Tekton Enzo - The most inexpensive speakers that is in the league with high-end speaker

[Dennis Murphy]

Pretty much. I'm sure Tekton speakers sound better than Logitech computer speakers. But beyond that, let's just say that in this world, quantity is better than quality. I'd take one quality review over dozens of reviews by "randoms". And I very much am willing to accept that I'm in the random category if you want to insist on that.

I sure as hell wouldn't value the review of anyone whose reference speakers were B&W (IE Andrew Robinson pre-Tekton or even Kal Rubinson) or who is dumb enough to think cables change sound (steve guttenberg). Actually, you'll rarely find me reading any reviews because I think most audio reviewers are in fact pretty poor listeners, who also may be using extremely poor-measuring electronics chains. In fact I think the industry as a whole is such a mess that I generally wouldn't participate in much of it.

And mind you, I'm not even one of the people on this board who would shoot down the possibility of subtle differences in sound between components such as capacitors or amplifiers or preamplifiers or DACs - I just think those potential differences are a waste of time/money to chase after without strict controls in place to make a comparision - something which never seems to be the case.

Forget all the above though.

How do you qualify someone as a "Professional Listener"?

You seem to believe that having heard a great quantity of gear (with the presumption that some of that gear can even be "heard" in the first place) is the qualifier. I disagree. I don't know what the qualifier is myself, but that's why I don't get very caught up in subjective reviews.

All I know is, the Tekton M-Lores that you're dreaming about, use an Eminence Beta-8 and off-the-shelf Vifa BC25. Decent budget drivers but nothing I would personally order.

I guess Tekton and I are direct competitors, so I probably shouldn't be saying anything. But I don't think this thread is going anywhere. The fact is that these speakers have made a lot of people very happy. And the fact is you haven't heard them. (I haven't either, but would love to.) I understand your apprehension about some of the basic design decisions and perhaps the choice of drivers, but at this point there's really nothing more to be said until you actually hear the things, or read a documented review by someone you respect. So I think we should give this a rest until there's something more concrete to go on.

 

[SearchofSub]

Pretty much. I'm sure Tekton speakers sound better than Logitech computer speakers. But beyond that, let's just say that in this world, quantity is better than quality. I'd take one quality review over dozens of reviews by "randoms". And I very much am willing to accept that I'm in the random category if you want to insist on that.

I sure as hell wouldn't value the review of anyone whose reference speakers were B&W (IE Andrew Robinson pre-Tekton or even Kal Rubinson) or who is dumb enough to think cables change sound (steve guttenberg). Actually, you'll rarely find me reading any reviews because I think most audio reviewers are in fact pretty poor listeners, who also may be using extremely poor-measuring electronics chains. In fact I think the industry as a whole is such a mess that I generally wouldn't participate in much of it.

And mind you, I'm not even one of the people on this board who would shoot down the possibility of subtle differences in sound between components such as capacitors or amplifiers or preamplifiers or DACs - I just think those potential differences are a waste of time/money to chase after without strict controls in place to make a comparision - something which never seems to be the case.

Forget all the above though.

How do you qualify someone as a "Professional Listener"?

You seem to believe that having heard a great quantity of gear (with the presumption that some of that gear can even be "heard" in the first place) is the qualifier. I disagree. I don't know what the qualifier is myself, but that's why I don't get very caught up in subjective reviews.

All I know is, the Tekton M-Lores that you're dreaming about, use an Eminence Beta-8 and off-the-shelf Vifa BC25. Decent budget drivers but nothing I would personally order.

My "dream" speakers are actually eNZO's in walnut paint.. Although I would REALLY like to hear the Ascend towers with RAAL. Since I decided to up my budget to $2,500 - $2,800 give or take on just a pair of speakers, I might just be able to swing it. Need more research now sionce my budget is up. Half the fun is in researching Actual purchase would prabably be in 3-4 weeks afetr I am done with research.

 

[fuzz092888]

Tekton Enzo - The most inexpensive speakers that is in the league with high-e...

