0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 19981 times.
One last thing. Jim needs to seriously consider his source. There was absolutely no extended highs or blooming mid range at all and a little toe in may have helped sound staging.
My impression like other was that the sound was disappointing. But what gets me is that other rooms with similar challenges had better sound. I must admit that the Salk speakers just didn't rise to the level I had anticipated. what I'm getting at is that even thought others vendors complained about the bright rooms (Grape Vine Audion for one and btw had one of the BEST sounding rooms at the show) you could still gauge the potential of the speaker leaving you with the impression there was more to gain from them. The Salks just didn't have that effect on me.
I think people should be more respectful of unpopular/lukewarm opinions of Salks, no one speaker if for everyone.Now onto something more important, my opinion. Regarding the Soundscapes, the dynamics, clarity, soundstage, and the way the speakers completely disappeared from the room was just so above and beyond what I've heard before, I was left speechless. Ridiculous.
Hey ricman, after the next review comes out I suspect you will seriously reconsider suggesting that Jim Salk "seriously considers his source." Best regards,Frank Van Alstine
Hi I'm glad you liked the speaks, and I also agree that we shouldn't jump on anyone who didn't hear what we heard. I'm really not apologizing for the sound in any way--that was one big hog room, and it made vocals very difficult as I think you can understand, but at the same time all that space above and behind the speakers made for some very dramatic presentations--particularly on organ, brass, and Big Bass Drums.
Jim or Swerd - Was the Thai meal courtesy of Thai Basil in Chantilly? I know its a fair ways from Swerd's house, but it is well known across the country for having great Thai food (it was also featured on Food Network).
Which speaker was reviewed?
We ate Thai food at Benjarong http://www.benjarongthairestaurant.com/, a place nearby the Glenview Mansion in Rockville.I have to agree with the others who thought the room had a lot to do with the disappointing sound. It had very high ceilings, marble floors, and all the walls and ceilings were plaster. Not only was that room very large, it was empty of furniture. All those hard surfaces had an effect that I thought was quite different from the other rooms of the mansion, large or small, which had much lower ceilings, wooden floors, furnishings, and curtains.I've heard Salk speakers including the SoundScapes in a variety of other rooms, and none of them were like the room at the Glenview mansion. That room had the ambiance more like a railroad station or a cathedral than any room in a private home.So to respond to the person who voiced the lukewarm or unpopular opinions, I respect your impressions. I think you described what I heard too. But I urge you to listen to Salk speakers again under different conditions before you make those your settled opinions.
Anyone?
To answer the easy question first, yes--you should listen to the ST's on the tweeter axis. The two woofs will start to cancel each other in the upper midrange if you don't. Ideally, the tweeter probably should be a little higher, but there's only so much you can do in an MTM without making the cabinet too tall for the width--both from an aesthetic and stability standpoint. And ideally, the tweeter should be a little lower on the SoundScape. Again, aesthetics come into play. But the SS's are much less sensitive to listening axis than an MTM. Nothing horrible will happen if your ears happen to end up at the bottom of the tweeter or a little lower. A little dip will start to develop at the crossover point, but I think it would only be audible on pink or white noise.
Comparing different gear in different rooms? Apples, meet oranges.
I don't think it's AVA electronics. May be it's the choice of music, the file format........
