AudioCircle
Industry Circles => Salk Signature Sound => Topic started by: jsalk on 7 Mar 2010, 02:42 pm
-
Yesterday was a watershed day for us. Dennis Murphy flew in with his "magic comparo" box and six of us spent the day putting prototypes of this new design through their paces. We had three complete prototype pairs up and running in order to make a final determination as to which midrange would make the cut.
I am very happy to report that it was no contest. There was a clear, unanimous favorite.
So after three years of planning and almost a year building and testing prototypes, the design is now in the books and we will shortly be announcing this new model.
We are currently building one pair each of the 10" and 12" woofer versions. As soon as they are finished, we will shoot some pictures, do a complete write-up and post the new design on our web site. There isn't much more to say about the design until then.
We owe a debt of gratitude to all those who helped make this project possible. Dennis has invested countless hours in this labor of love and deserves all of the praise which will undoubtedly be heaped upon him. We probably drove him crazy and I apologize for that.
I'm sure I drove our staff members crazy as well, especially Sam Zioli, John Fallows, Teresa Allen, Juan Luis and Ammar Dabesh. They put in countless hours on prototype after prototype and I'm sure they wondered if we were pouring money down the drain on a project that would never see the light of day. Hopefully they will derive the benefits they deserve for their efforts.
Others I would like to give special thanks to include Jeff Bagby for design work on the spectacular woofer section, Paul Kittinger for early work on the TL prototype version of the woofer section (in the end it didn't work out, but his help in reaching that conclusion was invaluable), John Janowitz for building some great woofers, Alex from RAAL for his work on the spectacular ribbon tweeter, FAL for their tireless efforts even though we were unable to use their driver in the end, Mike Vettraino for some very accurate design and CAD work, Bob Bogart for ongoing work on custom-designed polymers which will be used in the final product, Tom Boyer and the staff at Solid Concepts for CNC and milling work, and the list goes on and on. (Are my 45 seconds up yet?)
The point is, this was a huge project in the end - far more complex than imagined when Dennis and I began discussing it about 4 years ago. And without the help from all these people and more, we would never have reached the finish line.
Personally, I am very pleased with the results. Along the way, I was often told we were crazy designing a high end flagship model in the middle of challenging economic times. On those occasions, my response was simple...I'm not really concerned with whether or not we sell enough pairs to recoup our R&D costs. We simply wanted to see what we could accomplish with no restraints. And now that I have the speakers I wanted personally, I need to thank everyone who made that possible. You are all the very best.
- Jim
-
Congratulations to you and your team!
We need pictures. ; )
The Salk Demo on the West Coast seemed to go very well.
-
Congratulations to you and your team!
We need pictures. ; )
The Salk Demo on the West Coast seemed to go very well.
Bob -
From the pictures, it looked like a great time was had by all. Wish we could have been there.
As for pictures from yesterday, BigRedMachine took a few and perhaps he will post them. But don't look at the speakers. They were mostly unfinished prototype cabinets. As soon as we finish the first production pairs, we'll have some pics to post.
- Jim
-
Thanks for letting us all be a part of the journey, Jim. It's been fun to see these speakers progress to this point.
I look forward to reading the complete write up and, eventually, listening to them as well.
Congrats to all involved, :thumb:
Jerry
-
I'm sure these will turn out to be truly amazing.
What midrange did you settle on?
-
I'm sure these will turn out to be truly amazing.
What midrange did you settle on?
A round one.
-
A round one.
With a white face and two round black eyes peering back at you?
-
Congrats, team! The audio loving public are in for a huge treat!
Pepsi cans are still being saved out here. :drool:
-
A round one.
Dennis, was that selection made after careful evaluation of other shapes
like OVAL?
(just saw a listing on Craigslist for my first component speakers that I had as a youth, the Lafayette Minuette II with 5" X 7" alnico oval midbass)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27499)
or EAR SHAPED (Yamaha)?
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27500)
Steve
-
Congrats - defintely rewarding to set out on a certain task and succeed - especially after the time you put into it :thumb:
-
Cool! and congratulations! :thumb:
I'll never be able to afford a pair but I am excited nonetheless!
-
Dennis, was that selection made after careful evaluation of other shapes
like OVAL?
(just saw a listing on Craigslist for my first component speakers that I had as a youth, the Lafayette Minuette II with 5" X 7" alnico oval midbass)
[Steve
Well, we tried a rounded rectangle, which is about as close as you can get.
-
Maybe something from Audiotechnology, or Thiel and Partner :thumb:
Well, congrats and best of luck! Looking forward to see the pictures!
Regards,
Joe
-
With a white face and two round black eyes peering back at you?
The "best" mid range in my opinion. They're awesome!!!
-
I've doctored the photos to protect the "innocent".
Yesterday was an absolute blast. While we waited for John to swing by the shop and pick up the "device", we started out grounding ourselves by listening to the FAL 15 incher mutha. Then Sam and I had to pick them up and move them out of the way. argh, dropped a kidney on Mary's floor. Sorry Mary.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27510)
Next we started listening to two pairs of 10 inchers, one with each midrange in final match-up mode to fight for supreme victory and avoid the agony of defeat. Note the one piece of the Comparo device in the middle of the floor.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27512)
Lots of AVA gear in play. The DEQX was out of the system for this day.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27514)
Some close-ups of the Comparo:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27517)
So we played various tracks from Doc Severinsen, Stone's Wild Horses with Norah Jones, and some tracks I don't remember. Then there was the little incident with the greenhouseman rock track......
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27523)
Yep, that's a blown fuse alright! :duh:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27524)
I guess a room of "experts" should have noticed the large bunch of bubble wrap over the amp left channel vents holding up the Comparo!! Let that be a lesson to you kids.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27525)
Outboard crossovers in their raw, unadulterated state - not for minors to view!
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27526)
Have we reached a consensus?
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27527)
Yes, we have!! Pop that cork!!
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27528)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27529)
-
Thanks for the pics! Looks like fun. ; )
-
You seem to only have doctored the first photo, not the second...kinda gave it away. Great mid!!! Same mid I use in my speakers. :lol:
-
With a white face and two round black eyes peering back at you?
Yes, they stared us down all day, although I don't think that's why we chose them.
- Jim
-
Yes, it stared us down all day, although I don't think that's why we chose it.
