Salk WoW1 Bookshelf Speaker Review

[AverageJoeAudiophile]

Talk about an unfocused business model... lol. How could a small company catering to a specialized niche market perfect anything with such a wide offering.

As a comparison, when I bought a pair of S400 last year, Buchardt Audio only had 2 models on the catalog with 3 finishes each. They’ve since expanded their lineup with 2 new powered speakers for a total of 4 products. When I see that, I know they are taking the time to perfect each model. And if you look at their powered speakers there’s a lot of similarities with the passive line. They are building on top of their previous designs, perfecting and improving it. And creating their own unique R&D culture focused on the goal of providing quality attainable sound reproduction for home environments. And that piques my interest.

As seen either the WoW1 some of these designs are pushing a decade old. When you are not mass making them, there is no disincentive to NOT keep past projects on the list of available models. Had you actually spent time on Jim's sites, you'd also see that many are either incremental upgrades, cabinet shape, or tweeter swaps.

 

[EchoChamber]

As seen either the WoW1 some of these designs are pushing a decade old. When you are not mass making them, there is no disincentive to NOT keep past projects on the list of available models. Had you actually spent time on Jim's sites, you'd also see that many are either incremental upgrades, cabinet shape, or tweeter swaps.

It’s ok to discontinue obsolete products and keep you product offerings lean.

 

[AverageJoeAudiophile]

It’s ok to discontinue obsolete products and keep you product offerings lean.

Sure it's OK. And if he was under any economic or Supply pressure I'm sure he would.

One of Jims contemporaries, Selah has 11 current finished offerings and 17 kits. JBL seems to release a new line every other year. Polk still sells marginally acceptable 15 year old designs.

Having a tiny selection is the comparatively rare.

 

[Bachemar]

Talk about an unfocused business model... lol. How could a small company catering to a specialized niche market perfect anything with such a wide offering.

As a comparison, when I bought a pair of S400 last year, Buchardt Audio only had 2 models on the catalog with 3 finishes each. They’ve since expanded their lineup with 2 new powered speakers for a total of 4 products. When I see that, I know they are taking the time to perfect each model. And if you look at their powered speakers there’s a lot of similarities with the passive line. They are building on top of their previous designs, perfecting and improving it. And creating their own unique R&D culture focused on the goal of providing quality attainable sound reproduction for home environments. And that piques my interest. Oh, and they also publish a good amount of measurements.

Salk is a custom build/made to order shop, with a 3 month lead time for delivery. Every speaker is built to order “after” you place your order. The only cost to having multiple designs is customer confusion.

The reason mass manufacturers have limited product offerings, is not because perfection is hard. It is because inventory costs money, and limiting sku’s reduces the chance of slow sellers accumulating in warehouses with sunk cost of space, materials and time.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but mass manufacturers aren’t Ideal perfectionists, trying to build the best product ever. They are capitalists who are constantly optimizing for cost, profit, and sales volume.

 

[jsalk]

Great response, Jim.

Tweeter concept? Is this in relation to Dennis's friend in the D.C. area?

No, it is not.

- Jim

 

[EchoChamber]

One of Jims contemporaries, Selah has 11 current finished offerings and 17 kits. JBL seems to release a new line every other year. Polk still sells marginally acceptable 15 year old designs.

Having a tiny selection is the comparatively rare.

It's funny that you mention Selah, I think they are in the same boat as Salk. I was curious at the time with all the hype around those new speaker makers and bought one pair of one of their 3 way tower speakers. I always had issues with those speakers, I was never able to make them sound right... Eventually I gave up and replaced them with the SEAS Thor that completely outperformed them in every way. A DYI speaker using SEAS's high end drivers but properly designed by professionals who actually know how to design a speaker system (and speaker drivers). I think the key here is design vs build. I can build audio gear (not speaker cabinets so well), but designing is something very different.

I bet JBL is not starting from scratch with every new line, they are likely improvements of the previous one. And I'm not looking at Polk, especially if they haven't been investing in R&D.

My constructive feedback to both Salk, Selah and any other similar company would be:

1. Understand what your customer needs are and focus on it. I for one want ultimate transparency in speakers but something I'd be happy to look at every day in my living room (pro gear is often not visually compatible in a domestic environment - tends to be ugly and/or plasticky)
2. Based on that, establish a line of products that solve those needs starting with the most popular (I'll guess a bookshelf "monitor" speaker)
3. Spend a year designing the best bookshelf speaker you can, define your requirements, learn everything there's to learn, iterate until you have a satisfactory result, focus on sound quality
4. Shift to the second most popular type of speaker (another guess: a small near field desktop speaker)
5. Keep what you have perfected - in Salk's case, cabinet craftsmanship and customization
6. Establish a line of 3 or 5 products that you know are as good as or better then each segment's reference
7. Use your direct to consumer model to provide value and an attainable price
8. Send your master piece to Amir and let him validate your work

I'd be interested in buying one pair.

