I have been doing some research into the Monitor Audios and from some other people’s descriptions it appears that the midrange may be purposefully “dialed back” which is why the Axioms sound more “forward”. In reality, I believe the Axioms may be portraying the "real" sound and the Monitors portraying a slightly tweaked midrange to provide their interpretation of what sound people want to hear (what people are used to hearing from speakers). I found a frequency graph of the GR10 (same midrange as GR60) that shows a dip around the 4 to 5 kHz range.
Looking at the Axiom M22Ti (can not find a curve for the M60Ti) we see the following:
I realize the M22 has two mids versus the M60’s one but it should get the point across. When listening at Chess's place, there was a live recording of Eric Clapton in which some whistling was recorded. On the Axioms the whistling was "in your face" so to speak and irritating. On the Monitors it was subdued and did not get on your nerves. If I think about being in a stadium or a venue with live music and people around me whistling, the sound is typically "in your face" and sometimes quite annoying (I notice the dirty looks I get when I whistle like my grandpa taught me
- he whistled loudly for the cattle to come in from the fields).
I believe the Monitors are tweaked to make this midrange (to what we are most sensitive) "more listenable" which may be perceived as sounding better. Thus, the Axioms can be regarded as being more accurate in portraying the sound, although the Monitor midrange is slightly more refined (law of diminishing returns).
For a properly done recording, the Axioms really shine (as I mentioned with the Seal demo). And to reiterate, the hometheater demo was seamless and was everything
I would want in home theater audio. I tend to like the home theater sound to be more forward...or shall I say accurate
.
