[jsalk]

When the SongTowers were originally introduced almost a year ago, we received quite a few inquiries about a ribbon tweeter version.  At the time, I didn't think it made all that much sense.  We already had the Veracity HT2's which are also an MTM design but feature an LCY ribbon tweeter along with a pair of Seas Excel W18's.

Adding a ribbon tweeter to the SongTower design would naturally add cost.  And while the HT2's would still be more expensive, I thought that the difference in price was such that those really wanting a ribbon would just "upgrade" to the HT2's.

But we continued to get inquiries.  So Dennis began playing with the concept and tried a version with the LCY ribbon tweeter we used successfully in the HT2's.  After performing his usual magic, he informed me that the combination works very well and that he actually preferred the LCY version.  So we started building a "test" pair.

About that time, Nuance ordered a pair of SongTowers and heard about this impending design.  He emailed to ask if he could get this first pair.  I told him yes.

In the process of designing this new SongTower version, we noted that the woofers would need to be spaced slightly farther apart to accommodate the larger LCY tweeter.  I had always toyed with the concept of a machined aluminum front baffle and since we had to make new templates for this new version anyway, I thought this would be a good opportunity.

It took a little longer to get the front baffles designed and machined than I originally anticipated.  But they are now done and last week we finished the first SongTower RT pair, gave them a good listen over the space of a few days, tweaked a little (I was quite impressed) and shipped them off to Nuance.

These pictures do not capture the real beauty of this particular batch of rosewood (pau ferro), but it was the nicest batch we had ever worked with (and the most expensive).  The pictures do not show the hand-rubbed finish we put on these cabinets very well either.  But here they are:



Here a picture of the machined aluminum front baffle (anodized black):



In anticipation of a few questions, there is no way to upgrade current SongTowers to this new configuration since the woofers are spaced farther apart.  Perhaps we will work up some kind of trade-up program for current SongTower owners who feel a strong need to upgrade.

As for pricing, we may not be able to hold it and it may need to be increased as we get more manufacturing experience under our belt.  But, for the time being, this model will be priced at $700 more than a comparable regular SongTower ($2395 in satin black, $2495 in a standard veneer and $2695 plus the cost of veneer for a "custom" model).

As to whether or not there will be a ribbon-based center channel and surrounds, that is an open question.  Since the speakers are basically voiced the same, we don't see an urgent need (the existing center and surrounds should work just fine in combination with the SongTower RT's).  But, if the demand is there, we will certainly explore the concept.

The aluminum baffles look quite nice and worked out very well.  As of now, we have a limited number anodized black and clear (sliver) based on the sample run.  Whether or not we will continue using this baffle in the long run is an open question.  In order to get the price where it needs to be, we will have to order quite a large number at a time.  And it remains to be seen how popular this model will become.  So we'll use them until they are gone and re-visit the issue as we get a better feel for potential volume.

Now that the design is complete and in production, we'll have 3 - 4 additional pairs of SongTower RT's finished for customers in the next week or so.

In the mean time...Happy listening Nuance!

- Jim

[avahifi]

Jim.  Outstanding!

Do me a pair just like these please.

Best regards,

Frank Van Alstine

P.S.  Are there front grills available for these?  If so I will want them.

[jsalk]

Frank -

Jim.  Outstanding!

Do me a pair just like these please.

Best regards,

Frank Van Alstine

I have a pair of cabinets just like these already set aside for you.  (Actually I built them for myself, but you can have them and I'll just bulid another pair.)  We will most likely assemble them tomorrow.  So watch for an invoice!

P.S.  Are there front grills available for these?  If so I will want them.

Yes, grills are part of the package (although we hope you use them very sparingly).

- Jim

[BradJudy]

Very nice Jim.  It's been a while since we've seen a thread showing off a new pair of Salk's, and the new RT version is very interesting.  I can't imagine machined aluminum baffles are cheap. 