 

[snapsc]

Funny you should mention that, I have a set of BeATs on order and Amir has agreed to test them when they arrive. I put the order in about 6 weeks ago so I'm hoping to see them by September. I'll keep everyone posted!

I'd like to suggest that you listen to them first and see how much you like them...or not. Once Amir tests them, what you hear will be influenced because if he finds even the slightest bump in the curve (so to speak), you will be listening for the bump and not listening to see how well the speaker conveys the music (the power of suggestion...it is hard for any of us to resist).

 

[RMW_NJ]

It's funny that you mention Selah, I think they are in the same boat as Salk. I was curious at the time with all the hype around those new speaker makers and bought one pair of their 3 way tower speakers and later a sub I asked to be custom build. I always had issues with those speakers, I was never able to make them sound right... Eventually I gave up and replaced them with the SEAS Thor that completely outperformed them in every way. A DYI speaker using SEAS's high end drivers but properly designed by professionals who actually know how to design a speaker system (and speaker drivers). I think the key here is design vs build. I can build audio gear (not speaker cabinets so well), but designing is something very different.

I bet JBL is not starting from scratch with every new line, they are likely improvements of the previous one. And I'm not looking at Polk, especially if they haven't been investing in R&D.

My constructive feedback to both Salk, Selah and any other similar company would be:

1. Understand what your customer needs are and focus on it. I for one want ultimate transparency in speakers but something I'd be happy to look at every day in my living room (pro gear is often not visually compatible in a domestic environment - tends to be ugly and/or plasticky)
2. Based on that, establish a line of products that solve those needs starting with the most popular (I'll guess a bookshelf "monitor" speaker)
3. Spend a year designing the best bookshelf speaker you can, define your requirements, learn everything there's to learn, iterate until you have a satisfactory result, focus on sound quality
4. Shift to the second most popular type of speaker (another guess: a small near field desktop speaker)
5. Keep what you have perfected - in Salk's case, cabinet craftsmanship and customization
6. Establish a line of 3 or 5 products that you know are as good as or better then each segment's reference
7. Use your direct to consumer model to provide value and an attainable price
8. Send your master piece to Amir and let him validate your work

I'd be interested in buying one pair.

You are missing the point of Jim and Rick’s businesses. They are boutique, made-to-order companies. They cater to the individual with specific needs, not a mass group of people. They are not Harman and I doubt they have any desire to be.

 

[EchoChamber]

Salk is a custom made to order shop, with a 3 month lead time for delivery. Every speaker is built to order “after” you place your order.

Custom furniture.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but mass manufacturers aren’t Ideal perfectionists, trying to build the best product ever. They are capitalists who are constantly optimizing for cost, profit, and sales volume.

I don't see Genelec as a mass manufacturer. LG and Samsung yes, but we're not talking sound bars here.
Lol, I don't think Salk is selling speakers for a loss... Or is that charrity?

 

[Sonny1]

I once had a business in the field of loudspeaker development, after working with a company, OEM only, for two years. I'm a natural scientist by education. Additionally I studied mathematics, chemistry, AI, social sciences, and was in economics for a year. I hang around with artist and musicians back then. I'm still in frequent, yet private contact to sound designers / engineers. My current job is in AI, security for automatic automobiles.

In this thread I gave some numbers, which raise questions. Answers are also given. By the Fletcher/Munson curve, given the maximum SPL of this speaker the deepest bass notes cannot be perceived. Then it may be beneficial to dampen the enclosure with poly wadding more as to get rid of the ports interference, while in parts giving up that deep bass. This current discussion again went into the direction of dismissing measurements, but weigh the listening experience as a final criterium the most. Of course there are only satisfied customers. At least I see a well known pattern at work.

Since you were in the field of loudspeaker design, it would be interesting to see a model you designed or helped design. Even if it’s OEM, although I suspect you will say there is an NDA preventing you from providing this information. Maybe even send it to Amirm to have it measured.

 

[Worth Davis]

I think the manufacturers who take this data, engage, and improve are the ones to be cherished. So far its been Schiit, Denon, Newman? (the freezer test lol), Topping, and a few others. Salk (and I bet Selah) are in this group as well as others. The ones who ignore it or just get defensive will never be purchased by me again. This analysis and subsequent discourse is amazing on ASR.

 

[MattHooper]

Because different people balance priorities differently. For some, having a good looking, well made speaker from a small business adds value. Salk also has a reputation for providing excellent support, and that's important too.

Not to mention that the only real problem this design has, the dip from 500-700Hz, is readily EQable. The rest, at least in terms of FR and directivity is actually very good. Horizontal directivity is excellent, and the listening window is very flat, especially for a passive design, and especially above 2K or so where I tend to feel linearity is more important.