- Jim
They're sooo good though. :drool:
-
You seem to only have doctored the first photo, not the second...kinda gave it away. Great mid!!! Same mid I use in my speakers. :lol:
I really love that driver. Can't say I have ever heard it sound bad.
Great choice!
George
-
You seem to only have doctored the first photo, not the second...kinda gave it away. Great mid!!! Same mid I use in my speakers. :lol:
I was covering the veneers, not the drivers.
-
I was covering the veneers, not the drivers.
:oops:
-
I dunno Jim,,, after once again listening to your HT-3's last week, it blows my mine that you've finally surpassed them in overall musical quality. But after listening to your Songtowers, then your HT-3's, there's no doubt in my mine that you's just added a few more rungs to your Salk ladder. I hope to one day have an opportunity to listen to them. :thumb:
For now tho, I'll just anxiously await the pictures like everyone else. Congrates Jim! :D
Cheers,
Robin
-
Awesome, can't wait to hear the final version. Who will be the first to step up to the plate for an order? :thumb:
-
Awesome, can't wait to hear the final version. Who will be the first to step up to the plate for an order? :thumb:
Me.
-
Me.
Jim himself maybe? :lol:
-
Jim himself maybe? :lol:
Yup. BUT then someone will see/hear them, buy them on the spot and then Jim will have to build another pair for himself..... :lol:
-
Yup. BUT then someone will see/hear them, buy them on the spot and then Jim will have to build another pair for himself..... :lol:
Not if he paints them bright red like the pair of HT2-TL's he brought to RMAF. :wink:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=22522)
-
Awesome, can't wait to hear the final version. Who will be the first to step up to the plate for an order?
Me.
And me. :eyebrows:
Pending, hopfully, a listen very soon.
Bob
-
I spy 2 different woofers, an Accuton 7" and one I can't make out (Scanspeak Illuminator?) which one was chosen?
-
Congratulations to Jim, Dennis and the rest of the team. Your hard work has paid off! I can't wait to receive updates and perhaps hear a pair myself one day.
-
I spy 2 different woofers, an Accuton 7" and one I can't make out (Scanspeak Illuminator?) which one was chosen?
I think the Accuton was chosen, but still waiting on the official announcement.
George
-
Congrats to the "Team". Very exciting.
-
Yes, it was the 3" Accuton midrange. We purchased, tested and listened to at least a dozen high-end midranges from the best in the business. We then built full working prototype pairs of speakers for those we felt were in contention. In the end, it took only a few short minutes of comparative listening to choose a winner. There wasn't a hint of debate amongst those in attendance, even from those who had a bias against Accuton going into the session.
- Jim
-
Yes, it was the 3" Accuton midrange. We purchased, tested and listened to at least a dozen high-end midranges from the best in the business. We then built full working prototype pairs of speakers for those we felt were in contention. In the end, it took only a few short minutes of comparative listening to choose a winner. There wasn't a hint of debate amongst those in attendance, even from those who had a bias against Accuton going into the session.
- Jim
The C-79?
-
Does the Accuton have the same open back design as the FAAL?
-
Great work.
Definitely eye candy!
Anand.
-
The C-79?
Yup--that's the one. It's not really a 3" driver--more like a 4". But that means it can dig low enough to mate with the big HT4 woofs using my preferred 2nd order crossovers, and it's small enough to provide near-perfect dispersion over the narrow range (300 Hz-1900 Hz) it's used. And yes, it's open to the back. That's a bedrock aspect of the HT4 design. But the rear wave opening can be adjusted from 100% all the way down to zippo. Sealed.
-
That's great news. Thanks, Dennis.
-
:D those look very nice !!! what is the ball-park sticker on those ?? :D
-
Congrats guys. Looking forward to seeing them in full production, and hopefully I will get a chance to hear them, too.
:thumb:
-
The C-79?
No, the C-90.
Does the Accuton have the same open back design as the FAAL?
Yes, everything is the same except the midrange and, of course, the crossover.
- Jim
-
Congratulations to the whole team. It is fantastic that a clear consensus was reached. I am sure that it is a tremdous speaker.
Tom
-
Congratulations Jim, Dennis, Paul, Jeff et al. Can't wait to hear the SoundScape.
Will the SoundScape be @ AK Fest?
-
Wow, those look great! Someday, Rob...someday... :wink:
-
Congratulations Jim, Dennis, Paul, Jeff et al. Can't wait to hear the SoundScape.
Will the SoundScape be @ AK Fest?
Yes, they will. I think I will bring a 10" version this year, but it depends on what we get finished.
- Jim
-
No, the C-90.
Yes, everything is the same except the midrange and, of course, the crossover.
- Jim
Actually, it's the C-79. The C-90 is a 5" midwoofer without the black eyes. So don't put any orders in for the C-90.
-
:D those look very nice !!! what is the ball-park sticker on those ?? :D
10k for the 10" version in MDF, more for 12" or Bamboo, I believe the 12" Bamboo version is 17k.
-
Actually, it's the C-79. The C-90 is a 5" midwoofer without the black eyes. So don't put any orders in for the C-90.
Yes, I know I wasn't going to be "that guy" and correct. I use the C-79 in my DIY 3-way and it's spectacular.
-
I can't take much credit for the Soundscape (thanks, anyway) as my contribution ended up proving what wouldn't work in the box size and shape Jim wanted, an aggressively tapered TL, due to way too much air flow out the terminus. Still, Thomas Edison never got discouraged in his quest to invent a practical and long-lasting light bulb; he tried many, many materials for the filaments that didn't work out, maintaining a positive outlook and happy he was determining what wouldn't work.
Paul
Congratulations Jim, Dennis, Paul, Jeff et al. Can't wait to hear the SoundScape.
Will the SoundScape be @ AK Fest?
-
Just to clarify, Accuton has changed model numbers in the past. It was the C-79 and now the correct current number is C90-6-79.
- Jim
-
Just to clarify, Accuton has changed model numbers in the past. It was the C-79 and now the correct current number is C90-6-79.
- Jim
:lol: We're both right!
-
I can't take much credit for the Soundscape (thanks, anyway) as my contribution ended up proving what wouldn't work in the box size and shape Jim wanted, an aggressively tapered TL, due to way too much air flow out the terminus. Still, Thomas Edison never got discouraged in his quest to invent a practical and long-lasting light bulb; he tried many, many materials for the filaments that didn't work out, maintaining a positive outlook and happy he was determining what wouldn't work.
