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
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.
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.
@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?
David,

You are asking some valid questions here and I will answer with my opinion for me.

I currently don't listen to much analog at all and see no reason to change anything with it.

I have used a fair amount of different Dac's over a 5 to 7 yr period and feel like I have upgraded in sound overall with what I use now.

Direct stream
Direct stream Jr
Yggy

The Yggdrasil is the newest and was mainly bought to compare with the Jr and be used in my 2nd system.I use the direct stream in my main system and I haven't tried the Yggy there.Maybe I need to and maybe different cabling as well needs to be tried.

The direct stream with the latest Huron software is the best Dac that I have ever heard or owned,do you have any suggestions.

Best,

Kenny.
Kenny, my post wasn't and isn't about suggestions for DACs. Your PS Audio Direct Stream with the Huron update is widely praised and recognized; and I think there are others on this thread that are also very happy with theirs, as you are.

I'm in no way suggesting that we should be unhappy with what we currently have.

I'm just surprised that the front ends appear to be static or status quo for most of us. This strikes me as odd when we (MYSELF included) are working on replacing preamps and amps. 

And this is in spite of a truly remarkable whole lot of 'whole lot of' going on in the digital arena.