2. speakers
  3. 137114-20253

Tekton DI Monitors

Finally got to see the measurements for the Double Impact monitors. I’m a little disappointed.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/tekton-design-impact-monitor-loudspeaker-measurements

This woofer - tweeter - woofer configuration is similar to the style named after the esteemed Joseph D’Appolito. Done well this configuration functions like a single large woofer in terms of dispersion. Less floor and ceiling bounce yield better detail at the listening position. 

Interestingly, the Audiogon craze of criticizing the tweeter array for possible comb filtering is not what I’m sad about. In fact the array appears to be the least of the issues. Look at figure 4. The horizontal plots are superbly clean. Any comb filtering from the tweeter array would be displayed here, and it’s not. Those critics going nuts about the array’s poor performance can apologize for their uninformed criticism right now.

The problem is really the vertical response. It is terrible. Here we do have evidence of comb filtering! See the plot closest to the viewer in figure 5? See the regularly occurring hills and valleys completely absent from figure 4? That my friends is comb filtering. However it’s not coming from the tweeter array, but from the two widely placed woofers. There’s also a great deal of hash above 5kHz on this same plot. This makes me so very very sad.

Part of this is fixable. As Dr. D’Appolito discovered, the designer should have used a higher order crossover slope, which would have taken care of the hash above 5 kHz. However the comb filtering below this is not easily remedied. The issue has to do with how far away the two woofers are from each other. They are so far, and cut in so high that they can’t help but interfere with each other and this woofer to woofer distance is ultimately controlled by the size of the tweeter array.

Should you buy this speaker? I think you should listen to it. See how it sounds to you as you move around your listening space. If you find yourself enamored of the mid-treble resolution and detail, I would encourage you to listen to other Tekton designs that don’t attempt a D’Appolito design, because I'm afraid that the main benefit of this type of design, narrow mid-woofer dispersion, is lost.  A simpler 2-way would avoid these issues and be as good at detail and resolution 
erik_squires
teajay
1,333 posts
 
I reviewed the Double Impact Monitor for hometheaterreview.com, gave them five stars out of five stars, bought the review pair to use in my smaller reviewing system and am delighted with their performance.  I have had speakers in for review in this system that cost more then 6K to 8K that were easily out performed by this 2K speaker.  I have had many listeners that are shocked at how beautiful the DI Monitor sounds even compared to the ULF's in my much more expensive reference system.

Frankly, when I'm listening to music I'm sitting down in front of my system, therefore, believe it's mute how the speaker sounds when I'm walking around in the room.  I'm always listening to music when I'm home, like now as I write this, as background pleasure, but that has nothing to do with serious listening to either of my systems.  So, who cares what any speaker sounds like when your walking around the room. 
erik_squires OP
5,268 posts
 
@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? 
erik_squires OP
5,268 posts
 
teajay -

* moot * :)

And thank you for your informed listening experience! It sounds like that tweeter array is behaving as expected for you. 

Erik
seanheis1
359 posts
 
Terry, sorry but this is a reviewer pet peeve of mine. Mentioning that a speaker outperforms speakers costing more than 3 to 4 times its price....but then failing to name those mystery speakers. 

In the review, you make a comparison to the pint sized KEF LS50, a speaker that costs $500 less and the B&W 705S2, a speaker that costs $500 more...
teajay
1,333 posts
 
By the way guys,

Technically, the DI Monitor is not a D'Appolitos design because it is a three way design, not a two way design.  The smaller transducers sonicly function as a single point two way coaxial speaker, hence it's a three way design.  In a true D'Appolitos approach you have MW/T/MW drivers that are always a two design.

The reference UIF's are a true D'Appolitos were the double circle array of small transducers are the MW "drivers" flanking the tweeter between the two arrays.  

I nick named the DI Monitors Jr DI's because in a smaller acoustic space they are very similar to their larger siblings in performance.  What surprises a lot of my listeners is the powerful bass extension and overall macro-dynamics of this stand mounted speaker.  It completely disappears like all reference level stand mount monitors, but presents over all as if its a full size floor-stander.  Unlike Herb, I had no problem with over loading my room with bass, and did not have any reason to stuff the rear ports with socks. I think his review says more about the limitations of his room regarding bass response, then any short-comings in the bass response of the DI Monitor. 
More to discover