How much better do better speakers actually sound? Where's the breaking point of value/performance?

[baronvonellis]

Congrats!

The 3A is more sensitive to your source music for sure...while the listener is rewarded more with good recordings, bad recordings are exposed moreso as well.

I've been waiting 2 months so far for my Salks. Personally I found the Accutron to sound like everything was etched in stone. It's hard to describe, it was a bit too detailed for me personally, but if you like it that's great! Plus the 3A's are over my budget so it was a easy choice. The RAAL tweeter is phenomenal, and the Satori woofer was very punchy and dynamic. I think it's the best woofer I've heard as well. I listened to very good quality SACD recordings, classical, jazz, rock. But it could have been the guys receiver was a 15 year old class D amp, with old DACs. Those older DACs can sound harsher than new ones, it could have been the DAC that I was hearing. He had the speakers against the wall so the setup wasn't idea, that's the downside of trying it in someone else's home.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

it could have been the DAC that I was hearing.

When it comes to the human brain and sensory, it could have been anything.

It could have been your mood at that exact moment in time.

 

[ryanosaur]

Personally I found the Accutron to sound like everything was etched in stone.

Interesting that you chose that phrase. "Etched" is seemingly common in describing that Accuton mid. FWIW, while corresponding with Dennis recently, I asked about his preferred Mids: Mainly looking at what other premium mid-woofs are like and why he felt that way. In order (based on my understanding from a few different missives):
The Tectonic BMR. Wide dispersion, great detail, and when treated properly in the design process, very well behaved.
The Accuton Mid used in Salk's speakers. High quality and exceptional detail.
Audio Technology used in Salk's speakers. Solid driver
Eton Mid used in Salk's speakers. Inconsistent quality but can be good.

He had the speakers against the wall so the setup wasn't idea, that's the downside of trying it in someone else's home.

Dennis recommendation for the Phil 3s (and I think this is true for any rear port/terminus/open back design) was to have them several feet into the room. The open back design for the BG Planar in the Phil 3 is nice, and I noticed subtle but distict changes in SQ as I experimented with placing the 3s in my small room. Something like that Accuton would probably benefit from that same rule-of-thumb. Potentially, there could even be a case made for a small acoustic diffraction/absorbtion panel behind the speaker (depending on how the rest of the room measures, of course).
My audition with the 3s was the same but different. The guy did have things dialed in pretty well. He had the upper cabinet fully stuffed with the supplied poly-fill, plus had a small foam egg-crate panel behind each speaker. They were up against the wall with not too much distance from speaker to LP, but the overall floor-plan and room was very open which allowed that TL Bass to expand and move around.
Contrary to your experience though, the guy was running Tidal: computer/Schiit Yggdrasil/First Watt F7/Phil 3. Not too shabby.

 

[panteragstk]

Yes! I love my Ultras. Very good cost/performance ratio.

Bout time you showed up.

@MalVeauX I'll just simply agree with what everyone else has said on this thread, but I'll also throw in my opinion of the sub aspect of your room.

The polks you have are fine (heard them many times as a salesman) especially since you have 4, but I do think it'd be worth your while to at least audition something epic to see what you could be missing. I've got decent subs in an enclosed room and with two it sounds good, but after I add the second pair I expect things to get better.

This isn't stopping me from wanting to do a DIY build with an 18" sub in each corner.

 

[2channel lover]

I've been waiting 2 months so far for my Salks. Personally I found the Accutron to sound like everything was etched in stone. It's hard to describe, it was a bit too detailed for me personally, but if you like it that's great! Plus the 3A's are over my budget so it was a easy choice. The RAAL tweeter is phenomenal, and the Satori woofer was very punchy and dynamic. I think it's the best woofer I've heard as well. I listened to very good quality SACD recordings, classical, jazz, rock. But it could have been the guys receiver was a 15 year old class D amp, with old DACs. Those older DACs can sound harsher than new ones, it could have been the DAC that I was hearing. He had the speakers against the wall so the setup wasn't idea, that's the downside of trying it in someone else's home.

The RAAL is the splash, the Accuton is the meat and potatoes of the speaker as the mid is for any speaker.

