or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › The OFFICIAL GedLee Speakers Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The OFFICIAL GedLee Speakers Thread - Page 4

post #91 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by loopguru View Post

Isn't this generally done through x-over design?

Yes; failry common to attenuate tweeters using L-Pads
post #92 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

Is the only difference between the Abbey and the Nathan to low end? It looks like they have the same tweeter, same crossover, its just a different 10" driver vs the 12" driver. The 10" driver should still go fairly low and if I have a sub system no need to worry about it going that low.

Also, how does Geddes control the sensitivity mismatch between the woofers and the waveguild/tweeter design? It looks like one is 110dB and one is 92dBs.

I think that I missed this question originally - sorry.

The 12" woofer has about 3 dB more sensitivity and about 10 dB more headroom than the 10" so that makes a big difference in the systems sensitivity and headroom. Then the waveguide in the Abbey is bigger so it has better polar control. There are a lot of differences and all of them tend to make the Abbey the better speaker. But its also bigger, heavier and costs a lot more. Its up to you which suites your situation best.

The 12" woofer is about 95 dB sensitivity. The waveguide, being CD, has a falling response and is about 110 dB at the lower end, but at the upper end it is more like 98 dB. So most of the sensitivity matching is done via the frequency response tailoring required for CD. But this also yields a large limitation on the excursion requirements for the Compression Driver, meaning that almost no excursion is actually required at all. This is a major benefit.
post #93 of 135
Thread Starter 
Come on, GedLee owners, let's see some pictures of these in your set-ups.
post #94 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by loopguru View Post

Come on, GedLee owners, let's see some pictures of these in your set-ups.

I guess that they are too busy listening to take photos

As an update: making Harpers now, and I've sorted out the subwoofer designs so I'll be offering those as well. Its all on my web site.

Order queue is still pretty long, which is good and bad. Good that I'm busy, bad that I can't get more product out. I'm working on this. I will be gone to China at the end of the summer so that will delay things quite a bit. Basically an order now might just make it before I leave. Much later and I have to quote September or later.

New website coming. The old one is so bad that we are just dumping it. The new site will be at a new URL.
post #95 of 135
Because I cycle through gear on a regular basis, I try to pick things up second hand.

I've been watching Audiogon hoping to find some of these, but haven't.

Anyone got an idea of where else one might find a second hand set?
post #96 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan_h View Post

Because I cycle through gear on a regular basis, I try to pick things up second hand.

I've been watching Audiogon hoping to find some of these, but haven't.

Anyone got an idea of where else one might find a second hand set?

I would be surprised if anyone who owns these speakers is going to "cycle" them. I don't know of a single owner who has sold a pair. There have been some unmade kits sold, but that too has been very rare.

Let me know if you find any for sale used. I'd love to know why they were sold.
post #97 of 135
Lots of reasons people sell, other than sound quality: Lost job, wife wants something else, got the money to move up to a bigger model, moved into a home where they won't work, stole them from the neighbor's house. Okay just kidding about the last one.
post #98 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan_h View Post

Lots of reasons people sell, other than sound quality: Lost job, wife wants something else, got the money to move up to a bigger model, moved into a home where they won't work, stole them from the neighbor's house. Okay just kidding about the last one.

I'm sure there are, its just that it has not happened yet to my knowledge.
post #99 of 135
Any recommendation for a min / max wattage with Abbeys & the sub?

Joe
post #100 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jp_over View Post

Any recommendation for a min / max wattage with Abbeys & the sub?

