Salksound Veracity and Ridge Street Sason speakers

Marbles · « **on:** 4 Apr 2005, 07:28 pm »

A few months ago I went up to see the Salk Sound Veracity speakers, and last month I went over to Ridge Street Audio to listen to the Sasons.

The Sasons are a beautiful speaker and they sound as good or better than they look as near as I could tell from the room.

I had thought before I visited that they were just an expensive 2 way monitor...I was wrong. They are a medium size nearly full range speaker that plays loud and clean and had wonderful imaging.

I would have liked to have demo'd it in my system, but in talking to Steve Rothermel it seems that my room is not large enough to do them justice.

While I was looking at them, Robert showed me the Cardas Patented binding posts and how they work...it is very cool the way that Ridge Street did the internal to external speaker wire hookup.

This is a speaker where absolutely nothing was left to chance and every little detail was well thought out.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

When I listened to the Salksound Veracity Ht3's, I liked everything about them but the midrange. It was OK, but not as open as the VMPS I am used to.

Since Zybar liked his so well, I decided to give them a try in my system to see if it was the room/system interaction I objected to, or if it was the speaker.

Well, it seems that Jim is sold out of HT3's, but he was kind enough to let me demo a pair of HT1's, that have the same tweeter and midrange. I thought this might give me an idea if the HT3's would work for me, so I agreed.

For the first 2 days, I listened running the HT1's full range and brought my subs underneath at about 70 hz. This was OK, but the midrange was not as clear as I was used to ....to be honest the VMPS has the fastest, cleanest, most air around instruments midrange I have ever heard.

Then I decided to run the HT1's actively XO'd to my subs at 70 hz, freeing up the middriver from having to play the lowest bass. This really cleaned up the midrange..still not as good as the RM40's, but not bad.

IMO, the bass of both speakers, using my memory of the HT3's and the RM40's(since the midbass upgrade to the RM40's) is about the same. The midrange of the VMPS is a bit better, but I prefer vocals and piano's of the HT1/sub combo. HF of both speakers is about the same as well. Slight advantage to the RM40's as far as sonics are concerned.

Strange thing happened while listening to the Salks though. I no longer listened to the music...I got lost in it. It did not do as many things as spectacularly as the 40's, but I had a more emotional connection to the music. In fact after I actively XO'd them to my subs I don't remember a song where I wasn't bobbing my head, tapping my foot or both.

One of the very few things I don't like about the RM40's is that they really dominate a room visually, they are big. The HT1's and I hope by extension the HT3's should not be quite so visually overpowering.

Every HT3 is hand built and veneered a little differently so no two are the same. In addition Jim is more than willing to work with the most anal of us to get the things we want in our speakers...for example, it looks like Ridge Street audio might be doing the internal wiring, and I will use the same Cardas Patented binding posts that are used on the Sason (Thanks Robert). Jim will be using Sonicaps where it makes sense and bypass caps where it makes sense. In addition I have requested the high gloss laquer finish which should give it a tremendous look. I have also ordered the matching HTC center channel.

The veneer I ordered is Waterfall Bubinga with the baffle being a solid piece of plain bubinga as a contrast.

Anyway I thought you guys might be interested on the speakers I was going to.

Music Maven · « **Reply #1 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 08:15 pm »

I was interested in your report!

Always great to have some "vicarious" fun!

I've heard neither speaker and am totally unfamiliar with the Ridge Street product, but can attest to both the absolute BEAUTY of the Salk speakers (as seen on computer) and that Jim Salk is absolutely a pleasant and very dedicated person. His conduct and care speak very well for his product so I hope you are as happy as I would expect you to be.

Jerry

Bingenito · « **Reply #2 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 09:04 pm »

The midrange as with anything is personal opinion. I have heard VMPS before as recently as 3 weeks ago. The owner of the VMPS also preferred the midrange over the Seas Excel in my system.

For me the ribbon mid is on the thin side at least as it is used in the VMPS. The midrange is very clear and 3D but lacks the body and dynamics of a rigid cone mid. This is only my opinion.

For me the cone mid with proper implementation provides a sound that is more natural and real.

