Minor quibble: Imo a distributed multisub system is significantly different in "concept" from systems which rely primarily on processing/equalization.
Last edited:
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Salk WoW1 Bookshelf Speaker Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Minor quibble: Imo a distributed multisub system is significantly different in "concept" from systems which rely primarily on processing/equalization.
These speakers could be tuned differently for better 40 Hz output, but they were likely designed for better performance against a wall. Probably the same reason the port is on the front. Am all about value, but cannot blame Salk if people like the Wow1 and continue to buy.
For $300 less, you can get a bigger woofer in very comparable package with the SongSurround 1. If not, there are plenty of similarly sized speakers that I would not limit myself to ones with 4” woofers!
If the above is referring to my comment, it would appear that you have misinterpreted it completely- I was not referring to Jim's post at all, but rather to some of the other comments insinuating that the WOW1 must be a POS or that Jim's measurements were untrustworthy. There is nothing in my post that is dismissive of measurements either as far as I can see. Seems like it is getting harder to have any kind of conversation about anything anymore. As it happens I am familiar with (and a fan of) both Jim's work and yours and have heard both of your products and met you both. (At Capital Audiofest, I walked up and identified myself as the person who came up with the name 'Songtower'). Hope you are doing well.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2020
- Messages
- 1,071
- Likes
- 4,542
Sometimes the antecedent for a post gets a little confusing. I was agreeing with you. "That quote..." was referring to a previous post that inferred Jim wasn't interested in measurements, just pretty boxes. Sorry for the confusion. Cheers
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2019
- Messages
- 9
- Likes
- 145
A number of people commented here on the cost of the speakers and cost of our cabinets. I should probably explain our philosophy.
When I began building speakers, someone posted a picture of a pair I built. A few days later, I received an unsolicited email explaining the I was doing things all wrong. I was spending too much for drivers and fancy woods and veneers. I responded that I wanted to use the best drivers I could find for a given project because I wanted to build the best speaker I could. Also, building cabinets is a lot of work and I wanted them to look like I put that much effort into them.
Yes, we could make less expensive cabinets. No doubt about that. We could use pre-veneered stock. Of course, there would be no book-matching. We could shoot them with conversion varnish in a single day rather than shooting as many as 12 - 15 coats of sealer over the space of a month. That would certainly lower the cost.
But we have no interest in such an approach. There would simply be no joy in it. Besides, there are scores of companies already doing that for those who do not care about fine cabinetry.
Here is a picture of a pair we finished today...
A project like this makes everyone here proud of their work and excited to come back for another day. Pounding out cheap cabinets would simply be a job in comparison.
- Jim
When I began building speakers, someone posted a picture of a pair I built. A few days later, I received an unsolicited email explaining the I was doing things all wrong. I was spending too much for drivers and fancy woods and veneers. I responded that I wanted to use the best drivers I could find for a given project because I wanted to build the best speaker I could. Also, building cabinets is a lot of work and I wanted them to look like I put that much effort into them.
Yes, we could make less expensive cabinets. No doubt about that. We could use pre-veneered stock. Of course, there would be no book-matching. We could shoot them with conversion varnish in a single day rather than shooting as many as 12 - 15 coats of sealer over the space of a month. That would certainly lower the cost.
But we have no interest in such an approach. There would simply be no joy in it. Besides, there are scores of companies already doing that for those who do not care about fine cabinetry.
Here is a picture of a pair we finished today...
A project like this makes everyone here proud of their work and excited to come back for another day. Pounding out cheap cabinets would simply be a job in comparison.
- Jim
Hey Jim, if I recall, in your Reddit AMA a while back you discussed possibly doing a cheaper entry-level speaker (you current cheapest is $700 + shipping), is that still on the table?
Also, your cheapest is called the “Computer Monitor” yet it’s in the Bookshelf/Surround category and not the Monitor category. Can you please explain the difference?
Compared to its 4” Tang Band woofer, a cheaper option could be the Dayton Audio RS125 (don‘t know bulk pricing, but currently <$27/ea on PartsExpress). Measurements of 4ohm version show high sensitivity, neutral on-axis, maintains directivity up to 2kHz, and low-ish distortion even at 100dB.
Two good & cheap tweeters are:
1) Peerless BC25TG15: Measurements of 4ohm version, which Dennis used in the AAM which performed very well and Amir loved.