Walnut veneer you mean.

My "dream" speakers are actually eNZO's in walnut paint.. Although I would REALLY like to hear the Ascend towers with RAAL. Since I decided to up my budget to $2,500 - $2,800 give or take on just a pair of speakers, I might just be able to swing it. Need more research now sionce my budget is up. Half the fun is in researching Actual purchase would prabably be in 3-4 weeks afetr I am done with research.

 

[SearchofSub]

The "subtle" differences that you refer to is prababaly the very reason why there are so many products made. Not just with audio, but with video, cell phones, computers etc. From your logic, 1080p/60 to 1080P/24 would NOT make any difference. To me, there was infact a clear difference.

Isnt it true that the very "subtle" sonic differences you speak about being notohing, there is a whole other group out there referring to it as "sparkle"?.

There was a blind test done from a big retailer in audio a few months back.. 10 people were blid folded and tried to find the best sounding RECIEVER amongst recievers.

9 out of 10 chose a PIONEER reciever over a Denon, and Onkyo. If there is a DIFFERENCE even within a line of recievers, how can you say there isnt a difference in sound between recievers, amp/preamp/ tube amps and D-class amps etc...

 

[fuzz092888]

Tekton Enzo - The most inexpensive speakers that is in the league with high-e...

Please provide a link to this test.

Ill leave that first bit alone.

The "subtle" differences that you refer to is prababaly the very reason why there are so many products made. Not just with audio, but with video, cell phones, computers etc. From your logic, 1080p/60 to 1080P/24 would NOT make any difference. To me, there was infact a clear difference.

Isnt it true that the very "subtle" sonic differences you speak about being notohing, there is a whole other group out there referring to it as "sparkle"?.

There was a blind test done from a big retailer in audio a few months back.. 10 people were blid folded and tried to find the best sounding RECIEVER amongst recievers.

9 out of 10 chose a PIONEER reciever over a Denon, and Onkyo. If there is a DIFFERENCE even within a line of recievers, how can you say there isnt a difference in sound between recievers, amp/preamp/ tube amps and D-class amps etc...

 

[GranteedEV]

I probably got carried away earlier today, but I have really just kept my silence on this thread for days. It was a bit frustrating when after everything anyone said, OP was still vehement on the cap and cable upgrades, as well as the insistence on electronics debates based on other peoples' claims. The goal was never to bash Tekton. In fact I'm sure they sound pleasant as I've stated multiple times in this thread. But excellent, probably not.

I decided to up my budget to $2,500 - $2,800 give or take on just a pair of speakers,

A couple speakers to consider looking at in your new price range include the RBH SX-6300/R, KEF R700, Revel F206, Genelec 8040, JBLPro LSR 6332, Vapor Aurora, Salk Songtower SC, Philharmonic Audio 3s, Pi Speakers 3 Pi, JTR Noesis 228, and the Ascend Towers. Go and listen to at least a few of them instead of having preformed opinions, of course. Bring your own music along, hopefully the higher quality stuff you have.

 

[VicTorious1]

I still have an inkling that this board is getting seriously trolled. If so, it would be the finest trolling job I've ever witnessed. As I said several pages ago, I have Philharmonic, KEF, EMPTek, and Tekton speakers. Admittedly, I bought the Tektons as somewhat of an impulse buy. But I will reiterate it here, the Tektons I have do not strike me as some great set of audiophile speakers that I would write home about. When I first heard the Phil 2s in my place, I felt blown away. My KEFs also were quite surprising for their size and the EMPTeks were a steal. The Tektons, in my estimation, are a fun speaker, but with their delivery problems and wait times, I wouldn't recommend them to anyone. Additionally, I don't think I would spend over $500 on a set of speakers that I couldn't hear first.

By all means, get what you want, but if you're asking for forum advice and receive it in spades, yet choose to ignore it, expect the predictable backlash.

 

[SearchofSub]

I am mostly interested in the Ascend with RAAL/ JBL/ and Phil 3's. Thanks for the list.

