[Magnus_CA]

I'm still not convinced an audiophile grade speaker makes a good HT speaker, which will be my predominant reason for buying them.  Perhaps I need to demo more.

Any ways, how wide of a soundstage do you get with the SongTowers?  ie, how is off-axis performance?

[DMurphy]

I'm still not convinced an audiophile grade speaker makes a good HT speaker, which will be my predominant reason for buying them.  Perhaps I need to demo more.

Any ways, how wide of a soundstage do you get with the SongTowers?  ie, how is off-axis performance?

The off-axis performance is shown at http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=43364.0       That's about as good as can be achieved given the laws of physics.  Whether that translates into a "wide soundstage" is still open to discussion.  Everyone seems to have a pet theory concerning what contributes to soundtage width, depth, specificity.  Choose the one you like:  off-axis performance, baffle width, radiation pattern, phase tracking (not to be confused with a transient perfect crossover), crossover order, ability to pass a square wave (that's where transient perfection enters), and, of course, sunspot activity.   This is not a perfect science.  And soundstaging doesn't matter unless the basic sound is uncolored.  In any event, why don't you think an audiophile quality speaker will do well in a home theater?   The only complicating factor I can think of would be the tendency for HT soundtracks to run hot in the treble.  But most HT receivers have tone controls.....         As for reviews, I would love to have the ST's reviewed as widely as possible, but that's not really likely for speakers that aren't distributed through dealers.  For the mainstream mags, dealer distribution is a necessary condition for a review.  This is a rough biz.

[Magnus_CA]

Thanks for the reply Dale.  The FR at 60 degrees looks excellent.  I don't know of any manufacturers that provide that data so it's hard to compare. 

On a somewhat off-topic note, is there a picture of one of your crossovers somewhere?

Forgive my newbness but why go with a custom crossover over a mass-produced one?

[Rob Babcock]

Thanks for the reply Dale.  The FR at 60 degrees looks excellent.  I don't know of any manufacturers that provide that data so it's hard to compare. 

On a somewhat off-topic note, is there a picture of one of your crossovers somewhere?

Forgive my newbness but why go with a custom crossover over a mass-produced one?

Actually, it's Dennis.

[DMurphy]

>On a somewhat off-topic note, is there a picture of one of your crossovers somewhere?

Forgive my newbness but why go with a custom crossover over a mass-produced one?
[/quote]

Dale, Dennis----it's all rock and roll.  Anyhow, Jim may have a picture of the HT3 crossover--and one pic would probably be worth more than my words.   A mass-produced, "text book value" crossover (like you can get from the Rat Shack) would produce pretty horrific sound if connected to the HT3 drivers.  No crossover can work unless the component values and the topology of the circuits have been tailored to the specific response characteristics and impedance of the drivers being used.  If you looked at the raw response of the W18, you would see why you can't just slap a coil and a cap on it.  For one thing, It rings like a bell at 5 kHz.  You have to design a trap circuit to tame that peak, and then combine it with other components to achieve the precise acoustic roll-off you're after.  To do a crossover properly, you need to measure each driver in the cabinet you will be using, import those measurements into a design software program, and then experiment with different approaches and different crossover slopes and crossover points until you come up with something that measures well and sounds like music.  3-way crossovers in particular can be a nightmare.  If you change one thing in the midrange, you will probably throw off the transitions to the woofer and tweeter.  And then there's the matter of impedance--a flat response won't do you much good if the impedance drops to 1 ohm in the midbass.  And there's baffle-step compensation, phase integration, off-axis performance, driver distortion.  I've been working for 2 weeks on a crossover for a very high-end 2-way using a $350 Skaaning woofer and a $250 ScanSpeak tweeter.  I have 5 or 6 crossovers that look fine on paper, but aren't really up to snuff when I listen in my living room.  To put all this in perspective, I would much rather own a speaker that uses $30 drivers and a properly executed crossover than one with $300 drivers and a so-so crossover.

[jsalk]

Magnus_CA -

I'm still not convinced an audiophile grade speaker makes a good HT speaker, which will be my predominant reason for buying them.  Perhaps I need to demo more.

In the early days of HT, many people commented that speakers designed for music reproduction made for poor HT speakers.  And in many cases, this was true.

The reason is that one of critical design considerations for music speakers was bass extension.  This was often accomplished by the use of larger woofers or mid-woofers.  Since speaker design is the art of balancing trade-offs, the trade-off in this case was midrange response and clarity.

This is not necessarily all that noticeable by most consumers.  They are more impressed with a bright top end and deep bass response.  Midrange response is critical in home theater applications because that is the range that reproduces human voice.  So the better the midrange response, the better the intelligibility.

In our designs, we feel midrange performance is absolutely critical.  Which means that this aspect of the design is given far more weight than bass extension.

With the SongTowers, excellent midrange response is provided by 5" midwoofers.  The "trade-off" in this case is normally bass extension.  But in this case, the transmission line cabinets allow greater bass extension than either sealed or standard ported cabinets would allow.  And since the backwave of the drivers is allowed to move more freely out of the larger ports, they have less impact on the clarity of the midrange than other cabinet designs would allow.

The result is a speaker that should perform just as well for music or home theater applications.  In fact, we have supplied our high-end speaker designs for a great many home theaters and owners have raved about the results -- great music and an engaging cinematic experience.

While some music speakers may indeed perform poorly in a home theater situation, well-designed speakers will handle either task with ease.  The idea that music speakers do not make good home theater speakers is a myth - provided the speakers were well-designed in the first place.

I hope this makes sense.

- Jim

[zybar]

I'm still not convinced an audiophile grade speaker makes a good HT speaker, which will be my predominant reason for buying them.  Perhaps I need to demo more.

