Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
"Our new revolutionary U.S. patent #9247339 [issued January 26th, 2016] allows us to literally align the mass of cones to the harmonic spectra of the musical instruments being played. This means that, in theory, we've now made every other High Fidelity Loudspeaker on Earth Obsolete in one fell swoop!"
FWIW, Home Theater Review just put out a glowing review of these speakers. The reviewer bought a set that supposedly replaced his $18k Lawrence, Cello's. I'd like to hear a set to judge for myself.
Well this says it all
U.S. patent #9247339 (issued January 26th, 2016) allows us to literally align the moving mass of speaker cones to the harmonic spectra of the musical instruments being played.
Game over ....
That's a crazy looking speaker . I was talking with Eric a few weeks ago and I asked him about his "upgraded" crossover for the Lore's . He said he would be happy to send me a pair to try out , no problem . He then asked me how I liked my Lore's , I said they were awesome . He said " then leave them alone." He is a really good guy to chat with and I am happy for him .
Here's a new review from a Sound Engineer..
Just curious on what you guys who posted negative things about Eric and his speakers have to say now ?
Tekton Design just came out with much bigger Double Impact speakers, 70" tall! Pair them up with a Line Magnetic 508ia Tube Integrated amp and your be in HIFI Heaven!
At what point does kabuki begin?
Here's more feedback. Are these $3K Double Impact speakers really That Good?!..
If they sound better than my Lore's , yes . ( I have not heard them )
Audio Archon is not a mod shop. The manufacturer is doing an upgraded speaker through a dealer.
The upgraded SE Double Impacts will be sold at High-End Dealers.
These speakers will have much better crossover parts and wiring!
Where is he getting the Dynaudio drivers?
Edit: Sorry, wrong thread. I was asking about Silverline.
I am running an ayon 2s player , cary slp-05 preamp , first watt f6 amp (25 wpc) and tekton lores . The Thiels , Maggies and vandersteens ( all driven by a belles hot rod amp ) were shown the door when the lores were purchased . He does have a patent on this " development " and his stuff gets great reviews by almost everyone . He is doing something right . P.S. I can pretty much buy any speaker I like ( up to around $10000 ) , but cant justify it . These things are FUN .
Throwing more and more drivers (very cheap ones for $3000 per pair) into the mix doesn't usually add to the quality of the sound produced.
A well engineered 3 way is usually better sounding than a speaker with 10 or more drivers. I'd suggest that the only section of a 3 way system that ever needs duplication of drivers is the bass - and only then if undersized drives are required. The exception my be a d'Appolito design for mid speakers.
Here's feedback from a professional reviewer who has a pair of these speakers and others too
Just a little ditty on how orgasmic they are.
I'm always wary when something is labeled "professional review".
What's odd, is for all the self yanking about these speakers, they already mention that a upgraded version will be available through dealers soon.
Which dealers are you referring to? It was my impression that Tekton has no dealer network and sells direct to the consumer.
Audio Archon. Never heard of them, but he wrote that in the thread on audiogon. Did you read the thread?
I read the thread and I don't consider Audio Archon a Tekton dealer. They appear to be a mod shop. They stated that this speaker (in its factory form) will be available to the consumer directly from Tekton and that the modded versions only will be available from Audio Archon.
We're opening a whole different can of worms when we start talking about modded products. That's not a route I choose to take when discussing the merits (or lack thereof) of a particular component. It just clouds the issue.
I believe that Eric Alexander made a big (and hopefully not fatal) mistake when he posted all of that blather about patents, etc. If this new speaker is anywhere near what the (so far) sketchy reports claim it is Tekton should have a winner on its hands without the unnecessary hype. The hype is nothing but troll bait. Eric should have known better.
As an intermediate (at best) designer myself, I have considered a "flower petal array" of mids around a single tweeter... but I will never be a fan of more than one tweeter.
Because... I CAN'T CHANGE THE LAWS OF PHYSICS CAPTAIN!!
If people like these, more power to them.
They remind me of spider eyes, and that's interesting because I study spiders at the amateur level and they bloody well fascinate me.
Who is granting such patents? A sixth grader?
I'm pretty sure that the average double bass violin (aka "string bass") player would prefer to carry around the moving mass of a loudspeaker (diaphragm/surround/spider/voice coil) rather than the 20 pounds and six feet of wood (plus the carrying case) they do now.
Anyway, does anyone know if this is a utility patent, design patent, or bullshit patent? I've read parts of it, but haven't seen the patent type.
Where's George Augspurger when we need him!!
That quote just highlights how stupid this idea is.
If your idea is to match the moving mass of the driver to the moving mass of the instrument, don't pick an electric instrument and cite the mass of the string!
That's what I thought.
Bass guitar pickups are not microphones. The only time you "hear" what a plucked bass string on an electric bass guitar sounds like is when it's unplugged and it wasn't designed to work that way.
It's basically claiming that his drivers that have low mass, are highly compliant, and have a low resonant frequency, are novel and inventive. It may be; I'm not versed in loudspeaker IP. But it seems that it's been a design goal of many loudspeaker manufacturers for a long time.
