Hi Tyson:
Glad to see your build went well. Since we have both heard Mike Galusha's system which includes Dr. Geddes' Abbeys, and you have now built(although still not dialed in) the V-2's, I was hoping you could comment on the differences between the two speakers in regards to soundstage, imaging, etc. that you could share pertaining to classical music. I am not interested in which is the "better" speaker, but rather the differences. I realize it is a challenge to compare as I am well aware of the killer equipment that Mike is currently using! You don't have to respond until you get the V-2's more "dialed" in.
BTW, our orchestra is performing the Rachmoninov #2 with Andre Watts in November. Looking forward to it as I am the Principal Clarinet and will be playing the gorgeous solo at the beginning of the 2nd movement. 
Randy
That's awesome regarding Watts coming, he's a really great pianist! That clarinet solo is pretty exposed!
Regarding the Gedlee's, right now there's no question Mike's system sounds better in most respects. He has a very well treated, dedicated room with unlimited placement flexibility, while I have only a very limited set of options and no treatment at all in my living room. Plus the V2's aren't even broken in yet. And, he's got a world-class tubed preamp and is able to cycle between multiple different tube amps depending on mood or music needs (although I'd probably stick with that killer SET he has full time, myself).
Having said that, I'll state how they are similar first before I get to differences. Both the V2's and the Gedlee's are incredibly dynamic and precise sounding. Much more so than most "conventional" audiophile type speakers. They also both have about the best midrange-to-tweeter transition I've ever heard, particularly off axis. This integration seems to be easy to do on-axis, lots of speakers do it well. But, when you move to the side, most speakers have a pretty big change in power response and that makes the tweeter sound a bit isolated and hot, and the upper mids a bit muffled. The Gedlee's and V2's are far better at this than anything else I've heard. Finally, because they are so efficient and coherent sounding, there's a "pop" to the sound that really gets the toes tapping.
Differences are harder to state with full certainty because the V2's are still breaking in, and the other factors in the rest of our systems are going to play a large role. The most obvious example is tone, smoothness, and soundstage. Mike gets great tone and smoothness in his setup with fully broken in speakers and top flight tube gear, while my V2's (as I said in my last post) get a bit "spitty" with the breakin occuring and a digital, solid state preamp. I do think the V2's will smooth out, and I'm having a custom (very high end) tube preamp being built for me. I think with these changes the V2 will likely get close or at least match Mike's setup. The other area the Mike's setup excels is soundstage - huge, deep, very precise. I haven't spent enough time in the sweet spot in my setup to even begin to judge the V2's in this aspect, so I can't comment much here.
One area that I definitely do prefer the V2's is in the bass area, because I have such a difficult room. For me, box speakers just don't do well in my room. So, regardless of the other sterling qualities of the Gedlees, the bass from them (or from a box sub) would still be a major issue, that even my very powerful DEQX Room-EQ capabilities have a difficult time with. With the DEQX and box speakers, I can optimize things for one or 2 locations in the room, but control for other areas of the room drops off. With the V2's, the bass loads my room much more evenly, so I can walk around and get roughly the same bass energy/pressure on the far end as on the near end of the L shape.
Hope this helps!
