Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners Speaker face-off this weekend

We were just contacted by Curtis Chang of AVSForum.com to participate in a face-off between Aperion 522D's, Rocket RS150's, Ascend CBM-170's, and the VMPS 626R's. AVSForum requested the M22s to face off in this challenge, which is taking place at the home of a Rocket owner.

Curtis wanted me to invite anyone in the Los Angeles area to partake! Saturday, from 12-4pm in Monterey. If anyone would like to partake, you can email me for his address.

Incidentally, I believe that this is actually in Monterey Park in the LA area, for anyone interested.

That is going to be interesting. I look forward to the reports by the participants!

This should definitely have some interesting results, I can't wait to see.

So, it looks like some of the results of this face-off are coming in. Not surprisingly, considering the format of this face-off, the M22's did not fare that well. As an Axiom owner, I could certainly rebut some of the comments on the AVS board, but I fear a flaming if I did so (and I would leave that to some of the more seasoned Axiom owners anyway). Most of the comments of the M22's focused on words like metallic, tinny, and bright, which as Axiom owners know, is more cliche than reality. And, I certainly wouldn't question the reviewers' opinions, because everyone is entitled to their opinion. But, considering that one of the reviewers is an ardent Rocket speaker owner, and those speakers are often defined as "too laid back", it's no surprise that he found the Axioms too bright and not to his liking. My only fear is that some people may take this stuff as gospel, not just opinions from people who either prefer or have become accustomed to a very different sound, not necessarily better or worse.

Plus, I believe the speakers were tested without a sub. So, on the one hand, they were each tested the same way, fairly. But, it could have been some effect similar to the M3's vs. M22's. I have read that the M3's are tweaked differently than the M22's, so they may sound better without a sub. But, with a sub, the M22's seem to be preffered over the M3's, as the M22's midrange and highs really shine.

These are just my .02 cents. I obviously would have preffered to see the M22's fair a bit better (hey, at least they were preferred over one brand), but these are just opinions, and opinions vary.

It always up to the individual. People have varied tastes. I used to have the M22Ti for 5 months. They are good speakers. I traded them for the M3Ti because my ears enjoyed the sound of the M3Ti much better. Its all personal taste.

Saturn

gem,
Your comments are well placed. I certainly agree with your thoughts on the reviews.

One major problem with a speaker face off with multiple people over a weekend can be quite hard to accomplish properly. Considering the time it takes for the brain to break into the new sound of each speaker, a single day with several people may not be enough time for you to decide whether this sound is better or worse. You can easily define how other speakers sound in comparison to the original reference that the listener is used to hearing, however, that original reference is just that, the point at which the listener feels is often the best to begin with (biased towards what you know well).

Although the Axioms have been reported as being bright (and they are) very few people report on how clear or precise that also makes them. I think the descriptions of tinny and metallic are coming from those who researched the tweeter materials ahead of time. It looks to me like at least 2 of the other tweeters are not pure metals and hence get the reputation of producing a 'softer' sound (silk vs. aluminum...it must be 'softer' right?).
That being said, the different materials can produce a different frequency curve, different spikes or dips, or rolloff quicker at the upper end. My Tannoys employ the soft dome (silK) tweeter and i find them to be really smooth in their delivery but a bit less detailed than the Axioms. I have yet to hook them up to my system that powers the Axioms though so this is not quite apples to apples.
So which do people prefer then?
Accuracy in sound from a flatter frequency response curve with a metal tweeter?
Or the rolled off upper end that may sound 'less harsh' to the ears but then 'less accurate' reproduction of sound?

Perhaps you can post the link to the AVS forum talk on this. I would enjoy reading it i'm sure.

I love my m22's. I think Axiom was mentioned about 3 times in 65 posts. the reason for that face off was for the host to compare his aperions or ascends with the Onix shill and a really high priced speaker. Man, that site is slow. Looks like they are closing portions of it as well.

here is one

and


here is the other

Frank

blame it on amie she sent a bad color-lol
it sounds like they all like what they bought before the showdown -already had perceptions on what the sound would be.
but hey no one makes a speaker that works for everyone anyway.

They certainly did sound like they hated that maple color. I also asked if they listened blind, and they did not. Hmmm...

There may be a round 2 with the Aperions, Ascends and M22. If so, I believe I'll be able to attend. I've suggested that this time a few changes are made.

1) listen blindly

2) listen both sub-free and with a sub. If a sub is added it'll be a Hsu VTF-3, a GREAT sub! I would agree that the M22's are bit bright in the high end. But I believe it is partly due to the fact that their high end and mids are so strong, and they are quite weak in the lower end. When I added my VTF-2 sub to the M22's that brightness seemed much more subdued - because it was now part of a much fuller sound.

3) add another type of music. They only listened to one piece of classical, and Nora Jones. Granted those are nice choices, but something a bit more difficult is in order. I suggested Propellerheads. It's a super clean, tight bit of electronica which encorporates orchestral music as well. It'll really work the speakers over. I use it as a test cd quite often. Speakers tend to start sounding "muddy" when pushed to play it. The M22's handled it with ease. (That's partly why I own them!)

I think these are fair suggestions, and are in now why designed to "help" the M22 in the process. Any comments? If this round two does happen, I want it to be as thorough, and fair as possible.

Blind testing was not used...major problem number one (good question spiffnme).

