Looking at Tekton Double impacts SE. Anybody have any experience with them?

[Matthew J Poes]

The Salks I heard at AXPONA were one of my favorite speakers at the entire show. I would happily buy them as the mains in my own system.

I believe this is what I heard:
http://www.salksound.com/model.php?model=Song3 Encore
Sounded great.

This was an image I took of the Salks I heard. Look at that wood finish!

The Impact monitors were in the Parasound room. I spent some time before the show started listening to this system. I enjoyed the system and thought the speakers sounded really nice. It's hard to judge at a show and the Parasound guys are great, so who knows, could have been the speakers or the company that left the fond memory.

I know a lot of people have been skeptical of the tweeter array that he developed for this. If you look at John Atkinson measurements for these, they measured really well:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/tekton-design-impact-monitor-loudspeaker-measurements

A show is a notoriously bad place to draw any firm conclusions (as @shadyJ reminded me many times), but from that show memory, the Salks were the better speaker of the two, but both were among my favorites at the show.

Another speaker that really impressed me was the LSA LS-20 Statements. I have been meaning to contact Underwood about a review, but I've been too busy. At the show, they sounded excellent, especially for the money.
https://thelsagroup.com/products/lsa-20-statement

A pair of those 24" subwoofers wouldn't be too bad either.
These speakers were engineered by Dan Wiggins, he designed every aspect including the drivers.

 

[ryanosaur]

The Salks I heard at AXPONA were one of my favorite speakers at the entire show. I would happily buy them as the mains in my own system.

I believe this is what I heard:
http://www.salksound.com/model.php?model=Song3 Encore
Sounded great.
View attachment 27052
This was an image I took of the Salks I heard. Look at that wood finish!

The Impact monitors were in the Parasound room. I spent some time before the show started listening to this system. I enjoyed the system and thought the speakers sounded really nice. It's hard to judge at a show and the Parasound guys are great, so who knows, could have been the speakers or the company that left the fond memory.
View attachment 27051
I know a lot of people have been skeptical of the tweeter array that he developed for this. If you look at John Atkinson measurements for these, they measured really well:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/tekton-design-impact-monitor-loudspeaker-measurements

A show is a notoriously bad place to draw any firm conclusions (as @shadyJ reminded me many times), but from that show memory, the Salks were the better speaker of the two, but both were among my favorites at the show.

Another speaker that really impressed me was the LSA LS-20 Statements. I have been meaning to contact Underwood about a review, but I've been too busy. At the show, they sounded excellent, especially for the money.
https://thelsagroup.com/products/lsa-20-statement
View attachment 27053
A pair of those 24" subwoofers wouldn't be too bad either.
These speakers were engineered by Dan Wiggins, he designed every aspect including the drivers.

Admittedly, I really enjoyed talking to Eric from Tekton, and I really appreciate his desire to innovate. I’ve read so many people say without listening that there is no way the tweeter away can work... but everybody that has listened says it works great! I tend to believe the latter is true. I do hope I get the opportunity to hear them sometime.
I have no second thoughts though, with my decision to go Phil 3 + BMRs... and a few extras to round me out while I wait.

 

[Matthew J Poes]

Admittedly, I really enjoyed talking to Eric from Tekton, and I really appreciate his desire to innovate. I’ve read so many people say without listening that there is no way the tweeter away can work... but everybody that has listened says it works great! I tend to believe the latter is true. I do hope I get the opportunity to hear them sometime.
I have no second thoughts though, with my decision to go Phil 3 + BMRs... and a few extras to round me out while I wait.

There is plenty of prior art for tweeter arrays like that. Bessel had an array that looked similar if I recall. It helps control directivity. To minimize comb filtering you need to cross the outer tweeters so they don’t operate full range. There are a few other tricks to make it work in the crossover. I don’t know this, but suspect this is a variation of such a Bessel Array.

 

[ryanosaur]

There is plenty of prior art for tweeter arrays like that. Bessel had an array that looked similar if I recall. It helps control directivity. To minimize comb filtering you need to cross the outer tweeters so they don’t operate full range. There are a few other tricks to make it work in the crossover. I don’t know this, but suspect this is a variation of such a Bessel Array.