Paul
Hey Paul--it wasn't a total failure. I still amaze my guests by firing up your prototype with a 20 Hz test tone. It shoots poly fill twenty feet across the room. Anyhow, you're allowed one small debit against all the credits you've racked up with the other designs.
-
And the best part is that I learned my lesson; now on any TLs I model, I make darned sure to check the port/terminus air velocity very carefully with higher input powers to the driver, at least to where the driver reaches its rated Xmax at audible frequencies (above 20 Hz). I don't think I'll ever make that same mistake again! Just for the record, though, a less-tapered TL with a much lower terminus air velocity could be easily created for the 12" woofer used in the SoundScape, but the box would have to be larger in order to make the line longer.
Paul
Hey Paul--it wasn't a total failure. I still amaze my guests by firing up your prototype with a 20 Hz test tone. It shoots poly fill twenty feet across the room. Anyhow, you're allowed one small debit against all the credits you've racked up with the other designs.
-
All of you guys amaze me. I wish I could design speakers - maybe in retirement.
One thing I was happy with was validating my ears are as good as I always thought they were by using the Comparo gizmo and comparing notes with the rest of the group. Whew. :rock:
-
Jim
we might need to talk
I thought the HT4's were going to be way too large and major overkill for a mid size 2 channel audio room (15' by 27' - long wall placement)
Actually being smaller than the HT2's the footprint could be ideal.
If anyone could better the HT3 it would be Jim and Dennis.
Imagine extracting even more resolving musical nuance in a refined audiosystem
sounds like a trip up to Michigan to see my family and Jim soon
how do you spell burbinga?
cheers
Tom
-
how do you spell burbinga?
Without an 'r'.
Steve
-
Without an 'r'.
Steve
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
-
Although this may have been mentioned in another HT4 thread:
I can see that the mid/tweeter module is made of laminated sections. Does this same construction extend to the woofer module?
If so, what is the resultant wall thickness (I assume the same section pieces would be used whether MDF or Bamboo plywood), and what is the approximate weight of either version?
Steve
-
Congratulations to Jim and the team on this.
I'm ready to fit them in the following space :thumb:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27347)
-
Congratulations to Jim and the team on this.
I'm ready to fit them in the following space :thumb:
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27347)
I gotta hunch you'll be making room 1 way or another Phil. :lol: :thumb:
Cheers,
Robin
-
Steve -
I can see that the mid/tweeter module is made of laminated sections. Does this same construction extend to the woofer module?
Chances are we won't do that unless it is requested. It is terribly labor-instensive. As for the top sections, we will do that for only a short time until we make a mold. From that point on, we will mold the top section with a custom polymer formulation that will be slightly more dense than MDF.
If so, what is the resultant wall thickness (I assume the same section pieces would be used whether MDF or Bamboo plywood), and what is the approximate weight of either version?
Regardless of the technique used, the 12" version will have 2" thick walls and the 10" version will have 1.5" thick walls. Both will be very heavily braced.
- Jim
-
Steve -
As for the top sections, we will do that for only a short time until we make a mold. From that point on, we will mold the top section with a custom polymer formulation that will be slightly more dense than MDF.
- Jim
Injection mould? I've been thinking of having my injection moulder do it...then I designed / priced the tooling and thought otherwise. :) Especially for ONE pair...
I look forward to hearing this speaker at RMAF.
-
awesome. I'm close to in for these...
-
Wow! I am glad to hear this design saga is finally coming to close and we will have a finished speaker to admire. It should be awesome too. Jim - I am glad I could help. I hope we can get together next month and check them out (along with a couple other new speakers as well). I am looking forward to it, if everything works out. Dennis - thanks for hanging in there. I would have selected the second order acoustic crossover as my preference too, and knowing your propensity for perfection, I am sure it sounds great. Congrats guys.
Jeff B.
-
Why did you guys decide to finally scrap the FAAL? It's a great midrange, as is the Accuton.
-
How heavy is HT-4? Heavier than HT-3? 150 - 200lbs?
HT-4 costs twice the price of HT-3. I wonder what the difference is - particularly the SQ...
Well,I'll never know unless I buy a pair, and A-B them with my lovely HT-3s.. If only I had room.. Darn!
-
How heavy is HT-4? Heavier than HT-3? 150 - 200lbs?
HT-4 costs twice the price of HT-3. I wonder what the difference is - particularly the SQ...
Well,I'll never know unless I buy a pair, and A-B them with my lovely HT-3s.. If only I had room.. Darn!
Very, but now in two pieces so manageable.
Twice the sound quality, of course! The HT3 can't deliver the bass nor soundstage the open back mid of the HT4 allows.
You won't have to have them side-by-side to A-B them!
And hello from Portland - cloudy with a chance of clouds - my trip for the week.
-
>The HT3 can't deliver the bass nor soundstage the open back mid of the HT4 allows
Oh please... don't tell me that! I just bought it:-)
Again, how heavy are the individual pieces?
and hello from the sunny sunnyvale (albeit a bit chilly)!
-
>The HT3 can't deliver the bass nor soundstage the open back mid of the HT4 allows
Oh please... don't tell me that! I just bought it:-)
Again, how heavy are the individual pieces?
and hello from the sunny sunnyvale (albeit a bit chilly)!
Well, hopefully you didn't think Jim would try to sell a $10k speaker that wasn't better than the HT3. That's kind of what this exercise has been all about. As for size, the 10" version doesn't look any bigger than the HT3 from the front. The difference is in the depth--the bass portion of the HT4 is about 7 inches deeper than the HT3. I don't know the specifics on weight, but I doubt that the bass portion weighs more than the entire HT3. And the midrange-tweet module isn't all that heavy. So I really think the decision between the HT3 and the 10" version of the HT4 is basically one of price, not room size--unless your only alternative is to slam the speaker flat up agains the rear wall. And that's probably not great for either speaker, though it would be particularly unfortunate for the HT4 since you would lose some of its soundstaging depth advantage.
-
Great to hear everything is finalized! For my own selfish reasons I am hoping it might increase the used HT3 market :)
-
Congratulations to you and your team!
We need pictures. ; )
The Salk Demo on the West Coast seemed to go very well.
Just curious, what Salk demo on the west coast? When and where did it take place? Was it open to the public or was this where the SoundScape comparison held? I would have loved to have attended nonetheless!
