well, looking at the speakers youve had in the past. none was considered high efficiency (Zu dont count imo)
I think thats most of the sound you missed and found in the Tekton!
HE is where its at. I highly recommend for you to start exploring the wonderful world of paper cone, HE and low class a amps!
I see for the dual subs. that should solve your slight lack of extension!
I have two rooms and audio was my pandemic hobby. Unlike so many of the posters on this thread I like to hear something before I render an opinion on it. The Moabs are the only speakers that have stayed in constant rotation and I have yet to hear any speaker costing less than $25,000 that I would consider replacing them with. There is a reason why there has been a 3-5 month wait list to get the speakers and it isn't because people like how the tweeter array looks.
^ exactly (as if this is a "what's "best" forum"). Really if you want to "feel good" about your commercial purchase this isn't the forum for that.
..and then being dismissive when others talk about design constraints (..and in my case actually having both designed and heard something exceedingly similar).
..and then being dismissive when others talk about design constraints (..and in my case actually having both designed and heard something exceedingly similar).
I am exploring, thus my original post to ask if others have any other recommendations. HE implementation sometime lacks bass(fullrangers), too big (horns), or they cost alot (Tannoy Kingdom Royal).......or all 3 original sins!
Like Andrew Jones said, BASS, SIZE, COST, pick 2!
My next step is to see the Lii audio F15s fullranger; again, it's bigger than I'd like with the baffle, but it might be worth it.
So...with all these elements/considerations, I think the tekton is striking a pretty sweet balance, that's all.
Im unable to find the Tekton Moabs Measurements. Any measurements available anywhere?
..around 2.5kHz for the high-pass, the added gain I mentioned before (driver multiples and baffle diffraction) compensates for pressure loss below that and somewhere around 1 kHz is the summed high-pass for the mid-tweeter array (or where the midbass has its low-pass filter).
I could be wrong, but looking at the Impact's Impedance trace doesn't suggest multiple different low-pass filters.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/tekton-design-impact-monitor-loudspeaker-measurements
Last edited:
I couldn't find any either, and as I mentioned before - the verticals will have quite a lot of combing considering the distances with a very narrow vertical response (the portion that's linear) as a result.
This isn't necessarily a bad thing though (despite the fact that it doesn't look good on a graph), in fact some designs strive for a narrow vertical window to reduce floor and ceiling effects.
Note: when looking at the Impact's vertical response that most of the tweeter's combing occurs above 2 kHz, the added combing below it is from the midbass drivers. My guess is that the Moab's result is similar yet with a more exaggerated result that starts lower in freq. for the mid. tweeter array (..which would also be true of the midbass section as well given the distancing of the drivers).
fairy nuff, but at that rate of turn around wouldn't an extended audition have been easier?
Which is fine for reporting on things in your room, with your music and your ears. Sadly not much use for me as I have a completely different set of compromises to you. But understanding the reasons for the design and the benefits/drawbacks is both interesting and one day might help me with getting the right direction for my needs.
Oh and the wife has mild trypophobia. Modern Iphones with all the lenses on the back trigger it so this speaker would not get anywhere near my house 😀. I wonder if I could get away with the Geithain approach to the problem...
P.S. What is good is you are happy with your choice.