GedLee Abbey's Feedback Wanted!

poseidonsvoice · « **Reply #280 on:** 10 Oct 2010, 08:37 pm »

Quote from: dwr on 10 Oct 2010, 08:20 pm

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....

When JTW comes over in a few weeks to listen, he can give you guys a more impartial viewpoint.

Anand.

jtwrace · « **Reply #281 on:** 10 Oct 2010, 08:48 pm »

Quote from: poseidonsvoice on 10 Oct 2010, 08:37 pm

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?

Quote

When JTW comes over in a few weeks to listen, he can give you guys a more impartial viewpoint.

dwr · « **Reply #282 on:** 10 Oct 2010, 08:52 pm »

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.

mgalusha · « **Reply #283 on:** 10 Oct 2010, 09:11 pm »

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

dwr · « **Reply #284 on:** 10 Oct 2010, 09:33 pm »

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.

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #285 on:** 10 Oct 2010, 09:56 pm »

Quote from: mgalusha on 10 Oct 2010, 09:11 pm

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....

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/diy/0309/gedlee_abbey.htm

Wind Chaser · « **Reply #286 on:** 10 Oct 2010, 10:09 pm »

About the crossovers, are they first, second, or third order? Just wondering if this plays into the dynamic capacity.

mgalusha · « **Reply #287 on:** 10 Oct 2010, 11:10 pm »

Quote from: Wind Chaser on 10 Oct 2010, 10:09 pm

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.

poseidonsvoice · « **Reply #288 on:** 10 Oct 2010, 11:43 pm »

Quote from: Wind Chaser on 10 Oct 2010, 10:09 pm

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

. 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.

Wind Chaser · « **Reply #289 on:** 10 Oct 2010, 11:50 pm »

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.

dwr · « **Reply #290 on:** 11 Oct 2010, 12:05 am »

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.

poseidonsvoice · « **Reply #291 on:** 11 Oct 2010, 01:16 am »

Quote from: dwr on 11 Oct 2010, 12:05 am

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.

dwr · « **Reply #292 on:** 11 Oct 2010, 01:36 am »

That is exactly what Earl told me also Anand that the difference in the crossover in the two was minimal.

JohnR · « **Reply #293 on:** 11 Oct 2010, 05:48 am »

Quote from: JoshK on 8 Oct 2010, 07:14 pm

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

TRADERXFAN · « **Reply #294 on:** 11 Oct 2010, 05:53 am »

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.

JohnR · « **Reply #295 on:** 11 Oct 2010, 06:02 am »

Quote from: TRADERXFAN on 11 Oct 2010, 05:53 am

http://www.gedlee.com/downloads/Philosophy.pdf

HI, thanks - not sure how I missed that, but it doesn't explain the theory -

Quote

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.]

turkey · « **Reply #296 on:** 11 Oct 2010, 01:36 pm »

Quote from: dwr on 10 Oct 2010, 05:29 pm

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.

turkey · « **Reply #297 on:** 11 Oct 2010, 01:39 pm »

Quote from: dwr on 10 Oct 2010, 07:12 pm

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.

turkey · « **Reply #298 on:** 11 Oct 2010, 01:44 pm »

Quote from: dwr on 10 Oct 2010, 08:20 pm

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.

cujobob · « **Reply #299 on:** 11 Oct 2010, 01:51 pm »

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.