Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners Finally puchased the QS8s

So finally, after purchasing the M80s last January, the VP180 last June, I finally bought the QS8s today (Merry Christmas to me ) . I expect them to arrive Tuesday or Wednesday and once again I am very exited. I am sure they will surpass my expectations as the M80s and VP180 did.

I will be mounting them on my back wall using the T-bracket included. I remember reading that there is no space for banana plugs but is there space for spades or any other connector? If not, I'll just use bare wire.
I also remember someone mentioning something about having to bend the tabs on the bracket. I am not sure I understand. Can somebody explain? Any other recommendation about mounting them?

Probably not on the spades.

I didn't have to do any bending, but be VERY VERY VERY sure the tabs are in the slots before you fully let go of the speaker.

Yeah, just go with bare wire.

Just use the bare wire no neeed for any other connection. So far as the T bracket, check how it engauges into the tabs mounted on the back of the QS8 before installing the T on the wall. Just ensure the bracket slips under the mounting tabs on the back of the QS8, if it is a little too tight - really hard to engauge, then make some adjustments to the T bracket tabs to allow for easier installation by bending them slightly out.

Thanks for your help guys.

I use bare wire/T-bracket in my setup as well.

IMO the QS8's are Axioms best speaker.

I use bare wire on all my speakers. Less connections.

The Axiom binding posts work pretty well with bare wire actually. The connections on my Denon, not so much, so I use Banana plugs there.

I also use bare wire with the T bracket and it works great.

Be careful when you screw in the T bracket, if you are going into the stud, that you don't over torque the screw. The T bracket could bend a bit. If that happens, you'll never get the QS8 to line up with the tabs.

PN

Thanks for the tip.

What about a sub?

I'm hungry let's go.

Unfortunately I can only build my system one step at the time ($$$). I hope to be able to get a sub by the summer. At least this gives me some time to do some research

It also gives you something to look forward to - besides sitting and listening to your system.

I was exited all weekend thinking that they'll ship on Monday (they've always shipped the next day every time I ordered), I'll get them on Tuesday and do some listening. Monday went by, I didn't get my email. I emailed Noreen this morning, she replied that they'll ship today and I still didn't get my email . I guess they're pretty busy during the holidays. I just hope that they'll ship tomorrow as it's my only guarantee that I'll receive them by Friday. Then I'll be away for a week and I don't want Purolator to drop them on the porch while I'm gone, I might have nothing when I'll come back.

Just go my email, they've actually been shipped yesterday, I might get them today! Woohoo!

Awesome, Bruno!

Get an empty, clean jar so you can preserve some of that new Axiom smell!

(Otherwise, you'll have to keep buying speakers to get that fix)!

Too bad you have to wait so long for them

OK, so I received the QS8s. After installation I ran Audyssey on my system and during calibration I noticed that the sound from one of the QS8s sounded different than the others. After calibration I went to check the parameters and the receiver detects one of the surrounds at 7.5ft and the other at 3.9ft (the one that sounded different), both my QS8s are 7.5ft from the main listening position. The receiver also sets the crossover at 200Hz which is very odd for the QS8s as other owners usually have it set anywhere between 90Hz and 120Hz. I ran the autocalibration 3 times and got the same result every time. So I decided to manually set the crossover at 100Hz and play a heavy bass CD in 5ch stereo mode. One of the woofers from the "bad" speakers is not emitting any sound or at least no low frequencies . I removed the grills and noticed a significant dent on the cone. I don't know if the dent is the cause of the problem but there is definitely something wrong with this woofer.
I own 5 Axiom speakers and so far have had 2 bad drivers, these are not very good odds. Either I am very unlucky or Axiom should tighten their QA.
Anyway, I just sent an email to Noreen and have no doubt that they will fix this but I can't help to be a bit disappointed .

That is very disappointing. Sorry for the bad luck. Those are very odd settings, once you get a good set of speakers I am sure you will be very happy.

Higher crossover settings by Audyssey may be more common on surrounds than we think...it set mine at 150hz.

They will replace the bad drive no question about that, but i understand this is really annoying that you have to wait until the new one arrive.

The surround settings do seem to be higher with speakers mounted in 'open air' stands, opppsed to near/on the wall mountings. Mine are picked up and set at 80hz, my VP150 gets set to 60hz . I really don't hear much of a difference with it set to 60 or 80 so I leave it at 60.

hehehe!

