|
|
Post by rbk123 on Aug 25, 2017 8:28:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 25, 2017 9:49:25 GMT -5
|
|
fattykidd
Sensei
It's ok.. I have an et-3.
Posts: 122
|
Post by fattykidd on Aug 25, 2017 10:32:02 GMT -5
OMG 🤤🤤🤤🤤
|
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Aug 25, 2017 11:11:45 GMT -5
Compensation maybe? 😋
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Aug 25, 2017 11:14:19 GMT -5
Moar power! Hehe! Reminds me of the JTR speakers - so large. Two 14 inch drivers. |
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Aug 25, 2017 11:21:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by jmasterj on Aug 25, 2017 11:56:51 GMT -5
You Guys know Eric Alexander looks in on this forum right?
|
|
|
|
Post by copperpipe on Aug 25, 2017 14:28:11 GMT -5
You Guys know Eric Alexander looks in on this forum right? I think the "compensating" comments are directed more at the buyer then the creator; from Eric's standpoint, if people will buy what he builds, why not build it? The buyer is the one with the "issues"  Much like how GM can build $80,000 chrome/black Escalades, but it's the buyer who is attracted to it for certain reasons. It's just good natured teasing anyway... |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Aug 25, 2017 14:36:49 GMT -5
You Guys know Eric Alexander looks in on this forum right? I think the "compensating" comments are directed more at the buyer then the creator; from Eric's standpoint, if people will buy what he builds, why not build it? The buyer is the one with the "issues" Much like how GM can build $80,000 chrome/black Escalades, but it's the buyer who is attracted to it for certain reasons. It's just good natured teasing anyway... OK guys, I made the "compensation " remark, yes it's directed at the buy! 😎 Yes I own a set of Big Dog XPR-1 MONOBLOCKS, No, Im NOT compensating,,,,,,,LOLROFI have BIG hand too! 😋 |
|
|
|
Post by sebastianr on Aug 25, 2017 14:50:55 GMT -5
Bigger is better...Sir Mix A Lot speaks the truth! |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs 
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,094
|
Post by klinemj on Aug 25, 2017 15:15:32 GMT -5
I think the "compensating" comments are directed more at the buyer then the creator; from Eric's standpoint, if people will buy what he builds, why not build it? The buyer is the one with the "issues" Much like how GM can build $80,000 chrome/black Escalades, but it's the buyer who is attracted to it for certain reasons. It's just good natured teasing anyway... OK guys, I made the "compensation " remark, yes it's directed at the buy! 😎 Yes I own a set of Big Dog XPR-1 MONOBLOCKS, No, Im NOT compensating,,,,,,,LOLROFI have BIG hand too! 😋This is reminding of the time when I bought some DCM QED speakers. They were tall and thin. A "not very into stereo" friend asked me "what kind of speaker are those?" Before I could answer, another friend answered "They are Phallic...Phallic Symbols" The first friend say "ok...cool. They sound great" From that day forward, I always wonder how many people he told about my amazing speakers and named them... Mark |
|
|
|
Post by triodegeek on Apr 25, 2018 10:14:17 GMT -5
Is it ok to resurrect an old thread, idk. My forum etiquette is weak.
I was wondering if anyone has tried the Tekton DI’s with a pair of XPR-1’s. If so, what was the result? How do they match up?
I have the monoblocks connected to B&W 801 series 80’s now and am looking to change things up a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Apr 25, 2018 11:13:56 GMT -5
Is it ok to resurrect an old thread, idk. My forum etiquette is weak. I was wondering if anyone has tried the Tekton DI’s with a pair of XPR-1’s. If so, what was the result? How do they match up? I have the monoblocks connected to B&W 801 series 80’s now and am looking to change things up a bit. I see no reason for it to not to work. However, if I was you I would just get some tube monoblocks! Yes I am very bias...😎 |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Aug 22, 2020 4:29:49 GMT -5
As I understand the Tekton patent (and this is a stretch, so give me some rope here...):
Due to high mass, most speakers can't track the acoustic changes of low mass instruments (the sound of the string, for example, not the sound of the whole instrument). The way to "speed up" speaker response is to require less excursion from the driver(s). With less excursion required, the time that it takes the driver(s) to accelerate, stop, and recover is reduced by orders of magnitude. (all the commentary to this point is my speculation and interpretation based on the verbiage of the patent).
