AudioCircle

Industry Circles => Salk Signature Sound => Topic started by: albireo13 on 28 Jun 2011, 11:51 am

Title: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: albireo13 on 28 Jun 2011, 11:51 am
OK, sorry about yet another post.  Instead of individual threads, asking questions about various models, I'd like to get feedback from Salk owners on their 2ch speaker selection.  I currently have 2ch, with Paradigm Studio 20 bookshelves ... no sub.   This is for my living room which is 16 X 24ft, 8ft high.   

  I've been going through postings and it seems most folks are building multi-channel HT systems.  I have a basic 5.1 HT system in my finished basement with big screen TV and am now swinging back in the other direction ... more towards the retro 2-channel music days.   I just enjoy music more as 2-ch.  I would consider 2.1, adding a sub but, maybe I wouldn't need that with the right speakers.  Anyway, I could always add that later if I wanted to.

  This will be a dedicated music setup, in my living room. I don't plan to ever upgrade it beyond 2.1 audio.

  My first order of business is targeting the right speakers.  I enjoy jazz, vocals, classical, blues, new-age and some classic rock.  I'm definitely not a high volume listener.   My Studio-20s sound nice for vocals and jazz.  Diana Krall sounded wonderful the other night!
However, for chuckles, I popped in some older Pink Floyd after that and was underwhelmed by the Studios.   The Studio-20s have been a wonderful upgrade from my previous old college dorm speakers.  Now I think one more step up is in order.  I don't think I'll ever go super high end.  With 5 kids, youngest in 9th grade, bills and financial pressures are keeping me grounded.
WE plan to sell the house within 5 years to downgrade.  I can either look to upgrade now (within a year) or wait and save pennies until we move.

   In any case, I had first found out about Salks, and this web site, last year.  I instantly fell in love with the SongTowers.  They seem to be a great deal.  However, I'm also looking at HT1, HT1-TL, Ellis 1801-TL,  and HT2-TL as well.   I hate to be impatient and jump for Songtowers within a year finding out I have upgraditis after a year or so.   I hope to listen to some Songtowers locally soon but, don't expect to be able to listen to all these models.

  So,  to those folks with humble 2ch Salk systems ... what have you settled on?  What would you recommend?

I am ruling out anything over $4K.  The HT2-TLs are a stretch goal and realistically, anything pricier than Songtowers would have to wait a few years.

  Thanks to all for putting up with my postings.

  BTW, my electronics are currently all Emotiva .. USP-1, UPA-2.  Upgrading those .... that's another story for another day.  :D

Regards,
Rob


 

 

Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: jd3 on 28 Jun 2011, 12:10 pm
Rob,
I've used HT1-TL's, SongTowers, and SongBirds in a 2 channel setup in my living room, which is a bit smaller than yours.  Any of those will provide you what you're looking for, it just depends on the level of refinement you want.  As you move up the line you get higher quality drivers.  The ST's will play a bit louder than the HT1-TL's at the same level, but you say you're really not looking for that.  All the models I mentioned should provide enough bass (they did for me) to avoid the use of a sub.  (My personal preference has always been to avoid the use of a sub in 2 channel setups...I've never been able to get them integrated properly, but that's me!) 

The hidden gem of all the above models IMO is the SongBird.  It images like crazy, goes surprisingly deep, and like all Salks, has a wonderful midrange.  It is just a fabulous bargain at its price-point.   

John
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: albireo13 on 28 Jun 2011, 12:23 pm
Hi John,
  Thanks for the reply. This is exactly the type of input I'm hoping for.   Hmmm .... Songbirds.  Perhaps this is a good entry into Salk sound. I could start with Songbirds and upgrade later perhaps.

  I'm not worried about the efficiency so much.  I currently rarely operate higher than 9:00 on my amp volume knob.  Then again, the Studio-20s are reasonably efficient .. 89-90dB.

  Yes, I've used a sub before as well and was never quite happy with how I was able to integrate it in.   It could be just me though.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: albireo13 on 28 Jun 2011, 12:24 pm
Forgot to mention .... the HTs seem nice as well.  the appear to go lower than my Studios.
I could still stick with bookshelves, since I have stands already.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: Nuance on 28 Jun 2011, 01:30 pm
Rob,

My humble system is:

- Parasound 2100 Preamp
- PS Audio Digital Link III DAC
- I sold the Butler 2250 and now use a Parasound A23, because in my room and to my ears the difference was not worth the money (the Butler was decent, though).
- Salk Signature Sound SongTower RT's (LCY).
- Dual DIY TC Sounds TC2000 15" sealed subwoofers (only one in use for now)

Right now I am at the point of diminishing returns, in which I net less performance gain than I'd like even if I spend a good deal more.  I may just leave things as is and enjoy, or I may try a (tube) DAC and/or preamp/amp combo.  Regardless, it won't get much better for me IMO. 

If you plan to integrate a good subwoofer, go for the SongTower RT's.  Now that they are available with the RAAL tweeter it's a win win.  To my ears they are about 95% of the HT2-TL's when crossed to a capable sub.  If you want to stay with 2.0, get the HT2-TL's so you won't wonder "what if?"

For what it's worth, I don't use a subwoofer for music because the ST's necessarily "need it;" I use the sub(s) to take the room out of the equation.  It's much easier to integrate a subwoofer than it is to find the spot in your listening room that will provide excellent bass response and imaging and sound stage width and depth for the speakers.  In fact, it's likely that the best place for in-room bass response won't be the best place for the rest of the speaker attributes, hence the subwoofer recommendation (an active speaker would solve this, such as the active HT3).  YMMV, and to each their own.

