Tekton style like tweeter array good idea?

[WillBrink]

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.

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

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

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.

Even the cabinet alone is a mess.

 

[Theta]

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.

 

[Waxx]

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).

 

[Marchio]

I am contributing this because my two most recent DIY loudspeaker projects involve multiple tweeters covering the midrange but in a 2-way configuration. Perhaps someone will find this useful though it might seems a bit out of place at first.

Dynaco A25, Polk Monitor 7, Mirage SM-3, Klipsch Cornwall, then a series of 4 DIY loudspeakers. So what is this list? It is the speakers I have found most musically convincing over the previous 60 years. Each earned its place as my main loudspeaker for over 5 years.

I have no interest at all in specs for their own sake, though the Apogee Stage, big Thiel, and many other impressive speakers have passed through my listening room, none except those on the list stayed for more than a month or two. Why? They were not consistently and abundantly musical.

That brings me to my las 4 DIY loudspeakers. I will mention 2 which are highly pleasing musically without necessarily impressing non-human test equipment!

The first is 2-way with a cheap Goldwood Sound GW-12PC-8 from Amazon in a Karlson cabinet with no inductor and 2 Dayton AMTPRO-4 both in series with a 22uF cap installed in an angled picture frame that allows me to overcome any beaming for a wide sweet spot. The AMT are run open back so produce equal sound from the back and front. The speakers are all set in phase with no reverse between the woofer and mid/tweeters. For under a grand it beats anything else I have heard for less than 7 grand, especially in Jazz and Baroque. It sound better than you could possibly believe. With your eyes closed and no test equipment allowed in the room, Abbado's Brandenburgs would really damage your ego when you opened your eyes and read "Goldwood".

The other I will mention is currently under construction. My design process is always iterative with lots of listening and re-building. It consists of 2 Electro-Voice Regency cabinets empty except for Klipsch K-33-4 clones, also fairly cheap. It covers roughly 30 to 2000 Hz. The Regency is a folded horn/bass reflex hybrid that prevents the woofer from making much noise above 2K simply by making 30 to 2K so damned loud. Then 4 tungsten 5"x10" generic horn tweeters in series parallel with a 22 uF cap covering roughly 1750 to 20K, but they are rated 500 Hz to 20 kHz. Two face forward and two backward and out at a 45 degree angle. Again there is currently no coil in the system. Well, if the Karlson AMT system above is pretty, dainty, detailed, and fast; then this Regency/Cornwall system is big and impressive. It can get very loud with 5 Watts, probably SPL over 110. The bass is solid, music, and also thunderous. The highs would easily fill a concert hall. In fact, it can play so loud with low distortion that I have to take care lest I blow my 72 year old ear drums! For rock and roll and pop, it's hard to beat, again, for under a grand!

 

[DanielT]

I am contributing this because my two most recent DIY loudspeaker projects involve multiple tweeters covering the midrange but in a 2-way configuration. Perhaps someone will find this useful though it might seems a bit out of place at first.

Dynaco A25, Polk Monitor 7, Mirage SM-3, Klipsch Cornwall, then a series of 4 DIY loudspeakers. So what is this list? It is the speakers I have found most musically convincing over the previous 60 years. Each earned its place as my main loudspeaker for over 5 years.

I have no interest at all in specs for their own sake, though the Apogee Stage, big Thiel, and many other impressive speakers have passed through my listening room, none except those on the list stayed for more than a month or two. Why? They were not consistently and abundantly musical.

That brings me to my las 4 DIY loudspeakers. I will mention 2 which are highly pleasing musically without necessarily impressing non-human test equipment!

The first is 2-way with a cheap Goldwood Sound GW-12PC-8 from Amazon in a Karlson cabinet with no inductor and 2 Dayton AMTPRO-4 both in series with a 22uF cap installed in an angled picture frame that allows me to overcome any beaming for a wide sweet spot. The AMT are run open back so produce equal sound from the back and front. The speakers are all set in phase with no reverse between the woofer and mid/tweeters. For under a grand it beats anything else I have heard for less than 7 grand, especially in Jazz and Baroque. It sound better than you could possibly believe. With your eyes closed and no test equipment allowed in the room, Abbado's Brandenburgs would really damage your ego when you opened your eyes and read "Goldwood".