No it doesn't claim anything that specific, it just has very vague claims about mass similar to that of the instrument which made the sound.
Hard to believe the patent was issued in that form.
As I said, "basically." Yes, Claim 1 is very general, but as it reads in the specification (para. 0006), "For example: a woofer is designed to be highly compliant with very low moving mass and a low resonant frequency." This is the underpinning of matching the driver to the sound being reproduced (or so he states).
In any case I've seen worse. As a colleague once said, "They don't call it The No-Patent Office."
That stuff is illustrative but has no legal force. Only the claims matter:
Clam 1, in totality: "A speaker comprising: a transducer configured to reproduce a sound generated by a moving and sound-generating portion of a musical instrument, the transducer comprising a moving element, wherein the moving element is limited in mass to approximate the mass of the moving and sound-generating portion of the musical instrument."
As written, it's super vague, and either covers nothing, or almost all speakers.
How do you determine if a transducer is "configured to reproduce a sound generated by a moving and sound-generating portion of a musical instrument"?
What is the 'sound generating portion of the musical instrument'? Let's take a clarinet. Is this the reed? Or the body of the clarinet? Or the mass of the air inside
What about a piano? Is this mass the string? What about the hammer, that's pretty important to the sound-generating, and it moves. What about the wood body, that's also important to making the sound. Which mass is this?
If you find a transducer of mass x and an instrument with 'sound generating portion' of nearly mass 'x', and you can play that sound through the transducer, does the patent cover it?
If so, it would cover all speakers, just need to find one instrument to match a transducer's mass.
Or it covers nothing because speakers aren't "configured" to reproduce a sound generated by a musical instrument, they are configured to reproduce an electrical signal in sound pressure.
If they sound half decent, makes one wonder how some companies manage to charge $60,000 and upwards for their speakers.
If Tekton used a dealer network, they'd sell speakers to the reseller for about $3,000 and the retail price would be between $5-6K.
> If they sound half decent, makes one wonder how some companies manage to charge $60,000 and upwards for their speakers.
Most of the expense is in cabinet fabrication. About 'charging' who knows, but no doubt this cabinet is not anything special or unusual. That may not be a problem, but that's where the money isn't going.
Here's some feedback on their facebook page on these Double Impact speakers
when a reviewer in Brooklyn introduced his speaker claiming it was the greatest ever.
The Wilson WAMM . :)
Anyone living in Chicago can go to this meeting and give us some feedback on these speakers this coming Sunday Mar. 5, 2017
Would that be a "radial array"?
I confess that as an electrostatic enthusiast, I agree with his sentiment about mass - and the Sound Lab U-1PX trumps his design by orders of magnitude. :)
But, I'll stick with my plans for a DIY swarm with cone drivers under and between the 63s.
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
Cone drivers are fine for bass because bass is much slower.I still love the bass on large electrostatic panels such as the Acoustats and Soundlabs but,they are massive in size to get there. My Martin Logan CLXs are also massive in size but only go down to 55hz so I do need a sub for deep bass.
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong" H. L. Mencken
Cone drivers are fine for bass because bass is much slower.
one matches monopolar dynamic drivers to dipolar panels. Arguably, using dipolar subwoofers would address that challenge.
Or, use specially designed electrostatic subwoofers like the UB-1!
I doubt that anything by the same designer is worth even material used to make the box.
"One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane."
I have heard them at Axpona few years back. For me, those were the only speakers at the whole show that I could not stand to listen.
"One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane."
Not everyone likes the Lores, but most people who buy them do. For $1,000 they are considered a good bang for buck speaker as are most of the Tekton products. I owned a pair a few years ago and liked them.
Despite the hyperbole and somewhat over the top "patent" associated with the Double impact, it sure looks like a lot of speaker for $3,000 and I would guess is very competitive at that price in the market today.
I like my Lores quite a bit. Are they perfect? Nope. I cheated by re-doing the crossovers with some boutique parts that made a noticeable improvement, and even after that they're still not perfect. But even in un-modded form they brought across the emotion and soul of the music. My last pair of $12k speakers didn't. The $10k pair before that didn't either. Both were far more accomplished in the usual audiophile parameters, and both were far less accomplished at drawing me into the art of the performance. It's been a very long time since I had a speaker that generates music so well. So I forgive the Lores for their flaws and enjoy them for what they do well. And when I want to, I can blast them to beyond-stupid SPL's with 20 watts of SET power. Not that I do it often, but it's damn sure fun after consuming quantities of imported libations. :) And, oh yeah, they were $1k. Add $300 and some of my labor on the crossovers.
Now the big question: If I had spent $13k on them instead of $1.3k, would I be as forgiving of their flaws?
I have to agree. I've had the M-Lore and a friend still uses the Lore in his HT set-up. I've found both to be well voiced and a good value at their respective price points. On the other hand, I pay little or no attention to the hype or claims made on the website.....which are about as useless as the comments of the "critics" here who have never heard the speaker.
A comparison with Golden Ear Titans will be enlightening.
