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
almarg's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
almarg
9,670 posts
 
A few years ago one of our members who performs professionally in a classical symphony orchestra posted the following, in this thread.  I would emphasize the words "continuous time weighted average" in his post.

Recently, there was a post on the ICSOM board that I thought I would share the info from. ICSOM is the International Congress of Symphony and Opera Musicians, which consists of the musicians of the major US and some international orchestras.

The topic was How long can a person endure a certain noise level before hearing impairment occurs. As you can imagine, this is a fairly hot topic among symphonic musicians the world over, as it has been proven that we will lose at least 20% of our hearing over the course of our careers. I think audiophiles will also be very interested in the following stats, especially those of you who like to listen very loudly for long periods.

What follows are the current standards for recommended permissible exposure duration for continuous time weighted average noise, according to NIOSH and CDC. Keep in mind this is an average level for continuous exposure, and these numbers may not represent a world wide view of the subject. Basically, for every 3dB beyond 82dB, the permissible exposure time is cut in half before hearing damage will occur.

82dB - 16 hours
85dB - 8 hours
88dB - 4 hours
91dB - 2 hours
94dB - 1 hour
97dB - 30 minutes
100dB - 15 minutes
103dB - 7.5 minutes
106dB - less than 4 minutes
109dB - less than 2 minutes
112dB - less than 1 minute
115dB - less than 30 seconds
Regards,
-- Al
 

craigl59
307 posts
 
Almarg:
Not sure about the word "noise" in your post. Music at 95db from acoustical instruments is not dangerous at all. Noise, however, can be troublesome as loud as 90 db. Am considering "noise" to be random in nature and not periodic as is music.
Regularly play on a piano at 95 db and it is not at all stressful. When I listen to a sound system at the same level, however, it sounds loud -- and can be stressful if there is any noise (=hiss) or distortion.
Know a number of symphonic musicians who are 65+ years old and they hear fine after playing loud symphonies all their life. They do, of course, worry about their sound exposure and take certain precautions.
I share a number of the views above about the dangers of listening to recorded music at the 105-110db level. Have done DB tests with my audio systems and find this dangerously loud.
The more you listen to very loud audio, the more deadened your hearing becomes and you tend to up the volume to recapture the pleasurable sense of "loud." Take an hour off, instead, and return to the level you were listening at -- you will notice how much louder this is than you earlier had thought.
nitrobob
249 posts
 

Al

Everybody that has ever been to a 3 hour rock concert, or a drag, circle, or road course race ( Like Nascar)  ...just flunked. I'm assuming you do none of these . We are not all built alike.. Cigarettes,lack of seat belts and helmets, obesity . There are a lot of things that are a no no . Do you wanna die from it, or go to your grave craving it ...  

shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
I dont think audiologists have a clue. All we know is for sure that super loud prolonged exposure is bad - gunshots, cannon etc  can cause instant damage. Rock concerts are damaging. Another big factor is aging - hearing (like eye sight) deteriorates with age - some much faster than others.

I agree that giving ears a break is crucial. Avoiding loud rock concerts. Also avoiding instantaneous damage from loud explosions is key. It appears that continuous background noise is also bad (engine noise in a mechanical room or factory). 

I suspect ear buds are very bad as low frequencies are trapped in the ear between the bud and ear.

Natural variability in the individual makes it so hard to generalize. 
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 
Hi nitrobob,
To be clear, obviously it's your call as to how loud a volume you prefer listening to music,  no argument.   You are correct, certain people seemingly defy known or established risk factors. For example the person who smoked a pack of cigarettes per day for 60 years and lived to an age of 100 years. It happens.

You have apparently suffered no ill effects to your hearing despite high SPL exposure, congratulations my friend.  110 db SPL is too much for me. As I said before, we all make our choices .
Charles  
More to discover