ASR is what it is. TEkton is what it is. So are all the other vendors and hifi websites including Audiogon. The good news is you get to pick and choose. The more choices the better! THe good ones will survive and the others not so much. Does that settle the dispute?
Some thoughts on ASR and the reviews
I’ve briefly taken a look at some online reviews for budget Tekton speakers from ASR and Youtube. Both are based on Klippel quasi-anechoic measurements to achieve "in-room" simulations.
As an amateur speaker designer, and lover of graphs and data I have some thoughts. I mostly hope this helps the entire A’gon community get a little more perspective into how a speaker builder would think about the data.
Of course, I’ve only skimmed the data I’ve seen, I’m no expert, and have no eyes or ears on actual Tekton speakers. Please take this as purely an academic exercise based on limited and incomplete knowledge.
1. Speaker pricing.
One ASR review spends an amazing amount of time and effort analyzing the ~$800 US Tekton M-Lore. That price compares very favorably with a full Seas A26 kit from Madisound, around $1,700. I mean, not sure these inexpensive speakers deserve quite the nit-picking done here.
2. Measuring mid-woofers is hard.
The standard practice for analyzing speakers is called "quasi-anechoic." That is, we pretend to do so in a room free of reflections or boundaries. You do this with very close measurements (within 1/2") of the components, blended together. There are a couple of ways this can be incomplete though.
a - Midwoofers measure much worse this way than in a truly anechoic room. The 7" Scanspeak Revelators are good examples of this. The close mic response is deceptively bad but the 1m in-room measurements smooth out a lot of problems. If you took the close-mic measurements (as seen in the spec sheet) as correct you’d make the wrong crossover.
b - Baffle step - As popularized and researched by the late, great Jeff Bagby, the effects of the baffle on the output need to be included in any whole speaker/room simulation, which of course also means the speaker should have this built in when it is not a near-wall speaker. I don’t know enough about the Klippel simulation, but if this is not included you’ll get a bass-lite expereinced compared to real life. The effects of baffle compensation is to have more bass, but an overall lower sensitivity rating.
For both of those reasons, an actual in-room measurement is critical to assessing actual speaker behavior. We may not all have the same room, but this is a great way to see the actual mid-woofer response as well as the effects of any baffle step compensation.
Looking at the quasi anechoic measurements done by ASR and Erin it _seems_ that these speakers are not compensated, which may be OK if close-wall placement is expected.
In either event, you really want to see the actual in-room response, not just the simulated response before passing judgement. If I had to critique based strictly on the measurements and simulations, I’d 100% wonder if a better design wouldn’t be to trade sensitivity for more bass, and the in-room response would tell me that.
3. Crossover point and dispersion
One of the most important choices a speaker designer has is picking the -3 or -6 dB point for the high and low pass filters. A lot of things have to be balanced and traded off, including cost of crossover parts.
Both of the reviews, above, seem to imply a crossover point that is too high for a smooth transition from the woofer to the tweeters. No speaker can avoid rolling off the treble as you go off-axis, but the best at this do so very evenly. This gives the best off-axis performance and offers up great imaging and wide sweet spots. You’d think this was a budget speaker problem, but it is not. Look at reviews for B&W’s D series speakers, and many Focal models as examples of expensive, well received speakers that don’t excel at this.
Speakers which DO typically excel here include Revel and Magico. This is by no means a story that you should buy Revel because B&W sucks, at all. Buy what you like. I’m just pointing out that this limited dispersion problem is not at all unique to Tekton. And in fact many other Tekton speakers don’t suffer this particular set of challenges.
In the case of the M-Lore, the tweeter has really amazingly good dynamic range. If I was the designer I’d definitely want to ask if I could lower the crossover 1 kHz, which would give up a little power handling but improve the off-axis response. One big reason not to is crossover costs. I may have to add more parts to flatten the tweeter response well enough to extend it's useful range. In other words, a higher crossover point may hide tweeter deficiencies. Again, Tekton is NOT alone if they did this calculus.
I’ve probably made a lot of omissions here, but I hope this helps readers think about speaker performance and costs in a more complete manner. The listening tests always matter more than the measurements, so finding reviewers with trustworthy ears is really more important than taste-makers who let the tools, which may not be properly used, judge the experience.
Showing 14 responses by mapman
I’m with @prof on this one. Emotionally based arguments against things that add value make no sense to me. Nobody is perfect. Live long and prosper! 🖖 |
It’s a free country so anybody who thinks they can do some thing better than someone else is free to do their thing. Otherwise negativity is just counterproductive words that anyone can toss about. I’ve found ASR to be one of the more useful resources out there to help find good value products. I want more of that not less. We all have egos. Keeping that under control is pretty much always a good thing. |
Yes acoustics are obviously important but this thread is not about acoustics. For the record here are the things one has control over that I think matter most for good sound. 1. Good quality well engineered gear designed to work well together from source to speakers. Good quality implies gear has a good handle on distortion. Many speakers will qualify here. You choose. 2. Amplification that can get the most out of the speakers. 3. Room acoustics. You can do some treatments to help. Then after that smart application of DSP can help adjust for the rest, tailor the sound to personal preferences as needed, and help one get off the merry go round of changing gear. 4. Choose your tweaks from there. |
In general some forms of distortion are more undesirable than others. I suppose the Amygdala has something to do with that. It’s good to understand why and how we respond the way we do (each differently to some extent). So it’s true there is more to what appeals to us in sound than low distortion, but that does not change the fact that distortion exists and it’s also a good thing to understand that as well in each case. Distortion does matter. There are several pieces to every puzzle. |
I find useful info on ASR all the time including just now. Task: use Roon DSP to tweak a pair of Polk Atrium 4 outdoor speakers . 1. Did not measure well on ASR 2. The review indicated a treble bump and bass rolloff at about 100 hz. Good info! 3. The review indicated he liked the sound better than expected after measured but could not recommend. 5. Where my speakers are mounted is not uncommon. Listening is never on axis so treble bump is actually a good thing and not a problem. |
Music is art. Art has nothing to do with how good it measures. Art appreciation is a totally subjective thing. Ahhh! But the gear that plays the music…..that’s technology. Measurements are pretty much the only way to clearly identify technology done well versus not so much. In fact the only way to clearly define a technology is to measure it. It’s all about the numbers and there is no getting around it. Good engineers tend to be very good at math! So there is no dilemma here. No need to pick just one. Art is subjective. Technology is not. It takes two to tango but only one can lead. Take your pick! |
People on a budget should appreciate that ASR identifies many very cost effective products that perform well. Many are so cost effective that it makes sense to consider and compare. You might save a lot of $$$$s if that is something that matters to you. It does to me and I have found some very good values via ASR. Or if you think price always determines quality then probably not so much. You get to choose and be happy. It’s not hard though to see where ASR reviews may represent a threat to vendors that fear their products may be undercut by others of lower cost. That’s a real possibility but one that benefits the buyer and works against some but not all “high end vendors”. Those that offer unique value or perhaps just an alternate good sound that may or may not measure well should be fine. But it’s clearly the buyers and the more cost effective product vendors that benefit. Other high end review sites that focus exclusively on “audiophile” customers help make up for that though. |
If the conclusion is $1k speakers are all different and I get to choose the ones I think are best for whatever reason I choose, then I think I must agree. I feel so much better now! 😌 But please do let me know when it is finally determined without a question of doubt which ones are in fact best. I might, just might, be forced to change my mind. 😱
|