2) HiVi Q1R: Measurements
All are high sensitivity, which is great.
I watch a lot of movies, so high sensitivity is important, and besides the MTM SongSurround II, your cheapest standmount offering that has a sensitivity higher than the average 86dB is the $3600+shipping Silk AT Monitors.
So, for a mixed usage consumer like myself, I would either need to save up a lot or get your SongTower or SongTower RT, and some people don’t want towers.
Last edited:
I totally get this. While I have often opted for hitting a price point, it still comes back to being proud of what you do and excited to come back for another day. There are "jobs" which pay better, but don't include the opportunity to actually create something of value.
(I made more money with far less effort as a high-end home audio dealer than I have as a manufacturer, but I wanted to make stuff.)
Last edited:
What is the difference between a conversion varnish finish and 12 to 15 coat sealer finish?
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2019
- Messages
- 1,172
- Likes
- 2,321
Hey Jim, if I recall, in your Reddit AMA a while back you discussed possibly doing a cheaper entry-level speaker (you current cheapest is $700 + shipping), is that still on the table?
Also, your cheapest is called the “Computer Monitor” yet it’s in the Bookshelf/Surround category and not the Monitor category. Can you please explain the difference?
I would think his pricing couldn't go much lower while maintaining the domestic cabinet construction. He has indicated in the past, he has no interest in purchasing cabinets from overseas and it is not part of his business model. If we take the Surround One which sells for $895 in the basic finish and back out the cost of the drivers, $390 at retail ($250 for the tweeters and $140 for the woofers), that leaves $500 for the cabinets and crossovers. Assuming that the crossover remains similar, the cabinet cost isn't going to change, this leaves the only place to cut, the drivers. Even using the drivers you propose for a total cost of $75 per pair and you are still at $575.
The question, to me at least, then would be how many people would really be interested in a $575-600 speaker with $25 woofers and $15 tweeters? I would say few, but then I look at companies like Totem that sell speakers with exactly that, not as nice of cabinets or finishes, virtually no crossover (unless a coil on the woofer counts), for $1,000 a pair and have been doing so for a couple of decades.
Still >$100 cheaper than his cheapest offering
And my comment about his offerings of high sensitivity speakers still stands.
Thanks for the clarification Dennis. With all that is wrong in the wourld today, surely there are better targets for ire than anything to do with audio.
I can confirm Jim builds beautiful cabinets (room/system still a work in progress)
They sound good too! I’m looking forward to seeing how the measurements correlate with what I’m hearing, and while I wait gives me plenty of time to understand the character.
They sound good too! I’m looking forward to seeing how the measurements correlate with what I’m hearing, and while I wait gives me plenty of time to understand the character.
If I wasn’t obsessed with doing things myself, I’d be asking if Jim could build me one of his incredible cabinets per my design. Sound considerations aside, it’s nice having something that occupies a significant space be so beautiful.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2020
- Messages
- 1,071
- Likes
- 4,542
I'll let Jim explain the technical differences, but I have had experience with the results. My original business model was to offer speakers with the highest performance I could provide, but with cabinets that were presentable but not furniture quality. That worked while I had access to a cabinet builder near me. He ended up in Hawaii (a considerable drive from Washington, D.C.), so I arranged to have Jim provide cabinets, particularly for the Phil 3. To keep costs and build time to a minimum, I asked Jim to use a simpler finishing process as an option, and he experimented withe conversion varnish. The results ranged from acceptable to pretty awful. Although the conversion varnish can be applied in a single coat, it won't fill deep grains like mahogany. It really only worked well with maple. I could tell it was painful for Jim to ship the conversion varnish cabinets, and we agreed to only offer the furniture grade multi-stage finish that is necessary to completely fill the grain and provide a smooth, solid-wood appearance.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2019
- Messages
- 9
- Likes
- 145
Conversion varnish can be shot in a single day (not a single coat). You can sand each coat except the final coat. So there will be a few flaws (dust particles) in the final finish. You can sand these flaws out of lacquer and simply shoot lacquer thinner to "re-melt" the surface. So as a final finish, lacquer is more versatile and allows for a better final finish. But unlike conversion varnish, there aren't as many solids in lacquer. And you can only shoot so many coats before you risk it cracking over time. So you need to use sealer if you are doing a closed-grain finish with lacquer. If you shoot an open grain finish with lacquer (where you can see and feel the grain), you don't need any sealer. An example of this would be a black ash finish. If you filled the grain, you would have no idea it was ash since it would just be a flat black surface.
