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
lancelock
1,084 posts
 
@david_ten , I enjoyed a visit to LTA yesterday. Mark said he would have his amps in 3 different rooms at Axpona. I think the plan is to introduce the UltraLinear there. The new cases from Fern and Robey will arrive in about two weeks and then they will be building and selling the production model. Unlike the ZOTL40 and similar to Berning’s ZH230, it uses TV sweep tubes instead of EL34. The UL makes my DI sing like no other amp I’ve tried thus far.
david_ten
5,480 posts
 
Charles, it's difficult for me to understand your and Tom's findings to be mainly "listener taste" and "room" dependant. I can, however, accept system compatibility or optimization (or lack of) within a system playing a role, but to a degree. 

For example, 'anemic' is well, anemic. : )  To me, that's (fairly) unequivocal. 

This would be good to figure out. Perhaps those who have different and positive results with the MZ2 as a linestage can offer their thoughts as well?
david_ten
5,480 posts
 
@lancelock   April isn't that far off. Thanks for the heads-up. Chicago in mid April sounds more appealing, than Chicago in February. 
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,230 posts
 
David,
I referenced listener taste/preference because it’s an unavoidable factor in that people "do"hear and interpret differently.
1. Clean and neutral to one listener is dry and analytical to another 2. Full bodied and tonally/harmonically rich to one listener is gratuitous and colored to another.

People do have notable differences in perception even when sitting side by side listening to the exact same system. I’ve had this type of experience. I am not suggesting my interpretation was the correct one, just that someone else heard something quite different from what I heard. It happens.
Charles

david_ten
5,480 posts
 
Charles, I get that and I understood what both you and Tom were communicating. Your most recent response makes that even clearer in the brilliant way you (and only a few others) are able to. And I fully accept your findings and results with the MZ2. 

I also believe that both of you are reasonable listeners and have reasonable assessments. Therefore 'anemic' (used as an example, since it was brought up) is likely anemic. I don't see how a component can somehow 'change it's spots' for lack of a better phrase. 

I'm trying to understand 'anemic' in this context...in other words, it wasn't something that was subtly better or preferred or marginally 'less' in some way or manner.

My base-line for this is that differences in quality components exist, but are not drastic. Perhaps I need to re-assess that base-line?
More to discover