[oneinthepipe]

If the speakers were 90" apart, you could, if there aren't any physical obstructions, pick up another 30" in the room's length (based up a Cardas triangle setup) and bring the speakers out from the front wall another foot or two.  The speakers probably should be placed forward of the front of the wardrobe and shouldn't be directly on the sides of the wardrobe, which would have a similar effect as having them directly next to a side wall, increasing the potential for bass issues and limiting the speakers dispersion, reducing the sound stage, imaging, etc.   Ideally, you want the speakers and your listening position to be away from walls (and cabinets, wardrobes, etc.) as much as practical and practicable. 

[FidelitySeeker]

Or in a 2 channel application for serious music listening?  IMO a bedroom is backgound music or TV application.

I know it is probably just semantics, but IMHO, background music is for stores and refers more to the music content than anything else. It is music which has been compressed and designed to be unobtrusive. I don't do background music.
Realistically, I would say it will be 95/5 casual/active listening. I will define active listening as when I am sitting in my sweet spot and doing nothing but listening to music. While in the BR, about 70% of the time I would in my listening chair. While in the chair, I would most likely be reading, planning, and/or on the laptop. I have always enjoyed casual listening and when the right passage comes along, I get happily interrupted and listen. If the sound quality is good, that happens more often!

The speakers are now waiting patiently in the car!

Cheers,
Kurt

[FidelitySeeker]

The speakers probably should be placed forward of the front of the wardrobe and shouldn't be directly on the sides of the wardrobe.

Thanks!
The wardrobe is 4-5 ft wide so there will be some side clearance. Let me get out a floor plan, but as is, the front of the speakers would be 8" proud of the wardrobe. The side clearance between the speakers and the wardrobe would be about 15".

[Nuance]

The speakers probably should be placed forward of the front of the wardrobe and shouldn't be directly on the sides of the wardrobe.

Thanks!
The wardrobe is 4-5 ft wide so there will be some side clearance. Let me get out a floor plan, but as is, the front of the speakers would be 8" proud of the wardrobe. The side clearance between the speakers and the wardrobe would be about 15".

+1 on seeing a layout or pictures of your room.  Oh, and congrats on their arrival!  Bring on the speakers pics! 

[K Shep]

Or in a 2 channel application for serious music listening?  IMO a bedroom is backgound music or TV application.

I know it is probably just semantics, but IMHO, background music is for stores and refers more to the music content than anything else. It is music which has been compressed and designed to be unobtrusive. I don't do background music.
Realistically, I would say it will be 95/5 casual/active listening. I will define active listening as when I am sitting in my sweet spot and doing nothing but listening to music. While in the BR, about 70% of the time I would in my listening chair. While in the chair, I would most likely be reading, planning, and/or on the laptop. I have always enjoyed casual listening and when the right passage comes along, I get happily interrupted and listen. If the sound quality is good, that happens more often!

The speakers are now waiting patiently in the car!

Cheers,
Kurt

It is semantics.  I understand your point though and casual listening is a better term.  I worked for an intergration sub-contractor and I sold Crestron systems and with that distributed audio in residential applications.  Background music is a term that is used in the industry to describe non-critical areas where speakers are installed.  It probably is not appropriate to use Background music on this site. 

So the ceiling speakers in my bedroom are for TV watching.  The ceiling speakers that I will install in my kitchen will be for casual listening.

My attic, well that is just nirvana! 

Kirk

[FidelitySeeker]

Finally got the speakers set up and have spent some time listening to them.
Nice!
I'll write up a audition in a day or two after I have more time to characterize them.
I plan to have a bookshelf set-up as well as a floor standing one. I have been comparing bookshelf speakers for some time and my current champions are the RBH-61lse for overall sound, and the Paradigm S-1 for its high frequency extension. I am hoping that a Paradigm S-2 (next on my bookshelf list) would give me the overall effect of the RBH while retaining the upper end of the S-1.
In any case, my initial listen puts the Salk on par with the S-1 (berylium tweeter) for the high end as I had hoped (remember, I arrived at the S-1 after ~10 A-B trials, the SongTowers were an outright gamble).

[K Shep]

Kurt,

Please fill us in on what you are using to drive those beauties.  The Sansui or the Marantz, you can't start a thread like this and then leave us hanging.

Kirk

[FidelitySeeker]

Marantz for speaker comparisons. I am set up to instantly A-B between speakers using the remote, with pre-matched sound levels.

[Nuance]

Glad you are liking them so far, FidelitySeeker.  Keep us posted when you've had more time to listen. 

