Tekton M-Lore Speaker Measurement Update

[Toxmarz]

I would bet that @Eric Alexander doesn't really want to have a legal court ruling that his speakers in fact do measure poorly. He's just trying to bully anyone that might cause a dent in his wallet with truth into silence.

 

[Pinkynator]

No talk about religion please. I am going to sleep and am hoping you all don't strangle each other!

I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump. I ran over and said:

"Stop. Don't do it."
"Why shouldn't I?" he asked.
"Well, there's so much to live for!"
"Like what?"
"Are you an audiophile?"
He said: "Yes."
I said: "Me too. Are you objectivist or subjectivist?"
"Subjectivist."
"Me too. Are you transistorist or tubeist?"
"Tubeist."
"Me too. Are you triodist or pentodist?"
"Pentodist."
"Wow. Me too. Are you suppressor wired to cathode or suppressor wired externally?"
"Suppressor wired externally."
"Me too. Are you 6V or 6.3V?"
"6.3V."
“Me too. Are you 7V7 or 7W7?"
He said: "7W7."

I said: "Die, heretic scum," and pushed him off the edge.

 

[BALKAN_RAKIA]

it is pretty flat between 7 and 9k. and nowhere else. which is a shame given the price tag of the speakers and the imaginary lawyers involved.

 

[Esprit]

I think Teton would have been wise to plug their own holes

His mouth

 

[Toxmarz]

Thank you @amirm

As much we may understand Eric’s point of view that a minor cabinet leak can, and will change the port turning, and measuring on a different axis will affect the measurement, I feel that the owner’s reaction was unnecessary.

The approach to critical feedback can be managed in a different way.

After all, this is not the same magnitude of problem like a gross error- like a driver being wired out of phase, or a damaged / non-functioning driver.

I would have thought that a different approach would be more constructive eg. Reflecting on limitations of being able to control a user’s set-up process (eg. not installing feet) or listening on the tweeter axis instead of the woofer axis.

I would think this is a better approach and better for public relations for all involved.
After all, Eric does seem to have other interesting designs worthy of audition / measurement / review.

View attachment 364801

Ulfberht

Named after medieval-era Viking swords, the Ulfberht loudspeaker is the ultimate hammer/butterfly of sonic expression, striking out at the listener with percussive elements and a constant velocity…

tektondesign.com

Their speaker designs with a myriad of drivers always make me think of

 

[AudioSceptic]

As most of you probably know, I reviewed the Tekton M-Lore speaker back in October of last year. Company recently complained that my measurements were in error due to woofer being listening axis and not the tweeter (speaker manual disputes this). And that without the feet, the holes that house them go all the way through causing additional leakage. Owner/designer @Eric Alexander has implied that these make a big difference. So much so that he was planning to litigate against me back in March of this year:
View attachment 364796
Company has failed to this date to provide any measurements of its own, backing that I have "damaged this loudspeakers reputation." Instead, it has repeatedly demanded that I either delete the review or lately, to remeasure it.

I had responded to him that changing the listening axis would not make much of a difference. He disagreed. Fortunately Klippel Near-field Scanner computers the full response of the speaker in 3-D space so I could re-present the results using the woofer axis. As simple math would have predicted, there is little difference as I post in the review thread:

Subsequently, Eric Alexander sent me email demanding that I correct the step response. I explained to him that this was a different measurement and to redo that, it would require to test the speaker again. And that if he provides me with his step response, I would include it in the review. I received no answer.

In the interest of going above and beyond, I exchanged messages with the owner of the M-Lore who had since sold the speaker. He was kind enough to offer to actually buy back the speaker so that we could re-test! Fortunately we didn't have to go that far as the new owner was kindly willing to let me borrow the speaker again. I got both speakers with the spikes as shipped. I don't know which one I tested but I think the results below are representative enough that I don't need to test the other speaker.

I put the feet on and measured the impedance (I have left out phase to make it easier to read the graph):

View attachment 364797
As a number of expert members had predicted, the impact is very small and limited to very low frequencies. There was a tiny resonance at around 400 Hz which got reduced a bit and shifted to higher frequency as noted. It should be noted that you can get larger difference if you just change the test voltage. So all of this is in the noise, literally.

The other complaint was about the step response. Most of you know that I only post that for the few people who care and it doesn't enter my analysis of the performance of the speaker. @Eric Alexander however, insisted that there would be a difference here. First, let me explain that the step response comes from my 86 dBSPL, near-field, non-anechoic measurement. As such, it is very sensitive to where you set the reference axis. In my original review, that was the tweeter. I remeasured, this time by making woofer the reference axis. Since the path length to the microphone from the woofer is shorter than the tweeter now, the first spike that represents the tweeter is lower in amplitude (right):
View attachment 364798

Neither represents bad or good results in my book. But if the right graph makes Mr. Alexander happier, there it is.

