Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2020 23:15:17 GMT -5
I'm debating whether or not to pull the trigger on the Double Impacts. The economy may be headed for hell in a hand basket... Less expensive alternatives abound... Carpeting the floor might provide a bigger sonic improvement (or might not)... There's seemingly a waiting list/time to receive an order. Eric/Tekton also has a money back guarantee in which I'm not familiar with specifics. Again, as mentioned awhile back be sure to tell them you're a reviewer and your publication because I've witnessed Eric making the reviewer's gear priority bumping them in front of everyone else on that long waiting list. I'm seeing nearly a year wait time for product fulfillment in entirety as grills seemingly are being delayed the longest and arrive at different times. Anyhoot, I'm sure there's always an option of going to one of the audio shows where his designs are being demoed. If you're looking for the best sonic improvements to what already is may I recommend: /QTips-56b001d75f9b58b7d01f60f1.jpg) Laugh bro! I'm kidding. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 2, 2020 2:11:13 GMT -5
There's seemingly a waiting list/time to receive an order...I'm seeing nearly a year wait time for product fulfillment...Eric/Tekton also has a money back guarantee in which I'm not familiar with specifics... Such is life. ...tell them you're a reviewer and your publication because I've witnessed Eric making the reviewer's gear priority bumping them in front of everyone else on that long waiting list... Unfair to others - I'll wait my turn. ...grills seemingly are being delayed the longest and arrive at different times... Tekton does them in batches for efficiency. ...Anyhoot, I'm sure there's always an option of going to one of the audio shows where his designs are being demoed... Not COVID-19 feasible. ...If you're looking for the best sonic improvements to what already is may I recommend...Q-tips...no kidding No laughing matter. I clean daily & do an audiogram annually. Can't personally recommend the Q-tips because they're not doctor-approved (but I use them anyway & always have). Cheers - Boomzilla |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Sept 2, 2020 3:47:56 GMT -5
Cool! But I don't think that a patent is necessarily connected to science, it is just a unique idea not previously patented. Dr. Amar Bose held dozens and dozens of patents Which have become a patent infringing money maker for MIT. Are you speaking about patents in general and not Eric’s specific patents? I'm sure Tekton speakers sound very good as testified by many of you, but his reasoning for it is bunk, not science. Any good speaker with a flat extended frequency response will produce the fundamental and all harmonics of a string instrument or any other instrument for that matter. Here is the patent filing - patents.google.com/patent/US9247339B2/en |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 2, 2020 4:19:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Sept 2, 2020 8:49:46 GMT -5
And that may not be his actual reasoning, just what he supplied to the Patent office to get it passed. |
|
butchgo
Emo VIPs 
The Dark Side rules
Posts: 570
|
Post by butchgo on Sept 2, 2020 9:04:57 GMT -5
All I know is that I have the Enzo XLs and patent or no patent they do sound marvelous!!!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 10:02:52 GMT -5
Are you speaking about patents in general and not Eric’s specific patents? I'm sure Tekton speakers sound very good as testified by many of you, but his reasoning for it is bunk, not science. Any good speaker with a flat extended frequency response will produce the fundamental and all harmonics of a string instrument or any other instrument for that matter. Here is the patent filing - patents.google.com/patent/US9247339B2/enSure his reasoning was just that he had extra 20 grand piles of cash laying around for each patent filed. In all seriousness, there's a lot of talk of science but ya haven't actually followed the scientific method [observation, testability, repeatability]. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 2, 2020 11:20:26 GMT -5
In all seriousness, there's a lot of talk of science but ya haven't actually followed the scientific method [observation, testability, repeatability]. I am looking for the those in his patent. Where are the experiments he's done to show that his speaker output is superior to another method? Has he published anything to that effect? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 11:53:45 GMT -5
In all seriousness, there's a lot of talk of science but ya haven't actually followed the scientific method [observation, testability, repeatability]. I am looking for the those in his patent. Where are the experiments he's done to show that his speaker output is superior to another method? Has he published anything to that effect? In the past not only has he but another publication. I have not kept the links to as such. What I do recall from a publication speaking of Eric's method was the application of Newtonian law. Other than that I hadn't much interest at the time in the applicable science behind his methodology. What I do recall was nodding my head as most of which was explained seemingly was common sense. However, what seeming is sensible isn't always acceptable until backed by science. To stray from your inquiry for a moment Garbulky, I'm wary of peoples that begin with a presupposition and use science to prove it. For example, a lot of people refer to science in order to seemingly be credible, reasonable, etc. However, I've observed too many or too much reason which has appeared rather rational and logical to question later only to discover the false premise in which quite logical arguments appear to be constructed on. Point being, I think one should approach said method as an agnostic. Though I'd be ignorant if I ignored the observable world around me in which science or any other method is used to deceive. For example, today's statistical science has revealed itself as quite the tool in which to prove falsehood. Having said that, I'll dig later for some of the publications which were sent my way before my initial purchase. In the meanwhile to hear first hand from the horse's mouth: Enjoy in your research! |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 2, 2020 12:07:15 GMT -5