Did you (or anyone here) have the v2 of the Q8s? Is there significant difference in sound quality? (I looked it up on the "what's new at axiom" - v3 thread to find the answer, and went through approx. 20pages before giving up... so I apologize if this has been addressed before - which I'm sure it has been).

I’m not sure if anyone on this forum has commented on any difference but Axiom put this review in it’s last newsletter where the reviewer says there is.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/home-thea...ew.html?start=3




I did an A/B comparison using v2 vs v3 as surrounds and couldn’t tell any difference FWIW.

However, I have found one difference. When I knock over one of the new ones the magnetic grill just falls off rather than the mounting pegs breaking off which has happened to me a couple times.

Thanks! I was wondering because I have a set of v2s and I'm getting another set for the 7.1 (although with 800 I would have to say it's more 7.2 no??? hey, 2 woofers... = 2 subs to me! that's my story and I'm sticking to it!

I won't bother going with the v3s when I can get the 8s under $400! (won them on the auction page). I can forget about the upgrade and rest easy now.

ahhhhh... gotta love those axioms!!

Has anyone ever had anything bad to say about any axiom speaker performance??? I haven't come across any yet... and that's a good sign!

If there is anything bad said about Axiom speakers it would be due to a personl sound preference not due to quality of sound; ie. I don't like the M3 but it is not due to them being a poor speaker, it is just because they are voiced differently.

OK, so quick update:
-Good news: I got my replacement driver and it works fine.
-Bad news: while replacing it, I noticed that 2 of the screws required no force to be removed, I could screw or unscrew them just by hand. It turned out that they had been screwed sideways into the MDF towards the cut out for the speaker so there was barely nothing holding them. Of course, since there was no force that could be applied to tie them, the driver doesn't hold properly against the body of the cabinet. On top of that it's the bottom driver so it could get worst over time. Of course I contacted Axiom and after a couple of days they replied that they will ship a new QS8.

First of all, I would like to say that I think Axiom is a great company that makes great speakers. I love the sound of all my Axioms and their customer service is so far the best I’ve ever seen. The only negative that I see within the whole company is the quality control / quality assurance, there is definitely a problem there and here is why:

- I first bought my M80s in January 2010, I loved them since the first time I heard them and never had any problem.

- Then I bought the VP180 in June. Great center speaker. However, like many other at the time, I was surprised with the new look of the drivers. Since I keep my grills off, I contacted Axiom to see if all my parts were V3s. I got an email from Axiom saying that yes. So in order to have my speakers to look the same, I purchased the 8 all-aluminum drivers to replace on the M80s and that’s when the problems started.

- From the 8 drivers that I received, 5 had their cone either badly scratched or dented. Axiom was great and shipped a quick replacement.

- A few weeks later I realized that one of the 6.5’ woofers was making some rattling noise at some frequency. Again, Axiom sent me a replacement.

- A couple of weeks ago, I purchased the QS8s. Right away upon first listening, something is wrong, one of the woofers makes this awful grizzling noise at all frequencies. Once Again I need to contact Axiom and once again there is no trouble in getting a replacement.

- So then I go to replace the bad driver and I noticed this screw problem. This could have been easily caught by the person responsible for assembling the speaker since you're trying to tie a screw and nothing gets tied !?!

So now, I think that Axiom, like so many ID companies offers great value for the money. However I am building my system one step at the time because, relatively speaking, it’s not cheap and it takes time and hard work for me to save for it. I think that with this price tag should come great sound and great customer service which Axiom definitely has but also great reliability and a great final product problem free. I should be able to get a product with no defect.

So, would I ever recommend Axiom to friends as a great product for the money? Certainly as I already have a few times. Can I tell my friends that they will receive a product with no mistakes and working flawlessly? Unfortunately I can’t because my experience has been far from being headache free. It’s just too many problems with so few purchases. So either I am extremely unlucky or something should be improved in QC/QA.

Now about the QS8s:
I don't know if it's is because it's my first HT or just simply because they are amazing but I really loves them. Their position is far from ideal since they are on my back wall but they are doing a wonderful job at making you feel like you are there.
I listened to some CDs in PLII and NEO6 and really like the ambiance created even though for some reason, in NEO6 it sounds like there is to much echo, I'm not sure if it's the algorithm or my settings. I particularly enjoy 5 CH stereo.
Concerts (DVD and Blu): the concerts that I heard had mostly the crowd mixed in the rears which gives a good feeling about being there. The exception was the Eagles, Hell freezes over, where there even the instruments are mixed in the surrounds. Not lossless but excellent DTS 5.1 mix BTW.
For me, where the QS8s really shine is for movies. It's a completely different experience. Somebody said on another thread that one doesn't have a HT until he has surround and he was darn right. A few good scenes that I've found so far:
- The Matrix: lobby scene and when Neo dodges the bullets in slow motion (priceless)
- The Matrix Reloaded: the car chase
- Star wars phantom menace: the pod race is spectacular but there is constant surround throughout the whole movie
- Daredevil: when he wakes up in the hospital and discover the super sense.
- Wanted: good surround mix thru the whole movie.