 

[GranteedEV]

The "subtle" differences that you refer to is prababaly the very reason why there are so many products made. Not just with audio, but with video, cell phones, computers etc.

Huh? What?

From your logic, 1080p/60 to 1080P/24 would NOT make any difference.

No, by my logic 1080P/80fps and 1080P/81fps would not make any difference. Since, ya know, our eye's refresh rate is somewhere around 75hz.

Isnt it true that the very "subtle" sonic differences you speak about being notohing, there is a whole other group out there referring to it as "sparkle"?.

No, it is not.

There was a blind test done from a big retailer in audio a few months back.. 10 people were blid folded and tried to find the best sounding RECIEVER amongst recievers.

And the relevancy of this so-called blind test? The test methodology? The controls? The documentation? The peer-review?

how can you say there isnt a difference in sound between recievers, amp/preamp/ tube amps and D-class amps etc...

For starters, because if there is a difference, it implies one or the other or both is doing something inherently negative to the signal.

And when such (measurable) negatives are a nonfactor, it's never been proven that magical differences exist - yet has been disproven many times under controlled conditions. This indeed even includes tube amplifiers if the output stage is adequeatly designed and implemented (though often, it isn't). This even includes class D amplifiers if the output stage is adequately designed and implemented (though again, historically and often, it isn't.).

I believe great amplifiers can be designed as tubes, transistors, or switchmode. Poor amplifiers of each amplifier can also be designed. So long as one avoids the latter - which is pretty easy in this era - there is no lack of transparency.

Beyond that, go on believing what you will. I'm a bit tired of this beating of a dead horse.

 

[SearchofSub]

I still have an inkling that this board is getting seriously trolled. If so, it would be the finest trolling job I've ever witnessed. As I said several pages ago, I have Philharmonic, KEF, EMPTek, and Tekton speakers. Admittedly, I bought the Tektons as somewhat of an impulse buy. But I will reiterate it here, the Tektons I have do not strike me as some great set of audiophile speakers that I would write home about. When I first heard the Phil 2s in my place, I felt blown away. My KEFs also were quite surprising for their size and the EMPTeks were a steal. The Tektons, in my estimation, are a fun speaker, but with their delivery problems and wait times, I wouldn't recommend them to anyone. Additionally, I don't think I would spend over $500 on a set of speakers that I couldn't hear first.

By all means, get what you want, but if you're asking for forum advice and receive it in spades, yet choose to ignore it, expect the predictable backlash.

I AM accepting most of the suggestions. If you read through this thread, I am NOT getting a rug anymore, OR the morpheus cables. I ADDED a sub and increased my budget another $1000..

 

[SearchofSub]

Huh? What?



No, by my logic 1080P/80fps and 1080P/81fps would not make any difference. Since, ya know, our eye's refresh rate is somewhere around 75hz.



No, it is not.



And the relevancy of this so-called blind test? The test methodology? The controls? The documentation? The peer-review?



For starters, because if there is a difference, it implies one or the other or both is doing something inherently negative to the signal.

And when such (measurable) negatives are a nonfactor, it's never been proven that magical differences exist - yet has been disproven many times under controlled conditions. This indeed even includes tube amplifiers if the output stage is adequeatly designed and implemented (though often, it isn't). This even includes class D amplifiers if the output stage is adequately designed and implemented (though again, historically and often, it isn't.).

I believe great amplifiers can be designed as tubes, transistors, or switchmode. Poor amplifiers of each amplifier can also be designed. So long as one avoids the latter - which is pretty easy in this era - there is no lack of transparency.

Beyond that, go on believing what you will. I'm a bit tired of this beating of a dead horse.

Oh jesus.. BRO.. EVEN the Presets like PLIIZ to THX Cinema to NeoX sound different. Do it on your reciever right now..
From your logic, you are saying you know the ORIGINAL source and the sound of the source as if you were there witnessing the recording and somehow you remember all the sounds to the last detail in memory to compare.

