SE WI Tower speaker GTG - Page 9

Now is that due to the HT2-TL or your incredible setup that you specifically pieced together to achieve just this quality? How did the other speakers fare with this song?

Again, I do not believe I tweaked my setup to suit my Salk speakers. What I've found and learned over the last two years is that the Salk's can show you everything your front end electronics are giving you. Every time I "upgraded" something, the sound changed. This happens even down to interconnects and speaker wires. But none of these things really came down to tone as I've experienced in the past. Now it's clarity and definition.

I can't speak for anyone else at the GTG, but I did not detect any tonality issues from any of the other speakers. It really came down to clarity of presentation; at least it did for me. I personally don't think any of the speakers suffered from my front end electronics.

So here is my honest take on what I heard ranked in order of preference:

1. Salk HT2-TL: The overall presentation was very accurate. The entire audio spectrum sounded great from the subs up. The midrange was very transparent and the treble displayed great detail and reality with no detectable anomalies.

2. Salk SongTower RT: A very close second displaying nearly the same attributes of the HT2-TL. There did seem to be a little less midrange transparency, but it seemed to be on the lower end. I may have been one of the only ones to detect it as I'm the only one familiar with my HT2-TL's. I think Nuance heard something there too, but I'm not certain. The treble sounded identical and the Salk sound was easily identifiable. Absolutely fantastic speakers for the money.

Tie for 3rd. Ascend Towers: To be honest, I think this could be a fantastic speaker if Dave Fabrikant would ditch the tweeter. I could never live with it. For me, it's not a preference thing, it's just wrong. There were tracks that I easily detected a distortion of sorts. It sounds to me like the tweeter is crossed too low and caused the tweeter to break up. I heard obvious false tones in "Rubina" by Joe Satriani and "Dream On" by Kelly Sweet. It takes the speaker a long way from transparent and realist sounding. I have a hard time listening to the rest of the speaker because of this. The tweeter also lacks extension causing the speaker to lose any bit of airy sound. The speaker can throw some tones right in your face. I'll also mention that the bass is impressive when running full-range as we did at the last GTG, but it seemed stressed or compressed in some way. It was as if the speaker was playing at it's limits...maybe it was... I personally think Ascend is close to making a truely fantastic speaker, Dave just has to find a better tweeter.

Tie for 3rd. Paradigm Signature 8: The Sig's use one of the best sounding dome tweeters I've heard. I've heard these speakers at extreme volume levels, and it amazes me how well they maintain their composure. This is something the Salk's will never do. The weakness of this speaker was the midrange. There was a lack of transparency. I could hear a midrange speaker was playing. The tonality was different with these speakers and that was mostly due to the midrange.

There are always compromises taken with speakers. It is my opinion that the Salk's just seem to get most things right.

It's very hard for me to believe it's a preference thing between the speakers we heard. To me, it's what sounds more realistic in presentation and has the least amount of anomalies. In that case, the Salk's are the easy winners.

As always...YMMV.

^ This.

The track listing of the GTG was as follows (thank you, Terry):

"Rubina" Joe Satriani
"Chant" Fourplay
"Go Insane" Fleetwood Mac
"Seven Wonders" Fleetwood Mac
"Family Man" Fleetwood Mac
"Nomali" Huge Masakela
"Ntyilo Ntyilo (The Love Bird)" Huge Masakela
"Stimela (The Coal Train)" Huge Masakela
"Safari" Keiko Matsui
"Dream On" Kelly Sweet
"Shibumi Dunes" Mino Cinelu
"Oncoming Horizons" Mino Cinelu

Terry, would you mind posting up the pics that were taken?

Although I have only heard the dome version of the SongTowers, the opinions of what sounds "right" and "wrong" is interesting.

If you are saying you don't agree, I'm not surprised.

Here are the pics from the GTG:

The Salk HT2-TL (picture taken prior to the GTG):



The Paradigm Signature 8:



The Ascend Tower:



The Salk SongTower RT:



And finally the group (minus me):

Nice jab , but not an agreement or disagreement.

I can't really comment on what you heard. I wasn't there.

I do disagree on one thing, but that is on tweaking the front end, and the system as a whole....and that is a whole 'nother discussion/thread.

edit: You left out the picture of the HT2-TL's.

It was only meant to equal yours. And seriously just in fun.

I would like to have that discussion with you behind the scenes. I'd love to know what's on your mind. PM'd you.

I do have a couple of questions:

TJ, have you heard a SongTower with the dome tweeter? How did you feel about it?

