Impressions of Salk SongTowers

[jostenmeat]

I own SongTowers, and a DIY 2-way (the CAOW1, see link below) that is essentially the same as the SongSurround I. I'd say they have a close family resemblance across the midrange and higher frequencies, like big and little brothers. The smaller SSI will have less bass and will not be as sensitive as the MTM towers. You can easily order 3 from Salk.

Thanks for your reply. At a glance, I cannot find certain specs like nominal impedance for the SS1. I must presume they will be an easier load, for my friend will only have an HT receiver to power the speakers. I see that the STs are 4 ohm nominal, but otherwise I don't know how difficult they are as far as minimal impedance, phase angle issues, etc.

FWIW, he listens at moderate volumes. I've only been asked to turn my own HT's volume down twice, possibly three times, and he was one of those times. Although he did once bring over a Jimi concert, and he sure didn't ask to turn it down then.

I knew the specified height of the ST, but seeing it in the photos now makes me keenly realize that an identical tower center will force the display to be too high. (FWIW, I never pushed the 3 identical speaker idea on him; he just wants it because he knows how strongly I feel about it). The SSIIs being mtm, with a lower than ideal placement does not seem to work too well either. I suppose he can have offset with either SS1/SongCenter + STs/SSIIs.

I heard some Aperion 6Ts, but not the 5T, just last week at the Oregon GTG. I don't remember them well, because they were OK but not as memorable as other speakers I heard that day. I did hear another tower, the EMP E5Ti towers $400 a pair, that I did like more than the 6T.

Thanks very much for you subjective review. The EMPs are interesting for both the price and the shorter height. People seem to like these speakers quite a bit, altough the reviews aren't quite as rave as with Salk, and I am curious if these can be purchased "individually" as well.

My SongTowers are with a standard cherry veneer and have the standard black satin finish on the upper half of the front baffle. See photos.

They look very lovely. It's really nice to see such grade of cabinet finish at this price point.

I'm Swerd's little brother for those who don't know, so I've seen and heard his STs (and all the others). I recently helped a neighbor get the high gloss black STs which show the satin black under the grill like many STs. They are both nice. High gloss black (think piano finish) is beautiful but a pain for dust and fingerprints. I prefer it to the satin but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Thanks. How do you feel about the differences between SS1/SS2/ST? I know Swerd is a fan of the tweeters, but does missing out on the QWT design sort of defeat the purpose of buying Salk? I suppose not, but I wonder.

[Swerd]

Thanks for your reply. At a glance, I cannot find certain specs like nominal impedance for the SS1. I must presume they will be an easier load, for my friend will only have an HT receiver to power the speakers. I see that the STs are 4 ohm nominal, but otherwise I don't know how difficult they are as far as minimal impedance, phase angle issues, etc.

The SS1s have 8 ohm impedance. And yes, they (that is my CAOW1s) are an easy load for any amp I've used including an old 30 wpc stereo receiver.

For what its worth, the STs are nominally 4 ohms, but they are also a very easy load. I've driven mine with an old Denon HT receiver that does 70 wpc. Salk says any amp that delivers an honest 50 wpc will drive them. I have heard STs nicely driven by a 30 wpc tube amp. So even though I now use a 200 wpc amp for them, STs are an easy load than most any HT receiver can drive.

This is an impedance curve for the STs, red is impedance in ohms and green is impedance phase in degrees. It can be found here. They go as low as 4 ohms, but never lower.

I knew the specified height of the ST, but seeing it in the photos now makes me keenly realize that an identical tower center will force the display to be too high. (FWIW, I never pushed the 3 identical speaker idea on him; he just wants it because he knows how strongly I feel about it). The SSIIs being mtm, with a lower than ideal placement does not seem to work too well either. I suppose he can have offset with either SS1/SongCenter + STs/SSIIs.

SongTowers are listed as 44.5" high, but with the plinths you should add about 2" depending on how deep the spikes sink into the carpet.