Any of Salk's "entry level" speakers will best the Studio 20's in my opinion; in every aspect.  Investing in room treatments will also vastly improve your system.  Even the greatest speakers in the world will perform poorly in a room with bad acoustics.  The room and the speakers will make up 90% of what you hear, so be sure to get those in order first. 

I hope that helps.  Whatever you choose, I think you'll be very pleased. 
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: jtwrace on 28 Jun 2011, 01:58 pm
If you're open to finish, these are a great deal  http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=93870.msg960117;topicseen#new
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: geezer on 28 Jun 2011, 02:17 pm
You list classical music among the types you like to listen to, and you also note you're not a high volume listener. Those are mutually contradictory statements. Much of the most interesting classical music exhibits a very wide dynamic range, and if you want to approach the 'live' listening experience (and you don't want to lose the softer passages) you'll need high volume. On symphonic music I frequently listen with the volume set at 11:00. For me, this is an important issue (even more so with opera).

Of course if classical is a small fraction of your listening, or if you primarily use it just as background music, this doesn't apply.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 28 Jun 2011, 03:30 pm
Rob,

My humble system is:

- Parasound 2100 Preamp
- PS Audio Digital Link III DAC
- I sold the Butler 2250 and now use a Parasound A23, because in my room and to my ears the difference was not worth the money (the Butler was decent, though).
- Salk Signature Sound SongTower RT's (LCY).
- Dual DIY TC Sounds TC2000 15" sealed subwoofers (only one in use for now)

Right now I am at the point of diminishing returns, in which I net less performance gain than I'd like even if I spend a good deal more.  I may just leave things as is and enjoy, or I may try a (tube) DAC and/or preamp/amp combo.  Regardless, it won't get much better for me IMO. 

If you plan to integrate a good subwoofer, go for the SongTower RT's.  Now that they are available with the RAAL tweeter it's a win win.  To my ears they are about 95% of the HT2-TL's when crossed to a capable sub.  If you want to stay with 2.0, get the HT2-TL's so you won't wonder "what if?"

For what it's worth, I don't use a subwoofer for music because the ST's necessarily "need it;" I use the sub(s) to take the room out of the equation.  It's much easier to integrate a subwoofer than it is to find the spot in your listening room that will provide excellent bass response and imaging and sound stage width and depth for the speakers.  In fact, it's likely that the best place for in-room bass response won't be the best place for the rest of the speaker attributes, hence the subwoofer recommendation (an active speaker would solve this, such as the active HT3).  YMMV, and to each their own.

Any of Salk's "entry level" speakers will best the Studio 20's in my opinion; in every aspect.  Investing in room treatments will also vastly improve your system.  Even the greatest speakers in the world will perform poorly in a room with bad acoustics.  The room and the speakers will make up 90% of what you hear, so be sure to get those in order first. 

I hope that helps.  Whatever you choose, I think you'll be very pleased.

For what it's worth, I agree with Nuance 100%.  I have HT2-TL's and I run a subwoofer for music as it's the only way I can get a flat bass response.  I certainly don't need a sub with the HT2-TL's, until you factor in what my room does to the frequency response below 100Hz.

I would consider 2 options.  I would highly consider the HT1-TL's if you want to attempt not using a subwoofer.  They would seem to fit your needs perfectly.  The best option IMO, would be the SongTower RT's with a nice sub.  It's what I'd do without hesitation. 

As far as integrating a sub, it takes more than just a great sub.  You absolutely MUST EQ the sub.  The reason most people can't get a sub to properly integrate with their speakers is because the sub does not have a flat frequency response and therefore is too quiet at some frequencies and too loud at others.  This makes the sub more noticeable and the sound isn't very good at all.  I run dual 18" LMS Ultra subs with my Salk's and many people ask if the subs are being used for music.  The integration is flawless to my ears.  So is Nuance's 15's. 

If I were you, I'd pair a Rythmik 12" to the SongTower RT's and be in heaven with the sub properly EQ'd.  :thumb:



 
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: fsimms on 28 Jun 2011, 03:39 pm
If you live near Houston, my friend Raj is still selling his SongTowers.  He hasn't had anybody out to even hear them.  I don't think anybody could hear them and not buy them.  :thumb:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=87239.0 (http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=87239.0)

Bob
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: albireo13 on 28 Jun 2011, 04:06 pm
fsimms ...  darn!  those look nice but, I live in New Hampshire.


  It's sounding like the STs area great choice for me.  I'm intruiged by the HT1-TLs though, as well.
Perhaps I'll try and chat with Jim about it but, I don't want to bother him too much.

Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 28 Jun 2011, 05:10 pm
fsimms ...  darn!  those look nice but, I live in New Hampshire.


  It's sounding like the STs area great choice for me.  I'm intruiged by the HT1-TLs though, as well.
Perhaps I'll try and chat with Jim about it but, I don't want to bother him too much.

I'm positive Jim won't mind a chat with you.  Call him!

Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TF1216 on 28 Jun 2011, 06:43 pm
Where do you live in NH?  There are a few folks who own Salk speakers nearby.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: eclein on 28 Jun 2011, 07:02 pm
  It's sounding like the STs area great choice for me.  I'm intruiged by the HT1-TLs though, as well.
Perhaps I'll try and chat with Jim about it but, I don't want to bother him too much.

albireo13-Jim is one of the nicest guys on here and loves to talk about all things audio as far as I can tell, I'd call him myself and wouldn't hesitate about that at all...let us know what he says. Great folks here that genuinely want to share good sound with everybody....welcome to AC, Call Jim
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: adydula on 28 Jun 2011, 08:36 pm
Hello!

I am one of those humble 2 ch SalkSongtower owners!!

I had many speakers over the past 30 yrs in this hobby..I am 62 yrs young as of last week.

You will not go wrong with a pair of SongTowers, they are absolutely marvelous...for the price there is NO better out there PERIOD.

