[mgalusha]

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.

[TRADERXFAN]

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

[dwr]

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.

[dwr]

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! 

[TomS]

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

[AJinFLA]

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  .

cheers,

AJ

[jtwrace]

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.

[mgalusha]

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.

[brj]

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.

[Wayne1]

How 'bout this one, Brian?

[brj]

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.

[dwr]

Wayne, how old is that picture??

[brj]

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.)

[TRADERXFAN]

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

[jtwrace]

How long does it usually take Dr. Geddes to reply to email?  It was super quick and now it's been 3 days.   

[Wind Chaser]

3 days is nothing.  If it was weeks, that would be another story.

[goskers]

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.

[poseidonsvoice]

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.

[Tyson]

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.

[jtwrace]

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?   

Not me!