• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Tekton M-Lore Speaker Review

Rate this speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 273 58.5%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 172 36.8%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 15 3.2%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 7 1.5%

  • Total voters
    467

thewas

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 15, 2020
Messages
6,895
Likes
16,895
Take a closer look... it pivots with a ball screw mechanism allowing the array to be directed/focused to the listening position.
This still is an unnecessary compromise as there is only one "focusing distance", reflections from walls at different distances will still have the lobing problems of such MTM configurations. Placing the drivers all much closer instead would have reduced such, now its just an complicated/expensive imitation of a classic MTM structure.
 

CleanSound

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 30, 2023
Messages
1,652
Likes
2,501
Location
Northeastern region of USA
Haha! So funny! Richlite - this speaker is 700lbs and $125K
Mr. @Eric Alexander enough chit chatting about jibberish.

If you are here to defend your products, please go ahead and send in one of your critically acclaimed speakers for review and have an one-on-one technical discussion on Tekton's design theories with either Amir or Erin as you stated you would.

Please do not come here with bad faith and just to troll.
 

dogmamann

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Dec 16, 2022
Messages
816
Likes
513
Mr. @Eric Alexander enough chit chatting about jibberish.

If you are here to defend your products, please go ahead and send in one of your critically acclaimed speakers for review and have an one-on-one technical discussion on Tekton's design theories with either Amir or Erin as you stated you would.

Please do not come here with bad faith and just to troll.
. A negative review here in this site is not going to hurt his business though. Yet I think that’s plain disrespectful to someone who took his time to explain the reasoning of his product
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,651
Likes
240,789
Location
Seattle Area
. A negative review here in this site is not going to hurt his business though. Yet I think that’s plain disrespectful to someone who took his time to explain the reasoning of his product
What good is that? He claims the review is wrong and we are still waiting for data that proves that.
 

CleanSound

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 30, 2023
Messages
1,652
Likes
2,501
Location
Northeastern region of USA
. A negative review here in this site is not going to hurt his business though. Yet I think that’s plain disrespectful to someone who took his time to explain the reasoning of his product
What? You have some audacity to call me disrespectful. And what reasoning has this guy provided?!?!?

ASR did a review based on objective scientific data that shows the significant flaws in his speaker. He burst into ASR, blasting that the review is based on "rigid science," and that it's a "disservice" to audiophiles. Doesn't even refer to Amir by his name in his own house (talking about disrespect).

Mr. Alexander proceeds to make several claims with no logical reasoning and with zero explanation. The claims are:

1) A flat anechoic FR of a speaker is not audiophile quality. Offers no rationale, logic nor reasoning why. Proceeds to talk about his FR curve and how it is audiophile worthy, offers no explanation as to why his specific curve is audiophile worthy. Shite, my 10 year old can doodle a FR curve and claim that that is audiophile worthy, so you should just shut up and believe him?

2) That creating a flat anechoic FR speaker is "easy" (presumably also a flattish off axis anechoic FR) and his simulation software can do it in "3 seconds," utterly disrespecting other folks who's spent decades designing quality speakers.

3) Claims that Amir's measurements are "botched." And that is speakers should be measured directly on axis of the woofer, also offering no explanation as to why.

The entire damn time, he offers absolutely zero (nada, goose egg, zilch) logical, scientific, factual, rationale nor reasoned explanation on anything about his speakers nor anything he has said.

Then HE IS THE ONE, who said that he is "open" to sending another one of his more critically acclaimed speakers for review as the Lore is built within a certain budget AND to sitting down to have a one-on-one technical discussion about Tekton's design decisions/theories.

I know Amir won't like me saying this, but so far, based on what I have witnessed, it is the same old tricks that all con artists and pseudo scientists act and say when they get exposed.

You have some audacity to call me disrespectful.
 
D

Deleted member 21219

Guest
What? You have some audacity to call me disrespectful. And what reasoning has this guy provided?!?!?

