Tekton Double Impacts

Jeffrey regarding the 'forward in your face'  description;  Are you able to increase the distance between you and the speakers, or try to aim them with less toe-in using a focal point behind your sitting position by several feet, or space them apart much further apart (or a combination of the 3), to reduce this effect if it's undesirable?

Personally, I like dynamic vocals that are a tad forward, especially at lower volume levels, but I wouldn't sacrifice coherence for it.  When I say "In your face" to describe a sonic presentation it's used as a perjorative to describe a deleterious reproduced midrange that's calling attention to it's self, lacking in coherence, shouty/shrill/peaky/lacking in micro dynamics and nuance (like a certain OEMs horn with a measured rising top end from 2k-10k of 2-8db!)  not to be confused with "a close shave" something I might say about certain metal tweeters that are hot and cut like laser beams severing your ears off in the process.  So on a scale of 1-10 (one being very recessed, 5 being about right, 10 being you can tell the lead vocalist needs to floss better) where do the Ulfberhts fall?
 
Thanks again for your honest assessment of their sound and I really value your opinion, but I just wanted to compare how we both say the same thing and if we mean it in a bad or a good way and to what degree.  If you could tell me and forgive me for asking this if it's been answered, but what are your room dimensions?  What is the distance between the speakers, the speakers front baffle to the back wall as well as your listening positioning?  Just approximations, and again forgive me if this was answered before. 

Thanks again for helping us all with your experience with the Ulfberhts. I really want a pair for my large listening room.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Carcopo  

Excellent, standard 1/4 x 20. You can tell they're made in America.

As I recall 1/4-20 lancelock.

Lance,

You will need 1/4-20 thread size.

Kenny.

Hey guys, what thread size for the feet on the DI's?

Can't wait to see pics Lance. That orange should be sweet. More importantly I'm looking forward to your accessment of them. As you know I'm also a user of the Herbies threaded Giant Gliders. They work very well for me. Davids set up is quite interesting also but with my low ceiling I don't want raise my speakers any higher. 

@lancelock :

I am using Herbie's 'Giant Threaded Stud Gliders' screwed into the Double Impacts and Herbie's 'Giant Fat Gliders' under each 18 by 20 inch isolation platform. 

The DIs with Gliders rest upon the isolation platform. The isolation platform with Gliders rest upon an oak hardwood floor.

I went with Herbie's based on others here in this thread recommending them (though I also had previous experience with his footers and tube dampers).

Others within the thread also recommended Soundocity, which I also seriously considered. Star Sound Technology's Sistrum platforms were also highly recommended within the thread (and would have been my first choice, but my goal was mainly to protect the speakers from tipping over should my 3 and a half year old son somehow manage to do so)

The impact on sound quality was immediately apparent, as I'm sure it would be with the other two options mentioned here (as well as those not mentioned above).

Hope this information is helpful. I asked a similar question quite awhile back, if you search you should be able to land on those pages. Everyones input was extremely helpful.

My orange DI's with upgrades are on the way. I am considering Herbies gliders temporarily to find optimum placement and then using spikes on thin carpet with concrete underneath. I suppose I could then sell the gliders.

anyone else have any ideas? Im guessing they will be difficult to move once spikes are installed.

im looking forward to joining the conversation about how they sound.

I heard three or four of the SF line of speakers before I went with the Tektons. Everyones taste is different. I thought the lower end Sonus were ok, but the higher end speakers I thought were very good. I liked them a lot. For me, they did not leave me thinking that they were worth that kind of money and I had to have them like some other expensive speakers did. Personally, I do not think they did anything that the DIs could not, but that is just to my ears. I do have to say that the higher end ones look great. Would definitely dress up a room.

My speakers are not slow in the least ,your choice of amplifier will determine that. Yes I did here the D impacts ,not SE version, a  week ago at a audio get together .they did s lot of things well.
The Olympica-3 drivers are night and day better quality even 
Vs the As a version that I can say as s Fact. Much of the technologies is from their flag ship. And the only clarity worth 
Their salt, I have used them all is their new Copper MR,
Or Copper ESA,their 2nd in line. And Jsntzen coils are a favorite,
And mundorf supreme resistors,or worlds best Path Audio
Under 1% max .Duelund 5 and 10% are a 10,and 20% total variance .
Cabinet design build is totally an art form and specialty. 

Yes, mofojo, Eric was quite open about the brand of caps and coils your $300 got you.  So not quite sure where audioman is getting the impression this is all guarded information.