[K Shep]

Marantz for speaker comparisons. I am set up to instantly A-B between speakers using the remote, with pre-matched sound levels.

 
After all of the suggestions, you chose your reciever over your integrated amp? 

[Nuance]

^ Probably because it puts out more power, or maybe it sounds better to his ears.  We look forward to an update, FidelitySeeker.

[K Shep]

Nuance,

You own a good quality receiver.  However, you chose to incorporate a preamp into your system for 2 channel listening.  Do you prefer the sound of your preamp/amp setup over your receiver setup while listening to music through your SongTowers?

Kirk

[FidelitySeeker]

Marantz for speaker comparisons. I am set up to instantly A-B between speakers using the remote, with pre-matched sound levels.

I didn't mean to be abstruse with my answer.
Right now, my expectation is to drive them with the Sansui. However, for the reasons stated above, I am currently using Marantz as a speaker comparison platform.

[FidelitySeeker]

^ Probably because it puts out more power, or maybe it sounds better to his ears.  We look forward to an update, FidelitySeeker.

As a very brief update, the ST's are sounding very good.

[oneinthepipe]

Good.  Glad that you are pleased.  The ST are very, very nice speakers.

[K Shep]

As many of you know Fidelityseeker bought his STs from me.  They arrived with damage to one of the plinths.  This is bad news, but I take responsibility as I packed the parcel for shipment.   

Has anyone contacted Fedex for a claim?  Please share your positive or negative experience. More importantly what is the cost of a replacement plinth? 
 
I shipped the speakers with the plinths bolted to the speakers.





Kirk

[Nuance]

Nuance,

You own a good quality receiver.  However, you chose to incorporate a preamp into your system for 2 channel listening.  Do you prefer the sound of your preamp/amp setup over your receiver setup while listening to music through your SongTowers?

Kirk

Well yes, but that doesn't mean others will. 

Much condolence about the busted plithes.  Our couriers these days make me want to go postal, no pun intended.   

[Nuance]

^ Probably because it puts out more power, or maybe it sounds better to his ears.  We look forward to an update, FidelitySeeker.

As a very brief update, the ST's are sounding very good.

You weren't kidding; that couldn't have been more brief.   

[K Shep]

Nuance,

You own a good quality receiver.  However, you chose to incorporate a preamp into your system for 2 channel listening.  Do you prefer the sound of your preamp/amp setup over your receiver setup while listening to music through your SongTowers?

Kirk

Well yes, but that doesn't mean others will. 

You're right.  I guess at times I expect everyone to have separates and a setup like mine.  Thanks for the reality check.

Kirk

[FidelitySeeker]

Note: To avoid confusion, I'll point out up front that ST = SongTower RT (ribbon tweeter option), S1 = Paradigm Signature S1, v2.

Sorry for the suspense, but it has been too many times that I have made preliminary statements and regretted them later, after enough time to really analyze and put things together.

I received my Paradigm S1 v2's a day before the Salks, so they are both new to me. As a recap; I am currently putting together two systems. I am committed to one bookshelf system (2.1) for WAF and the other can be whatever I want. Based on everything I have read (esp. Nuance's "Journey"), it made sense to try out the Salk SongTowers.
For the bookshelf speakers, after exhausting local store options, I have been using Audiogon to buy used, audition, then resell. This works okay for bookshelf speakers since they are small and my cost is essentially the cost of shipping one-way. My bookshelf quest is pretty mature. Thus far, I have worked through 11 pairs of speakers and the Paradigm S1's are the best bookshelf to my ear thus far. After listening to the ST's, I think the Paradigm S2 may be my next move on the bookshelfs.

As you all know, the ST's are great speakers. However, the amazingly small S1's are not push overs. Please keep in mind that when I say one speaker is better than the other, we are talking the kind of difference that I, personally, do not believe you could detect without having both pairs in the same room at the same time.

Bass - I wasn't sure how to handle this. Obviously, the little speakers are not in the same league as the ST's. The S1's roll off at 73Hz (-2dB). My intent is to use the S1's in a 2.1 system. The difference in the depth of bass presented too much of a distraction, so I added my SVS SB-12Plus subwoofer into the mix. I tried the ST's alone, but this gave the reverse situation where the fullness of the S1's with sub overwhelmed other aspects. I hooked the sub in with the ST's and played around with tuning for a while to end up with the crossover set at 80Hz for both. After doing this, I really did not notice any substantial difference in bass and I did not make an effort to evaluate the low end since I have modified it. As a side note, I was pleased that both sets blended with the sub as well as they did.