Realize that the SongCenter and SSII are essentially identical.

Thanks. How do you feel about the differences between SS1/SS2/ST? I know Swerd is a fan of the tweeters, but does missing out on the QWT design sort of defeat the purpose of buying Salk? I suppose not, but I wonder.

I'm not Dan, but I'll give my answer anyway.

The QWT transmission line design primarily affects the bass performance of the ST. The main feature of Salk sound that I like so much, a crisp clean present midrange with excellent dispersion and imaging comes in all the Song series models. It is largely a result of midrange performance due to the crossover design, and that is independent of how the cabinet handles bass.

The ST and the SSII are MTM designs, and they do have a differing dispersion patterns and presentation than the SSI. But they all share a strong family resemblance.

[jostenmeat]

Thanks very much Swerd. He is now more strongly considering fireplace mounting, which will necessitate the horiz center. I'm not sure how ugly a shelf mounted large speaker will be above the roughly 3 ft tall tv, but I hope he can do the Salks. I find on-wall speakers to be value-poor, speaking performance for the dollar.

[Warpdrv]

I know that Denon makes good AVRs despite having a $500 Ethernet cable: but it's hard to want to invest time in auditioning Salk speakers given their advocacy of "better sounding cables" http://www.salksound.com/cables.shtml

hahah never saw that...

Can't say that I approve, but I'll put a dope load of money on the fact the only reason is because he is selling speakers to people that buy into the hype, and if they want it, why not sell it to them...

I would...

Advise against it, but if they truly want it - here ya go...

[JerryLove]

Can't say that I approve, but I'll put a dope load of money on the fact the only reason is because he is selling speakers to people that buy into the hype, and if they want it, why not sell it to them...

It's not so much selling it that concerned me. It's his own hype of them.

From the website:

"To my surprise, I immediately heard a difference (as did practically everyone at the Chicago Audiofest where I met Carl). And the difference was not subtle."

This thread made me go look at the speakers in the first place. I love the look, and am a fan of ribbon tweeters and so many here loved them. Then I saw that and immediately wondered "what other claims on the site are also BS?".

[jinjuku]

I know that Denon makes good AVRs despite having a $500 Ethernet cable: but it's hard to want to invest time in auditioning Salk speakers given their advocacy of "better sounding cables" http://www.salksound.com/cables.shtml

Just like any respectable manufacturer they should stand behind their product. If they don't have a trial policy then I wouldn't give them my business.

[jsalk]

It's not so much selling it that concerned me. It's his own hype of them.

From the website:

"To my surprise, I immediately heard a difference (as did practically everyone at the Chicago Audiofest where I met Carl). And the difference was not subtle."

This thread made me go look at the speakers in the first place. I love the look, and am a fan of ribbon tweeters and so many here loved them. Then I saw that and immediately wondered "what other claims on the site are also BS?".

JerryLove -

First of all, thanks for pointing this out. The web pages in question were written a few years ago and, frankly, I really did not think much about them since. Here's some background...

We had been getting quite a few requests for recommendations on high end cables, but had nothing to recommend in those cases. About that time, I was attending a speaker meeting and ran into Carl Smith. The guy is an expert on wire, cable and braiding techniques. He spent his entire adult life designing and building high quality, noise-immune test cables for Bell Labs. He was just getting started building audio cables and offered to let me try a pair.

I'm personally conservative when it comes to issues like this and don't buy into much of the snake oil being sold in high end audio. I was quite skeptical at the time, but thought I'd give them a try. They arrived the same day someone was coming over for a demo. So at the end of the demo, we thought we'd just give them a listen. I wasn't expecting any change in performance and either was our customer. But to our amazement, the bass performance improved rather dramatically (it was not subtle).

So I offered to help Carl out and list his cables on our site for those who might be interested. I wrote up my impressions at the time, took some pictures and generated some web pages. If anyone expressed an interest, we just put them in contact with Carl and let them deal directly.

