Salk WoW1 Bookshelf Speaker Review

[pjug]

This is also a very popular size, including the LS3/5a and descendants. Which others have you considered?

Another one I considered is PSB Imagine Mini. I like the looks of the Salk much better though, with grille on.

 

[ttimer]

Why passive if active gives better results for less money?

Running cables for active speakers often results in a mess that is not compatibe with the goal of "small and nice looking". Not to mention that the market for non-ugly actives is tiny, even more so if you want a color that isn't matte black.

@pjug Given these results, i would rather try my luck with something like Dali Menuet (SE) speakers before resorting to this one. They haven't been measured yet, but what are the chances of them being worse?

 

[AudioSceptic]

The amp is in an adjacent room, where I usually listen. So these are just a 2nd pair of speakers for another whole system. Active is an option I really could consider, along with a little streaming box, but for now that is not how I want to go. Also my house is old with few outlets, so that makes active a challenge. I would probably have to do electrical work on the room to avoid ugly cord clutter.

Fair enough. Houses never seem to have enough mains sockets, whenever they're built, do they?

Another one I considered is PSB Imagine Mini. I like the looks of the Salk much better though, with grille on.

The PSB looks like a good performer <https://www.stereophile.com/content/psb-imagine-mini-loudspeaker>, given the inevitable lack of real bass. How about a used Harbeth P3ESR <https://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/harbeth_p3esr_loudspeaker/index.html> or Spendor S3/5 <https://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/879/index.html>?

 

[AudioSceptic]

Running cables for active speakers often results in a mess that is not compatibe with the goal of "small and nice looking". Not to mention that the market for non-ugly actives is tiny, even more so if you want a color that isn't matte black.

Actives seem to be mostly for the pro market. I think the potential market for non-ugly ones is much bigger. AVI were one of the few to realise this <https://www.hificorner.co.uk/blog/post/avi-active-speakers-dm5s-and-dm10s>

@pjug Given these results, i would rather try my luck with something like Dali Menuet (SE) speakers before resorting to this one. They haven't been measured yet, but what are the chances of them being worse?

Apart from Revel, it seems hard to guess how anything will measure.

 

[R Swerdlow]

Here is a quick in-room experiment with the port. The main frequency response measurements were made at about 30 inches from the speaker (solid lines). The port measurements are made point blank (half inch from the port).
View attachment 74592

Measurements of the port (dashed lines) clearly show the dip going away. Impact on the main measurements (solid lines) is there but room interactions complicate it some.

Edit: fixed typo on the graph.

That seems to settle the question of the 500-700 Hz dip. Sound from the port may interfere with sound from the woofer. Amirm's dotted line traces were made with the mike ½" away from and directly in front of the port.

His solid line traces were made 30" away from the speaker. With regard to the tweeter, woofer, and port, where was the mike placed? Those two traces do seem to make the difference between a closed and open port appear smaller than on the close-up dotted-line traces.

I'm not 100% certain, but I believe when the trace published by Salk on the WOW1 page was measured, the mike was placed directly in line with the tweeter. I'm also not certain about the distance between the mike and tweeter. But it's clear that microphone location and distance can make a big difference.

This raises a question: If the listener sits roughly 2-3 feet away from the speakers, will the 500-700 Hz dip be noticeable?

 

[pjug]

Fair enough. Houses never seem to have enough mains sockets, whenever they're built, do they?


The PSB looks like a good performer <https://www.stereophile.com/content/psb-imagine-mini-loudspeaker>, given the inevitable lack of real bass. How about a used Harbeth P3ESR <https://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/harbeth_p3esr_loudspeaker/index.html> or Spendor S3/5 <https://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/879/index.html>?

I don't really want to go into reconsideration mode yet. It doesn't bother me if others want to discuss alternatives to the WOW1, but I am more interested in getting a handle on the issues that Amir uncovered.

 

[R Swerdlow]

SEAS magnesium Excel is honestly incomprehensible to me. None of the drivers are as usable as the Prestige drivers, due to the awful break-up. It needs supremely low XOs at LR4+ and even a notch, while nonlinear distortion is at that price class average at best with ok-to-good excursion. Ascend speccing a Curv woven polyprop cone on an Excel motor is something SEAS should have come up with themselves a long time ago. And a massive phase plug (reducing radiating surface) on a 12cm driver strikes as a form-above-function choice.

With Revelators, C-Quenze, Satori and now Purifi in that price class (all more usable FR-wise, with at least competitive distortion, build quality and reputation) - the Excel is a dinosaur.

