If your ego was a speaker, you could see it from space.
There are much better ways to get your point across using a bit of humble prose, instead of a hammer whack of amour propre.
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).
449 responses Add your response
@toddalin BEAUTIFUL CAR!!! Guys, this is old news. Tekton could not build a decent speaker if their lives depended on it. Their use of tweeters is suicidal and they can't figure out what type of speaker they want to make line source or point source. The entire speaker has to be one or the other. Multi driver speakers have been tried over and over (Nearfield Pipe Dreams) and none of them last very long. |
I have owned Tekton in the past, measured them, etc. In general, they are very good value for the cash, because it is manufacturer direct (no dealer middle man leeching away 50 to 70%). 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. If Eric Alexander kept his enormous ego down for a minute and went to other experienced guys like Andrew Jones, Michael Borresen, etc and said, "Bro, can you review it, be a 2nd pair if eyes and let me know what could be done to improve it?", he may get further somewhere. Are they ugly? It’s all relative, uglier than some, better looking than others. But, imo, they don’t fall in "the ghastly face that only the father or mother could love" category or the "ultimate chicken repellant" category. There are other ugly nauseating speakers that take that spot. |
This loudspeaker sounds exceptionally good for it's price. Doing the midrange entirely in beryllium is something to be auditioned. A 'Klipsch Forte IV" is not even in the league this speaker resides in. Make a short list of $30K loudspeakers selling today and this speaker holds its own with them; and it WILL BE be the most exciting sound of the group. If the listener is on a budget then purchase a pair of Ulfberhts - a speaker under $10K that sounds as good as the Focal Grand Utopia. |
Gotta love these Tekton threads. They all go the same way. Starts out civil and then the flies all catch a whiff and gather. Then disparaging remarks from members who have never heard the speaker but "know" it doesn't sound any good and even if it did they are so "ugly" I would never own them. So helpful. |
Stereophile Class A, etc.? Well... The PSB Synchrony One (I have a pair; they're in storage) were listed by Stereophile in 2012 as a starred “Class A Loudspeaker Recommended Component,” along with speakers costing up to $80,000 in that category, and as a “Recommended Reference Component” by Soundstage Hi-Fi —again, in competition with vastly more expensive speakers. Summing up his review in Stereophile, founding editor John Atkinson wrote: “the Synchrony One offers surprisingly deep bass for a relatively small speaker; a neutral, uncolored midrange; smooth, grain-free highs; and superbly stable and accurate stereo imaging. It is also superbly finished and looks beautiful. Highly recommended. And when you consider the price [$4,500 a pair, and $5,500 a pair by the time they were listed as a “Class A Recommended Component"], very highly recommended.” SoundStage HiFi awarded the Synchrony One “Reviewer’s Choice” recognition when it was first released in 2008, then “Recommended Reference Component” status in 2012. The original review found the Synchrony One “among the most neutral speakers ever reviewed” that “sets a new standard for tonal accuracy, clarity and detail.” The follow-up review noted that the Synchrony One is “the least expensive speaker to ever be included in our list of Recommended Reference Components,” and that it measured (in the anechoic chamber of Canada’s National Research Council) lower levels of distortion “than any speaker at any price we’d measured up till then.” The review concludes “it’s important to realize that the Synchrony One isn’t being recognized as an RRC for the performance it offers at the price [$5,500 a pair]; rather, it’s a reference-caliber speaker that compares with top-class speakers at any price.” Well...OK, boomers, boom me. But the Synchrony One doesn't. It's "soulless," as a friend put it. Doesn't do anything wrong, exactly. But it's just not engaging, exciting, "musical." My opinion? Yeah, but also that of several friends who have heard it in A/B/X comparisons with several others. So why the rave reviews? Hmmm... |
You are completely right my friend... I say it sincerely you are right about what you just said... But you miss as most people what i spoke about ... Is it my poor mastery of English that does not help ? Probably ... But it seems most people had no idea of what is acoustics ( not mere room acoustic only ) impact on a system well embedded and the huge difference between before and after... Because they never experienced that they think erroneously that i propose that my 100 bucks modified speakers so well embedded it is equal in sound quality potential some speakers well designed and more costlier ...Only an ignorant could claim that... 😊 This is not my point at all . Do you think i am completely deluded and cannot differentiate the higher design of my Magnepan’s friend or my past Tannoy dual concentric as superior in design and potential S.Q. compared to my actual modified low cost speakers so good they are ?