My only problem now is that I find myself paying to much attention to what is in the surround and actually lose some of the enjoyment of watching a movie just to watch a movie . I am sure that will go away once the excitement starts to fade

In conclusion, I really like the QS8s, really recommend them, and I hope to receive my replacement soon and hopefully there will be no problem this time.

There would appear to be some QC tightening necessary by the looks of it. I've not had any problems with any of my Ax's but I'd certainly be frustrated with any of these problems if they happened to me.

It sounds like v3 means increase margins by cutting costs.

Bruno, it is rather disturbing to note experiences such as yours which seem to indicate that the quality control isn't what it was in the past.

As to the mode to be used for the QS8s with 2-channel sources, my suggestion is to use DPLII rather than 5-channel stereo. The 5-channel stereo mode simply duplicates the left front in the left surround and likewise for the right side(a center speaker gets both the left and right front equally). While the ambience DPLII extracts from the front channels is of course very similar to the rest of the front channel material, it isn't identical. The ambience is slightly different in phase(because the reflections are delayed in time)and also is less prominent in the high frequencies and slightly lower in level(other properties of the reflected sound). Playing the original front channel sound in the surround may in a sense be more impressive since it's louder, but playing the extracted ambience instead is closer to reality.

"knock on wood" I have had five shipments of stuff so far and everything is good. But one of the M80 needed a little more trimming on the vinyl in one corner on top.

Not a real biggie but geez, you should be able to catch that type of error? I was sweating when I trimmed it, turned out well!

But ya, that's gotta hurt when that happens bud.

In my line of business, if I make a mistake, there's a meeting to discuss it and we find a method to keep it from happening again in the future. I continue to make mistakes, sure, but mostly they are different mistakes, because the old ones no longer happen. There is zero tolerance for mistakes, because mistakes affect the bottom line.

It almost seems that QC at Axiom guarantees that a certain percent of mistakes are mandated or required.

Thank you guys for your support.

Don't get me wrong, I love my speakers and really like the company and their philosophy. I don't know too many people with HT but of the ones I know, I have the best sounding one (at least to my ears) but not the most expensive one.

My previous post was from the email that I wrote JC while discussing the speaker replacement. As I told him, this email (and my post) is not, by any means, meant to be a complain letter. If anything, it is meant to help Axiom improve what I believe to be their weak point and what prevents the company from being a great company all around. I really believe it can be a great company all around. It is just frustrating to see so many mistakes that, being honest, can be easily avoided. They should be able to catch a defective driver at the factory, drivers scratched or dented should be caught by a simple visual inspection, if it happens during shipping, the packaging should be rethought. Assembling the speaker, they should notice that the screw keeps on spinning without tying anything. Like I said, a lot of mistakes that can be easily avoided and save the customer some frustration. Anyway, hopefully the next one will be fine.

Thanks JohnK. I am aware of that. While it is true that DLPII recreates a more realistic ambiance, I enjoy this mode when I am sitting in front of my system at the main sitting position. What I like about the 5 CH stereo is that the room is full of sound without any imaging which is nice if I am moving around the room a lot or playing with my daughter.

What is your impression of NEO6? Do you experience as well this echo effect or is it just me? I remember a member (Dean I think) that mention that delays and other parameter could be changed to taste but I couldn't find it on the receiver.

Neo:6 music should have the parameters (as does PLII Music).

I don't like the extraction process performed by DTS's algorithms at all. I even apply PLIIx to 5.1 DTS tracks for my surround back.

Dolby does the ambiance extraction in very logical way, and patented the process. So DTS searching for their own routine had to come up with something else. To my ears it is much less natural.

Bruno, I agree with Chris about Dolby vs Neo:6. At first Neo:6 can sound interesting but after listening for a while Dolby clearly sounds more natural. Like Chris I also use PLIIx on DTS tracks now.

The only parameter I can set on my receiver for Neo:6 is the center width. However, for Dolby I can set the center width, panorama (blends mains more into the surrounds) and dimension (moves soundstage forward or backwards). But AFAIK these all only work with 2.0 sources.