Yes. I don't know the details from a true speaker designer perspective, though I did read the patent. Nothing much there that I could really have an A-ha moment with. I do know the center tweeter is The tweeter, and the 6 around are the Midrange array... with the 6-tweeter array set to run much fuller range than normal, with the idea being that the much lighter vibrating mass of the tweeter will outperform any other Mid-range cone in duplicating the sound and harmonics of the source instruments/voices/etc. Then depending on the speaker, he uses both "Mid-Bass" drivers and woofers. My general understanding is that for all drivers, Eric prefers very lightweight cones for the quickness of their response and similarity to the "vibrating mass" of the source.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

t's t

I've owned and listened to a *lot*. At the high end of ownership would include products like the B&W 801 Nautilus s, and at the high end of extended listening the McIntosh XRT2k.

I've also had the opportunity to hear several different Salks (and I own Phil 2s)

My favorite speakers are my Salks (SCSTs). Truthfully, I'm not sure how much I'd even want to move myself up the chain from there as I pair with a sub (this is the 802+Sub > 800 without B&W argument). They are by far the most beautiful, and tied with other extremely flat speakers for sound (reminding me of my 801 matrix and Infinity RSIIIb in all but LF extension).

[FWIW: the XRT2k was beautiful until you got to upper frequencies. I think that once the frequencies became localizeable beyond a certain level, the fact that the size of the line array was larger than the imaging size caused them to sound "oddly diffuse". ]

I am not personally a huge fan of the shape of the Phil2/3, preferring the less-deep towers of the Salks; but you do get a very similar sound.

JerryLove. Now that's the name I haven't heard in a long long time....

 

[Swerd]

The OP owns Thiel 3.6 speakers and is thinking of replacing them. They are certainly very good speakers. What is a worthy replacement? He has already listened to:

Golden Ear Triton reference​

B&W 804​

Legacy Audio Focus SE​

Legacy Signature SE​

So far, he seems to like the sound of both of those Legacy speakers better than the others. Within that list, I tend to agree.

And he wonders about the Tekton Double Impact SE speakers. I haven't heard them, but in the past I did hear Tekton towers; I believe they were Pendragons. They were very large towers and, if I remember, they cost about $2k per pair. It was late in the day at an audio show – admittedly those conditions were not the best – the room was small and I was tired from seeing too many other speakers. There was nothing obviously wrong with them, but overall, I was unimpressed by their sound. I tried to listen if there was a mid range suck out between those large (10"?) woofers and the 3 dome tweeters, but the music selections they played didn't reveal that, if it existed. In general, I found the widespread internet buzz about them didn't match what I heard that day. I've always been turned off by Tekton's willingness to promote high-priced options such as exotic crossover parts or binding posts. As a result, I've ignored them since. I could be wrong, but I doubt if any Tektons are worthy replacements for Thiel 3.6s.

Matthew J Poes mentioned (above) Salk Song3 Encores. I have also heard them recently at an audio show, and I liked them very much. They certainly also belong on the list of speakers the OP should consider. They're less expensive than the Salk SS8.

 

[Kvn_Walker]

I think part of the reason he likes the Legacy offerings the most is because he wants that "punch you in the gut" bass feeling that only those multiple large drivers can provide.

I can relate- for as much as I have loved my Revel F30's, every time I would listen to the SOS Band's "Tell Me" and that 'heartbeat' note was only heard and not felt, I felt a longing. It was made worse just because I knew how that note was supposed to feel, since I have owned speakers with 15's in the past. Not good bass (raises hand as owner of Realistic Mach 3's and Infinity SM-155's in the distant past), but I had become accustomed to the sensation, the impact, of certain notes in certain songs.

All that said, the Encore might have great accurate bass but it may not possess the same "oomph" as the OP gets from his 3.6's with the added passive radiator.

 

[Ridire Fáin]

I think part of the reason he likes the Legacy offerings the most is because he wants that "punch you in the gut" bass feeling that only those multiple large drivers can provide.

I can relate- for as much as I have loved my Revel F30's, every time I would listen to the SOS Band's "Tell Me" and that 'heartbeat' note was only heard and not felt, I felt a longing. It was made worse just because I knew how that note was supposed to feel, since I have owned speakers with 15's in the past. Not good bass (raises hand as owner of Realistic Mach 3's and Infinity SM-155's in the distant past),but I had become accustomed to the sensation, the impact, of certain notes in certain songs.