I disagree. There may indeed be problems with the Seas Excel W12 woofer installed in a very small cabinet, but to say all Excel magnesium alloy woofers are at fault is painting with too broad a brush.

When they go into break-up, their peak may be large in amplitude, but the frequency at which they go into break-up is shifted to significantly higher frequencies than for paper, poly or aluminum alloy cones. This makes for a wider pass band, a very useful feature. It may require LR4 and a notch filter to supress the break-up peak, but it can be used with a higher crossover frequency, not a "supremely low" one. This can be especially useful in 2-way designs.

 

[CDMC]

This raises a question: If the listener sits roughly 2-3 feet away from the speakers, will the 500-700 Hz dip be noticeable?

Yes. See my measurements on my desktop system on page 4.

 

[AudioSceptic]

I don't really want to go into reconsideration mode yet. It doesn't bother me if others want to discuss alternatives to the WOW1, but I am more interested in getting a handle on the issues that Amir uncovered.

Understood. I was just suggesting possible alternatives that you might have looked at before going for the Salks.

 

[Ilkless]

I disagree. There may indeed be problems with the Seas Excel W12 woofer installed in a very small cabinet, but to say all Excel magnesium alloy woofers are at fault is painting with too broad a brush.

When they go into break-up, their peak may be large in amplitude, but the frequency at which they go into break-up is shifted to significantly higher frequencies than for paper, poly or aluminum alloy cones. This makes for a wider pass band, a very useful feature. It may require LR4 and a notch filter to supress the break-up peak, but it can be used with a higher crossover frequency, not a "supremely low" one. This can be especially useful in 2-way designs.

The aluminium L18 has a much higher-Q peak with lower magnitude, at 7kHz. The W18 has a break-up peak at a lower frequency (5kHz), with lower Q and a higher magnitude. I can't see how that's not a regression. Moreover, the break-up will also cause distinct peaks in HD in the passband.

Also, with sophisticated soft cones now, the break-up is so benign that it is a controlled neat roll-off and you can cross anywhere.

 

[pjug]

Understood. I was just suggesting possible alternatives that you might have looked at before going for the Salks.

I do appreciate that the suggestions are coming out of wanting to be helpful. So I did not at all mean to be rude, just wanted to explain why I might not respond to the posts with suggestions on alternatives.

 

[KEW]

I do appreciate that the suggestions are coming out of wanting to be helpful. So I did not at all mean to be rude, just wanted to explain why I might not respond to the posts with suggestions on alternatives.

Certainly, it makes sense to wait for Salks reaction.
At 6 pages into this thread, it seems like we wound know something by now, but that is "forum distortion"; it has only been 18 hours since this review went live and if we are talking business hours, it has only been 3 hours!

 

[thefsb]

I don't think there are any accepted definitions for monitor vs. bookshelf

Monitor is a fairly well understood term in live sound and in recording. A bookshelf is somewhere that you can put a loudspeaker in a room and usually refers to home applications.

I don't understand why Salk would call these speakers "monitors" since the prestige wood and construction value proposition doesn't suit either live sound or studio monitoring applications.

Even in a home studio, I don't think Salk would be an obvious choice for monitoring regardless of performance since its aesthetic doesn't fit well the computer displays, keyboard, audio interfaces etc. And studio monitors are mostly self-powered now. I tried looking for rack-mount power amps for studio monitors recently and didn't find much.

 

[R Swerdlow]

The aluminium L18 has a much higher-Q peak with lower magnitude, at 7kHz. The W18 has a break-up peak at a lower frequency (5kHz), with lower Q and a higher magnitude. I can't see how that's not a regression. Moreover, the break-up will also cause distinct peaks in HD in the passband.

Although the L18 woofer has it's worst looking break-up peak at 7 kHz, it looks like it's going into break-up as low as 3 kHz. For that matter, the W18 also looks like it's going into break-up around the same frequency. Going into break-up might be more easily seen in a plot of response phase vs. frequency, but Seas does not show that.

Seas does recommend 2.5 kHz as an upper limit for both woofers. I would prefer the W18's potentially lower distortion due to the T-shaped pole piece.

For what it's worth, Zaph Audio uses 2 kHz as a crossover frequency for the L18 in his DIY 2-way design with an LR4 crossover.

Also, with sophisticated soft cones now, the break-up is so benign that it is a controlled neat roll-off and you can cross anywhere.