Thanks, Garth
-
Just curious, what Salk demo on the west coast? When and where did it take place? Was it open to the public or was this where the SoundScape comparison held? I would have loved to have attended nonetheless!
Thanks, Garth
Hey Garth,
Maybe a poor choice of words on my part? We did have a Salk GTG on Saturday. The details can be found here:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=72983.msg746198#msg746198
-
Well, hopefully you didn't think Jim would try to sell a $10k speaker that wasn't better than the HT3. That's kind of what this exercise has been all about. As for size, the 10" version doesn't look any bigger than the HT3 from the front. The difference is in the depth--the bass portion of the HT4 is about 7 inches deeper than the HT3.
No, I don't think that. I think my HT3 are worth 10k:) So I was wondering how the HT4s will be...
just dreamin'..of getting these ... may be when my wife is out-of-town for few days... sneak these in?
-
Thanks Bob for the update, wish I could have been there. Garth
-
I'm sure it's been mentioned.
What ribbon tweeter is being used in the HT-4?
Looks like a RAAL?
-
I'm sure it's been mentioned.
What ribbon tweeter is being used in the HT-4?
Looks like a RAAL?
It is a custom RAAL tweeter. Aleksander did a great job with it.
- Jim
-
It is a custom RAAL tweeter. Aleksander did a great job with it.
- Jim
What's custom about it?
-
What's custom about it?
Tap values were selected to allow for flat response, -1 1/2 db and -3db response out of the same driver with no change in the crossover for these settings.
- Jim
-
Tap values were selected to allow for flat response, -1 1/2 db and -3db response out of the same driver with no change in the crossover for these settings.
- Jim
Nice. I take it that it's the 70-20XR?
-
Nice. I take it that it's the 70-20XR?
Yup. The main advantage is that the wider ribbon allows for a lower crossover point--around 1900 Hz--which lets the ribbon do its thing over as wide a range as possible.
-
Nice. I take it that it's the 70-20XR?
Yes. When you purchase a manufacturing run, you get to specify the sensitivity values.
- Jim
-
Thank you gentlemen. :thumb:
-
I don't want to run this thread off on a tangent, so feel free to move it as needed and/or if more appropriate in another location :scratch:
I've been following this thread for some time and marvel at the art & the science that goes into the creation of a s.o.t.a. speaker such as the HT4.
Two things I am curious about;
1. The decision to use a TM two driver design vs. a MTM three driver design. Is it simply to balance speaker size & cost over diminishing performance benefits (in my limited understanding) of the MTM? At this sota design level, I see numerous examples of each and wonder why I see no apparent consensus. I'm thinking of the Song Towers, top models of Wilsons, Hansen, Eggleston, YG Acoustics, Magico, Evolution Acoustics (MTMs) vs. (TM) Usher BE, smaller Wilsons, Magico, YG Acoustics, Kharma, etc.
2. Midrange driver size. The Accuton ~3"+/-4" diameter midrange. Wow, that seems like a small diameter. I understand the desirable benefits of speed and dispersion with smaller driver sizes, but how is the gap between the midranges lower end of ~300 Hz down to the woofer get filled? There is obviously some juggling of sizes (maybe a 5"-6" midranges) with frequency ranges taking place.
Thanks
Kenreau
-
"1. The decision to use a MT driver design vs. a MTM three driver design. Is it simply to balance speaker size & cost over diminishing performance benefits (in my limited understanding) of the MTM? At this sota design level, I see numerous examples of each and wonder why I see no apparent consensus. I'm thinking of the Song Towers, top models of Wilsons, Hansen, Eggleston, YG Acoustics, Magico, Evolution Acoustics (MTMs) vs. (TM) Usher BE, smaller Wilsons, Magico, YG Acoustics, Kharma, etc."
This really wasn't a close call. One of the main advantages of an MTM configuration is added sensitivity overall and power handling in the bass. But that only holds for a 2-way. In a 3-way with one large woofer capable of plumbing the depths down to 19 Hz, the woofer sensitivity will establish the system sensitivity, and it will be quite low if the woofer can really deliver the bass goods (remember the Iron Law of bass). So the added midrange senstitivity of an MTM would be completely wasted. You would have to pad down the mids anyhow. And the Accuton doesn't have to produce any low bass, so power handling isn't an issue either.
"2. Midrange driver size. The Accuton ~3"+/-4" diameter midrange. Wow, that seems like a small diameter. I understand the desirable benefits of speed and dispersion with smaller driver sizes, but how is the gap between the midranges lower end of ~300 Hz down to the woofer get filled? There is obviously some juggling of sizes (maybe a 5"-6" midranges) with frequency ranges taking place."
The Fs (natural bass resonance)of the Accuton is 96 Hz. It's crossed to the woofer at 350 Hz, so there is no hole in the response to fill. The Accuton and the Big Hog woof blend together perfectly using 2nd order acoustic slopes. And by the time the Accuton hits its Fs, it's 24 dB down. If it were used in a small 2-way, it could produce substantial output at 96 Hz. The HT4 design doesn't call on it to produce much of anything there.
In retrospect, I wish I had thought of the Accuton in the first place. I had a pair lying around from a previous experiment that didn't work out due to a tweeter with no low end output, and I forgot all about them. When the FAL driver proved unworkable because of a design defect the factory couldn't fix, the light bulb finally clicked on.
-
Is it time to drop the HT4 designation?
or
Is it time to make it part of the name?
The design looks killer, wish I had the $$$$ to get a pair.
-
Going from a great 3 way (HT3) to a better 3 way (HT4) is not as dramatic as going to a Line Array or a WMTMW, or even a full OB. In my large room (18x22') i only have 2 and 3 ways, i really want to hear all 4 design types side by side in a big room to make sure what i get next is an upgrade.
-
Thanks for the excellent explanations, Mr Murphy.
So, my notion is that explains why some of the larger MTM 3-way speakers use an active/built-in subwoofer amp. It must help jack up the overall assembly sensitivity to align more closely with the MTM array.
Thanks
Ken
"1. The decision to use a MT driver design vs. a MTM three driver design. Is it simply to balance speaker size & cost over diminishing performance benefits (in my limited understanding) of the MTM? At this sota design level, I see numerous examples of each and wonder why I see no apparent consensus. I'm thinking of the Song Towers, top models of Wilsons, Hansen, Eggleston, YG Acoustics, Magico, Evolution Acoustics (MTMs) vs. (TM) Usher BE, smaller Wilsons, Magico, YG Acoustics, Kharma, etc."
