Salk Silk named one of the "Best Loudspeakers in the World" by Audioholics

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 12919 times.

JonnyFive

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 279
http://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/best-loudspeakers-world

Wow!!!!  Notice that the next most-economical speaker in that list (excluding the budget designs) is $20k/pr.

Congrats to the Salk Team!

laulau


High praise indeed.  Congrats!   :thumb:


FireGuy

Yes, I agree.  Congrats.  And, as a side note...

Conceding their sound is fabulous (the Status Acoustics),  are (aesthetically) the worst looking high-end speakers I've ever seen.  And for $50K.   This is my opinion only.  Would love to hear them though and maybe seeing/auditioning them in person in a optimum environment may change my mind.  But I doubt it.


DMurphy

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 1458
    • SalkSound
Yes, I agree.  Congrats.  And, as a side note...

Conceding their sound is fabulous (the Status Acoustics),  are (aesthetically) the worst looking high-end speakers I've ever seen.  And for $50K.   This is my opinion only.  Would love to hear them though and maybe seeing/auditioning them in person in a optimum environment may change my mind.  But I doubt it.



They're actually very popular on the planet Andros 7.   Shipping is a bit steep. 

Kenneth Patchen

  • Volunteer
  • Posts: 1030
  • Bangin on those bongoes like a chimpanzee
Yes, but some would consider the teleportation function on the Status Accoustics to be an attractive bonus.

front242

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 15
I marvel at my Silks almost daily.  The detail, lack of congestion and bass extension are incredible when you match those up with the huge/deep image they throw.   

Wonderful guitar speakers.  Jimi and Stevie Ray never sounded better at my house.  That's for sure. 

I only wish they were a little more amplifier-friendly in terms of the need for watts.  Someday, I will (a) go for a big watt solid state amplifier, or (b) swap them out for Salk Silk Towers (which have a higher sensitivity due to the extra driver).

Buy this speaker.  Thank me (or Jim) later. 

Tomy2Tone

I marvel at my Silks almost daily.  The detail, lack of congestion and bass extension are incredible when you match those up with the huge/deep image they throw.   

Wonderful guitar speakers.  Jimi and Stevie Ray never sounded better at my house.  That's for sure. 

I only wish they were a little more amplifier-friendly in terms of the need for watts.  Someday, I will (a) go for a big watt solid state amplifier, or (b) swap them out for Salk Silk Towers (which have a higher sensitivity due to the extra driver).

Buy this speaker.  Thank me (or Jim) later. 

Hi front242!

Just curious if you ever had the chance to listen to SS8's? If so, can you compare to what you have there with the Silks.

I was considering these a while back as an upgrade over my Songtowers but I've only had the luxury of hearing SS8's before I made the decision to go that route.

front242

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 15
Hi front242!

Just curious if you ever had the chance to listen to SS8's? If so, can you compare to what you have there with the Silks.

I was considering these a while back as an upgrade over my Songtowers but I've only had the luxury of hearing SS8's before I made the decision to go that route.

I have not.  I never considered a speaker with the bulk of the SS8 for my listening room.  I like bookshelf speakers on four post Sound Anchors, and the Silks are the best I have found.  Previous speakers included Swan D2.1 SE, ProAc Response D 2, and Reference 3A mm de Capo i.  I like the Silks best -- by a long stretch.  They lack a boxiness that I found in my prior speakers only when I noticed it was not present in the Silks!  A happy surprise.

Folsom

Not just that... They don't look freaking stupid, they look nice.

dB Cooper

Yes, I agree.  Congrats.  And, as a side note...

Conceding their sound is fabulous (the Status Acoustics),  are (aesthetically) the worst looking high-end speakers I've ever seen.  And for $50K.   This is my opinion only.  Would love to hear them though and maybe seeing/auditioning them in person in a optimum environment may change my mind.  But I doubt it.


Well, while they may be good, perhaps great, speakers, for me, the company's name pretty much sums up what they're mostly about. And yes, they're fugly. They look like somebody stole them from George Jetson's house. Would much rather have a moderately priced speaker and spend the difference on concert tickets.

Folsom

They look like a guy who makes pornos would own, like the guy who drugged "The Dude".

ArthurDent

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 8337
  • Don't Panic / Mostly Harmless
Congratulations Jim & Co. More well deserved recognition.  :thumb:

mresseguie

Jim,

Congratulations. Please note it is Audioholics that declared this rather than Audio Circle.  :wink:

rick240

I only wish they were a little more amplifier-friendly in terms of the need for watts.  Someday, I will (a) go for a big watt solid state amplifier, or (b) swap them out for Salk Silk Towers (which have a higher sensitivity due to the extra driver).


Do you think these would perform well with a 100wpc amp, or would they want more like 250wpc? Especially since i plan to cross them to a sub at 80Hz (so the power hungry low frequencies wouldn't be going there).
« Last Edit: 29 Jan 2015, 01:18 am by rick240 »

jsalk


Do you think these would perform well with a 100wpc amp, or would they want more like 250wpc? Especially since i plan to cross them to a sub at 80Hz (so the power hungry low frequencies wouldn't be going there).

That all depends on how loud you would like to play them.  100 watts would likely work just fine.  I don't seen an issue there.  But 250 watts would provide more headroom, keeping things pristine.

Keep in mind that you are normally listening at about 5 - 8 watts RMS (average).  But instantaneous transients (drum hits and the like) can easily hit peaks of 200 watts or more.  So the more watts you have, the cleaner the resulting sound will be. 

- Jim

rollo

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 3666
  • Rollo Audio Where Home demo rules
  Congrats Jim. Interesting concept.


charles

jsalk

Just so there is no confusion, the speakers shown in the photos on this thread are not the ones listed as "Best Bookshelf Speakers in the World."

- Jim

Joe Frances

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 52
I marvel at my Silks almost daily.  The detail, lack of congestion and bass extension are incredible when you match those up with the huge/deep image they throw.   

Wonderful guitar speakers.  Jimi and Stevie Ray never sounded better at my house.  That's for sure. 

I only wish they were a little more amplifier-friendly in terms of the need for watts.  Someday, I will (a) go for a big watt solid state amplifier, or (b) swap them out for Salk Silk Towers (which have a higher sensitivity due to the extra driver).

Buy this speaker.  Thank me (or Jim) later.

Just a quick question if I may, what kind of amp are you using with the Silks and how much power/wattage does it have?  Thanks,

Joe

Barry

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 61
I'm interested to know would the "Cherry In-Line Maraschino Amplifier" be good to drive the Silk Speakers?   I'm also considering to bi-amp as the in-line Maraschino Amp is small enough to hide behind the silk speakers (practically make them active bi-amp speakers).   Any suggestion?