Keep in mind when you are used to hearing things a certain way you expect everything to sound similar.

jackman · « **Reply #3 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 09:08 pm »

Great report Marbles! I have only one (MAJOR) problem with your assessment. You were called Marbles (great name) because you had nOrh speakers, never changed to "Ribbons"(Can't blame you) when you had VMPS, and now you have Bubinga speakers. Can you at least change your name to something to do with Bubinga? Okay, at least wood. How about Major Woodie? Sounds kind've militaristic! That's my vote!

Cheers, and enjoy your new speakers! I hope to hear them at the next "Woodyfest"! Okay, that may sound kind've strange. Maybe you should just stick to the name Marbles!

Jack

Marbles · « **Reply #4 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 09:14 pm »

I mentioned that I XO'd the HT1's to my subs at 70 HZ, but I failed to mention that the HT3's are XO'd at 300 HZ, about the same as the RM40's with the mid upgrade.

Since the midrange drivers of the HT3 won't have to play so low, I'm guessing this will clean the midrange even more than what I was hearing with the HT1/sub combo.

I can understand how one could easily think the 40's lack body in the midrange.

Marbles · « **Reply #5 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 09:17 pm »

I still have 5 marble 5.0's, and two pair of marble column 9.0's....If I can't keep my handle with 9 marble speakers, how many would it take????

I do like the handle Major Woodie though

Wasn't that an actor in a porn movie???

Marbles · « **Reply #6 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 09:20 pm »

Jackman, you might be interested in knowing that since I heard your 1801's, I've been interested in having Dennis Murphy upgrade the XO's in my nOrh 9.0's.

He sent me an XO a year and a half or so ago to try, but the week I got it I sold my regular 9.0's.

Tomorrow I will be sending him a mini marble column 9.0 to redue the XO on.

James Romeyn · « **Reply #7 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 10:20 pm »

Marbles
I'm using RM30 Xd at about 80Hz, Sunfire True Sub Sig EQ below that.

I'd imagine you have sampled the RM30 set up properly? If so, how'd you compare them to your RM40, but only above 100Hz. The reason I ask is I really love the RM30/Sunfire sub rig (three front RM30, two rear Dipole Surrounds), but am considering something smaller like the Salk. So I could get an idea what the Salk are like based on your review above, after hearing what you think of the 40s vs. 30s.

Marbles · « **Reply #8 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 10:28 pm »

Quote from: RibbonSpeakers.net

Marbles
I'm using RM30 Xd at about 80Hz, Sunfire True Sub Sig EQ below that.

I'd imagine you have sampled the RM30 set up properly? If so, how'd you compare them to your RM40, but only above 100Hz. The reason I ask is I really love the RM30/Sunfire sub rig (three front RM30, two rear Dipole Surrounds), but am considering something smaller like the Salk. So I could get an idea what the Salk are like based on your review above, after hearing what you think of the 40s vs. 30s.

Jim,

While I have the RM30C, I only have one and use it as a center channel (horizontal).

I have not heard a pair of 30's unfortuneately.

I should also add that I think the 30 makes an incredible center channel...the best I have ever heard, but it didn't match well with the HT1's, and I think the front three have to be as close as possible for the best HT experience.

The HT3's will be as tall as the 30's and wider, so I don't think they would work if you are looking for smaller...the HT1's on the other hand...but they will need stands, so I don't see any real size benifit going from the 30's to the Salks.

James Romeyn · « **Reply #9 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 11:38 pm »

But Marbles, look how deep those 30s are....I must manuever between the right RM30 & the right edge of a huge 3-piece sectional sofa that seats about 200 people (well you know how I 'zaggerate...)

Whatever I end up will be a matched set of speakers in front, so all three front RM30s would be replaced.

Marbles · « **Reply #10 on:** 4 Apr 2005, 11:40 pm »

Quote from: RibbonSpeakers.net

But Marbles, look how deep those 30s are....I must manuever between the right RM30 & the right edge of a huge 3-piece sectional sofa that seats about 200 people (well you know how I 'zaggerate...)

Whatever I end up will be a matched set of speakers in front, so all three front RM30s would be replaced.

The Salks are pretty deep too... sorry I can't help..

You know, the planars BC uses only need a cabinet deep enough to obsorb the back wave, and the Ribbon tweeter is in it's own cabinet. Why not have BC make you a custom speaker that is 6" deep for the Planars and ribbon and use the sub for the bass?