This really wasn't a close call. One of the main advantages of an MTM configuration is added sensitivity overall and power handling in the bass. But that only holds for a 2-way. In a 3-way with one large woofer capable of plumbing the depths down to 19 Hz, the woofer sensitivity will establish the system sensitivity, and it will be quite low if the woofer can really deliver the bass goods (remember the Iron Law of bass). So the added midrange senstitivity of an MTM would be completely wasted. You would have to pad down the mids anyhow. And the Accuton doesn't have to produce any low bass, so power handling isn't an issue either.
"2. Midrange driver size. The Accuton ~3"+/-4" diameter midrange. Wow, that seems like a small diameter. I understand the desirable benefits of speed and dispersion with smaller driver sizes, but how is the gap between the midranges lower end of ~300 Hz down to the woofer get filled? There is obviously some juggling of sizes (maybe a 5"-6" midranges) with frequency ranges taking place."
The Fs (natural bass resonance)of the Accuton is 96 Hz. It's crossed to the woofer at 350 Hz, so there is no hole in the response to fill. The Accuton and the Big Hog woof blend together perfectly using 2nd order acoustic slopes. And by the time the Accuton hits its Fs, it's 24 dB down. If it were used in a small 2-way, it could produce substantial output at 96 Hz. The HT4 design doesn't call on it to produce much of anything there.
In retrospect, I wish I had thought of the Accuton in the first place. I had a pair lying around from a previous experiment that didn't work out due to a tweeter with no low end output, and I forgot all about them. When the FAL driver proved unworkable because of a design defect the factory couldn't fix, the light bulb finally clicked on.
-
An active bass module would certainly deal with the sensitivity issue, at the cost of some flexibility in the choice of amplifiers and ease of set up.
-
Is it time to drop the HT4 designation?
or
Is it time to make it part of the name?
Marbles -
You are right. Time to drop the HT4 code name as it is not in the Veracity line and is a totally different speaker. I changed the name of this thread to reflect that.
Thanks,
- Jim
-
Jim:
What are the amplifier requirements for the SoundScape 10 and SoundScape 12?
-
Jim:
What are the amplifier requirements for the SoundScape 10 and SoundScape 12?
Since Jim hasn't chimed in, I'll give you my experience. The SS10 is slightly more sensitive than the HT3, so whatever works for them will work for the 10's. The 12's are a couple of dB more sensitive, so they would actually need less power. Both models have almost identical impedance profiles--generally 4 ohms, never below, and somewhat higher in the midrange.
-
So something in the 200-250 wpc for solid state should suffice, Dennis? Obviously the more the better...
-
So something in the 200-250 wpc for solid state should suffice, Dennis? Obviously the more the better...
I'm using Frank's 120 (?) watter on both, and I haven't had any problems knocking pictrures off the wall. That's why you buy these things, right?
-
I'm using Frank's 120 (?) watter on both, and I haven't had any problems knocking pictrures off the wall. That's why you buy these things, right?
Dennis, who's wall? Your wall or your neighbor's wall.
I wonder how the SoundScape would operate in a 205 square foot room :o
Jim, what is the pricing?
-
Not if he paints them bright red like the pair of HT2-TL's he brought to RMAF. ;)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=22522)
Why 'dis the red? RED is good.
-
I loved the red too Big Red. I believe they were painted red so Jim could keep them, at past RMAF's someone always bought the display speakers. His strategy seemed to work because Dennis mentioned them in another thread.
...Jim had a pair of red (very red) HT2 TL's sitting in the corner that I would have loved to have heard alongside the HT4's, but I had to dash back to the airport.
Wayne
-
I'm using Frank's 120 (?) watter on both, and I haven't had any problems knocking pictrures off the wall. That's why you buy these things, right?
Absolutely! :D
-
Well, hopefully you didn't think Jim would try to sell a $10k speaker that wasn't better than the HT3. That's kind of what this exercise has been all about. As for size, the 10" version doesn't look any bigger than the HT3 from the front. The difference is in the depth--the bass portion of the HT4 is about 7 inches deeper than the HT3. I don't know the specifics on weight, but I doubt that the bass portion weighs more than the entire HT3. And the midrange-tweet module isn't all that heavy. So I really think the decision between the HT3 and the 10" version of the HT4 is basically one of price, not room size--unless your only alternative is to slam the speaker flat up agains the rear wall. And that's probably not great for either speaker, though it would be particularly unfortunate for the HT4 since you would lose some of its soundstaging depth
Well that is my problem. I have no choice but to slam them up against a rear wall. Depending on the depth of the SS10 the most I will have is 28" from the back wall to the front of the speaker. At least I will have 4 feet from the sides of the speakers to the walls.And please dont suggest another speaker might work better in my situation. I have been saving my money ever since I heard them at the lincoln city audiofest and now can purchase them and I will not be denied.
-
"Well that is my problem. I have no choice but to slam them up against a rear wall. Depending on the depth of the SS10 the most I will have is 28" from the back wall to the front of the speaker. At least I will have 4 feet from the sides of the speakers to the walls.And please dont suggest another speaker might work better in my situation. I have been saving my money ever since I heard them at the lincoln city audiofest and now can purchase them and I will not be denied."
I better not deny you unless I want Jim to put a hit out on me. No one in Washington would notice if there were one less economist walking around. The rear opening of the midrange
cabinet is considerably short of the rear of the bass module. So you would get some added information and soundstaging depth even if the bottom cabinet were close to the wall. But it would be better if you bought a new house.
-
The rear opening of the midrange
cabinet is considerably short of the rear of the bass module. So you would get some added information and soundstaging depth even if the bottom cabinet were close to the wall. But it would be better if you bought a new house.
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
-
Oh, sure, it's funny until someone loses an eye, er sale! :duh:
Can you eek those bass modules out 12" or so?
-
only if I put wheels under them. This is what I am stuck with, they would replace the S6 speakers and would be limited to the rug for the front of the speakers. room is 14 x 18, speakers along 18 foot wall.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27827)
-
That looks like enough. How much wood is showing there? Those bass modules are about 30 inches as a guess. Jim or Dennis can measure one.
Is that a dog bed on the left?
-
...would be limited to the rug for the front of the speakers...
I would think that any speaker would benefit by being forward of the equipment rack, even if it were only 6".