[jd3]

Jim,
Fabulous job as usual.  I've had my ST's a year this weekend and I never tire of listening to them.  Best speakers I've ever owned.  I'm sure Nuance will love these.

[R Swerdlow]

That rosewood looks stunning.

Just curious… do the vertical grooves in the baffle have an acoustic function?

[jsalk]

That rosewood looks stunning.

Just curious… do the vertical grooves in the baffle have an acoustic function?

Absolutley none. As a matter of fact, they are not really grooves.

We toyed with all kinds of ways to put a final finish on the baffles. Most of them involved a good deal of additional expense. So, in the end, we tested a machining pattern that resulted in machine marks that look like grooves. But the surface is actually flat.

You are seeing evidence of tool marks that were not sanded or sand-blasted out. It started as a way to control costs, but actually turned out to look quite nice. They appear to be grooves but are not actually groves. It's kind of like figuring in wood--it appears to be 3-dimensional but is actually flat. It is just the way light strikes the surface and gets reflected back. I hope this makes sense.

- Jim

[ThorsHammer]

What is the difference when you mount on a baffle as opposed to mounting directly on the wood??

[ThorsHammer]

So, it's the same principle as when you see the stripes cut into a major league ballpark....the grass is all the same length but the direction of the cut allows the surface to reflect light in different ways.

[ArthurDent]

Lovely work Jim  , I'm sure Nuance will be one happy lucky dog to have the first ones. If Frank wasn't taking all my money I'd consider an RT set to go with the originals, but am still trying to analyze finances to see if I can complete my tri-fecta with the surrounds.

Am also awaiting arrival of my Carnation friend's QWs to see how those sound. So much fine sound, a shame we only have 2 ears, and limited $$. 

[zybar]

Looks great Jim!

As a very happy SongTower customer, I am sure this version will be outstanding!

George

[Nuance]

Gents -

I have a whole lot more listening to do, but let me tell you, these speakers are the real deal!  If you want to know if I think the upgrade is worth it, so far I’d say yes. I’m only comparing to the "stock" SongTower's based off memory, but the ribbon seems to complete that 3rd dimension if you will. What was an already incredible high frequency response has been refined with an added transparency and smoothness that seems to extend into eternity – just what I was looking for. The sound is neither too bright or too laid back, but "just right" to my ears. However, as mentioned above, I still have plenty of listening to do.

Pics can be found at the link below.  Sorry guys, my camera is a lousy point and shoot, but you get the idea. 

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=14546639&postcount=1678

I am honored to be the first recipient of the SongTower RT's.  A huge thanks to Jim and Dennis for making this dream come true!  Thank you so much!

Now if you'll excuse me gents, I have some more listening to do.  My review should be up by Labor Day.   

[jsalk]

ThorsHammer -

What is the difference when you mount on a baffle as opposed to mounting directly on the wood??

Well, this could certainly be done as well.  But to mount directly into the cabinet without a baffle, you would have to add harwood trim to the cabinet edges in order to do the required round-over (for diffraction abatement).  This adds the cost of the hardwood trim (which can be significant depending on the type of wood required) and there is a good deal of added labor.

That is why we developed the black satin front baffle on the basic SongTower design.  It provides a surface we can round over without the expense of harwood or the extra labor involved.

I hope this answered your question.

- Jim

[Nuance]

My review is complete.  Wow...that was a lot of writing.     It can be found at the new thread I started (linked below).

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=59166.msg525606#msg525606

[doug s.]

ThorsHammer -

What is the difference when you mount on a baffle as opposed to mounting directly on the wood??

Well, this could certainly be done as well.  But to mount directly into the cabinet without a baffle, you would have to add harwood trim to the cabinet edges in order to do the required round-over (for diffraction abatement).  This adds the cost of the hardwood trim (which can be significant depending on the type of wood required) and there is a good deal of added labor.

That is why we developed the black satin front baffle on the basic SongTower design.  It provides a surface we can round over without the expense of harwood or the extra labor involved.

I hope this answered your question.

