2. speakers
  3. 128578-80822

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
333jeffery
122 posts
 
Mofojo, I definitely prefer the Ulf's over the DI's. The bass alone is a considerable improvement over the Double Impacts. Not only is there more of it, but it's very refined. The Ulf's also do fine detail and nuance that the DI's can't quite match.
Both are great speakers, but the Ulfberhts are on a whole different level.
willgolf
936 posts
 
Jeffrey
I have a pair of Wilson Audio Duette 2's that I absolutely love. It is powered by a Raven Integrated Reflection MK2 amp which produces fantastic sound.  I was intrigued by this conversation and was going to buy the DI's for fun to compare to the Duette 2's.  But now with the Ulf's that is a different story.  At $12k I would have to sell my Duette's.  Obviously the size comparison is monumental.  If you have the experience, what high end speakers would you compare the Ulf's to.  Another reason I am considering the Uhf is that I have a ginormous room.  What speakers did you have before the Ulfs ( not counting the DI).  Is there anyway you could post a video to You Tube?  
vitop
221 posts
 
Willgolf:

I happen to love Wilson speakers. They have many fans and many detractors, but for the life of me I can't understand what there is not to like about their sound. They sound very good to me. I've heard many in their line and obviously I like some more than others, but they all are very musical as far as I am concerned.
vitop
221 posts
 
Jeffrey --

I also wanted to ask another Ulf question. Have you heard any speakers that sound better than the Ulf? And I mean any speaker at any price.
david_ten
5,480 posts
 
@kdude66 @porscheracer @craigl59 @lmswjm @sbayne @bullitt5094

Thanks to all of you who responded to my query (regarding minimal discussion of our source / front end components) with your thoughts and perspectives. Very helpful in expanding my understanding.

Some additional thoughts regarding that post (page 27 closer to the bottom of the page).

Bill: I suggest the speaker expresses rather than "determine[s] the appropriate quality of the other upstream components in a system." Would you agree?

Kenny, You said: "I look at that as most users of the DI’s already have a quality front end either digital or analog and are kinda set using what sounds good to them,..."

This was my implied concern with the original post/question:

’What if we don’t?’

It is difficult for me to imagine that we do, given that we are spending a lot of time, energy, and budgets on amps and preamps. If we believe two parts of the chain need massaging (which is pretty much happening across all DI owners, myself included), why not all parts?

We certainly haven’t spent much time on that end of the equation, so how would we really know?

This falls under that ’philosophical question’ moniker. Additional thoughts?
More to discover