Wow, thanks for the extremely detailed response as usual TJHUB. Man, I really wish I could listen to some Salk Sound speakers. I've never heard a ribbon tweeter and am used to hearing conventional aluminum dome tweeters (which I don't prefer). When I listened to the Sierra-1 NrTs at Curtis's house, the highs sounded a bit forward, but that could have just been the mids being a bit recessed, which should have been fixed with the Towers.

You clearly prefer the Be tweeters to the NrT tweeters on the Ascends. From your listening experience is this typical? I tend to prefer silk domes to aluminum domes and haven't had enough listening experience with Be domes to make an accurate assessment. In my opinion tweeter breakup is one of the harshest sounding elements of distortion so I completely understand what you mean by having a hard time listening to rest of the speaker.

One more question. Your HT2-TL uses the LCY ribbon, correct? Have you heard the newer versions with the RAAL? Also, I wonder how the Salk RAALs compare with the larger RAAL and the Fountek NeoCd3 available from Madisound. I'm really curious as to how the Songtowers compare with the DIY Statements that also use ribbon tweeters. I tried looking for Statement owners in WI over on HTGuide, but nobody replied.

Unfortunately I have not heard a SongTower with the dome tweeter. To be honest, I have yet to hear a soft dome tweeter I like. I'm a big fan of ribbon tweeters, and I like the LCY in my Salk's. I hope to hear the standard dome version one day.

What get me most about soft domes is that they lack a metallic quality of instruments. Cymbals tend to come off as digitally generated tones, flute tends to lose the presentation of a metal body instrument, and piano lacks the hammer/string relationship and again seems like a false or generated tone. I also seem to hear anomalies, or incorrect tones from them. They lack air and an overall realism for me. I could go on, but I think you get the point.

I used to prefer metal domes, but ribbons ruined that for me. The Be tweeter in the Sig's is very tolerable for me, but I still prefer the ribbons in my Salk's.

I was actually wondering the exact same thing. I think the difference is that the Salks are smoother (think silky), while the Ascends are more dynamic and in your face. Of course, neither of these qualities affect transparency, but I can certainly understand how someone who's more sensitive to the upper registers will prefer the Salks.


That's interesting. I'd think that someone who's sensitive to the highs would prefer soft domes. Metallic dome tweeter breakup is a very common problem that exists in all but the best tweeters. These cause severe distortion issues, that I'd imagine you would clearly dislike, it seems that may not be the case. Be dome tweeters are supposed to remedy this problem with metal domes, but as I mentioned, I don't have enough experience to make an accurate judgment although the Usher "Tiny Dancers" seem to receive rave reviews.

I think the speaker in general was definitely more forward than the Energy Veritas, and standard Sierras, but also less veiled.

There is no need to feel like anyone wants a fight. I hate that. What I do like is a civil discussion and debate. Sometimes people point out aspects that make me think or even realize something I had never paid attention to before. A lot of good can come from that. That's why I asked the questions I asked you guys when we wrapped up the GTG.

I am shocked you think the Salk's are "dull" or "uninvolving" in any way. Seriously, shocked! To me, the ribbon tweeter gives them more resolution and makes them livelier. I never felt the tweeter in the Ascend's was aggressive, I felt like it was off tonally with some odd issues with certain tones or sounds. I agree the soft dome has the detail, you just have to really listen to hear it. The Salk ribbons make this more effortless while never being too bright.

Most live music doesn't sound "good". I can't remember the last time I heard a band in person that was mixed properly. If I had to listen to music like that all of the time, I wouldn't bother. So if a speaker brought that quality to all of my music, I wouldn't listen.

Some of my favorite music is live. You heard it at the GTG. It sounded wonderful tonally. As a matter of fact, it was that very music I used to judge tonality.

I personally don't think the Ascend's bring a live quality to the music. I think there is an upper midrange issue caused by the tweeter. Some of the tones I heard were just plain wrong. I wouldn't call it "dynamic."

I don't want anyone to get me wrong. I'm being very picky here. The Ascend Towers do more right than wrong, it's just that the wrong they do makes me not "prefer" them. I'd need an extended period of time with them to really understand them.

Nuance?

How important is "soundstage" to those at the sessions (and anybody wishing to give their views really)? I understand that was a very big part of Sanjay really admiring the Ascend tower in his listening session. One of the things that people who spend megabucks on speakers always seem to want is a realistic "soundstage".

When it comes to imaging, he is one of the most critical I know of.

Yes, I completely agree. It's obvious too since my friend (owner of the Veritas) has the treble turned up on his receiver to compensate. The downside is that I hear significant amounts of distortion when he has it EQd that way. Many people are used to this sound as that's what you hear in public places like clubs, but I've always thought those club speakers were horrendous. The distortion at most of these places are just disgusting.