They play loud, go low and sound so 'musical' nothing humble here from lite jazz, classical to rock...all really great.

They are easy to drive, sound good with a variety of equipment, AVR's seperates etc..

Wait until you hear Diana Krall on these speakers!!! OMG its really great.

Unless you want your speakers to go down REALLY low these will handle 95% of all music really well...your musical tastes are much like mine...

The bass from these never ceases to amaze me...and if after awhile you want to upgrade your SongTowers will not be hard to find a home for.

Several times I have started the upgrade to the HT2's and I keep saying for me why? I am very content with them....maybe if I will the lottery..then it would be the SoundScapes!!  :D

I have used these speakers with a Onkyo 805 receiver with great results and now with a AVA Ultravalve amp with only 35 watts per channel and its a marraige made in heaven for sure!!

I am a 2 ch guy, and I have a sub and a 6.1 HT but tried the sub several times, always too boomy for me and the SongTowers do just fine in the bass department...and many use subs with good results.

Give Jim a call he is a great guy and will answer your questions!

Best of luck with your decision!

All the best
Alex
 :D

Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: albireo13 on 29 Jun 2011, 10:50 am
Hi Alex,
  That sounds neat.  I'm not looking for the ultimate speaker, just something at the "next level", compared to my Studio-20s.
I actually have enjoyed the Studios but, do recognize their limitations.

Rob
 8)
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: Nuance on 29 Jun 2011, 12:32 pm
Well said, TJHUB; well said.  It's imperative to purchase a quality subwoofer (sealed or passive IMO, as ported can give off port noise).  If you don't EQ the subwoofer, or you neglect finding a quality unit (Rythmik, JL Audio, DIY, etc), you certainly will not enjoy the integration.  It's impossible to integrate a poor to average quality subwoofer while also not apply parametric EQ below the crossover.  For what it's worth, SVS ported subs are also well designed and seem to integrate pretty well into music systems (TJHUB's old PB13 Ultra comes to mind).  I'll always recommend sealed, though, as they just sounded more "right" to my ears.  YMMV, and I am sure there are many other subwoofer manufacturers than provide quality products that will pair well with Salk speakers. 

In short, don't skimp on the subwoofer and don't hesitate to EQ it, else a solid integration just won't happen.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: Saturn94 on 29 Jun 2011, 01:26 pm
To my ears my SVS 16-46PC+ (powered vented cylinder sub) integrates very well with my HT2-TLs.  No sub EQ, btw. :wink:
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 29 Jun 2011, 01:44 pm
Hi Alex,
  That sounds neat.  I'm not looking for the ultimate speaker, just something at the "next level", compared to my Studio-20s.
I actually have enjoyed the Studios but, do recognize their limitations.

Rob
 8)

I almost purchased a pair of Studio 20's some years back.  I passed them up as soon as I heard a pair of B&W 805S's that I found bettered the Studio's in every way.  For the price difference, they should too! 

A little over 2 years ago, I was invited to Nuance's home to listen to his SongTower RT's.  Actually, I brought my B&W's along to compare.  To my surprise, the SongTowers absolutely ruined the B&W's for me.  To make a long story short, the SongTowers made the midrange of my B&W's sound dull and lifeless. There was SO much more detail and clarity.  The B&W's treble was also lacking in comparison.  The treble on the SongTowers was so clean and detailed while never sounding bright or in your face.  By comparison, the treble on the B&W's lacked the detail and clarity of the Salk ribbon, and often sounded bright and shrill on some material.  I was basically embarrassed to own the B&W's.  I couldn't believe such a highly regarded speaker sounded compared so poorly to the Salk's.  I even thought that getting the B&W's back home in my setup would make things better...NOPE!  I sold the B&W's in the following weeks and ordered my HT2-TL's.  I have not heard a speaker I'd rather have to date.  As Nuance has already stated, I agree that the SongTower RT's give 95% of what the HT2-TL's do minus the bass extension. 

IMO, any of the Salk's are FAR MORE than the "next step" over your Studio 20's. 
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 29 Jun 2011, 02:08 pm
To my ears my SVS 16-46PC+ (powered vented cylinder sub) integrates very well with my HT2-TLs.  No sub EQ, btw. :wink:

I'm not doubting your ears, but I'm going to offer my humble opinion.  :)

I purchased an SVS 20-39PC+ basically when they first became available (I had a VERY low serial number).  I always liked the sub and didn't EQ it for many years.  It did always seem to integrate well with my various speakers, so I didn't really think twice about it. 

However, one day I learned more about how bass could, or should, sound.  It seems things always sound great until you hear something better.  Well, I heard something a lot better.

This got me on the path of in-room frequency response measurements.  Sure enough, I had peaks and valleys below 100Hz that could be corrected with an EQ device.  Once I EQ'd my sub, the sound got better, but it wasn't nearly as good as I had heard.

My next sub was an SVS PB13-Ultra.  Now things got MUCH better.  One thing I learned at the time is that good bass is much more than low frequency output.  One thing no one should argue is that SVS is great at the low stuff, but their subs really lacked detail and articulation above 50Hz.  The PB13 was a HUGE step in the right direction in this regard.  When properly setup and EQ'd, the PB13 sounded really good.

But again, I had heard better.  One thing that always bothered me about the PB13 for music is that I always felt it had a boxy sound to it.  It was like I could hear the inside of the box and it came through in a lot of music. 

