Salk WoW1 Bookshelf Speaker Review

[Xulonn]

There is something about zircote that I find extraordinarily attractive. To supplement my Social Security pension from 2006-2011, I worked at the Woodcraft franchise store in Santa Rosa,. California. (It closed permanently in 2011). There, under the tutelage of my eccentric friend and former Alembic guitar (LINK) wood detail and inlay specialist Kris Worden, I learned much about exotic and tropical woods. (Kris later returned to Alembic, and still works there.) Kris and I would drool over the best random width and length planks and turning blanks every time we got a shipment and checked in the wood.

Zircote has a very unusual "spiderweb" grain pattern, and is one of the rarest and most expensive woods in the world. Fortunately, in spite of its rarity, is sustainably harvested in Mexico and Central America. If I could afford them, I would purchas a pair of Salk Song Towers and a Song Center in Ziricote, satisfying my lust for my absolutely favorite wood in the world. I see from the Salk gallery, someone else has the exact same taste as me in exotic wood veneer speakers:

 

[R Swerdlow]

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.
View attachment 75992

I agree completely, both with your opinion of Jim Salk's wood finishes, and with you choice of the Veracity ST speaker. Mine are clear-coated unstained ropey cherry veneer. The rounded-over frame around the front baffle is solid cherry. The photo shows them when new. Now, they're four years older and have darkened to a very pleasing red cherry color.

 

[R Swerdlow]

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?).

I'm not Jim Salk, but those speakers look like the Song 3 BeAT. It's one of the 3 variations of the standard Song 3 model. It's drivers are the SB Acoustics beryllium dome tweeter, the Audio Technology midrange, and the Satori 7½" woofer. Jim will have to tell us what veneer they have.

 

[muad]

I'm not Jim Salk, but those speakers look like the Song 3 BeAT. It's one of the 3 variations of the standard Song 3 model. It's drivers are the SB Acoustics beryllium dome tweeter, the Audio Technology midrange, and the Satori 7½" woofer. Jim will have to tell us what veneer they have.

It's similar to the BeAT. It's actually the SS 9.5. Same mid and tweeter but the woofer is satori 9.5in wo24-p. Also, the mid on the SS 9.5 is run on an open baffle, unlike the sealed SONG3 line. This was the first picture that I have seen of an SS 9.5 that didn't have the faceted baffle.

 

[R Swerdlow]

It's similar to the BeAT. It's actually the SS 9.5. Same mid and tweeter but the woofer is satori 9.5in wo24-p. Also, the mid on the SS 9.5 is run on an open baffle, unlike the sealed SONG3 line. This was the first picture that I have seen of an SS 9.5 that didn't have the faceted baffle.

Cool! I didn't know that existed.

I shouldn't be surprised because Salk does modify existing designs, or create new designs, to suit the customer.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

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

Amir should be receiving the very similar BeAT tower around October. Measurements-wise, it should be very similar to the SS 9.5 except for the deepest bass. Subjectively, the 9.5 would sound a little different because of the open-back midrange chamber.

 

[snapsc]

I took a moment to google images of the woods that have been shown/posted here (fireburst elm, cherry brownburst, medium curly cherry, zircote) on Jim's speakers. There is no comparison between the googled images and what Jim does with the wood on the speakers he builds...his team are woodworking masters. Oh, and they produce beautiful music as well.

 

[richard12511]

Amir should be receiving the very similar BeAT tower around October. Measurements-wise, it should be very similar to the SS 9.5 except for the deepest bass. Subjectively, the 9.5 would sound a little different because of the open-back midrange chamber.

I’ve heard some of Salk’s higher end offerings, and to this day, it’s some of the best sound I’ve ever heard. Really interested to see measurements to maybe understand why I liked them so much.

 

[maize and blue]

That’s not a Salk SS9.5, I believe it is the Song3 Encore. Note there isn’t the dual 12” passive radiators.

 

[muad]

That’s not a Salk SS9.5, I believe it is the Song3 Encore. Note there isn’t the duel 12” passive radiators.

The encore has the satori 9.5 woofer lower down, and it uses an eton mid. The pictured SS9.5 speaker is using a Audiotechnology mid.

Since Salk does alot of custom stuff maybe they moved the PRs to the rear? Or reconfigured it for use with a rear port?

 

[maize and blue]

Don’t think so, yes Jim does a lot of custom work but that isn’t an example of it except for maybe the veneer. The Song3 BeAT is essentially an SS 9.5 without the dual passives and open back mid and with the 7.5 Satori woofer rather than the 9.5 woofer of the SS 9.5.
With a correspondingly smaller cabinet of course. The Song3 Encore is a bit of both.