The speaker setup area put several ppl off axis by the sounds of it and there was no mention as to how long each speaker set was listened to before switching.

The words 'speaker break-in' continue to fly around.

This Norah Jones cd kept popping up as the one which ppl covered their ears for when using Axioms (source material and components?) yet not during some classical music with high note violin pieces.

The knuckle test for build quality is downright silly.

One post mentions "flatter speakers tend to shine at higher volumes, where their flatness becomes a huge bonus... " yet excludes Axiom from this category. I don't think they have seen the frequency response graphs for the M22s which are pretty flat at the upper end and certainly do not roll off as sharp as the Ascends especially on the off axis.

The SSBL person seems to have been a bit more objective although still mentions the {sigh} speaker break in "phenomena" and cable-component mismatching.
Do these ppl ever think of the recordings themselves?

I was a bit shocked at the overly negative impression of the Axiom vinyl finishes as well. You can't really compare it to real wood veneers but damn, for vinyl the Axiom material is pretty darn good.
At least these reviewer are aware of Axiom's new speaker finishes.

At least the reviewers tried to stress that the opinions expressed were only their opinions but i am still going to say that their choice of words was rather unflattering ( 'metallic and tinny' instead of 'bright' or ' high clarity') compared to how they referred to faults in other speakers. I never saw anyone call the Rockets lifeless, muffled and dull although the closest description was "they were holding back" which certainly is not as harsh compared to 'metallic and tinny'.
I had some old cheap computer speakers that were thin little things. Now THEY sounded metallic and tinny.

I would love to see some more home auditions like this done but with a bit better control. The idea is great and certainly a socially fun one.

I read your post in AVS spiffnme.
Well done.

My suggestions for improvements:
1) same as yours, listen blind, use score sheets with numbers but not names (only one person should know how they match up and they would not be listening or at least not include their ideas in the pool)
2) listen w/o the sub, after all, they are head to head speaker on speaker and the sub adds an additional element
3)YES, add more music types BUT allow each listener to take as much time as they want with their OWN music

This process would take more time than a single evening depending on how many ppl show up but its the only way to get individual results of ppl sitting in the same spot, not knowing what speakers are on at any given time but using material they are familiar with.

Finally, once the listening is done, gather the score sheets together and finally add the numbers to the names to find out which brand may have scored highest.
You can always rank for build quality and looks afterwards.

I will give alot more credit and respect for the scores of such a test. Apparently Amie even sent along some speaker grille material for them to use in blind testing, and yet they did not bother.

I posted this message on the AVS site in regards to adding the sub.

"I think a sub SHOULD be used in a blind test. You should listen to both with and without the sub, and both should be blind.

We're dealing with bookshelf speakers, and for the most part, in the real world, we'll listen to them paired with a subwoofer. Listening without a subwoofer is a good to get an idea of the characteristics of the speaker, but the real test is WITH the subwoofer - if that's how you'll be listening to it at home, no?

I did this very test at home myself. I brought home speaker A and speaker B. (Not using brand names, because it's irrelevent).

Alone with no subwoofer, A & B were very comparable speakers. Speaker A was a bit more detailed in the high end, but lacked much heft in the lower end. Speaker B on the other hand was much superior in the lower end, but lacked the detail of speaker A. Then I flipped on the subwoofer. With the added subwoofer, the difference between the two speakers was like night and day. Speaker A was clearly the superior speaker, as the clarity and details which were it's fortes, now blended with the low end of the sub, and made for a clear, full-bodied, rich sound. Speaker B on the other hand still suffered from the lack of detail in the highs, but now it's "superior" low end did nothing for it. It sounded "muddy" as though it were being played from behind a damp cloth.

My point is this. Without the subwoofer, I wasn't sure which speaker I'd buy, and if I didn't own a subwoofer, I may very well have purchased speaker B. But the fact is, I do own a subwoofer, as do most all of us here. Don't you want to know what the speakers sound like, as you'll actually be listening to them?"

Since this is the Axiom board, I'll let you know that it was the M22ti vs. Energy C-3, that I was comparing.

Though their "shoot out" was flawed, they did a commendable job considering how many speakers they were trying to listen to in one evening.

I'm hoping we'll be able to do a round two with just the Ascends, Axioms, and Aperions. This time blind and with the added sub. (yeah, I'm sticking to my sub idea!)

-Craig

Guys, these are great ideas, and would certainly make the face-off a bit fairer. But, I still think that the blind testing is not necessarily the answer.

Take the Rocket owner again as an example. He obviously prefers and has grown accustomed to the Rocket sound. Even if the test is blind, I would imagine that he would still prefer the sound of his Rockets, and possibly still describe the Axioms as metallic and tinny. I have never heard the Rockets, but from reading descriptions, their sound is probably clearly differentiated from the Axioms. And this would likely be picked out by owners of each and preferred accordingly.

So, since psychology would probably enter into even a blind testing, as long as people will be listening to their own speakers in the face-off, I don't think there is an easy answer. But, I do like the idea of using a sub, because my M22's really shine when used with my sub, and are clearly not as good when used without a sub. This is interesting stuff though.

Agreed. I LIKE "bright" (I call 'em "crisp") high ends. I like the tight, clean details. Some people don't. Blind or not, they won't like a "bright" sounding speaker.

They did make a point of stating that these were their opinions and nothing more. They were very fair in that sense. And of course if you've read many posts on that board, there are a LOT of Rocket fans there.

