Compared to better speakers, rooms with more treatment, or bigger rooms, the measurements are more average. There are also many ways to show measurements. In Holm Impluse everything is zoomed out. Show the same measurement in REW and it will look very different.
-
jtwrace told me not to and I will respect that.
Wrong! Read my post above. It cleary says that I look forward to your posting a new thread about your setup. :duh:
And what's the point?
Seems like people are getting upset because I'm not following the stream and saying the measurements are great. It all depends what it's compared to. Compared to many typical box speakers in the marked, they measure very good. Compared to better speakers, rooms with more treatment, or bigger rooms, the measurements are more average.
No not upset at all. In fact, you are entitled to your opionions and thoughts as anyone is on this site. "Better" speakers is subjective.
There are also many ways to show measurements. In Holm Impluse everything is zoomed out. Show the same measurement in REW and it will look very different.
You're kidding me right? Do you not realize that there is scaling on the X and Y axis? It doesn't make a difference whatsoever. Look at the scaling and if it's the same as any other program it doesn't make a difference.
Data is Data
When do your Abbeys, Harpers and subs arrive? Why are buying Abbeys if you think there are better speakers?
-
Wrong! Read my post above. It cleary says that I look forward to your posting a new thread about your setup. :duh:
Exactly. In another thread.
No not upset at all. In fact, you are entitled to your opionions and thoughts as anyone is on this site. "Better" speakers is subjective.
You're kidding me right? Do you not realize that there is scaling on the X and Y axis? It doesn't make a difference whatsoever. Look at the scaling and if it's the same as any other program it doesn't make a difference.
Data is Data
With the standards they do look different. Of course, the measurements are the same. Something that's zoomed out compared to something that gives a closer look, will seem different for the eye. Many don't bother to actually look at the dB difference. Like previously mentioned, you have a quite large deviation (everything is relative though) and you have two rather big cancellations/dips plus the extra energy at 2,5k. There's definetly room for some improvement. But that's good though. That means your system can potentially sound even better then what is does today. :)
When do your Abbeys, Harpers and subs arrive? Why are buying Abbeys if you think there are better speakers?
Harpers will arrive in March/May. Not sure about the subs. Abbey will not get here until the summer.
I believe they are outstanding speakers in their price range. I don't know any other speakers that has the same performance for that price. I can't afford speakers that cost many times more and I'm far from sure that they would sound much better. The multiple subwoofer approach also seem very logical to me.
-
Harpers will arrive in March/May. Not sure about the subs. Abbey will not get here until the summer.
I believe they are outstanding speakers in their price range. I don't know any other speakers that has the same performance for that price. I can't afford speakers that cost many times more and I'm far from sure that they would sound much better. The multiple subwoofer approach also seem very logical to me.
You are keeping your standards nice and high which is exactly what you should be doing. When you get your Abbeys, irrespective of measurements, your standards will rise even higher. And suddenly, you wonder why that 'other' loudspeaker is $40K.
Be that as it may, an apples to apples comparison is what is needed. Take the Abbeys in a well designed room, room treatments, etc...and you'll have a superb response curve. Hopefully I'll be able to demonstrate that in my new audio/HT room by the end of the year.
My hats off to Jason for sticking his head out and divulging the measurements that he has for all critical eyes to see/discuss/dissect/ponder about.
Best,
Anand.
-
...
My hats off to Jason for sticking his head out and divulging the measurements that he has for all critical eyes to see/discuss/dissect/ponder about.
...
+1. And not to mention the probably hundreds of plots he did on both HOLM and REW that you didn't even see. It is very tedious work but it tells you just how much the room is actually doing (yes, a lot).
Tom
-
Thanks guys!
Yes, I've done hundreds of measurements now. I'm on my third setup since moving the subs around and this is the best yet. HolmImpulse has some excellent features that REW doesn't. If Holm continues to develop that tool it will truly be the most advanced imo.
Being able to check and set the phase and delay on each sub has been invaluable. It's sounding the best it has since getting them in my room.
Orso, I encourage you to start a thread on your setup, room and effort. Not only will GedLee owners learn something but everyone that decides to measure and dig deeper into proper room setup will. I don't understand why more people don't take the time to measure and at least see what they have just out of curiosity. With a bit of time and some tweaking they can make a huge improvement.
-
Just in case you haven't seen, the prices are going up 10% on 6/1/11. Get on the list now if you're thinking about it.
http://www.gedlee.com/Loudspeakers.htm
-
Has anyone else taken delivery of their GedLee speakers lately?
-
I orderd some in November and it is sounding like I might get them in May. I'm not sure I would have gone this route had I known it was going to take this long.
-
I orderd some in November and it is sounding like I might get them in May. I'm not sure I would have gone this route had I known it was going to take this long.
Have you heard a GedLee setup?
-
No, I have not. I took a leap of faith. I hope they are worth the wait.
-
I orderd some in November and it is sounding like I might get them in May. I'm not sure I would have gone this route had I known it was going to take this long.
Wow! Six months of waiting with no set delivery date in sight. IMO this is poor business practice. If he has so much business, he should hire help rather than making his customers wait so long.
-Roy
-
No, I have not. I took a leap of faith. I hope they are worth the wait.
Well, I'm in love with them. I really couldn't be happier.
What are you getting? Abbeys? Subs?
-
Thanks guys!
Yes, I've done hundreds of measurements now. I'm on my third setup since moving the subs around and this is the best yet. HolmImpulse has some excellent features that REW doesn't. If Holm continues to develop that tool it will truly be the most advanced imo.
Being able to check and set the phase and delay on each sub has been invaluable. It's sounding the best it has since getting them in my room.
Orso, I encourage you to start a thread on your setup, room and effort. Not only will GedLee owners learn something but everyone that decides to measure and dig deeper into proper room setup will. I don't understand why more people don't take the time to measure and at least see what they have just out of curiosity. With a bit of time and some tweaking they can make a huge improvement.
Excellent advice especially the measurements. Probably the most affective tool we have that is underused. Most of us would save on tweaks if the room was measured and treated accordingly. The best move we ever made.
charles
-
Wow! Six months of waiting with no set delivery date in sight. IMO this is poor business practice. If he has so much business, he should hire help rather than making his customers wait so long.
-Roy
I only waited three! :thumb:
Yes, six months is a long time but it's worth it IMO.
-
Wow! Six months of waiting with no set delivery date in sight. IMO this is poor business practice. If he has so much business, he should hire help rather than making his customers wait so long.
-Roy
Roy, this is easy to say and very hard to do when you are a small businessman for many reasons.
A lot of business choices revolve around 3 criteria: market size (projected sales); quality desired; finally, selling price/profit. It is hard to juggle these three. In a boutique audio business, the market is unstable and sales fluctuate wildly. It is hard to pay bills and eat when there are no sales. Quality is probably the hardest of the three when a peraon is hired to do a particular job in a field that is new to them. How many professional cabinet makers proficient in polyurethane construction do you know? The third is very tricky. People (myself included) want the higest quality at the lowest price possible. If Dr. Geddes was charging for the value of his speakers vs. the current marketplace they would easily be double the price.
I can only speak for myself when it comes to this part - My business runs from no orders to unbelieveably backordered at the drop of a hat. I provide the higest value /dollar in my field that is possible while maintaining the highest quality (for an ugly black box) that I can. People buy my products for what they do, not how they look. I have run the numbers. If I hired a person to help my (legally, which is the ONLY way I would do it) my price would need to triple in order to make the same living that I am now. This is something that I cannot and would not do. Besides, when business slowed down, I would have to lay the person off and provide unemployment compensation benefits through an insurance plan. If a person is hurt on the job who do you think pays? In the coming economic climate I would have to provide healthcare. Teaching someone how to do something is a long process. Even then there is no guarantee of product quality from another persons' hand. You should try to hire competent help at what a job is worth not what the employee wants to be paid. My zoning allows me to work out of my residence as long as I do not have employees. I cannot afford to do what I do for the price I get while maintaining a manufacturing plant. Then there is security that must be dealt with as well as all of the OSHA requirements.
It is easy to judge anothers' performance in any particular field of endeavor. In our industry something is either worth the investment, in the context of dollars and time involved), or it isn't. That is up to the buyer not necessarily the spectator IME.
My $1.98
Dave
-
Roy, this is easy to say and very hard to do when you are a small businessman for many reasons.
A lot of business choices revolve around 3 criteria: market size (projected sales); quality desired; finally, selling price/profit. It is hard to juggle these three. In a boutique audio business, the market is unstable and sales fluctuate wildly. It is hard to pay bills and eat when there are no sales. Quality is probably the hardest of the three when a peraon is hired to do a particular job in a field that is new to them. How many professional cabinet makers proficient in polyurethane construction do you know? The third is very tricky. People (myself included) want the higest quality at the lowest price possible. If Dr. Geddes was charging for the value of his speakers vs. the current marketplace they would easily be double the price.
I can only speak for myself when it comes to this part - My business runs from no orders to unbelieveably backordered at the drop of a hat. I provide the higest value /dollar in my field that is possible while maintaining the highest quality (for an ugly black box) that I can. People buy my products for what they do, not how they look. I have run the numbers. If I hired a person to help my (legally, which is the ONLY way I would do it) my price would need to triple in order to make the same living that I am now. This is something that I cannot and would not do. Besides, when business slowed down, I would have to lay the person off and provide unemployment compensation benefits through an insurance plan. If a person is hurt on the job who do you think pays? In the coming economic climate I would have to provide healthcare. Teaching someone how to do something is a long process. Even then there is no guarantee of product quality from another persons' hand. You should try to hire competent help at what a job is worth not what the employee wants to be paid. My zoning allows me to work out of my residence as long as I do not have employees. I cannot afford to do what I do for the price I get while maintaining a manufacturing plant. Then there is security that must be dealt with as well as all of the OSHA requirements.