"Poor" amps that you are talking about I AM saying the tube amp owners and T-amp owners are saying are the COMMON denons, onkyo's etc. This is what I've been tryinig to say all along.

And yes, Steve from CNET is saying the new Emotiva UMC-200 pre-amp with Emotiva AMP combo is the way to go for sound and the common AVR reciever is the "poor" amp of the two kinds.

I am assuming he is saying it is ALOT cleaner and transperant in Stereo mode compare to the common recievers. Switch your AVR reciever from 5.1 coded mode to 2.0 stereo mode right now. You will immiediately notice when switching to stereo mode that the sound is more FULLER but alot more distorted.

I guess from your perspective, you are talking about in terms of 5.1. I am talking in 2.0 stereo mode only.

Ofcourse when the signal is split in 5 ways, it will be clean as hell. BUT, if you actually read my posts, I am going 2.1 ONLY.

 

[Grador]

Can this thread please be locked?

 

[GranteedEV]

How are the bass on the phil 2's? What is the difference between the Phil 2's and Phil 3's?

The Phil 2 woofer is a bit larger, so it probably measures ever-so-slightly worse near the crossover, and it's got a higher Fs and lower x-max compared to the higher end Phil 3 woofer, so the bass might not be as deep or powerful without a subwoofer. Since the Phil 2 woofer allowed for a 2.5 db higher sensitivity, and my plan to use it with my Mal-X anyways so it was a no-brainer to me. How is the bass without a sub? I think it's very powerful and extended. It's been a long time since I used a less powerful amp with them, but with the XLS2000 amp, it is definitely enough bass for my tastes except on certain recordings that have a lot of deeep percussive elements.

But don't get me wrong - I don't know if they're better or worse than any of the other speakers on my list above. They measure similarily enough to most of them that one would have to compare by listening, since most of the list as far as I can tell are what I consider good speakers, with a few question marks thrown in. When I bought my speakers, Dennis was pretty much selling them at or below cost because he's crazy, so I couldn't resist. I don't think I could have DIYed with plans, what Dennis was charging for them at the time. I believe he is retiring the Phil 2s now because people just aren't interested in them at the new price point compared to the Phil 3s but that doesn't mean anything to me. I'd pick the Phil 2s personally over and over. If I want better bass I'm manning up for some Soundscape 12s But personally I love PH2s + Sub(s).

What I can tell you is that we all hear pretty similarily, despite the audio community adage that says the opposite. Some might be more sensitive to some issues and others more sensitive to other issues, but we tend to be equally insensitive to non-issues. People widely do prefer accurate measuring loudspeakers. The tradeoffs from accurate are where we have to make judgement calls. ANd different forms of accurate are suited to different rooms and placement.

 

[GranteedEV]

Oh jesus.. BRO.. EVEN the Presets like PLIIZ to THX Cinema to NeoX sound different. Do it on your reciever right now..

Why are we discussing matrixing modes?????

From your logic, you are saying you know the ORIGINAL source and the sound of the source as if you were there witnessing the recording and somehow you remember all the sounds to the last detail in memory to compare.

Not saying that - but I know what a clarinet, trumpet, human voice DON'T sound like. Especially brass. If a trumpet doesn't sound good on a speaker, it's probably a lame speaker.

"Poor" amps that you are talking about I AM saying the tube amp owners and T-amp owners are saying are the COMMON denons, onkyo's etc. This is what I've been tryinig to say all along.

*sigh*. And here I said I was done with this thread.

So let's clarify that the owners of these amps:

The series output filter, however, will interact with the load impedance, and this interaction can be seen in fig.1, which shows the Super T's frequency response with the amplifier driving resistive loads ranging from 2 to 8 ohms, as well as Stereophile's standard simulated loudspeaker. While the high-frequency response is drastically curtailed into 4 ohms and below—the output into 4 ohms is down by 2dB at 20kHz and a very audible 6.5dB into 2 ohms—it actually peaks by 1.5dB at 23kHz into 8 ohms.

and these amps:

the response variation was ±3.2dB, which will be very audible.

claim that this amp:
Marantz SR6004 Measurements and Analysis | Audioholics

is poor.