Though blind listening would help when it comes to prejudging. The Axioms received prettly low marks all around for style - or lack thereof. (I have to agree - I REALLY want some wood veneered Axioms). If you HATE the way a speaker looks, you're already mentally leaning to the negative side when you hear it.

Good ideas, Craig. Blind testing doesn't remove differences that actually exist(and some do exist in speakers, although not to the "blow-away" extent sometimes described when fairly similar speakers are involved), but it does remove preconceived notions as to construction, brandname, price, etc. I noted that even Curtis used the term "metallic" twice in his first M22 impressions. Of course, no such characteristic sound exists; a speaker with a titanium dome tweeter can be made to sound as dull or "laid-back" as one desires by increasing the value of the resistor in the crossover. Conversely a speaker with a paper cone tweeter can be made to sound harsh(metallic?)with the opposite crossover treatment. Can't recall many comments about a "papery" or "plasticky" quality of a speaker.

I remember my first(anonymous)post here over a year ago in which I was somewhat derisive of an M2 listener who reported not only a ringing in his ears but a metallic taste in his mouth. In a later post he made clear that he didn't appreciate my advice to listen with a mint in his mouth and my failure to take him seriously.

This also brings to mind the occasion a few years ago when otherwise identical black and gold finished receivers were presented to a listening panel with the "explanation" that different output impedances were being tested. The panel members were in general agreement that the sound of the gold receiver was "warmer".

I suppose the bottom line may be that the mantra to "trust your ears" can't be applied to someone who's listening with preconceived notions.

Hi All....this is the famous Curtis.

First...let me say that the Axioms were not my least favorite of the bunch.

The word metallic was the word "I" chose, because that is how it sounded to me. You must admit that the M22's are bright speakers.

The speakers are clean sounding. I believe I stated that.

Did you read how I descibed the Rockets?....or the Aperions?

We did not do blind simply because of the amount of time we had...and the number of speakers.....I hauled four pairs of speakers there and a center channel.

Pre-conceived notions? Don't you think you may have some as well. Yes...a blind test would help that.

I spent a total of 5 hours listening to the Axioms...and about 5 listening to the Aperions, and did not listen to MY Ascends for two days...trying to clean my "palette"

I can not honestly tell you if I am biased in any way...but I hope I am not.

There were three people there that did not own any of the speakers that were being reviewed.

This negativity to the reviews is exactly why I had hoped an Axiom owner/person could have attended.

I am more than happy to answer any questions you have.

curtis

Welcome, Curtis. I only mentioned you specifically because you received the M22s and were the first of the group to use the forbidden word. Also, my recollection of the guy who reported a metallic taste in his mouth certainly wasn't meant to imply that your comments were of a similar nature, but merely to illustrate the lengths of silliness we sometimes hear on this subject.

I enjoyed reading your impressions and I'm sure that it would be interesting if you and Craig were able to get together for a more detailed analysis.

The Axioms were tested against some of what I would call higher end speakers. Certainly the VMPS 626 are a much more expensive speaker than the Axioms M22. I was very interested in the results and not really surprised.

The bottom line for me is that I know the problem lies in the Axiom crossover parts. These other speakers are using crossovers with better parts. If the M22's were tested with with higher grade caps,resistors, & inductors the talk would have shifted from a discussion of metallic sounding drivers to one of air & detail.

I would be happy to build a high quality crossover for Axiom to test out on the M22. Again, I have rebuilt the crossover of my M60, VP150, & QS8 using point to point wiring, factory inductors (didnt have the values to do a replacement) and exact value replacement with high end caps & resistors.

End result on my speakers was really wonderful. With a new high end crossover this face off test would have come out very different. (Just my humble opinion)

have read thread here and at other forums, and yes i do own axioms. how can an unbiased test be done by anyone who owns better than htib speakers subjectively? dumb as it may sound, newbies who have not purchased anything yet need to compare the different brands. geographically this might be a nightmare as readers are from all over. i'm sure even my wife would chose the axioms in a blind test because she has listened to them and is accustomed to them. i would love to attend a boston based shoot out as an observer only. people could be polled by the various speaker companies, give away a system comparable to their 1st choice as a reward for their time and testing. maybe i'm all wet on this, but to me this is a way to get unbiased opinions, getting someone who has not listened to any of the speakers about to be tested.

John,

Thanks for the welcome.

Yes...the higher end speakers were there as well, but we specifically compared the "budget" speakers with each other. After that was complete, we then moved on to the expensive stuff.

I am looking forward to getting together with Craig, but please be aware, my setup and space is much more limiting than Mad Dog's.

curtis

curtis

Hey Curtis, thanks for showing up. Your shoot-out was interesting reading. And, keep in mind that I am not dismissing or disputing your opinions--they are your opinions and that is obviously fine.

I honestly think, as JohnK noted, that the use of the word "metallic" leads to the strongest rebuttal from Axiom owners. We all know that Axiom advertises aluminum woofers and titanium tweeters. So, yes, there can be implied a metallic undertone to their sepeakers. But, I know that personally, I have played Norah Jones (one of your test disks) for a ton of people in my home using the Axioms, and everyone has said that it sounds beautiful. And obviously, the large amount of professional reviews have (and take them for whatever they are worth) never mentioned anything about a metallic sound. While Axioms may be somewhat bright, having a somewhat higher tweeter output does not impact their stellar midrange, and I have never found listening to them to be a problem. Who knows, maybe this results from my always using a sub with my M22's, and the help a sub provides to balancing the sound.

