My shoot-out. Salk Songtower and Aperion Verus Grand

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I think speaker break in is one of those hotly-debated topics. As ADTG rightly pointed out, it can take your brain some time to break-in to a new sound. At first listen "Oh wow, speaker X sounds really really dry." But after some more listening..."Actually, it's not dry, but I'm hearing less mud and more detail." And so forth. My suggestion would be to really give it some time, get the sub out of there and disable Audyssey as well.

I own Salks and I love them, but I bet I'd like the Aperions in their own way as well. All speakers are compromises, so the key is to find the design with the compromises that fit best with your tastes and budget.

Most of the time, I don't need to get used to the speakers, at least the traditional front radiating speakers. The only time I had to get accustomed to the speakers was when I first got the Bipolar Def Tech and the dipole Orion. At first they sounded a little weird. But then after repositioning a little, they sounded great, especially the Def Tech BP7000 because they have 14" side-firing subwoofers. When I had the side subs facing the side walls, the sound was kind of bad. But the minute I face the subs to the center of the room or facing each other and away from the side walls, the sound was awesome.

But the other speakers - Funk, Phil, Focal, Revel, KEF, B&W, TAD, Dynaudio, ATC, etc., did not require any period of adjustment at all. They sounded great right out of the box.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I needed a good laugh this morning.

You must be "psycho" not to like the Salk and Phil, right?

 

[Swerd]

WOW!!! WOW!!!! WOW!!!! WHAT A TRANSFORMATION!!!!!
I ran the Salks for 12 straight hours today, and then listened again tonight. It is magical the way they have opened up! The sound is as full as the Aperions now, and the clarity is still amazing. My son said it is a no brainer now. The compromise that appeared to be there last night when they were out of the box is completely gone now. I was listening to something with a lot of bass earlier, and I could not believe how much the lower 5 inch driver was moving in and out. I think that little guy needed a little time to loosen up. The bass has really improved. I will give them a couple more days, but I think we have a winner!

As a side note though, I want to give Aperion major props. I called to see if they would give me an extension on the 30 day trail, and they graciously increased it to 45 days immediately. They seem like a first rate company.

Thanks for taking the time to tell us your observations. It's interesting that you could tell almost immediately that these two speakers sounded different, but it took longer before you could decide which speaker you preferred. Aren't you glad you made the effort to try them at home?

… the Aperions are rated to be 4dB more sensitive than the Salks (92dB vs 88dB), which is a fair gap.

I was surprised that sound levels actually seemed to match up pretty well. After the suggestion here, I downloaded Sound Meter ver 1.5.8 by Smart Tools for Android on my Note 2. I just went back and forth and both speakers were a match at 71 dB on the music I was just listening to, so they must be pretty close.

This isn't the first example of speakers with different sensitivity ratings, that were roughly equal in a home trial. Manufacturers have different ways of estimating these ratings, and one must be careful in making comparisons based on those numbers alone.

I also find it interesting that, in this price range, you found two speakers that both sounded good to you, but also sounded obviously different. This is generalizing, but I think this price range is where the Internet Direct speakers really begin to stand above the speakers available through the retail stores.

 

[Ponzio]

You must be "psycho" not to like the Salk and Phil, right?

You my friend are a troublemaker.

Ever since you put those KEF Reference 201/2 on sale I haven’t had a good night’s rest. Talk about “pining for the fjords” (Monty python reference). But the Epos Epic 2's will have to do for now ... the sacrifice's I've had to make ... until I move them into my bedroom and get a pair of ...

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

You my friend are a troublemaker.

Ever since you put those KEF Reference 201/2 on sale I haven’t had a good night’s rest. Talk about “pining for the fjords” (Monty python reference). But the Epos Epic 2's will have to do for now ... the sacrifice's I've had to make ... until I move them into my bedroom and get a pair of ...

The grass is always greener on the other side.

But I hope I don't regret it once they are gone.

My room will look lonely after I sell everything, including the ATI AT2000, AT 6012, and Denon AVP-A1HDCI. I will keep the AT3000 and Denon AVR-5308CI.

 

[Ponzio]

it's amazing how one gets attached to inanimate objects. friends & family have remarked that I hold my equipment more dear than them. what can I say?

 

[gene]

I've had the Aperions for close to a month. Members on the forum said I would be wise to also demo the SongTowers, so I ordered those as well and received them yesterday. The Aperions allow for Bi-Amp, which I had been doing. I went back to running them off one set of wires so I could have the Salks on "A" and the Aperions on "B", for quick back and forth comparisons (Technics SA-DA10 AV Receiver - 100W/channel). Both speakers are highly reviewed under the professional product reviews on this website, and have very good linear responses across the frequency range. The Salks have not yet had break-in time, but the paper work from Salk said to pop in their demo CD and start listening critically right away. I will have them on all day today, and will compare again tonight. The Salks have no grill, as that is recommended for critical listening by Salk. The Aperions have the grill, as the manufacturer says they are voiced with the grill on. At first, I had the Salks on as I watched my recording of "American Ninja Warrior" from the night before. With mainly commentator voices to listen too, I noticed something that I later noticed as we went back and forth on the speakers with the demo music CD. The Salks are very pure, but sound thinner (less bass?) and don't fill the room with the same width. The Aperions sound a little dirtier (you get the feeling that you can hear a little more static from the recording), but seem to have more bass, sound more rounded, and fill the room better (advantage of having two 5 inch and two 6 inch drivers?). I tried to get my son to not tell me which speakers he was turning on as he went back and forth, but after a few minutes, we could all identify which speakers were on easily. They both sound good, but different. My wife absolutely likes the Aperions better. My son and I are torn, as we appreciate what seems like a cleaner, less distorted purity of the Salks, but miss the fullness the Aperions seem to bring to the table, and which might be better for my home theater application. I have a large, 18inch Tekton Designs Cinema subwoofer on for both, with crossover at 60Hz. Both speakers look amazing. The Salks look boxier, but have a very nice finish. The wife again prefers the look of the Aperions.

