Name this RAAL/Illuminator speaker

jimdgoulding · « **Reply #120 on:** 17 Feb 2013, 08:19 pm »

Rodin's

jsalk · « **Reply #121 on:** 17 Feb 2013, 08:24 pm »

We have built these speakers for customers who expressed interest. The hangup on getting them posted to our web site is the name. Around the shop, "Silk" seems to be the front runner at this point (as in "smooth as silk"). Perhaps I should try and get some closure on this this coming week.

- Jim

dflee · « **Reply #122 on:** 17 Feb 2013, 08:32 pm »

Salk Song Birds

srb · « **Reply #123 on:** 17 Feb 2013, 08:38 pm »

Quote from: dflee on 17 Feb 2013, 08:32 pm

Salk Song Birds

That would differentiate it from the existing SongBird by virtue of the space between song and bird?

http://www.salksound.com/songbird%20home.htm

Steve

dflee · « **Reply #124 on:** 17 Feb 2013, 09:20 pm »

Ok song bird series and call it the Thrush

laulau · « **Reply #125 on:** 18 Feb 2013, 12:54 am »

To throw a few more out there:

Songstress

Songster

Singer

Troubadour

Sonata

funkmonkey · « **Reply #126 on:** 19 Feb 2013, 06:56 am »

okay... riffing off the popular name in the shop:
Silky
Smoothies
panty peelers (after a beer I recently sampled, that was excellent)

completely unrelated, but popped into my head this afternoon:
Sputnik

Mudslide · « **Reply #127 on:** 19 Feb 2013, 01:41 pm »

Quote from: funkmonkey on 19 Feb 2013, 06:56 am

okay... riffing off the popular name in the shop:
Silky
Smoothies
panty peelers (after a beer I recently sampled, that was excellent)

completely unrelated, but popped into my head this afternoon:
Sputnik

Hahaaa...Greg, I think the Californicate air has finally gotten so polluted with pot smoke that you should go get some munchies.

I gotta say that I laughed myself silly at SPUTNIK. (Oh wait! Maybe it's the Oregon air up here.

)

funkmonkey · « **Reply #128 on:** 19 Feb 2013, 09:12 pm »

glad you liked it RJ... I figured it was a really good name for some satellite speakers, no?

yetis · « **Reply #129 on:** 20 Feb 2013, 08:32 pm »

Sticking with "Salk Reference Monitor"... Which then opens up the possibility of a full "reference" line!

ckullmann1 · « **Reply #130 on:** 20 Feb 2013, 10:11 pm »

I like "Salk Reference Monitor" the best. The other names sound a little forced to me (just my opinion).

Russell Dawkins · « **Reply #131 on:** 20 Feb 2013, 10:55 pm »

The problem I see with that name is that this is not a reference monitor.

The terms reference and monitor have real meanings and, unfortunately, the manufacturers who are genuinely attempting to create a monitor with accuracy such that it can be considered a true reference for music production purposes, like Klein + Hummel, ATC, Geithain, and PSI, for example, almost never use the term as it is assumed that this is their intent - at least the "reference" part of it.

I understand this speaker to be the product of a client choosing some good-sounding drivers for which a crossover was (presumably) custom-designed. The sound of the speaker was enjoyed by many who heard it and so the one-off will become a production model.

bahorn1 · « **Reply #132 on:** 12 Mar 2013, 07:23 pm »

Hi Jim (or anyone who knows the answer). What is the response and sensitivity of the "Silk" or to be named speakers?

Thanks,
Doug

jsalk · « **Reply #133 on:** 12 Mar 2013, 07:58 pm »

Quote from: bahorn1 on 12 Mar 2013, 07:23 pm

Hi Jim (or anyone who knows the answer). What is the response and sensitivity of the "Silk" or to be named speakers?

Thanks,
Doug

The "Silk" bookshelf speakers are about 84db sensitive and the frequency response is 45Hz - 60KHz +/- 3db.

- Jim

floresjc · « **Reply #134 on:** 14 Mar 2013, 02:32 am »

What are the dimensions on these? They don't look like they'd be that big.