Steve
-
No one will deny you, titaniumhead. Pick them up, take plenty of pictures and keep us posted as to how they sound. :thumb: I look forward to it!
-
If the SS10 is 7" deeper than the HT3 that would put them about 22" deep which would leave me 6" from the back wall and 4" in front of the entertainment center. That would be pushing it to touching the rug.
-
Well that is my problem. I have no choice but to slam them up against a rear wall. Depending on the depth of the SS10 the most I will have is 28" from the back wall to the front of the speaker. At least I will have 4 feet from the sides of the speakers to the walls.And please dont suggest another speaker might work better in my situation. I have been saving my money ever since I heard them at the lincoln city audiofest and now can purchase them and I will not be denied.
If you have 28" from the front of the speaker to the rear wall, you would end up with 5" of free space behind the woofer cabinets. Since they are not rear ported (like the HT3's), it doesn't seem to me that this would be a major problem. I can certainly move my prototypes to 5" from the rear walls and check them out for you.
Dennis does point out that the rear wave of the mirange would benefit from additional space. But the rear of the top section would still be 15" from the rear wall. This, too, may be workable. At worst case, you could experiment with additional acoustic stuffing to control the amount of backwave information, or even use the hard grill to create a psuedo-sealed midrange section.
We are faced with sitautions like this all the time. Many owners simply don't have the option of dealing with speaker setup in a totally optimum fashion. But in any given case, the same limitations apply to any speaker. So we do the best we can. And in most cases, owners are more than satisfied with the results.
In this situation, the SoundScape 10's would certainly be a better fit than rear ported HT3's where you would only have 13" from the rear of the speaker to the rear wall. While not totally optimum, I think you would be OK and I suspect the SoundScapes would outperform anything else you could fit in this space.
Of course, that's just my 2-cents worth...
- Jim
-
Thanks for the comments Jim. If you do get the chance to move them close to the wall I would be interested in how much the sound is compromised, but like you said I will have to deal with it.
-
This thread is making me question my current plans. :scratch:
I had planned on finishing up my home theater by getting a center and surrounds to match my HT2-TLs, along with processing, amplification, and 2 or 3 subs.
Since I got my salk speakers though, i find myself spending more time listening to music than watching movies. Also the HT2-TLs provide a very strong center image along with nice bass for movies, so I don't feel that I'm missing all that much for casual movie watching.
Today I had some time to kill, and I started adding some things together. If i sold my HT2-TLs :bawl: , and combined that with the money I had planned to spend to complete everything, I could easily afford a pair of soundscapes. Plus, I already have plenty of amplifcation.
Just thinking out loud :dunno:
-
^ Saaaaweeeeeeeeeeet! :D
-
This thread is making me question my current plans. :scratch:
I had planned on finishing up my home theater by getting a center and surrounds to match my HT2-TLs, along with processing, amplification, and 2 or 3 subs.
Since I got my salk speakers though, i find myself spending more time listening to music than watching movies. Also the HT2-TLs provide a very strong center image along with nice bass for movies, so I don't feel that I'm missing all that much for casual movie watching.
Today I had some time to kill, and I started adding some things together. If i sold my HT2-TLs :bawl: , and combined that with the money I had planned to spend to complete everything, I could easily afford a pair of soundscapes. Plus, I already have plenty of amplifcation.
Just thinking out loud :dunno:
It's interesting to watch upgraditus take a hold of someone. Especially when I am in the middle of my own case of the affliction.
-
It's interesting to watch upgraditus take a hold of someone. Especially when I am in the middle of my own case of the affliction.
No more GTGs for you! :nono:
:green:
-
This thread is making me question my current plans. :scratch:
I had planned on finishing up my home theater by getting a center and surrounds to match my HT2-TLs, along with processing, amplification, and 2 or 3 subs.
Since I got my salk speakers though, i find myself spending more time listening to music than watching movies. Also the HT2-TLs provide a very strong center image along with nice bass for movies, so I don't feel that I'm missing all that much for casual movie watching.
Today I had some time to kill, and I started adding some things together. If i sold my HT2-TLs :bawl: , and combined that with the money I had planned to spend to complete everything, I could easily afford a pair of soundscapes. Plus, I already have plenty of amplifcation.
Just thinking out loud :dunno:
I am still amazed at how much great music there is out there and how much of it I have still not discovered. On the flip side I have a hard time finding movie's I could care less about.
:icon_twisted:
-
No more GTGs for you! :nono:
:green:
I'll send you photos of the new toys as soon as they arrive...hint....hint :wink:
-
Coke,
I have been thinking along the same line. I have been juggling figures to see how I can afford the SS10. :eyebrows:
-
Today I had some time to kill, and I started adding some things together. If i sold my HT2-TLs :bawl: , and combined that with the money I had planned to spend to complete everything, I could easily afford a pair of soundscapes. Plus, I already have plenty of amplifcation.
But you know, when you get your SoundScapes built, you'll have to pick a really cool veneer. 'Cause let's face it, if you don't outdo your HT2-TLs, everybody will be disappointed! :thumb: Start shopping NOW! :)
-
No more GTGs for you! :nono:
:green:
LMAO! :lol:
-
It's interesting to watch upgraditus take a hold of someone. Especially when I am in the middle of my own case of the affliction.
I thought I had learned my lesson. I used to really be into car audio. I was adding a new piece of equipment almost monthly. I finally learned to just get "the good stuff" and be done with it.
When searching for speakers, I had decided on Songtowers, and emotiva gear or possibly upping my budget to include AVA insight.
I thought back to my car audio days, and decided to step up to HT2-TLs as well as AVA Ultra gear.
I don't regret any of the purchases at all, but knowing better sound is only a few $$$ away is tempting.
But you know, when you get your SoundScapes built, you'll have to pick a really cool veneer. 'Cause let's face it, if you don't outdo your HT2-TLs, everybody will be disappointed! :thumb: Start shopping NOW! :)
I bought enough veneer to do a center and surrounds. There could possibly be enough to clone my HT2-TLs, but I'd have to talk to Jim.
Coke,
I have been thinking along the same line. I have been juggling figures to see how I can afford the SS10. :eyebrows:
Those are the ones that would fit within my current budget, but the SS12 are only a few $$$ away :lol:
-
I will just get ready for all the used HT2-TL's that will come on the market once the Soundscapes are out. :)
-
I will just get ready for all the used HT2-TL's that will come on the market once the Soundscapes are out. :)
Very smart strategy - it won't be long before they start appearing on the "market." I too, am considering creative ways on how to finance the Soundscapes. :drool:
-
I will just get ready for all the used HT2-TL's that will come on the market once the Soundscapes are out.