All that said, the Encore might have great accurate bass but it may not possess the same "oomph" as the OP gets from his 3.6's with the added passive radiator.

To Swerd as well. The program material I primarily listen to is not shall we say "Polite" music. So yes you are right the Legacy product has the stronger appeal to me than the Golden Ear. T-Ref may arguably be more accurate, but they do not slam you like the Focus and Sig III. Both Legacies to me are a more of (for lack of decent way to describe them) I am not afraid to get in your face type system. They do what they do with authority. Which is a bonus with rock and metal music. Much like the 3.6 currently does. Perhaps too much of a good thing for some, but I like it.

In the day I was auditioning these, I also listened to, Alon IV, Hales 3, and the Von Schweikert VR4. (Gods I am dating myself here.) Big tower that could also move a lot of air. Despite the excellence of these manufacturer's design I kept going back to the Thiel because of the tight bass, and that punchines. I also at that time listened to Joseph Audio, Maggie 3.5, Inner-sound, and Martin Logan. Of all the things I auditioned, only the 3.6 came in at the price-point I wanted and could believably convey the full audio spectrum. They are not a full 20hz to 20,000Khz system for sure, but in my room I do get audible output to at least the 25 Hz range. Of all the things I explored, the bass out of 3.6 did not sound bloated or rolled off. Hence the decision that they were the right speaker for me.

Another side note that you folks are picking up on. I do favor the sound out of systems that use a sealed enclosure or passive radiator. In general, I often find the sound out of ported designs bit too fat and sluggish. Especially on drums where they have to be very deft in conveying the higher pitch of a stick hitting the skin of the tom and then the boom.

 

[Swerd]

The OP seems (to me) to want both potent bass and mid range detail & resolution. Mid range detail & resolution seem to be harder to talk about than well-damped & potent bass. In my opinion, the mid range qualities are most important, and are more often lacking in speakers. Others, of course, have widely varying opinions of this.

All that said, the Encore might have great accurate bass but it may not possess the same "oomph" as the OP gets from his 3.6's with the added passive radiator.

A passive radiator adds no more bass oomph than a properly tuned port. In fact, a passive radiator is essentially the same as a wide and very shallow port. When you design a ported cabinet or one with a passive radiator, mathematically they are treated identically. When you design a sealed bass cabinet, the math is different. It depends entirely on what cabinet size and bass alignment a bass driver needs to best deliver well-damped bass.

 

[Swerd]

In the day I was auditioning these [Thiel 3.6s], I also listened to, Alon IV, Hales 3, and the Von Schweikert VR4. (Gods I am dating myself here.) Big tower that could also move a lot of air. Despite the excellence of these manufacturer's design I kept going back to the Thiel because of the tight bass, and that punchines. I also at that time listened to Joseph Audio, Maggie 3.5, Inner-sound, and Martin Logan.

In speaker cabinet design talk, tight punchy bass = low Q and well damped bass. It costs more to do that right. Clearly Thiel understood that.

Do you remember which Joseph Audio model you heard? I've heard them at audio shows. I liked the speakers, but not their prices.

Another side note that you folks are picking up on. I do favor the sound out systems that used a sealed enclosure or passive radiator. In general, I often find the sound out of ported designs bit too fat and sluggish. Especially on drums where they have to be very deft in conveying the higher pitch of a stick hitting the skin of the tom and then the boom.

Too many ported designs sound a bit too fat and sluggish because the speaker manufacturers choose to built them that way. They get exaggerated bass (high Q) usually in a smaller cabinet, but the response tends to ring on and on (poor damping). When people talk about fast or slow bass, they mean this. It's not so much about bass response that starts fast, it's about bass that stops fast. A ported bass cabinet can be designed properly to deliver good sounding bass. So can passive radiator, sealed, or transmission line designs.

