Tekton DI Monitors
To be clear: The tweeter array has no apparent comb filtering as a result of the array itself. All those armchair designers and array detractors were W R O N G. OTOH, the array to woofer matching shows plenty of comb filtering, none of which the A'gon pundits warned about! So I'm doubly amused. This is the sad part, and also sad because the same designer's own Enzo is relatively free of these effects. It is the insistence on a W-(array)-W arrangement that causes this. Best, Erik |
Hey @teajay Read my comments, from the very first posting until now. When have I assessed the sound quality of these speakers? In fact, I make it clear you should listen to them, and many replied that they only care in the sweet spot. At most, I recommend where listeners should pay particular attention. So I don't know what part of your body you type out of, but I hope it connects to the part of you that thinks a little more soon. Kristofa - I'm not sure it is even a problem, since most listeners are reporting that they listen only in the sweet spot. If your question is: Would this kind of comb filtering be in other models? Then the answer is: Depends on the crossover slopes, high pass point, and space between the woofers. Best, Erik |
Yes, I get that D’Appolito array is different, but as far as the woofer to woofer spacing and lobing, along with the integration to the drivers, they are the same problems. The reason D’Appolito now prefers 4th order filters is exactly why they DI monitors have horrible vertical response above 1 kHz. The reason Joe tried to keep the woofers together and pick a low enough crossover frequency is exactly why the DI monitors show gross combing between 300 Hz and 1 kHz. Everything Joe did right, the Tekton’s do wrong, regardless of whether it is a 2 or 3 way or 3 way coaxial. The core issues which D’Appolito deals with are exactly why I’m complaining but also why I feel the D’Appolito design is the perfect example against which to compare the DI monitors to. Best, Erik |
Hi @steakster I don't want to beat a dead horse, but no. The issue is the distance between the two woofers. On the other hand, as the review and others have noted, in the exact sweet spot, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the performance of the DI monitors in the sweet spot. It is really two things: 1 - Above and below 2 - The entire purpose of a true D'Appolito is to narrow the beam width of the mid-woofers, which you don't get with this design. Often angling a driver off-axis eliminates on-axis issues. Wilson did this with the Focal tweeters. :) Best, Erik |
@charles1dad I think as a buyer you are right on. :) One important part of the hobby and engineering though is to examine our assumptions about what sounds good (and good enough) vs. measurements. A couple of weeks ago, comb filtering was all the rage on Audiogon. It seems that the DI monitors have plenty of comb filtering and no one cares. Curious! Erik |
P.S. I reserve the right to coin a new phrase, in this case quasi-D'Apollito to mean speakers which use a Woofer - (something) - Woofer array when that (something) shares a similar crossover point that could be expected wiht a D'Appolito, around 2-5kHz. By my definition and for the purpose of this argument, the Tekton DI Monitors qualify. |
You keep referring to the DI Monitor as a "quasi' D'Appolito design" , however I politely disagree with this statement @teajay If the monitors are not attempting the same dispersion control that D'Appolitos bring, then it is just bad speaker design. Spreading out the woofers around a central array without taking into consideration the crossover point is sad indeed. On the other hand, if I think of the designer attempting to extend the focus of the tweeter array to the woofers then the intentions were good, but the execution incomplete. Either way, as good as they may sound, this seems like only a partial success. Best, E |
Hi Charles, My critique may be a moot point is listeners don't mind the off axis performance or plan on only listening in one fixed location. I think that for the same price, a slight re-arrangement of the woofers along with a higher order crossover could perform better. So, in that sense, yes I think I might be able to best the monitors. :) Take a look at the vertical dispersion (fig. 5) of the Tekton Enzo to see what I mean. https://www.stereophile.com/content/tekton-design-enzo-xl-loudspeaker-measurements As for the price, Tekton is getting an amazing price break from SB Acoustics in order to make those price points with seven tweeters. I think that the combination of interesting and very well behaved tweeter array plus components make the speakers a potentially very good value (assuming they sound good). If I had to sell speakers for $2k and make a profit, I'd probably try a much more traditional line array. It is quite a challenge! And not one I would attempt commercially. Best, Erik |
Based on the impedance charts, I'm guessing the woofers cross over at around 1kHz when (based on spacing) they should have been crossed around 300 Hz. Alternatively, the designer could have done an (array) - WW design, eliminating the comb filtering altogether and providing similar output. In case it's not clear, one reason I wanted to talk about this design and measurements is that it clearly illustrates comb filtering while at the same time proving the tweeter array doesn't have any. It's pretty ironic to me. :) Best, Erik |
@teajay - On the other hand the woofer to array crossover seems rather high, around 1-2 kHz, so we can’t call the outer ring mid-woofers either. Point is, why bother with a W - (something) - W array if you are not going to get the benefits? Yeah, this is one major reason I throw Stereophile reviews in the trash. Bad rooms they refuse to do anything about, or failure to listen to manufacturer's requirements before auditioning. Their measurements are credible though, so worth looking at, especially when they completely dispute their review. :) |
@corelli - It really depends on the buyer. I often have music playing in my home regardless of what I'm doing, so having a pleasant off-axis experience in both planes is important for me. There's much that has been written that a lot of consumers really value a wide sweet spot. Magico and Revel designs specifically for this. The DI Monitors seem to have plenty of that. I'm just super disappointed in that these appear to be a failed D'Appolito design. Part of what you get with a D'Appolito is a tighter vertical dispersion down to the mid-bass, which these speakers do not have. They are aesthetically D'Appolitos without being functional D'Appolitos. Am I being too critical? |