It is easy to judge anothers' performance in any particular field of endeavor. In our industry something is either worth the investment, in the context of dollars and time involved), or it isn't. That is up to the buyer not necessarily the spectator IME.
My $1.98
Dave
Not saying you Dave, but this is how fly by nighters operate... just so you know.
-
Not saying you Dave, but this is how fly by nighters operate... just so you know.
There are crooks in every aspect of business. Remember AV123... or Enron? A majority of the high(est) quality, low volume audio retailers are one man operations just like mine. I refuse to source my products (even at 4 times the potential profit) from China. Not gonna do it!
Just so you know, most of the fly by nighters had no clue as to what they were doing to begin with nor the guts to deal with the marketplace extant.
I'm just sayin' >>>>>>>>>>
Dave
-
There are crooks in every aspect of business. Remember AV123... or Enron? A majority of the high(est) quality, low volume audio retailers are one man operations just like mine. I refuse to source my products (even at 4 times the potential profit) from China. Not gonna do it!
Just so you know, most of the fly by nighters had no clue as to what they were doing to begin with nor the guts to deal with the marketplace extant.
I'm just sayin' >>>>>>>>>>
Dave
Just so we were clear that i wasn't talking about you and your point made is a big difference.
-
I would never place an order with a company that requires 1/2 down and has a track record of indeterminate delivery dates. You would think that the delivery date could at least be specified to the month and if not achieved the customer would have the option of canceling the order and the deposit returned. A pair of Abbey kits are now pushing 4 grand. Somehow I get the feeling that he's pushing the price higher and higher till the orders drop off and the waiting period is stretched out to whenever. What happens if he goes under or just shuts down? Do the customers lose their deposits?
I'm sure that they're great speakers but once you get to a certain level other speakers become viable options with great cabinetry to boot.
-Roy
-
I would never place an order with a company that requires 1/2 down and has a track record of indeterminate delivery dates. You would think that the delivery date could at least be specified to the month and if not achieved the customer would have the option of canceling the order and the deposit returned. A pair of Abbey kits are now pushing 4 grand. Somehow I get the feeling that he's pushing the price higher and higher till the orders drop off and the waiting period is stretched out to whenever. What happens if he goes under or just shuts down? Do the customers lose their deposits?
I'm sure that they're great speakers but once you get to a certain level other speakers become viable options with great cabinetry to boot.
-Roy
Well, I do understand your concern. However, I can also say that I've never heard anything like the GedLee system. It's no joke!
If you place an order and get tired of waiting Dr. Geddes will most certainly refund your deposit. I asked before placing mine.
-
Well, I do understand your concern. However, I can also say that I've never heard anything like the GedLee system. It's no joke!
If you place an order and get tired of waiting Dr. Geddes will most certainly refund your deposit. I asked before placing mine.
Agreed. I asked him as well. I assume a 6 month wait whenever I order from him. Some will not want to wait and that's fine, he'll refund.
As for value of the loudspeakers, that's another topic. Roy, The Abbeys fully built are currently $4400. The kits are $3400/pair.
Prices of Geddes speakers (http://gedlee.com/Loudspeakers.htm)
Anand.
-
DBe has it completely right, its a complex business decision made more complex by the fact that making speakers is not my primary business. If I were to charge my consulting rates to make the speakers the prices would sky-rocket. So it all becomes a tradeoff.
There are very good reasons why the delay is so long, very good reasons why I require a deposit, and very good reasons why the timing is a guess, but all that is too complicated to get into now. I fully understand why someone would not want to purchase my products under these conditions, but I think that it should also be understood that others don't have a problem with this. I do loose a lot of sales because of this situation.
The deposits can be withdrawn at any time and you can send the speakers back if you don't like them - neither of these has ever happened.
For complex reasons, there is no real solution to this problem as long as I continue to run the business. I will be trying to sell it so that it can be expanded to better meet the customers expectations and to get me - the major roadblock to expansion - out of the middle of this whole thing. I am caught in the middle of something that I should not be in the middle of.
Just go hire someone!? Its not quite that simple. And I can't build many speakers in China where I am at the moment. Have them built here? No one knows better than I how problematic that is. Its easy to have cheap junk made here its another thing to have world class speakers made.
-
DBe has it completely right, its a complex business decision made more complex by the fact that making speakers is not my primary business. If I were to charge my consulting rates to make the speakers the prices would sky-rocket. So it all becomes a tradeoff.
Just go hire someone!? Its not quite that simple.
Dr. Geddes, you and I both know that having your own small audio business is one of lifes' really over rated little pleasures. I'm in it because I love what I do and the people that I serve - many have become friends. I'm certainly not in it for the $$$. I just finished my taxes and I'm wondering why I keep at this addiction.
If only it were easy to find someone with the same desire to put out the best product possible for slave wages I would hire them in an instant and be a happy man.
I know a lot of people that are in this wacky business individually building the best product possible and there aren't any of them getting rich that I know of. If only. :roll:
Dave
-
Yea, this was all kind of a fluke. There was a business start in Thailand that went bust (a whole other story), but based on that I knew that speakers could be vastly improved with new approaches. So I gave it a try. Well, it worked -- now what!? I think that someone could make a good business from my designs, but I don't think that is me. I'm not a young man and starting a business is a young mans game.
-
Yea, this was all kind of a fluke. There was a business start in Thailand that went bust (a whole other story), but based on that I knew that speakers could be vastly improved with new approaches. So I gave it a try. Well, it worked -- now what!? I think that someone could make a good business from my designs, but I don't think that is me. I'm not a young man and starting a business is a young mans game.
:scratch: Abbey, Nathan, Harper have no interest huh?
-
Well, I'm in love with them. I really couldn't be happier.
What are you getting? Abbeys? Subs?
I'm getting the Abbeys. I considered what ordering from a one man operation might entail before I placed the order so I'm not "ranting" about the waiting period. Just saying I might have considered other options. I also thought of the posibility the business could go south due to any number of reasons or that Earl might get hit by a bus (not yours Dave). I have not ask for or even about a refund so I'm in this for the long haul.
-
The danger of the one man operation has been anticipated and all of the procedures, technique, materials, etc. have been documented. Builds for every speaker have been video taped and "Abbey" is preparing a manual on assembly etc. just in case the "bus" does come along, "someone" can follow up.
But Nathan is only 12 and making speakers is a little out of his league. What is funny is that he is passionate about music, quite a good piano player, but takes excellent sound quality as a given. He doesn't yet understand that what he takes for granted is not all that common. Will he be an engineer, hard to say. he is two grades ahead in math so thats not going to limit him, but he does not seem to have that thirst for "tinkering" that I had at his age. I built a pair of speakers at about his age.
Sometimes the skill of the parent can kill this in the child. My mother-in-law was a great cook, so my wife never bothered to learn. The guy who discocered the prevailing Unified Field Theory had a father who was a well known physicist. He stayed away from physics and got his BS in business. Then in his late 20's he went back to schhool in physics and is now one of the leading theorists in the world. Its funny how we sometimes shun what our parents do.
-
Yawn.
Perhaps this thread should be moved to Industry Ads (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?board=17.0).
-
Yawn.
Perhaps this thread should be moved to Industry Ads (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?board=17.0).
Or perhaps simply locked, or maybe split and locked. I've given wide latitude to this thread because it initially had great value illustrating the shopping, selection, purchase, delivery, and set up of a particular speaker. As it has now descended into an industry ad, unless someone has something new to contribute to the discussion, in the next day a decision will be made.
-
One page of de-railment out of 46 isn't really that big of a deal IMHO so I hope it will stay where it is... I check this thread regularly hoping for more feedback and to see what others think of these speakers relative to their former choices.
Has anyone done the upgrade from the original crossovers to the new ones and can comment on the change in SQ?
-
Or perhaps simply locked, or maybe split and locked. I've given wide latitude to this thread because it initially had great value illustrating the shopping, selection, purchase, delivery, and set up of a particular speaker. As it has now descended into an industry ad, unless someone has something new to contribute to the discussion, in the next day a decision will be made.
I appologize if I was out of line. I thought that I was just answerering some questions that only I could answer.
-
I'm getting the Abbeys. I considered what ordering from a one man operation might entail before I placed the order so I'm not "ranting" about the waiting period. Just saying I might have considered other options. I also thought of the posibility the business could go south due to any number of reasons or that Earl might get hit by a bus (not yours Dave). I have not ask for or even about a refund so I'm in this for the long haul.
Well, if you take the time and effort for proper setup, you'll be VERY happy. I'm still blown away every time I listen to them.
-
One page of de-railment out of 46 isn't really that big of a deal IMHO so I hope it will stay where it is... I check this thread regularly hoping for more feedback and to see what others think of these speakers relative to their former choices.
me too. If it wasn't for this thread and the kind people on A.C. I probably wouldn't of knew about them and listened to them. :thumb:
Has anyone done the upgrade from the original crossovers to the new ones and can comment on the change in SQ?
There are about four guys that have changed components. Maybe some of them will chime in with their experience.
-
I appologize if I was out of line. I thought that I was just answerering some questions that only I could answer.
You've nothing to apologize for, it's just the nature of the beast. If a manufacturer is posting about their product and they are not either a) posting in their own circle, b) posting in Industry Ads, or c) answering a specific question in a general circle they entertain the risk of running afoul of the regulations on this site. You and other manufacturers can of course post to your hearts content about other subjects on other threads, but on a Gedlee Abbey thread you are held to a much higher standard. This is somewhat unfair when you are speaking generally about business models, but it's the context of where it's posted that becomes the problem. So it is rather I who should apologize for having to clamp down on you so harshly, but it's for the protection of all of the members here.
Unless vetoed by John, I am inclined to let the thread continue unaltered because it has been so interesting and educational for so many members. However that is under probationary forbearance and unless it resumes it's former values changes may be necessary. So here's hoping for continued enjoyment for everybody.