Many who bought the HT2-TL either had a smaller room, couldn't afford the extra 50% cost of the HT3, or both.
Now that a $10K+ model is out, I wouldn't expect a lot of people to be selling their HT2-TLs and spending an additional $7K+ to acquire them.
Steve
-
I will just get ready for all the used HT2-TL's that will come on the market once the Soundscapes are out. :)
Hmmmm, that's an idea. As to how to finance ? Wonder if I could get a gov't grant to make an acoustic study comparing & contrasting the STs vs the HT2-TLs ? Yeah, that's it. Now don't any of you steal my idea to finance your SoundScapes !
Congrats Jim, Dennis, & all on realization of the dream. Wish I could have made it to Ore last fall to hear them. Any chance you & Mary might make the extended trip again this fall Jim ? :eyebrows:
Don't spoil my delusion Steve. :(
-
Don't spoil my delusion Steve. :(
No, I'm just saying that there will only be so many hitting the used market, so be prepared to pounce!
Steve
-
Since I got my salk speakers though, i find myself spending more time listening to music than watching movies. Also the HT2-TLs provide a very strong center image along with nice bass for movies, so I don't feel that I'm missing all that much for casual movie watching.
I completely agree. I wish I had known what my habits were going to be when I first purchased my SongTower's. I probably said something like 80%/20% music/movies. However, it's more like 95%/5% now. Part of me wishes I could go back and just purchase HT3's and call it a day. But I know I wouldn't have been happy, as I've always wanted a 5.1 setup. Now I realize that I don't often use 3 of those speakers (but I do use the Subwoofer for music).
Of course, my wife tells me AFTER I've purchased, that *I* was the one who limited myself $$$ wise... so I probably COULD have had a full 5.1 HT* setup. Of course, she just wanted to stop hearing me talk about speakers, so she was probably willing to part with any amount of $$ to shut me up.
Now I can stop thinking about the HT3's and start thinking about the SoundScape's.... I'm pretty sure a pair of these would fit very well in my basement!
-
I am officially taking HT2-TL donations for anyone looking to move up to the SoundScapes. :D
-
I am officially taking HT2-TL donations for anyone looking to move up to the SoundScapes. :D
get in line :p
-
I am officially taking HT2-TL donations for anyone looking to move up to the SoundScapes. :D
How 'bout some Rocket 750's instead - I have 4 of them, but I only have 2 HT2 TL's :wink:
Wish I was in financial position to upgrade to the HT4's but that's life. If I win the lottery I'll take you up on the HT2-TL donation Brandon!
-
Nuance I have a pair just right for you !
Harrison
-
and just purchase HT3's and call it a day.
After buying HT3 last month I proclaimed to a friend of mine.. this is the end of the road for me! :-)
-
Jim,
Congratulations on your new flagship speaker. Judging from the reactions, it's bound to be a great success. And with high-end pricing the way it is these days, $10K or so for the basic model sounds like a bargain.
Though perhaps you were intending it to be primarily for two channel music, if one were thinking about using it for multichannel, what Salk speakers would you recommend for center and surrounds? Or do you plan to eventually add such speakers to the Soundscape line?
You seem to be doing something incredibly right, given the intense loyalty of your customers.
Happy listening.
Paul G.
-
Nuance I have a pair just right for you !
Harrison
Oh baby! :lol: :)
-
Any chance you & Mary might make the extended trip again this fall Jim ? :eyebrows:
About the closest we will probalby get this year is Rocky Mountain Audiofest. You might want to check that out as it is a fun event.
- Jim
-
Paul -
Jim,
Congratulations on your new flagship speaker. Judging from the reactions, it's bound to be a great success. And with high-end pricing the way it is these days, $10K or so for the basic model sounds like a bargain.
Thanks for the kind words - much appreciated. Obviously we are biased, but we are very confident that there will be nothing even remotely close to this price that will perform at this level.
Though perhaps you were intending it to be primarily for two channel music, if one were thinking about using it for multichannel, what Salk speakers would you recommend for center and surrounds? Or do you plan to eventually add such speakers to the Soundscape line?
We already have a center channel (large) design underway. If you can imagine turning the woofer cabinet on its side and placing the top section on top in the middle, that is what we have in mind.
As for surrounds, we will obviously have to attack that as well. but first we need to get a few pairs of these out the door. Our intention is to ship the first 12" model by the end of the month and a 10" model shortly after. We will take pictures of these first pairs and post them on our web site along with a description of the design.
- Jim
-
Wow! That sounds like a MONSTER center channel! :o
-
Paul -
Thanks for the kind words - much appreciated. Obviously we are biased, but we are very confident that there will be nothing even remotely close to this price that will perform at this level.
We already have a center channel (large) design underway. If you can imagine turning the woofer cabinet on its side and placing the top section on top in the middle, that is what we have in mind.
As for surrounds, we will obviously have to attack that as well. but first we need to get a few pairs of these out the door. Our intention is to ship the first 12" model by the end of the month and a 10" model shortly after. We will take pictures of these first pairs and post them on our web site along with a description of the design.
- Jim
Jim,
Will both the SS10 and 12 cabinets be made of MDF/veneer or are you carrying forward with bamboo?
-
Jim,
Will both the SS10 and 12 cabinets be made of MDF/veneer or are you carrying forward with bamboo?
We will be willing to do either. The bamboo adds quite a bit of cost, especially with the 12" version as it takes one person one week just to sand the cabinets. It is like sanding concrete. That is why the 12" bamboo version will be $18,999. We don't expect there will be much demand for bamboo cabinets, but would be happy to build for anyhone who would prefer them.
- Jim
-
Wow! That sounds like a MONSTER center channel! :o
Yes, position it correctly the first time as you would probalby not want to move it too often.
One of our associates, Sam, is building this center and will be using it with a pair of SoundScape 12's. So he'll end up with three SoundScape 12's across the front of his home theater.
- Jim
-
We will be willing to do either. The bamboo adds quite a bit of cost, especially with the 12" version as it takes one person one week just to sand the cabinets. It is like sanding concrete. That is why the 12" bamboo version will be $18,999. We don't expect there will be much demand for bamboo cabinets, but would be happy to build for anyhone who would prefer them.