The Reciever should not have that much impact on the SQ, but the bottom line is you're getting the one you want and that's what really matters....for less money to boot, you can't beat that.

Again, congrats! You have a bit more time I assume before they're ready to ship.

 

[Swerd]

Personally I found the Accutron to sound like everything was etched in stone. It's hard to describe, it was a bit too detailed for me personally, but if you like it that's great! Plus the 3A's are over my budget so it was a easy choice. The RAAL tweeter is phenomenal, and the Satori woofer was very punchy and dynamic. I think it's the best woofer I've heard as well. I listened to very good quality SACD recordings, classical, jazz, rock.

You've ordered Song3s, right? From what you say, it makes sense to get them instead of the 3As. That's why Jim Salk makes the various Song3 models with all those variations.

But it could have been the guys receiver was a 15 year old class D amp, with old DACs. Those older DACs can sound harsher than new ones, it could have been the DAC that I was hearing.

Possible, but in my opinion, unlikely. I've heard those Accuton mid range drivers, and I agree they are highly detailed. I like them, but that isn't everyone's cup of tea. And it's nice to have some price choices.

He had the speakers against the wall so the setup wasn't idea, that's the downside of trying it in someone else's home.

In my limited experience, placing speakers closer against the wall tends to intensify the bass without altering the mid-range and treble. It tends to make them sound warmer by changing the overall bass-treble balance. This perception can vary depending on the music being played.

I've been waiting 2 months so far for my Salks.

How many times per day are you checking their progress on the Salk web site? I've been in those shoes too . What finish did you order?

 

[baronvonellis]

Interesting that you chose that phrase. "Etched" is seemingly common in describing that Accuton mid. FWIW, while corresponding with Dennis recently, I asked about his preferred Mids: Mainly looking at what other premium mid-woofs are like and why he felt that way. In order (based on my understanding from a few different missives):
The Tectonic BMR. Wide dispersion, great detail, and when treated properly in the design process, very well behaved.
The Accuton Mid used in Salk's speakers. High quality and exceptional detail.
Audio Technology used in Salk's speakers. Solid driver
Eton Mid used in Salk's speakers. Inconsistent quality but can be good.

Yea, Jim ranked his mids from most detailed to less detailed as Accutron, Eton, Tang Band, Audio Technology. He said the Audio Technology is the most musical sounding though, and most forgiving. So I figured something in the middle would be a good combo of forgiving and details, I hope I like it. I havn't actually heard that mid so, it's kind of a leap of faith.

Yea, usually speakers sound better a couple feet out into the room if you can. I used to have sound absorbers behind my speakers, but now I felt like they made them too dead sounding, and now I like them with out the absorbers haha.

 

[baronvonellis]

You've ordered Song3s, right? From what you say, it makes sense to get them instead of the 3As. That's why Jim Salk makes the various Song3 models with all those variations.
Possible, but in my opinion, unlikely. I've heard those Accuton mid range drivers, and I agree they are highly detailed. I like them, but that isn't everyone's cup of tea. And it's nice to have some price choices.
In my limited experience, placing speakers closer against the wall tends to intensify the bass without altering the mid-range and treble. It tends to make them sound warmer by changing the overall bass-treble balance. This perception can vary depending on the music being played.
How many times per day are you checking their progress on the Salk web site? I've been in those shoes too . What finish did you order?

Yes, I ordered the Song 3 in waterfall bubinga. It's also $900 less than the 3a and the 3s are kind of the top of what I wanted to pay, these are already the most expensive speakers I've ever bought. I also requested an open back midrange, I thought it would be interesting to have maybe it's not necessary. I heard MBL $100k speakers that are omni directional speakers and they sounded like the band was there in the room. I thought perhaps the open back midrange will give a more 3D sound like those omni speakers I heard.

I didn't think putting speakers against the wall would change the midrange much either.

Haha, yea it's hard not to check the Salk website now, I'm only at 23%

 

[ryanosaur]

Yea, Jim ranked his mids from most detailed to less detailed as Accutron, Eton, Tang Band, Audio Technology. He said the Audio Technology is the most musical sounding though, and most forgiving. So I figured something in the middle would be a good combo of forgiving and details, I hope I like it. I havn't actually heard that mid so, it's kind of a leap of faith.
Yea, usually speakers sound better a couple feet out into the room if you can. I used to have sound absorbers behind my speakers, but now I felt like they made them too dead sounding, and now I like them with out the absorbers haha.