-
If not Abbey's then what? I may have a WAF issue on the Abbey's. Should I just go down the GedLee product line for something smaller or is there another alternative someone would suggest. Primarily interested in HT in a living room environment.
-
If not Abbey's then what? I may have a WAF issue on the Abbey's. Should I just go down the GedLee product line for something smaller or is there another alternative someone would suggest. Primarily interested in HT in a living room environment.
I'm probably going to get flamed for this, and for this one reply permission granted, I'll don a suit, but there are other CD speakers on the market, and there are other speakers that sound wonderful. I have a suspicion that a great deal of the Gedlee sound is not derived solely from CD, but from a combination of high quality drivers in a well designed cabinet, and unique speaker placement. You can get a hint of this from toeing in your conventional speakers at 45 degrees and having their axis cross in front of your listening position. This is a placement technique long used in HT applications. Flame away gentlemen, no repercussions if you'll just avoid foul language. :thumb:
-
How dare you!!
-
If not Abbey's then what? I may have a WAF issue on the Abbey's. Should I just go down the GedLee product line for something smaller or is there another alternative someone would suggest. Primarily interested in HT in a living room environment.
Buy a pair of Nathan; you won't regret it.
Cheers,
Ian
-
If not Abbey's then what? I may have a WAF issue on the Abbey's. Should I just go down the GedLee product line for something smaller or is there another alternative someone would suggest. Primarily interested in HT in a living room environment.
Duke's Audiokinesis stuff has a lot of similarities to Earl's work (intentionally)... and is more WAF-friendly. The smaller cabinets of the Nathans in a non-black color could look good in a living room, as well.
-
I'm probably going to get flamed for this, and for this one reply permission granted, I'll don a suit, but there are other CD speakers on the market, and there are other speakers that sound wonderful. I have a suspicion that a great deal of the Gedlee sound is not derived solely from CD, but from a combination of high quality drivers in a well designed cabinet, and unique speaker placement. You can get a hint of this from toeing in your conventional speakers at 45 degrees and having their axis cross in front of your listening position. This is a placement technique long used in HT applications. Flame away gentlemen, no repercussions if you'll just avoid foul language. :thumb:
Actually, the toe-in for Gedlee speakers is uniquely effective because it eliminates the only issue in response (on-axis dip) and also changes the first reflection point.
-
... there are other CD speakers on the market ...
The problem that I see with this statement is that I hear this claimed all the time, but I have not seen much evidence that it is actually true. Anything that I have measured certainly does not show very stable CD operation (A Behringer that I tested being a notable exception).
I have a suspicion that a great deal of the Gedlee sound is not derived solely from CD, but from a combination of high quality drivers in a well designed cabinet, and unique speaker placement.
I would certainly have to agree to this - there is more to it than just "CD", although CD is a minimum requirement. And, as I often point out, its not just CD that is important it is "narrow CD" that is required and this is actually extremely rare (i.e. the Behringer is rather wide, although well controlled).
"Toe-in" is not succesful unless the speaker is truely CD and as I said above, most of the evidence that I know of says that this is not very common at all. Its usually a serious failing of most designs. Toe-in for these speakers creates more problems than it solves.
-
If only there was a "Venue"......say in the fall.....say October.....
That all the designers could get together and show their wares to the public.....
That people on forums.....like this one could...could offer their humble opinions on what they hear...
and let us know what they think....not being fan boys.....an objective review....
One room being equal to another......with the designers setting up what ever way they want......
Wow....if only there was a "Venue" like that......
-
Right on Perry! A "Venue" like that would be a great idea!! :wink:
Best,
Ed
-
Sounds like ya'll need to make the trip to Denver for RMAF!
-
It's all in jest because Earl isn't a fan of audio shows, but those shows have always been problematic.. with a limited amount of time and space, there's only so much that can be done with a small hotel room...and not all rooms there are equal. It's cool to visit, absolutely, but a good judge of the sound quality...not at all.
-
hmmmm........seems it would all be equal, a fair playing field then.........
Problematic......for all......
Like our rooms.......or just where we listen.......like most......
Or do we need a special room........??
Or do all, to make a point, need special........??
-
Hotel rooms have poor AC, but I don't believe that's as big of an issue as many make it out to be. It's just that some vendors use large rooms and others are in smaller rooms... some use very large speakers and others smaller. Setting up a good home theater system takes a lot of measurement and time, plus it's not a real audition. The music is often chosen for you, the best seats taken up, and the background isn't likely to be the quietest.
-
CD speakers like the Geddes should have a large advantage in a poor room like at RMAF. If theory holds, then his speakers should sound quite a bit better than the non-CD speakers from other manufacturers.
-
:D good gosh man,50 pages.wow.i am going to buy these tomorrow just because i am a speaker nut.first and next thing you do is get a Swarm to compliment.....?? :D
-
The swarm subwoofer system is a great match to the sealed mains.
-
:D :D can never have too many speakers,just ask Lonewolfy Chris....... :thumb: not sure what model to buy ?? talk with the man tomorrow...... :D
-
:D good gosh man,50 pages.wow.i am going to buy these tomorrow just because i am a speaker nut.first and next thing you do is get a Swarm to compliment.....?? :D
Get a couple of his subs too while you're at it. Enjoy the wait!
-
Can anyone send me a photo of their Abbeys? I am trying to resolve some WAF issues.
Thanks
-
Can anyone send me a photo of their Abbeys? I am trying to resolve some WAF issues.
Thanks
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=86403.msg913124#msg913124
-
Sorry for double reply but it wasn't showing my post just the quote. It does that every once in a while.
Anyway. Scroll down on that post and see if that will help. If not, I'll email you some pics. Just PM me with your email.
Remember-SPA days go along way. :green:
-
Here are a few shots of my Abbeys.
(http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm39/dguarnaccia/New%20Gedlee%20speakers/IMG_1030.jpg)
(http://i292.photobucket.com/albums/mm39/dguarnaccia/New%20Gedlee%20speakers/IMG_1029.jpg)
Though to be honest, if I had it again, I'd do Black not Red...clashes with my walls, so I might have them refinished. The sound amazing though, and that's all I really care about.
-
Are the red Abbeys done in gloss? Does it look like a proper piano finish? It's always hard to tell in a photo.
Thanks
-
Are the red Abbeys done in gloss? Does it look like a proper piano finish? It's always hard to tell in a photo.
Thanks
Where are you located?
-
Can anyone send me a photo of their Abbeys? I am trying to resolve some WAF issues.
I built mine from kits (older version with rounded corners). The new design looks to me like it would be more veneer-friendly, so you could probably achieve a similar look if you are handy or are willing to employ someone to do the work. The grill cloth is stretched directly over the front baffle and secured by pressing into a groove containing window spline. I had to trim down the bulge on the foam plugs by an inch or so so the cloth would lay flat.
(http://www.dougsmith.lisalandy.com/myalbum/Abbey with stand.jpg)
If mine had had the rear-mount woofer design with roundover, I might have dispensed with the grill cloth altogether. Here is how they looked without the grill cloth:
(http://www.dougsmith.lisalandy.com/myalbum/before cloth.jpg)
-
I built mine from kits (older version with rounded corners). The new design looks to me like it would be more veneer-friendly, so you could probably achieve a similar look if you are handy or are willing to employ someone to do the work. The grill cloth is stretched directly over the front baffle and secured by pressing into a groove containing window spline. I had to trim down the bulge on the foam plugs by an inch or so so the cloth would lay flat.
If mine had had the rear-mount woofer design with roundover, I might have dispensed with the grill cloth altogether. Here is how they looked without the grill cloth:
Beautiful work Doug, as usual.
Mine are done in black gloss. Remember, getting a "piano black gloss" finish is extremely difficult. Mine looks like an automotive finish and has that sheen or reflection. Piano black gloss terminology is vague, it varies from finisher to finisher. I wanted a piano black gloss originally, but once I saw my current Abbeys, I stopped worrying. You can see a partial picture of it on my systems page. Of course, the picture does not do it justice, in real life, I like it a lot.
Even the standard black satin that jtwrace has is very nice and with the lights on dim or off, who cares, really :roll:
You can pm me off line and I can send you some more detailed pics by regular e-mail as the files are very large.
Anand.
-
Are the red Abbeys done in gloss? Does it look like a proper piano finish? It's always hard to tell in a photo.
Thanks
I should respond to this question. No, they are not a piano finish. They are simply a gloss like you might find on a car, but not a show-car finish either. They exhibit orange peel and have some pits. This was not the upgraded "gloss" finish that I sell, but mearly a trial of a lower cost (less work) non-wet-sanded finish that I offered the buyer at no cost.
The upgraded finish is wet-sanded and polished, but I still would not rank it as a piano finish simply because my facilities are not capable of that. It is a "good" finish as you might find on a typical production car. I cannot use premium car finishes because I paint inside of my home and the fumes are toxic and I have kids. I use all water based finishes, which while "good" are not the kinds of paint that lend themselves to a "piano" or "Show-car" finish.
I am trying to find a shop that I can farm out these premium finishes to, because I will never be able to do a truely hi-end gloss finish in my current location.
-
Personally, I am not sure I'd want such a finish anyhow. If you put it near your screen you are going to get annoying reflections. Secondly, if you dust them with a rag, you might loose that perfect finish anyhow.
-
My original Summas had a piano finish and I had to spray over this because of the strong reflections from my projector. You cannot have gloss if you have a projector.
-
I gotta say that my satin finish which has some texture is great. It's easy to clean and doesn't scratch easily. My wife wanted that finish as she was affraid that we would get TV reflections. She was correct (as always)!
Also, as mentioned above, I listen in the dark so they're pretty dark anyway. :P
-
I have jl audio fathom subwoofers and I am trying to find speakers to match. That is why I am asking about gloss. I like the finish on the fathoms and don't have an issue with my projector
-
I have jl audio fathom subwoofers and I am trying to find speakers to match. That is why I am asking about gloss. I like the finish on the fathoms and don't have an issue with my projector
Oh. Well, in that case just request Gloss from Dr. Geddes and you should be in good shape.