So, please accept our respectful disagreement with some of the findings from the face-off. And, the bottom line is, Axioms are not the choice for everyone, the same way the Rockets and other speakers are not the choice for everyone. The beauty is, there are tons of great brands out there now, for every taste.

Steven,
Don't you believe that Axiom has spent alot of time and dollars researching such items?
How is it that you have come to define a better method without having the same testing facilities and R&D that Axiom does?
Have you blind tested your new designs against the old ones and used a panel of other people to generate the numbers?
If not, then other than your own ears why should anyone believe your statements?

Gem,

Thank you.

Respectful disagreement is respectfully accepted.

The "metallic" word may have been a bad choice, but it was merely a description. By the way, I am not a good writer.

I like the Axioms, and agree the midrange is very good. And yes, my Hsu VTF-3 does make a difference....as with the Ascends and Aperions too.

I do have a question on the brightness of the speaker. Do you think I gave them enough playing time before the review? Fifteen or so hours at a higher than usual (for me) listening level. Is break-in critical for the M22?

By the way, I have a friend coming over this evening. Before we head out for dinner/movie, she wants to hear the speakers, Ascends, Aperions, and Axioms. They will all be side by side by side on my shelf. She is not an audiophile, she had a set of Bose Acoustimass a while ago, and currently is using a set of smaller Radio Shack speakers. Would you folks be interested in what she thinks.

Also, a co-worker looking to replace his older Paradigms took the Axioms home with him yesterday. He was very much interested in them after looking at the Axiom website. I will post his thoughts as well if you like.

OK, here we go ... when someone says something Chesseroo doesn't agree with, he says something like, "other than your own ears why should anyone believe your statements?" If you say you A/B tested the issue with other people who agreed, he'll tell you that your testing methods are defective and urge you not to believe what those people heard either. I don't know whether he intends to be rude.

In any case, I have a bunch of M22 like speakers which use the same drivers as Axioms do. I do not know whether these speakers use the same cross overs, but I'd guess they probably do. In any case, I took one pair apart replaced the tiny capacitors with great big Jenson paper/oil caps and the resistors with Caddocks. The sound (which I love out of the box) opened up and smoothed out. Now, of course, that's just by my ears, so why should anyone believe my statements either?

That's why I've suggested, from time to time, that Axiom make a "Gold" or "Platinum" series of upgrades for every speaker in their line-up, one which would use upgraded parts in the cross-overs. I think for a modest increase in production cost Axiom could step up and take on even more expensive speakers than they already do.

Curtis, welcome to the site.

As you should have seen in my earlier post on nit picking, several points remain valid.
Blind testing is the only way to remove any bias that people have before reviewing speakers.

What you could have done with your testing was this:
Invite ppl over for a listen but don't even tell them what speakers they will be listening to.
Put up the grille cloth that Amie had provided you in front of the speakers.
And then yes, you need to have TIME and PATIENCE to do the listening properly.
You could setup any sets of speakers behind the listening area and you (and only you) would be the one to do all the speaker changing.
Sure it is alot of effort, but the results from people not even knowing what brands were behind the grille were being used could easily have provided alot of different descriptions.
In fact, a fun addition to this test would be to ask each listener to try and guess the brand after hearing each.

The time for the brain to adjust to new sounds is variable but typicallly takes longer than an hour or two (many people falsely believe this is actually speaker break in time). Your weekend testing should incorporate two days at least. The first day ppl can make first impressions and listen lots. Give them a night to 'cleanse' their pallettes and then have them back the next day for brunch and another round of listening. I bet hearing speakers a second time a day later may change from their first impressions. I know mine did when i first heard my Axioms on day one and was a bit upset they didn't 'blow me away" like so many ppl had posted they would. Heck, someone may have been in a bad mood the day before, or perhaps even imbibed too much wine.

As JohnK had mentioned about the 'metallic' thing, did it ever occur to you that ppl often research the speakers they are about to hear before listening to them?
Several have mentioned in past posts how metal drivers always sound "metallic and tinny" while silk tweeters seem to be 'soft'.
I think JohnK had put it into the best perspective in stating:
"Can't recall many comments about a "papery" or "plasticky" quality of a [poly or paper driver based] speaker. "

More test music is required and it should be familiar to the listeners. I cannot stress that one enough. It is apparent this Norah Jones cd is recorded very different from the classical music you used since the Jones showed brightness while the classical violin did not. This may be a fault of the recording, not the speaker.

Beyond those major issues, your listening session is a great idea, but when ppl (newbies) on forums use that info to base their buying decisions, i find it to be very lacking in completely accurate info.
Kudos to your attempts to get across to people that they are just your opinions though. Nonetheless, some do take them as gospel.

As for the idea that we over on the Axiom forums are biased, of course we are, to some extent.
I myself have mentioned that my Axioms are bright, but since that is my preference especially for HT purposes, i'm thrilled. For music it makes them detailed and if you have a well recorded music piece, it really shows! Unfortunately many music cds have that edge of higher treble from the designs of the sound mixing ppl that is hard to work with.