Joe

This depends entirely on your listening habits. I use 100 watts and occasionaly clip, but I like loud. Less that that will work, but the amp will just clip at lower SPL levels. The system can handle a lot more power than you would ever want to listen to since they are so efficient. 250-500 wtts would not be out of the question, but I have actually played them with a headphone amp. The sub needs a lot of power, it not being nearly as efficient since its designed for LF extension not efficiency. 100 watts is probably not enough, 250 would be safe, 500 would give you a lot of headroom, but this too depends on your listening habits. The sub should have about twice the watts of the mains.
post #101 of 135
Thanks! Do you feel, the Abbeys would function well as a pair (subs included though I think I can only include 2) in a home theater setting with only 2 vs the standard 5 + speakers? I'm not necessarily looking for surround but I would like very clear dialouge when I'm watching a movie or the news.
post #102 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jp_over View Post

Thanks! Do you feel, the Abbeys would function well as a pair (subs included though I think I can only include 2) in a home theater setting with only 2 vs the standard 5 + speakers? I'm not necessarily looking for surround but I would like very clear dialouge when I'm watching a movie or the news.

They would work well, of course. I have always prefered a pair of great mains to any 5 channels of mediocre sound. As far as dialog goes though, a center channel is the way to go. Dialog is precisely why the center channel is used. But again, unless its a great quality center channel you are better off with phantom mode. In my experience with HT the front channels are about 90-95% of the perception. Of these three the left and right are about 70-80%. Thats a heavy weighting towards the importance of the two main channels, but the center is a big asset if you can do it right. A good pair of mains with a wimpy center (because you can't fit anything else) is a poor choice. Better to stick with just two channels than go with a degraded center.
post #103 of 135
Good info! Also, I'm trying to figure out a solution for my center. If I had 2 Abbeys & 1 Nathan - would it "match" (in terms of sound/provide seemless integration) or would I have to have 3 Abbeys or perhaps 3 Nathans?

I've been trying to find speaker stands as well but have only found one(linked Attachment 186187attached picture - looks really good!). Is this an option you offer or would a buyer need to find / design his own stands?

Last, what model receiver do you use? Of note, the vast majority of my listening is at low levels but on occassion, I listen a bit louder.

Thanks again!

Joe
LL
post #104 of 135
Three Abbeys would be best (with the center Abbey modified for axial listening - I do that), but two Abbeys and a Nathan is also a good choice.
post #105 of 135
I think that people might find this interesting:

http://videos.nj.com/star-ledger/201...rocket_sc.html

Note that the speakers that are used are Nathans. Prof Choueiri told me that these were the best speakers among the dozens of hi-end name brands that he measured. He said that they were also the only speakers that he measured to be the same as what the manufacturer claimed. Somehow he was surprised by that!
post #106 of 135
Wow - that's quite a "plug" for your speakers! Did you have a recommendation on stands or is this up to the buyer? Also, I've heard you use an old pioneer receiver - can you tell me which model?

Thanks!

Joe
post #107 of 135
I have upgraded my Pioneer receiver to the VSX-919 AH - I needed the HDMI inputs for Blue-Ray. Its sounds the same. I am planning on making stands, but I don't have that in place as yet. They just need to be 12"-18" high, nothing special. I used a milk carton for awhile
post #108 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jp_over View Post

I've been trying to find speaker stands as well but have only found one(linked Attachment 186187attached picture - looks really good!). Is this an option you offer or would a buyer need to find / design his own stands?

I guess Bose does make good stuff! Those are the 901 stands.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...als_Pair_.html
post #109 of 135
The Bose stands are quite acceptable. I think that they look great as well. And I like the fact that they would have minimal diffraction.
post #110 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by gedlee View Post
The Bose stands are quite acceptable. I think that they look great as well. And I like the fact that they would have minimal diffraction.

So you would be against a speaker stand that made the Abbey's look more similar to a floor stander? In other words, setting the speakers on a box of the same width and depth as the cabinet?

Cheers,

James
post #111 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudbaseracer View Post

So you would be against a speaker stand that made the Abbey's look more similar to a floor stander? In other words, setting the speakers on a box of the same width and depth as the cabinet?