I’m not sure if your Denon has a setting similar to my Onkyo but when I’m up and moving around I switch to just my front 3 speakers + subwoofer. It basically gives me whole house audio (well whole neighborhood if I turn it up) by running my 3 M80s and sub.

With 3 identical speakers across the front, you should try decreasing the center width. It's there for people who have centers that are weaker than their mains.

You're right Neo:6 Music only has a center setting. I did play with the Panorama and Dimension, but ended up going back to the original setting for both as that sounded the most natural too (although it is neat to adjust while listening to music, it does make a noticeable change).

PLII(x) Music can only be chosen when fed a 2 channel source. When I'm listening to CDs and then throw in a DVD-A, my receiver switches back to regular ol' PLIIx, which does not have the additional settings.

Bruno, I also definitely prefer DPLII to Neo:6. Although I really didn't consider it to be an "echo" effect, it nevertheless didn't sound as realistic to me.

As to changes in the surround parameters, I think that it's more likely that you're recalling a discussion of the ones available in DPLII, which are more extensive. "Dimension" varies the amount of extracted ambience which is sent to the surrounds, and to some extent can help on recordings which have a relatively low amount of ambience mixed into the front channels. "Center Width" varies the amount of equal left/right material sent to the center speaker from none("phantom" center then exists)to the maximum amount for a strongly anchored center image. "Panorama" sends some front channel direct sound(not the ambience)to the surrounds to "widen" the front sound stage and is an effect I don't care for, although I wonder if it simulates to a degree the use of separate "width" speakers.

Interesting because, from the few movies that I've watched, it seemed that DTS 5.1 or Master HD sounded better, or should I say, had more impact than Dolby Digital or TrueHD.
But I agree that NEO6 sounds odd, for me specially on the vocals (ie the "echo").
I also didn't know that you could apply DPLII to DTS 5.1, I thought is was only for 2 ch stereo, I'll need to try that.
I'll also need to look deeper, and maybe try to understand my Denon's manual :), and try to find where I can change these parameters (dimension, width, etc..) as I haven't found it so far.

DTS had (as in the past) a lossy compression scheme that allowed for 1.5 Mbps of the DVD's mux rate to be allocated to audio. That often wasn't used because there still had to be a DD (or PCM, but that'd be stupid) track, as DTS was an optional part of the spec. 1.5 Mbps plus at least 256k for the backup DD (and each additional language) was too much for most to give up. But the 1.5 Mbps DTS was the best sounding audio available on DVD.

In order to be more accepted DTS made a 768 kbps variant of their codec. While it still sounded good, it was obvious why DTS sounded better than DD with it's 384 kbps rate. Their algorithm just wasn't as good at compressing, but still benefited much from the larger bandwidth allocation.

When it comes to the modern TrueHD vs HD Master Audio, there is no difference. They are both lossless. Studio's seem to prefer DTS's offering, maybe because their name still makes people think they are getting more.

PLII can't be applied to 5.1 sources. But PLIIx can be used to turn 5.1 to 7.1. When I have PLIIx set, and feed my receiver 7.1 audio, it also turns off, just as PLII would turn off for a 5.1 feed.

Thanks Chris for the explanation. The only thing I still don't understand is that you say that DTS was the best sounding audio on DVD but you still prefer Dolby? Or is it just that you prefer DPLII over Neo6?

The latter, I prefer Dolby's ambiance extraction/channel expansion to DTS's. That is to say, I like the way Prologic sounds more than Neo:6.

So if I have a DVD or BD with a DTS 5.1 soundtrack I'll pick it for playback, but processed with PLIIx to make it 7.1, rather than Neo:6.

I got it, Thanks.

Heh. I prefer Neo6. DPLII just sounds muddy to me. If I actually got around to setting the channel levels on it, I'd probably use Logic 7, though.

I prefer bbigwyrz 2.1. Serround for musik sound fake.

So I got my replacement and everything seems to be fine with it. My only concern is the crossover level set by Audyssey. At first, I only ran it for 1 position just for a quick listening. It set the crossover at 200Hz. Then I ran Audyssey for the 6 positions and it set it a 150Hz.

My room is 20x11 ft, hardwood floor, high pile rug in the center, 2 bay windows with no curtains just blinds and not too much hanging from the wall (I know, far from ideal). My TV is wall-mounted at the center of one of the long wall, my couch is against the opposite wall (actually about 70% of the couch is against the wall and 30% has one of the bay windows behind). The QS8s are wall mounted with the T-bracket on my back wall, each about 7ft from the main listening position and and the tweeters are about 2ft above ear level. Since my couch is against the wall, they are very slightly behind me.