ASR did a review based on objective scientific data that shows the significant flaws in his speaker. He burst into ASR, blasting that the review is based on "rigid science," and that it's a "disservice" to audiophiles. Doesn't even refer to Amir by his name in his own house (talking about disrespect).

Mr. Alexander proceeds to make several claims with no logical reasoning and with zero explanation. The claims are:

1) A flat anechoic FR of a speaker is not audiophile quality. Offers no rationale, logic nor reasoning why. Proceeds to talk about his FR curve and how it is audiophile worthy, offers no explanation as to why his specific curve is audiophile worthy. Shite, my 10 year old can doodle a FR curve and claim that that is audiophile worthy, so you should just shut up and believe him?

2) That creating a flat anechoic FR speaker is "easy" (presumably also a flattish off axis anechoic FR) and his simulation software can do it in "3 seconds," utterly disrespecting other folks who's spent decades designing quality speakers.

3) Claims that Amir's measurements are "botched." And that is speakers should be measured directly on axis of the woofer, also offering no explanation as to why.

The entire damn time, he offers absolutely zero (nada, goose egg, zilch) logical, scientific, factual, rationale nor reasoned explanation on anything about his speakers nor anything he has said.

Then HE IS THE ONE, who said that he is "open" to sending another one of his more critically acclaimed speakers for review as the Lore is built within a certain budget AND to sitting down to have a one-on-one technical discussion about Tekton's design decisions/theories.

I know Amir won't like me saying this, but so far, based on what I have witnessed, it is the same old tricks that all con artists and pseudo scientists act and say when they get exposed.

You have some audacity to call me disrespectful.

1707764649261.jpeg
 

lewdish

Active Member
Joined
May 29, 2021
Messages
259
Likes
198
Would you like me to serve you up a speaker that would make you drool and slobber? Provide me with ten bullet point attributes of what your perfect speaker must possess and what the cost ($$$) needs to be.
If we can provide specifications for a design would you guys be interested in producing a one off?
 

JustJones

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Messages
1,746
Likes
2,466
When you read the patent referenced in this thread the beginning seem at odds with the stated goal of the manufacturer in the thread of "fun speaker" no matter the accuracy.

1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to loudspeakers, and more particularly to designing loudspeakers to more faithfully and accurately reproduce signals.
 

ahofer

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
5,039
Likes
9,125
Location
New York City
If we can provide specifications for a design would you guys be interested in producing a one off?
Didn’t I already suggest some? Or are you aiming for something easier?

. A negative review here in this site is not going to hurt his business though. Yet I think that’s plain disrespectful to someone who took his time to explain the reasoning of his product
His design is either more accurate or more “fun” with an accuracy trade-off. It is unclear which one was the target. In any case, it sounds more directional than other options.
 

CleanSound

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 30, 2023
Messages
1,652
Likes
2,501
Location
Northeastern region of USA
When you read the patent referenced in this thread the beginning seem at odds with the stated goal of the manufacturer in the thread of "fun speaker" no matter the accuracy.
Read the whole thing, it's a long circular entanglement of confusion and sometimes references to remotely plausible but very vague "science."

He talks extensively about overtone and moving mass of transducers. He claims that the transducer for mid-range and high frequency should weigh less than what current transducers weigh such that it matches or weighs less than the moving mass of the instrument's moving part or vocal and placing such mid range and high frequency transducers closer to the woofers will reproduce the overtone more accurately.

First, he produces no scientific perimeter/reasoning as why overtones are not being produced accurately before this patent, let alone how/why overtone can be produced accurately with his method (granted that is not a requirement for a silly patent). Second, we've known that transducers should ideally be able to produce a perfect pistonic motion and ideally weighing as close to nothing as possible for decades and decades before this silly patent was even granted.

I would love for this guy to have an one-on-one, sit down, deep technical discussion (preferably live stream) on his speaker design decisions/theories with either Amir or Erin. In fact, he has already replied that he is "open" to it, but all talk and no walk at the moment (standard con-artist MO).

