[Rob Babcock]

Okay, I'm having no luck getting anyone to spill the beans!     Has anyone heard all three of these gems?  I'm really curious just how much of the HT3 quality you get from the EXTs- are we talking 75%?  50%?  Just how much resolution does it lack vs it's big brother?  And how do the QW and EXT stack up?

I've been really anxious every since Jim announced the EXT.  I use a pair of subs, so the bass is irrelvant to me.  I like the looks of the EXT, and at first blush it seems like it would work well for me.  But I've heard almost no reports on they sound.

What do you say, Mr. Salk?  Don't worry about sounding biased- if it's that or no info, I'll take a sales pitch!

[MaxCast]

Jim plans on bringing a pair of EXT's to Chicago so I should be able to give some thoughts after the show.

Since you have a pair of subs, why aren't you looking at the HT1's??

[Marbles]

I heard the Salk HT1's in my system actively XO'd with my subs and liked it a LOT.

I then had Dennis Murphy redue the XO's in my nOrh column 9.0's and I put them in my ref system and actively XO'd them to my subs.  It sounded very much the same.  In fact I probably wouldn't have ordered the HT3's if I had the DM XO'd nOrhs first.

That would have been a mistake, as the integration of the woofers on the HT3's is superior to what I could get with the HT1 or 9.0's actively crossed to my subs, and the integration of the sub/sats was pretty darn good.

So Maxcasts recomendation of the HT1's crossed to your subs is a great one, but if you can raise the coin for the big guys, you will be rewarded with  better integrated bass.

I don't know how Dennis Murphy does it, but the man is a wizard with a XO.

I have not heard the EXT or the QW.

[Rob Babcock]

Jim plans on bringing a pair of EXT's to Chicago so I should be able to give some thoughts after the show.

Since you have a pair of subs, why aren't you looking at the HT1's??

Becuase basically I despise stands.     Bookshelf's are fine sitting by my computer, but I really really really prefer towers/floorstanders.  And I suspect that for integration with subs and max spl the EXT's would mop the floor with the HT1s.  Lastly, from "reading between the lines" it sounds like the general concencus is that the HT1's are decidely inferior to the HT3's in all areas of sound, not just bass.

I really don't want to go much above $2500 for mains, partly because I'm not very interested in 2CH/stereo, so I have to include a good center and some reasonable surrounds in my budget.  There's a lot of good stuff in that price range, and it ain't like that's the only thing I have to spend my money on!   In the back of my mind I'm also really leaning towards saving my pennies towards a Meridian G68, and that definately ain't cheap, even used.

[Marbles]

Lastly, from "reading between the lines" it sounds like the general concencus is that the HT1's are decidely inferior to the HT3's in all areas of sound, not just bass. ...

I would say that's true if you run them full range, but if you actively XO them to subs and releive the HT1's woofer from having to play the lowest bass it really makes that speaker come alive.  Then the HT1/sub system becomes much more competitive with the HT3's.  The bass integration of the HT3's is about perfect though, and it's harder to get that integration with seperate subs.

I do see your rational on the stands thing...by the time you get stands and HT1's, you are VERY close to the price of the EXT.

[Hogg]

If anyone wants to borrow my QW's for a listen, just ask.  I bought them from Dennis Murphy.  If you want them you'll have to come to my home or meet me half-way, as there were never any boxes for them.  I picked them up in Washington DC.

                                                                Jim

[jackman]

Okay, I'm having no luck getting anyone to spill the beans!     Has anyone heard all three of these gems?  I'm really curious just how much of the HT3 quality you get from the EXTs- are we talking 75%?  50%?  Just how much resolution does it lack vs it's big brother?  And how do the QW and EXT stack up?

I've been really anxious every since Jim announced the EXT.  I use a pair of subs, so the bass is irrelvant to me.  I like the looks of the EXT, and at first blush it seems like it would work well f ...

I hope you can make it to the fest in Chicago this weekend.  Jim is a really cool guy who is a woodworking master.  I have heard the Veracity and the QW's and both sounded great.  Check with Jim to see if there is someone in your area who owns any of Jim's speakers.  

Good luck!

Jack

[jsalk]

Sorry for the double post, but I don't know how to delete it.

- Jim

[jsalk]

Rob -

Okay, I'm having no luck getting anyone to spill the beans!     Has anyone heard all three of these gems?  I'm really curious just how much of the HT3 quality you get from the EXTs- are we talking 75%?  50%?  Just how much resolution does it lack vs it's big brother?  And how do the QW and EXT stack up?

I've been really anxious every since Jim announced the EXT.  I use a pair of subs, so the bass is irrelvant to me.  I like the looks of the EXT, and at first blush it seems like it would work well f ...

OK, I'll give it a shot.
If you must have a floor-standing speaker, your budget won't allow for HT3's (which I believe would thrill you to no end), and you are integrating with subs, here are my thoughts:

It depends on what type of music you primarily listen to.  Rock, for example, has relatively little detail. For jazz and classical, detail is extremely important.  So my comments here are based on the assumption that you listen to a variety of music and detail is important.

In that case, of the speakers you mention, the QW's are probably your best bet.  The Extremis 6.8's in the EXT's do a remarkable job.  But their claim to fame is deep bass reproduction which you don't really need if using subs.  The midrange detail of the 6.8's doesn't quite compare to the W18's in the Veracity designs.