-
The Red ones aren't a piano finish, but they are a gloss finish that Earl was trying out. Not mirror smooth, they do have some imperfections. I'm considering having someone refinish them to a Piano black finish.
Edit: Just noticed Earls response. Yes, his desciption is spot on, there are some minor imperfections, and he gave me the choice for this new finish and I accepted. Hindsight being 20/20,I should have gone with Black. Even with the Gloss finish, it doesn't interfere with my projector though but I have my Abbeys spaced pretty widely to the sides of my screen.
-
If I could offer a suggest - don't do that - don't space your speakers too far apart. Best is about 10 feet or even a little closer. Mine are something like 9 feet and should probably try them even closer since there is no lack of seperation at 9 feet. When spaced this close I do not see how reflections can't be a problem if you use a projector.
-
Here is a pic of the gloss finish in black. My speakers are 8 feet apart for what it is worth as I don't use a projector, but I have no problem with reflections.
Dan
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=36613)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=39681)
-
Nice stands, but for future reference, it would be best if the stand did not stick out past the radius on the lower edges of the cabinet. Maybe move your speaker forward.
Note, there are various sizes of foam plugs - these are the largest. No obvious measureable differences in performance (by that I mean that no two speakers are identical and the foam size makes less of a difference than the individual variance). I made the last batch smaller, but slightly too small (see the front page of my website). I will end up somewhere in the middle. This is all just trying to find what looks best. Votes?
-
Good eye Earl!!...Thats an older picture, the speakers now extend past the edge of the stand by about 1 inch so the radius is past the plane of the front of the stand.
Dan
-
Note, there are various sizes of foam plugs - these are the largest. No obvious measureable differences in performance (by that I mean that no two speakers are identical and the foam size makes less of a difference than the individual variance). I made the last batch smaller, but slightly too small (see the front page of my website). I will end up somewhere in the middle. This is all just trying to find what looks best. Votes?
I'm with you, somewhere in between dwr's and the pic on your web site.
-
At first when I saw the Abbeys I thought that a grill would look good. After living with them, I like 'em how they are. :thumb:
I still can't get that darn woofer to move though. :duh: :lol:
-
If I could offer a suggest - don't do that - don't space your speakers too far apart. Best is about 10 feet or even a little closer. Mine are something like 9 feet and should probably try them even closer since there is no lack of seperation at 9 feet. When spaced this close I do not see how reflections can't be a problem if you use a projector.
I've tried them a few ways now, and the image seemed best this wide but I can try it again. I sit fairly far back at around 12 feet from the front wall, and tried to create an equalateral triangle, with the Abbeys toed in at 45 degrees so they'd cross 2 feet in front of me. Wouldn't bringing them in closer have them crossing in front of my around 4 feet in front?
-
I've tried them a few ways now, and the image seemed best this wide but I can try it again. I sit fairly far back at around 12 feet from the front wall, and tried to create an equalateral triangle, with the Abbeys toed in at 45 degrees so they'd cross 2 feet in front of me. Wouldn't bringing them in closer have them crossing in front of my around 4 feet in front?
That is about the way I have mine set up as well (12' triangle), but the axes end up crossing ~4 ft in front of the listening position. They are set up against the long wall of the room so there is plenty of space to either side. I didn't experiment much with the setup - I just liked the wide soundstage.
-
My setup:
102" from the center to center of the waveguide Cross at ~112" in front of listener.
Dr. Geddes recommends a cross of 48" in front of the listener but I found 30" to be best for me and my room.
This is something that I tried many times and of course measured every change.
-
Does the woofer have a foam cover or is that just for the top part of the speaker?
-
Does the woofer have a foam cover or is that just for the top part of the speaker?
Just the top. Remember that the foam isn't there just for show...it's patented for your benefit! :D
http://www.google.com/patents?id=8EiaAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
-
Does the woofer have a foam cover or is that just for the top part of the speaker?
No, but Earl can stretch AT fabric across the woofer if you prefer. That's what he did on mine.
-
No, but Earl can stretch AT fabric across the woofer if you prefer. That's what he did on mine.
Pics please. :thumb:
-
Pics please. :thumb:
See previous page, mine are the red ones
-
See previous page, mine are the red ones
:duh:
-
Just a quick update as we approach the 4 month mark.
These speakers and multiple sub setup still continues to impress me every time I listen. I can't stress enough how important the integration of the mains to subs is.
Like any speaker you have to find that synergy of the setup that not only satisfy your measurements but also your ears. I've done more listening with my measurements then confirm with my ears and I really do think that's the best way.
-
Curious to know about the final measurements. Are they flat through the frequency range or boosted in any particular freqency to please your ears ? Did you notice any measurements that proved to you a certain character in sonics over another ? For example did a rise say in the 2500hz range or 4000hz range reveal anything.
I have followed this thread with great interest. Actually learned a thing or two. What I'm getting at was there any correlation between measurements and a particular result in sonics. Thanks.
charles
-
Are they flat through the frequency range or boosted in any particular freqency to please your ears ?
Yes, I chose to go for flat across the range. Some people do like to boost the low to low mid. This is personal taste
Did you notice any measurements that proved to you a certain character in sonics over another ? For example did a rise say in the 2500hz range or 4000hz range reveal anything.
Yes, I found that getting the subs intergrated with the mains as best I could changed the clarity of the sound. There is no doubt in my mind that when the intergration isn't "perfect", you will get slightly smeared sonics. Of course it can vary depending on how far off one is but when it's dialed in, it's night & day.
I have followed this thread with great interest. Actually learned a thing or two. What I'm getting at was there any correlation between measurements and a particular result in sonics. Thanks.
charles
Absolutely! I think if one spends enough time listening as they measure you get an idea of what the measurement change sounds like. The neat thing about changing in the DCX (or any active crossover) is that you can toggle between settings on the fly. This really allows the listener to swap back and fourth and hear the change that is sometimes not so obvious without measurements. It makes a better listener IMO. Like you, I've learned a TON by doing this. The best part is that all of this is usable no matter what system one has...it's about learning and understanding what you're changing and ultimately hearing.
I had a member over this past weekend for a little and I think he was pretty impressed with the sound and effort.
-
I had a member over this past weekend for a little and I think he was pretty impressed with the sound and effort.
Ahem...that would be me. You can click on my systems page to see what I am used to listening to, and of course, I also own GedLee Abbeys.
One of the reasons I wanted to audition jtwrace's system, is that he is the only fella near me that has Earl Geddes bandpass subwoofers (passive) and I wanted to see how that integrated with the Abbeys. The ultra low frequency is supplemented with the Rythmik 12 inch sealed subs as you all know. In the future, I will be in receipt of a pair of Earl's latest bandpass subs, which use passive radiators;the bandwidth for these subs is about 45 Hz to 150 Hz, an excellent complement to the Abbeys, Nathan or Harpers.
First of all, in the areas of the macrodynamics, dynamic range and speed, jtwrace's system as it is now optimized, beats mine. Bass is fast, deep and taut, but not so taut that you lose that buoyancy effect. Soundstaging is incredibly deep as usual with the Abbey, and I am always surprised how the Abbeys can provide pinpoint imaging of various performers in space in both the vertical and horizontal planes. This is something I've experienced with my own Abbeys, but jtwrace's acoustic space is a little larger and it is definitely easier to appreciate. Basically, not all recordings have the vocalist front and center, some are shifted to one side or the other, further back or forward, all in a 3D space. It's pretty spooky to be honest. Jtwrace's system also has some better ancillary components which only makes the Abbeys sound even more resolving. But to be honest, I truly believe that the integration of his subs is what catapulted his system forward.
In the realm of microdynamics, midrange tonality, I would say both systems are quite similar. The Abbeys, regardless of electronics I've used or auditioned them on, have the most open midrange I have ever heard, in the class of SoundLab electrostats, etc...it is incredibly uncolored.
So to conclude, I could listen to jtwrace's system all day long, and there were several times that we were clearly listening at 105 dB peaks, with plenty of foot tapping.
Best,
Anand.
-
There was a very long thread over at DIY on "Is flat correct". the general concensus is that it should not be. In a small room I don't believe that it is and here is why.
Flat bass does not sound right to me, never has, and I conclude that in a small room the reverb time is very low compared with a large room. This means that the time-level tradeoff of bass perception will trend towards a lower level of perceived bass in a smaller room when compared to a larger room with the same levels.
Next, is that the very upper end of the spectrum will always sound too bright if the axial response is flat on a CD speaker. This is because a lot more HF energy is being put into the room when the speaker is CD than happens with any other type of speaker or real source for that matter. And in a small room the multiple very early reflections in a live room, like mine, causes the sound to be too bright when the listening axis is set to flat at the high end. By flat here I mean the direct field, not the reverb field. I never measure the true reverb field in a room so I am not sure if it is flat, but I highly doubt it. I have measured the first 10 ms in my room and it is basically very smooth, but falls at about 3 dB per decade across the whole spectrum. This is certainly not an excessive rate, but I think that it is significant.
-
Very interesting post Dr. G!
-
I do want to be clear that "what" we are measuring matters a lot. If its the direct field - no reflections, thats one thing, if it is the early field, say the first 10 ms like I do, its another, and if its the steady state field, thats something else again. It is very unlikely that they will all be the same.
At LFs of course there is only the steady state so there is no ambiguity there, but at HFs its the direct field that should fall ever so slightly IF the speakers are truely CD. Most speakers are not, especially at the HF limits. Most beam somewhat (or severly if they are direct radiators) and as such there power response IS falling even though the direct response may not be. We have to be very careful what we are talking about when we talk about "flat".
-
Ahem...that would be me. You can click on my systems page to see what I am used to listening to, and of course, I also own GedLee Abbeys.