Conclusions
As is plainly obvious, these are all nits and do not in any way change the picture of the performance of the Tekton M-Lore speaker. All of this was communicated to the company but the designer refused to accept. And kept insisting that the measurements were "botched" or "flawed." The negligible difference could be and have been predicted so there was little reason to bring them up. It is very odd that a speaker designer would exaggerate such differences so much. And then refuse to post measurement differences when challenged. But here we are.

This concludes my testing of the Tekton M-Lore speaker and addresses the complaints of the company. I am open to testing other speakers from the company but I am done with M-Lore seeing how the company doesn't care enough to release its own measurements.

Now please excuse me as I make arrangements to return these two bulky speakers to the new owner. Special thank you to him and the first owner by being so generous with their time and kind motivations to help resolve this issue.

I look forward to seeing Mr. Alexander's profuse apologies for wasting so much of your time and attacking your reputation as a thorough, fair and unbiased audio reviewer.

(AS IF!!!)

 

[olieb]

It is the step response of the magnitude response you see in the distortion measurements. I often spend time optimizing the axis to get the most even response.

I see, probably the best way to do it. But any near field measurement will have different timing of the drivers on the baffle compared to a far field measurement, so it would still be interesting whether you measure in the ballpark of 1m or 30 cm or ...

 

[AudioSceptic]

Any speaker designer should have known that the feet wouldn't make a huge difference in the measured response. Odd that this one didn't and so intensely protested the results. The damage to the companies reputation for their imperfect design would have been minimal--all speakers have some degree of "imperfect". The damage from the veracity of the response and threats will likely be far, far greater.

All this makes me think that Ascend Acoustics got a worse review and instead of refuting the results and threatening the reviewer, they responded with incredible designs that most people were ecstatic with. This review was an opportunity to do something better. Now, I could care less what they do as I'd never support someone who acts like this unless they had a public reconning.

Did you mean "reckoning"? Actually, re-conning, as in, conning the public again, also fits.

 

[DSJR]

I doubt Amir and Eric will get that apology @AudioSceptic unfortunately...

Here's the page (again) of the TDL RTL2 series 1 measurements. We sold a heck of a lot of these and for their short stature, they 'sounded' wonderfully judged (best of the range if max volume wasn't an issue) and definitely NOT a fully neutral balance. For many domestic listeners away from sites like this and Erin's, in-room it really doesn't matter so much, however painful this may seem to many of 'us' here... What put me off was the poor if unintentional bubble-vinyl finish of this model range.

http://www.tdl-loudspeakers.co.uk/pdf/rtl_page2.pdf

 

[AudioSceptic]

This is a good thing done. Thank you Amir for this new publication.

I think we should also contribute to pay Eric Alexander for public relations lessons, because instead of seeing his relationship grow with the community of high-fidelity enthusiasts, his reaction to the measures of Erin Corner and ASR harmed him greatly. But certainly not the measures published by the two of you which were perfectly harmless and without any consequence on his reputation.

Now, that an amateur appreciates them does not surprise me at all, speakers measuring execrably are adored by their owner.
But I bought to see a pair of Kali 8 V2 whose measurements are very good but very choppy at the top of the spectrum due to the coaxial speaker: excellent out of the box. Corrected by my Tact 2.2X after measurements: really very very good...

Well-made measurements, and you, like Erin, do them according to the rules of the art, say everything about electronics and almost everything about acoustic speakers like never before in the history of high-fidelity and allow amateurs to sort between all the products placed on the market.

I bought three devices following ASR's tests: a Dac Topping DX3 Pro +, a THX 759 AAA headphone amp and a pair of Kalin-IN8 V 2s that I bought out of curiosity. And I correct my Sennheiser headphones in Roon with Amir's parametric corrections. And I welcome it every day. I was able to compare the Topping and the THX AAA with similar devices at a much higher price which confirmed that the measurements say everything about the quality of an electronic... and not the price paid. And the Kali IN8, despite the measurement accidents around 8 and 9 Khz, sound splendidly 2.5 m from my ears and I had young 27-year-old ears in perfect condition "check" if this uneven high was audible: no, it's not at all... any frustration.... and elsewhere in the house I listen on a pair of Focal-Divatech MC 210 Wide Listening Monitors which have made me happy for 20 years... corrected up to 350 Hz by Audyssey ... Oh yes ! I forgot: I also bought a Denon AV 3600 thanks to ASR... And I love the look made by very subjective audiophile friends when they realize that it's a home cinema amp that drives these monsters. 'pregnant... They can't believe it... and their certainties take a hit.

So well done! again to ASR-Amir and Erin Corner for their useful work... large companies trust them and sometimes even work hand in hand with ASR to resolve design problems.

I would contribute to buying a copy of <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influence_People> to send to Mr. Alexander.

 

[AudioSceptic]

I doubt Amir and Eric will get that apology @AudioSceptic unfortunately...

