Tekton speaker comparison thread

I have had the Tekton Moabs with BE tweeter and upgraded crossover for about 7 months.  I think they are fabulous speakers, especially for the money.  I also have a pair of Magnepan 3.7's set up in a second room.  The ribbon tweeters in the 3.7's do create a better top end with more air but I prefer the Moabs in every other way and do almost all of my listening on them.  I have directly compared the Moabs to the Pure Audio Project Trio 15 horns, Spatial Audio M1's, Emerald Physic CS2's, Vandersteen 2Ce's, Magnepan 1.7's, Zu Audio Omen's, and KEF LS50s among others.  None of them comes anywhere close.   I have not had the opportunity to listen to truly high end speakers, much less buy and compare them to the Moabs in my own home.  

For whatever reason, the Tekton Speakers attract haters and devotees in about equal measure.  Almost without exception, the people that own Tektons are happy, and the people that own Moabs are ecstatic.  I think it is notable that  Jay's Audio Lab auditioned the Tekton Ulfberht's on his YouTube channel with generally positive comments.  His current speakers are $170,000 Magico M6's!  BUT, I do think that people who claim the Moabs are equal to speakers costing 10x as much probably have no basis for saying that.  Since I am able to compare the Moabs with the Magnepan 3.7s whenever I want I can tell you there is plenty of room for improvement in the Moabs.  My perfect speaker would combine the incredible detail and treble response the 3.7's offer with the stunning soundstage, great dynamics, terrific bass, and rich involving sound the Moabs have.  What I can't tell you is what that perfect speaker is or how much it would cost!

The Moabs also work well with every kind of amp ranging from the flea watt Dennis Had SET amps on up to the 700 watt PS Audio M700's.  I have built 4 First Watt DIY amps and the Moabs are very revealing of the differences between them which is a huge positive.

Bottom line is I would recommend the Moabs without reservation. 

@benarritt  I have never heard the Double Impacts but I do have the Moabs with BE tweeters and I had the opportunity to audition the Focal Sopra No 3’s for about an hour at a local dealer. The Focal’s were a very interesting speaker and they had the best bass I have ever heard playing the Hell Hounds of Krim by King Crimson. They also had what I would describe as an exaggeratedly warm and resonant mid-range. It was easy to like, but I’m pretty sure I would tire of it over time. The soundstage was markedly worse than the Moabs. The highs seemed quite recessed to me and listening closely to cymbals or triangles there was a harshness to the highs that I think explained why Focal choose to dial the upper end back. I don’t think it is a surprise that if you like the Focals recessed highs you might feel the DI’s were too much.

Overall, I can understand the preference for the Sopra No 3’s, but I never felt tempted to replace my Moabs with them. On the other hand, I do lust after the Wilson Sasha DAWs, but don’t expect to afford them anytime soon.

And I would note that you are comparing a $4250 speaker with at $24,000 speaker. It isn’t 3x as expensive as you said in your review, it is 5.6x as expensive. People that have heard both claim the Moabs are dramatically better than the Double Impacts. I have no idea if that is true, but it seems plausible to me and Moabs are only 25% the price of the Sopra No 3s.

Anyhow, I have no interest in getting into another one of these endless love/hate debates over Tekton speakers. But I really don’t think the vast majority of people that own DIs or Moabs would think the highs are shrill or hard. A more valid criticism would be that other speakers offer more micro detail and coherence. I have had speakers like that in my system and appreciate those attributes but I always come back to the Moabs for their musicality, soundstage, and density and they are plenty detailed for me.

 

@smodtactical All of the Magnepan speakers I have owned have had more micro detail than my Moabs.