I would be glad if you somehow got to hear some Salk speakers. He goes to an annual audio show each year in Chicago. Jim Salk definitely understands how to properly achieve tight & punchy bass. Many of his designs with smaller bass drivers feature mass-loaded transmission line cabinets, but the Salk designs that reach lower than ~30 Hz, are either ported or passive radiator designs. I think you should ask Jim Salk about owners nearer you who welcome potential buyers to listen to their speakers. He keeps a list of names for that purpose.

Are you in Minnesota? Jim is originally from there too, St. Cloud I believe. Now he works out of Pontiac, Michigan. I've ordered from him three times now, and I can't recommend him enough. He is a real pleasure to talk with and to do business with. In case you haven't noticed , I'm one of his most ardent unpaid fan boys. I do the same for Dennis Murphy.

 

[ryanosaur]

To Swerd as well. The program material I primarily listen to is not shall we say "Polite" music. So yes you are right the Legacy product has the stronger appeal to me than the Golden Ear. T-Ref may arguably be more accurate, but they do not slam you like the Focus and Sig III. Both Legacies to me are a more of (for lack of decent way to describe them) I am not afraid to get in your face type system. The do waht they do with authority. Which is a bonus with rock and metal music. Much like the 3.6 currently does. Perhaps too much of a good thing for some, but I like it.

In the day I was auditioning these, I also listened to, Alon IV, Hales 3, and the Von Schweikert VR4. (Gods I am dating myself here.) Big tower that could also move a lot of air. Despite the excellence of these manufacturer's design I kept going back to the Thiel because of the tight bass, and that punchines. I also at that time listened to Joseph Audio, Maggie 3.5, Inner-sound, and Martin Logan. Of all the things I auditioned, only the 3.6 came in at the price-point I wanted and could believably convey the full audio spectrum. They are not a full 20hz to 20,000Khz system for sure, but in my room I do get audible output to at least the 25 Hz range. Of all the things I explored, the bass out of 3.6 did not sound bloated or rolled off. Hence the decision that they were the right speaker for me.

Another side note that you folks are picking up on. I do favor the sound out systems that used a sealed enclosure or passive radiator. In general, I often find the sound out of ported designs bit too fat and sluggish. Especially on drums where they have to be very deft in conveying the higher pitch of a stick hitting the skin of the tom and then the boom.

I am by no means an expert, if I haven't said that before...

But you really do sound tailor-made for Eric's philosophy at Tekton. That said, if you aren't afraid to roll the dice to try them, as long as you don't customize anything, I believe Eric has a return policy if they aren't right for you. You pay freight back, though... *shrugs
It strikes me that it might also be worthwhile to look at his Encore speakers if you haven't. Larger drivers for bass and mid-bass... little more expensive, of course, but within your stated budget.
This is only hearsay, and I could not find the sources in my quick look right now, but the other item that made me question these is reports of them having poor off-axis performance. Likewise, as I stated before: I haven't heard them myself. So for all the haters that don't like his bombastic marketing claims, or think the reviewers that have reported on his speakers are full of it, again... a lot of people are liking Eric's product! And whatever his innovation on the Bessel Array actually is, it seems to work for those that have actually heard them.
For me, the gamble was too rich. If I bought a 7.2 system from him and didn't like it... well, I eat it and live with it.

With my experience hearing Dennis' work, I know that these boxes can bump. And I suspect the Salk SS8 is no different. Featuring 8"woofers and 12" passives, it clearly has what it takes to deliver on Ridire's wants. Could it be a little too polite? Can't say. I had no complaints listening to the Phil-3s! And I threw some deep Hip-Hop and throbbing Rock at it... plus the sample from the Munch-Saint-Saens Symphony that my host played.
I. Felt. IT! and that was just on a 30w amp.

One last thought... Ridire, why no Sub? I bought subs partly for the minimal HT usage that I engage in, but moreover for the Organ and Percussion work that I love. I won't try to sell you on the idea, but if you really want to extend to the 16hz range and get the true feeling of the 32' stop... Well, those boxes are there! Consider that Jim does custom builds using Rythmik's 15" servo-drivers and Amps... in a sealed box or ported, or with Passives added, he can build it down firing if you want... and finish it the same as any of his other work. He recommended sealed to me when I described my usage, and says that is what he uses, too. I chose a different product because I couldn't afford that build with the Phil-3s.

