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
@greg22lz
I am not sure if you understand grannyring's point.  He is only pointing out that people should expect to hear different sound opinions from others based on the frequent changes to parts on the DI speakers.  While you seem to have a problem with Bill's scrutiny, which came about because he chose to mod his, we should be grateful and lucky to know this, so that we don't blame people's upstream components so much like it has happened on this thread, when someone complains about what they hear with the DI's. 

For me, I just want this speaker manufacturer to succeed in that he is bringing stellar and affordable speakers to the market. However, I hope he takes this in a positive way, and perhaps allow more time on newer designs, and to settle on parts/ sound before launching them.
Wide-polar is for primarily the in-wall version of the Double Impact for home theater and the folks that want a wider off-axis polar response. Background music, room size, unable to toe-in the speaker are all examples of where the wider off-axis might be preferred.

Regarding all of the chatter about the mods being done on here. Every facet of this speaker was carefully thought through and it concerns me when people say how much they’ve "improved" upon the speaker. I’m not entirely on board with this. Especially, for the ones that do not have access to scientific equipment to show everyone exactly what they’ve done to the speaker.

For example, the swapping out of the 10" woofers... accurate simulations and measurements will prove one 'mod' spoken of on here will sacrifice extreme deep bass extension and yield higher mid-bass output. Therefore, the system is now something much different and some of the original ’spirit’ of the design is compromised. Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to say the speakers are now different over claiming an outright improvement? Sound is subjective, and I have a hunch not everyone will like it. To be entirely fair... the DSP processing will clean everything up and from that angle about any 10" woofer off the shelf will fit the bill. The problem here is that some of us are pure analog and any changes here will be far more noticeable so extra care is needed when anything is changed.

It’s key to note: good loudspeaker design tends to be primarily about evaluating trade-off’s and what you can do with the sum-total of the parts. I could use the same aforementioned 10" driver in all Double Impacts produced, and have considered it. In my opinion, overall tonal balance, warmth and access to a bit more deep extension all directed me to go with the 10" driver we are using today.

In my professional opinion, it’s more appropriate to for those saying they’ve "successfully completed a ’mod’ to this design" to say they’ve changed the speaker dramatically over "dramatically improving" the speaker.

For those wanting more we have the DI SE. The speaker sounds fantastic and the ’spirit’ of the Double Impact design is intact. All transducers incorporate the biggest improvements possible with drives built to my requested specs; with cast frames for less flux leakage, a bigger motor, reversed venting and a rigid dust cap.

Musicmann, thanks for your comments, and yes... you’re speakers are sounding exactly as I intended them to and they should be sounding really good.

Eric Alexander - audio designer



@muzikmann.  The question was rhetorical, and I actually have not seen posts to this extent evaluating every aspect of a component builders' methods or reasoning! Have you? I think what I really see here is people love the DI's and are thinking about them in a deep way . Exciting, isn't it?
@tektondesign
Thanks for taking time to clarify things on this thread - it really helps!!  I do not own your speakers yet.  I am considering the SEs, and I am working on adding a dedicated room in my basement first.
@greg22lz,
But Bill was NOT putting down the DIs other than making people aware to accept other opinions regarding sound since there are variants of these speakers with different parts. Is that a bad thing for him to say? Most of us or posters on this thread are here because of a GOOD thing: great sounding speakers for less $$$. Does that mean some can’t pass on meaningful/useful information to others here or make constructive criticism about the speakers?