The other I will mention is currently under construction. My design process is always iterative with lots of listening and re-building. It consists of 2 Electro-Voice Regency cabinets empty except for Klipsch K-33-4 clones, also fairly cheap. It covers roughly 30 to 2000 Hz. The Regency is a folded horn/bass reflex hybrid that prevents the woofer from making much noise above 2K simply by making 30 to 2K so damned loud. Then 4 tungsten 5"x10" generic horn tweeters in series parallel with a 22 uF cap covering roughly 1750 to 20K, but they are rated 500 Hz to 20 kHz. Two face forward and two backward and out at a 45 degree angle. Again there is currently no coil in the system. Well, if the Karlson AMT system above is pretty, dainty, detailed, and fast; then this Regency/Cornwall system is big and impressive. It can get very loud with 5 Watts, probably SPL over 110. The bass is solid, music, and also thunderous. The highs would easily fill a concert hall. In fact, it can play so loud with low distortion that I have to take care lest I blow my 72 year old ear drums! For rock and roll and pop, it's hard to beat, again, for under a grand!

Welcome to ASR!

Exciting speakers you have put together. I see a 5 dB boost from 6 kHz to 10 kHz with your speakers. A matter of taste if you like that. I had ..., hum when I think about it tried with an amplifier with a treble control and twisted it a bit. They usually operate around 10 kHz and get below that frequency a falling FR when in use. Maybe not the most optimal because what happens then from 6 kHz and below? But on the other hand, if you have an amplifier with that function, you can do a test. That's what tone controls are for.

On the other hand, if you listen at low volume, there is already a built-in loudness compensation for the higher frequencies with your speakers.
____
You mention Dynaco A25. They have figured in the thread below. A thread that I think you will like:

Audio Note speakers

What's the deal with Audio Note speakers ? They have so many models and they're not exactly cheap (can cost over $100K) And it seems they're "legendary " speakers on other audiophile forums. What's so special about them ?

audiosciencereview.com

 

[mhardy6647]

The Dynaco A25 loudspeakers are indeed quite pleasant to listen to, and, for many years were quite inexpensive & thus popular. They're a sort of do no harm design (which is not meant as a criticism). Two pairs here, plus a pair of A35. None of them is in regular use, though, as there are far better options in the house. Still, they're important and historically significant, so they stay. Plus, one pair of the A25 were my parents'.

 

[Waxx]

The Dynaco were relative cheap and very good sounding for their time. It's the speaker that made Seas (who supplied the OEM drivers, the A25 woofer and H087 tweeter) world famous. Before they were only lcoally known, altough they already made OEM speakers for B&O and other Nordic brands.

The design is a smart use of aperiodic porting a cabinet to get relative low bass from a small enclosure. The design by Ejvind Skaaning (Dynaco) is often copied (or at least tried) but the only one who could do this kind of design right (and maybe even better) was Snell.

I repaired many of those, and it's mostly the crossover that aged to much that is the problem.

 

[mhardy6647]

...
I repaired many of those, and it's mostly the crossover that aged to much that is the problem.

Not that there's much to it.

source: https://www.updatemydynaco.com/A25LoudSpeaker.html

That's the other piece of the "magic" of the A25 and its kin -- and the SEAS (and ScanSpeak) drivers used for them. The drivers were well-behaved and didn't require sophisticated (read: expensive and power wasting) crossovers to perform with reasonably real-world fidelity.

Winslow Burhoe (who is still around and still at least semi-active in the loudspeaker biz, last I knew) took a similar approach, and achieved a roughly similar level of commercial success (thanks to Consumers Reports!) with his EPI (Epicure Products, Inc.) two-way loudspeakers. Different drivers (built in house, at least AFAIK) but, again, designed to behave and thus require very little from a crossover.


(A later version of the very popular and successful EPI 100, this one the lower-priced, vinyl covered EPI100V variant)

source: https://www.humanspeakers.com/e/epi100.htm

 

[mhardy6647]

Oh, to keep this on-topic -- like some of the Tekton loudspeakers (especially their earlier, simpler, and far less expensive products!), the above-mentioned A25 and the (acoustic suspension) EPI100 were/are relatively sensitive and extremely easy to drive. In the case of the Dynaco and the EPIs, this resulted in very satisfactory (qualitatively and quantitatively) sonic output with very modest and inexpensive amplifiers (and receivers) of their heyday.