Teajay, I also noted my original review that the DI's do a very nice job of conveying a sense of the venue of the performance.  I would be surprised if the Ulfs can't discriminate in this regard.  As others have stated makes one question either  room/placement issues or associated gear.  If that's not the case....well,I'd keep my DI's.

@audioman58 
The $300 upgrade version uses Clarity caps. 
Just curious if you have ever heard the DIs? You say the Sonus Fabers are much better balanced. I heard the Olympica 3 at Hansen's audio in Dayton Ohio and did not care for them much. Seemed like they slowed and rounded transients somewhat for a lusher type of sound. 

As far as presentation with my DIs in my room, the lunatic in Dark Side of the Moon is standing behind your left shoulder. I've startled a couple of people with that effect. And that's driving them with a SS Receiver. If the imaging of the Ulfs surpasses that, it must be impressive. This effect and just the general depth/width/definition of the sound field was never as good as this with my B&W 804s. And they are know to be pretty good in that aspect. I am really looking forward to my DI SE when Eric gets to them.

The dialogue exchange on this thread continues to be educational and certainly interesting. Teajay said that the Tekton Double Impacts are a true conduit and I believe the same would be true regarding the Ulfberths.

This leads me to believe that the "forward " presentation of the Ulfberths is simply a reflection of what source and amplifier driving them. Change the power amplifier and the presentation changes accordingly.

A genuine conduit will starkly reveal the the nature and quality of the recording and audio components in the signal chain or pathway. My gut feeling is that the Double Impact SE (with the excellent Scanspeak drivers and upgraded crossover parts) driven by SETs mentioned throughout this thread would be musically sublime. 
Charles

Hi David Ten,

It's been my experience that a great sound-staging speaker, if driven by the right electronics and it has enough acoustic space to breath, gives the listener different spatial dimensions accurately based on how and where the recording was made.  I have auditioned speakers that on any recording present in a "forward sound-stage way" that I do believe is a shortcoming/flaw in its design.  The DI's sound-staging changes when the recording presents a studio/hall/out door venue perspective, if driven by the right gear.  

One thing the double impacts are not are refined . Erik will not even disclose the 
Type and crossover type,brands used, and this has Nothing to do  with his 
So called proprietary design. He uses cheaper parts period . Myself using from basic to 
Exotic capacitors ,resistors, and the purity is very evident.
As well as the drivers used,precision definitely not.  Very good bottom end Big sound stage 
And big wave front from all the drivers. My Sonus Faber Olympica-3  speakers are much better balanced for exsmple. It sll depends what  perspective is most important to You and  your system. Whatever makes You happy.😎

Thanks Jeffrey
I'm not sure how I feel about that. My first thought is that it might not be "natural", but without hearing it I am just making conclusions that I have no business making. But in general, I don't like being right on top of a band. The soundstage does not open up. Not sure if that is the case with the "in your face" presentation you are describing.

@teajay : Hi Terry. Are you saying that a more forward stage presentation is a 'shortcoming' or was your comment more of a general statement? Thank you.

@333jeffery: Thank you!!!

 That's what I thought. How close would you say you are to the 'stage' with the Ulfberths?

If I remember correctly, your seating position is about 10 feet from the speakers.

By forward, I mean that the soundstage is very close to the listener, almost in your face. The Ulf's are not excessively bright.

My audio chain is: Yggdrasil dac to BHK Signature preamp to BHK 300 amps to the speakers. Same setup I used with the Double Impacts.

Hey Guys,

I'm still waiting for my review pair of ULF's.  Hope I'll get them in the next couple of weeks.

I have a question for Jeffrey, unless he posted this before and I missed it, what amplifiers and source gear are you using to power your ULF's?  I'm quite curious because how he describes the performance of his new speakers, I'm assuming that the ULF's are at least as much as a conduit as the DI's, if not more transparent, sound more the shortcomings of the upstream gear.  

@vitop: I'm sure @333jeffery will clarify, but I don't believe he means bright.

David:

I am having the same issue I am struggling to visualize (audiolize? :-)
what Jeffrey is trying to explain. I was taking forward to mean bright? kind of like a B&W, but still not sure.

@333jeffery: When you say 'forward' do you mean closer to the stage? And when you say 'more in your face,' are you describing the same as being 'forward' or something else? Thanks. - David.

