2. speakers
  3. 189477-20253

Some thoughts on ASR and the reviews

I’ve briefly taken a look at some online reviews for budget Tekton speakers from ASR and Youtube. Both are based on Klippel quasi-anechoic measurements to achieve "in-room" simulations.

As an amateur speaker designer, and lover of graphs and data I have some thoughts. I mostly hope this helps the entire A’gon community get a little more perspective into how a speaker builder would think about the data.

Of course, I’ve only skimmed the data I’ve seen, I’m no expert, and have no eyes or ears on actual Tekton speakers. Please take this as purely an academic exercise based on limited and incomplete knowledge.

1. Speaker pricing.

One ASR review spends an amazing amount of time and effort analyzing the ~$800 US Tekton M-Lore. That price compares very favorably with a full Seas A26 kit from Madisound, around $1,700. I mean, not sure these inexpensive speakers deserve quite the nit-picking done here.

2. Measuring mid-woofers is hard.

The standard practice for analyzing speakers is called "quasi-anechoic." That is, we pretend to do so in a room free of reflections or boundaries. You do this with very close measurements (within 1/2") of the components, blended together. There are a couple of ways this can be incomplete though.

a - Midwoofers measure much worse this way than in a truly anechoic room. The 7" Scanspeak Revelators are good examples of this. The close mic response is deceptively bad but the 1m in-room measurements smooth out a lot of problems. If you took the close-mic measurements (as seen in the spec sheet) as correct you’d make the wrong crossover.

b - Baffle step - As popularized and researched by the late, great Jeff Bagby, the effects of the baffle on the output need to be included in any whole speaker/room simulation, which of course also means the speaker should have this built in when it is not a near-wall speaker. I don’t know enough about the Klippel simulation, but if this is not included you’ll get a bass-lite expereinced compared to real life. The effects of baffle compensation is to have more bass, but an overall lower sensitivity rating.

For both of those reasons, an actual in-room measurement is critical to assessing actual speaker behavior. We may not all have the same room, but this is a great way to see the actual mid-woofer response as well as the effects of any baffle step compensation.

Looking at the quasi anechoic measurements done by ASR and Erin it _seems_ that these speakers are not compensated, which may be OK if close-wall placement is expected.

In either event, you really want to see the actual in-room response, not just the simulated response before passing judgement. If I had to critique based strictly on the measurements and simulations, I’d 100% wonder if a better design wouldn’t be to trade sensitivity for more bass, and the in-room response would tell me that.

3. Crossover point and dispersion

One of the most important choices a speaker designer has is picking the -3 or -6 dB point for the high and low pass filters. A lot of things have to be balanced and traded off, including cost of crossover parts.

Both of the reviews, above, seem to imply a crossover point that is too high for a smooth transition from the woofer to the tweeters. No speaker can avoid rolling off the treble as you go off-axis, but the best at this do so very evenly. This gives the best off-axis performance and offers up great imaging and wide sweet spots. You’d think this was a budget speaker problem, but it is not. Look at reviews for B&W’s D series speakers, and many Focal models as examples of expensive, well received speakers that don’t excel at this.

Speakers which DO typically excel here include Revel and Magico. This is by no means a story that you should buy Revel because B&W sucks, at all. Buy what you like. I’m just pointing out that this limited dispersion problem is not at all unique to Tekton. And in fact many other Tekton speakers don’t suffer this particular set of challenges.

In the case of the M-Lore, the tweeter has really amazingly good dynamic range. If I was the designer I’d definitely want to ask if I could lower the crossover 1 kHz, which would give up a little power handling but improve the off-axis response.  One big reason not to is crossover costs.  I may have to add more parts to flatten the tweeter response well enough to extend it's useful range.  In other words, a higher crossover point may hide tweeter deficiencies.  Again, Tekton is NOT alone if they did this calculus.

I’ve probably made a lot of omissions here, but I hope this helps readers think about speaker performance and costs in a more complete manner. The listening tests always matter more than the measurements, so finding reviewers with trustworthy ears is really more important than taste-makers who let the tools, which may not be properly used, judge the experience.

erik_squires
deep_333
1,372 posts
 

These 2 groups in fact presented pieces of gear as it could be the solution ,on the contrary they should have presented really any pieces of gear as component for an acoustic problem, a problem that cannot be solved anyway either by mere tools or by adding new components . Acoustics parameters controls matter. They supposed "ears/brain/system/room" existence as one so that experience and experimentation could be possible......

 

What i do with my pieces of gear linked as one system in my dedicated room, looking for electrical,mechanical and acoustical basic knowledge is creating my own system...

I mislead no one recommending at each and everyone to study acoustics then they will understand that "timbre" is not a colored illusion for example and they will understand how to use the electrical,mechanical and acoustics parameters to improve their experience.

What is this electromechanical and "acoustical" synthesis/optimization you have done that no one else has been able to do (seemingly)? Can you list the tangible/physical things you did (stuff that went further than the theorycrafting domain)?...I sincerely hope it doesn’t involve a healthy dose of listener self-hypnosis as well! 😬

prof
3,473 posts
 

Amir and ASR don't deserve this much attention.

I find this to be sad.

Nobody needs to agree with everything Amir has said to be able to recognize how much valuable information Amir has produced, both in explaining some of the principles in audio gear, in having provided measurements for many hundreds of products, in taking a look at all sorts of claims by audio manufacturers and seeing if they stand up to more rigorous scrutiny and measurements etc.