 

[Sal1950]

The Dynaco A25 loudspeakers are indeed quite pleasant to listen to, and, for many years were quite inexpensive & thus popular. They're a sort of do no harm design (which is not meant as a criticism). Two pairs here, plus a pair of A35

Dang Mr Hardy, you got all the kool toys!
Seriously, who can underestimate the contribution that Dynaco made to the US High Fidelity movement.
Absolutely one of the leaders in the glory days of Hi Fi sound for the working class.
Starting out as a high quality HiFi transformer production company called Acrosound, then later expanding into Dynaco.
The Stereo 70 amp began in 1959 and sold like 350,000 units, the biggest selling amp of all time, then sold as either kits or factory built.
The Dynaquad matrix decoder and QD-1 kicked off the multich sound movement that still continues to advance the SOTA in home audio.
A25 speakers, another working mans leader in HiFi, still continues to be popular with enthusiasts of all types today.
What a glorious time for US Hi Fi development, so sad to see it go.

 

[mhardy6647]

@Sal1950 -- Amen.


I do keep meaning to play with a Hafler surround setup!

 

[Waxx]

That's the other piece of the "magic" of the A25 and its kin -- and the SEAS (and ScanSpeak) drivers used for them. The drivers were well-behaved and didn't require sophisticated (read: expensive

The Scanspeak was only in the later generation, and was what they used also in the bigger A35 that came later. The first generations were only Seas drivers.

Dang Mr Hardy, you got all the kool toys!
Seriously, who can underestimate the contribution that Dynaco made to the US High Fidelity movement.
Absolutely one of the leaders in the glory days of Hi Fi sound for the working class.
Starting out as a high quality HiFi transformer production company called Acrosound, then later expanding into Dynaco.
The Stereo 70 amp began in 1959 and sold like 350,000 units, the biggest selling amp of all time, then sold as either kits or factory built.
The Dynaquad matrix decoder and QD-1 kicked off the multich sound movement that still continues to advance the SOTA in home audio.
A25 speakers, another working mans leader in HiFi, still continues to be popular with enthusiasts of all types today.
What a glorious time for US Hi Fi development, so sad to see it go.

Dynaco was a smart id, use european tech and adapt it for the US market. Th ST-70 was a scottisch design (the Williamson amplifier) rebadged. It was designed in 1973 by David T.N. Williamson for the company Marconi-Osram in Manchester. Dynaco made a kit form of it to sell to diy'ers which was a huge success.

The A25 was a variation of a Seas design that was sold by many companies in different variations. They used the design by the Danish designer Ejvind Skaaning from SSC (in 1970), his company that also made those speakers as OEM build. That company became later Scan-Speak, and started to build their own tweeters as Seas could not deliver the H087 anymore. Later on when Skaaning sold Scanspeak (after a divorce and some other financial trouble) he was cofounder of Dynaudio and Audio Technology, but each time he had to sell his part after trouble with the partners. He never got really rich from all his inventions altough but he is responsible for some of the big names in speaker design now.

Dynaco was very good in finding such gems in the EU market and bringing them to the US in adapted form. This was before internet or other forms of easy comunication between the continents. But they did not invent much themselves, they just were good bussinesmen and marketeers with a nose for a very good design.

 

[mhardy6647]

FWIW, I was (am) under the impression that David Hafler had some significant role in Acrosound transformers.

Dynaco did, interestingly, sell bang & olfusen cartridges, a b&o tonearm, and a b&o reel to reel tape deck as Dynaco products.

random interent photo shared at https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-in-hi-fi-equipment.42987/page-8#post-1525136

image from an audio magazine scan -- I've lost the original reference, but it's from https://hifihaven.org/index.php?threads/b-o.3597/#post-67429

 

[Sal1950]

Dynaco was a smart id, use european tech and adapt it for the US market. Th ST-70 was a scottisch design (the Williamson amplifier) rebadged.

Far from "rebadged" Williamson,

"In December 1951 Hafler and Keroes began promoting the ultralinear stage - a method of distributing load between anode and screen grid of a pentode or tetrode, invented by Alan Blumlein in the 1930s. An ultralinear stage delivered 50%[110] to 100% more output power than the same stage in triode connection, at roughly the same distortion, and cost less than a pure pentode or tetrode stage (the latter required a separate screen grid supply, the ultralinear did not need it).[54] The first Ultralinear Williamson, employing a pair of 6L6 in a Williamson-like topology,[60] delivered 20 W;[111] their second model, built around more powerful 807 tetrodes, delivered 30 W.[111] Very soon the American public acquired taste to high-power amplification, and the industry launched the "race for Watts".[q] By 1955 Hafler and Keroes, now working separately, were offering 60-Watt models employing pairs of 6550 tetrodes[113] or quartets of KT66s.[114] Thus in less than a decade, step by step, the industry abandoned the principles set by Williamson, but continued to use his name as a convenient free trademark. In the 21st century it is even used for amplifiers without global negative feedback; the only thing they have in common with the true Williamson amplifier is the four-stage topology.[115][31]"

Williamson amplifier - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Sal1950]

FWIW, I was (am) under the impression that David Hafler had some significant role in Acrosound transformers.