At the time we originally auditioned the cables, we happened to be running a 40 watt tube amp. Since that time, I have run Carl's cables with many other amps, most of which were solid state, and did not perceive any performance improvements. So I can only conclude the cables somehow loaded the original tube amp differently than the generic cables I had been using at the time.

Since the cables in question were not ours and were posted primarily to benefit Carl (and those customers who felt cables were important), I never paid much attention to the web pages after they were created.

Today, rather than spending the time to edit the pages, I simply removed them from our site. I may go back at some time and re-edit my comments so I can re-post the pages. But that will have to wait until I have some spare time.

Speaker cables and inter-connects are topics I generally try and avoid. There are strong feelings on both sides of the issue. To me, these are more like religious issues...either you believe or you don't. And while I certainly have a personal bias, I don't feel its my place to try and convert others to my point of view. I simply want to build great speakers and leave that topic to others to sort out.

Once again, thanks for pointing this out.

- Jim

[gene]

Jim;

Perhaps the cables are very low impedance which helped to improve damping of the tube amp. I suspect if you ran solid state amps, the variances you are hearing with difference cables would pretty much dissolve except for the deliberately poorly designed stuff. 10AWG zip cord is usually adequate enough for all speaker applications. If you are worried about noise, get twisted pair and be done with it. Also if your running a high capacitance cable, its probably a good idea to attach a zobel network across the speaker terminals. We have several articles on this topic you may wish to peruse.

http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/

Never blindly trust the claims of an exotic cable vendor no matter how good their intent allegedly is If his logic was correct than you should also change out the cables inside your speakers, inside your power amps and the 3k run of electrical wire from the power company to your house

I perused your site for a moment and saw you recommending star quad cables with 14AWG conductors. Those are good cables and yield an effective gauge of 11AWG. We have several articles with measurements from various manufacturers selling the exact same cable, most of them for a lot cheaper. There is no magic to good cable design.

[jinjuku]

JerryLove -

Speaker cables and inter-connects are topics I generally try and avoid. There are strong feelings on both sides of the issue. To me, these are more like religious issues...either you believe or you don't. And while I certainly have a personal bias, I don't feel its my place to try and convert others to my point of view. I simply want to build great speakers and leave that topic to others to sort out.

Once again, thanks for pointing this out.

- Jim

Thanks for the comprehensive post.

I think there are two major issues for a lot of people when it comes to cables:

1. No independent, repeatable measurement method. Just a bunch of esoteric sounding terms with people saying not everything heard can be 'measured'. Which in the realm of 20hz to 20khz is BS.

2. With some outfits (AQ and Kimber Kable) no trial. Hell you get 30 days to try amps and speakers for pete's sake! We are talking cables that can fit in a padded flat rate mailer.

I have no problem with BJC/Signal Cable etc... They at least let you try in your own home. I personally can not pony up $$ for a company that can't put it's money where it's mouth is. If the company has no faith in their product why ever in the world would I?

[jamie2112]

Yes, Gene is right about the low impedance cable with the tube amp.Otherwise as long as the cable is 12awg or better you really won't hear any difference in sound whatsoever,even measuring with meters there will be none.I know this because I have done the coathanger test with Kimber Audioquest and a few other not worth mentioning companies in a controlled DBT.Also there was Eddie Kramer there who was Jimi Hendrix's studio engineer and built Electric Ladyland studios in NYC.We could not hear a difference in the coat hanger and the $$$ KImbers at all.I really love the Salk sound but am very dissapointed to see the WWWAAAAYYYYY overpriced "snake oil" cables on your site.Not good Mr.Salk.Most of us here that have Real audio knowlage KNOW better than the claims made on your site.I am glad you took it down.You should know better Jim that this is going to get called out by the faithful here.LOve your speakers Jim but I would NEVER buy cables anywhere near the $ you are selling them for......... Thanks, Jamo