 

[Dennis Murphy]

That’s not a Salk SS9.5, I believe it is the Song3 Encore. Note there isn’t the duel 12” passive radiators.

The pic Jim posted must be the BeAT's. What's confusing things is the perspective--it looks too wide for a BeAT, but I don't think Jim would build a 9.5 without the passives or faceted corners. Oh Jim............................

 

[maize and blue]

To me it looks like the speaker in post #346 (Jim’s post) is a Song3 BeAT, the one in post #360 (Muad’s post) looks to me to be a Song3 Encore. That’s all I was referencing. Could certainly be wrong.

 

[muad]

To me it looks like the speaker in post #346 (Jim’s post) is a Song3 BeAT, the one in post #360 (Muad’s post) looks to me to be a Song3 Encore. That’s all I was referencing. Could certainly be wrong.

The one in my pic is the encore for sure. The one in Jim's post would have to be a modified ss9.5. The driver spacing on Jim's post has the woofer much higher than the song series. That's a significant change and would require a significant crossover change.

Edit: Jim made a post on aufiocircle awhile back saying he could do the ss9.5 in a rectangular form factor... But where he put the PR is anyone's guess

 

[MattHooper]

While we're talking about beautiful finishes... this has to be my favourite!

View attachment 75999

Another example of how tastes differ. I think Salk makes beautiful speakers (and I want my speakers to look great), but the finish pictured
above is probably my least favourite finish example. The deeper brown/black Zircote finish pictured later in the thread is more up my alley.

There are certain wood finishes I can not countenance. I would run screaming from any room with a pair of speakers in Black Ash, Oak, or Cherry.
Black Ash because it is the signifier of "cheap" (and it's a very ugly finish IMO). Oak because...well...Oak. Cherry because it was the de jour
finish not only in audiophile speakers in the 90's but it was just everywhere as the wood finish of choice. So to me it is not only bland, it's as contemporary feeling as a mullet.

 

[maize and blue]

Maud,
Perhaps the absence of front porting is causing some distorting of the perceived driver positioning? The Satori woofer does appear higher.

 

[muad]

Another example of how tastes differ. I think Salk makes beautiful speakers (and I want my speakers to look great), but the finish pictured
above is probably my least favourite finish example. The deeper brown/black Zircote finish pictured later in the thread is more up my alley.

There are certain wood finishes I can not countenance. I would run screaming from any room with a pair of speakers in Black Ash, Oak, or Cherry.
Black Ash because it is the signifier of "cheap" (and it's a very ugly finish IMO). Oak because...well...Oak. Cherry because it was the de jour
finish not only in audiophile speakers in the 90's but it was just everywhere as the wood finish of choice. So to me it is not only bland, it's as contemporary feeling as a mullet.

For sure, it's completely subjective. I normally can't stand cherry but I love what Jim's team did with keeping the colour natural, and an almost raw like appearance with only the hint of a burst for stain. I personally would never get it myself... Not a big fan of what cherry turns into after a few years of sun.

 

[Xulonn]

Not a big fan of what cherry turns into after a few years of sun.

Even just an hour of direct sunlight can darken freshly planed or sanded cherrywood. Some fine woodworkers and furniture makers carefully expose cherrywood to sunlight or UV at somepoint in the process. The below photo shows the effect of sunlight/UV on prefinished cherrywood.

 

[Ericglo]

Another example of how tastes differ. I think Salk makes beautiful speakers (and I want my speakers to look great), but the finish pictured
above is probably my least favourite finish example. The deeper brown/black Zircote finish pictured later in the thread is more up my alley.

There are certain wood finishes I can not countenance. I would run screaming from any room with a pair of speakers in Black Ash, Oak, or Cherry.
Black Ash because it is the signifier of "cheap" (and it's a very ugly finish IMO). Oak because...well...Oak. Cherry because it was the de jour
finish not only in audiophile speakers in the 90's but it was just everywhere as the wood finish of choice. So to me it is not only bland, it's as contemporary feeling as a mullet.

I completely agree about Ash and Oak. I don't have a strong opinion either way on cherry, but I understand where you are coming from.

I will add that Zircote has to be one of the most exotically beautiful woods I have seen.

 

[aarons915]

Even just an hour of direct sunlight can darken freshly planed or sanded cherrywood. Some fine woodworkers and furniture makers carefully expose cherrywood to sunlight or UV at somepoint in the process. The below photo shows the effect of sunlight/UV on prefinished cherrywood.

View attachment 76190

Yeah one way you combat that is by having your windows tinted, it doesn't have to be dark, I had some put on that blocks 100% UV and you can't tell anything is on the window at all.