[/COLOR]
I am assuming he is saying it is ALOT cleaner and transperant in Stereo mode compare to the common recievers. Switch your AVR reciever from 5.1 coded mode to 2.0 stereo mode right now. You will immiediately notice when switching to stereo mode that the sound is more FULLER but alot more distorted.

I guess from your perspective, you are talking about in terms of 5.1. I am talking in 2.0 stereo mode only.

Ofcourse when the signal is split in 5 ways, it will be clean as hell. BUT, if you actually read my posts, I am going 2.1 ONLY.

What are you even talking about?

I don't even use matrixing modes. And the rest of your post makes no sense.

There are plenty of reasons why Steve Guttenberg imagines stuff that I don't, but I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't make them up at random.

 

[SearchofSub]

Thanks for info. I am going to head over to the Phil thread and read up...

 

[SearchofSub]

I think its going to come down to Ascend Sierra with RAAL, Phil 3's and Tekton eNZO for me.. Will do alot of reading tommorow after work.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I AM accepting most of the suggestions. If you read through this thread, I am NOT getting a rug anymore, OR the morpheus cables. I ADDED a sub and increased my budget another $1000..

You realize we expect a bunch of pictures of your setup when it's all finished so open up a Photobucket account.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I guess Tekton and I are direct competitors, so I probably shouldn't be saying anything. But I don't think this thread is going anywhere. The fact is that these speakers have made a lot of people very happy. And the fact is you haven't heard them. (I haven't either, but would love to.) I understand your apprehension about some of the basic design decisions and perhaps the choice of drivers, but at this point there's really nothing more to be said until you actually hear the things, or read a documented review by someone you respect. So I think we should give this a rest until there's something more concrete to go on.

I actually think that most speakers sound very good - even the ones that measure poorly. So my qualm with Tekton isn't about SQ.

I wasn't against Tekton until recently when I saw those complaints about people NOT getting their speakers after 7 months (because it was their fault that they had paid upfront), and people c/o blown tweeters. There are not that many Tekton speaker owners. So a "few" blown tweeters from a few owners seems like 30-35% of the owners.

I've played all my speakers big and small to very high volume beyond 105dB just to test and stress. In over 20 years I've never had a blown tweeter. So it's rather disconcerting to see a few blown tweeters from a few owners in such a short period.

 

[slipperybidness]

Oh jesus.. BRO.. EVEN the Presets like PLIIZ to THX Cinema to NeoX sound different. Do it on your reciever right now..
From your logic, you are saying you know the ORIGINAL source and the sound of the source as if you were there witnessing the recording and somehow you remember all the sounds to the last detail in memory to compare.

"Poor" amps that you are talking about I AM saying the tube amp owners and T-amp owners are saying are the COMMON denons, onkyo's etc. This is what I've been tryinig to say all along.

And yes, Steve from CNET is saying the new Emotiva UMC-200 pre-amp with Emotiva AMP combo is the way to go for sound and the common AVR reciever is the "poor" amp of the two kinds.

I am assuming he is saying it is ALOT cleaner and transperant in Stereo mode compare to the common recievers. Switch your AVR reciever from 5.1 coded mode to 2.0 stereo mode right now. You will immiediately notice when switching to stereo mode that the sound is more FULLER but alot more distorted.

I guess from your perspective, you are talking about in terms of 5.1. I am talking in 2.0 stereo mode only.

Ofcourse when the signal is split in 5 ways, it will be clean as hell. BUT, if you actually read my posts, I am going 2.1 ONLY.

That is lot of babble that makes absolutely no sense. Quit while you are ahead.

 

[Chu Gai]

Last time there were that many blown tweeters was when the Twitter convention hung out with the Secret Service in that Colombian brothel.