Treble - From my perspective, most speakers do pretty well with everything else, but it is this high end that separates the wheat from the chaff.
I am absolutely delighted to own both of these pairs of speakers. Their top ends make them truly special! My 2.1 quest has guided me to the Paradigm Be (beryllium) tweeters as a tweeter having clear, realistic high frequency extension. Until I heard the Be tweeters, nothing quite had it right. The Al Paradigm Studio v5 tweeter has good extension, but it missed the boat on being clear - it seemed as if they were just good at "faking" it. The Be tweeter filled the gap getting damn close to actually standing there when the triangle or chimes are struck. It just makes me grin! This was my biggest concern about the ST RT! I knew the ribbon tweeters would be very good, but if they fell short of the Be tweeters, it would be a disappointment. I would go so far as to say the sound was almost identical. Whenever I heard a strongly voiced high pitched steel, I would think "WOW, the other speaker can't do that", rewind, and either would nail it!
The beauty of it is that they both do this without listening fatigue!
They both had all of the shimmer and shine! The difference is that the ST's had just a touch more air.
The Salk's get the nod for the top end by a slight margin.

If anyone is trying to decide between the standard and the Ribbon Tweeter, auditioning the much more readily available Paradigm Be tweeter would give a taste of how the RT sounds (IMHO).

Here are some good test spots for the type of treble which both of these speakers eclipse any others I have ever heard:
The Ed Palermo Big Band - "Take Your Clothes Off When You Dance" Track 1@6:38; Track 5@5:16. (Ed Palermo is a Jazz Band that performs the music of Frank Zappa, it has very well recorded cymbals and chimes)
Eric Clapton - "Unplugged" Track 4 (Tears in Heaven) has a well recorded triangle which is played throughout the track (rewind for proper comparison - the strikes vary).

Midrange - I saved this for last, because it has been the most troublesome aspect of these speakers to characterize. While the treble was incredibly similar, the midrange really showed some differences. About 80% of the time, I could tell which speaker I was listening to based on the midrange. My setup allows instant switching. With other pairs of speakers, I could often lose track of which speaker I was listening to (a good thing for attempting to be "blind").
I first listened to Steely Dan - "Aja". No contest! The Salks get the nod!
But then, as I listened to a variety of materials there were spots where the S1's sounded better. The ST's were more frequently better, but not always.
The Salks have more ambiance (I hope that is the right word, it is like a very slight touch of reverb which gives the sound of being in a studio, etc).
As I said, the Salk's rule on "Aja". They gave a wide and excellent soundstage which nicely fell in with the polished clean sound of this album.
In comparison, the Paradigms sounded a bit thin and congested.

While listening to Ed Palermo, the variety of sound would have me go either way between the ST's and the S1's. On track 5, there is a saxophone solo at 0:17. At the start of this solo, the ST sounds stellar, that ambiance gives the sax just a touch of the fantastic sound of a solitary sax being played in an empty alleyway. However, later in the same solo, there is a spot where the saxophonist is mouthing a lower note (0:59) and the S1's lack of ambiance sounds better rooted and more realistic.
Another interesting place where I experienced better sound from the S1's is Rosanne Cash "Interiors". On track 9 (I Want a Cure), Rosanne's voice sounds more natural on the S1's. To venture a premise, it sounds like the recording engineer "enhanced" her voice by adding a little ambiance. This "enhancement" plays well on the Paradigm, but it seems overblown on the ST. I have no idea if that actually happened, but if the engineer was listening to monitors which sounded like the S1's it would make sense to add that ambiance!
I have been talking about spots where the S1's shine, but need to keep things in perspective. I definitely prefer the ST's to the S1's; however, you would find me grinning a lot while listening to either.

Overall, I am tickled pink! If either of these speakers had really spanked the other, it would have been a major frustration. To have gambled on the Salk's and lost would have been a bit expensive. Conversely, if the S1's were not competitive, I would have been concerned that a high quality bookshelf 2.1 system might not be attainable.
The Salk ST RT's made enough of a case for better sound that I will try the Paradigm S2. The S1's are a sealed speaker measuring 7"W X 11"H and it is just cool getting so much sound out of them, but I hope the added size and porting of the S2 might help it capture a bit of the ambiance of the ST. The bookshelf S2's cost about the same as a ST with the ribbon tweeter. If you wanted a floorstanding Paradigm from the Signature series you would be beyond the cost of the ST. The ST RT is a great value in my book.