Talk:Leslie speaker

Smiths : How Soon Is Now?
IMO, another very popular use of the Leslie Speaker was in The Smiths song How Soon Is Now? during the song opening and throughout the song. This is a prototypical example for some college music classes. If I find a reference for this then I'll add that to the Notable Users section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtmoon (talk • contribs) 18:42, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The Hammond/Leslie "marriage" became a standard in the Gospel music beggining in the forties. Many African-American churches adopted this arrangement as a compliment to piano, as it gave a a good approximation of far more expensive pipe organs. Often the system constitsed of a Hammond B3 or C3 with the Hammond PR40 tone cabinet nd a Leslie 122RV, placed above the choir loft so thattherotqtiong Leslie would have its effect greatly enhanced the effect for a very impressive sound.
 * Many jazz and blues musicians polished their arts in such churches. 108.227.225.226 (talk) 06:32, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

"Because the Leslie is a sound modification device in its own right, ...."
Forgive the dullness of those of us who don't find that clear, but how has that property of the device stimulated efforts at simulation? --Jerzy ("Simulates-a-state-of-being-stimulated") [NO SURNAME]•t 00:28, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * What on earth are you talking about? Grab a Hammond and Leslie, stand in the middle of the room, get one person to play a note and listen. Or read the citations that talk about it in the body, particularly Scott Faragher's excellent Hammond / Leslie book. Or play File:LeslieCabinetSlowFastSlow.ogg. For a practical example, Santana uses lots of slow / fast Leslie switching, while Made in Japan has no Leslie at all, but has the Hammond going through a Marshall Stack. You should be able to easily hear the difference. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:29, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Leslie speaker. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120115144857/http://www.trekii.com/UC1A.html to http://www.trekii.com/UC1A.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131007131458/http://hammondorganco.com/products/leslie/122xb/ to http://hammondorganco.com/products/leslie/122xb/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:58, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Speaker animation
The animation is slightly inaccurate in it's depiction of the Leslie speaker function, in that the animation depicts both the horn (treble) rotors and the woofer drum (bass) rotors rotating in the same direction, while the Wikipedia entry for the similar Sharma speaker notes that in a Leslie, these two components rotate in opposite directions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.177.164 (talk • contribs)

Other musical applications
I think it's worth mentioning its importance in Gospel music, especially that of the African-American churches... Many famous jazz and blues singers began their careers by either playing through or singing with a Hammond B3 or C3. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.227.225.226 (talk) 06:09, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Possessive plural for company names?
In the first section of this article, I see "Hammond were not interested". The reference is to the electric organ mfg. company.

This is the first time I've encountered this anywhere. Does using "were" in this context comply Wiki style? 74.198.131.130 (talk) 09:24, 16 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Probably just a UK/US thing. Given that it's about a US company/product/inventor, "was" should probably prevail (AIUI it specifically refers to Mr Hammond anyway) but as I'm English I'm biased in favour of the UK, er, flavour. --Vometia (talk) 08:38, 22 January 2023 (UTC)


 * That's probably a mistake, as a British editor, I probably did that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  14:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)