Eventually my wife and i will be putting together a second system, stereo and music based only and chances are we will not be buying a second set of Axioms for the main speakers.
Why?
Because shopping for something new and different is just more fun. Who the heck would want to own nothing but the same Honda Civic model each year, for both husband, wife, kids all the time for 20 years? Where's the fun in that?
So in regards to Axiom bias, yes, i know i certainly do have some since afterall, i do own them. But please don't believe our comments or rebuttals are based solely on such premises. Some of us do try to be more objective than that on the whole. For some of us, its our livelihood.

2x6spds
Please keep your personal attacks to yourself or send them to me in a private message.
You are being very discourteous in trying to pick open fights.
If you have a rebuttal, make it general and not personal.

chesseroo...

I agree with everything you say, your points are valid. But please remember how we prefaced this whole event. We are amateurs...plain and simple. Criticizing our event after the preface is ridiculous. I really hope someone takes the time to do a comparison with your requirements.

We had about 4 hours to listen to 7 pairs of speakers and 3 centers. It was fun, and a great experience. Good people, good food, and good music.

Simple question, do you think you would have the same criticisms of our get together if we liked the M22s more?

Hrmm, so someone, in their own home, with their own equipment, listened to a bunch of speakers, and decided they did not like Axioms. Right, and this affects you and I, as Axiom owners, how?

Several owners/posters have indicated they may sacrifice the "accuracy" of the Axioms for something more musical, including that blind-testing advocate that shall remain nameless who indicated a preference for Tannoys (I have a pair of older 605? also). If an individual has so much affinity for a product and chooses to ignore the obvious "defects" of it, how is that any different from believing "myths" like biwiring, biamping, etc etc ...

Somelike dislike the speakers I have. Big deal. I like them (enough to keep listening to them). That's all I care.

Happy listenin'

I've come to believe that the power of suggestion is a huge factor here. My M60s so impressed me immediately, not only did I keep them I ordered a complete Axiom HT system. Later I read someone state that Axioms sound metallic and tinny. I listened for that and started to believe he may be right. I tried playing all sorts of music to determine if this were actually the case.

I came to this conclusion: the strings on guitars (usually) are metallic, cymbals are metallic, the little springs under a snare are metallic, tambourines are metallic, etc... My M60s let me hear that they are. Bongo drums on the other hand have such a soft, well rounded sounded through my Axioms - not a hint of "metallic" sound because they shouldn't. Neither do violins or any other non-metallic intstrument sound "metallic".

My Axioms do not make all music sound good, but I wouldn't want a speaker that glosses everything over and makes it all sound the same.

Furthermore, a better speaker comparison would involve using a recorded piece of music with the performer on hand to play it live. Which speaker sounds most like the performer? Not... Which speaker makes this recording sound most palatable to my ears? Maybe you can get Norah Jones to stop by next time, Curtis.

Geesh, seems like this little speaker face off is being taken a bit too personal.

Bottom line is that people like different things. I LIKE crisp, detailed highs. Many people do not. It's as simple as that.

It sounds like they had a great time, and I wish I could have been there!

Hello Curtis,

I feel I should weigh in here because I did do many years of truly scientifically controlled double-blind listening in professional surroundings at Canada's National Research Council in Ottawa, Canada, where over the course of 13 years I reviewed (with colleagues) various speakers for test reports published in Sound&Vision magazine Canada. These sessions were supervised and designed by Dr. Floyd Toole, a scientist and psycoacoustician (also an audiophile) who, over the course of 25 years running the Acoustics division at the NRC, explored exactly how subjectivity in listening tests influences our conclusions--and how these relate to the frequency response measurements taken in an anechoic chamber at some 220 positions in a sphere around the speaker.

Here are some controls that must be in place if you are to reach anything other than anecdotal conclusions that have no scientific validity.

You must conceal the brand, the price, and the physical details of the speakers from the listeners with a visually opaque and acoustically transparent curtain. If you don't, listeners' preconceived expectations will hopelessly bias the results.

The speakers should be listened to in mono first, to avoid small variations cause by placement/room effects of stereo listening. The switching between speaker brands must be instantaneous, and volume levels must be adjusted to within 1/10 of a dB. If not, listeners will always perceive the louder speaker as "better," or give it a higher ranking even if it doesn't subjectively sound any louder. The switching should be done by a person with no interest in the test outcome, who is unrelated to any of the listeners. The technician should collect the scoring sheets and keep track of the data. No discussion during or between listening sessions is allowed..

Trying to assess more than four different speakers accurately is impossible in less than several days of concentrated sessions of about 20 to 25 minutes each, followed by a break, for 6 to 8 hours per day. For greater numbers of speakers, I used to spend 3 or 4 days of full 8-hour sessions.

Stereo listening does not change the ranking order of speaker preferences. Stereo is a flattering effect, and scores will be higher, but the order of preferences does not change. Mono testing enables rapid pinpointing of speaker distortion and colorations. A wide variety of listening material--pop, jazz, classical and rock--should be sought out and tested as to its ability to distinguish good from bad speakers. Many electric rock selections are not useful in this regard.

You must exchange and rotate speaker positions and listening seats to randomize out the effects of the room. If not, many of your judgements will be a product of a given speaker's position in that particular room, rather than intrinsic qualities or liabilities of the speaker. I cannot emphasize enough how important this is. Just a difference of one or two feet in the placement of two different speakers will cause a bigger change in the scores than differences in the actual speakers themselves! What you end up reviewing are the acoustic properties of the room, rather than the speakers!