Yep,
"In 1950 David Hafler and Herb Keroes started a Philadelphia-based company called Acrosound to build and sell audio-quality output transformers, primarily for home electronics hobbyists.[1] The two men refined and developed the ultra-linear audio circuit pioneered by British audio electronics engineer Alan Blumlein, using taps from the output transformer to feed signal back into the output stage screen grid circuitry.[1]"

Dynaco - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Waxx]

Hafler and Keroes did not invent that much, they just combined the inventions of Williamson (negative feedback to reduce distortions) from 1943 with the invention of Alan Blumlein (the ultralinear stage) from 1937. They also used better components (as the caps and transformators were not good in the original Williamson design). The only thing they did invent was the shunt cap on the cathode.

Their main archivement was combining the inventions of others and make a working model for a relative cheap tube amp, that is copied a lot untill today. And that was a big archivement, because many things were invented by engineers at that time, but it hardly became a working product that the average user could build and/or use. Many of those devices were also way to expensive for the average person who was still using big old wooden console radio's with EL84 (or equivalent) SE amps driving open back fullrange speakers (at least in Europe). Dynaco also made other companies aware of that, so they also moved on.

 

[Sal1950]

Hafler and Keroes did not invent that much, they just combined the inventions

No man stands alone, every great "invention" was built on the work of others.
The B2 Stealth Bomber was built

on the work of Orville and Wilbur Wright

 

[DanielT]

The Dynaco ST-70 Series 3 seems to be just fine. I could imagine that amp with a pair of Ohm friendly 90 dB sensitive speakers IF it wasn't for the price. To me it's not worth $3000 for 40 watts just to see some vacuum tubes shine.

Dynaco ST-70 Series 3 Tube Amplifier Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Dynaco ST-70 Series 3 tube stereo amplifier. It is on kind loan and cost $3000 (seems to be discontinued now). The amplifier is gorgeous looking and better than just about any tube amplifier I have seen. You can see the style and modernization...

audiosciencereview.com

Because the thread is about Tekton. The Dynaco ST-70 Series 3 together with the Tekton Enxzo XL would probably be a good match.

...90.6dB(B)/2.83V/m...remains above 6 ohms at all frequencies...The Enzo XL is therefore well suited for use with low-powered tube amplifiers.

FR looks pretty ok, other than around 1kHz to 3kHz. A little extra bass boost for those who like that:
The roller coaster around 2 kHz is a shame because we are sensitive to deviations in that area.

Tekton Design Enzo XL loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements I used DRA Labs' MLSSA system and a calibrated DPA 4006 microphone to measure the Tekton Enzo XL's frequency response in the farfield; and an Earthworks QTC-40, with its small, ¼"-diameter capsule, for the nearfield responses.

www.stereophile.com

Edit:
Why not one, 1 sufficiently sensitive tweeter or a compression driver together with the bass drivers in the Enzo XL in a 2.5 crossover solution? Okay then it would not have been Tekton with array tweeters but it would have been a more sensible, "normal" solution. Even better is a traditional three-way speaker with the two bass drivers in the Enzo XL, but then it's a different type of speaker we're talking about.

 

[Sal1950]

The Dynaco ST-70 Series 3 seems to be just fine. I could imagine that amp with a pair of Ohm friendly 90 dB sensitive speakers IF it wasn't for the price. To me it's not worth $3000 for 40 watts just to see some vacuum tubes shine.

How iconic is the ST70 for nearing 70 years remains a popular amp for tube lovers.
Do a gaagle search and you can find 2 or 3 brand new variations being built to fill the appetite
Every once in a while, just for grins I would fire up my 1960s original., driven directly from my CD player into my Klipsch La Scala's.
Rolled off top and bottom and very soft sounding but fun none the less, power a-plenty.
But going back to my VTL monoblocks instantly revealed its antiquity.
I wonder how the one being built by Will Vincent would measure, someone send one in please.
IMHO they look pretty kool, painted any color you like on order.