Craig, the Ulf's have superior dynamic headroom compared to the DI's. I tested this by playing pipe organ recordings at near-deafening levels. No stress/breaking-up of the music whatsoever. My dad played his piano recordings at thunderous levels, and the Ulf's maintained proper tone all the way. Keep in mind that this is with big amplifiers, The Ulf's happily consumed all the power I could give them.
Vitop, the Ulf's are more "in your face" than the DI's. This is gradually softening, but I know some folks don't like this characteristic in speakers. Just something to keep in mind. In my listening room, the DI's sounded recessed by comparison.
Mac, my listening room is acoustically dead. Lots of padded furniture and thick carpet that soaks up sound. Still, the Ulf's can fill it with sound at reasonable listening levels.

Jeffrey,

thanks for the update and please keep them coming. The Ulfberhts must be amazing to better the DI's in bass and detail. I'm not surprised they do as Eric went all out with his best design utilizing the best possible components to create the sound he was after. I believe proper room treatment is essential for the best sound with any speaker but even more so with the likes of the DI and Ulfberhts as they produce prodigious amounts of sound. Adding floor to ceiling 2'x2' bass traps in each corner with quadratic diffusers on side and back walls and ceiling really make my DI's sing in my relatively small room with less than 8' ceilings. The Ulfberhts would probably be too tall in my vertically challenged room but the mini Ulfberhts might work.......they fit my budget better too :) I hope to hear the Ulfberhts someday though, I bet they are amazing. I'd really like to hear them with a small SET amp........you get your Ulfberhts yet Teajay? 

Jeffrey -

So other than the bass (more and better), midrange and treble (more detailed) all sounding better than the DI, I guess there is not much to talk about :-)

Seriously though, can you go into the "forward" nature of the Ulf. I can take that to be either a positive or a negative. The DI is also pretty forward, so do you mean the Ulf is too forward? Or maybe describe forward in what way?

Thanks.

Jeffery:
Overall would you say the ULFs have greater dynamic headroom than the DIs? In particular, am thinking of large orchestral recordings where the ideal is to be very loud but not sound electronically/acoustically stressed. Am getting some of this with the DIs and have found that cleaning up the room's resonance characteristics helps greatly with this goal.
Thanks again for your information. Eric lists the amp limit at 1000 watts -- can only think of the Emotive mono blocks that produce this kind of power at 4 ohms. Getting this as class A power would be another story...
Craig

According to the specs the Ulfs are 1db more sensitive than the DI's.

On my DI's I changed the woofers to the eminence betas which gave me much better defined bass.I changed the crossover parts to much better as well,I only use my subs for some music usually they are turned off.

Kenny.

Vitop, that would be correct. Though the bass is the most noticeable difference, so far. Also, the Ulf's have a very forward presentation to them compared to the DI's. This is settling down somewhat with burn in, but it's still there.

Jeffrey:
I am assuming the detail is not in the bass? So you have the difference in the bass as well as the detail in the mids and highs?

Klh, it's hard to say. I've only played them with large amps, greater than 300 watts/channel. From my experience with them and the DI's, I do not think they will scale as well as the DI's. But we'll just have to wait until someone pairs them with a smaller amp to be sure.

Jeffery, How much less sensitive are the Ulfs than the DIs?

I have about 40 hours on the Ulfberhts, so far. They are really starting to come into their own now. One big difference between them and the DI's that I have noticed is the bass. It's not only more plentiful but also much better quality than on the DI's. Very tight and precise, with nice texture to it.
I played some cd's on the Ulf's that sounded okay on the DI's but were never really satisfying on them. Through the Ulf's they sounded like brand new recordings. Lots of details that I never noticed before. Blind Faith and Robin Trower never sounded this good before.

Lance,

I would expect yours to ship within 2 wks or sooner,if they are already painted.I would bet Eric is probably busier than he has ever been,he does answer emails if you want to try that.

Best,

Kenny.

I ordered my DI's over a week ago and Eric was painting another pair the same color that I want so he did paint them that day.  Does anyone have a feel for how long it takes to get them. Im not in a hurry and don't really want to bother Eric yet.

Lance

Teajay,
Thanks. I’ve used both of those tubes in my amplifier and  thought the Sophia  Royal Princess was very good sounding. I like the EML XLS and Takatsuki even more with direct comparison. I’m pretty certain that the particular amplifier in use has some influence regarding tube preference.
Charles

Hi Charlies,

The 300B tubes I used in the Canary amps were Sophia Electric  Mesh Plates which I like very much.  When I was rolling 300B's at one time this tube and the even more expensive Royal Princess tube were my favorite.  