Ways to reduce excursion include:
Increasing radiating area of the driver (a self-limiting solution since as radiating area increases, so does mass)
Improving the coupling of the driver to the air (this is the principle of horn-loading, but it comes with a lot of non-linearities due to the horns, themselves)
Increasing the number of drivers (to get an equivalent SPL, each driver must move less)
The third option seems to be the path proposed by the patent (along with reducing the mass of each individual driver). With multiple, low-mass drivers tracking the same waveform, the distortion is decreased and the apparent "speed" of the driver array is increased.
Thus the multiple-tweeter arrays of the Tekton speakers offered under the "new" patents. Their efficacy is limited to the bandwidth covered by the arrays, and the "conventional" drivers of the super-tweeter / midrange / bass do NOT benefit from the patent designs.
Does it work? Judging from the sales numbers of the "new" Tekton speakers, and their consistently positive reviews, I'd guess "yes." But I have not personally heard any yet, and so reserve judgement until such time as I get a review pair in for analysis. Since Tekton does not commonly "loan" review speakers, nor do they offer any reviewer discount, any Tekton "review pair" will have to be purchased or borrowed from a generous, proximate audiophile. To my knowledge, nobody close to me in Baton Rouge owns any of the new Tekton models, so if my curiosity is to be satisfied, I'll have to pay to satisfy it. C'est la vie.
Boomzilla
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2020 8:44:25 GMT -5
As I understand the Tekton patent (and this is a stretch, so give me some rope here...): Due to high mass, most speakers can't track the acoustic changes of low mass instruments (the sound of the string, for example, not the sound of the whole instrument). The way to "speed up" speaker response is to require less excursion from the driver(s). With less excursion required, the time that it takes the driver(s) to accelerate, stop, and recover is reduced by orders of magnitude. (all the commentary to this point is my speculation and interpretation based on the verbiage of the patent). Ways to reduce excursion include: Increasing radiating area of the driver (a self-limiting solution since as radiating area increases, so does mass) Improving the coupling of the driver to the air (this is the principle of horn-loading, but it comes with a lot of non-linearities due to the horns, themselves) Increasing the number of drivers (to get an equivalent SPL, each driver must move less) The third option seems to be the path proposed by the patent (along with reducing the mass of each individual driver). With multiple, low-mass drivers tracking the same waveform, the distortion is decreased and the apparent "speed" of the driver array is increased. Thus the multiple-tweeter arrays of the Tekton speakers offered under the "new" patents. Their efficacy is limited to the bandwidth covered by the arrays, and the "conventional" drivers of the super-tweeter / midrange / bass do NOT benefit from the patent designs. Does it work? Judging from the sales numbers of the "new" Tekton speakers, and their consistently positive reviews, I'd guess "yes." But I have not personally heard any yet, and so reserve judgement until such time as I get a review pair in for analysis. Since Tekton does not commonly "loan" review speakers, nor do they offer any reviewer discount, any Tekton "review pair" will have to be purchased or borrowed from a generous, proximate audiophile. To my knowledge, nobody close to me in Baton Rouge owns any of the new Tekton models, so if my curiosity is to be satisfied, I'll have to pay to satisfy it. C'est la vie. Boomzilla This explanation reminded me of the "sweet sixteen" speakers from 1961, a 4x4 array of cheap 5" radio speakers to create a hi-fi instrument. www.jimkyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Sweet-16.pdfI thought about building some at the time but it involved work, so I didn't. I wonder if the Tekton patent references Jim Kyle's work. If not, it should have. |
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Official Emofest Scribe
Posts: 15,094
|
Post by klinemj on Aug 22, 2020 15:43:51 GMT -5
As I understand the Tekton patent (and this is a stretch, so give me some rope here...): Due to high mass, most speakers can't track the acoustic changes of low mass instruments (the sound of the string, for example, not the sound of the whole instrument). The way to "speed up" speaker response is to require less excursion from the driver(s). With less excursion required, the time that it takes the driver(s) to accelerate, stop, and recover is reduced by orders of magnitude. (all the commentary to this point is my speculation and interpretation based on the verbiage of the patent). Ways to reduce excursion include: Increasing radiating area of the driver (a self-limiting solution since as radiating area increases, so does mass) Improving the coupling of the driver to the air (this is the principle of horn-loading, but it comes with a lot of non-linearities due to the