Questions:

1) Could the fact that the bottom driver is so low be the reason for this 150Hz crossover? Not enough distance for the sound to spread?

2) Does anybody has had Audyssey cross over the QS8s that high?

3) The QS8s should be able to play 100Hz. So if I manually set the crossover to 100Hz, does it mean that Audyssey will just not apply EQ between 100Hz and 150Hz, or the QS8s can simply not play anything below 150Hz in my room?

If you lower the crossover from where Audyssey performed it's measurements, you'll just get a linear EQ applied (i.e. no EQing) below the original EQ point. The speakers will play those frequencies.

Still odd to have your QS8's being set that high but I would suspect it is just your room/speaker placement causing an issue.

With Audyssey setting the crossover that high simply means it is seeing a substantial drop off below that frequency from the QS8's so it wants to send anything below that crossover(rolled off not a brick wall) to the sub. Since this is just a surround channel I wouldn't worry too much about dropping that crossover on them to 100 or even 80.

I would suggest having a listen at all crossover points from 80 to 150 and then go with the one you liked the best.

While trying different crossover points, turn off all the Audyssey processing (you may end up leaving it off), so it isn't adding or removing anything to the upper frequencies that were measured.

Good point Chris

Here I am, getting all excited about the idea of (possibly) getting a modern receiver with room calibration, and all y'all are bursting my bubble. Not likely to happen, anyway, but with the b'day coming up, ya never know...

Ken, just remember this is an often debated topic with a 50/50 score from what I've read!

I'm typically Canadian and split the difference - one foot in each camp. I like the standing wave correction from my Pio receiver but defeat and manually set/override all other parameters from the auto-calibration routine.

I'd bet you'll find something to like for sure with a new receiver.

What I really want is the dynamic EQ. Or maybe the dynamic other thing. Kinda like night mode.

It's called the low level audio thingie-ma-bob.

Both Dynamic Volume and Dynamic EQ are awesome. The room setup stuff / calibration I could take or leave.

Dynamic volume, that's it.

I personally don't really like the results of the Audyssey calibration but ironically most of the time I have Audyssey ON. I like the way my system sounds without EQ but it needs to be at high volumes. If at low or even moderate volumes, I start to lose some of the "feel" of the material played. Since our ears are more sensitive to high frequencies than lower, I find that at lower volumes I am missing some of the bass that would require to have the volume much higher to hear properly. So:
1) If I'm at home by myself, I'll have the volume pretty loud and no EQ. Unfortunately that doesn't happen very often.
2) Most of the time I'll have the volume at moderate level and have Dynamic EQ on. Even though the highs don't sound as good as with no EQ, at least I get to hear the bass level closer to what I should hear.
3) At night when everybody is sleeping, I use dynamic volume so I can hear everything clearly without having this huge volume change.
I really think both Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume are very usefull features. I just wish their principal could be applied without the EQ settings generated by Audyssey.

I just went in and manually set the EQ sliders to neutral positions if I remember right.... allowing me to have Audyssey on for these features without it otherwise EQing the sound...

Good idea! I never thought of that. Is having the EQ sliders at 0 (like in the "manual" EQ setting) equivalent to no Audyssey EQ?

Mark, the EQ can't be manually set if Audyssey is left on.

John is right. I tried and the sliders can only be changed if the EQ is set to manual. But as soon as I select DynEQ or Dyn Vol, the EQ switches back to the Audyssey EQ. Too bad...

Bruno, it shouldn't really be viewed as "too bad"; Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume work based on the overall Audyssey parameters. Dr. Kyriakakis has made clear that there's no provision for manually "tweaking" the Audyssey settings. The manual setting available on some receivers(which he's referred to as "crude")is only available instead of Audyssey, not to modify it. Audyssey(including the Dynamic EQ and Volume features)is either on or off.

Thanks John. What I meant by "too bad" is that even though I am not a fan of the results given by MultiEQ, I find DynEQ and DynVol very useful. I understand that they will not work without MultiEQ on but also think that it's a choice from Audyssey in order to promote their EQ system. In a design stand point, they could probably apply the same algorithm used for DynEQ and DynVol to an EQ set manually, they just choose not to.

You've got top of the line, very linear speakers. I bet you could start adding some room treatments, and reduce the amount of adjustment being applied by the MultiEQ.