Cheers,

James

Hi Jim

No, speaker stands are not critical (but obviuosly necessary), but perhaps I would say that they need to be robust. They should not have sharp edges, just as there should not be any sharp edges anywhere near the speaker mains - diffraction form these objects has a negative effect. Short of those two rules, stands are stands.

I am thinking of making matching stands for the Abbeys - ones that continue the look downward to the floor and which mate with the Abbeys without gaps or edges. Would this interest you?
post #112 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by gedlee View Post

Hi Jim

No, speaker stands are not critical (but obviuosly necessary), but perhaps I would say that they need to be robust. They should not have sharp edges, just as there should not be any sharp edges anywhere near the speaker mains - diffraction form these objects has a negative effect. Short of those two rules, stands are stands.

I am thinking of making matching stands for the Abbeys - ones that continue the look downward to the floor and which mate with the Abbeys without gaps or edges. Would this interest you?

Yes, that would be of much interest. Would they be of the same inert poly material?

James
post #113 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudbaseracer View Post

Yes, that would be of much interest. Would they be of the same inert poly material?

James

Yes, thats the plan. They would simply be a downward extension of the Abbey. I would then NOT route the bottom edge of the Abbey and not route the top edge of the stands. The two would then mate up perfectly. Identical paint and there would only be a small line visible between the two. The material and work would make this a $300 option (standard paint), but I can do them for you if you want.
post #114 of 135
Would this also be an option (matching stands) for the Nathans?
post #115 of 135
"this"? Is something missing?
post #116 of 135
Dr. Geddes,

Sorry for the confusion - I'd like to know if stands (similar to what you described for the Abbeys) would be available for the nathans. I can only fit a nathan in my entertainment center (a high dollar custom amish job - no replacement until I retire!).

I'm concerned that a nathan with 2 x abbeys would not be as balanced as 3 nathans. Also, my wife just doesn't like the looks of stands and a matching stand that makes the speaker simply look taller would solve this. Ideally, this stand would be permanently fixed to the speaker.

Thanks,

Joe
post #117 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jp_over View Post

Dr. Geddes,

Sorry for the confusion - I'd like to know if stands (similar to what you described for the Abbeys) would be available for the nathans. I can only fit a nathan in my entertainment center (a high dollar custom amish job - no replacement until I retire!).

I'm concerned that a nathan with 2 x abbeys would not be as balanced as 3 nathans. Also, my wife just doesn't like the looks of stands and a matching stand that makes the speaker simply look taller would solve this. Ideally, this stand would be permanently fixed to the speaker.

Thanks,

Joe

I get it now. Sure that would be an option. But it is not feasible, nor a very good idea, to make the stand and the speaker 1 piece. I just can't handle the greater size of material in one piece. Split into the speaker and the base, I can do that. Then there is only a thin line between the two.
post #118 of 135
Thanks for the quick response.

Forgive my ignorance, but I'm having trouble understanding your frequency response graphs for the Abbey and Nathan. What type of low frequency extension can I expect in room with both of these. From my limited knowledge, -6 is where useful sound begins to fall off. At what hz would this be for the nathan and abbey?
post #119 of 135
The solid line is -6 dB, so for exampe, the Abbey is -6 dB at about 77 Hz. These are full free field measurements and not the typical 1/2 space or other as virtyually everone else does. So comparisons will be difficult. In a real room you would probably get to about 50 Hz with room gain, but thats completely room dependent.
post #120 of 135
What a fantastic thread. I'm in Windsor and I may just have to get a passport just to visit and check these out.

I'm curious about something though. Specifically related to the multiple subs/Different subs idea.

You have been pushing the use of Multiple subs and different tonal tuning subs.

What about infinite Baffle systems used with the Abbeys?

Is there a reason that no one has brought IB systems up?

Do they not work well with waveguide technology?

I was always under the impression that a properly done IB Sub system was pretty much as good as it gets.

Is that technology compatible with your system Dr.?

Thanks!

Test,
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › The OFFICIAL GedLee Speakers Thread