Introducing the SILK AT

johzel · « **on:** 26 Nov 2015, 03:45 pm »

I received a wonderful Thanksgiving present yesterday from Jim and the crew at Salk Sound - my new SILK AT monitors. I was reading an older Salk thread and liked Jim's description of the Audio Technology drivers. So, I inquired as to whether Jim might be able to create a pair of monitors for me with the ATs . . . and I left the design up to him. As we like to say in Wisconsin . . . "never throw the guide out of the boat!". The pictures show Jim's design - the new SILK AT Monitors . . . stained maple burled wood, a species native to our state. I couldn't be happier. I also included a picture of the speakers on new Skylan 4-post stands - made to the Salk's dimensions. Jim, thanks so much!!!

martyo · « **Reply #1 on:** 26 Nov 2015, 04:07 pm »

Very nice!! I'm sure they sound even better than they look.

Wife and I were in New Glarus for the weekend beginning of October at the Lucky Dog Farm. Spotted Cow is here favorite, had to bring a couple of cases back with us to Illinois.

mresseguie · « **Reply #2 on:** 26 Nov 2015, 04:18 pm »

Those do look nice! I'll bet you'll be thrilled with what comes out of those speakers. I assume they'll sound best after 100 or so hours, yes?

I wonder how their sound differs from the original Silks. Has Jim said anything?

I often wonder how a speaker's sound alters when a different woofer or a different tweeter is used.

Enjoy!

johzel · « **Reply #3 on:** 26 Nov 2015, 04:20 pm »

Martyo, Excellent.

Feel free to stop by and say hi next time you're up. Or I'll meet you at Puempels!! Make mine a "Fat Squirrel". About 70% of all beer made is Spotted Cow . . .

benguin · « **Reply #4 on:** 26 Nov 2015, 04:23 pm »

Johzel- I know you'll love these. I continue to be amazed at the work Jim and his crew produce- I love the look of the maple burl and the stain really complements the grain.

Hope you'll post some listening observations.
Ben

Phil A · « **Reply #5 on:** 26 Nov 2015, 04:27 pm »

They look amazing - enjoy!

johzel · « **Reply #6 on:** 26 Nov 2015, 04:30 pm »

Quote from: mresseguie on 26 Nov 2015, 04:18 pm

Those do look nice! I'll bet you'll be thrilled with what comes out of those speakers. I assume they'll sound best after 100 or so hours, yes?

I wonder how their sound differs from the original Silks. Has Jim said anything?

I often wonder how a speaker's sound alters when a different woofer or a different tweeter is used.

Enjoy!

Lots of break-in going on . . . I also have a new Spectrum Technologies Son of Ampzilla MK2 amplifier so a few hours yet for sure.

I do believe he's very happy with this design . . . It's my undestanding he's considering offering this as an alternative model to the regular Silks. This driver is a bit more expensive. But I best leave such discussions for Jim himself.

toddc2 · « **Reply #7 on:** 27 Nov 2015, 12:50 am »

Nice, these look fantastic! Did Jim use the AT with the LR motor? Please keep us updated with the break in.

Todd

PMAT · « **Reply #8 on:** 27 Nov 2015, 06:32 am »

That is one amazing imitation of Walnut.

fsimms · « **Reply #9 on:** 27 Nov 2015, 02:16 pm »

Quote from: PMAT on 27 Nov 2015, 06:32 am

That is one amazing imitation of Walnut.

You'r just trying to be a little

Bob

SCompRacer · « **Reply #10 on:** 27 Nov 2015, 05:43 pm »

Congrats! Beautiful speakers! Nice stands too.

TwymanJ · « **Reply #11 on:** 28 Nov 2015, 03:00 am »

Congrats on these! As the owner of the original one-off monitors that Jim built with the AT woofers, I feel sure that you'll be very pleased with these. I'm listening to mine right now. Other than the veneer (obviously), the only outward difference I can spot is that the original design was rear ported rather than the front slot porting on yours (and the original Silks). I would guess yours are also a bit taller to accommodate the front porting. Did you have placement issues that necessitated the front slot? Do you know if Jim made other revisions to the original design?

Enjoy!

johzel · « **Reply #12 on:** 28 Nov 2015, 12:45 pm »

Quote from: TwymanJ on 28 Nov 2015, 03:00 am

Congrats on these! As the owner of the original one-off monitors that Jim built with the AT woofers, I feel sure that you'll be very pleased with these. I'm listening to mine right now. Other than the veneer (obviously), the only outward difference I can spot is that the original design was rear ported rather than the front slot porting on yours (and the original Silks). I would guess yours are also a bit taller to accommodate the front porting. Did you have placement issues that necessitated the front slot? Do you know if Jim made other revisions to the original design?

Enjoy!

Thanks. They are terrific right out of the box. Have only had one day of serious listening but all thumbs up. Extremely detailed and coherent - there may be speakers that do a better "disappearing" act but I've never owned any. You're quite observant. No, I didn't state any particular need for front porting and they are, indeed, a bit taller than the regular silks. I had these out in the room quite a bit initially and they benefited from being moved a bit closer to the wall. Not sure about any other differences . . . Jim will have to weigh in on specifics. By the way, have you found a need or desire to add a subwoofer or two to yours? The bass response is really very impressive for their size. Here's the thread that led me to the design request.

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=125934.0

TwymanJ · « **Reply #13 on:** 29 Nov 2015, 02:33 am »

Yeah, those are the pair I have. I'm a long time apt dweller and standmount guy, but, for that species, I've found these capable of serving the music very well without any desire to supplement the bass. Depending on your room size and listening habits, you may reach a different conclusion. I did find they worked best with some room around them (like most speakers). In speaking with Jim, the ability to work in tighter spaces was the one advantage he noted of the original Silks over the ATR's.

TwymanJ · « **Reply #14 on:** 29 Nov 2015, 02:55 am »

Thought you might enjoy seeing a pic of my pair in the wild.

Tomy2Tone · « **Reply #15 on:** 29 Nov 2015, 03:03 am »

Quote from: TwymanJ on 29 Nov 2015, 02:55 am

Thought you might enjoy seeing a pic of my pair in the wild.

Very nice TwymanJ!

Did you make the stands yourself?

TwymanJ · « **Reply #16 on:** 29 Nov 2015, 08:39 pm »

Quote from: Tomy2Tone on 29 Nov 2015, 03:03 am

Very nice TwymanJ!

Did you make the stands yourself?

Thanks. No, I wish I had that kind of ability. They're the Core Audio Designs stands in walnut. Technically, a high quality stand, and, I think, a good cosmetic match with the Salks.

Nuance · « **Reply #17 on:** 30 Nov 2015, 07:17 pm »

Those look amazing, TwymanJ. Congrats!

rif · « **Reply #18 on:** 8 Dec 2015, 09:44 pm »

Wow, very nice. They must weigh a ton. What equipment do you have hooked up to them?

johzel · « **Reply #19 on:** 8 Dec 2015, 10:54 pm »

Quote from: rif on 8 Dec 2015, 09:44 pm

Wow, very nice. They must weigh a ton. What equipment do you have hooked up to them?

They do weigh a ton for their size. I believe each speaker shipped at 38 pounds. I have an Oppo BDP-93 (as a transport) running to an Exogal Comet DAC (also used as "preamp") into the new SST Son of Ampzilla II amplifier. The combination is marvelous. Still breaking in - but together - the best I've had. Interestingly, so far, I haven't felt the need for a subwoofer. I have a couple, someday I will throw them into the mix. New Year's resolution: Start streaming music . . . whatever that is