...today's statistical science has revealed itself as quite the tool in which to prove falsehood... Science (including statistical science) is just that - a tool. Any tool can be misused or abused. The programmer's motto "Garbage in, garbage out" is also still true. So don't ANYONE blame the tool for the outcomes that you don't like. Instead, look at the premises and the application of the tool. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 12:20:08 GMT -5
...today's statistical science has revealed itself as quite the tool in which to prove falsehood... Science (including statistical science) is just that - a tool. Any tool can be misused or abused. The programmer's motto "Garbage in, garbage out" is also still true. So don't ANYONE blame the tool for the outcomes that you don't like. Instead, look at the premises and the application of the tool. Couldn't agree w/ you more Boom. However, I'm pointing to the person [human nature] behind the application of said tool which obviously has a bearing on how any tool is misused. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 2, 2020 13:13:38 GMT -5
I am looking for the those in his patent. Where are the experiments he's done to show that his speaker output is superior to another method? Has he published anything to that effect? In the past not only has he but another publication. I have not kept the links to as such. What I do recall from a publication speaking of Eric's method was the application of Newtonian law. Other than that I hadn't much interest at the time in the applicable science behind his methodology. What I do recall was nodding my head as most of which was explained seemingly was common sense. However, what seeming is sensible isn't always acceptable until backed by science. To stray from your inquiry for a moment Garbulky, I'm wary of peoples that begin with a presupposition and use science to prove it. For example, a lot of people refer to science in order to seemingly be credible, reasonable, etc. However, I've observed too many or too much reason which has appeared rather rational and logical to question later only to discover the false premise in which quite logical arguments appear to be constructed on. Point being, I think one should approach said method as an agnostic. Though I'd be ignorant if I ignored the observable world around me in which science or any other method is used to deceive. For example, today's statistical science has revealed itself as quite the tool in which to prove falsehood. Having said that, I'll dig later for some of the publications which were sent my way before my initial purchase. In the meanwhile to hear first hand from the horse's mouth: Enjoy in your research! Well said. I've read some earlier submissions for his patent but no measurements of real output and comparisons to regular speakers. Hopefully he will publish it. For me extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In some previous work, he talked about how this invention made obsolete every single other speaker out there. Now Eric's speakers sound exceedingly good. I really enjoyed his Pendragons and those were two massive woofers combined with three tweeters...something that shouldn't really be sounding good, and yet it did. So I believe it when he says these speakers will sound great. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 13:18:46 GMT -5
In the past not only has he but another publication. I have not kept the links to as such. What I do recall from a publication speaking of Eric's method was the application of Newtonian law. Other than that I hadn't much interest at the time in the applicable science behind his methodology. What I do recall was nodding my head as most of which was explained seemingly was common sense. However, what seeming is sensible isn't always acceptable until backed by science. To stray from your inquiry for a moment Garbulky, I'm wary of peoples that begin with a presupposition and use science to prove it. For example, a lot of people refer to science in order to seemingly be credible, reasonable, etc. However, I've observed too many or too much reason which has appeared rather rational and logical to question later only to discover the false premise in which quite logical arguments appear to be constructed on. Point being, I think one should approach said method as an agnostic. Though I'd be ignorant if I ignored the observable world around me in which science or any other method is used to deceive. For example, today's statistical science has revealed itself as quite the tool in which to prove falsehood. Having said that, I'll dig later for some of the publications which were sent my way before my initial purchase. In the meanwhile to hear first hand from the horse's mouth: Enjoy in your research! Well said. I've read some earlier submissions for his patent but no measurements of real output and comparisons to regular speakers. Hopefully he will publish it. For me extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In some previous work, he talked about how this invention made obsolete every