The EXT's were designed for a person who does not have subs and loves rock music or similar.  Detail is not quite important in that situaion, but bass response is.  Don't get me wrong, the midrange detail is quite good and Dennis did another great job on the crossover. In fact, they are better over all than I anticipated and I think they will be very popular.  But very few drivers can compete with the W18's in the midrange detail area.

A number of very experienced audiophiles have commented that the QW's are the absolute best 2-way they have ever heard. The only downside in your application is trying to integrate the QW's with a sub.  The bottom-end slope on the QW's is very steep.  

The advantage of the QW's is that they play deeper than the HT1's.  But when they hit their bottom end, it drops off like a rock.  A sub, on the other hand, has a gradual slope on the top end.  So you may have to use your reciever to limit the bottom end extension of the QW's to obtain better integration. That, of course, negates their advantages (but you do have a floor-stander).

Now, there is another alternative.  If the floor-standing aspect is basically aesthetic, I could build you a floor standing version of the HT1.  This would be almost identical to the Ellis 1801f versions shown on my site (or, at least I think I have pics on my site -- if not, let me know and I can certainly post one).

I won't have a pair of QW's at the Chicago Audiofest.  But I will have active and passive HT3's, EXT's, HTS MTM's and HT1's (can't carry more). So if you could possibly get away, you could hear most of the alternatives back to back.  That would help you more than my descriptions.

I hope this helps.

- Jim

[brj]

And, to relay a comment Jim made to me last week, you could have the floorstanding HT1s made with a sealed enclosure instead of the traditional ported design.  This provides a more gradual rolloff of the lower frequencies, which would further facilitate integration with your subwoofers.

[Marbles]

Rob, here is the picture of the Ellis 1801f from Jim's website, just to wet your apetite.

[Rob Babcock]

Thanks, Jim.  It actually had occured to me that since all your speakers are essentially custom made, that perhaps a floorstanding version of the HT1 could be made.  That would obviate the need for stands, but unless you took the time to retune & revoice them for a larger cabinet, it wouldn't really improve the dynamics.  Still, that looks like a very appealing possibility.

I'm not sure I agree that rock doesn't require detail, but I think I know what you're trying to say.  My musical tastes run the gamut from Priest and Slayer to Holly Cole and Brubeck, and I have several hundred classical discs.  So NEUTRAL is what I want.  

I realize we're talking "custom" here, but can you ballpark me what a floorstanding HT1 would cost in a fairly vanilla finish?  Yeah, the HT3's are really a bit more than I can justify right now, although no doubt they're please me to no end.

[jsalk]

Thanks, Jim.  It actually had occured to me that since all your speakers are essentially custom made, that perhaps a floorstanding version of the HT1 could be made.  That would obviate the need for stands, but unless you took the time to retune & revoice them for a larger cabinet, it wouldn't really improve the dynamics.  Still, that looks like a very appealing possibility.

Actually, the cabinet volume would remain the same.  The front baffle would be slightly narrower (and the depth shorter), but not enough to necessitate re-voicing.  It would essentially perform the same.

I'm not sure I agree that rock doesn't require detail, but I think I know what you're trying to say.  My musical tastes run the gamut from Priest and Slayer to Holly Cole and Brubeck, and I have several hundred classical discs. So NEUTRAL is what I want.

Agreed.  What I meant is that much of rock music is so highly compressed that there isn't much chance to hear the detail that may be there.  The nice thing about the Veracity designs is that they do not impress their own signature on the sound to the extent that many other speakers do.  They are very neutral.

I realize we're talking "custom" here, but can you ballpark me what a floorstanding HT1 would cost in a fairly vanilla finish? Yeah, the HT3's are really a bit more than I can justify right now, although no doubt they're please me to no end.

I could do a pair of HT1's in floor-standing cabinets for about $100 worth of additional materials.  So about $2295.00.

- Jim

[Rob Babcock]

I realize you can only tell me so much about the sound without me hearing them, but would a system based on HT1's with a pair of subs do a credible job with Slayer, Metallica, Magnitude 9 and the like?  Can they handle "rocking out" and playing dynamically with hard rock and home theater?  How about raising the roof with Mussorgsky's "Pictures at an Exhibition" or Strauss "Zarathustra"?

For specifics I'd naturally contact you directly, but I'd probably like a floorstander with a chamber I could fill with sand or lead shot to deaden and mass load...

[jsalk]

Rob -

The basic answer to your question is yes.  The tweeter is padded down about 10db to match the output of the W18.  So you will likely never push the tweeter anywhere near its max.  The W18 is a very clean, low distortion driver.  I often warn people that the lack of distortion means that they will end up listening at higher levels than they think (most people adjust the volume until the distortion levels are too high.  They percieve this as being too loud and back off.  With the HT1's you will not get this distortion cue, so you will listen louder than you think you are.

There are two aspects of integrating with a sub that will be critical to your ultimate success.

First, it is really helpful if the sub is fast.  While any sub will obviously work, having a sub with a fast driver will provide better integration with the fast drivers of the HT1's.

The second aspect is obtaining proper integration both in terms of FR and phase.  This is an issue I can explain in greater detail later.

As for the cabinet, if you want to fill the lower cavity, I will have to build them slightly differently than the 1801f pictured above.  That cabinet is exactly the right internal volume so it can't be filled.  This is OK though.  I can build it with a 9" fonrt baffle rather than a 7 1/2" front baffle and it will actually perform a little better (since the crossover was designed with a 9" front baffle).  In this case, the speaker would take up the upper 19" and the rest can be filled.

- Jim