Fast forward a couple of years and a Seaton Sound Submersive HP, and I finally heard what I think is the best bass I've heard.  A friend has a single 18" TC Sounds LMS Ultra DIY sub.  I was amazed to say the least.  Needless to say, I now run dual 18" LMS Ultra's and they amaze me almost every day.  They dance across every bass note with ultimate clarity and detail.  I've heard nothing better. :D

Now, the sub has to be capable of certain level of performance on it's own, but proper setup is a HUGE part of the battle.  Subs fall victim to the room they are in.  Placement can be picky, and the listening position is equally important.  My room is tough in one spot, but I've seen and worked with worse.  99% of the time, any sub is going to hugely benefit from being EQ'd.  The ONLY time this hasn't been true is in Nuance's new home.  If he was to add any EQ to his sub, he could only make it worse.  I've never seen anything like it! 

So it is possible your sub is working great in your room, but from my experience, EQ'ing it could make it a lot better.  As far as the sound quality of the 16-46PC+, sure it sounds great, that is until you hear something better.  :wink:

BTW, what do you use for x-over and what frequency do your high-pass your mains and sub?



 
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: Saturn94 on 29 Jun 2011, 03:09 pm
I'm not doubting your ears, but I'm going to offer my humble opinion.  :)

I purchased an SVS 20-39PC+ basically when they first became available (I had a VERY low serial number).  I always liked the sub and didn't EQ it for many years.  It did always seem to integrate well with my various speakers, so I didn't really think twice about it. 

However, one day I learned more about how bass could, or should, sound.  It seems things always sound great until you hear something better.  Well, I heard something a lot better.

This got me on the path of in-room frequency response measurements.  Sure enough, I had peaks and valleys below 100Hz that could be corrected with an EQ device.  Once I EQ'd my sub, the sound got better, but it wasn't nearly as good as I had heard.

My next sub was an SVS PB13-Ultra.  Now things got MUCH better.  One thing I learned at the time is that good bass is much more than low frequency output.  One thing no one should argue is that SVS is great at the low stuff, but their subs really lacked detail and articulation above 50Hz.  The PB13 was a HUGE step in the right direction in this regard.  When properly setup and EQ'd, the PB13 sounded really good.

But again, I had heard better.  One thing that always bothered me about the PB13 for music is that I always felt it had a boxy sound to it.  It was like I could hear the inside of the box and it came through in a lot of music. 

Fast forward a couple of years and a Seaton Sound Submersive HP, and I finally heard what I think is the best bass I've heard.  A friend has a single 18" TC Sounds LMS Ultra DIY sub.  I was amazed to say the least.  Needless to say, I now run dual 18" LMS Ultra's and they amaze me almost every day.  They dance across every bass note with ultimate clarity and detail.  I've heard nothing better. :D

Now, the sub has to be capable of certain level of performance on it's own, but proper setup is a HUGE part of the battle.  Subs fall victim to the room they are in.  Placement can be picky, and the listening position is equally important.  My room is tough in one spot, but I've seen and worked with worse.  99% of the time, any sub is going to hugely benefit from being EQ'd.  The ONLY time this hasn't been true is in Nuance's new home.  If he was to add any EQ to his sub, he could only make it worse.  I've never seen anything like it! 

So it is possible your sub is working great in your room, but from my experience, EQ'ing it could make it a lot better.  As far as the sound quality of the 16-46PC+, sure it sounds great, that is until you hear something better.  :wink:

BTW, what do you use for x-over and what frequency do your high-pass your mains and sub?

Hehehe.....isn't it always the case that we think what we have is great until we hear something much better. :lol:  After my speaker purchase 4 months ago, I can't afford to hear anything better for awhile. :wink:

Late last year I did try SVS's sub EQ (AS-EQ1) but was dissappointed with the results.  At first I just thought I wasn't use to "flat" bass, but the low bass just seem to be missing.  Some of my favorite classical recordings that have bass much like I remember hearing in live performances sounded downright anemic with the EQ.  So I ended up returning the sub EQ to SVS.

Of course there's also the question of preference.  It very well could be that I don't like a flat bass response.

Perhaps when I have the funds and the motivation I might try one of the EQ's that allows you to customize the curves to one's preference.

In your opinion, would the best performance boost value come from EQing my existing sub or upgrading the sub itself?  I don't want to derail this thread, so please PM me (or we could start a new thread).

BTW, to answer your last question, I seem to get the best response by setting low pass to 80hz and high pass to 125hz.  This gives me a nice smooth transition from the HT2-TL to the sub.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 29 Jun 2011, 04:27 pm
Hehehe.....isn't it always the case that we think what we have is great until we hear something much better. :lol:  After my speaker purchase 4 months ago, I can't afford to hear anything better for awhile. :wink:

Late last year I did try SVS's sub EQ (AS-EQ1) but was dissappointed with the results.  At first I just thought I wasn't use to "flat" bass, but the low bass just seem to be missing.  Some of my favorite classical recordings that have bass much like I remember hearing in live performances sounded downright anemic with the EQ.  So I ended up returning the sub EQ to SVS.

Of course there's also the question of preference.  It very well could be that I don't like a flat bass response.

Perhaps when I have the funds and the motivation I might try one of the EQ's that allows you to customize the curves to one's preference.

In your opinion, would the best performance boost value come from EQing my existing sub or upgrading the sub itself?  I don't want to derail this thread, so please PM me (or we could start a new thread).

BTW, to answer your last question, I seem to get the best response by setting low pass to 80hz and high pass to 125hz.  This gives me a nice smooth transition from the HT2-TL to the sub.

I often wish I wouldn't hear better.  It would save me a lot of money and stress.  It's tough when you have friends that are in the hobby and contribute to your hearing better all of the time.  :roll:

As I don't believe this discussion is derailing this thread, I'll make some additional comments.  I honestly think any system could benefit from a sub.  I think the OP should go the sub route without question, but that is me...