From what I've read, few if any of these controls were observed or even possible in your admittedly amateur assessments. Thus your conclusions are really casual anecdotal opinions--I'm sure it was pleasant, but it's unwise to make any final conclusions about the inherent virtues or limitations of any of the products under review.

Regards,

Hey chesseroo,

I did end my previous post with saying in my humble opinion

Yes I agree that Axiom R&D team new what they were doing when they designed all of these crossovers. I did not change the values of any of the crossover components (I completely accept that the experts knew what they were doing) I merely duplicated their crossover design and rebuilt using point to point wiring and substituted high end components (except inductors) for the factory ones.

I had the benefit of evaluating my work in my own home with my own system doing an A/B comparison with the factory crossovers. The improvement in sound quality with my new crossovers (again I used the exact design and component values as the factory - I just totally rebuilt them from scratch)was huge.

If one was just to take the factory crossover out of the M22 and compare it to the factory crossover on the VMPS 626 there is just no comparison. The factory cost (and customer cost) of that VMPS 626 crossover is substantially more. I am pretty sure that VMPS factory crossover upgrade options alone cost more than a pair of new Axiom M22's. I am certain that the Axiom factory crossovers are designed properly for each model. However, it is clear (to me) upon close visual inspection of the factory crossover that certain financial based decisions were made by Axiom when selecting the crossover components. I mean come on these speakers are very resonably priced - thats one of the reasons why I bought them!

Based upon my own substantial results, I am positive that if the M22's would have had a crossover of similar factory design but with high end components the face off reviewers would have abolutely raved about the sound quality.

I would be interested to hear from Axiom if the R&D team or anyone else at Axiom ever tried high end components in their crossovers. If not someone should figure out how to give it a listen. I would be happy to lend assistance.

Even you Cheeseoo might (would) be amazed!

you got Norah's number?

Alan,

Thank you for the education.

"From what I've read, few if any of these controls were observed or even possible in your admittedly amateur assessments. Thus your conclusions are really casual anecdotal opinions--I'm sure it was pleasant, but it's unwise to make any final conclusions about the inherent virtues or limitations of any of the products under review."

Did we ever imply that they were not casual? In your statement then, is this how someone should come to a conclusion? So anyone who has speakers in their home, but has not reviewed them in your manner, should not voice an opinion?

We stated, over and over again, these were our opinions. We never claimed to be professional. I never claimed anything more. Oh..by the way..we had an SPL meter to get levels even.

I think, after reading these posts, that many people will not want to listen to these speakers under one roof and then voice a opinion.

May I suggest that you get samples of all the speakers in question, do your review in your conditions, and then maybe you and others may be satisfied with the results.

Some of you are as bad as the hyping Rocket people.

my review of the Axioms.....

"Axiom Audio M22Ti – This speaker sounds pretty good to me and I think it would appeal to a lot of people. Detailed with good clean midrange and highs. It does sound bright to me, and a bit metallic, and those characteristics showed themselves a lot with the Norah Jones CD we were using, but when playing classical music, they seemed to sound much better. Good imaging and soundstage. In my home, when turned up, the metallic characteristics seem much more prominent. I didn’t like the finish that was sent to us, but there are other finishes on their website that look nice. More efficient than the Aperions. If you like the bright sound, you should definitely try to give these speakers a listen before you buy."

So my guess is that all the unhappiness is because I used the word metallic....because as I read it, that it the only thing that made come across negative.

This thread reminds me of a great debate I saw on TV the other day. It went a little something like.....

Tastes Great! Less Filling!
Tastes Great! Less Filling!

In the end it didn't really matter because they were both hot and I got to see them wrestle in the water. (Those of you who have seen the Bud Light commercial know what I'm talking about!)
So I guess it all boils down to whether you like the blond or the brunette better.

Yeah, the original is a great commercial, but the new one is not PC. It ends with the big fat guy standing menacingly over the little guy in the fountain. The implication is clear. Being a big fat guy myself, my feelings are hurt. Of course, that is my own biased opinion.

huffer...so true...

by the way, Amie sent the blonde (light maple, light colored grill)

I think the idea of 'high' end vs. 'low' end components is the question i'm asking here Steven.
How do you determine better vs lesser? Metal types used? Solder type? circuit boards? etc.

It is very possible that you have a different crossover design which provides another type of sound with the Axiom speakers and by all means, send in the idea to Ian for testing.
Maybe you will make a million off the design.

I'm always up for hearing something new. I would love to be amazed every now and again. Perhaps i'm becoming too cynical.

That is a neat idea, although an expensive one.
Perhaps with enough speaker company sponsors we could get some big name bands into Curtis's place, fly in about 150 people and hold a big ol hoedown.

That's a nifty idea i say.

I've never heard anything from the hyping Rocket ppl.
Got any samples?

Blonde.

I respectfully disagree with you Chess...brunette!!

If you don't partake on other boards, or don't notice it, than I'd rather not point it out. If all you do is hang out on the Axiom board...you need to read some of the other boards to get a broader view.

In reply to:

---

We are amateurs...plain and simple. Criticizing our event after the preface is ridiculous. I really hope someone takes the time to do a comparison with your requirements.

---

This is just how science experiments work. Trial and error. You try, you find errors, you improve the trials. That's all i was getting at with the freindly suggestions for future attempts.