Anywhere? I doubt if you meant literally anywhere . Seas recommends a frequency range of 40 Hz to 4 kHz, but I would hesitate to cross it anywhere above 3 kHz, for the same reason as for the L18 or W18. And, at 3 kHz that driver is beaming, so for dispersion reasons, a lower crossover frequency would be desired.

 

[Selah Audio]

I hope negative reviews like this don’t bias people who own the gear to dislike it. There really is no right and wrong when it comes to subjective experience.

I think ‘good enough’ plays a big role in audio playback. That’s all I care about. Unfortunately for the old pocket book my ‘good enough’ has proved elusive on speakers.

On amps, phhft, I’ve been happily using random junk I picked up for cheap or free. I swear I do hear differences in how they sound, but until I blind test I not worry about it. (I have a couple of old Yamaha RX450s that I swear sound sublime that had been junked by past owners!)

But I don’t feel the need to have the best, if I’m listening I just want to enjoy myself!

There was a great cartoon in the old Audio Critic magazine. I guy has this huge pair of speakers (a mock-up of Wilson Audio) that he just purchased. He rings up his audiophile buddy to tell him about his new speakers. His friend asks "how do they sound?" to which he replied "I don't know - I haven't read a review yet".

 

[MZKM]

Also, @Dennis Murphy, Do you know what causes the horizontal response to rise & bunch up ~5kHz?:

It’s well above the crossover point so I don’t think it’s showing a difference in directivity (the AAM measurements show a similar happening at 3kHz, but I think that’s just the tweeter‘s wide dispersion meeting the woofer’s narrow dispersion at that point). Do you know if that’s just how the driver performs, or is it related to the baffle (it is a chamfered edge, where maybe a round-over edge may be better)?

 

[ctrl]

The aluminium L18 has a much higher-Q peak with lower magnitude, at 7kHz. The W18 has a break-up peak at a lower frequency (5kHz), with lower Q and a higher magnitude. I can't see how that's not a regression. Moreover, the break-up will also cause distinct peaks in HD in the passband.

Also, with sophisticated soft cones now, the break-up is so benign that it is a controlled neat roll-off and you can cross anywhere.

As long as the break-up does not come too close to the planned crossover frequency, it is not a problem - especially with active crossover.

The Excel W18EX001 has a maximum of 0.5% HD2 and HD3 at 90dB in the 1-2kHz range, according to magazine reports.

On the other hand, the larger 8" U22REX chassis with soft cone, which decays completely without break-up at high frequencies, has about 2% HD2 at 90dB around 700Hz and at 500-1000kHz decay delays - probably due to the flexible cone (which in this case is a disadvantage).

The devil is in the details

 

[Selah Audio]

The onus is on the manufacturer for sure. I'd move onto testing the next speaker in your queue - the ball is out of your court. If the manufacturer wants a re-test let them pay for it from a third party or donate to the site for a re-test. They need proof, not you.

I'd bet this speaker was never tested before shipping.

Lools like in early 2019 Seas moved to manufacture less in Taiwan and more at the HQ in Norway. I assume this was for quality control and turn-around. I wonder where the part in this speaker was made?

https://audioxpress.com/news/seas-expands-in-house-production-and-announces-extreme-subwoofer-series

Seas only had one 10" sub driver made in Taiwan. The quality was excellent.

 

[MZKM]

As long as the break-up does not come too close to the planned crossover frequency, it is not a problem - especially with active crossover.

The Excel W18EX001 has a maximum of 0.5% HD2 and HD3 at 90dB in the 1-2kHz range, according to magazine reports.

On the other hand, the larger 8" U22REX chassis with soft cone, which decays completely without break-up at high frequencies, has about 2% HD2 at 90dB around 700Hz and at 500-1000kHz decay delays - probably due to the flexible cone (which in this case is a disadvantage).

The devil is in the details

Where are you seeing distortion info?

 

[gr-e]

Also, @Dennis Murphy, Do you know what causes the horizontal response to rise & bunch up ~5kHz?:

It’s well above the crossover point so I don’t think it’s showing a difference in directivity (the AAM measurements show a similar happening at 3kHz, but I think that’s just the tweeter‘s wide dispersion meeting the woofer’s narrow dispersion at that point). Do you know if that’s just how the driver performs, or is it related to the baffle (it is a chamfered edge, where maybe a round-over edge may be better)?

On-axis cancellation (off-axis graphs "jumping over" the 0 line) is a clear sign of diffraction