I am a firm believer that one can and does develop a preference with sound.  For example, many people like a bloated bass sound.  For movies, bloated is fun, for music, it is unacceptable to me.  I think we get used to various sounds and can certainly be trained to enjoy properly tuned systems.  If someone doesn't want that, fine by me.

I'm not at all familiar with the SVS AS-EQ1.  I've heard it's a very nice piece of gear, but it is too much money for me and you have too little control.  I agree with you that the best option is an EQ you can customize the sound to your preferences. 

Thus far my favorite EQ is a Behringer Feedback Destroyer (1124P).  The price is low (~$100.00), it has 10 parametric filters, and it's very flexible.  The only issue with it is that it's ugly.  It's not a piece of gear you proudly display in your rack.  I'm currently using a Velodyne SMS-1, and it's ok.  I'm thinking about moving back to the Behringer, but I'm not sure.

Anyway, we could take any further stuff to PM.  I'll PM you later on whether to upgrade your sub or not.  I will just make a quick comment that only YOU know the answer to that question.  If you're happy with how your sub is working, I'd say stay happy and keep it!  :thumb:
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: Big Red Machine on 29 Jun 2011, 04:46 pm
Blasphemers!!! :guns: :uzi: :flame:
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: Saturn94 on 29 Jun 2011, 05:38 pm
I often wish I wouldn't hear better.  It would save me a lot of money and stress.  It's tough when you have friends that are in the hobby and contribute to your hearing better all of the time.  :roll:

I guess I'm lucky I don't have any audiophile friends (my friends are just average folk who think my system is stunning! :thumb:).  However, these forums can be very dangerous! :lol:

Quote
.....I honestly think any system could benefit from a sub.  I think the OP should go the sub route without question, but that is me...

+1

My HT2-TLs sound better with my sub than without.


Quote
I am a firm believer that one can and does develop a preference with sound.  For example, many people like a bloated bass sound.  For movies, bloated is fun, for music, it is unacceptable to me.  I think we get used to various sounds and can certainly be trained to enjoy properly tuned systems.  If someone doesn't want that, fine by me.


Agreed.

Quote
I'm not at all familiar with the SVS AS-EQ1.  I've heard it's a very nice piece of gear, but it is too much money for me and you have too little control.  I agree with you that the best option is an EQ you can customize the sound to your preferences.

Again I agree.  I might have kept it if it allowed the user to customize bass curves.  Wouldn't it be great if you could just plug in the curve you wanted and the unit would automatically calculate and apply the appropriate settings. 

Quote
Thus far my favorite EQ is a Behringer Feedback Destroyer (1124P).  The price is low (~$100.00), it has 10 parametric filters, and it's very flexible.  The only issue with it is that it's ugly.  It's not a piece of gear you proudly display in your rack.  I'm currently using a Velodyne SMS-1, and it's ok.  I'm thinking about moving back to the Behringer, but I'm not sure.

That's good to know.  I'll have to check that out.

Quote
Anyway, we could take any further stuff to PM.  I'll PM you later on whether to upgrade your sub or not.  I will just make a quick comment that only YOU know the answer to that question.  If you're happy with how your sub is working, I'd say stay happy and keep it!  :thumb:

I am happy with my sub (since I've not heard better yet :wink:), so maybe I should leave well enough alone (yeah right! :o).  I look forward to your PM.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: Nuance on 29 Jun 2011, 06:07 pm
To my ears my SVS 16-46PC+ (powered vented cylinder sub) integrates very well with my HT2-TLs.  No sub EQ, btw. :wink:

That's awesome!  I've had my SongTower's and DIY subs in three rooms now, and not until my current one was I able to remove the PEQ from my system.  The other two rooms had large peaks in the midbass.  TJHUB came over to my home and we experimented with subwoofer placement, and the second spot we tried followed the REW 24dB slope octave curve perfect, so I was happy to remove the Behringer 1124p.  I am very fortunate, and it sounds like you are as well.  But as TJHUB mentioned, sometimes we just don't know until we hear better.  In your case, I'd try working with what you have, adding an EQ device that allows more customization.  Also, using a piece of software like REW, in which you can actually see what's happening, is pretty crucial IMO.  The only problem with REW is it is advanced, and many people get scared away.  I'd be more than happy to help you (or anyone) complete the initial setup, though.  Once that is completed it's as easy as pie to use.

@ BRM - LOL!  :lol:  Well, I won't blaspheme God, but I'll happily do it concerning the 2-channel/subwoofer debate.  After all, audio is just audio, and is based on subjectivity more than anything.  An active design may be the best solution for the purist IMO.  After all, if you (we) are supposedly purists, wouldn't that mean we need to take the room out of the equation to be taken seriously?  What the room can do to the overall sound quality is far more detrimental than adding a subwoofer output and sub, no?

P.S.  This is a good conversation, so let's keep it public unless the OP requests otherwise. 
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: Saturn94 on 29 Jun 2011, 07:42 pm
That's awesome!  I've had my SongTower's and DIY subs in three rooms now, and not until my current one was I able to remove the PEQ from my system.  The other two rooms had large peaks in the midbass.  TJHUB came over to my home and we experimented with subwoofer placement, and the second spot we tried followed the REW 24dB slope octave curve perfect, so I was happy to remove the Behringer 1124p.  I am very fortunate, and it sounds like you are as well.  But as TJHUB mentioned, sometimes we just don't know until we hear better.  In your case, I'd try working with what you have, adding an EQ device that allows more customization.  Also, using a piece of software like REW, in which you can actually see what's happening, is pretty crucial IMO.  The only problem with REW is it is advanced, and many people get scared away.  I'd be more than happy to help you (or anyone) complete the initial setup, though.  Once that is completed it's as easy as pie to use.

