Hi, this is Ezra, owner of the ulfbhert Be's to which my dear friend Tejay was referring. I have also heard the regular ulfbhert speakers as compared to my beryllium ulfbherts . I find it amazing as to how men perceive and interpret sound differently. first, allow me to give a brief description of my room with which I have lived for twenty years and am most familiar with. my room is 15 ft wide by 26 ft deep by 8 ft high. it is cement on dirt with bank carpet. it is 6ft under ground. not small, but not nearly as massive as Tejay's room, which I have visited many times. I have been quite fortunate as to have such industrial luminaries as, Magico's Alon Wolf, Albert Von Schwiekert, of Von Schweikert speaker company, Barry Ober formerly of JL audio Clement Perry of stereo times and many others , all stating that my room is one of the finest they had ever heard. I have heard the regular ulfbherts on different occasions, and I do find quite a difference. First consider the differences in the materials, cloth vs metal. by the very nature there is an undeniable difference. Just consider the molecular structure of metal and cloth. In my opinion,to deliberately attempt to get them to sound alike, let alone identical, would be a monumental scientific task. To my hearing, the beryllium is quite a bit faster and much more extended and cleaner, however both designs are quite musical. Herein comes preference , or possibly budget. I think Eric Alexander to be quite a genius in his abilities and accomplishments. I think him to be to quite astute. As to double the cost, go through excruciating design changes just to get the same results? I personally would not insult his intelligence. Both speakers, in my opinion are ground breakin, sonically competing way above their price point. As a matter of fact, I sold a $70,000.00 pair of Sonus Faber Lilium's and replaced them with the double impact se's. Why? because in my opinion the double impacts were sonically superior. the ulfbherts? another league. However I think wherever you go within the Tekton line you win. just my opinion, I have no desire to bicker or fight. we are all entitled to our own opinion, this is simply mine. With due respect. Cheer's, Ezra
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.
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.
- ...
- 5692 posts total
- 5692 posts total