[brj]

There is something about the Jazz Modules Abbey's proportion together with the veneer Black Satin Paint that makes they very attractive.   

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!

[doug s.]

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:




a mullet present
will detract from the looks of
attractive speakers
 

doug s.

[cujobob]

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.

[Wind Chaser]

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.

[cujobob]

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.

[Wind Chaser]

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.

[jtwrace]

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. 

[nicksgem10s]

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  .

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.   

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

[Wind Chaser]

When I asked and was told about the electronics he used in this system my jaw hit the floor  .

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.

[nicksgem10s]

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!

[cujobob]

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.

[brj]

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.

[Wind Chaser]

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.

[poseidonsvoice]

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.

[brj]

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*)

[poseidonsvoice]

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 

Best,
Anand.

[lonewolfny42]

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...

[cujobob]

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.

[jtwrace]

Thanks for all the feedback.  Next up, the audition.   

[cloudbaseracer]

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