Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo very critical review of the VP150...makes me wary

This review is NOT from one of the editors at AudioReview, but from a person called "Terror Beast". So I don't put to much weight on this review since it is not from a credible source. Funny "Terror Beast" is very similar to "Pure Evil" on AVS. hmmmm do I smell a troll.

I'm not sure I agree with Senor Terror Beast. My initial impression of ALL my Axioms was that they were a little bright/sibilant/harsh/etc. But having observed the forum for a couple of months before the buy, I let the speakers and my ears break in. Also, added an area rug(over hardwoods, needed it anyway) and tweaked placement. The area rug was my only sound suppression add. I don't have any traps/diffusers or such things. I also have good, middle of the road components. I actually for a day or two worried that the 150 was too boxy in the mids until I adjusted its position on the tv. Happy as a puppy with two peckers since. I don't know what the reviewers experience is, but from what I have read break in and position tweaking for a week or more is almost universally accepted as a standard tool for critical listening. I wonder if this person:

A)Had the 150 in his house for a week or more.
B)Listened to it at his friends house for 1/2 hour right out of the box.
C)Has heard one at all.

In reply to:

---

Until you want to cite your source, this is worse than irrelevant. Casting anonymous, uninformed aspersions used to be called slander. Publishing somebody else's work without attributing it used to be called plagarism.

---

Yep.

what's a troll? i found that on audio review...and i posted it just to see what your thoughts were...no other reason man...

...also...Pure-Evil is my other online name...i have no others.

I think the problems were (a) it was hard to tell where your comments ended and the third party review began, and (b) without a link pointing to (citing) the original review its hard to judge the credibility / source of the original material...

That's it...

Hey Michael (Jinx, Pure Evil) I was just trying to be sarcastic, please don't take any offense. Dude you really need to take a lot of the crap you read on the internet with a grain of salt. I was like you about a year ago, all excited about this stuff, asking questions left/right, starting threads like I was going for a record to catch up to these old timers

Then I took a chill pill, and realized these guys around here will give you the straight scoop, trust them, learn from them, its all good man.

Peace Out from Iowa

ps: I'm off to listen to some Rush. The rest of their stuff does not suck, Moving Pictures is one of my favorites. Your mileage may vary, especially if you have a mini cooper.

thanks dude...and sorry..but the rest of rush..although Canadian...DOES in fact suck big donkey youknowwhat..sorry dude..but CARESS OF STEEL is the only decent album they ever made!!!

Hmm. Wasn't that their "Down the Tubes" tour ?

What is it that you think makes Caress of Steel a standout ? Any particular track, or the transitional nature of the album and the group at that time, or what ?

Don’t you guys think your being just a tad bit defensive? I don’t see what’s so bad about the review. It’s been discussed numerous times on this very board how important room treatment, speaker set up and placement is. That’s all the reviewer was stating. I’m looking into a HT system myself and Axiom is at the top of the list, but I’ve also heard from several members of this board that the VP’s are not of the same caliber as the towers and surrounds. I’ve read it enough to have reservations about buying one, and am planning to use three towers for that very reason.

Why is it that when someone posts anything other than Axiom praise, the cowboys come a running with guns blazing? Try having an open mind to differing opinions and discuss it without gunplay.

Mike, on a basic level, I agree with you that the actual content of the review is relatively even-handed and useful. However, it was not allowed to speak on its own merits without the editorial preamble interpreting it (incorrectly and uncharitably, IMO) as "very critical". Likewise, it was initially unattributed and is clearly just another user opinion, not a professional or scientific review. It's not the content of the review I object to, but the context in which it was presented.

As to being defensive, you likely have a point. And consider the circumstances; because of the nearly absolute latitude we enjoy here, it is easy to minimize what it means that this resource remains sponsored and subsidized by Axiom. The environment here is wonderful, casual, educational, helpful, etc. AND this is not a "neutral, public, free speech" zone. Since the forum remains completely unmoderated by its sponsor, I do feel some compunction to cry "bullsh*t" occasionally in return for my enjoyment of Axiom speakers and the Axiom forum.

On a real fundamental level, there is a big difference to me between "my experience was suboptimal. Here are my impressions. Here is the environment. Here are the potential causes" and "somebody said xyz sucks". I do not think it is intellectually honest to afford both of those positions the same deference.

And, like, what else would you expect any self-respecting posse to do?