- Jim

hi jim,

i wonder how important any roundover is, for diffraction abatement - unless you go to a roundover of at least 1.5".  have you read david ellis' comments about this?  in his 1801c discussion string thread, he stated:  "...I will never purvey, or build a speaker with less than a 1 1/2" radius roundover in the future.  If the subjective value of the Sonicap Platinum bypass capacitor implementation is $180, the subjective value of the 1 1/2" radius roundover on all edges of the baffle is $400-$500..." 

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=50882.msg509318#msg509318

as his products are listed on your website, i thought it would be interesting to get your take on this...

thanks,

doug s.

[DMurphy]

I think 1.5" is pretty extreme, although I'm sure it doesn't do any harm.   3/4" is enough to pretty much solve the problem.  See http://murphyblaster.com/content.php?f=cabinets.html

[doug s.]

I think 1.5" is pretty extreme, although I'm sure it doesn't do any harm.   3/4" is enough to pretty much solve the problem.  See http://murphyblaster.com/content.php?f=cabinets.html

i am not sure measurements tell the story.  at least the way dave ellis tells it:

"...I made several incorrect assumptions.  First, I assumed that if having a large radius roundover on a speaker was important that ALL truly high-end loudspeakers would implement a large radius roundover.  This assumption was incorrect.  Second, I assumed that a 3/4" roundover should have some impact, but in very thorough previous testing, (objective and subjective), this assumption was incorrect.  Third, I assumed that if a large radius roundover was significant, then surely the DIY crowd would implement this in their workshops.  This assumption was incorrect.

Several months ago I asked Dave Elledge what he thought of large radius roundovers.  I deeply respect Dave's opinion.  His commentary and insights are on par with Jeff Glowacki's insights.  Over the years, I have eventually learned that many of their opinions are true and valid.  Dave conveyed that the radius has to be large to be effective.  He further explained that a 1 1/2" radius would be effective and I agreed to try this.

My experiment was setup in my living room using outboard crossovers and two pairs of 1801C loudspeakers.  Both pairs of speakers used the Accuton C95 woofer and the Hiquphon OW1 tweeter.  As mentioned above, there was no discernable measurable impact.  While there were measurable differences, they were very small and nothing that would indicate a difference between the two cabinets.  One pair of cabinets was the 1801 floorstanding version having square edges.  The other cabinet was the 1801 stand mounted version with a 1 1/2" radius roundover.

I also understand that visual appearance can be a factor in the subjective opinion regarding a loudspeaker.  On this subject, the audibly superior cabinets were quite... ugly.  The 1801 floorstanding cabinets ware nicely finished with a cherry veneer.  The 1801 stand mounted cabinets were raw MDF.

Several pieces of music were used and 3 pairs of ears were subjected to the a/b test on different occasions.  The commentary was universally similar.  There was a significant difference. The difference was not subtle. The impact of the large radius roundover was easily superior...."

i have heard diffraction-based cabinet designs help speakers do amazing disappearing acts (like the diapason adamantes, for example); i have always wondered about large roundovers... 

doug s.

[DMurphy]

Well, I would have to do a controlled A-B comparison to say anything more.      So I won't say anything more. 

[Russell Dawkins]

A well respected designer whose work I pay attention to figures that 1/4 the wavelength of the frequency of interest is the critical radius where audible diffraction is concerned.

For example, for 1000 Hz (with a wavelength of around 12"), 1/4 of the wavelength is 3" which would be the radius larger than which no significant diffraction occurs. For 2000Hz, 1.5"; for 4000Hz, .75", etc.

His designs compromise with a 2" radius.

[DMurphy]

That's certainly interesting.  But the critical phrase is "audible diffraction."  I wonder whether he's really performed the kind of blinded, controlled A-B comparisons that would be necessary to establish what's audible and what isn't.  I'm not necessarily denying that it's audible, but it's an open question.  I wonder how many people could really hear the difference between a good speaker with its grill on and off.  There are big differences in the measured response, but I've tried that test on some people, and it was flunk city.