I think the only commonality between the two is the word ugly. 

I am a 'form follows function' sort of guy, so, if the design does what they say (it makes structural and acoustic sense), then I find nothing ugly about them.

Also, they mention near the beginning of the vid, that they are still in their development stage, so the the final version as it will be released, has not been seen yet.

I just read the Tekton patent. Good luck enforcing it, both for prior art (McIntosh and others) as well as lack of specificity of what makes the Tekton patent special.

I’m not a patent attorney but this reads like an attempt to get a patent by obfuscation.

PS - As I've said I've never heard a Tekton and I think there is quite a bit of innovation both in getting SB Acoustics to make them affordable and to using the array like they have.  Is it patentable?  Well only if you consider prior art and explain why it's new or different than others.

@jallan I currently own a pair of completely refurbished DQ10's that I use in my shop. I replaced the black three leg stands with much more attractive solid walnut stands. I still think they are very well designed handsome speakers...sound pretty damn good too!

Just because they charge rapey prices for replacement drivers doesn't mean they aren't cheap.

08-15-2022 at 02:19pm 

The Tweeters used in Tektons top models are Scanspeak.  Not cheap drivers.  Even the Eminence pro woofers are their best driver.  The problem with Tekton is an absolutely horrible cabinet with extreme resonance and all the drivers back waves firing into the box without sub enclosures, damping and bracing.  I've owned a few pairs and can tell you it's a novel design that is fun to listen too but lacks refinement.  EXACTLY.....for the $.....The "music" they produce is untouchable.....A real fun speaker you can enjoy for hours at a time and Affordable.....Cabinets suck but I don't listen to the "cabinets."