In reply to:

---

We had about 4 hours to listen to 7 pairs of speakers and 3 centers. It was fun, and a great experience. Good people, good food, and good music.

---

This is what i liked so much about the whole gathering. Just a great idea. But i still would love more time to hear the speakers. As i said, perhaps an after dinner evening followed by a brunch the next morning. I hear sushi has a large house in Texas we could possibly use....

In reply to:

---

Simple question, do you think you would have the same criticisms of our get together if we liked the M22s more?

---

Absolutely. In fact i returned the M22s i originally auditioned myself so i'm not biased towards how they sound.

I am trying to be as honest as possible in stating my thoughts are objective and not biased by the fact i own Axioms. Heck, i own Tannoys too and i love Boston Acoustics but i'm not on those forums 'defending' their honour. I just don't have the time.

I've been to other more home theatre based boards (not AVS) but i don't recall seeing alot of Rocket hyping, at least nothing beyond the usual "hey, have you heard the new Rocket brand yet?" kind of stuff.

No no no jbz!!!

Clearly, in using blind testing, the blonde wins hands down ( pun intended)!!

OK...so I have to ask, why did you return the M22s?

That was well over a year ago now so remembering my exact impressions of the M22s is somewhat faded.
Just offhand though i found them to be thin. I wanted more and i didn't want it from a subwoofer so i moved towards the floorstanding models instead.
I hear the M3 is more robust in its sound than the M22 so perhaps if i had auditioned them instead i would have reconsidered. Who knows.

If Sushi offers a face-off at his house I'll bring the beer and some Maggies and some KEF's and some M22s!!! Hell, I'd even bring some components. Someone else would have to bring the dancing girls for intermission.

I should have jumped in earlier - my apologies to all!

I understood completely when Curtis contacted me that he was going to be performing casual listening tests, not double-blind listening tests. He was very clear that he was not hosting the event, so he wasn't in charge of the wiring, switch boxes - even the beverages! I think Curtis has done a great job of giving an overview of his opinion of several popular speakers.

I'd like to extend an invitation to Curtis to come up to Axiom, visit our facilities, spend some time on the lake oggling the neighbours (but that's another post!) and to the NRC to conduct a controlled double blind listening test. Ian, Alan, and Dr. Floyd Toole of Harmon-Kardon (amongst others), spent years developing those tests and any audio lover would enjoy the experience, I'm sure.

So that's what happened, and what we'd love to have happen, and thanks Curtis for the opportunity.

Best,

mwc,
What kind of Kefs do you own?
Newer stuff or older?
I have a friend of mine who is a Kef nut.

Curtis, re your "break-in" question, since in the very first minute of play a woofer cycles thousands of times and a tweeter hundreds of thousands, I think it was a wise man indeed who opined that "Break-in was invented so that we couldn't return anything".

And now see, little did you suspect that this would wind up with you getting invited to Canada.

Amie,
Your comments again reinforce what a unique company Axiom is. Very classy indeed.

Whenever we sell our house and get something smaller Axioms are coming in the door and I suspect that 30 days later they will still be there .

Curtis,
Your event sounded like a lot of fun, I'd love to attend one sometime if it ever makes it up to the Great White North.

Amie,

Thank you very much for your post and your kind phone call this afternoon. Your support is much appreciated. I want to reiterate, in no shape or form did I take comments made on the board as a reflection on Axiom.

I would love to visit your facilities if I get I ever get the chance. Does Shania Twain own Axioms? That may cause me to sway my opinions, especially if she was in the room....double blind or not!

No matter what the reviews said, one thing is perfectly clear to me. All of the folks that I dealt with from the internet speaker companies, Axiom Audio, Ascend Acoustics, and Aperion Audio, have been extremely supportive and gracious. I believe in the internet direct model. The main reason for this event was to be able to listen, first hand, the various speakers. It would be nice to have "showrooms" around so people could listen and touch these speakers.....which is the only drawback of the model.

If any of you are ever in the Los Angeles area, I would love a shout, and maybe we can set something up so you can listen to other speakers in my home.

curtis

hello everyone,

i am the individual who offered to host this INFORMAL comparison...

first off, i'd like to thank curtis and Axiom for making the comparison possible...

secondly, i'd like to thank each one of you for reading my review.

now i've read all of the replies that there were paid schills and inherent biases and what not and would like to address some of these things.

i did say in my write up and will repeat once again that everything i shared was MY PERSONAL OPINION. nothing more, nothing less...i also told folks to take everything with a BIG GRAIN OF SALT...why? because i know i like smooth yet detailed sounding speakers...

in reply to those who have insinuated that some of the attendees including myself might be paid schills...i can tell you that i am not. whether you believe it is up to you...based on my interactions with curtis, i do not believe he is a schill either as he has told me and posted that he is still learning alot about this wonderful hobby. a schill would know how to setup his speakers to sound better than the rest...curtis did not handle any of the speaker placement and yes, each speaker was placed in the EXACT same location to minimize variables. sa-dono is not a paid schill...he doesn't own Rockets and is still waiting for his Reference speakers...shokunin is not a paid schill...he doesn't own any of the budget branded speakers and preferred the Ascends...bioforce is not a paid schill...he is a dealer of other brands of speakers and like shokunin, found the Ascend sound more to his liking...panofka is not a paid schill...he doesn't own any speakers at this time and came over hoping to gain some direction on his decision...