I agree about the live music part as you can infer from my response to Curtis, if by live music you're referring to as a concert with a band playing through mics and speakers. The speakers used in these venues are designed for SPL and CD(constant directivity) so that the entire crowd can listen. These are PA speakers not designed for high fidelity critical listening.

However, if by live music doesn't sound "good" you're referring to orchestras, then I disagree. Those are the most realistic pieces of music one can ever hear. That is what I'm looking for in a set of speakers.

I do not find my dome SongTowers to be lacking in detail at all. I think it comes down to personal perference as to whether you prefer a more detailed speaker opposed to one thats more laid back. I enjoyed my non NrT Sierra-1s very much although some find them to be too laid back and lacking in detail. I found the dome STs bring more detail to the table over the Sierra-1s but not too much as to be on the bright side.

I think it is hard at times when speakers sre being discussed as we are doing here that people might be offended by others honest opinions. I never take it personal as everyone will hear the same speaker in the same environment differently. If someone thinks the STs suck thats fine with me but I'm sticking with mine. I would be somewhat suspicious of that person as he would probably be setting me up to buy my STs if I sold them cheap.

I think you can not go wrong with any of the speakers that were at the recent WAC'd GTG. Its just which one you prefer SQ wise, within ones budget and the build quality preference (veneers etc.) as well.

Bill

Brandon, no one thinks you're looking to picking a fight. This is just a hobby, so you're not offending me in any way. I do sometimes feel like I am setting myself up for a beating when I post my honest impressions after GTG's like these, though.

My personal opinion is that there is nothing dull about the Salk's (quite the opposite in fact), but I am just one guy with only my own opinion. Your dull might be my refined and lively, and vice versa. I don't think I've ever seen the word "dull" used concerning the Salk's before, though. I guess there is a first for everything.

On to the soundstage questions, I would say the Ascends threw a very realistic soundstage; one of the best at the GTG. Imaging was also very good. I can see why sanjay liked them. It is only one attribute in speaker design, though.

In short, I agree with Terry (gee, big shocker, right?). I really cannot add much to his post, as he explained it very well.

I really hope no one is getting bent out of shape about our differing opinions. The whole point of these GTG's is to have fun, enjoy the good company and listen to some cool tunes. And on a more personal level, its about finding out if your speakers (or the ones in attendance) (still) make you happy. I left the GTG with no desire to trade my speakers for the Ascends or Paradigms, and I'd guess Brandon left not willing to trade his either. Who's right? Who's wrong? Neither of us. We stuck with what we preferred, and I'd be willing to bet if he preferred the Salks after the GTG he'd likely sell the Ascends. The same goes for me, as I could care less what brand I own; I just want to best sounding speaker that I can afford. When I find something that tops mine for within the same price range, I'll pull the trigger and then happily shout it from the mountain tops.

I agree with this. Luckily, the crossover designer for Salk uses classical music as an aid while designing them, so I guess it makes sense that I feel the Salk's excel very well with live orchestral music, not to mention studio recordings.

This calls for an example. I used to go to a friends house (way back in the day, in the 70's) when most electronics had tone controls. He didn't hear the highs very well so he would have the bass toned down and the treble turned all the way to the right. Because of his hearing that was making his system sound to him better than any other settings. To me I couldn't stay in the room with it as there was so much treble and so loud it just didn't sound like music to me. It wasn't a matter of who was right or wrong, just what it sounds like to the listener.

No one should be dismissed or jumped on or anything else. If 1 person thinks the ST sounded better than the Ascends then they are just stating what they heard and vice versa, it's not personal and I appreciate all of you guys feedback from your GTG. I'm going to purchase new speakers fairly soon and all this helps. I won't be able to go $4500 but I'm gonna jump in somewhere around the $2000 point.

I got you. I don't think I heard better dynamics, but I may have missed that.

I respect your opinion of your speakers as well. One thing that is clear to me is that we all listen differently. We have to get what's best for ourselves.

Well one thing's for certain, speaker loyalty is alive and well

Apparently none of the speakers were that much better than the other to tempt someone to jump ship........ even the $8k Paradigm Sigs didn't fare so well.

DreamCatcher

Is that an axe in your hand behind the couch?

Bill

Agreed. Sounds like a classic case of "Nothing sounds quite as nice as that which I own". Indeed, some of the descriptions of the attributes of the speakers sound like wine critic puffery. I'm waiting for someone to describe the Salk's mids as chocolate on the nose with a hint of oak and a peppery finish.

lol