I will post more as I give them all a little more time.

Happy Wife = Happy Life

 

[rojo]

it's amazing how one gets attached to inanimate objects. friends & family have remarked that I hold my equipment more dear than them. what can I say?

Tell them to move out of the way. They're blocking your view of your equipment.

 

[Ponzio]

I mean, who doesn't like to look at their equipment, right?

 

[rdalcanto]

Maybe your ears and brain are just getting used to the new speakers interacting with your room and auditory senses. Psycho-acoustic break-in.

A lot of encouragement and reinforcement from the forum regarding the Salk didn't hurt.

I promise you that isn't it. My wife and son could care less about the speakers, and when I was testing them with no break-in, and we were switching back and forth between the two, and not telling each other which was which, everyone could easily tell the two apart. The Salks, the first night, had a thin midrange and treble and just didn't fill the room. It was painfully obvious which speakers were which. I ran them for 12 hours the next day when I wasn't home, so there was no "getting used to them." When I got home I went to do the same tests, and was blown away. I could hardly tell the two speakers apart. The Salks had completely filled in. The Salks are just a little cleaner sounding, so with careful listening, I could tell the two apart, but it was much, much harder than the night before. My wife and son both agreed that the Salks suddenly sounded much richer or more full than the day before. I should note that I had not changed the speaker positions or sub setting from one day to the next. I have the Salks on the left side of the Aperion, on both sides of the room, so the spacing between the speakers is identical. I just have to slide my self 1 foot to the right if I want to be as perfectly centered between the Aperions as I am for the Salks.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

I promise you that isn't it. My wife and son could care less about the speakers, and when I was testing them with no break-in, and we were switching back and forth between the two, and not telling each other which was which, everyone could easily tell the two apart. The Salks, the first night, had a thin midrange and treble and just didn't fill the room. It was painfully obvious which speakers were which. I ran them for 12 hours the next day when I wasn't home, so there was no "getting used to them." When I got home I went to do the same tests, and was blown away. I could hardly tell the two speakers apart. The Salks had completely filled in. The Salks are just a little cleaner sounding, so with careful listening, I could tell the two apart, but it was much, much harder than the night before. My wife and son both agreed that the Salks suddenly sounded much richer or more full than the day before. I should note that I had not changed the speaker positions or sub setting from one day to the next. I have the Salks on the left side of the Aperion, on both sides of the room, so the spacing between the speakers is identical. I just have to slide my self 1 foot to the right if I want to be as perfectly centered between the Aperions as I am for the Salks.

There's no question that woofers do break in--the surrounds and spider need to flex to achieve their intended elasticity. But--this takes maybe 15 minutes max on bass material. And the audible difference is subtle. I guess you heard something out of the ST's that you hadn't heard before. But that dramatic a difference can't be attributed break in. I've designed a bajillion speakers, including the ST's, and out of the box they sound pretty much like they do later on.

 

[crossedover]

As mentioned in this thread, trying to do an a/b evaluation without level matching is fruitless. Thin at a 3db difference isn't thin FWIW.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

it's amazing how one gets attached to inanimate objects. friends & family have remarked that I hold my equipment more dear than them. what can I say?

You probably wouldn't treat them that way if they would treat your equipment with a lot more respect.

 

[Alex2507]

You probably wouldn't treat them that way if they would treat your equipment with a lot more respect.

Are we still talking about audio gear?

 

[Ponzio]

You probably wouldn't treat them that way if they would treat your equipment with a lot more respect.

no, nothing like that. my equipment is reliable & consistent, unlike humans.

 

[cpp]

Are we still talking about audio gear?

Sounds like kids or maybe the wife but audio equipment does need some loving to make it opened up and talk to you

 

[ousooner2]

Thread bookmarked for those times when I need to show someone just how much something OTHER than the speakers can influence sound

 

[Ricardojoa]

I had similar experienced to the OP about breaking in the speakers but not with salk. The salk sounded good right out of the box and i did not hear much difference in sound. With the sierra 1 and selah tempesta, i did notice a change in sound after a day. With the sierra 1, it was a smother less edgy midrange while with the tempesta, the midrange sounded less congested and had better bass. So i guess is possible about the OP findings.

 

[herbu]

It is interesting to me that pretty much regardless of the subject and data, people's perception will vary. Not saying either of these 2 speakers is "better", or anyone's experience is flawed. It's just interesting to read, "I heard this", and "I thought that", and "I heard that, too", and "I didn't hear that", etc.

I notice this happens not just w/ audio, but with other subjects. When data is cited, it's fun to see how both sides can find numbers to support their position. Having spent a good portion of my career being paid to use statistics to support this position or that, I know how easily it can be done on either side. And when subjective observation is used, who can argue with, "I heard/saw that"?

It all seems to support the wisdom of letting your own senses be the final arbiter. Ricardojoa, I commend your effort and patience to order, install, seriously listen to both speakers, decide, then return the pair you don't choose. It is a process few are willing to execute... thus the plethora of, "Which is better?" threads.
YOU are The Man!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Are we still talking about audio gear?

You perv.