Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo INSANELY BRIGHT?

Axiom makes quaility speakers.. Proof: 1) Way too many happy owners.. 2) They would be out of business otherwise..
A poorly set up room can wreak havok with the best of systems.. (I know, I'm still tuning my own..)
As Chess pointed out, the only true test is to test them yourself, in your own home.. Hence the 30 day trial offer..

littleb,

There are so many speakers out there (especially in the low-three-digits price category) that are so laid-back in the "presence-region" and rolled off in the top octave. This is because these kinds of sound appeal to many people as pretty, mellow and relaxing. There are people who are so used to this type of speaker sound to the extent that they come to firmly believe that it is the "natural" or "neutral" sound.

Some of them might even claim that they have a "musical" background and knows how the "real" instruments sound. But you should be careful here -- unless this person semi-routinely listens to unamplified acoustic instruments in both near- and far-field, these claims mean very little to me. All amplified instrumental sounds, whether they are vocals, acoustic guitars, string basses, drums, piano, or winds/brasses, are electrically reproduced sounds. As a person who used to play in both classical and contemporary ensembles, I can tell you that the original instrumental sounds are VERY different from these amplified sounds to start with. And the reproduced sounds differ from each other, again hugely, even coming from the identical instrument/player, depending on the mic/amp/speakers used, and especially on the placement of the mic(s).

To me, the golden standard of naturalness/neutrality is still the sound I hear in the 100%-acoustic, live orchestral and chamber concerts in large and small venues. And even here, you find the sound character hugely different between a front-row seat on the orchestral floor and a back-row seat on the uppermost floor of the hall. And I can tell you that the Axiom sound is indeed neutral and natural, faithfully reproducing what the recording engineers intended for. It does not mellow down the recordings that use multiple near-field mics and intends to mimic the feel of the front-row seat; it does not brighten up the far-field recording that aims at reproducing the ambiance of the hall, either.

There is nothing wrong with liking a speaker sound with rolled-off highs etc; after all, it's completely up to his/her personal preference. And the Axioms may not be for people who are looking for a mellow, relaxed sound. But for any person who claims that the Axioms are "excessively bright" or otherwise non-neutral, I would suggest he/she should listen to a live orchestral sound (either a classical or pops program) in a choral terrace seat or a front-section seat of the orchestral floor -- he/she will immediately realize how "naturally bright" the live orchestral sound is.


curtis,

I still don't understand your argument on the "sound characters" of amps/receivers. After all, the vast majority of modern solid-state amps have a ruler-flat frequency/phase response and extremely low THD+N levels over the entire 20Hz-20kHz range and beyond, until you approach the maximum power output, where everything starts to degrade usually very rapidly. There are no measurable resonance and other time-domain aberrations, either. So, how the heck can the Yamaha receiver make it "brighter"??? -- I've seen the frequency response of the Yamaha and other receivers measured and published by HiFi News (UK), as well as many other solid-state amplifier measurements published in places like Stereophile, all of which are just FLAT, period.

I cannot imagine a possible mechanism(s) by which these amps make it brighter or warmer, while maintaining a ruler-flat measured frequency response. When it comes to the electronics (not necessarily for speakers), I firmly believe that we can measure EVERYTHING that is sonically relevant. I don't think there is a hidden "mythical" factor left there. Any ideas?

yup. try the new Lucinda cd or Beth Hart cd. don't know the names, they're in wife's section. i think the both sound terrific.
dan

sushi,
All I can say is to give it a try. There were differences comparing my Marantz to my current HK, and from my Onkyo to Adcom setup with my previous system, and I have never heard a Yamaha sound good to me....the treble was always the issue. I don't have a good argument for what you believe or don't believe, but just like speakers, just give it a try. If you still do not hear the difference...then with you, my statement is not true.

curtis

Curtis,

My son has a Yamaha rxv-596 which is a bright receiver, however I purchased the htr-5280 which is the twin of the rxv=800 or something like that and I have found that to be more neutral and possesses more tonal quality.

littleb,

Thanks littleb. Perhaps I need to listen to that model. Sushi...do you give me any credit now?

Curtis, et al; the speaker review mentioned is hopelessly out of touch with reality, but the "sound" of a receiver deserves some further comment. There certainly are many "bright" recordings in the pop area and a very live listening room can certainly have a major effect in not taming this, since well-engineered speakers have their drivers and crossovers designed for "typical" listening rooms. Tone controls and equalizers are meant to be used in such situations. Receivers, however, don't change the situation and are transparent, with no "sound" of their own unless driven beyond their designed operating limits. I'm sure that over the years both sushi and I have listened to setups with possibly hundreds of different amplifiers and at least I can say that as theory would indicate, a Yamaha doesn't make a speaker sound any different than say, a Marantz, when both are adjusted to exactly the same volume.

Unfortunately, despite the frequently heard mantra, you can't "just trust your ears" . Blind listening tests have shown that flat response, which nearly all receivers and separates have, is flat response and no difference can be heard, regardless of the nameplate or price tag.

Well with a measured flat response across the entire sound range it would seem the hypothesis of internal filtering has been ruled out.

Curtis, now you should know better.
Credit is given when peer reviewed papers are published with scientifically acceptable tests concluding in the electronically unmeasurable yet human detectable 'differences' in amps/receivers which has yet to occur.
I wonder why THAT is?

Another consideration to ponder...

JohnK,

With the flat response curves of the amps AND speakers, how do you respond to speakers being "bright" as opposed to no sonic differences in receivers?

curtis