Best,
R

 

[snakeeyes]

I am by no means an expert, if I haven't said that before...

But you really do sound tailor-made for Eric's philosophy at Tekton. That said, if you aren't afraid to roll the dice to try them, as long as you don't customize anything, I believe Eric has a return policy if they aren't right for you. You pay freight back, though... *shrugs
It strikes me that it might also be worthwhile to look at his Encore speakers if you haven't. Larger drivers for bass and mid-bass... little more expensive, of course, but within your stated budget.
This is only hearsay, and I could not find the sources in my quick look right now, but the other item that made me question these is reports of them having poor off-axis performance. Likewise, as I stated before: I haven't heard them myself. So for all the haters that don't like his bombastic marketing claims, or think the reviewers that have reported on his speakers are full of it, again... a lot of people are liking Eric's product! And whatever his innovation on the Bessel Array actually is, it seems to work for those that have actually heard them.
For me, the gamble was too rich. If I bought a 7.2 system from him and didn't like it... well, I eat it and live with it.

With my experience hearing Dennis' work, I know that these boxes can bump. And I suspect the Salk SS8 is no different. Featuring 8"woofers and 12" passives, it clearly has what it takes to deliver on Ridire's wants. Could it be a little too polite? Can't say. I had no complaints listening to the Phil-3s! And I threw some deep Hip-Hop and throbbing Rock at it... plus the sample from the Munch-Saint-Saens Symphony that my host played.
I. Felt. IT! and that was just on a 30w amp.

One last thought... Ridire, why no Sub? I bought subs partly for the minimal HT usage that I engage in, but moreover for the Organ and Percussion work that I love. I won't try to sell you on the idea, but if you really want to extend to the 16hz range and get the true feeling of the 32' stop... Well, those boxes are there! Consider that Jim does custom builds using Rythmik's 15" servo-drivers and Amps... in a sealed box or ported, or with Passives added, he can build it down firing if you want... and finish it the same as any of his other work. He recommended sealed to me when I described my usage, and says that is what he uses, too. I chose a different product because I couldn't afford that build with the Phil-3s.

Best,
R

Sure would love to trade up to a Salk finished Rythmik pair of 15s!!! That blue dye looks sweet! On the other hand it would probably cost more than the hot tubs I’ve been looking at....

 

[Swerd]

With my experience hearing Dennis' work, I know that these boxes can bump. And I suspect the Salk SS8 is no different.

For what it's worth, both Dennis Murphy and Jim Salk rely on the same guy, Paul Kittinger, to work out all the details of bass performance in their designs. Paul definitely designed the bass cabinet alignments in both the Phil 3 and the SS8.

 

[ryanosaur]

Sure would love to trade up to a Salk finished Rythmik pair of 15s!!! That blue dye looks sweet! On the other hand it would probably cost more than the hot tubs I’ve been looking at....

Only 1900 a pop plus shipping. Extra for the passives.

 

[Swerd]

One last thought... Ridire, why no Sub?

I can respect it if someone doesn't want the added complexity of a sub as long as we're talking music playback . The problem is that good bass performance below ~30 Hz costs money, and 25 Hz or lower costs big money. If you have the space, cash, and desire, good bass can be done without a sub.

 

[snakeeyes]

Only 1900 a pop plus shipping. Extra for the passives.

Ya maybe a little out of reach for me. LOL

 

[ryanosaur]

I can respect it if someone doesn't want the added complexity of a sub as long as we're talking music playback . The problem is that good bass performance below ~30 Hz costs money, and 25 Hz or lower costs big money. If you have the space, cash, and desire, good bass can be done without a sub.

Indeed, Swerd... mostly just curious about his perspective. Especially as I'm still learning myself!

 

[Ridire Fáin]

I am by no means an expert, if I haven't said that before...