One of the reasons I wanted to audition jtwrace's system, is that he is the only fella near me that has Earl Geddes bandpass subwoofers (passive) and I wanted to see how that integrated with the Abbeys. The ultra low frequency is supplemented with the Rythmik 12 inch sealed subs as you all know. In the future, I will be in receipt of a pair of Earl's latest bandpass subs, which use passive radiators;the bandwidth for these subs is about 45 Hz to 150 Hz, an excellent complement to the Abbeys, Nathan or Harpers.
First of all, in the areas of the macrodynamics, dynamic range and speed, jtwrace's system as it is now optimized, beats mine. Bass is fast, deep and taut, but not so taut that you lose that buoyancy effect. Soundstaging is incredibly deep as usual with the Abbey, and I am always surprised how the Abbeys can provide pinpoint imaging of various performers in space in both the vertical and horizontal planes. This is something I've experienced with my own Abbeys, but jtwrace's acoustic space is a little larger and it is definitely easier to appreciate. Basically, not all recordings have the vocalist front and center, some are shifted to one side or the other, further back or forward, all in a 3D space. It's pretty spooky to be honest. Jtwrace's system also has some better ancillary components which only makes the Abbeys sound even more resolving. But to be honest, I truly believe that the integration of his subs is what catapulted his system forward.
In the realm of microdynamics, midrange tonality, I would say both systems are quite similar. The Abbeys, regardless of electronics I've used or auditioned them on, have the most open midrange I have ever heard, in the class of SoundLab electrostats, etc...it is incredibly uncolored.
So to conclude, I could listen to jtwrace's system all day long, and there were several times that we were clearly listening at 105 dB peaks, with plenty of foot tapping.
Best,
Anand.
Thanks for the kind comments and input. I think it sounds great but it's always nice to have someone familar with the sonic character listen to take a listen. As you know, when you measure a bunch you can get really :duh: :scratch: :oops:
Also, one thing to point out is that measurements are "flat" but do have the typical Abbey character where they taper down as I showed earlier in this thread. I do really think it sounds great but am going to try to boost the LF by 2-3dB and see how that sounds. What I find is that it's music dependent. It's all about finiding settings that are universal for a wide range of recording quality. Some are bass heavy and some aren't so I can try both ways and see.
-
I do really think it sounds great but am going to try to boost the LF by 2-3dB and see how that sounds. What I find is that it's music dependent. It's all about finiding settings that are universal for a wide range of recording quality.
I am using my hot rodded DCX2496 and use the remote to adjust the levels by a few dB either way for some recordings. Since all channels are adjusted in the analog domain none of the settings for the individual subs are altered. 0dB on the analog level was the reference when I did all the measuring and tuning.
-
I am using my hot rodded DCX2496 and use the remote to adjust the levels by a few dB either way for some recordings. Since all channels are adjusted in the analog domain none of the settings for the individual subs are altered. 0dB on the analog level was the reference when I did all the measuring and tuning.
What remote?
-
What remote?
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=47777.0 for more info.
-
Still searching for an audition :D.
I'm heading up/down the east coast for the http://www.capitalaudiofest.com/p1.html (http://www.capitalaudiofest.com/p1.html) on Jul 8-10th (Rockville MD).
Anyone interested in allowing me a listen, please advise.
JT and Anand, you've been PMed :wink:.
cheers,
AJ
p.s. I don't look quite as bad as my avatar in real life. Close though.
-
Still searching for an audition :D.
I'm heading up/down the east coast for the http://www.capitalaudiofest.com/p1.html (http://www.capitalaudiofest.com/p1.html) on Jul 8-10th (Rockville MD).
Anyone interested in allowing me a listen, please advise.
JT and Anand, you've been PMed :wink:.
cheers,
AJ
p.s. I don't look quite as bad as my avatar in real life. Close though.
reply sent
-
Here's a picture of my Harpers. Still waiting for Abbeys and bandbass subs.
Like the stands? :lol:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=47784)
I think the glossy finish is quite nice and good enough for me, but like Earl has said they're not top notch piano black. Here's some pictures of the Harper next to another speaker and sub in glossy black.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=47785)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=47786)
-
Here's a picture of my Harpers. Still waiting for Abbeys and bandbass subs.
Like the stands? :lol:
Congrats on your purchase! How do you like them? Of course without subs you don't get the full effect but you should get an idea.
-
Your Harpers look substantially different from the picture on the Gedlee site.
http://www.gedlee.com/Harper.htm
I would be interested in your first impressions, especially compared to the Gradients.
Thanks,
Russell
-
Your Harpers look substantially different from the picture on the Gedlee site.
http://www.gedlee.com/Harper.htm
I would be interested in your first impressions, especially compared to the Gradients.
Thanks,
Russell
Yes, Dr. Geddes now mounts the driver from the back of the baffle now.
-
Paint has been my biggest problem. Anyone who knows about paint knows that you cannot do good paint without mega fcilities, like dustless paint booths etc. Since I am still working out of my home, this is impossible for me. I am looking to farm out this work, but nobody is very anxious to do it. So for now the paint is "OK".
-
Paint has been my biggest problem. Anyone who knows about paint knows that you cannot do good paint without mega fcilities, like dustless paint booths etc. Since I am still working out of my home, this is impossible for me. I am looking to farm out this work, but nobody is very anxious to do it. So for now the paint is "OK".
I will say that the sonics make up for any lack of finish there may be. :bowdown:
-
Here's a picture of my Harpers. Still waiting for Abbeys and bandpass subs.
Like the stands? :lol:
I think the glossy finish is quite nice and good enough for me, but like Earl has said they're not top notch piano black. Here's some pictures of the Harper next to another speaker and sub in glossy black.
Yes, I've yet to read even one review on the Harpers. A pair of Harpers, with a pair of GedLee bandpass subs and the Elemental sub as your ULF sub should really kick ass. I'll be using 4 Harpers as my surrounds soon.
Anand.
-
I haven't had time to really listen to the Harpers yet. Just got them up and running. With almost no bass below 100 Hz it's also difficult to judge a speaker. But they seem to sound encredible clear, open and free of coloration/distortion.
Something I could actually try when comparing them to the Gradients, is to use the bass section of Gradients with the Harpers. I also have the eD 18" sub. But you need to give me some time. I'm not crudges after a surgery of ACL.
I will start a new thread since this is about Abbey and mainly jtwrace's setup. Perhaps a thread about Geddes speakers in general?
P.S. May also see me under a new nick. Would like to change the one I've to Bjorn (my first name).
-
Jason was gracious enough to have me over for a listen this weekend.
This is my second time hearing Geddes speakers and have heard the principle theories in action many times so I had an idea what to expect. I've followed Geddes work for maybe 3-4 years now and respect his contribution to the hobby. I think Jtwrace may have described his system somewhere in this thread so I won't bother much with that but just give some of my initial thoughts.
Cutting to the chase the system sounds very good. Jtwrace has done a wonderful job integrating his subs with his mains and it makes the system a top tier performer for a typical home listening room. Simply one of the better bass systems I've heard in a typical listening room. In fact in all of my comments when I say typical listening room I mean that in a positive manner. Not many people have dedicated audio rooms and even fewer will have purpose built rooms for home audio so it makes most sense to have components that perform well in the majority of real world rooms, a typical listening room.
The Geddes speaker and sub approach address that issue and Jtwrace has implemented the approach successfully and I think has achieved a very desirable result. I'm a bit biased as his system's theory and sound signature happen to aligned with mine. Before the session I told Jtwrace all it would take for me is about 15 minutes to assess the system for my own personal tastes and the rest was academic or fluff. During the session 15 minutes was about all it took and the rest was a matter of curiously hearing how something sounded on his system or just wanting to here a song for enjoyment rather than assessing the system.
Basically my take away is that his system is very nicely balanced, leans on the side of neutral and communicates. In a nutshell we went from starting out with Tool and the system plays rock with some balls which is key for me. Here is a place where Jtwrace's system shines for the common man in a typical room. His system has the elusive "gut punch" that's missing in a great many hi-fi systems in typical rooms. Kick drums kick with great attack and force (speakers) and the decay is weighty and taut (subs) to combine for the elusive "gut punch" and IMO the speaker/sub integration is a major part of the enjoyment of the system. I know a good kick drum when I feel it and his system is about as good as any I've heard in a typical room. Hats off to Jtwrace for getting it set up well.
Somewhere in the middle we listened to "Dance of the Tumblers from The Snow Maiden" which played with a nice sense of vibrancy, clarity and verve. Spirited transient attacks, wonderfully dynamic and entertaining as it should be.
At the end was Mighty Sam McClain "Hanging on a Cross" and it was Sam in all his blues finest. I use it as a show stopper reference track for me and show stop it did, Jtwrace's system highlights this tunes dynamic percussion and horn work. We were listening at a good volume before but then he was really liking Mighty Sam or sensed I was enjoying it and turned it up louder. An important point, this is where a great many systems would have bit the dust but having a well designed speaker like the Abbey with pro components (a very important feature), controlled directivity and the care in system set up as he has done and it allows you to go to that next level on the volume without everything falling to pieces due to driver compression and very audible distortions. So we went along for the ride and you get rewarded with your own private concert in many ways. Close your eyes and to a large degree you can imagine that Mighty Sam and the boys are right there on stage. A very credible reproduction of a live amplified concert of your very own.
"Hanging on a Cross" can test your system's dynamic potential (not just sheer output but soft to loud), transient attack etc... The percussion and horns can smack quick and hard if your system is capable. Jtwrace's system is such and can deliver the smack you upside the head dynamics that make listening fun and engaging. For me "Hanging on a Cross" is a goosebumps song and it's why I use it as a reference, it's great music, recorded well and when played back as I like it can give me goosebumps and his system blasting at 100+ dB peaks as he pointed out gave me the goosebumps I expect from this song. A sound so engaging, loud, dynamic, tuneful and musical on this track that you have to respond emotionally and/or physically. We both may have begun to go through the audiophile motions at about this point with the testing but Mighty Sam changed the vibe and shined well in this system. I think Jason said something like this guy is awesome and I was thinking and he sounds bad-ass right now too.