Based on my short experience with the Phil 3s and the di-pole BG Planar, I suspect the choice of open back mid using the Accuton is to help it fill out the overall soundstage.
A combo Diffraction/Absorption panel may find the balance point by redirecting some of that energy back into the room in different directions.
Based on intuition only, I get the feeling that the Accuton is like a razor blade. Truly high performance, and it shows in the cost. You don't expect Ferraris and Lambos to just sit there when you punch the gas. I hope very much to get to play with a pair of those one day soon!

I have a fantasy, 4-way build, using all premium drivers which I have been working on. My goal is a true full-range tower, voiced in Dennis' style. I've been shopping drivers to start learning the pros and cons of each. I've considered everything from TL bass cabinets to open back-or even a TL Mid-Woof. It's silly, but we all have to be able to dream. This won't exist for at least 5 years. My hope is that I'll be good enough to build my own replacement for Dennis' speakers.

Regardless, the thing about Dennis and Jim... hell, any speaker builder that is doing this small scale boutique build... They can't afford to have you NOT like them! I didn't hear the BMRs before I bought them. I could have turned around and been like: "Hey DM, WTF?!!!" The truth was far, far different: B-M-WOW! Once hearing the 3s, I had no compunction about going all in on a Philharmonic Rig.

I'll be updating the story soon. B-M-Wow! and Philharmonic 3... Packing and Shipping will soon have a love child.

I do hope you enjoy yours Salks when the time comes... as the rest of us have enjoyed our own gifts from Dennis and Jim. (That's what they are... even though we paid for it... they are gifts of sound every time I turn on the Rig!)

Cheers!

 

[Swerd]

I ordered the Song 3 in waterfall bubinga.

Nice . We insist on photos when they arrive. You are going to love hearing and looking at these speakers.

I also requested an open back midrange,

I didn't know that could be done. But that's yet another reason why we love Jim Salk.

 

[D Murphy]

Nice . We insist on photos when they arrive. You are going to love hearing and looking at these speakers.
I didn't know that could be done. But that's yet another reason why we love Jim Salk.

I'm not sure it can be done, at least not without making the cabinet larger. The only way you can implement an open-back mid would be to close off the space between the woofer and midrange, Otherwise the woofer backwave would also fire into an open rear, which would ruin the bass tuning. So you would need to increase the volume of the cabinet below the midrange, and you would have to do that by deepening the cabinet to maintain the same internal volume supporting the woofer. You couldn't widen the cabinet, because that would throw the crossover off. I have to assume that baronvonellis has discussed this with Jim and they agreed upon a deeper cabinet.

 

[2channel lover]

Yea, Jim ranked his mids from most detailed to less detailed as Accutron, Eton, Tang Band, Audio Technology. He said the Audio Technology is the most musical sounding though, and most forgiving. So I figured something in the middle would be a good combo of forgiving and details, I hope I like it. I havn't actually heard that mid so, it's kind of a leap of faith.

Yea, usually speakers sound better a couple feet out into the room if you can. I used to have sound absorbers behind my speakers, but now I felt like they made them too dead sounding, and now I like them with out the absorbers haha.

Leap of faith...One thing for sure...if Jim has a good sense of what you like, he'll be able to steer you into the best driver.

 

[baronvonellis]

Nice . We insist on photos when they arrive. You are going to love hearing and looking at these speakers.
I didn't know that could be done. But that's yet another reason why we love Jim Salk.

Haha, thanks yea I'll definitely post some pictures! I'm sure they will look and sound amazing!
I just asked him if that was possible, and he said he could do it!

 

[baronvonellis]

I'm not sure it can be done, at least not without making the cabinet larger. The only way you can implement an open-back mid would be to close off the space between the woofer and midrange, Otherwise the woofer backwave would also fire into an open rear, which would ruin the bass tuning. So you would need to increase the volume of the cabinet below the midrange, and you would have to do that by deepening the cabinet to maintain the same internal volume supporting the woofer. You couldn't widen the cabinet, because that would throw the crossover off. I have to assume that baronvonellis has discussed this with Jim and they agreed upon a deeper cabinet.