@david_ten actuallly Kathryn did asked what I was going to do with the 804s the DIs displaced. But mom wasn't letting those leave the house. They displaced some floor standing 6 series B&Ws I had in the family room. The 804s are very nice looking, as well as sounding great IMHO so that was a win for the wife. Kathryn is likely to "inherit" the 6 series for the new house they are building. I need some good sound when I visit over there too! Win, win, win.

Baranyl,
Thanks for your additional listening impressions. If the Canary 300b SET is anything like my Coincident amplifier the choice of 300b tube has a substantial effect on the sound quality and character. What tube was teajay using?

He used a very well regarded NOS RCA with the 2A3 amplifier. Based on your sonic descriptions I’d choose the Triode Labs 2A3 SET as well. I’ll always prefer the component that gets to the core of music and increases the emotional involvement/communication aspect of listening.

This emotional connection factor (and tonality/timbre) could vary noticeably depending on the quality of 300b tube used in my amplifier. The one drawback admittedly is the better 300bs are expensive relative to most other output tubes.

Teajay said that the Double Impacts are a conduit and that seems to be quite an accurate assessment. The variety of amplifiers mentioned in this thread is diverse. Personally I’d love to hear the Triode Labs 2A3 SET in direct comparison to the Line Magnetic 508ia used by Chris (Waltersalas). Now that would be very interesting, pure SET DHT tubes in both low power and  moderate power presentation. 

The Double Impacts open the door to some compelling scenarios.
Charles

I had the wonderful experience of listening with Teajay to the two SET amps with DI last Wednesday. I must say that I thought the 2a3 amp made by Triode lab was far better than the Canary 300b mono blocks. Everything Teajay said about the Canarys is true. They have a huge image with great dynamics and they are the champs at detail retrieval. They just don't sound as much like music as the 2a3 amp IMHO. The 2a3 amp bowled me over with its incredible tonality and beautiful imaging. It was the best that I have ever heard Teajay's system. There was real music playing with the 2A3 amps. The Canarys had a more exciting sound but the Triode lab was just the music. Both are great amps but the 2a3 literally knocked my socks off!

 I told Teajay that Triode lab was so good that I wanted one of to buy one....even though not having speakers that would work with it...it was that good!

Bullitt.... Careful, she may be angling for a pair of DIs  : )

david_ten I can't leave well enough alone. Told my daughter I was upgrading to the SE version and she said they BETTER sound as good as these! I assured her she would again get an A/B audition and I could return either set. No pressure!

Bullitt,

Enjoy the gear you have,We are just picky fussy audiophiles that like specific music.

Play some moody blues and steely dan and you would be closer to what I like the most.

Kenny.

Bullitt you are one lucky dude...you got a 'Yes' from  a woman and not one but two. Celebrate! : )

The longer this thread goes, the more unworthy I feel to own the DIs with my crummy signal path and lousy taste in music. My 28 year old daughter was here all weekend and continues to enjoy the DIs. We enjoyed a few hours listening and I'm pretty sure the closest to Classical or Jazz we got was "Yes". Fun to have the family enjoy your hobby with you.

Thanks for the response Charles 

Kenny,

youre totally correct regarding the limitations of the MZ. I rarely listen to classic rock and when I do I do so on my SS system. 

Im with you on using great NOS tubes with the MZ. I'm currently using the TungSol round plates and 40's Mullard 12AT7's and have a pair of 40's Sylvania 12SN7's on the way. Im loving my current sound and if the Sylvania's improve it further......better yet!

Mac,

I can relate to all you have said,and the direction you are going to get a quality dht set amp,that will give you what you are looking for in spades.Now the hard part begins finding the one for you amongst all the very good choices and also that meet your budget.

Yes the MZ2 is very good on it's own driving my DI's for about 85% of the music I listen too,but for full orchestra and the occasional classic rock played loud definitely needs a little more headroom.

I like mullard 12at7's from the 50's and 1940's slyvania vt231's the best so far for me,the 1940's tung sol round plates would be my 2nd pick.You definitely can't go wrong with the wonderful nos tubes that's for sure.I did also try new production tung sol and Sophia 6sn7's that I have used in other preamps with fair to good results but they both sounded terrible in the MZ2.They both were noisy and the tone shifted to the cool side which I did'nt like at all.

I'm going to use my MZ2 by itself for a wk or 2 and then pair it with a couple of amps and see which I like best.

Best,

Kenny.