But you really do sound tailor-made for Eric's philosophy at Tekton. That said, if you aren't afraid to roll the dice to try them, as long as you don't customize anything, I believe Eric has a return policy if they aren't right for you. You pay freight back, though... *shrugs
It strikes me that it might also be worthwhile to look at his Encore speakers if you haven't. Larger drivers for bass and mid-bass... little more expensive, of course, but within your stated budget.
This is only hearsay, and I could not find the sources in my quick look right now, but the other item that made me question these is reports of them having poor off-axis performance. Likewise, as I stated before: I haven't heard them myself. So for all the haters that don't like his bombastic marketing claims, or think the reviewers that have reported on his speakers are full of it, again... a lot of people are liking Eric's product! And whatever his innovation on the Bessel Array actually is, it seems to work for those that have actually heard them.
For me, the gamble was too rich. If I bought a 7.2 system from him and didn't like it... well, I eat it and live with it.

With my experience hearing Dennis' work, I know that these boxes can bump. And I suspect the Salk SS8 is no different. Featuring 8"woofers and 12" passives, it clearly has what it takes to deliver on Ridire's wants. Could it be a little too polite? Can't say. I had no complaints listening to the Phil-3s! And I threw some deep Hip-Hop and throbbing Rock at it... plus the sample from the Munch-Saint-Saens Symphony that my host played.
I. Felt. IT! and that was just on a 30w amp.

One last thought... Ridire, why no Sub? I bought subs partly for the minimal HT usage that I engage in, but moreover for the Organ and Percussion work that I love. I won't try to sell you on the idea, but if you really want to extend to the 16hz range and get the true feeling of the 32' stop... Well, those boxes are there! Consider that Jim does custom builds using Rythmik's 15" servo-drivers and Amps... in a sealed box or ported, or with Passives added, he can build it down firing if you want... and finish it the same as any of his other work. He recommended sealed to me when I described my usage, and says that is what he uses, too. I chose a different product because I couldn't afford that build with the Phil-3s.

Best,
R

One last thought... Ridire, why no Sub?
I. I do not have room for one in this space
II. I do use one in my wife's modest system. I can guarantee you that I have both the phase and cutoff frequency all messed up. I have output sure, but who knows if I have it coherent and in phase to her mains. So I just do not like messing with them. Prefer to have one integrated system that has all that worked out.

 

[ryanosaur]

One last thought... Ridire, why no Sub?
I. I do not have room for one in this space
II. I do use one in my wife's modest system. I can guarantee you that I have both the phase and cutoff frequency all messed up. I have output sure, but who knows if I have it coherent and in phase to her mains. So I just do not like messing with them. Prefer to have one integrated system that has all that worked out.

Cool, Thanks for sharing!

 

[Ridire Fáin]

In speaker cabinet design talk, tight punchy bass = low Q and well damped bass. It costs more to do that right. Clearly Thiel understood that.

Do you remember which Joseph Audio model you heard? I've heard them at audio shows. I liked the speakers, but not their prices.
Too many ported designs sound a bit too fat and sluggish because the speaker manufacturers choose to built them that way. They get exaggerated bass (high Q) usually in a smaller cabinet, but the response tends to ring on and on (poor damping). When people talk about fast or slow bass, they mean this. It's not so much about bass response that starts fast, it's about bass that stops fast. A ported bass cabinet can be designed properly to deliver good sounding bass. So can passive radiator, sealed, or transmission line designs.

I would be glad if you somehow got to hear some Salk speakers. He goes to an annual audio show each year in Chicago. Jim Salk definitely understands how to properly achieve tight & punchy bass. Many of his designs with smaller bass drivers feature mass-loaded transmission line cabinets, but the Salk designs that reach lower than ~30 Hz, are either ported or passive radiator designs. I think you should ask Jim Salk about owners nearer you who welcome potential buyers to listen to their speakers. He keeps a list of names for that purpose.

Are you in Minnesota? Jim is originally from there too, St. Cloud I believe. Now he works out of Pontiac, Michigan. I've ordered from him three times now, and I can't recommend him enough. He is a real pleasure to talk with and to do business with. In case you haven't noticed , I'm one of his most ardent unpaid fan boys. I do the same for Dennis Murphy.

Do you remember which Joseph Audio model you heard? I've heard them at audio shows. I liked the speakers, but not their prices.

I agree the Joseph's were out of budget for me too. The ones I auditioned was the RM 25 and RM 33. They were both gorgeous, spent quite a bit of time listening. The 25 was closest to my budget but did not extend like the 3.6. The 33 was a good fit and met almost every criteria I had, but there was no way I could afford them.