single other speaker out there. Now Eric's speakers sound exceedingly good. I really enjoyed his Pendragons and those were two massive woofers combined with three tweeters...something that shouldn't really be sounding good, and yet it did. So I believe it when he says these speakers will sound great. Interesting, I wasn't even aware the Pendragons are under the same patent as the Ulfberhts. They each use very different arrays. Correct me if wrong but Pendragons use a mini "line array" whereas the Ulfberhts use a "MTM 'poly' array"? On the topic of the Pendragons are all three tweeters producing the same frequency or are they similar to the Tekton MTM where each poly cluster below and above a dedicated "higher" frequency tweeter producing lower frequencies? The Pendragon description doesn't say whether it's a 2 way or 3 way speaker which would be a dead giveaway. |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 2, 2020 13:37:06 GMT -5
Well said. I've read some earlier submissions for his patent but no measurements of real output and comparisons to regular speakers. Hopefully he will publish it. For me extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In some previous work, he talked about how this invention made obsolete every single other speaker out there. Now Eric's speakers sound exceedingly good. I really enjoyed his Pendragons and those were two massive woofers combined with three tweeters...something that shouldn't really be sounding good, and yet it did. So I believe it when he says these speakers will sound great. Interesting, I wasn't even aware the Pendragons are under the same patent as the Ulfberhts. They each use very different arrays. Correct me if wrong but Pendragons use a mini "line array" whereas the Ulfberhts use a "MTM 'poly' array"? On the topic of the Pendragons are all three tweeters producing the same frequency or are they similar to the Tekton MTM where each poly cluster below and above a dedicated "higher" frequency tweeter produce lower frequencies? The Pendragon description doesn't say whether it's a 2 way or 3 way speaker which would be a dead giveaway. The Pendragon was released before his patent. I don't believe they share the same tech. I'm just saying that I know that eric has the ability to deliver great sound in a great package at a fantastic price. I still don't know how he makes them for so little! |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 2, 2020 15:03:34 GMT -5
...tell them you're a reviewer and your publication because I've witnessed Eric making the reviewer's gear priority bumping them in front of everyone else on that long waiting list... Unfair to others - if I were asking them for a review pair, the priority might be justified, but (although I will review them), these are primarily for my own long-term use. I have emailed Tekton and asked about the wait time. I'll see what they say... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2020 15:09:37 GMT -5
...tell them you're a reviewer and your publication because I've witnessed Eric making the reviewer's gear priority bumping them in front of everyone else on that long waiting list... Unfair to others - if I were asking them for a review pair, the priority might be justified, but (although I will review them), these are primarily for my own long-term use. I have emailed Tekton and asked about the wait time. I'll see what they say... I know I forwarded or suggested you reveal yourself as a reviewer in order to cut down on wait time but I agree w/ you in your approach, not only in your chivalrous mannerism but remaining anonymous kinda ensures you as a reviewer are receiving the normal speaker design and not some pre-prepared special speaker w/modified internals [more expensive]. For the sake of your viewers I think most publications/reviewers ought, in case of retail manufacturers, ask where they can go and just purchase the in stock inventory to minimize the chance of manufacturers manipulating the reviewer w/ different equipment. Just my thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Sept 2, 2020 15:29:08 GMT -5
...I think most publications/reviewers ought, in case of retail manufacturers, ask where they can go and just purchase the in stock inventory to minimize the chance of manufacturers manipulating the reviewer w/ different equipment... They can't afford to. |
|
|
|
Post by daveczski65 on Sept 2, 2020 15:56:17 GMT -5
...tell them you're a reviewer and your publication because I've witnessed Eric making the reviewer's gear priority bumping them in front of everyone else on that long waiting list... Unfair to others - if I were asking them for a review pair, the priority might be justified, but (although I will review them), these are primarily for my own long-term use. I have emailed Tekton and asked about the wait time. I'll see what they say... I waited 3mo and i had to call alot and got the run around,,a different story every time.all depends on how long want to wait,,i believe at least 6mo or more now. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2020 0:03:11 GMT -5
...I think most publications/reviewers ought, in case of retail manufacturers, ask where they can go and just purchase the in stock inventory to minimize the chance of manufacturers manipulating the reviewer w/ different equipment... They can't afford to. I've read from reviewers which demanded/conditioned reviews based on pick up from local inventory especially while reviewing modern Televisions. Reviewers wanted a common calibrated TV that could be purchased from stock rather than doubting that extra preparation for the reviewer was made. I speculate that such reviewers arranged a voucher to pick up from any retail store with the product in inventory. |
|