Hello Dennis, thanks for commenting about this! No Jim didn't mention any of this! I think he just said that he would route a hole in the back for the open back midrange. I'd have to check with him about the cabinet design.

 

[D Murphy]

Hello Dennis, thanks for commenting about this! No Jim didn't mention any of this! I think he just said that he would route a hole in the back for the open back midrange. I'd have to check with him about the cabinet design.

Looks like I may have sounded a false alarm. I just remembered that the Satori 7.5" woofer doesn't require much volume in a vented enclosure. So there's probably already a partition below the midrange, doubling as a brace. Never mind.

 

[baronvonellis]

Looks like I may have sounded a false alarm. I just remembered that the Satori 7.5" woofer doesn't require much volume in a vented enclosure. So there's probably already a partition below the midrange, doubling as a brace. Never mind.

Phew, that's good! I'm curious are you the speaker designer, or do you collaborate with Jim like Lennon & McCartney?

 

[D Murphy]

Phew, that's good! I'm curious are you the speaker designer, or do you collaborate with Jim like Lennon & McCartney?

At least you didn't say Beavis and Butt-Head. I'm strictly a crossover dude. I have nothing to do with the bass tuning, which is handled either by Paul Kittinger, Jeff Bagby, or Jim. He sends me a test cabinet with all the drivers wired for measuring, and I usually don't see what's inside.

 

[baronvonellis]

At least you didn't say Beavis and Butt-Head. I'm strictly a crossover dude. I have nothing to do with the bass tuning, which is handled either by Paul Kittinger, Jeff Bagby, or Jim. He sends me a test cabinet with all the drivers wired for measuring, and I usually don't see what's inside.

Haha, good one! I see.

 

[baronvonellis]

Based on my short experience with the Phil 3s and the di-pole BG Planar, I suspect the choice of open back mid using the Accuton is to help it fill out the overall soundstage.
A combo Diffraction/Absorption panel may find the balance point by redirecting some of that energy back into the room in different directions.
Based on intuition only, I get the feeling that the Accuton is like a razor blade. Truly high performance, and it shows in the cost. You don't expect Ferraris and Lambos to just sit there when you punch the gas. I hope very much to get to play with a pair of those one day soon!

I have a fantasy, 4-way build, using all premium drivers which I have been working on. My goal is a true full-range tower, voiced in Dennis' style. I've been shopping drivers to start learning the pros and cons of each. I've considered everything from TL bass cabinets to open back-or even a TL Mid-Woof. It's silly, but we all have to be able to dream. This won't exist for at least 5 years. My hope is that I'll be good enough to build my own replacement for Dennis' speakers.

Regardless, the thing about Dennis and Jim... hell, any speaker builder that is doing this small scale boutique build... They can't afford to have you NOT like them! I didn't hear the BMRs before I bought them. I could have turned around and been like: "Hey DM, WTF?!!!" The truth was far, far different: B-M-WOW! Once hearing the 3s, I had no compunction about going all in on a Philharmonic Rig.

I'll be updating the story soon. B-M-Wow! and Philharmonic 3... Packing and Shipping will soon have a love child.

I do hope you enjoy yours Salks when the time comes... as the rest of us have enjoyed our own gifts from Dennis and Jim. (That's what they are... even though we paid for it... they are gifts of sound every time I turn on the Rig!)

Cheers!

Yea, I think a combo 2" thick Diffraction/Absorption panel behind the speakers would work really well too! That might be the best!

Thanks, glad you like your speakers as well!

 

[Pogre]

Your Ultras sounded awesome when I listened to them last. I can imagine with the tweaking you've done since, they are even better. Good to see you on the forum. I haven't posted much lately so its great to cross paths again

Hey Buck! You know, I've thought about you a few times when I'm listening to those much more precision tuned subs I have.

How 'bout you? Any upgrades? New sub? Were you pricing amplifiers? I really loved your setup too. I knew you had a sub somewhere, but couldn't locate it. Your rig's nothing to sneeze at either.