I will call it now with this guy, that's how confident I am with my con-artist radar:
(1) he will sparingly sprinkle in remotely plausible but very vague "science" to fool the naive, but will never divulge any technical nor logical rationale/reasoning to his design decisions/theories, because it's all based on make-believe science
(2) he will not engage in technical discussions or discussions with any substance, because he is not versed in the science of loud speaker design and it will further expose him
(3) he will result to customer testimonials and subjective reviewers' awards as prove and evidence of the validity of his speakers
(4) he will never ever send any of his speakers to any reviewers who has a technical background or will approach the review with scientific methods and industrial measurement tools, except for that one mistake he made when he sent his speakers to Stereophile, where they did an quasi anechoic measurement on it.
(5) he will eventually fizzle out on this forum and then go to his naive base and claim that the members of ASR don't know what they are talking about and that they are all about "rigid science" who listens with measurement tools and are completely unreasonable where he is viscously attacked.

These are the standard protocols of damage control and containment with all con-artists.
 

prerich

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2016
Messages
323
Likes
244
Read the whole thing, it's a long circular entanglement of confusion and sometimes references to remotely plausible but very vague "science."

He talks extensively about overtone and moving mass of transducers. He claims that the transducer for mid-range and high frequency should weigh less than what current transducers weigh such that it matches or weighs less than the moving mass of the instrument's moving part or vocal and placing such mid range and high frequency transducers closer to the woofers will reproduce the overtone more accurately.

First, he produces no scientific perimeter/reasoning as why overtones are not being produced accurately before this patent, let alone how/why overtone can be produced accurately with his method (granted that is not a requirement for a silly patent). Second, we've known that transducers should ideally be able to produce a perfect pistonic motion and ideally weighing as close to nothing as possible for decades and decades before this silly patent was even granted.

I would love for this guy to have an one-on-one, sit down, deep technical discussion (preferably live stream) on his speaker design decisions/theories with either Amir or Erin. In fact, he has already replied that he is "open" to it, but all talk and no walk at the moment (standard con-artist MO).

I will call it now with this guy, that's how confident I am with my con-artist radar:
(1) he will sparingly sprinkle in remotely plausible but very vague "science" to fool the naive, but will never divulge any technical nor logical rationale/reasoning to his design decisions/theories, because it's all based on make-believe science
(2) he will not engage in technical discussions or discussions with any substance, because he is not versed in the science of loud speaker design and it will further expose him
(3) he will result to customer testimonials and subjective reviewers' awards as prove and evidence of the validity of his speakers
(4) he will never ever send any of his speakers to any reviewers who has a technical background or will approach the review with scientific methods and industrial measurement tools, except for that one mistake he made when he sent his speakers to Stereophile, where they did an quasi anechoic measurement on it.
(5) he will eventually fizzle out on this forum and then go to his naive base and claim that the members of ASR don't know what they are talking about and that they are all about "rigid science" who listens with measurement tools and are completely unreasonable where he is viscously attacked.

These are the standard protocols of damage control and containment with all con-artists.
"(4) he will never ever send any of his speakers to any reviewers who has a technical background or will approach the review with scientific methods and industrial measurement tools, except for that one mistake he made when he sent his speakers to Stereophile, where they did an quasi anechoic measurement on it."
I've looked at the measurements of the Impact Monitor as performed by Stereophile - and those turned out to be pretty good. I'm actually seeing a trend of the tweeter surrounded by multiple mid-range units. Yes - Eric needs to have a "sit-down" and explain his science and his findings. I'd be interested in seeing some of his speakers with the quai-coax measured. Even Genelec is using a quai-coax in one of their top of the line speakers.
 