Hell, if he would make a tower 6" deep with 6-8 planars and a ribbon or 8, I doubt he could keep them in stock....

James Romeyn · « **Reply #11 on:** 5 Apr 2005, 12:12 am »

Yes, as usual, you seem to have the best idea. All I'd need is like you say, about 6-8" depth stuffed with polyester batting or whatever. I'm sure the fact that the RM30 6-1/2" mid-bass is high-pass x'd at 80Hz or so means they require only a moderate enclosure volume for them also. But someone besides Brian would have to make them. He has about as much interest in custom cabinets as doubling his tax bill every year.

Actually, a speaker system as described above, with no PRs of course because they need no bass extension, paired with a top-notch sub that goes to 20Hz, would be about the best system on earth by my standards: moderate size with the best possible performance.

Marbles · « **Reply #12 on:** 5 Apr 2005, 12:16 am »

Well, you know your not the only one who needs a speaker like that.

I think that that idea has been around here a while.

If Brian would make it...they would come..........

Tweaker · « **Reply #13 on:** 5 Apr 2005, 01:26 am »

The VMPS midrange panel sounding thin could be due to the output being set too high in relation to the woofers. I experienced that myself when I first got my RM2's and cured it by adjusting the midrange volume pots down 1 dB at a time until the thinness disappeared. That being said I agree they have a different sound characteristic compared to moving coil mids that might not be everyones cup of tea. I think modern moving coil speaker design with stronger better magnets has improved the speed and definition to the point they are much more competitive with paner/ribbon/electrostats in those areas without the shortcomings (peculiar dispersion characteristics, etc.)

Bingenito · « **Reply #14 on:** 5 Apr 2005, 01:48 am »

Quote

The VMPS midrange panel sounding thin could be due to the output being set too high in relation to the woofers. I experienced that myself when I first got my RM2's and cured it by adjusting the midrange volume pots down 1 dB at a time until the thinness disappeared.

Not bashing anyones product here but based on what I heard the thin mid range was more a function of crossover point to the mid bass then volume pot adjustments. We did back down the midrange panels which helped as you stated. The midrange was very good but it just lacked that fullness you get when the crossover is higher and the midbass drivers round out the midrange a little more. Again just personal preference.

There is not a speaker (or any other product) made without a compromise regardless of price. We as consumers just have to decide which compromise works for us.

Marbles · « **Reply #15 on:** 5 Apr 2005, 01:51 am »

Again I can certainly understand this...the new midwoofer and cap upgrade certainly makes a huge difference in addressing this problem...rather successfully I think.

zybar · « **Reply #16 on:** 5 Apr 2005, 02:12 am »

Quote from: Bingenito

Not bashing anyones product here but based on what I heard the thin mid range was more a function of crossover point to the mid bass then volume pot adjustments. We did back down the midrange panels which helped as you stated. The midrange was very good but it just lacked that fullness you get when the crossover is higher and the midbass drivers round out the midrange a little more. Again just personal preference.

There is not a speaker (or any other product) made without a compromise regardless of price. We as consumers just have to decide which compromise works for us.

Bryan,

I agree with your assessment on the RM 40 sound.

The RM 40's are and will continue to be an excellent speaker. It is simply that the HT3's have a different, yet equally pleasing sound that I preferred.

Can't go wrong with either speaker.

George

Tweaker · « **Reply #17 on:** 5 Apr 2005, 02:59 am »

Personally, even if the RM40 were a slightly better sounding speaker to my ears I would probably purchase the HT3's because they are so damned beautiful.

lonewolfny42 · « **Reply #18 on:** 5 Apr 2005, 06:01 am »

Major Woodie :

Quote

Strange thing happened while listening to the Salks though. I no longer listened to the music...I got lost in it. It did not do as many things as spectacularly as the 40's, but I had a more emotional connection to the music. In fact after I actively XO'd them to my subs I don't remember a song where I wasn't bobbing my head, tapping my foot or both.

[/list:u]

Kishore · « **Reply #19 on:** 5 Apr 2005, 05:48 pm »

Very nice info Marbles! While I intend to sell my RM40s since I have moved to a smaller place, I think RM30s would be worthy contender to compare to HT-3s. I personally feel the RM30s are mini RM-Xs (imho).

I am glad we have good choices-esp from amazing manufacturers with excellent customer service!

Cheers,
Kishore