Golden ear triton 1 vs tekton double impact speakers

You are a funny guy, Kosst.

While I appreciate a good AMT, I've never heard GE speakers use one. Also, having measured them several times, I have no idea what this artifact is you speak of, do you have a paper to point me to? 
Also, while the issue of comb filtering has been thrown out, there's a great deal of debate about measurement techniques in terms of actual listening location. If comb filtering occurs, it is incredibly easy to hear it. Move your head. Come filtering would cause rapid changes in frequency response. No one who has heard a tekton has complained about it. Therefore, the point seems like poor matching of theory to perception and measurement. Not good engineering at all.

Best,
E

You’ve never heard a Golden Ear speaker with an air-motion transformer? They all use air-motion transformers.

That’s not what I meant to say. I meant that I’ve never heard GE use a good one. I’ve heard the Triton one and it was awful. The FR response explains what I heard. The severe and deliberate coloration in the top octave sounds like an ear drill to me. This is possibly a good match for those with matching hearing loss in that octave however. To me it was not only bright, but severely compressed.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/goldenear-technology-triton-one-loudspeaker-measurements

As for those anomalies caused by the grill, no, my Mundorf AMT’s do no such thing.

Golden Ear, like  others, sometimes favors having peaks and valleys to make them appear to stand out in detail in some areas, so no wonder they would pick an AMT with such issues. 

Wow. This reads like the script from a high school argument from the late 1960s about whether Ford V-8s are better than Chevy's.

Every well regarded speaker that's ever been made has its fans and its detractors. Name a speaker, any speaker, and it won't take you long to find people that think its terrible. 

I've read nice things about the Tekton, but never heard them, so have no comment. I happen to have a set of Triton 7s and enjoy them immensely. I think they are a great buy for the money. But, I decided a long time ago that I did NOT want to be an "audiophile." I just happen to enjoy music and also have audio as a hobby.  Pity that some need to get so petty about what makes others happy.

I have heard both these speakers. In fact,, I happen to have both in my dedicated theater/listening room right now. I know I'm very late to this party which seems to have devolved into pointless and meaningless insults about concepts the writers have no understanding of whatsoever. I'm not going to address any of those issues here and simply give you my impressions as an experienced listener to shed some light on the differences and benefits of each of these speakers.
First, I long ago had experience with speakers with built in subs and I was very unhappy with them. It took a long time before I would consider looking at one of these again but the reviews and awards for GE's Triton series required a more serious look-see. 
I've had the Triton 1s for quite a while now and I like them, especially for home theater. 
The benefits;
-they more than replace having separate subs which can be a space saver
-very good full range sound
-I liked that I didn't have to constantly adjust the sub output dependent on volume or source

Unfortunately, for my purposes, the list of shortcomings is notably longer;
-due to the design of my theater room, the speakers had to be brought well into the room and away from the back wall to perform their best.
-the low end is great for home theater but not as much for music. It lacks the punch and detail for pleasurable music listening and is muddier than one might hope for.
-I found the high end very good but the midrange seems to have a void in it no matter the source components or material. In some songs and try some Eagles out on these for example, as soon as the vocals started it was like the speaker from a clock radio cut in. It's very noticeable especially when you're familiar with your music collection on lots of equipment over many years. I found there was an overall lack of fullness with big emphasis on the low and high ends. Overall, I would still call it very good.
-It really doesn't matter in my particular space but not a particularly attractive speaker

The Tekton DI benefits
-remarkable full range sound from deep down, fully and completely, coherently, through the high end
-the low end is very impressive, accurate, quick and can't wipe the smile off my face satisfying
-very forgiving respecting placement
-works well with all kinds of gear
-very easy to listen to at any volume, any genre. These speakers never seem to give up or breakup
-excellent for music listening and would work well in most home theaters without a sub

The shortcomings
-as with the Tritons, not a particularly attractive speaker but you can have them just about any way you want them so this can be overcome, at a cost.
-the most serious audiophiles might hope for a more clinical presentation, if only for certain recordings
-if you've got the space and equipment, you may want to add a sub for home theater for those subterranean frequencies you can only feel.

My conclusion - these are both exceptional speakers for the money but in my world, the Double Impact comes out well ahead. 90% of people are not going to need or miss a separate sub with these in their home theater and they're simply outstanding and "can't wipe the smile off my face" satisfying to listen to music through. They're very forgiving in placement which makes them easier to get to locations that look good and not just sound good. If your emphasis is far and away on home theater, you may find the Tritons more satisfying. If you like to cover both music and home theater with a single product or a dedicated music system, you'll certainly enjoy the DIs

Hopefully this is helpful to those considering these speakers. It's a good comparison as these are similar size, similar price, smart and effective engineering in both.