@ BRM - LOL!  :lol:  Well, I won't blaspheme God, but I'll happily do it concerning the 2-channel/subwoofer debate.  After all, audio is just audio, and is based on subjectivity more than anything.  An active design may be the best solution for the purist IMO.  After all, if you (we) are supposedly purists, wouldn't that mean we need to take the room out of the equation to be taken seriously?  What the room can do to the overall sound quality is far more detrimental than adding a subwoofer output and sub, no?

P.S.  This is a good conversation, so let's keep it public unless the OP requests otherwise.

If I decide to give sub EQ a serious shot, you and TJHUB will be the first people I contact for help. :green:
 
Better yet, wouldn't the two of you enjoy a nice relaxing vacation in SE VA helping a fellow AC member fine tune his system......... :thumb:   If you need help I'll be out back by the pool. :lol:
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: Kinger on 29 Jun 2011, 07:49 pm
Very good read.  I've had many PM's with Nuance about the possible integration of a sub to my ST/RT's, but my tube preamp choice (AVA T8) along with my severe lack of knowledge to all of this EQ/measurement stuff keeps me thinking that I'll eventually just purchase HT2-TL's for the added low end I'm looking for even though it's probably the more expensive option.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 29 Jun 2011, 07:50 pm
Blasphemers!!! :guns: :uzi: :flame:

Whatever... :roll:  Some of us aren't ordering SoundScape's you lucky bastage!  :green:
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 29 Jun 2011, 07:59 pm
Very good read.  I've had many PM's with Nuance about the possible integration of a sub to my ST/RT's, but my tube preamp choice (AVA T8) along with my severe lack of knowledge to all of this EQ/measurement stuff keeps me thinking that I'll eventually just purchase HT2-TL's for the added low end I'm looking for even though it's probably the more expensive option.

I understand EQ/measurement thing holding someone back.  I struggled my way through REW a few years ago, and now I pray every day that my laptop doesn't die.  Why?  Because I'm going to have to struggle through setting up REW again!!  :x

However, your AVA T8 preamp shouldn't hold you back.  I run a 2-channel tube preamp that has no bass management whatsoever, and I have a solution that is working perfectly for me.  You could even use a Velodyne SMS-1 with your preamp to integrate a subwoofer.  I've done it that way in the past.  PM me if you're interested at all.

Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: sarge_in on 29 Jun 2011, 08:51 pm
As we are talking about preamps and bass management, how would one switch between movies and music for the sub with a preamp like T8? Manually pull and change cables?
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: Nuance on 29 Jun 2011, 09:05 pm
If I decide to give sub EQ a serious shot, you and TJHUB will be the first people I contact for help. :green:
 
Better yet, wouldn't the two of you enjoy a nice relaxing vacation in SE VA helping a fellow AC member fine tune his system......... :thumb:   If you need help I'll be out back by the pool. :lol:


Yes, yes we would.  Just let me know when you'll be mailing the plane tickets to me. :D

As we are talking about preamps and bass management, how would one switch between movies and music for the sub with a preamp like T8? Manually pull and change cables?

Unfortunately, yes.  You'd need a preamp with HT bypass.  There are dozens out there, but none offered from AVA that I am aware of.  Wouldn't something like this work, though?

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71464
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 29 Jun 2011, 10:12 pm
As we are talking about preamps and bass management, how would one switch between movies and music for the sub with a preamp like T8? Manually pull and change cables?

I just saw that Frank FINALLY gave in and is offering home theater bypass on his preamps.  It's only a $100.00 upgrade.  I'd do it in a heartbeat.  Frank just put his preamps back on my list of consideration for the future.  I saw some have sent there existing preamps back for retrofit.  It works with the preamp powered off too!

 
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: sarge_in on 30 Jun 2011, 03:58 am
Unfortunately, yes.  You'd need a preamp with HT bypass.  There are dozens out there, but none offered from AVA that I am aware of.  Wouldn't something like this work, though?

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71464

Yep, that's what I thought about the AVA pre-amps.
OK, even if one used the manual way, does it have a high-pass for the main speakers? I didn't see any info about that too. The questions might be more suitable for AVA forum I guess :)

I just saw that Frank FINALLY gave in and is offering home theater bypass on his preamps.  It's only a $100.00 upgrade.  I'd do it in a heartbeat.  Frank just put his preamps back on my list of consideration for the future.  I saw some have sent there existing preamps back for retrofit.  It works with the preamp powered off too! 

Yes, that's certainly good but still a bit of hassle for the sub, and I am also not sure about HP for the mains.

Any other decent tube pre-amps out there with these features?
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 30 Jun 2011, 04:03 am
Yep, that's what I thought about the AVA pre-amps.
OK, even if one used the manual way, does it have a high-pass for the main speakers? I didn't see any info about that too. The questions might be more suitable for AVA forum I guess :)

Yes, that's certainly good but still a bit of hassle for the sub, and I am also not sure about HP for the mains.

Any other decent tube pre-amps out there with these features?

There would be no HP filter on the AVA preamp even after adding HT-bypass.

The best solution I've found for preamps without bass management (like mine) is using FMOD's as a high-pass filter for your mains.  I use them and they work great.  They are also the least degrading filters I've been able to find. 

Search "FMOD" at Parts Express. 
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: sarge_in on 30 Jun 2011, 05:08 am
There would be no HP filter on the AVA preamp even after adding HT-bypass.

The best solution I've found for preamps without bass management (like mine) is using FMOD's as a high-pass filter for your mains.  I use them and they work great.  They are also the least degrading filters I've been able to find. 

Search "FMOD" at Parts Express. 

Wow, thanks!  Had no idea such products even existed! Am curious how they perform compared to electronic crossovers in pre-amps that do have HPF, like the Parasound 2100 or AV receivers?
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 30 Jun 2011, 01:18 pm
Wow, thanks!  Had no idea such products even existed! Am curious how they perform compared to electronic crossovers in pre-amps that do have HPF, like the Parasound 2100 or AV receivers?

