Tekton Double Impacts


Anybody out there heard these??

I have dedicated audio room 14.5x20.5x9 ft.  Currently have Marantz Reference CD/Intergrated paired to Magnepan 1.7's with REL T-7 subs.  For the vast majority of music I love this system.  The only nit pick is that it is lacking/limited in covering say below 35 hz or so.  For the first time actually buzzed the panel with an organ sacd. Bummer.  Thought of upgrading subs to rythmicks but then I will need to high pass the 1.7's.  Really don't want to deal with that approach.

Enter the Double Impacts.  Many interesting things here.  Would certainly have a different set of strengths here.  Dynamics, claimed bottom octave coverage in one package, suspect a good match to current electronics.

I've read all the threads here so we do not need to rehash that.  Just wondering if others out there have FIRST HAND experience with these or other Tekton speakers

Thanks.
corelli
@porscheracer, thank you for the update.  I am glad that you got the satisfactory resolution.
Muzikmann and Snopro,
You two express an interest in the LTA MZ2-S and the Coincident Statement Line Stage (CSL) comparison. Tom (Mac48025) described the differences well and I really appreciate him brining his preamplifier to hear in my system this afternoon.

The MZ2-S was a good match as a preamplifier with the Frankenstein driving Tom’s Double Impacts, transparent, fast and clear with very good detail retrieval. In my system it exhibited the same traits. In direct A/B comparison with the CSL I heard the following areas of improvement with the CSL playing the same music after both were sufficiently warmed up.

1 Dynamic energy, contrast and increased "pop/startle factor"
2 Instrumental weight and presence, the sense of flesh on the bone" noticeable increased.
3 Superior musical ebb and flow, swing and soulfulness, Musicians were more in the room and very tactile with that elusive the "breath of life " aura, or you being in the recording venue. In short, more reach out and touch vibe taking place.
4 Larger scale presentation across the board and particularly with rhythm section instruments i.e.piano, stand up bass and drums very significantly more present and realistic.

I would categorized the MZ2-S as a "good" High End preamplifier.
The CSL would be by relative comparison be categorized as "superb" it is very transparent and very open. The main distinction between the two is noticeably more dynamic force, weight and superior harmonic richness,fuller tone, overtones and texture. The MZ2-S relatively speaking has a leaner and lighter weight/presence and sounds smaller in scale. This made it sound less (but not devoid) emotionally engaging.

To put in proper context the MZ2-S is 1800.00 dollars and weighs about 5 pounds and has a separate small power supply of about 3 pounds.

The CSL is 5500.00 dollars, is 2 chassis and total weight of 70 pounds (power supply chassis weighs 40 pounds).
In my opinion Tom’s Double Impacts would easily reveal the differences due to their resolving ability.
Charles
Gentleman,

I very highly recommend that you put on your short list of very affordable hand made SET amplifiers, the AricAUDIO Transend Series SET KT-120 amplifier.  Kenny had already mentioned on the thread that he was having Aric build him a custom SET 2A3 which I'm sure will be a superlative piece of audio art/performance.

When I setup this review with Aric for hometheatereview.com on this SET amplifier I was a very "Doubting Thomas" because I have never personally liked KT-88, 120, or 150 based amplifiers.  I found them all to be very solid state "ish"  for my ears.  Well, after 10 hours of listening to the Transend SET KT-120, being driven by the Micro-ZOTL through the Ulfberth's I'm patiently shocked how this amplifier sounds!

If I was blindfolded and was asked what type of tube was being used I would swear that it was either a world class SET 300b or possibly a 211 based amplifier.  I have another highly regarded set of SET 300b mono-blocks in-house for review that are great and they retail for 10K.  Plus another thousand or so if you are going to get the best tubes to run in it.  

Well, Aric's amp out performed these mono-blocks and its retail price is $2,350.00.  Totally transparent- oozes mico-details effortlessly, a sound-staging wizard, great tonality, sparkly/sweet highs, silky smooth like a SET is supposed to be, and finally balls to the walls dynamics and the best control over the Ulf's gut pounding lowest octaves.  

Is it better then the Triode Lab SET 2A3?  No, it's a very different presentation of the music almost like comparing apples to oranges. The 2A3 is all about dense color tonality, lush liquidity, more meat on the bones, and oozing of the sound into your room.  The SET Kt-120 is not quite as intimate or romantic, but gives more "clean" leading edges with out cutting your ears, more "kick/pop" to the underlying pulse of the music, not quite as colorful timbres- but wonderful tonality, and control over the bass with an accurate "iron-fist".  They are both superlative, personal taste would decide which one is for you.

Well, I'm still pretty much shocked that I would ever say things like I did above about a KT-120 based amplifier.  However, I had never heard this tube used in a SET design amplifier before.  Aric, now joins my list of very talented designers/builders on the market today.  

Final note:  Rolled in some NOS Sylvania Gold Brand 12AT7's (12au7's, 12ax7's are compatible), instead of  Russian Electric Harmonic current production, and the amp just got that much better!  You can also use KT-88, KT-150, or 6550 power tubes to get different "tastes" in your system and whatever you roll-in/change you will easily hear it through the DI's or Ulf's.  I'm looking forward to trying a pair of NOS Brimer Yellow label 60/60 12AT7's to see what magic will happen in this amplifier.  



   
Forgot to mention that the AricAUDIO SET KT-120 amplifier is a powerhouse SET putting out 20 watts per channel.
@charles1dad  and @mac48025  

Great information and sharing of your demos in both of your respective systems. Very, very helpful. 

Was there a reason why you only used the Franks with the DIs and not the Statement Line Stage + Franks with the DIs when Charles visited you, Tom? Perhaps you did and I don't have it right?