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
There's another way to look at power and the DIs. Eric specifies the power handling of the speakers at 400 watts. That's what I use to judge how large an amplifier is required.
@porscheracer - I agree now that I'm listening to another amp and have a decent amount of headroom.

@mac48025 - I will try out the ZOTL40 next.
Agreed, overkill wasn't the right word to use, but 40 watts certainly isn't necessary with the DI's......that doesn't mean having more wattage is a bad thing either. The ZOTL 10 would be plenty for the DI's, yet Terry London prefers using the MZ2 alone over the MZ2/ZOTL 40 combination and prefers the MZ2 with the Triode Lab 2A3 SET amp the most. Until living with one watt driving the DI's I would have never believed it would suffice let alone outperform the 220 watt SS monoblocks I was using before going to tubes. While the big amps were certainly louder, more dynamic and sounded very good, to my ears they didn't come close to the musicality and realism of the MZ2......especially with good NOS tubes.

Youre right Craig, Eric prefers large SS amps with his speakers. I believe he recommended Bryston to me. I don't dislike SS amps, I especially like the dynamic slam they can provide, but over the years I've gone from the likes of the ARC D400, Levinson 333 and Odyssey Kismet Monoblocks to small tube amps. Eventually I'll have an SS system for HT and rocking out to in addition to my DI/tube system. 
Mac: The power handling figure provided by Eric is not his preference; it is the result of the drivers chosen and his computation of those drivers sounding within the crossover design. It is clear that you like small tube amps and I have read and benefited from your perspective. But let's distinguish between facts and preference. Porscheracer is correct in referring to Physics and Eric's specifications are facts.
No disagreement from me at all Craig. I agreed that using large amps certainly isn't a bad thing and that I spent many years going that route......and enjoyed doing so and that my current preference are small tubes amps. The great thing about the DI's is that they sound great going either way. As we all know its the quality of watts that matters more than the quantity.......my budget doesn't allow me the luxury of a quality 400 watt tube amp :) That would be something to hear with the DI's! I've always been of the mind that you can't have too many watts, as long as they are quality watts and I still have trouble believing how good the MZ2 sounds driving the DI's. It's as much of an endorsement of the DI's as it is of the MZ2......the DI's will sound amazingly good with any type of quality amp. I agree that physics and facts reign supreme and am not ignoring them but in the end it all comes down to our personal preferences. Here's a toast to enjoying our systems no matter the configuration.......I'll be doing so delving into the Leonard Bernstein collection tonight!