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
Charles and Tom, Thanks.

In your case Charles, would you say that your personal reference for 'musicality' and what you prefer is based on your time in the analog realm which has led you to your choices in system build and synergy? (Tom, I'm not sure if you are also previously coming from a primarily analog based system/experience?)

I'm asking because I'm trying to get a feel for what my benchmark is or could be. I did spend most of my initial time in audio with tube based systems, but did leave those behind for a number of reasons. This 'second' coming into audio for me has been all solid state. Also for reference, I've never had the pleasure of owning analog gear because I came to this country in the digital age and had no records to begin with nor the means to acquire them. So a Sony Walkman it was. :)
David,
I listen to more digital now than I ever have and I would say the percentage is 70 to 30'percent digital to analog.The records I listen to are some that have never been released on cd or the record has better sound than my particular cd.
But with the better Dac's we have now I find myself spinning a lesser amount of records.

My benchmark to adjust and to critically judge my system is about a dozen different songs that I know very well and they are all digital for the easier use and more solid repeatability.

Best of luck to you,

Kenny.
Hello David,
Here’s my background. I grew up in a very music oriented family, I played trumpet beginning at age 10, my mother, both grandmothers and a brother played the piano and another brother played the trombone. There was much live music in our home. My father loved music and the record player seemed to always be playing Duke Ellington recordings.

Live instruments were my reference by default. I grew up in the vinyl records era and stuck with this medium for decades as early digital just didn’t move me. Eventually I discovered digital components that sounded natural and believable. The genre of jazz has always been well recorded for the most part (IMO) on Redbook CD. I just had to aquire the right digital gear.

I don’t miss my previous analog system although it was very satisfying, I’m very content with what I currently have as its natural and engaging which meets my objective.
Charles

Honestly, I think that you can have tube components that sound bad as well as sound good. The very same with solid state components. You can have good and bad.

You can find stuff that finds great with both types. Some people may have a preference for one or another (hence sounds better to them), but I think you can have someone that would like just the opposite. I think once you hit a certain level, you start to split hairs, but that's just my opinion.
No, actually you can’t have tube components that sound bad. They all sound good. What you can have, however, is people that are all thumbs, people that can't hear and room acoustics that make everything sound bad.