It's just sad to be so salty, or incurious, to dismiss Amir and ASR so easily.

mahgister's avatar
mahgister
13,011 posts
 

What is this electromechanical and "acoustical" synthesis/optimization you have done that no one else has been able to do (seemingly)? Can you list the tangible/physical things you did (stuff that went further than the theorycrafting domain)?...I sincerely hope it doesn’t involve a healthy dose of listener self-hypnosis as well! 😬

 

 

As i said in many posts here for 8 years, i experimented...

I described in details my own way to couple/decouple vibrations and decrease resonance in my speakers...It is not transferable for all speakers in all living room ( i had my dedicated room ) but this taught me a lot about mechanical controls of the speakers. The impact of negative resonance and vibrations is staggering and unsuspected by most speakers owners...

I will not describe anew here in a longer post what i described elsewhere...😊

Save if you want the details...

I did the same for electrical noise floor control in my own way.... It is well known that the house/room electrical noise floor level must be under control ...i created my own "tweaks " too (with shungite and copper and quartz) i dont buy anything that cost more than a peanuts butter pot...

i did the same with my two dedicated room... I know basic acoustics by experiments not by buying panels... 😁

In my first room i used a grid of 100 Helmholtz resonators for example mechanically tuned by ears in specific location to modify the pressure zones distribution... The location around listening position and around speaker A and speaker B was important...

i did many others things... But i cannot repeat all this in details here...Some will kill me for the post lenght...And some narrow mind will mock my use of other devices...

 

What i learned is that any relatively low cost system from 1,000 to 20,000 bucks with a minimal synergy quality, then well chosen, when they are embedded in these three working dimensions, mechanical,electrical and acoustical, they can gave their peak optimal working and reach their maximum working point.

This is enough to reach what i called : audiophile minimal acoustical satisfaction threshold...

Any costlier system if it is not well embedded in these three dimensions will be less interesting at worst or at best will be rivalled in S.Q. by a less refined design or less costly one...

Acoustics basic, mechanical and electrical basic knowledge rules audio , not price tags of the gear...

Creativity matter more than money...

And know that acoustics definitions and parameters controls had nothing to do with placebo and self hypnosis...

Timbre is defined by 5 factors at least , modify one in one direction or in the inverse direction and the timbre will change... No placebo here, it is acoustics principles at work... If you modify the reverberation time of your room by modifying the balance between absorption and reflection on some plane you will perceive a change in the experience... If you act in reverse you will perceive another change etc... there is no self hypnosis in experiments...

😊

 

Last thing : is it easy to do and learn ?

No i did it because i am retired... I did it full time for 2 years... Before that i was ignorant and frustrated as many here because i never love any gear system i owned anyway... I modified all my speakers and all my headphones with each time improvement ... But it was not enough ...And i was frustrated by my unability to pay for a very costlier one...I felt my audio system was anything but a stopgap...

When all parameters are balanced in a system/room you are no longer in a stopgap system. because the system work optimally... For sure you may upgrade it... But now it will be very costly to really upgrade and it will be less tempting too because when the S.Q. is optimal we listen music and forgot the sound...

 

All had changed when i learned by experiments how to work in these three dimensions : mechanical,electrical and acoustical...

For sure my speakers are low cost, i modified them with Helmholtz principle and now they are metamorphosed in a good piece of gear ( i hated them so much i never used them for music for 10 years) now they are my choice speakers... 😊

for my headphone i was lucky the laso one i bought was the best design and the more complex one ever make... It was my ninth headphone( i dislike all headphones even after my successfull modificatiopns) But this one is so refined one the only hybrid ever made with a grid of tune Helmholtz resonators inside a dual acoustic chamber, i was lucky to buy it... But it takes me 6 months of experiments to optimize it... it is the AKG K340 ... i even read the Dr. Gorike patent to unsderrstand this headphone ... i will not repeat all here ... 😊

 

The goal of my posts is motivate people to be creative if they had time and room for this... my goal is to inform them that it is not necessary at all to invest ton of money... it is more useful and more fun to study and experiment...

 Some people with very costly system think i am deluded... but those who are deluded are those ignoring what is acoustics...

I am more interested by hearing theory than by reviews of gear ...

 

my best to you...

I apologize if i cannot repeat all i ever wrote here ... but the principle is the more important... Each one will use the same principles in his own way...

 

 

 

 

 

mlsstl
1,436 posts
 

@botrytis -- I was responding to a post that was effectively complaining about how much attention ASR was getting. I simply pointed out that ASR’s original review wasn’t the cause of all that attention -- it was Tekton’s response.

The original review appeared in October 2023 and drew about 150 comments and went dormant in a few weeks. To my knowledge, no other online audio forum made any comments about the review at that time

ONLY when Eric got involved with his threats and allegations months later (Feb 2024) did the subject explode. The ASR thread is now well over 2,500 comments and additional threads have sprung up on other forums. Note this thread on Audiogon -- and other discussions on other forums -- didn’t start until a few weeks ago.

I don’t buy that "any publicity is good publicity" as a universal truth. I don’t think its worked much in Tekton’s favor for prospective customers. But, opinions are a dime a dozen.

nonoise's avatar
nonoise
10,836 posts
 

This is like a fight in an old folks home. 

More to discover