Re: Aluminum cone resonance
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,379 Likes: 7
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,379 Likes: 7 |
>>So is most of the brightness probably attributed to what we can see in the FR graph? (Aka the 3-6KHz peak and the tweeter peak at around 18-19KHz?)
I think it's just the 3-6 KHz peak. AFAIK the tweeter peak would be countered by the off-axis rolloff at high frequencies. I expect the tweeter peak would only be noticeable if you were sitting directly on axis AND very close to the speakers, which is geometrically difficult unless you put them close together and toe them in sharply.
M60ti, VP180, QS8, M2ti, EP500, PC-Plus 20-39 M5HP, M40ti, Sierra-1 LFR1100 active, ADA1500-4 and -8
|
|
|
Re: Aluminum cone resonance
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 649
aficionado
|
aficionado
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 649 |
I really don't feel like digging through all of that nonsense over there right now, but isn't this the same guy who finally buckled and admitted he'd never listened to a pair of Axioms?
M22ti mains, EP175 sub, VP150 center, QS4 surrounds
|
|
|
Re: Aluminum cone resonance
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,379 Likes: 7
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,379 Likes: 7 |
I think he said that in one post then retracted it in another. Probably a nice guy, but from his internet posts I have to admit I imagine him with shifty eyes
M60ti, VP180, QS8, M2ti, EP500, PC-Plus 20-39 M5HP, M40ti, Sierra-1 LFR1100 active, ADA1500-4 and -8
|
|
|
Re: Aluminum cone resonance
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,805
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,805 |
"but isn't this the same guy who finally buckled and admitted he'd never listened to a pair of Axioms?"
I believe you are right. I think he said he could tell the way the Axioms sounded by how they looked.
I think he is also the guy who passed himself off as a Dr. until someone (maybe Craig) busted him.
LIFE IS SHORT. DON'T BE A DICK.
|
|
|
Re: Aluminum cone resonance
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,331
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,331 |
In reply to:
isn't this the same guy who finally buckled and admitted he'd never listened to a pair of Axioms?
Actually no. That was a notorious troll who has been banned so many times, and had so many screen names, even HE can't remember them all. He was last posting as n8lyIeat, but got banned and is now posting under something close to abfan or abfam.
John has heard Axioms. Someone apparently traded in a pair of M2s for some NHTs at his store, and he revels in claiming this as proof that NHT's are superior speakers. OY! I don't believe he's heard any other Axioms, but I'm not certain about that.
Jack
"People generally quarrel because they cannot argue." - G. K. Chesterton
|
|
|
Re: Aluminum cone resonance
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 10
frequent flier
|
OP
frequent flier
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 10 |
John Ashman's recent post:
"Crossovers aren't instantaneous. If my math is right, it would take a 24dB/octave to the a 10dB resonance peak at 8.8kHz to ~1% distortion. Don't know what crossovers they use, but 24dB/octave is uncommonly high and I don't know where their 5" mid or 8" woofer rings. I forget what NHT uses on their metal 6.5", but I do know they cross it over at 850Hz for this very reason, then move frequencies above that to a 2" dome. On Xd, NHT uses a 110dB/octave digital crossover at 2kHz to cut out a 5kHz breakup mode on a 5" magnesium cone. A lot more effective than a passive low slope crossover."
Here's the thing, wouldn't this apply to all speakers then? If Axioms are brighter than other companies designs (aka, Rocket) if such a hard crossover is isn't implemented then the Rocket's would be "bright" too which is what I don't get.
Also Edster922 of the board talks about how Ascend posts all kinds of measurements (FR response, decay graphs) on their website. Do you think other companies, like Axiom, should do so as well? If decay graphs of Axioms would be made publically available, this would certainly dispell any "cone resonance" theories.
|
|
|
Re: Aluminum cone resonance
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,805
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,805 |
kobe
If you look under product information for any given Axiom speaker you'll see there is a (blue)graph button that when hit will show you a FR graph but no decay graph.
Last edited by bray; 11/30/05 05:29 AM.
LIFE IS SHORT. DON'T BE A DICK.
|
|
|
Re: Aluminum cone resonance
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 10
frequent flier
|
OP
frequent flier
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 10 |
I have another question. I've seen the designation "SE" quite often. What's the difference between the M22ti and M22tiSE? I have the regular one and I'm unsure of it's difference (if any).
|
|
|
Re: Aluminum cone resonance
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654 |
Just a change in the shape of the bevel on the front edges, made about four years ago to simplify manufacturing.
-----------------------------------
Enjoy the music, not the equipment.
|
|
|
Re: Aluminum cone resonance
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 10
frequent flier
|
OP
frequent flier
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 10 |
I ask this because the old soundstage graph of the M22TISe
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/axiom_m22ti_se/frequency_on1530.gif
http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/axiom_m22ti_se/frequency_listeningwindow.gif
Looks different from the M22TI graph on this website
http://www.axiomaudio.com/global/images/diagrams/m22ti_graph.gif
In the SE it looks like the highs are even to 20KHz
However, there other measurements such as Ascends, Athena, Energy, on Soundstage look a lot like the NRC measurements made.
That's why I thought there was a change in the models, specifically the highs look more tamed.
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,945
Posts442,489
Members15,617
|
Most Online2,082 Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
0 members (),
926
guests, and
4
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|