Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners Energy RC-10

Hi Stephane,

Oh, that's interesting! My theory about the 2.3i's midrange being similar to the 2.4i's may be wrong, and since I never heard the 2.3i, then what you report is likely accurate and not a function of the room. Certainly the 2.3i's enclosure is quite a lot smaller and with one less woofer, it would use a different crossover. So its bass output relative to the midrange would not be nearly as prominent as the 2.4i's. Hence the midrange would be more prominent relative to the bass.

To summarize what I said to FredK, it just takes a slight readjustment of midrange response relative to bass output and a speaker can be heard completely differently. As an example, when I first joined Axiom in 2002 and heard the M80s back then, I was not happy with the midrange--it seemed to have a glitch, an edginess that made some instruments hard-sounding. Ian re-designed the crossover--it was really a slight adjustment to the midrange--and then we did blind listening tests at Axiom with a bunch of my colleagues. We all chose Speaker B (the redesigned crossover) over Speaker A (the original M80), so the new crossover became a running change in production by 2003.

In my view, making that slight adjustment made the M80 into a really terrific loudspeaker. The change wasn't dramatic and was only noticeable on certain instruments (brasses, violins, vocals) but after the change, I could unhesitatingly recommend the M80 as a great loudspeaker.

Regards,

Alan

Thank you for answering so articulately Alan. Though Dr. Tool has a following in the audio community, it is hard to find anyone who has both an understanding of the research and practical experience in its application.

A number of his followers would tell me that a 3db hump would horribly and unimaginably (is that a word??) colour a speaker and render it useless except as a door stop.

Your answer matches with what I read in the many reviews people do on various boards of speakers they have listened to. Differences between good speakers are more subtle than some would have us believe.

In MY community, I'm often called a Toole.

At least you're called...

Um, Mark, I think you're talking about Tulle

Actually, I was thinking about Tilly. A lot.



(Image cropped since this is a family forum)

Pan down! Pan down!

And the movie is... ?

Great line, Tom. I had a good LOL.

Alan

Peter, that's not a movie still. That's a Polaroid from strip poker night at medic8r manor.

Jennifer does love a good game of poker.

What?! Really??

<internet research commences...>

Wow. I didn't realize that Energy was now owned by the Klipsch conglomerate. I guess you do learn somethin' new every day. That means that pretty much everything I remember about Energy might be null-and-void now. If they've adopted more of a 'Klipschy' sound, I'm NOT going to like them any more.

I don't remember the 2.3's (or were they 2.4's??) having a recessed midrange. It's been years, and memory isn't kind to audio tests, but I just remember their sound as really lovely and clear. Nice and powerful bass, pleasant midrange, and clear highs. Of course, I had also been listening to Klipsch and B&W speakers that day too, so maybe my memory is more tainted than I realize.

All I know is that when I heard 2.3/2.4's, I liked them. But they were way too expensive for me, and M80's are at least even on performance (if not better) for a fraction of the cost.

Asking the great Google, I found a this thread from Audioholics from a few years ago on this very topic. A moderately interesting read, IMHO.

Of course, all of this is straying far off from the original poster's question.... I say, buy a pair of RC-10's from somewhere with a return policy, and then buy a pair of M2/M3/M22 to compare it to. Whichever set you like the least, send back.