You're welcome.  They are cool little filters and work well.  One of the best features of these little guys is that you don't need to use another pair of interconnects with them. 

I ran a 2100 for over a year.  The FMOD is a very similar filter and performs nearly identically to the filters built into preamps like the 2100.  For ~$26.00, they are worth a try to see for yourself how they work.  Just know that you need to know the input impedance of your amp to properly size them.  If you need help, let me know.

Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: advanced101 on 30 Jun 2011, 09:21 pm
I just picked up a pair of the 50hz high pass, im pretty interested in the quality.  I will post my thoughts.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 30 Jun 2011, 09:26 pm
I just picked up a pair of the 50hz high pass, im pretty interested in the quality.  I will post my thoughts.

Do you know what the input impedance of your amp is?  I'm looking forward to your thoughts.

Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: advanced101 on 30 Jun 2011, 09:41 pm
8.3k, will the FMOD have any issues?
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 30 Jun 2011, 10:11 pm
8.3k, will the FMOD have any issues?

The FMODs are affected by your amp's input impedance.  The 50Hz FMOD will function more like a 100Hz filter, but I wouldn't be concerned as it's a shallow roll off of -12db.  They should work great. 

FYI for everyone:

A 50Hz high-pass FMOD will be:

50Hz with amplifier input impedance >= 97k
70Hz with amplifier input impedance ~ 22k
100Hz with amplifier input impedance <= 10k


Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: sarge_in on 1 Jul 2011, 04:21 am
You're welcome.  They are cool little filters and work well.  One of the best features of these little guys is that you don't need to use another pair of interconnects with them. 

I ran a 2100 for over a year.  The FMOD is a very similar filter and performs nearly identically to the filters built into preamps like the 2100.  For ~$26.00, they are worth a try to see for yourself how they work.  Just know that you need to know the input impedance of your amp to properly size them.  If you need help, let me know.

Not a bad option to try at all, once I get a pre-amp :). Will ping you if/when I get there.

I guess the only missing piece is a sub switcher, and manual is not an option for the family.  Any other options for this?
What will happen if I conenct the line level out from AVR and speaker level out from pre-amp to the sub (SongSub) simultaneously, taking care to have only one running at a time? And what happens if both are left on by mistake (e.g. while switching)?
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 1 Jul 2011, 12:56 pm
Not a bad option to try at all, once I get a pre-amp :). Will ping you if/when I get there.

I guess the only missing piece is a sub switcher, and manual is not an option for the family.  Any other options for this?
What will happen if I conenct the line level out from AVR and speaker level out from pre-amp to the sub (SongSub) simultaneously, taking care to have only one running at a time? And what happens if both are left on by mistake (e.g. while switching)?

I've gone through a similar issue connecting a sub to both a 2-channel preamp and a receiver.  I gave up and now use a simple manual switcher.  I don't know if your idea would work or not, but I suspect that gain could be an issue.  I have seen IR remote controlled switchers, and my parents used to use an auto sensing switcher.  Maybe one of those could work for you?
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: sarge_in on 1 Jul 2011, 11:49 pm
I've gone through a similar issue connecting a sub to both a 2-channel preamp and a receiver.  I gave up and now use a simple manual switcher.  I don't know if your idea would work or not, but I suspect that gain could be an issue.  I have seen IR remote controlled switchers, and my parents used to use an auto sensing switcher.  Maybe one of those could work for you?

Either of those options may be workable, esp the IR controlled ones.  Do you have any links/brands/models you can share? Your point about gain is a good one - won't that be an issue with these as well?
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 2 Jul 2011, 12:09 am
Either of those options may be workable, esp the IR controlled ones.  Do you have any links/brands/models you can share? Your point about gain is a good one - won't that be an issue with these as well?

I don't have any links for you, sorry.  I thought I saw one at Rat Shack when I picked up my manual switcher.

The gain may not be an issue either way because you can adjust the receiver's LFE output.  I run my receiver's LFE about 3-4db hot for movies; music is flat. 
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: sarge_in on 2 Jul 2011, 12:19 am
I don't have any links for you, sorry.  I thought I saw one at Rat Shack when I picked up my manual switcher.

The gain may not be an issue either way because you can adjust the receiver's LFE output.  I run my receiver's LFE about 3-4db hot for movies; music is flat. 

No worries, was it just a simple speaker selector, or something different? Have you seen options where one of the input can be a line-level input (for the AVR) and the other for speaker-level input (for the pre-amp)?
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 2 Jul 2011, 02:10 am
No worries, was it just a simple speaker selector, or something different? Have you seen options where one of the input can be a line-level input (for the AVR) and the other for speaker-level input (for the pre-amp)?

No.  I didn't look too closely at it because it was something like $50.00.  I think it was a more standard A/V switch.  I've never heard of a speaker-level input on these things.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: WntrMute2 on 2 Jul 2011, 03:21 pm
I'm a pure two channel guy and really enjoy my HT2-TLs.  I run purely tube gear and listen to mostly blues, 60s rock and working into jazz.  I find few weaknesses in this speaker.  The bass is surprisingly deep for the relatively small drivers.  I've never even considered needing a sub woofer.  I can't imagine what others are needing in bass.  Really, there are times I can feel it in my chest due to the bass extension.  This is in a smallish room too.  About 12 X 14 feet.  mate these speaker to good tube gear and prepare to be mesmerized.  Possibly, the best feature of these speakers is the ability to completely disappear into the soundstage.  There is rarely, if ever, that one is aware of the actual speaker location.  Even on the most mundane recordings the speakers simply are not there!  Pics about half way down.
 first page.http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=352739[/url   Oh, I forgot, I have some images in the picture gallery here too. (http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=352739)
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: albireo13 on 2 Jul 2011, 03:55 pm
Wow!  Nice looking gear.
How do you like the Latino amp?
I have Emotiva separates (all SS) but am intruiged by tubes.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: albireo13 on 2 Jul 2011, 10:31 pm
     Well, I has able to audition some SongTowers today.  Thanks go out to a most generous member here, et+kooper (thanks Bruce), for letting me interrupt his weekend.  Bruce showed me his impressive HT setup, with STs for the L/R mains.   I brought along my Studio-20s in order to compare them, in the same room and with the same electronics.

