[jtwrace]

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. 

[rollo]

  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
 

[jtwrace]

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.

[poseidonsvoice]

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.

[gedlee]

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.

[JoshK]

Very interesting post Dr. G!

[gedlee]

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".

[jtwrace]

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 

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. 

[mgalusha]

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.

[jtwrace]

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?

[mgalusha]

What remote?

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=47777.0 for more info.

[AJinFLA]

Still searching for an audition .
I'm heading up/down the east coast for the 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 .

cheers,

AJ

p.s. I don't look quite as bad as my avatar in real life. Close though.

[jtwrace]

Still searching for an audition .
I'm heading up/down the east coast for the 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 .

cheers,

AJ

p.s. I don't look quite as bad as my avatar in real life. Close though.

reply sent

[Bjorn]

Here's a picture of my Harpers. Still waiting for Abbeys and bandbass subs.

Like the stands? 


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.

[jtwrace]

Here's a picture of my Harpers. Still waiting for Abbeys and bandbass subs.

Like the stands? 

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.

[Russell Dawkins]

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

[jtwrace]

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. 

[gedlee]

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".

[jtwrace]

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.   

[poseidonsvoice]

Here's a picture of my Harpers. Still waiting for Abbeys and bandpass subs.

Like the stands? 

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.