Enter the Salk Sound SS8 R&L towers to anchor a 7.2.4 system.( I originally thought I'd do a 9.2.6 system but Pogre talked me out of it-overkill-). I decided on the SS7c center, and I'm stuck on what to do for the 4 surrounds. I read some fantastic reviews on the BMR and thought those would be great but was advised those might be overkill in a HT system as surrounds
I have two comments. First, check on the availability of Salk SS8 speakers. I thought it's woofers are no longer available. I believe this was the reason why he developed the newer SS9.5 model. Jim Salk may have a small number of SS8 woofers in his hands, but how might their limited numbers affect the SS8's price? Be sure to ask about that.
Second, I believe the BMR speaker, a 3-way stand-mounted monitor, is an excellent speaker. They are the least expensive speaker, with the smallest cabinet, that qualifies as a nearly full-range no-compromise 3-way speaker. They are, in my opinion, the World's Champion at creating a convincing image and sound stage. But I think it would be a shame to use BMRs as surround speakers. And I would hesitate to spend so much for surround speakers. Of course, it's your money and your choice what to buy, not mine.
FWIW, I have a pair of Salk Veracity ST front left & right speakers, a Salk SongCenter with dome tweeter, and use an older pair of NHT SuperZeros as rear channel speakers in 5 channel system. I usually use 2-channels for music, but not always. I almost always use 5 channels for video. While I can readily tell the difference between the front Salk and rear NHT speakers, I find their overall neutral balance is similar enough to allow them to blend well, especially on older recordings from the 1970s.
The differences between the Veracity ST speakers and the SongCenter are even less obvious. Some older recorded music, when played in my system, seems to sound better if I play it not as 2-channel, but 3-channel. My AVR allows me to choose that option. I suspect filling in at the center of the sound stage is caused by my speaker arrangement, something not easily changed.
I think a large part of it depends on what you want to spend and if you plan to listen to multi channel music at all.
I agree in general with NINaudio, but not when he says:
If you have any plans to go with multichannel music I'd personally want to have similarly capable speakers with matching tweeters. So I'd stick with something with a RAAL ribbon in that case, like BMR's or supercharged song surrounds.
I think the major differences come, not from the tweeter, but from the mid-range driver that works at frequencies below the tweeter. It's off-axis dispersion is beginning to fall off as frequency increases. The tweeter's off-axis performance doesn't become an issue until frequencies are much higher.
In my email exchanges with Jim, he in essence told me that you could mix and match any of his speakers as they are all voiced to the same standard. (as in pick what you want to spend on surrounds from him and get what fits your budget) If you're going to mostly stick with stereo music, I'd be inclined to get less expensive surrounds and put more money into my mains and/or center.
I would readily agree with what Jim Salk said. The 'voicing' of a speaker, as determined by the crossover designer is more important than the type of tweeter or mid-range driver. Because Dennis Murphy designed all these speaker crossovers, his consistent 'voicing' will be present in all of them.
Please keep us informed as you make up your mind. Nothing else on AH is so much fun to read about
.
