"The mid array is a good idea in theory, i.e., the mid range covered by small "tweeter sized" drivers ---> associated IR ---> perceived increase in resolution/clarity/etc. But, in practice, it doesn’t blow other conventional speakers out of the water on above mentioned. What gives? My theory is a suboptimal crossover design for such an array, nullifying the gains a bit." by deep_333 - seems to get to the heart of the most important issue: That Beryllium drivers going down to 770 (unheard of) really ought to have an incredible midrange. These apparently do not rise to that standard & they really ought to. Crossing over in the lower midrange to 12 inch drivers that are notably boomy (JA mentions the need to have them in large rooms away from walls & lots of talk of stuffing the port to tame the bass from reviewers) makes them decidedly problematic overall. Many measured resonating points as well. The unpriced superspeaker picture on his site may possibly resolve much of this. When it eventually (if ever) comes out.
Stereophile review of the $30,000 tekton speakers
We have had many discussions/arguments over tekton speakers in the past, mainly involving a couple posters who thought their $4000 tektons sounded better than the highest price Wilson’s and other high budget speakers.
In the latest Stereophile magazine, they did a review of the $30,000 tekton’s. In this Steteophile issue, they rate these $30,000 tekton’s as class B. When you look at the other speakers that are in the class B section, you will notice most of these speakers range in price from $5000-$8000. So it looks like you have to spend $30,000 on a pair of tekton’s to equal a pair of $5000 Klipsch Forte IV’s sound quality.
If I compare these $30,000 class B tekton’s, to some of the class A speakers, there are some class A speakers for 1/2 the price (Dutch & Dutch 8C, Goldenear triton reference), or other class A speakers that are cheaper (Magico A5, Kef blade 2).