Any ways, how wide of a soundstage do you get with the SongTowers?  ie, how is off-axis performance?

Magnus,

For almost two years I used my Salk HT3's as both my L/R speakers in my HT as well as for my 2 channel listening.

I can absolutely say that the HT3's were outstanding for both applications!!   

In fact, they were so good, it took speakers that cost more than $20k to displace them!

Furthermore, I liked the HT3's so much, that when it was time to finally buy speakers for my new dedicated HT, I went with three Salk Song Towers for L/C/R duties.  These speakers will be arriving next week.

I will do my best to take pics and get an initial assessment up as soon as possible.

George

[brj]

A comment... imaging and soundstage are going to be affected by the room layout and treatment level at least as much as by the speakers themselves.  Great speakers in a poor room can very easily sound worse than lesser speakers in an excellent room.  This effect applies equally to 2 channel systems as well as to HT systems, although specific room design and treatment will differ between the two configurations.

(I've taken a pair of Salk HT3s from a lesser room to a fantastic room, and the difference was stunning.)

[Kokishin]

Hi Dennis and Jim,

There is an HT3 option to use a DEQX active crossover.  Other than cost differences, what are the advantages/disadvantages of the active crossover versus the passive crossover?  Will the SongTowers have an active crossover option?

Best Regards

I'm still not convinced an audiophile grade speaker makes a good HT speaker, which will be my predominant reason for buying them.  Perhaps I need to demo more.

Any ways, how wide of a soundstage do you get with the SongTowers?  ie, how is off-axis performance?

The off-axis performance is shown at http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=43364.0       That's about as good as can be achieved given the laws of physics.  Whether that translates into a "wide soundstage" is still open to discussion.  Everyone seems to have a pet theory concerning what contributes to soundtage width, depth, specificity.  Choose the one you like:  off-axis performance, baffle width, radiation pattern, phase tracking (not to be confused with a transient perfect crossover), crossover order, ability to pass a square wave (that's where transient perfection enters), and, of course, sunspot activity.   This is not a perfect science.  And soundstaging doesn't matter unless the basic sound is uncolored.  In any event, why don't you think an audiophile quality speaker will do well in a home theater?   The only complicating factor I can think of would be the tendency for HT soundtracks to run hot in the treble.  But most HT receivers have tone controls.....         As for reviews, I would love to have the ST's reviewed as widely as possible, but that's not really likely for speakers that aren't distributed through dealers.  For the mainstream mags, dealer distribution is a necessary condition for a review.  This is a rough biz.

[DMurphy]

>Hi Dennis and Jim,

There is an HT3 option to use a DEQX active crossover.  Other than cost differences, what are the advantages/disadvantages of the active crossover versus the passive crossover?  Will the SongTowers have an active crossover option? <

Well, Jim is the marketing man, but that sounds like a pretty expensive upgrade for $1500 speakers.  I'm biased, but I really don't think you need the power of DEQX to merge the ST drivers successfully.  Frankly, the improvement on the much more complex HT3 is subtle.  What DEQX can do is equalize the bass room response, which can be a significant factor when you're dealing with the HT3's power and reach in that region.  But the ST doesn't seem to do need that kind of tailoring.  In some respects, less can be more. 

[jsalk]

Kokishin -

Hi Dennis and Jim,

There is an HT3 option to use a DEQX active crossover.  Other than cost differences, what are the advantages/disadvantages of the active crossover versus the passive crossover?  Will the SongTowers have an active crossover option?

Best Regards

Since we are basically a custom builder, we can produce active versions of any of our speakers, including the SongTowers. But I don't feel it would make much sense in this case, even if you take cost out of the equation.

DEQX is valuable in two main areas.

First, it can correct for phase and frequency response deviations.  But if you look at the the frequency response of the SongTowers, there just isn't anything that requires correction.  And the phase tracking is very accurate in the crossover region.  Hearing a stock SongTower will confirm this.  So I doubt there would be any sonic difference offered by the DEQX in this area.

The second main area is tailoring bass response to the room.  But the SongTowers will load the room to a much lesser extent than, say, our HT3's.  So gains to be made in this area are minimal at best unless the room is a major problem (in which case there are much less costly solutions like bass traps).

Now, when you consider the cost of the DEQX ($3795) and the additional two channels of amplification required, it really does not make much sense for a speaker in this price range that already performs marvelously.

That said, if someone wants it, we will be more than happy to produce an active pair.

- Jim

[Kokishin]

Thank you Dennis and Jim for your replies to my post.

Best Regards,

K

Kokishin -

Hi Dennis and Jim,

There is an HT3 option to use a DEQX active crossover.  Other than cost differences, what are the advantages/disadvantages of the active crossover versus the passive crossover?  Will the SongTowers have an active crossover option?

Best Regards

Since we are basically a custom builder, we can produce active versions of any of our speakers, including the SongTowers. But I don't feel it would make much sense in this case, even if you take cost out of the equation.

DEQX is valuable in two main areas.

First, it can correct for phase and frequency response deviations.  But if you look at the the frequency response of the SongTowers, there just isn't anything that requires correction.  And the phase tracking is very accurate in the crossover region.  Hearing a stock SongTower will confirm this.  So I doubt there would be any sonic difference offered by the DEQX in this area.

The second main area is tailoring bass response to the room.  But the SongTowers will load the room to a much lesser extent than, say, our HT3's.  So gains to be made in this area are minimal at best unless the room is a major problem (in which case there are much less costly solutions like bass traps).

Now, when you consider the cost of the DEQX ($3795) and the additional two channels of amplification required, it really does not make much sense for a speaker in this price range that already performs marvelously.

That said, if someone wants it, we will be more than happy to produce an active pair.

- Jim