ahofer

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
5,039
Likes
9,125
Location
New York City
I've looked at the measurements of the Impact Monitor as performed by Stereophile - and those turned out to be pretty good.
Yeah, pretty flat on-axis. Very directional though, particularly vertical, where JA points out that you really should listen on the tweeter axis to avoid coloration in the midrange.
 

raindance

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 25, 2019
Messages
1,041
Likes
971
Yeah, pretty flat on-axis. Very directional though, particularly vertical, where JA points out that you really should listen on the tweeter axis to avoid coloration in the midrange.
The model Stereophile reviewed is a completely different design and the tweeter axis makes sense for that particular speaker. You just can't use a different speaker as ammunition for the listening axis argument for the speaker that Amir reviewed. However, it should be said (again) that most designs with the woofer/mid on top of the tweeter require listening and measuring on the woofer/mid axis (PSB, Mission, etc).

I know folks want to dismiss the multi-tweeter array, but it makes sense that the "ring" of tweeters is used as a midrange driver and the single tweeter in the center is the actual high frequency driver. The whole combo acts kind of like a coax driver. The advantage of the ring of tweeters is that power handling for a tweeter is compromised at mid range frequencies, so the array allows tweeters to be used at lower frequencies than is typical because they are able to all share an attenuated portion of the audio signal.

I don't own any of Eric's speakers, but thought I would throw this in to the lions den here :).
 

RobL

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 4, 2021
Messages
936
Likes
1,562
Well, this is not a SOTA speaker obviously but capable of an Olive score of 6.0 with some EQ so not terrible. Other similarly measuring speakers seem to get less hate here.
 

CleanSound

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 30, 2023
Messages
1,652
Likes
2,501
Location
Northeastern region of USA
Other similarly measuring speakers seem to get less hate here.

Other similarly measuring speakers don't have the owner coming in here blasting the validity of decades of research that constitutes modern day gold standard in speaker design. Nor do they claim that the measurements made here are botched, discrediting others. Nor claim that a flat anechoic FR speaker is as easy as "3 seconds" of simulation software and then sprinkles vague, make-believe science and disappears.

The insult to the universal truth of science and scientific method is one of the high crimes here.
 

ahofer

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 3, 2019
Messages
5,039
Likes
9,125
Location
New York City
The model Stereophile reviewed is a completely different design and the tweeter axis makes sense for that particular speaker. You just can't use a different speaker as ammunition for the listening axis argument for the speaker that Amir reviewed. However, it should be said (again) that most designs with the woofer/mid on top of the tweeter require listening and measuring on the woofer/mid axis (PSB, Mission, etc).
Fair enough, that's specific to a multi-woofer design. But there is a trend of directivity trade-offs (which is unlikely to "make me drool and slobber", as he so artfully put it).
 

prerich

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2016
Messages
323
Likes
244
The model Stereophile reviewed is a completely different design and the tweeter axis makes sense for that particular speaker. You just can't use a different speaker as ammunition for the listening axis argument for the speaker that Amir reviewed. However, it should be said (again) that most designs with the woofer/mid on top of the tweeter require listening and measuring on the woofer/mid axis (PSB, Mission, etc).

I know folks want to dismiss the multi-tweeter array, but it makes sense that the "ring" of tweeters is used as a midrange driver and the single tweeter in the center is the actual high frequency driver. The whole combo acts kind of like a coax driver. The advantage of the ring of tweeters is that power handling for a tweeter is compromised at mid range frequencies, so the array allows tweeters to be used at lower frequencies than is typical because they are able to all share an attenuated portion of the audio signal.

I don't own any of Eric's speakers, but thought I would throw this in to the lions den here :).
I'm not using it as ammunition (forgive me if I came across that way). The Lore measured badly. What I am saying that is that sometimes a company can get it wrong - other times they get it right...and once they get it right - they kind of stick to that. I don't own any of Eric's speakers myself - but it seems that all of his newer models are going the route of the Monitor (Impact). It would be interesting to get one of those to Amir, alas - it is a heavy speaker.
 
Top Bottom