So what happens to the other expensive speakers in his line-up, like the 1812 Model V at $12K?
That seems to be the only speaker he is asking real money for.
From my days of living in Utah and hanging with low power tube amp crowd folks seem to like his 'Lore' speaker line.
I cannot believe anyone would want to give this guy $3K after reading such BS. Didn't he have some sort of testimonial from Glenn Beck on his website after sending him speakers as a gift? That says a lot.
Reading your Message it seems you intended to say "wrong" rather than "strong".
"The piano ain't got no wrong notes." Thelonious Monk
He does know what he's doing, even if the specified sensitivity is inflated by 6dB.
That story deserves an extra ZERO or two on the asking price IMNSO.
If the sound quality is anything like his earlier modest offerings, it might be a good deal, with or without the 'story'.
No one proofread the web page.
3K delivered! Maybe a zero left out?
If not,I'm calling right now! I don't care what the wife thinks, maybe 2 pairs, I will sell one for 10K, use the 4 for used Odin speaker cable
"I truly believe our granted US patent to be one of the most exciting and inspired electro-acoustical patents to be issued in the last 50 years. A patent that proves that loudspeakers can easily deliver a linear frequency response yet still be woefully inaccurate because they cannot produce the overtones and harmonics contained in music and recordings. So again… I invite you to literally hear what you've been missing!
Until now, there has been an inappropriate mass relationship between musical instruments and loudspeakers. This exists within all past and current competitors' speaker models, and it certainly includes the high-priced speaker models that cost more than new cars and houses!
When the moving mass of the loudspeaker cone is greater than the musical instrument's vibrating string, column of air, resonating surface, etc., it fails to accurately respond to the instrument's subtle nuances, details, upper overtones, and upper harmonics."
No, this has no relationship. Very roughly it is arguing for crossovers and woofers and tweeters. Well, uh.
"Loudspeakers are absolutely musical instruments"
let's hope NOT, because they would sound like themselves all the time and not the music I want to hear.
"and the music reproduced through high fidelity speaker systems cannot sound lifelike and correct unless the mass relationship between the speaker and the musical source is correct."
No, it's the relationship between the inertia of the speaker and air acoustically coupled to it and the forces applied to it.
"For example: the plucked and resonating low 'e' note (41Hz) on a Fender Jazz bass guitar has a moving mass of 19 grams. The highest reviewed and well-regarded subwoofers of today have cones with an average of 200-300 grams of moving mass to reproduce the same low 'e' tone. This is the equivalent of a Formula One team showing up on race day with a special new race car that has 15,000 pounds of sand added to it! Our competitors are building subwoofers in this exact way today. A subwoofer with 300 grams of moving mass can only give you a dulled out response down to 15Hz. The laws of physics prove the subwoofer cannot be musical nor can it even begin to produce the harmonic spectra of a Fender Jazz bass guitar (or any other bass-producing musical instrument) - period."
This is even more ridiculous---in an *electric* guitar, the sound you hear in the club is produced by an electrodynamic speaker, current in a wire gets pushed in a magnetic field.
Let's fix this analogy and use the ""reasoning"" in the assertions: they are asserting that the performance of the race car must somehow be related to the strength and mass of the foot on the accelerator pedal, and not what actual physics says matters: the relationship between engine power and mass and tire grip.
To re-use Wolfgang Pauli, "Not Even Wrong".
People at actual speaker companies must be thinking "How do we deal with customers who believe this inanity?"
Duh. I can feel the wind from the hand waving through my computer. His 'explanation' says nothing. There are questions about design that can be seen and in the specs. And his explanation about mass is simply nonsense. It's not mass but power to weight ratio(otherwise a VW beetle could out accelerate a Bugatti).
But then again the 1st thing a company needs to do is stay in business and all too often it's not what you do but what you say you can do and convince the public of. Just look at the Bose 901. It couldn't even do what Amar claimed it did.
Citing a patent is smart. It implies something new. But patents can be deceiving. A good example is the Dahlquist DQ 10. The patent had nothing to do with the acoustic performance of the speaker. It was the inexpensive way the individual panels were attached to the main box and the 'patent' caused significant ringing at 115 Hz.
I'd love to hear the speaker. If it turns out I'm wrong I'm not against saying so. In fact if it is that good it would be great to have such an advance. I hate making comments like this without an audition but this ad asks for it.
Has anyone done a REAL speaker sensitivity test on these?
Yeah, it's weird. Eric makes great speakers, so I don't know why he needs the bombastic marketing.
Too often hype sells and the truth doesn't.
Some feedback on these speakers
Even if, after auditioning, these things I agreed with the feedback(probably not exactly likely) that wouldn't change all the BS being claimed.
We will have to wait until we listen to them at one of the shows before judging them.
And I even grudgingly implied that. And perhaps it will be a very good product. But that won't change my opinion of his current hand waving explanation of how things work and some of the other claims like over 98 dB efficiency and 20 Hz lower bandwidth.
Usually when something sounds too good to be true it is too good to be true.
Post a Followup:
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: