Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners Suggestions for New Axiom Speakers

Yes, we all love our Axiom speakers. For me, the reasons are that Axiom speakers give great audio quality for a good price. My favorite Axiom speakers for 2 channel music (2.1) are the M3Tis. These are excellent speakers, at a very good price, but they are not perfect. It has its detractors on this site who correctly point out that these speakers have a 'hump' in their frequency response at about 90-120HZ and a 'hole' at about 8HZ.

So, here is the plot from SoundStage.com:



Response curve is an average of five measurements:
on-axis, 15 degrees left and right off-axis,
15 degrees up and down off-axis

Now, here is the plot for the Usher Be-718 (Little Dancer)



Here is the plot for the MB Quart Vera VS 1F Loudspeaker:



Anyway, I responded to the Axiom survey and here are some of my thoughts which I thought I would share:

Lower the price of the current line of speakers.
Come out with a premium line with high quality cross-over components.

Come out with a new line of speakers which target the icons in each segment

mini monitor, book shelf speakers (5", 6.5" and 8" driver) like the Usher above, the Harbeths, Spendor SA1, Focal;

Towers - here is the response plot for the M80Ti (not the V2):




Here's the plot for the Thiel CS2.4:



This is not to say that the Axiom speakers are not better than many very expensive speakers. Axioms are better than many, but not all.

Why not beat the really great speakers at Axiom price levels? It seems to me that Axiom is the outfit which just might be able to accomplish this.

Just a thought or two.

I wouldn't mind seeing a nice curved style cabinet like a few of the manufacturers have done with wood veneer finish, but I'm sure it would add a fair amount to the manufacturing cost.

Interesting thoughts.

I’m not sure how many people here who point out that the M3 has a hump are detractors. I often point that out either as a plus or a minus depending on the intended use to make sure someone understands what they are buying. I’ve never heard the speaker so I wouldn’t speak to how it performs. The VP150 on the other hand.

I’m curious what Axiom’s market research tells them. The present model seems to be to keep things simple. Limiting the number of different components need by keeping them interchangeable. I’d sort of hate to see them evolve to many “lines” of speakers like other manufactures.

OTOH there is something to be said for taking from the rich and giving to the poor. I’m sure many businesses charge a premium for “high end” lines to offset the price charges for “lower” lines.

I was actually a little disappointed at first when Axioms started making their amps. I’m of the philosophy that you do one thing really good rather than diversify to much and do many things marginally. Then I realized selling amps is probably a logical extension from designing amps for their subs.

It would be interesting to see Axiom take a kick at a higher end bookshelf. I don't know how that would fit into their business model though.

That might be a good marketing test...try an upscale bookshelf first, to see what kind of interest there is then maybe go to a tower speaker if it's successful. Could be like an "Anniversary Edition" or something along those lines.

I don't see a need for it. They have a pretty full line now and offer enough for most to choose from.

Hey Grunt

I never thought of you as a detractor just because of a little hump.

I also thought that Axiom stepped pretty far out of their comfort zone when they took a shot at an expensive switching type amplifier.

I thought their shot at the new range of subs was also pretty gutsy. There are some great sub manufacturers out there - JMLab, Hsu, SVS.

Yo Adrian, I agree, if Axiom were to try this, the bookshelf would be the place to start.

In any case, Axiom is a loudspeaker manufacturer which distributes on line. I think Axiom should aim higher, take on the best speakers out there and beat them at a low price.

Wireless speakers.

Axiom was working on wireless indoor/outdoor M3s at one point --- they had pictures of a pair at a home decor convention (I think?) they participated in -- but the wireless audio technology wasn't mature enough for them to release it. This is definitely something the audio market is ripe for, and I have a feeling Axiom will be quick to market with a product when they have one that performs up to their standards.

I think Axiom pretty well covers the gamut of speaker lines and has so for a number of years especially when you consider the unprecedented number of finish options available.

One area though, that I personally, would like them to add to their stable of speaker lines would be a LARGER center channel offering that one could run "full range" and negate the problem with many center channels and their small drivers AND cabinets which tend to have an unnatural emphasis of voices in the 300-500 hz range. I have tried many different center channels over the years and regardless of price, they all have to one degree or another this limitation and it has never sounded quite right to me. Because location of the speaker can substantially change the timbre, I have seen recently with Outlaw and Emotiva speaker products, that they have also included a built-in boundary compensation switch along with a switch to negate the "mid-range" emphasis. Never having heard speakers with these features, I am unsure as to their effectiveness. The smaller bookshelf speakers like the M2 and M3 can help in this area but they, sometimes, can have their limitations as well.

I know with center channels, cabinet size often is an issue, but I think a larger speaker would be a better blend with the M60's/80's and go a long way to negating the need for these switches.

I'd kind of like to see what they can do with an open-baffle design. I'd love to try something like the Linkwitz Lab Orions, only at Axiom pricing.

Why not build them yourself? (Or have someone here help with the wood work, while another--I'd lend a hand--does the electronics.)

I certainly don't have enough faith in my own abilities, but you raise a good point about enlisting the help of others.

Yup, that was my request I wonder if they can build a WMTTMW 3-way box. I'm still of the mindset that you'd need a big cabinet in order to come as close as possible to the M80.

I had a huge Klipsch center channel speaker, It was the KLF-C7 - twin 8" drivers, and a 1" compression driver horn tweeter. It was unsatisfying. It did not have the big, rich, realistic sound I expected from such a huge center channel speaker.

On the other hand, I once heard what I recall was a top of the line KEF center channel speaker. (before I knew anything about audio) I thought someone was speaking in the room. It was spooky realistic.

Spooky realistic should be the ambition of any speaker maker.

How many people would buy an M80 center channel if they started selling one today?


I can only dream of the day when I have room for one M80...

They do already sell them I bought one. Though I think it was Amie I talked to when I ordered it and she sort of suggested (hesitatingly as if she didn’t want to insult me) that people usually buy them in pairs. Then I explained why I was buying just one.

I suspect Peter means a horizontal one. Seems a tad...large to me, but I don't have a dedicated theatre or any likelihood of obtaining one anytime soon.

I would!

The trend for larger center channels seems to be happening. Paradigm, among others, has introduced larger center channel speakers in their three lines for awhile now, but if you want to see the "mother" of all center channels take a look at the new "EL" speaker line that "E Designs" just introduced.

Now THAT is a center channel!

Come on Axiom, lets get cracking!

Nice! But I was thinking more along the lines of a dual tweeter, dual mid, and dual woofer model to match the M80:

http://dynaudio.com/eng/systems/lines/evidence/center.php

That eD center is massive, pretty high in price too.

You'd figure for a massive centre they'd at least give you the dimensions to see if you could accomadate one...

I know they just put that line of speakers on the website. They have been inundated with sub orders and have been super busy. I'm sure they will have that corrected as soon as they can.

They gave the dimensions in the initial announcement.

42"W x 11"H x 12"D, weight 65lbs.

Thats true for mid-line speakers, and that is where probably 80-90% of the buyers are. Once you step into a higher fidelity and higher priced line, you narrow your market considerably.

It would expect Axiom to offer wireless speakers before the offer a higher end bookshelf: much wider appeal.

I kind of wonder too if that once you target the golden ear market who are ok with spending tons of $ verses the law of diminishing returns.... will they even pay attention to you unless you ridiculously overprice to feed their audio-egos?

Clearly, there are folks out there who buy brand names to show off. The more expensive the better. However, why would you think that all the folks who would like speakers which are as good as the best or close-to-the-best, want to spend too much?

I'd like to spend as little as possible. I'd like to get speakers which are better than Axiom's current offerings and I'd like to get them from Axiom.

Upgrade to the M80s then.

I didn't say "I think that", I said "I wonder if...."
Speculation is how we ask questions and explore a topic.
In order to successfully market into a niche market, you have to understand the niche.

Here's a link to the EL sub:

http://www.edesignaudio.com/product_info.php?cPath=2_42&products_id=918

Can't find any specs. I agree that it is pretty expensive. You can get a single M80 for $665 (US) right now, which is probably about what a horizontally configured M80 center channel would run for.

You know, with Andrew joining the Axiom team, it'll be interesting if any different ideas are put on the table(think some of Mirage's ideas).

Certainly with the upper end, high-priced speaker brands, aside from the evaluation of the sound, it always looks to me that much of what you are paying for is in the more exotic and more expensive cabinetry and aesthetics. Aside from name recognition, I believe the recent Lexicon/Oppo controversy somewhat revealed how that comes in to play with the "perception" of the potential buyer.

If one looks at the market place today, no other brand comes close to the enormous variety of finishes that Axiom offers and of course when you get in to the "real wood" veneer products, the price to build them goes up significantly. No matter what the finish, it doesn't change the quality of the sound but in the perception of the potential buyer if "hypothetically" Axiom decided to produce speakers strictly in the more expensive finishes, called it their "ultimate V3" line and charged more money, would that "niche" market perceive it to be better? Given the way some think, that would likely be the case. We see this exact example with even Axiom's closest Canadian competitors such as Paradigm and PSB who manufacture three or four lines each somewhat more "exotic" than the other and more expensive.

The way Axiom handles it, I believe, in the variety, just lets the "performance" of the product speak for itself and give the customer the options of how much more money they want to spend on "looks". In the end, I am sure their sales volume shows this to be the best overall marketing strategy.

Although I appreciate the finishes, I'm talking about improvements in sound quality.

Why aren't you looking at the newer plots for these speakers? Here's the 5 yr old plot for the M80v2 (which I imagine isn't particularly accurate any more), and it's way better than that M80ti plot you're using:

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/axiom_m80v2/

That's the newest Axiom plot they have. The next oldest one is from 2002. The one you're using? 2001.

QED: they're making improvements in sound quality. They may not be doing it how you'd like (eg with exotic materials and parts), but they're doing it.

My favorites link takes me to a soundstage list of speakers which does not include the V2 or I would have used it.

thanks for the link. I'll bookmark it,

That certainly is a beautiful fr plot.

Do you have the link to the master index page which includes the M80 V2 plot?

Here you are, P.

I was just looking at the graphs for the M80s and even the impedance graphs looks to have changed. Could one of you fellows (Peter) super impose one on the other to be able to take a better look.

I understand what you are saying, but I think there is an emotional desire for the company we love to love to stretch its wings, even if it makes no sense from a business perspective.

It may make some sense, FredK, even if sales are modest. Taking on the icons - Harbeth, Spendor, Usher's Little Dancers, Focal, Revel, Dynaudio ... and matching them or beating them at a reasonable price would work for me as a consumer.

Also, as to a premium line, if the upgraded components resulted in an improvement in sound quality would give folks an opportunity to upgrade at a modest cost. Some folks may want to upgrade the veneer finish. I'd be one of them also. However, what if you could upgrade sound quality for more or less the price of an upgraded finish? I'd go with the upgraded audio.

I don't know. Its usually a diminishing returns thing. Look at the jump in price between Paradigm's Studio and Signature line. Granted, Axiom may be able to narrow that gap but still...

I don't know that it makes sense from a sonic perspective, either. What I'm seeing is that what is desired is bragging rights.

Ken. I'm sure that there are speakers out there that sound significantly better than what Axiom currently offers. I'm also willing to bet that the cost and effort to get there is significant.

Why do you think they haven't tried more expensive crossover components and found the difference to be audibly negligible? Ian and his team don't just sit idly in their factory, waiting for orders to come in. They're always working on improving their current models.

I think it's selling their skills as speaker designers a little bit short to constantly assume that "if only they put in some high quality components, they'd be playing with the big boys." I can assure you that if it were that simple to take their speakers to the next level, they'd have already have it.

Yes, of course, PMB - to suggest that Axiom could make a better speaker is an insult ot Ian and the Axiom crew, is that what you're saying?

The suggestion that Axiom target the great speakers in each category and try to beat their performance at a good price suggests to you that I think Ian twiddles his thumbs?

Seems to me PMB you are just attempting to shut down the discussion.

The testing facility is fun and games. The environmental control chamber is set at the perfect temperature to chill cases and cases of beer.

If you look in the anechoic chamber there is two chairs, a small table and a chess board.

I don't understand why you think that Axiom's not "targeting the great speakers in each category." Simply because of the cost factor? The less interesting cabinetry? Or because you think they should be using fancy crossover components?

Also: disagreeing with you is continuing the discussion, not shutting it down.

There's obviously more to achieve, or they wouldn't have hired Andrew, and they wouldn't have had a customer survey. They've done a lot of testing to get where they are, and there will be a lot more testing to get any further. I think they're going at a fine pace, but of course as someone who likes spending money on the hobby, I wouldn't mind if they went faster.

The beer thread has been a little stale lately.

I suppose I should have been more specific. This is not the first time you've suggested that crossover component upgrades can be a magical fix. There is absolutely no real evidence that switching out crossover components with more expensive ones of the same value make a difference to the human ear -- you know, those things on your head you like to trust?

Now, if your suggestion is that they try different crossover points, that's a valid request. But again, they've already done this or are already doing this across their line.

Charles and Fred, I don't mean to say that there's not more to achieve--otherwise they wouldn't be making improvements all the time! But I don't think improvements could be made in the way that 2x6 is suggesting--if they could be, I think Axiom would have. What I'm (and I suspect Peter is) objecting to is the idea that Axiom would be better served by pricing their speakers higher and using esoteric components. Like Peter said, I'm sure they've tried them and found no difference, or none worth speaking of.

Here we go again….. That old perception verses reality thing. Some believe quality can only be bought and the price tag has a direct correlation to the level of quality achieved.

Another thing I wondered about 2x6's request. He prefers the M3; arguably, Axiom's least linear speaker. Likes the "sound" of tube amps, and uses speaker wire so thin as to add series impedance, which may emphasize the curve of the speaker making it even less linear.

Now, I don't have a problem with people preferring some colorations, over a strictly (I believe the term is Flockhart) flat response. Some high end ($$$) makers purposely tune their speakers for a unique sound to have them stand out against other brands. That's not Axiom's mission though.

Good call, Mike.

However, to be fair, Axiom is not a purely scientific endeavour - it is a business. I am a fan of Axiom products and the Axiom approach. But to think that Ian COULDN'T make a "better" speaker than the M80 is to sell him short and disregard the economic factors inherent in this venture. The question - at some point - becomes whether or not this "better" speaker makes economic sense not only for that model, but also for the rest of the line.

I absolutely believe that delivering a meaningful improvement over the M80 would cost A LOT more. My opinion is that - if something like that were to be offered - it would have to be a ridiculously expensive, custom, boutique product rather than a "value" proposition. That's the only way to bring it to market without cannibalizing the existing customer base.

Good points Tom. Anyone in business, with a desire to stay in business, will always have to weigh cost verses benefit.

The one nagging point that I continue to find issue with is this general impression that Axiom is a ‘budget’ speaker. This just isn’t true. For the bulk of residential A/V owners all over the world, the price point of Axiom speakers are not budget, but high. When you (you being anyone reading this) really start to think about it, just how many people do you know that have invested several hundred dollars, and in many cases, thousands on speakers for their system in comparison to the rest of the people you know? I bet that the vast majority will say fewer than 10% of the people they know. The other 90% think that if they buy a HTIB system at Costco, they’ve made a substantial investment.

When considering any of the Axiom systems, the cost is quite high to the average person who does not share the same passion as the very small percentage of audiophiles throughout the world (we are the minority). When considering an M80 / EP 600 system, the cost is considerably high. And then it is even higher if a person opts for that system in piano finish rosewood. So in reality, all Axiom products are ‘high’ end. The crowd who thinks they are ‘budget’ is the very few who think nothing about having an $800 bottle of 05 Chateau Latour with their fillet.

I also know for certain that Ian and his team constantly test and come up with improvements to their speakers. In the five years since I’ve been hanging out here, they have made numerous upgrades and tweaks to improve their product. Some have been discrete, and others have been significant. They just don’t advertise these changes very well. Not only do they make these subtle changes, they are constantly rolling new products out and trying to give potential customers more options and more products to choose from.

One other thing that I admire is Ian’s refusal to compromise his beliefs of just how a speaker should sound to accommodate ignorant perception for increased sales.

Has anyone taken an Axiom speaker apart and inspected the cross-overs?

What I am saying is that Axiom should reduce the price of its current lineup of speakers - offer a slightly more expensive line of upgraded speakers using upgraded components and then a 3rd line of speakers which target the 'icons.'

I am not saying that any more expensive capacitor or resistor or coil would result in an improved sound. I'll bet that some would.

Further my first question - the cross-over in an M3 the cap and resistor cannot cost much. I have no desire to hurt anyone's feelings by venturing a guess as to how much those parts cost.
What do you think a 5 1/2" or 6 1/2" axiom driver costs? I have an idea, but again, I'll keep it to myself. The 1" tweeter? the mdf cabinet?

Axiom speakers are wonderful but basic efforts. There is no internal metal structure like in some speakers, but they get the job done. I think axiom could sell the current line of speakers at a significantly lower price - no middle man, and sell alot of them.

Just my 2 shekels.

To add to what Michael mentioned there, I think to some degree, there is a very real anxiety amongst some of the retail stores when it comes to internet based companies and the insiders try to then instill some fear into the buying public. Before I purchased my Axioms, a couple of dealers(won't mention names) tried to do this to me for considering them vs their own offering. That's nothing new to me actually, a lot of salespeople think they have nothing to lose if you're ready to buy something else, so they'll say just about anything.

I read the article. Interesting.

I think it was Colin Flood's review that got me to thinking about Axiom speakers. Then Ian Masters'. Reviews are powerful, and clearly manufacturers cultivate and perhaps even 'water' these reviewers.

Hope for the best and trust your ears.

A fair number of people have. A crossover doesn't need to look beautiful to function as intended.


They'll take that under advisement.


I'm sure Axiom appreciates your tact, but I think you're operating on assumptions piled upon assumptions here. True, other speakers which cost and weigh a lot more than Axioms (and some would say sound better) do use more expensive components and significant internal bracing. The geometry of Axiom cabinets reduces the need for significant internal bracing. Bracing for the sake of bracing is pointless. It needs to make an audible difference. So do all of your suggestions. If the change does not make a difference that's reliably noticeable in a double-blind test, there's no point in bringing it to market. This is how Axiom operates.


Two shekels are worth US$0.54, so you've already said too much.

What sort of price range and name brands/models do you all considered "high end?" Do any of them sell direct online?

I would wager that if Axiom ventured into this market they would need to offer free in home trial with free shipping both ways. Consumers in this niche will not do a blind purchase. Paying for two way shipping may inflate the price overall, but if price and looks leads to the perception of a superior product then it won't be noticed.

pmb, I suppose with more than 12,000 posts you feel like you can speak for Axiom. You really presume too much.

Good point htnut. When I say that Axiom should target high end 'iconic' speakers, I don't mean they should match them in price or complexity. I hope and I don't know whether it can be done, that Axiom could match the sound quality of an Usher Little Dancer book shelf speaker at a much lower price. their msrp is about $2,700. I don't know what their markup is but they have at least one level of markup between the manufacturer and consumer. If Axiom could make a competing speaker for half that price, or hopefully less, I think the power of positive reviews would market these speakers.

VAF (http://www.vaf.com.au/), an Australian brand with a very similar outlook to Axiom. Their DC-X (similar to a M80) has a single capacitor as the "crossover"... because anything else they tried sounded, or measured, worse.

I was looking at VAF, but they don't make proper in-walls like Axiom do.

If Axiom made some super-premium product I could well be turned off because I'd always be wondering what I'm missing out on. I'd rather the company as a whole was targeted at my market/budget (as they currently are) and put all their effort into making me the best product they can for that budget.

The biggest problem with going high end imo would probably be that anyone willing to spend $5-10G (or more) on a pair of speakers is unlikely to purchase over the internet without a thorough auditioning first. That's where the dealer network takes over and hikes the price up another 50%+ (or whatever the markup is). The current pricepoint of Axioms takes much of the worry out of purchasing sight unseen (heard/unheard?) for many people. That doesn't mean to say that Axiom shouldn't experiment a little, say with an "Anniversary Edition" bookshelf or something like that, it might give them some idea about whether an 'upmarket' line would work, but it should certainly be done cautiously and not detract from their bread and butter lineup.

Have had the opportunity to directly compare the sound of the Usher 'Tiny Dancer' to any of Axiom's bookshelf speakers? I'm not saying it's true, but I bet you'd be more impressed with the M3s if they looked like the Ushers, had a beautiful crossover, but sounded exactly the same as the current M3s.

Since the Ushers are your paragon of bookshelfdom, why not save up for a pair?

I would like to see Axiom target speakers in the $5,000-$10,000 range, match their sound quality and come in at a much lower price.

Luke, I think the reason I like the sound of the M3s is because of the minimal x-over. The M3s roll off mechanically and the x-over just protects the tweeter.

The Reference 3a de capo speakers work the same way. I was able to pick up some de capo x-overs and modified them to work in my Frankenspeaker center channel project. I'll get a picture of one when I can dig it out of my garage. very high quality goods.

pmbuko, had a bad day, did you? If you have nothing constructive to say, why say anything?

How is that not a valid question? I have the same ones.

1. Have you ever directly compared the M3s to the Ushers? I'd ask if you did a double blind test, but I know that's not your thing.
2. If so, and you massively preferred the Ushers, why not get them?

There is no doubt Axiom would have lost most of the present owners if they were to target the "higher end" speakers. I wouldn't have gave them a second look due to the fact I simply could not afford them.

Plus with other ID companies there are far to many other choices.

What's that saying about the kettle and the pot?

Is it not constructive to suggest acquiring a pair of speakers you so clearly admire? I had a good day yesterday, and am having a fine morning today. Even pre-coffee.

FWIW, I look at an Axiom speaker as more than simply the sum of its parts. They are a business with expenses, wages, advertising, overhead, etc. to pay, all of which go into the development and production of the speakers. Plus they offer outstanding service and support.

Lowering the price would be possible if Axiom was a one man operation working out of his home, but the selling price is set where it is for a reason. At the end of the day, they need to cover all costs incurred in making the product and then make a profit.

I couldn't agree with you more, which is what attracted me to Axiom. But objectively speaking, those are purely selfish reasons which may not necessarily be ideal for Axiom. It may have been at one point, but things change and evolve and it is possible that they feel their businees model needs to change as well.

Axiom is a business and as a business they should at least consider and examine possible ways to grow or "spread their wings." Even if I did not like the idea of an upper tier line of products, I would understand why they are going that route.

That is my feeling as well. The high end market consumers prefer to visit their boutiqe shops, whether for auditions or just window shopping. Not sure what it would take to push them towards the net.

I think you have intentionally mischaracterized my position. I picked the Ushers as an example of an excellent books shelf, with a better frequency response plot than the M3s, which are my favorite Axiom speakers.

The point is not whether I prefer the Ushers, or whether I can afford them, it is that Axiom should identify the best speakers in class and try to match them at a much lower price.

Now, wid, kcarlie and pmbuko seem to be unwilling to accept the premise of my post. Instead of dealing with my point, they take my suggestion as an insult to Axiom, in general, to Ian, in particular, and now suggest if I like the Ushers so much why don't I save up and buy a pair. This is obtuse ... but by choice.

I think you have confirmed the point I made which FredK kindly recalled for us about the level of posting on this forum. It's like listening to a banjo with one string.

pmb and kcarlie - A claque of flacks - you don't do Axiom proud in my opinion.

I never said to save up and go buy the Ushers. The point I am trying to make is I think Axiom would LOSE market share if there were to go with high buck speakers.

Case in point, look at their amps. In my humble opinion they do not share the same market as their speakers. I doubt if they even come close to selling the same amount of units as the speakers.

I also think their subs are a bit on the high side compared to the other ID companies.

Axiom does not sell what most consider inexpensive speakers and if they were to go higher end it's my belief they would lose money.

You're entitled to your opinion. What you seem to forget is that Peter, I, and the rest of the forum members are too.

I ask, since you like the M3s the most of Axiom's speaker, and the are the least flat of their main line. What makes you think you'd prefer any other speaker Axiom designed with an even flatter response? A single high-pass filter on a tweeter, with the woofer simply rolling off due to its mechanical limits is always going to less linear than a tuned cross over network.

I believe I can make the assumption, based upon the gear you own, and the configurations you prefer, that you don't actually want a flatter response from your speakers. There are plenty of high-end designs which are purposefully colored to make some styles of listening more pleasing. That's not Axiom's philosophy, but there's no reason you shouldn't seek out other brands to see if there's one who's tuning aligns more with your preferred sound.

If you are looking at 3rd party measurments, the Ascend CBM 170 measures extremely well for its price point (similar price bracket to the M3/M22) 2 x 6. I think it is a more valid starting point than the Ushers.

I am not going to speak for Axiom but I do believe that the Axiom staff take part in double blind listening tests of competitors products. From what I understand Axioms design goals/philosophy are an ongoing combination of measurements/linear response and double blind listening tests which determine the final product and any modifications (crossover etc) to the initial design after its release.

Hi Club Neon

Antique Sound Labs MG S1 15 DT
Sonic Impact T Amps (modified) I like them and love the $25 cost
Anthem PVA 5 amp
Kenwood KA 9100
Yamaha M80(3 of them)
Integra M-504
Integra Processor
Sony TAE 9000 ES processor.

Now, for 2 channel music, I enjoy the tube amp driving M3s, Michaura M55s, Michaura M66s, Dahlquest DQM 905s.

I also like the KA9100 for 2 channel music.

I have a little modded Sonic Impact T Amp in my dining room with a Radio Shack 5 amp power supply, driving a pair of Michaura M55s and a 10" Velodyne. I enjoy it especially now that I swapped out the Pioneer DV 578A DVD player with a Sony DV CA9ES CDP.

I liked my M3s so much, I gave them away ... an purchased several pairs that I gave to friends. Right now, I am without M3s but have a pair of M2s bubble wrapped in the garage.

My tastes in audio equipment is broader than simply M3s driven by a SET tube amp. Anyone who presumes that the tube amp is a distortion generator, words of one of our resident gurus around here, is simply wrong.

I enjoy 2.2 music from my big HT system - Integra Processor, Yamaha M80 pushing a pair of Thiel CS3.6 speakers and a pair of SVS subs.

But, again, for me, when it comes time to kick back, my favorite is the 5 wpc SET tube amp and whatever speakers it's pushing.

As to the M3s, yes they are not perfect. That's my point. Although they have what to my ears is a richer sound than the M22s (mine are white) they have an audible hump and hole. BUT, I believe the M3s could be improved to be really world class speakers.

Anyway, I appreciate your post CN.

Personally, my standard for music reproduction is that it sound as much like the real thing as possible.

Curious, has any company tried marketing different lines of speaker based on their "sound?"

For example, Axiom could make the M models as their "flat" series and introduce a new "warm" series, or any other "fill in your sound here" type series. Each line or series of speakers would have their own distinct sound, but would more or less be the best models available in their respective line/series.

There would be no upper, lower, or middle tier/class of speaker since the lines are differentiated and based soley on their unique sonic characterstic(s). Price would simply be a reflection of how much it costs Axiom to produce that particulare line.

That way each line would keep their devotees without really crossing over (no pun intended) or stealing from another line. Axiom would not lose their current customer base since the M80 etc. will still be around. This wouldn't realy go against Axiom's philosophy, since they'd be maintaining the "flat response" line.

It would also be interesting to see which "sound" of speakers end up being more popular. It could very well be that we (meaning those of us who prefer a speaker that measures as flat as possible) are in the minority. If that were the case then Axiom could potentially be missing out on a significant market base. I wonder if marketing different sounding speakers would shake up the industry too much and/or ruffle too many feathers. Maybe it's already been done?

I think everybody does understand that this is your main point. You want Usher-like sound for non-Usher prices, from Axiom. It seems that you have this desire based only upon a frequency response graph. I asked before, but I'll ask again:

2x6, have you or have you not:

1. heard the Usher speakers you're holding up as a model?
2. been able to compare them to any Axiom speakers in the same setting?

These are basic questions. On what foundation are you placing your premise?


Is that any more obtuse than calling Axiom speakers "wonderful but basic efforts" ? Is that not an insult to Axiom, a company that has worked for nearly three decades to bring consumers ever increasing sound quality for extremely reasonable prices?


Ad hominem attacks don't help your case.

Hi Doc

Aperion, Epos, CBMs, Energy Speakers - there are a bunch of speakers at the Axiom price point which are very good.

Then there are speakers significantly more expensive, some of which I've heard, and others I have only heard about, including Magnepan, Definitive Technology, Anthony Gallo, Totem Acoustic, Ushers, Dynaudio, Harbeth, Spendor, which I'd like to see Axiom match or better at an Axiom price.

I don't quite understand what you mean by match or better. Is it a flatter frequency response/on-off axis/waterfall plots or just a speaker with a better braced cabinet, better drivers/tweeter, nicer looking crossover parts. They are correlated to frequency response/on-off axis but the designer still my not go for the flatest frequency response/neutral sound as possible. "High end" speakers does not mean "better sound" though in some cases it does (B&W 800 series). Some axiom speakers measure better than more expensive speakers...some don't. Same goes for subjective listening.

I am just trying to understand what you want to improve and the reasons why.

I don't know that a frequency response curve is a sufficient description of a speaker's sound quality. The M22s have a remarkably flat fr plot and I like the sound, no love. The M3s plot is not as flat, but I like them better. Thiel plots are better and I love the sound. Maybe the fr plot reveals flaws in the speaker's performance but does not guaranty a great sound.

Somebody has to listen the speakers and 'voice' them. Not a bad job especially if you own the company.

I agree that Axioms sound better than many "high end" speakers. When I refer to 'iconic' speakers I mean speakers known for their sound quality. Many are very expensive. Some, not so expensive.

Frequency response curves and measurements are the only objective tools I know of to compare speakers. Everything else is subjective. Having said that, the subjective part is important too, otherwise Axiom would not incorporate DBT's.

A Single Ended Triode tube amp with no negative feedback will easily have 100 times the total harmonic distortion of a solid state, push-pull, with feedback. Granted, the distortion of a SET has a large even-order harmonic component, where as the negative feedback leaves a little odd-order. So the "tube sound" is described as warm or fat, much as playing a chord sounds fuller than a single note, vs. disharmony of random notes which would be compared to odd-order harmonics.


"Richer" sound can easily be attributed to a mid-bass hump.

From your original post and the graphs you posted I assumed that was your argument regarding how those speakers were better than Axioms. Why did you post response curves in your initial argument? Colour me confused .

Regarding more expensive crossover parts, unless you are changing values/redesigning the crossover this will impact loudspeaker performance. Swapping out the crossover for more expensive parts would be personally the last thing I would do to improve a commercial loudspeaker.You would be raising costs with no improvement in sound quality. It will improve the internal looks (which you don't see). I would look towards the cabinet first (resonance) in commercial loudspeakers which have an audible/measurable impact on sound quality.