Conversion varnish is not as clear as a high quality sealer (we spend $2 ,000 - $3,000 per month for sealer from Italy). So the beauty of the wood will not show through quite the same.
Conversion varnish is what you typically find on inexpensive cabinets like those you might find at Home Depot or Lowe's. It is fast, serviceable and inexpensive, but not "furniture quality."
- Jim
Another idea I'd like to toss out about the WOW1, in addition to my opinion that its response curve is generally well-suited for its intended use (up against the wall):
In my opinion, 600 Hz is not a bad place for a dip.
In my experience there are three frequency regions where too much energy is definitely a bad thing, and where "flat" can end up being "unforgiving" of less-than-perfect recordings. And 600 Hz is within one of these regions. I call it the "gank zone", a term I got from musicians who are leery of over-emphasis there. It's roughly the octave between 500 and 1000 Hz. Imo problems in this region are actually pretty common. Once you are aware of it, you can walk from room to room at an audio show and instantly hear "gank" in maybe a third of them. Its imo primary cause is not something which is necessarily obvious or even visible on a freqeuncy response curve either.
I would expect the WOW1 to be free from "gank", and to sound balanced when placed up against the wall. No it's not perfect, but it looks pretty darn good to me when used as intended.
In my opinion, 600 Hz is not a bad place for a dip.
In my experience there are three frequency regions where too much energy is definitely a bad thing, and where "flat" can end up being "unforgiving" of less-than-perfect recordings. And 600 Hz is within one of these regions. I call it the "gank zone", a term I got from musicians who are leery of over-emphasis there. It's roughly the octave between 500 and 1000 Hz. Imo problems in this region are actually pretty common. Once you are aware of it, you can walk from room to room at an audio show and instantly hear "gank" in maybe a third of them. Its imo primary cause is not something which is necessarily obvious or even visible on a freqeuncy response curve either.
I would expect the WOW1 to be free from "gank", and to sound balanced when placed up against the wall. No it's not perfect, but it looks pretty darn good to me when used as intended.
Last edited:
Good info, Dennis.
That explains a lot to me. I bought some inexpensive yet quality kitchen cabinets, but the doors looked cheap to me. I believe it is a conversion varnish.
Two paint stores recommended a new lacquer for me to try. The store in Atlanta has been around for like fifty years and the owner knows his stuff. They both said that the local cabinet guys have been shooting this paint and really liking the finish. It is from Chemcraft and called Variset. The previous recommendation was ES Lacquer. I have a gallon of the high gloss White sitting here waiting to be sprayed onto these doors.
https://chemcraft.com/en/products/products-united-states/pre-catalyzed-us#variset®-pigmented-topcoat
That explains a lot to me. I bought some inexpensive yet quality kitchen cabinets, but the doors looked cheap to me. I believe it is a conversion varnish.
Two paint stores recommended a new lacquer for me to try. The store in Atlanta has been around for like fifty years and the owner knows his stuff. They both said that the local cabinet guys have been shooting this paint and really liking the finish. It is from Chemcraft and called Variset. The previous recommendation was ES Lacquer. I have a gallon of the high gloss White sitting here waiting to be sprayed onto these doors.
https://chemcraft.com/en/products/products-united-states/pre-catalyzed-us#variset®-pigmented-topcoat
snapsc
Member
Home audio is a form of art and as art, it has the potential to convey creativity and beauty. What I most appreciate about Salk speakers is that they are a treat to both the eyes and the ears. Every time I walk by them, I smile. Every time I hear them, I smile. I hope Jim never changes his philosophy of creating beautiful art.
Salk Veracity ST in Medium Curly Cherry:
Salk Veracity ST in Medium Curly Cherry:
Me like!
Jim, do you mind telling us what drivers those are? I can tell the tweeter is SB (Beryllium?). Not sure about the mid (Audio Technology?) and woofer (Scan Revelator?).
If you ever get to the point that you would like or be willing to send a pair to me for review I'm game. Not just of the ones above but any of your other designs. I recently reviewed the Philharmonic BMR (which was built by Dennis some years back) which you can look at if you want to get an idea for my review style:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...armonic-bmr-speaker-review.14781/#post-459861
Just throwing it out there.
- Erin
Similar threads
- Poll