From a reviewer's perspective, I very much agree that a passive speaker should not require EQ to fix major errors. But from a consumer perspective, I wouldn't really care. Same way I don't really care if a burger comes with yucky pickles if I can just take them off.

This also isn't directed just towards you, but I'm also of the opinion the ASR community is suffering a bit from a sort of compression of what constitutes a "good" speaker. Let's face it, were kind of snobs.

This is partly because most what has been reviewed are 'good' speakers from companies known to take a Harmanesque approach and likely not representative of the market as whole. Look at all the Revels, KEFs, JBLs, ELACs, Pioneers, Infinitys, and studio monitors.

Compare that to the number of B&Ws, Klipsch's, Martin Logans, Zus, Monitors, Paradigms. And yet, these brands are plenty popular and people still enjoy them a bunch!

I get it, we're a picky a bunch. But whenever a speaker doesn't measure in the top 10 or something, people seem to assume it's 'bad.' If a speaker scores below a 7 and Amir didn't like it, the default reactions seem to be either "this speaker is an awful deal" or to insinuate it's silly to spend money on that speaker when you can get something that scores better/seems to be preferred by amir. Imo that's too narrow a perspective.

Personally, I think there are just a lot of good speakers these days. I've enjoyed speakers that measure less than perfect. Over a large average, the preference score is likely a good indicator of preference over a few decimal points but for individual, sighted preference, I feel I need a solid 2 point difference to feel completely confident in my preference of one over the other.



This is a faulty assumption, imo.

When it comes to the basics of directivity and frequency response, you really don't need all that much fancy equipment. An anechoic chamber makes certain things easier but even then chances are you'll have to do some 'DIY' measurements anyway, because chambers aren't anechoic all the way down to 20Hz. That's why even Neumann and Dutch and Dutch use ground plane measurements. (By the way, if I recall correctly, the D&D 8C started as a project on DIYAudio).

And frankly, measuring speakers, especially bookshelf speakers, isn't really all that hard. Time consuming, yes, but not difficult.

If having access to resources were so important, we'd see much better speakers from a lot of the giants.

napilopez,

That was a thoughtful, self-aware post. Thank you!

 

[AverageJoeAudiophile]

Because different people balance priorities differently. For some, having a good looking, well made speaker from a small business adds value. Salk also has a reputation for providing excellent support, and that's important too.

Not to mention that the only real problem this design has, the dip from 500-700Hz, is readily EQable. The rest, at least in terms of FR and directivity is actually very good. Horizontal directivity is excellent, and the listening window is very flat, especially for a passive design, and especially above 2K or so where I tend to feel linearity is more important.

From a reviewer's perspective, I very much agree that a passive speaker should not require EQ to fix major errors. But from a consumer perspective, I wouldn't really care. Same way I don't really care if a burger comes with yucky pickles if I can just take them off.

This also isn't directed just towards you, but I'm also of the opinion the ASR community is suffering a bit from a sort of compression of what constitutes a "good" speaker. Let's face it, were kind of snobs.

This is partly because most what has been reviewed are 'good' speakers from companies known to take a Harmanesque approach and likely not representative of the market as whole. Look at all the Revels, KEFs, JBLs, ELACs, Pioneers, Infinitys, and studio monitors.

Compare that to the number of B&Ws, Klipsch's, Martin Logans, Zus, Monitors, Paradigms. And yet, these brands are plenty popular and people still enjoy them a bunch!

I get it, we're a picky a bunch. But whenever a speaker doesn't measure in the top 10 or something, people seem to assume it's 'bad.' If a speaker scores below a 7 and Amir didn't like it, the default reactions seem to be either "this speaker is an awful deal" or to insinuate it's silly to spend money on that speaker when you can get something that scores better/seems to be preferred by amir. Imo that's too narrow a perspective.

Personally, I think there are just a lot of good speakers these days. I've enjoyed speakers that measure less than perfect. Over a large average, the preference score is likely a good indicator of preference over a few decimal points but for individual, sighted preference, I feel I need a solid 2 point difference to feel completely confident in my preference of one over the other.



This is a faulty assumption, imo.

When it comes to the basics of directivity and frequency response, you really don't need all that much fancy equipment. An anechoic chamber makes certain things easier but even then chances are you'll have to do some 'DIY' measurements anyway, because chambers aren't anechoic all the way down to 20Hz. That's why even Neumann and Dutch and Dutch use ground plane measurements. (By the way, if I recall correctly, the D&D 8C started as a project on DIYAudio).

And frankly, measuring speakers, especially bookshelf speakers, isn't really all that hard. Time consuming, yes, but not difficult.

If having access to resources were so important, we'd see much better speakers from a lot of the giants.

If I could like this more than once I would.