regarding partiality to one's own speakers? i can only address this by saying that i am a former owner of Polk, Def Tech, Wharfedale, Thiel, Dynaudio, Acoustic Energy and other speakers...if i was partial to my own speakers, i'd still be listening to my Polks...no need to upgrade if i was so accustomed to picking speakers i own.

in reply to the metallic, tinny sound that emanates from metal tweeters...i've auditioned Revel and Aerial speakers, both of which use metal tweeters and did not find them to be metallic sounding...both of these offer LOADS of detail yet do not sound "bright" to my ear...

so i encourage you all to take our opinions at face value...they are simply our PERSONAL OPINIONS...nothing more, nothing less...

i have been through a lot of speakers and i am really enjoying my metalic bright sounding speakers, the ones they replaced sounded too polypropoleeny and kevlaraoonie and my klipsches were too horney....just a joke, please dont attack me

Mad Dog....I think we have finally gotten everything out of our systems. These folks have been very nice since Amie stepped in.

I think I am going to leave the reviewing to professionals and just enjoy the music now on. I really hope someday someone does a REAL comparison.

curtis

I think I used the word "schill" back on page 1 of this epic. Sorry, offhand comment said without any real deep thought or care. I am disgraced. It was the stress... the drugs... the alcohol... the drugs dissolved in the alcohol... the devil, yes definitely the devil that made me do it. BTW Radiohead's Amnesiac sounds fantastic in DPL II. Again, I apologize.

bj

"BTW Radiohead's Amnesiac sounds fantastic in DPL II."

It is better in Logic7!

Cheeseroo

I spent a lot of time looking at the factory crossovers and tracing out the circuts. Time consuming to get it traced out correctly but not really that hard. The factory crossover pc boards are not very complicated. So after much detailed analysis I am sure that I got it exactly the same as the factory layout.

I am not really sure what you are asking me when you typed the following: I think the idea of 'high' end vs. 'low' end components is the question i'm asking here Steven.
How do you determine better vs lesser? Metal types used? Solder type? circuit boards? etc.

Hey Chesseroo have you ever looked inside your Axiom speakers or perhaps taken a good look at the crossovers?

I've had my KEFs for about 4 yrs. I use them in a HT setup:

Q95 center
Q75 mains
Q15 surrounds

These are the KEFs with the tweeter located in the center of the mid-range driver. Kinda fonky' looking but kinda cool to.

I also have a pair of KEF RDM-2 bookshelf speakers in a bedroom 2 ch. setup.

I really enjoy the KEFs in the HT setup but for two ch. music, I prefer the Maggies or the Axioms.

I'd like to thank Curtis and Mad Dog for sharing their thoughts about all the speakers at the face-off. I've been reading the thread at AVS over the last couple of days and thought I'd offer some thoughts. I could have predicted some of the responses to the conclusions. I think the comment by Curtis questioning whether the response would have been different had they raved over the Axiom speakers was right on. I've owned a set of Axiom speakers (M60/VP150/QS8) for almost a year and was part of a group at HomeTheaterTalk that evaluated the Rockets when they first came out last year. I offered my thoughts on the Rockets here. You can also read my review of my Axioms here. I stated in my review and in my observations on the Rockets that I prefer the Axiom's more detailed presentation. I also stated that I loved the finish on the Rocket's, but they'd clash with the rest of my furniture so the Axiom's black finish works better for me. I had quite a few emails from people questioning my observations and suggesting what might have biased my opinion (maybe it was, as one emailer suggested, my "lack of high-end equipment"), so I can appreciate where Curtis and Mad Dog are coming from. They've offered their opinion based on a short listening period and a preference for a different type of sound. I didn't think that their observations were negative. They just didn't place the Axiom speakers at the top of the budget list, which is what seems to have concerned some people. My only concern is that I've already read comments in other threads at AVS from people that are basing purchase decisions on the outcome of the face-off. I only hope those people won't drop Axiom from consideration without auditioning the speakers in their own home or least trying to find an owner in their area.

David

davehead,

i agree with you...folks need to listen for themselves to determine what is best for them! i know what i like, but i certainly wouldn't tell anyone else what they should like and purchase!

It seems that many of us Axiom owners are a bit defensive about our speakers. I would imagine this is the same over at AV123 board (Onix) and every other brand supported board around. Let's face it, while we all have our preferences on sound, all of the speakers tested are well regarded and well reviewed. In fact, I hung around the Rocket board for quite awhile as I was considering purchasing Rockets. Unfortunately I hate wood grain finishes (no matter how well done) and that was the only finish available when I was ready to buy. The idea of internet based speaker companies intrigued me and that eventually led me to Axiom. Of course I also looked at the Ascends and Aperions as all of these brands are usually linked together by virtue of their internet direct sales.

Eventually I took the plunge and now I'm a huge Axiom fan. I think if I would have purchased the Rockets or Ascends I'd probably be a huge fan of those too.

Bottom line - it's a good time to be a consumer looking for quality audio equipment at great prices as there are choices that will satisfy everyone.

Frank

Kef always seem to make neat speakers.
They have a style that is just kinda wacky as you say.
The last time i heard a pair, i liked them, but i just coudln't get over their looks. I don't remember the model offhand but it was older (late 80s?, ~70lbs ea).