Last was The Fairfield Four that Jason recommended and it sounded great. Wonderful artists, nice recording and the take away here is yes there is meat on Them Bones of the vocalists. Singers have body and mass in Jtwrace's system as it should be. Again, I can't stress enough the pleasing sound in a typical room, no magic or voodoo, and can be achieved by the average listener. The room plays a vital role in music reproduction, we fight it or try to work with it at every turn. A system like this leverages its components and minimizes the room's effect to a noticeable degree. Very early on in the listening session Jtwrace asked me what would I do to improve his system, I think trying to get a feel for where I was coming from. I told him I accept each system on its own and listen for a few critical things above all else. Bottom line is Jtwrace's system is not perfect, none is, pointless to even mention. Are there areas for improvement, of course, but it's mostly a matter of taste or preference or expectation of a higher order beyond the reality of the situation. Did this system get my mojo working, yes sir. Did this system hit the technical marks that show a sign of good gear and good set up, yes sir, did this system make me have an "Oh Yeah" moment, yes sir. Then this system has done it's job for me and I'd be happy to call it my own.
But what about sound staging, imaging, mid-range liquidity, extended highs... yeah what about it.
The system does good things in these areas but that's to miss the point to me and frankly is boring in this context.
The main thing I mean to communicate is this system is bad-ass for the common man/audiophile or what have you.
If you are looking for a Rolls Royce hi-fi system then keep looking but if you're looking for a Corvette ZR1 hi-fi system then put your money down and get ready to enjoy the ride. Like many of us I've owned enough and heard enough to know in spaces most people have and how they will use the system the Geddes products are about as sensible and well performing as I can imagine. Jtwrace has a typical FROG and it isn't going to get much better sounding in that space than what he has put together.
For humor:
I don't always like to recommend gear but when I do I prefer Geddes.
Happy listening my friends.
-
Nice review Launche. Sounds like you have a winner there Jason, congrats.
Best,
Ed
-
Launche,
One of the most enjoyable reviews I've read! And I don't mean it cause you reviewed a Geddes system. I say it because you definitely have the flair and can carry the reader from paragraph to paragraph while describing the system almost as if I were there (of course I've heard Jason's system numerous times).
When I get my system cobbled together in the new house/room I'll give you a holler.
This review was polished and well worth the wait :thumb:.
Thanks!
Anand.
-
I suspect that many would be interested in hearing a shootout between optimally tweaked Abbey's and Super V's. Albeit somewhat of a price differential but perhaps the Super V setup could have a couple more of the servo subs to even the playing field. These are two of the most talked about speaker systems that are based on clearly different concepts therefore an excellent face-off. :thumb:
-Roy
-
launche,
great review, i'd love to hear the geddes speakers.
mighty sam is a friend of mine, his wife sandra works for me. i saw him firday night in watertown ma. he performed scent of a reunion with mahsa vahdat. it was superb, msm can move the soul!
drmike
-
launche,
great review, i'd love to hear the geddes speakers.
mighty sam is a friend of mine, his wife sandra works for me. i saw him firday night in watertown ma. he performed scent of a reunion with mahsa vahdat. it was superb, msm can move the soul!
drmike
Well any friend of Mighty Sam is a friend of mine for sure.
I heard about that show but too far for me. If he's ever closer to NC I'll surely try to be there. I was just looking at picking up Scent of a reunion off Sam's website. He indeed can move the soul.
-
Great job launche! :thumb:
It was a pleasure to have you over for sure.
-
At the end was Mighty Sam McClain "Hanging on a Cross" and it was Sam in all his blues finest.
Great stuff, thanks for bringing this to our attention, outstanding!! :thumb:
Here's a link:
http://www.amazon.com/Journey-Sam-Mcclain/dp/B00000652M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1308769931&sr=8-1
Best,
Ed
-
Wow that review was a great read as I come up on the 1 year mark of owning my pair of Abbey 12A speakers. I have enjoyed many of the same thoughts and feelings from my system as was described in the review.
Dan
-
Well it was one year ago today that I picked up my Abbey 12A speakers from Dr. Geddes. The first year has been great listening to the best sound I have had in my room in the 30 some odd years that I have had a system.
Dan
-
Well it was one year ago today that I picked up my Abbey 12A speakers from Dr. Geddes. The first year has been great listening to the best sound I have had in my room in the 30 some odd years that I have had a system.
Dan
Congrats! :thumb:
-
Why can't folks own these here in the SE. Darn... :wink:
cheers,
AJ
-
Why can't folks own these here in the SE. Darn... :wink:
cheers,
AJ
They do! Just not in your part of the SE. :wink:
-
Are any Abbey to Maggie comparisons available anywhere on the web? Anyone here have any?
Shane
-
Hi Shane,
I don't know of any Maggie to Abbey comparisons out there, myself I used to own Martin Logan electrostatics (Ascent i) and Linkwitz Orions before my Abbey 12A speakers. With the Logans, I could never get the bass to "match up" with the panels to my liking at all. The mid range was just excellent and I had no complaints there at all. The Orions just did not play loud well at all. Lower volume jazz and the such sounded real good but when you really stepped on the gas with the Orions it just wasn't good at all. Now that I have the multi sub system set up I have my eye open for a pair of Martin Logan CLS originals or IIz, I want to hear how they sound with the multi sub system. No I would not get rid of the Abbeys, they are here to stay for the duration, I just really want to hear how a pair of CLS stats sound with the multiple subs.
Dan
-
As someone who has owned 4 pairs of ML's and actually auditioned Maggies before the Abbey purchase these are just unlike anything I've heard.
I think "mgalusha" said it best, Abbeys are like electrostats with balls.
-
Jason,
What models of Logans did you have???
Dan
-
Jason,
What models of Logans did you have???
Dan
CLS > CLS IIz > QuestZ > Summit
-
Of the original CLS or the IIz which did you like better, and give me your opinion on how you think they would sound using the multi sub set up.
Dan
-
Of the original CLS or the IIz which did you like better, and give me your opinion on how you think they would sound using the multi sub set up.
Dan
To stay on topic of the thread, I'll PM you.
-
Yep good idea
-
i have heard original m-l cls', and i thought they were excellent, for low-key low-level music. i actually considered buying a pair at one point, thinking that, actively crossed over to my upright-style megawoofered vmps subs at ~80hz, it might improve on the cls' dynamics and ultimate loudness. gayle sanders himself told me that, even when crossed as high as 100hz w/a 24db/octave active x-over, the cls's will never go louder than ~93db. so, that ended my desire to own cls'...
ymmv,
doug s.
-
Hi Shane,
I don't know of any Maggie to Abbey comparisons out there, myself I used to own Martin Logan electrostatics (Ascent i) and Linkwitz Orions before my Abbey 12A speakers. With the Logans, I could never get the bass to "match up" with the panels to my liking at all. The mid range was just excellent and I had no complaints there at all. The Orions just did not play loud well at all. Lower volume jazz and the such sounded real good but when you really stepped on the gas with the Orions it just wasn't good at all. Now that I have the multi sub system set up I have my eye open for a pair of Martin Logan CLS originals or IIz, I want to hear how they sound with the multi sub system. No I would not get rid of the Abbeys, they are here to stay for the duration, I just really want to hear how a pair of CLS stats sound with the multiple subs.
Dan
What about a piston source dipole with the same type of sensitivity and lack of compression at high levels like the Abbeys? Did you try anything like that?
cheers,
AJ
-
Hi AJ
No I didn't because I found what I was looking for with the Abbeys. :)
Dan
-
Here's a picture of my Harpers. Still waiting for Abbeys and bandbass subs.
Did you get your Abbeys and sub yet?
-
Did you get your Abbeys and sub yet?
Speaking of waiting how about hearing from some others with Gedlee speakers on order on how long your wait has been. I've been waiting for a little over 8 months for my Abbeys and still don't have a clear start date.
-
Did you get your Abbeys and sub yet?
No. Just asked Earl Geddes about them, and was told the subs were soon ready but not the Abbeys. Earl has had to mount the woofer in a different way. My Harpers came damaged with the woofer deattached and so have other speakers he has shipped. They're only glued and that's not strong enough support.
This is part of the reason why I haven't commented on my Harpers yet. I've remounted them, but one has some resonances. I haven't had time to look more into it lately. Not fun.
-
They're only glued and that's not strong enough support.
Surely this can't be the case?!?!? There aren't any screws holding the drivers in place? I'd be interested in hearing more about this, I'm sure Dr Geddes has strong opinions about any construction techniques he uses. Thanks for you replies.
-
Speaking of waiting how about hearing from some others with Gedlee speakers on order on how long your wait has been. I've been waiting for a little over 8 months for my Abbeys and still don't have a clear start date.
My Abbeys and subs took just over 3 months. They arrived in perfect condition but I wasnt' surprised as the packing was impressive. I actually emailed Dr. Geddes and told hiim how impressed I was with the packing before hooking them up. It was that impressive.
I'm sure you have seen this: http://gedlee.com/Apology.htm
-
Surely this can't be the case?!?!? There aren't any screws holding the drivers in place? I'd be interested in hearing more about this, I'm sure Dr Geddes has strong opinions about any construction techniques he uses. Thanks for you replies.
Sorry. I meant screws with glue. But no clams. Just the glue to hold the screws and driver in place. Earl is moving towards clams behind the driver now. So that should definetly take care of it. No need to worry from now on.
I'm not DIYer, but I'm surprised clams wasn't used in the first place. The woofer is heavy and in shipment the box can get hits.
-
I'm sure you have seen this: http://gedlee.com/Apology.htm
I hadn't seen that before. Isn't this the third price raise within 6 months? The speakers are starting to cost quite a bit.