 

[EchoChamber]

By the way, if I recall correctly, the D&D 8C started as a project on DIYAudio.

I didn't mean that DYI was a bad thing... It is a great way to test ideas and experiment, but to make a DIY project a product that performs ready for consumption is another story.

The D&D 8C is a great example. Look at all the R&D and obsessive attention to detail that went into making the D&D 8C a masterpiece. With laser focus on getting the most out of that design. It is now far from a DIY project... And they only have one single product offering, because the goal is not to have a large catalog, but the perfect product.

 

[Bachemar]

Custom furniture.


I don't see Genelec as a mass manufacturer. LG and Samsung yes, but we're not talking sound bars here.
Lol, I don't think Salk is selling speakers for a loss... Or is that charrity?

He gives up sales volume and runaway growth, but he also minimizes loss or need for charity since he only starts building something after receiving a order along with the upfront deposit. That’s the trade off with “made to order”

(Yes, I’m ignoring your snark)

 

[PNWer]

Salk is a made to order company,
catering to individual customer is like Savile Row tailor custom fitting each suit to a customer.
I'm a satisfied customer of Salk Speakers ( of Salk custom cabinet finishing of Philharmonic Slims, BMR, new Philamonitors).

 

[CDMC]

It's funny that you mention Selah, I think they are in the same boat as Salk. I was curious at the time with all the hype around those new speaker makers and bought one pair of their 3 way tower speakers and later a sub I asked to be custom build. I always had issues with those speakers, I was never able to make them sound right... Eventually I gave up and replaced them with the SEAS Thor that completely outperformed them in every way. A DYI speaker using SEAS's high end drivers but properly designed by professionals who actually know how to design a speaker system (and speaker drivers). I think the key here is design vs build. I can build audio gear (not speaker cabinets so well), but designing is something very different.

I bet JBL is not starting from scratch with every new line, they are likely improvements of the previous one. And I'm not looking at Polk, especially if they haven't been investing in R&D.

My constructive feedback to both Salk, Selah and any other similar company would be:

1. Understand what your customer needs are and focus on it. I for one want ultimate transparency in speakers but something I'd be happy to look at every day in my living room (pro gear is often not visually compatible in a domestic environment - tends to be ugly and/or plasticky)
2. Based on that, establish a line of products that solve those needs starting with the most popular (I'll guess a bookshelf "monitor" speaker)
3. Spend a year designing the best bookshelf speaker you can, define your requirements, learn everything there's to learn, iterate until you have a satisfactory result, focus on sound quality
4. Shift to the second most popular type of speaker (another guess: a small near field desktop speaker)
5. Keep what you have perfected - in Salk's case, cabinet craftsmanship and customization
6. Establish a line of 3 or 5 products that you know are as good as or better then each segment's reference
7. Use your direct to consumer model to provide value and an attainable price
8. Send your master piece to Amir and let him validate your work

I'd be interested in buying one pair.

Just because your needs were not fulfilled does not mean that Salk and Selah don’t fulfill their customers needs. They offer products That others do not. My Revel F208s are, to be frank, ugly. The shiny finish belongs in a whorehouse. By contrast, the Salk Song 3 I had were beautiful and sounded wonderful. Why don’t I still have them? They don’t have that fat midbass the Revels have, which I like, instead choosing accuracy over a midbass hump. If Jim made the Song 3 tuned with a midbass hump, I would dump my revels in a heartbeat.

 

[EchoChamber]

He gives up sales volume and runaway growth, but he also minimizes loss or need for charity since he only starts building something after receiving a order along with the upfront deposit. That’s the trade off with “made to order”

(Yes, I’m ignoring your snark)

I'm having fun here with all the arguments that are shared. Like using words like "capitalist"... A private business needs to be profitable at some point to be sustainable. And the people working on those businesses need salaries so they can support themselves and their families and consume products from other businesses small and large and so forth... Not perfect for sure, but so far the only model we humans have found to work. And that model also is a competitive one forcing us to push ourselves. I think Salk need to push his products to be more competitive in regards to sound quality for me, as a discriminating customer, to give any attention. The custom to order model is not an issue, but needs to provide the expected sonic performance because there are other more competive options.

 

[EchoChamber]

Just because your needs were not fulfilled does not mean that Salk and Selah don’t fulfill their customers needs. They offer products That others do not.

You are right, if sound quality is not a priority. My experience was with an early Selah design, a poor DIY one, and not particularity good looking either, not as slick as my SB Accoustic kits or a S400. But I'm not going to through money at a company that's not delivering quality audio products. Small or large, it doesn't matter.

 

[AverageJoeAudiophile]

You are right, if sound quality is not a priority. My experience was with an early Selah design, a poor DIY one. But I'm not going to through money at a company that's not delivering quality products.

Based upon literary one speaker in their catalog. What a well researched opinion.