😊 do you think that i can think one second that a low cost tube preamplifier as i own will rival an atmasphere tube preamplifier or a Berning tube preamplifier ? Seriously ? Anyway.... People pay the heavy price ignoring acoustics concepts and experiments among other things they buy and upgrade and upgrade etc .... To each his own... i will stay in my dreamed world... 😊 Acoustics rule the gear design and embeddings, upgrade dont rule acoustics... We must learn how to embed a chosen system BEFORE upgrading because all three ways to install rightfully any system apply to all system nevermind their price ..¯ And for sure a minimal acoustic experience threshold is possible at low price... But there is big difference between mike lavigne system and mine , this is not even necessary to say it; but the way he embed all his gear in his room house is the same basic knowledge we must use for any system at any price even a low cost one... i wish you the best ... thanks for your respectful way of discussing ... 😊
|
Unfortunately @mahgister giant killers are a myth….they don’t exist. |
I live in a dreamed world... for sure... 😁 In the real world people think that the performance of any piece of gear on paper equal a S.Q. that cannot be experienced without specific ears/brain with specific HTRF, in specific room , in specific electrical grid , with or without vibration resonance control, and specific speakers... (and there is even more factors i cannot list here ) Installation and optimization process matter more than a gear piece choice especially if they could be near one another in performance nevermind the difference in price... Price matter but way less than people think in their "real " commercial world... I will stay in my dreamed world where price tag matter but way less than other factors... |
By the way I was under the impression that the Stereophile rating takes into consideration performance at the MSRP, what value does a product represent. I wouldn’t automatically assume that a $10,000 GoldenEar Stereophile Class A+ rated will outperform a $30,000 Class B rated speaker. This applies to any category. If anyone thinks they’re getting a performance of Chord DAVE from a $900 Polish OKTO dac8, I hate to poop on your parade but you’re living in a dream world. |
I dont give a damn about visual listening music... Tekton are ugly for sure... 😁 But i also thought that the price of speakers generally speaking matter way less than their installation in a room for some specific ears and head measurement... As usual reviewers spoke about price and design to sell them thats all ... Why not studying how to implement any speakers? Ok i will stay mute now ... 😊 |
Oh @bigtwin nailed it🤩…Too big and ugly to roommate with everyday. Many other choices…Give me water over light beer😜IPA please🍻 |
I could never buy Tekton speakers purely on aesthetics. They could be the greatest sounding speaker in the world, at the best price and I still couldn't bring myself to look at them every day. True I do have my eyes closed most of the time I'm listening to music, but still. To each their own when it comes to beauty, but for me, they are just butt ugly. That's just my opinion and no offence to those who find them a work of art. Life's just too short to drink light beer or own ugly speakers. IMHO 😁 |
| Post removed |
If a goofy Alexia V can cost 80k, i suppose Tekton is justified for trying to charge 30k for that signature series or whatever speaker. It doesn't look like it was cheap to make. Of course, there's any number of gate keepers real busy gatekeeping whatever can enter the "high end" or not, especially if it's "manufacturer direct". I am supposing that's also why the gatekeeper dealer network is talking a lotta crap on the Daniel Hertz stuff on various threads these days (i.e., since Levinson appears to be going the manufacturer direct route). |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
I have no particular experience with Tektons, but I will say I disagree with the idea that there should be some mathematical calculus between how Stereophile rates a speaker and how much it costs. Stereophile's speaker reviews are IMHO only useful for the measurements, which are sometimes not even interpreted correctly, and MSRP has little to do with whether I would like a speaker's sound or not.
|
So, you heard the speakers and agree with Stereophile? I've only heard the Moab and the Double Impacts and thought they were pretty good for the money. They may be outside their wheelhouse making a much more expensive speaker, but, I don't know because I haven't heard it. There are plenty of stinker components, by my taste, that get favorable review from Stereophile, and it is really hard to see any kind of consistency--a wide range of sounds get good reviews. In one sense that is good because they are not catering to one kind of sound, but, in another sense it is not so good because one cannot predict if they will like something based on a review. It still comes down t hearing for oneself, and PLEASE, don't consider watching youtube videos as "hearing for onself." |