     We first listened to the STs, in 2-ch mode.  Very impressive, with a lot of body to the sound. Then  we tried my Studios.
The Studios , to me, definitely sounded a bit too "trebley".  The treble seemed overly accentuated, fatiguing to listen to, IMO.
It's funny, I had liked my Studios at home but, had gradually recognized that the treble (high frequencies) bothered me.  It wasn't until I could A/B compare against the SongTowers that it jumped out at me.   Additionally, I felt the midrange of the STs was excellent, with good detailing.  :thumb:

    In addition to the STs, I was able to listen to Bruce's very nice disc player, a Oppo something or other ... maybe 95??
I currently use an Emo ERC-1, which is nice but, the Oppo was excellent and can handle SACD, DVDs, and other formats.
Hmmm ......  :P

    To summarize, I now am looking at a Salk upgrade and also an upgrade to my CDP.

Cheers,
Rob
 8)
 
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: albireo13 on 2 Jul 2011, 11:41 pm
Oh another thing .....  we were playing 2ch with the SongTowers and then kicked in the Songcenter sometimes as well.
It really did a good job of filling in the sound and also, I felt, adding to the bass.
Maybe STs pus a Songcenter for audio, instead of adding a sub??!!

Just thinking ....
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: TJHUB on 3 Jul 2011, 04:13 am
Oh another thing .....  we were playing 2ch with the SongTowers and then kicked in the Songcenter sometimes as well.
It really did a good job of filling in the sound and also, I felt, adding to the bass.
Maybe STs pus a Songcenter for audio, instead of adding a sub??!!

Just thinking ....

It's great you got a chance to hear and appreciate Salk speakers.  I can personally tell you that their superiority over your Studio's will be more apparent over time.  Remember, you just heard them once.  Imagine how they sound as you get to listen to more and more material?  It only gets better!

A small sub would be FAR better for music reproduction that adding a center channel. 

Just saying... :wink:
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: WntrMute2 on 3 Jul 2011, 11:08 am
Wow!  Nice looking gear.
How do you like the Latino amp?
I have Emotiva separates (all SS) but am intruiged by tubes.
Thanks for the compliment.  The Latino amp is a joy, on a number of levels.  Since I built it from a kit, I have pride in the work that I did.  The amp is smooth, well extended at both ends with beautiful midrange.  The sound is very warm and "burnished"  not overly so and compares nicely with my Transcendent SC-150s.  It drives my Salks easily and to very loud levels if needed.  Never runs out of steam, those that are using massive power amps are needing something I don't.  It was really fun to build with great instructions and Bob an e-mail away if I needed clarification.  Never waited more than a hour for a response, usually just a few minutes.  My only criticism of the kit was that there was no photo or schematic of the finished circuit board (would have helped a newbie like me), and he only includes one color wire for all the point to point stuff.  I suggested to him that maybe a couple of different colors would help.  You could buy other colors for a few bucks if desired.  Great value IMHO.  I want to build a set of his M-125 mono-blocks next.
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: albireo13 on 3 Jul 2011, 11:49 am
Nice.  I had actually looked at his kits recently, thinking of a tube build project.
What did you do for tubes?  Did you play around with different tubes or just use the ones recommended?

BTW, there seem to be tube sockets on the fron face of the amp chassis.  What are those for?
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: WntrMute2 on 3 Jul 2011, 01:18 pm
Bob sells his ST-120 kit complete with tubes.  Sovtek KT-88s, and EI/Phillips 12AT7s if I remember correctly.  I have rolled in a set of NOS Mullards into the driver and phase splitter location at Bob's suggestion.  I'm thinking about a matched quad of Genalex Gold Lion KT-88 reissues but I haven't pulled the trigger yet.  I'm just happy with the way things sound now.  BTW, his amps allow swithcing between Triode and Pentode at the flip of a switch on the fly!  Take a step into tubes, you won't look back.  I slowly started by replacing a SS pre-amp with a Dynaco PAS-3 and while not as dead quiet when not listening to music, the magic was evident.  With my set-up now, dead quiet and tube magic, what could be better!  Oh, the tube sockets, this is supposed to be a replica of the Dynaco amp, the tube sockets were there as a stock feature but I can't remember what for.   They are wired for bias setting and work fine for that, simple-dimple
Title: Re: 2-ch stereo system ... Salk selection??
Post by: albireo13 on 8 Jul 2011, 03:39 pm
Well, after reviewing this and talking with Jim,  I like a HT1-TL as a stretch goal.   
I may have to wait until we down-size (sell house), within 4 years, to afford it.
The Songtowers are great as well.  I could afford that now, but I'd have to sell off various hobby gear to free up the cash to do so.  Doable but, it would take some time and be a tad painful.

Another thought ....  the Songbirds!    I've heard they have great midrange and imaging.  Weaker in the low end for sure but .... if they are an improvement over my Studio20s, it would be a great way to get into some Salk sound!!!
I could run with Songbirds, maybe add a sub.

  Would that be more like a lateral move from my Studios, or a step up?
 :?
Rob