I have ordered my Geddes speaker for a hometheater setup (I have another setup for hifi) and haven't ordered a center speaker yet. I was planning to buy a center speaker when I move. That Abbey center speaker is going to cost me more then expected now.
Hmmm. We should probably start a thread for Geddes speakers in general.
-
Hmmm. We should probably start a thread for Geddes speakers in general.
Hi Bjorn:
Welcome to Audio Circle! :D Below is a link to a somewhat lengthy thread on Earl's speakers.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=56687.760
Randy
-
Hi Randy,
Hey did you ever get To Earls to have a listen to the speakers??
Dan
-
Hi Dan:
I was not able to make the trip to Michigan before Earl left for China. I did speak to Earl two days ago and was told that my waiting time for my Abbeys will be at least nine months as there are close to 30 people ahead of my order. :o :(
Only I can decide whether or not to have $1,700 hanging out there for such a long period of time.
Regards,
Randy
-
As an owner of Gedlee speakers I can tell you they are good. Are they 9 month good? Maybe so maybe not. Also you know deep down you will not have your speakers inside a year. There are many great speaker companies out there that "function" better and do not put out the customer like that. Outsourcing the cab construction is is imvho a no brainer
and people would be glad to absorb the cost for a set of speakers within a month.
-
I hope to hear Geddes speakers sometime. I'm extremely happy with the performance of my current system, it is finally dialed in the way I like it, but it would be interesting to hear Geddes' speakers because his approach is different than other speaker manufacturers. I'm not a DIY guy and finished speakers are my only option at this point. Earl's new cabinets look pretty cool.
Unfortunately, I'm afraid the recent price increases may have priced me out of the market even if I do like them. Geddes has lots of very happy customers and he is a very bright guy, so he must be doing something right! I look forward to hearing the speakers in the Chicago area soon. Anyone in the Western suburbs please drop me a PM. :thumb:
Cheers,
J
-
Well sts9fan how bout you lets us all know just what those other speakers are that are the equal to the Abbey 12As for the same price NEW, because I sure haven't found them. While I agree that it is a shame that the wait is that long. I don't understand the logic of the time of wait making the speaker "worth it" either the speaker is the best you can find in your price range or it isn't the wait time has nothing to do with that. As for your last sentence I have no idea what you are trying to say with that.
Dan
-
AudioKinesis (http://www.audiokinesis.com/) builds speakers that are similar to Gedlee speakers. I'm not sure what the waiting time is but I doubt that it's 9 months.
If you're into DIY, you might want to look at Econowaves. You might be able to find someone to assemble some for you.
There's a ongoing group buy happening here http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1291022&page=43 and here http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/group-buys/182279-official-group-buy-autotech-waveguides-2.html#post2582647. This group buy is for the waveguides and is a collaborative effort with possible group buys for the other components. If you go on those forums you might get someone to help you build a pair or find someone to build them for you.
-
Or you can check out Duke's speakers - AuioKinesis - they use many of the same design principles and approach as Geddes and are among the best speakers I've ever heard (that includes the Gedlee's).
Edit - Doh - I shoulda read rajacat's post first :P
-
Let's keep the emotional responses to a minimum. Time is a factor. Not everyone is willing to tie up their money for a year. There are plenty of great sounding options. As said AK would be on my shortlist. There are very few
reasons I can think of for such a long wait. Hire help, that's what growing businesses do.
-
I know at one point he had hired a guy for the help, and thought output would improve. It didn't last long, and I am not sure why. I have seen him mention he would sell it off.
-
Here's some of the waveguides/horns in the group buy.
(http://www.diysoundgroup.com/images/large/Colored_waveguides.jpg)
I'm getting some of the SEOS but in the 18" version. These are the 10" and 15".
(http://www.diysoundgroup.com/images/large/SEOS_waveguide2.jpg)
I suppose I'm getting too far OT. This probably deserves its' own thread. :oops:
-
Here's some of the waveguides/horns in the group buy.
(http://www.diysoundgroup.com/images/large/Colored_waveguides.jpg)
I'm getting some of the SEOS but in the 18" version. These are the 10" and 15".
(http://www.diysoundgroup.com/images/large/SEOS_waveguide2.jpg)
I suppose I'm getting too far OT. This probably deserves its' own thread. :oops:
Agreed! This looks like a good winter project. I'd move it to its own thread.
-
That blue one would look more interesting if it were pink.
-
I think "mgalusha" said it best, Abbeys are like electrostats with balls.
This is interesting as I recently sold my Geddes to go back to ML electrostats. My conclusion was that the B&C DE250 driver just didn't give me the detail I was looking for.
FYI, I went from multiple Maggies => Geddes => ML Aeon-i with multiple subs.
-
Here's the full pallet shipped from Poland. :D
(http://www.diysoundgroup.com/images/large/WG_Pallet.jpg)
(http://www.diysoundgroup.com/images/large/WG_Pallet7.jpg)
-
That blue one would look more interesting if it were pink.
...and mounted vertically? :thumb:
-
Bad move. No speakers beat Gedlee.
-
Bad move. No speakers beat Gedlee.
I look forward to hearing them sometime...but I ain't drinking no Kool-Aid!
:nono:
-
This is interesting as I recently sold my Geddes to go back to ML electrostats. My conclusion was that the B&C DE250 driver just didn't give me the detail I was looking for.
FYI, I went from multiple Maggies => Geddes => ML Aeon-i with multiple subs.
Maybe a better/more expensive beryllium compression tweeter/ driver would've given you the detail.
-
Bad move. No speakers beat Gedlee.
Wow....learn something new everyday.... :duh:
-
I look forward to hearing them sometime...but I ain't drinking no Kool-Aid!
:nono:
Ha! I'm guessing he's joking.
-Jim
-
Bad move. No speakers beat Gedlee.
I'd put that to the test if owners (Summa preferably) in the SE weren't so frighted at the prospect of me coming over.
Armed.
(speakers, no lightsaber)
cheers,
AJ
-
I'd put that to the test if owners (Summa preferably) in the SE weren't so frighted at the prospect of me coming over.
Armed.
(speakers, no lightsaber)
cheers,
AJ
You can come just about any time. Armed! If yours are better to me, I'll buy them. It's that simple. :D
-
I know at one point he had hired a guy for the help, and thought output would improve. It didn't last long, and I am not sure why. I have seen him mention he would sell it off.
Hi all - a little update. There is no clear solution here and the wait times have gotten worse not better. if you want your money back just let me know.
"So what's the problem!?" Its this. It is not economically viable for me to make speakers, its that simple. My consulting business has exploded and I'll be honest with you speakers don't make me anything like what consulting does.
"So hire someone else!" Been there, done that, doesn't work, its not that simple. There is nothing that I do making my speakers that is "typical" (Except cutting boards on a table saw.) Mixing plastics and casting them in molds - this is not something that you find someone on the street doing. Key parts have to be machined on a lathe - anybody can do that! Not! It takes a lot of training to bring someone on board and I don't have the time for that. I also don't have the room. My shop is so small that two people can't work at the same time and I can't make more than a pair or two at a time. A very slow process.
"So get a bigger place!" Well that would push my overhead up by about a factor of two and the speaker prices commensurate!! I am not sure my market can bear that. You know what kind of permits and OSHA approvals you need to open a shop that spays paint? Did you know that anyone spraying in such a place has to have a OSHA approved certificate? The local requirements are excessive and costly (I'm not complaining, compliance is necessary, but I do have to consider the costs if I am to move to a permanent location.)
Bottom line here is that I have three options 1) stop making speakers, or 2) make them at a rate and a cost that is attractive to me, i.e. use them to fill in what "free time" I might have or 3) sell the whole thing and get out from under it.
Option 3) is not up to me, although there might be some interest. Option 1) is, well, not really necessary as long as there is a viable option 2) - option 2) is what has been and what will continue to be the only one that I can see working for the time being.
I make no oppologies for the long wait times, it tells you something about the product. Consider that someone who waited from a year ago paid about 50% less then someone would pay today. Could you get a better better rate on your investment from a bank?
My biggest bottle neck is paint. I am having a test run as we speak on shopping that out. If that works then thoughput will jump up quite a bit. I can only use water based paints because I paint in my home. In this weather I am lucky if they dry in a week. At the shop they can use two part paints that dry in an hour or so - big difference.
Again, if you are tired of waiting for your Geddes speakers then just let me known and I will gladly give your money back. If you think that you can get better speakers elsewhere then by all means go buy them. I have no interest in doing something that is not in my own best interests.
Then there is the fact that three of my speakers fell off a truck in shipping and got destroyed. I had to redesign the woofer mounting because this kind of thing does happen. FED-EX says that you have to be able to withstand a freefall from 36" - thats a big problem to a 30 lb woofer. I had worries about the initial mounting change and now I can see that my wories were well founded. The mounting if fine, even excess, for normal use, but a free fall drop from 3 feet!! Thats something else. SO blaim Fed-Ex and UPS for much of the price increases and ALL of the shipping and handling increases.
To the guy who sold his "Geddes" speakers - wow thats a first! I'm curious who you are and when you bought them (your name does not ring a bell) - I have records of all my sales and I'd like to know what you bought.
-
Meh. There are lots of small speaker companies that seem to do what you say is impossible. It just seems you do not value these customers as much as your others, which sucks when you drop thousands of dollars.
-
Meh. There are lots of small speaker companies that seem to do what you say is impossible. It just seems you do not value these customers as much as your others, which sucks when you drop thousands of dollars.
I am sorry that you feel that way, but unfortunately it is somewhat true. Would you turn down an offer for a job at twice what you were currently making because you "valued your customers"? Come on - if they were actually good customers then they would understand, its only the few who don't. Do you want your money back? No problem!
