• 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 style like tweeter array good idea?

Given suitable tweeters (which are available today) and crossover (which I haven't modelled), I can see Tekton's tweeter array resulting in a narrower-than-normal and more-uniform-than-normal radiation pattern over its frequency range. So, I see it as an alternative to using a horn to cover approximately the same frequency range, rather than being an alternative to a more conventional mid + tweet pairing.

This is the model which stands out to me as particularly elegant in concept, and especially for its price. I wish I could do a decent horn speaker in that size/performance ballpark for anywhere near that price.
Considering the price, I think credit where it's due to Tekton for bringing to market a unique approach that some seem to really enjoy. I have never heard them so can't comment there. I'd always been curious to hear them, which ended with how the reviewers who found they were less than perfect in the measurements, were treated/threatened etc. There could have been a very productive and interesting mutually beneficial discussion about it, but ego and narcissism dominated and it went from bad to worse. Many brands don't measure well, preferring to have a "house sound" they prefer, and have a customer base who likes that sound. Some of the biggest brands in the biz are in that category. That's fine by me, just fess up to it, own it, and move along. For some, speakers that don't measure well are not for them, and they will pass on it. Not seen any measurements of the ATC SCM 19 v2 I have, but I think they sound damn good in my system. I hope they measure well when/if tested by Erin et al, will not alter my enjoyment of them. There was an earlier model tested by Amir, and it didn't fair well, ATC bashing fairly common on this forum.

Back to Tekton: he could have easily avoided all the drama, but doubled down on the poorly considered response to the reviews, which were not even particuarly negative! He could still pull a partial win from it the ego was put aside and rational thought returned.
 
I would not call these Tektons arrays "coaxial", obviously the 2+1 and 14+1 arrays are not even coaxial from a geometric perspective and even in the 6+1 array the top and bottom tweeters are used for a different frequency range the the other 4 ones on the left and right. So we can expect more evenly radiation on the horizontal than on the vertical axis, which is what we see in the 3 stereophile measurements:

2+1: https://www.stereophile.com/content/tekton-design-enzo-xl-loudspeaker-measurements
6+1: https://www.stereophile.com/content/tekton-design-impact-monitor-loudspeaker-measurements
14+1: https://www.stereophile.com/content/tekton-moab-be-loudspeaker-measurements

This has little in common with a real coaxial or fullrange driver.
I guess this should sound very Hi end lol
718TekIMfig5.jpg


Of course the ''But its measured performance shows that this unusual design is not compromised''
How much did pay Eric for that comment?, there is a guy in youtube that was payed to doing a good review to the double impacts, im not souprise by anything in this hobby
It's own measurements confirm the mess with the design. WTF.
718TekIMfig2.jpg


Even the cabinet alone is a mess.
 
There currently is some fuss about Tekton, especially since Erin (https://www.youtube.com/@ErinsAudioCorner) had reviewed a Tekton speaker and seemed to be forced to remove his review shorty after that. I very much hope that this matter will be resolved soon, since I very much appreciate Erin’s or Amir’s serious efforts in reviewing loudspeakers and other equipment. Free speech is essential for all of us, even if it might not be 100% correct sometimes. I was pretty surprised to hear that because to me Erin’s Tekton review sounded surprisingly good and I would say Tekton should be happy with it.

Anyway I would like to discuss one design principle that seems to be used in many Tekton speakers here:

Basically, most Tekton speakers have a rather traditional design with respect to treble and bass: One or two bass drivers in a ported cabinet and a single 1 inch dome tweeter are used. However, for the midrange they use an array of tweeter drivers identical to the one used for the treble. These additional “midrange tweeters” are attached via a bandpath filter in order to not interfere with the one “real tweeter”. Via this bandpath filter also more and more “midrange tweeters” are used towards lower frequencies. The idea seems to be to create a better midrange driver by utilizing the low mass diaphragm of multiple tweeter drivers. Of course, this approach has some problems that need to be addressed:
  1. Low impedance due to many drivers operating in the midrange. This seem to be addressed by utilizing a combination series (might by problematic) and parallel connection of the drivers.
  2. Operating the tweeters far outside of their usual frequency range (typicaly about 2-20 kHz) and even close (or perhaps below?) there resonance frequency (typically 500-1000 Hz). This may cause distortion, clipping, lower dynamic range or even desctruction of the drivers. I guesss Tekton tries to address this by just having to produce a lower SPL by each individual driver and using dome tweeters with low resonance frequency and an as wide as possible frequency range.
According to
Tekton use Scan Speak drivers (perhaps some OEM design?):

https://www.scan-speak.dk/product-categories/tweeter/
https://www.soundimports.eu/en/scan-speak-tweeters/

According to
they have a US patent https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/ef/3b/8b/91cfa120a70f05/US9247339.pdf on this sepcific way to arrange tweeter arrays. A crossover network sketch can be found here: https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/help-understanding-tekton-tweeter-array-schematic.336743/

Of course, using multiple (smaller) drivers is done since decades by many manufactures and DIYs. Typically, this is used for 2-4 bass or bass midrange drivers. Most of the time all drives share the same frequency range. Sometimes a second identical woofer is just added for the very low frequencies to extend the bass response. I had used this by myself with two KEF B110B in a ported cabinet 35 years ago (https://homeaudio.jimdofree.com/dirac-live/ picture at the very bottom). However, these approaches typically do not try to use drives for frequency range they are not intentionally designed for.

So is this a good idea? Is it cost effective or wouldn’t it be better to spent the money for a single high end midrange driver instead e.g. 6 additional tweeters? Are there any other manufactures or DIYs doing something similar?

Best regards
Randolf
Multiple large dome tweeters is a great idea. Well known large companies don't do it because of cost and profit margins.
 
I think it's easier to work with a horn and compression drivers, or if you want to cross over low to a woofer, a unity horn (like the Synergy horns of Danly) with the mid and tweeter in one horn. those are time and phase correct when done right, and go louder with way less distortion. The test that Erin did showed very high distortion on the tweeters i think. The Unity horn patent (owned by Tomas J. Danley) expired on 2019-04-28 so no reason for speaker builders not to use this technique if they want something coaxial behaving without being a coaxial driver.... The patent that is still acitve (the Synergy patent) only goes about the way he build the (passive) crossover for it (so use dsp).
 
Back
Top Bottom