Felixxia · « **Reply #135 on:** 21 Mar 2018, 01:20 pm »

i couldnt find this product at salksound website. is it canceled?

jsalk · « **Reply #136 on:** 21 Mar 2018, 02:14 pm »

Quote from: Felixxia on 21 Mar 2018, 01:20 pm

i couldnt find this product at salksound website. is it canceled?

Here is a link...

http://salksound.com/model.php?model=Silk+Monitors

- Jim

Felixxia · « **Reply #137 on:** 21 Mar 2018, 02:51 pm »

interesting!

a few questions for you, mr salk.

what does the exotica monitor r offer for 2000 dollar more than the silk AT ?

what is the advantage of the bigger woofer of the exotica when the bass output is limited to around 50hz? would the bigger woofer offer a better / wider / bigger sound stage?

what is the size of the woofer from silk at ? 6.5 inch?

what is the difference between silk and silk at? is it only the efficiency, or do they have different sound signature since they have different woofers?

thank you

jsalk · « **Reply #138 on:** 21 Mar 2018, 03:19 pm »

Quote from: Felixxia on 21 Mar 2018, 02:51 pm

interesting!

a few questions for you, mr salk.

what does the exotica monitor r offer for 2000 dollar more than the silk AT ?

These are two completely different types of speakers. The Silk AT is a lower efficiency model with a 5" woofer. The smaller woofer would normally provide a bit better off-axis response than a speaker with an 8" woofer. The lower efficiency will generally mean the speaker will play a bit deeper in the bass regions. And the cabinet volume would be less as well (there is no free lunch where speaker drivers are concerned). The Exotica Monitor will require quite a bit less power to achieve the same SPL's. Each 3db difference in sensitivity is equivalent to a doubling or halving the power requirements. So a 5db difference would be equivalent to about 3 - 4 times as much power required to drive the Silk AT to the same volume levels as the Exotica 3.

Quote

what is the advantage of the bigger woofer of the exotica when the bass output is limited to around 50hz? would the bigger woofer offer a better / wider / bigger sound stage?

The larger the cone surface area, the easier it is to move more air, which is what is required the deeper the speaker plays. An efficient driver like the W8 in the Exotica 3 Monitor will move more air with less power. But the trade-off is that it will not play as deep and the cabinet internal volume needs to be greater.

Another difference is that the larger the cone, the more it tends to fire straight forward. The smaller the cone, the better the off-axis response.

The sense of speed you get with a more sensitive driver is different as well. You can clearly sense the attack of a bow on the strings of a violin or cello with the Exotica's W8, primarily because it can start, stop and change direction more quickly.

Quote

what is the size of the woofer from silk at ? 6.5 inch?

5"

Quote

what is the difference between silk and silk at? is it only the efficiency, or do they have different sound signature since they have different woofers?

The Silk Monitor will play deeper bass in a smaller cabinet due to it's lower sensitivity. It is a very smooth driver. The Silk AT will not play quite as deep and the cabinet is larger, but it is more efficient. Hopefully you're starting to get the idea...in general, the lower the sensitivity of the driver, the deeper it will play in a smaller cabinet, but it will require more power to drive.

Both the Illuminator driver in the Silk Monitors and the Audio Technology driver in the Silk AT Monitor are very high quality drivers and both produce excellent sound. The character of the sound may be a bit different (hard to describe), but both are excellent in every respect.

Quote

thank you

Hopefully this helps.

- Jim

Felixxia · « **Reply #139 on:** 24 Mar 2018, 03:22 am »

1. With the bigger woofer in exotica that tend to shoot straight, does that mean listener has to sit in the sweet spot all the time? Would the imaging be better on the silk?

2. Lets say, we have a mid size dedicated room. The silk is given 400Wpc amp, and the exotica is given a subwoofer that goes just low enough to equal the silk. Would both be comparable, performance wise?

3. The weight in the spec, is it for a pair, or a piece of speaker?

Thanks