-
time for me to put in my 2 cents. I admire the small businessman. you succeed or you fail. for now Gedlee is
following his own business model. we should respect that. If he has a deficit will you make up the difference.
we can make suggestions but Gedlee has the right to do what he wants. If I had the money which I don't I
would buy his speakers in a heart beat and wait 18 months if necessary. why because GedLee is the best for
the money no BS from him. There are thousands of speakers out there supports the guys you think are the best for you. I support Gedlee because in the beginning many many years in the past made a great speaker
called the summa but nobody cared. not interested. he was so far under the radar. and now audiophile are
discovering GedLee and buying his speakers. I support him because he has a PHD, he publish in scientific
journals. He has a great science background. I suggest you guys google his resume. GedLee simply makes
great speakers. It would be a terrible loss if he decided not to make anymore speakers. for GedLee speakers
are a labor of love. we need these speakers. making music come alive is what you do. you cannot give it up. charge what you think you have to to survive. If there are long waits that is a good because that means
people want to buy. one drops out another takes his place. GedLee please don't stop making speakers.
-
If I had the money which I don't I
would buy his speakers in a heart beat and wait 18 months if necessary.
Just curious - have you heard them?
-
The fact is people would kill for his buzz but he cannot work it.
-
I'd like to step in here before anyone gets too emotional over any of the several issues in play on the thread presently. So far everyone's been fairly respectful of each other and I'd like to see it continue, so a gentle reminder to do so might be in order, thanks for your forbearance.
As for Dr. Geddes' business model, he is quite clear that presently it's like any craftsman building products to order, one or two at a time and the waiting list is long. I fail to see the difficulty in accepting this. He fully recognizes that this is not the best way to run a speaker company and lists the reasons why he's unwilling and/or unable to change things at the present time. Am I missing something here?
-
Well, for one thing, this is a non-commercial area of the site, yet Geddes is continuing to use it as a platform for his promotional activities. Not very sportsmanlike.
-
Lord knows many of us small business owners trying to make a living in audio would love to be in Earl's position with a huge backlog of orders.
Interested forum dwellers should remember quite a few things about Earl's products (such as the Constant Directivity horns and high efficiency drivers) can be found in designs from other manufacturers. Of course some of Earl's tech with the specific horn design is unique to him, but then other companies also have things that are unique to them too.
Some other ideas if the waiting list is too long:
Audiokinesis (e.g. the Jazz, which is less than a pair of Abbey's), which has already been mentioned and I have heard very good things about from my friends in the acoustics community.
PHC (Professional Home Cinema, the designer is none other than Paul Hales, who some of you may remember from 10yrs ago) who have been quietly making digitally crossed over home theater systems for many years now and have come up with a few new models recently at much lower price points, some of which are definitely suitable for home audio use. A model equivalent to the Abbey, the SCR12sm is around 25% more expensive than the assembled Abbey.
Also I believe one of the smallest Danley horns (SM-60M) is at a similar price point.
All other options worth investigating. PHC I am more familiar with, Danley and AudioKinesis less so. Jeff Hedback is a good person to ask about AudioKinesis.
-
Since this thread is really about Abbey's, I've started a new thread to discuss Geddes speakers and the design in general.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=96950.new#new
-
Oh for fuck's sake. More bloody Geddes threads. He can't deliver anyway, what's the point??
-
Oh for fuck's sake. More bloody Geddes threads. He can't deliver anyway, what's the point??
jtwrace, who started this thread, is indicated clearly that this primarly about his speakers. It's also not about Geddes speaker in general. And the other thread is about Summas. So, I would say there's a need for a thread about all Geddes speakers.
If Geddes speakers don't interestest you, you can simply stay away from the threads. I would appreciate if you can delete your message in the thread I started. It has no purpose.
-
Well, I would appreciate it if Geddes would follow the conventions and expectations of this site, and use the commercial areas as per the setup and overall guidelines. Then you guys who want to be his evangelists can post there, and those of us who are not interested can use our ignore lists, and we will all be happy.
-
Well, I would appreciate it if Geddes would follow the conventions and expectations of this site, and use the commercial areas as per the setup and overall guidelines. Then you guys who want to be his evangelists can post there, and those of us who are not interested can use our ignore lists, and we will all be happy.
I've started the thread, not Geddes, to discuss his speakers and design. I don't see the problem. Is it not allowed to discuss and share experiences of a speaker brand with other people here?
And why the negative tone?
-
Yes but, inevitably, Geddes will join in and use it to his advantage. After all, it's free, so why not.
Regarding negative tone - well, I have been doing this for many many years now and am pretty much fed up with people who value themselves over anyone else. Hope that is clear enough.
-
Holy Moly!!!! :o
I had no idea my post about my nine+ month wait would spark such a spirited debate. In any case, I am fine with Earl Geddes' business model. It wouldn't be my model but I am sure that he is trying to get a faster turn around on his speakers.
I spent quite some time reading the links to what Rajacat listed and found them facinating.
Again, it is my choice whether or not I want to wait so long to receive my Abbey's and have that amount of money tied up. Earl has no problem refunding my deposit if that is my direction.
Since this thread is really about Abbey's, I've started a new thread to discuss Geddes speakers and the design in general.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=96950.new#new
Once again, I will point you to this thread in the "Products Support" area... :D
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=56687.0
Regards,
Randy
-
Did I miss something or don't you have $5000 tied up, not $1700?
-
Once again, I will point you to this thread in the "Products Support" area... :D
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=56687.0
Regards,
Randy
I've seen the thread, but it's about Summa. So I don't think it serves the purpose. But perhaps Earl Geddes could change the topic?
-
Did I miss something or don't you have $5000 tied up, not $1700?
You put down a deposit. Not the total amount. So yes, you missed something.
Anand.
-
OK. So a year to wait for a kit? Is that about the status?
-
:D i bought Super V's because wait times in this day and age are simply out of the question.plus i want to hear that bass V's make....lost a customer here as i would like to hear these,but will not wait 10 months...... :D
-
OK. So a year to wait for a kit? Is that about the status?
Yup.
I had my deposit in December 2010. Am I worried I won't get my money back? Nope. I've got a center Abbey, 4 Harpers and 2 subs on order.
When will they arrive? When they do. I'm comfortable with that for now.
Anand.
-
Yup.
I had my deposit in December 2010. Am I worried I won't get my money back? Nope. I've got a center Abbey, 4 Harpers and 2 subs on order.
When will they arrive? When they do. I'm comfortable with that for now.
Anand.
I thought you already had something.
-
could the baffles/WAVEGUIDE be fashioned from cultured marble? Geddes could then farm it out to a likely to be starving cultured marble shop. The entire front baffle could be done one piece, require no additional finishing. Geddes should also significantly lower his kit price....he would likely turn a much higher volume to the point of higher gross profit. The diy'er really only needs his waveguide, box dimensions and crossover schematic anyway. The diy crowd is about to push him in to obsolescence anyway....have you seen the new waveguides they have on the group buys? Very impressive fr graphs. A nine month wait is excessive...no product can survive that kind of lead time, especially technology.....
or maybe not.....idrgara.
edit: baffle/WAVEGUIDE
-
I thought you already had something.
Yes I have a pair of Abbeys (they took 8 months to arrive).
But I am building a full theater.
Anand.
-
But I am building a full theater.
Anand.
7.3 right?
-
Yes I have a pair of Abbeys (they took 8 months to arrive).
But I am building a full theater.
Anand.
OK, sorry, I did think getting one Abbey was a little odd. (hah hah)
-
As for Dr. Geddes' business model, he is quite clear that presently it's like any craftsman building products to order, one or two at a time and the waiting list is long. I fail to see the difficulty in accepting this. He fully recognizes that this is not the best way to run a speaker company and lists the reasons why he's unwilling and/or unable to change things at the present time. Am I missing something here?
Not that I can see, and thanks for that. It's good to see that my points can be understood. I'm not trying to be "commercial" here, but people are saying and hypothesize a lot of things and I thought it best to tell the story "from the horses mouth" - not the other way arround :)
-
Not that I can see, and thanks for that. It's good to see that my points can be understood. I'm not trying to be "commercial" here, but people are saying and hypothesize a lot of things and I thought it best to tell the story "from the horses mouth" - not the other way arround :)
Yes but, we've heard it all before. Nothing changes except the price and the specifics of whatever insurmountable problem it is that you are having this month.
-
7.3 right?
Yah, but the third sub (Ultra Low Frequency) is from a different manufacturer :wink:
Anand.
-
I've moved this thread to Audio Industry Discussion. Since this is not a sponsored thread, discussion of and pointers to other speakers with similar design principles is also encouraged.
Thanks.
-
At his invitation I went to Charlotte last weekend to take a listen to Jason’s Gedlee Abbey’s and multi-sub set-up. He asked me to post my impressions so that others can benefit from an objective listener point of view versus the system owner’s. Jason played several tracks for me ranging from classical to blues to rock – even though the music was new to me I knew that his system was giving me one of the best presentations I have ever heard.
As we moved on to music that I brought with me my impression did not change - I was listening to a very very satisfying system. I am certainly not an audio reviewer but what I took away from my audition of the Abbey’s and multi-subs was: (1) excellent bass integration and quality of bass – dynamic, deep, and full - most systems I have heard always exhibit some boxiness and/or muddiness thru the bass region – not the case here at all; (2) effortless dynamics and SPL’s – there is no hint of strain at all no matter how loud you push the system; (3) a wide enveloping sound stage – on live recordings I never felt like I wasn’t in the concert hall; (4) very clear and lifelike vocals without hardness; (5) a level of detail on some recordings I have not heard in any other system – not etched or overbearing detail but natural additional information which adds significantly to enjoying the music; (6) and finally to me one of the most important aspects of a speaker system the ability to draw you into the music and make you tap your foot. I never got any listener fatigue in any kind of music we listened to, just a desire to keep listening to more music.
Probably the best part of my visit was being introduced to great new music – thanks Jason. His system is one that I would not hesitate to recommend to anyone regardless of your musical taste.
-
It was great to meet you Ben. Glad you liked the music! :thumb:
-
I want those Abbey's now Earl! :D