horns, themselves) Increasing the number of drivers (to get an equivalent SPL, each driver must move less) The third option seems to be the path proposed by the patent (along with reducing the mass of each individual driver). With multiple, low-mass drivers tracking the same waveform, the distortion is decreased and the apparent "speed" of the driver array is increased. Thus the multiple-tweeter arrays of the Tekton speakers offered under the "new" patents. Their efficacy is limited to the bandwidth covered by the arrays, and the "conventional" drivers of the super-tweeter / midrange / bass do NOT benefit from the patent designs. Does it work? Judging from the sales numbers of the "new" Tekton speakers, and their consistently positive reviews, I'd guess "yes." But I have not personally heard any yet, and so reserve judgement until such time as I get a review pair in for analysis. Since Tekton does not commonly "loan" review speakers, nor do they offer any reviewer discount, any Tekton "review pair" will have to be purchased or borrowed from a generous, proximate audiophile. To my knowledge, nobody close to me in Baton Rouge owns any of the new Tekton models, so if my curiosity is to be satisfied, I'll have to pay to satisfy it. C'est la vie. Boomzilla Those who believe in "TIPS" (the "Theory of Inventive Problem Solving") would agree with Tekton. TIPS is a problem solving technique (alternatively called "TRIZ" by some) developed in Russia. There are many aspects to TIPS, but one thing it teaches is that there are standard patterns of technology evolution. One is that is is common for technology evolve from using a single element, to multiple elements, to eventually fields to solve technology problems. In TIPS terms, if 1 tweeter is good, 2 is better, 20 is much better, and infinite (as in the limit of number of tweeter approaches infinity) is best (which is ultimately a field). There are many cited examples to support this, but it's not universal. Personally, I've found exceptions that completely baffled TIPS experts. Every time, the exception involved the introduction of a new requirement OR viewing the definition of "1" vs. "infinite" differently that one might normally view it. I have 1 example (which I cannot share) in which 1 = infinity. That baffled my TIPS gurus until they viewed it from a different point of view. In speaker terms, this would say that things like planars provide a more field-like technology and are therefore closer to the endpoint. Of course, the noted limits of planars break the rule due to limits on low end frequency response. But, the TIPS theory also would say that multiple subs is better than 1. Mark |
|
|
|
Post by JKCashin on Aug 22, 2020 16:28:31 GMT -5
Warning - my observations only, based on photographs. I have not heard these speakers, nor ever seen them in person.
OK now that that's out of the way, I have always found the Tektons look like they have cheap paper drivers. Even that semi-dense cardboard ring looks to be present, like you would find on some 1970s Radio Shack $39.95 speaker. Problem is I can't wrap my head around spending thousands on a speaker with what appears to be generic drivers. I'm hoping I am wrong, but they need to improve the look somewhat. Fix that cheap ring look at least. It's like staring at a pair of bloated Bose 901's
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2020 10:39:03 GMT -5
Warning - my observations only, based on photographs. I have not heard these speakers, nor ever seen them in person. OK now that that's out of the way, I have always found the Tektons look like they have cheap paper drivers. Even that semi-dense cardboard ring looks to be present, like you would find on some 1970s Radio Shack $39.95 speaker. Problem is I can't wrap my head around spending thousands on a speaker with what appears to be generic drivers. I'm hoping I am wrong, but they need to improve the look somewhat. Fix that cheap ring look at least. It's like staring at a pair of bloated Bose 901's The speakers Tekton utilizes are low mass drivers. I think Boom did a pretty nice job in summation, explaining the Newtonian law behind Tekton. Just note, there's only one tweeter if tweeter is defined by the frequency output. In Tekton's top array there are 15 low mass speakers which are identified as tweeters but only one produces high frequencies or around 5500hz and above. The other 14 roll on low round 200 to 300 hz. These poly arrays equal the area of a 7 inch midrange or two arrays for 1 nine inch midrange with the low mass of a tweeter. |
|
|
|
Post by JKCashin on Aug 23, 2020 11:00:52 GMT -5
So it behaves like a coaxial... clever. Just wish they could at least put on a trim ring to take away the Bose 901 off-the-shelf-driver look
|
|
|
|
Post by foggy1956 on Aug 23, 2020 11:04:27 GMT -5
So it behaves like a coaxial... clever. Just wish they could at least put on a trim ring to take away the Bose 901 off-the-shelf-driver look Eric doesn't waste a lot of energy on cosmetics |
|
Much like how GM can build $80,000 chrome/black Escalades, but it's the buyer who is attracted to it for certain reasons. It's just good natured teasing anyway...