Here's the page (again) of the TDL RTL2 series 1 measurements. We sold a heck of a lot of these and for their short stature, they 'sounded' wonderfully judged (best of the range if max volume wasn't an issue) and definitely NOT a fully neutral balance. For many domestic listeners away from sites like this and Erin's, in-room it really doesn't matter so much, however painful this may seem to many of 'us' here... What put me off was the poor if unintentional bubble-vinyl finish of this model range.

http://www.tdl-loudspeakers.co.uk/pdf/rtl_page2.pdf

Of course not. Wasn't the irony obvious?

 

[jeroboam]

I think Teton would have been wise to plug their own holes.

Especially the one beneath the nose

 

[Dennis_FL]

Remember when Dr. Bose argued that Consumer Reports didn't account for "direct/reflected sound" in their review of the 901 speakers and sued? The court ruled that proof of "actual malice" was necessary in product disparagement cases and the reviewer won.

I suppose that court ruling also applies here.

PS: Today, Consumer Reports really likes the modern day direct/reflecting Dolby Atmos Sonos Arc/Era speakers.

 

[poxymoron]

Great to see this finally wrapped up. Kudos to Amir as usual, for all his work, and kudos to the two owners of the speakers. Well done all of you, and thank you.

 

[KSTR]

On the FR graph in your original review at https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/tekton-m-lore-speaker-review.48732/ you make the comment "fairly uneven" but what I see is ± 4 dB from 70 Hz to about 18 kHz. That does not seem "fairly uneven" to me, really. It's not ± 3 dB like the 3-way Revel speakers tend to measure across the same range, and which you call "quite flat on-axis response" - but ± 3 dB and ± 4 dB is not really the distance between "quite flat" and "fairly uneven."

Quite flat and fairly uneven are subjective judgements, and I thought that this site was trying to be emphasize objective, scientific criteria. Might be better to let the measurements speak for themselves without the subjective editorial.....

Fully agreed. I would encourage @amirm to omit the judging comments in the actual plots (which are then "polluted" forever with that comment), rather place it below in an "interpretation" section -- doing it that way is common practice and it would be more unbiased in the presented graphical results. The data is the data, but the interpretation is always already somewhat subjective especially for the multidimensional and mult-facetted subject of speakers.

 

[AudioSceptic]

I would bet that @Eric Alexander doesn't really want to have a legal court ruling that his speakers in fact do measure poorly. He's just trying to bully anyone that might cause a dent in his wallet with truth into silence.

Actually, they don't measure particularly badly; there's worse out there. That's the huge irony in all of this.

 

[olieb]

On the FR graph in your original review at https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/tekton-m-lore-speaker-review.48732/ you make the comment "fairly uneven" but what I see is ± 4 dB from 70 Hz to about 18 kHz. That does not seem "fairly uneven" to me, really. It's not ± 3 dB like the 3-way Revel speakers tend to measure across the same range, and which you call "quite flat on-axis response" - but ± 3 dB and ± 4 dB is not really the distance between "quite flat" and "fairly uneven."

But ±3 dB versus ±4 dB does not capture the difference of the measurements at all.
Just have a look.

I would say that the M-Lore is "fairly uneven" in comparison.
The F206 ("pretty flat") does not have -3 dB anywhere and +3 dB only in a narrow band 4-5 kHz. The M-Lore looks quite pronounced in mids, that is different from having narrow band deviation from flat.

 

[Bicep]

But ±3 dB versus ±4 dB does not capture the difference of the measurement at all.
Just have a look.
View attachment 364838
I would say that the M-Lore is "fairly uneven" in comparison.
The F206 ("pretty flat") does not have -3 dB anywhere and +3 dB only in a narrow band 4-5 kHz. The M-Lore looks quite pronounced in mids, that is different to narrow band deviation from flat.

Ive been thinking about this kind of thing a bit lately. It would be nice to measure / calculate area of the deviation from the target. Looking at the two graphs above its quite clear that tekton has a far larger area of deviation than the revel.

 

[welwynnick]

I am open to testing other speakers from the company but I am done with M-Lore seeing how the company doesn't care enough to release its own measurements.

That's very noble of you, Amir, but I would have thought the entire audio community wouldn't want to have anything to do with Tekton after this episode.

 

[KSTR]

But ±3 dB versus ±4 dB does not capture the difference of the measurement at all.
Just have a look.
View attachment 364838
I would say that the M-Lore is "fairly uneven" in comparison.
The F206 ("pretty flat") does not have -3 dB anywhere and +3 dB only in a narrow band 4-5 kHz. The M-Lore looks quite pronounced in mids, that is different to narrow band deviation from flat.

Ive been thinking about this kind of thing a bit lately. It would be nice to measure / calculate area of the deviation from the target. Looking at the two graphs above its quite clear that tekton has a far larger area of deviation than the revel.

I often used a two-stage approach to judge a speaker response
- compare a heavily smoothed (like 1/3rd oct ) trend line version to a best-fit straight line (least-sum-of-squares fit), that gives the more overall dominant sound character like "mid-heavy" etc (assuming OK'ish directivity)
- normalize the unsmoothed (or preferably 1/24th oct smoothed) response to that heavily smoothed response to get an impression of the "roughness" of the response (usually way less important).