- Jim
Jim, are there set(base) prices for the 10" and 12" MDF? Thanks
-
Yup--that's the one. It's not really a 3" driver--more like a 4". But that means it can dig low enough to mate with the big HT4 woofs using my preferred 2nd order crossovers, and it's small enough to provide near-perfect dispersion over the narrow range (300 Hz-1900 Hz) it's used. And yes, it's open to the back. That's a bedrock aspect of the HT4 design. But the rear wave opening can be adjusted from 100% all the way down to zippo. Sealed.
The adjustment can be done by the user on the fly, or at the factory?
-
The adjustment can be done by the user on the fly, or at the factory?
You can pop the rear magnetic grill off and stuff the cavity of the mid if you wish/need. I'm not smart enough to say when the need arises.
-
You can pop the rear magnetic grill off and stuff the cavity of the mid if you wish/need. I'm not smart enough to say when the need arises.
There is no "correct" amount of fill, so it's not something that Jim should set at the factory. He's been running them with no fill--just acoustic lining on the inner walls. I've been using a little fill. It's strictly a matter of taste, location, and room size.
-
Will there be an active version of the SoundScape released, or instead perhaps a version that includes a multiple filter PEQ to be used to adjust the bass driver's frequency in-room?
-
martyo -
Jim, are there set(base) prices for the 10" and 12" MDF? Thanks
We will introduce the SoundScape 10's in MDF and a standard finish for $9999. We will then evaluate after about 60 days or so to see if we can hold that price. I hope we can, but we don't have any build experience to date, so it is hard to predict.
The SoundScape 12" in MDF and a standard finish will start at $13,999 to start. Again, we will review in 60 days or so, but this price is more likely to hold.
- Jim
-
Nuance -
Will there be an active version of the SoundScape released, or instead perhaps a version that includes a multiple filter PEQ to be used to adjust the bass driver's frequency in-room?
We could certainly do a version with DEQX at any time. That is not an issue and we could do it now.
As for a dedicated active version, that is a little trickier. There are some very nice active amps with built-in programmable DSP. Using them would eliminate the need for six channels of outboard amplification. But there are two issues with this approach.
First, if you have your favorite brand of amp, you are out of luck since the amps would be built into the speakers. Second, since it is DSP based, there is a bit of time delay involved. So you would have to use the same type of active set-ups in all home theater speakers (for 2-channel music reproduction this would not be an issue) so the delays were the same on all channels.
On the flip side, these units are programmable. So, in theory, you could measure them in the room, develop filters to correct for room modes and upload a new "crossover". In fact, one manufacturer even has an Ethernet connection so we could log on to the amp remotely and make changes. Isn't technology wonderful!
The bottom line is that we are custom builders. If someone wanted to pursue either of these approaches, we'd be happy to work with them and make it a reality.
- Jim
-
Jim
Will the bamboo cabinets be bamboo ply or solid wood sheet?
-
jtwrace -
Jim
Will the bamboo cabinets be bamboo ply or solid wood sheet?
Bamboo plywood. I don't think there is such a thing as solid bamboo hardwood. There is 3-ply and single ply. Single ply is just 3/4" strips glued together. The 3-play is more stable and the end grain looks kind of cool.
- Jim
-
Thanks for the reply, Jim. Yes, technology certainly is wonderful; ever changing it seems.
Personally I would never go fully active (Dennis' work is better IMO), but I would want to use DEQX to apply EQ to the lower frequencies. I was just curious, and think its amazing you would (do) offer it. Its just another reason to buy Salk products. :)
-
Jim this may have been asked, but what is the lower extension of the woofers in the SS-10 vs. the SS-12?
-
The ultimate -3dB point is very close between the two. The SS-12 has an F3 of 18Hz and the SS-10 is about 19Hz. The difference is in the sensitivity with the Soundscape 12 being almost 3dB more sensitive (Dennis can correct me if he was able to level the crossover out differently than this, but I think this is how it should work out based on the modeling). Then the 12" has a bit more cone area too, so it will be able to reach a slightly higher max SPL. I doubt too many people will ever push things to the point of noticing this though :wink:
Jeff B.
Jim this may have been asked, but what is the lower extension of the woofers in the SS-10 vs. the SS-12?
-
What is the sensitivity of the SS-12 and SS-10 ? I dont believe i ever saw it?
-
What is the sensitivity of the SS-12 and SS-10 ? I dont believe i ever saw it?
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=78682.msg749931#msg749931
-
The ultimate -3dB point is very close between the two. The SS-12 has an F3 of 18Hz and the SS-10 is about 19Hz. The difference is in the sensitivity with the Soundscape 12 being almost 3dB more sensitive (Dennis can correct me if he was able to level the crossover out differently than this, but I think this is how it should work out based on the modeling). Then the 12" has a bit more cone area too, so it will be able to reach a slightly higher max SPL. I doubt too many people will ever push things to the point of noticing this though :wink:
Jeff B.
The difference in sensitivity between the SS10 and 12 with the Accuton ended up pretty much exactly at 3 db, just as you predicted--maybe a shade less. The SS12 is probably an honest 87.5 dB, and the 10 a smidge under 85.
-
Jim and Dennis,
I was very intrigued by the FAL, Raal combo you had experimented with, and saddened that I did not work out. Is there a chance you will be experimenting with this pair again in some other configuration? They are some of the finest drivers I have ever heard.
-
Jim and Dennis,
I was very intrigued by the FAL, Raal combo you had experimented with, and saddened that I did not work out. Is there a chance you will be experimenting with this pair again in some other configuration? They are some of the finest drivers I have ever heard.
There was a mechanical issue with the FAL and despite their best efforts, they were not able to resolve it. My conclusion was that the driver was just not appropriate for an open baffle design. Although a little on the "polite" side (not quite as detailed as we would have liked), the driver sounded simply wonderful on 97% of the music played on it. But it would "buzz" on tones in the 1100Hz region on the other 3%. Sax solos, piano solos and female vocals would excite this fault making the music unlistenable. FAL worked on the issue for over a year and tried re-designing the driver a couple of times. They gave it their best effort, but were never able to eliminate the problem.
We still have some FAL drivers and may experiment with a sealed cabinet for them. The additional damping may eliminate the problem. But that is a future experiment. For this project, it simply did not work out.
- Jim