Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Technical Questions www.speakermeasurements.com

The M2i has a flatter listening window frequency response than the Wilson Audio WATT/Puppy 7. But that doesn't mean it's a better speaker or that it sounds better overall. The data is interesting and a good thing to consider. The NRC has proved the test data is somewhat relevant to human listening tests. However it's unlikely that every little bump on the graph meaningfully translates to audible differences.

Due to Axiom's return policy, you could haul your M60s to a Paradigm dealer and do an A/B test with the Ref. Studio 100s. In fact that would be a facinating test. Several possible outcomes:

(1) The Axioms sound better.

(2) The Paradigms sound marginally better but not sufficiently so to warrant the price difference.

(3) The Paradigms sound vastly, hugely better and the increased price is well worth it.

I'd bet on either #1 or #2. If you can arrange it, why not do the test? It would be good information to share, plus might give you peace of mind.

I've heard both the Energy Connoisseur C-9 and Paradigm Reference Studio 100 v.3...and I own the Axiom M60ti. As pretty much everyone here has just said, you can't buy a speaker based on a chart. Listen to them. IMHO, the C-9 sounded like crap, and the Paradigm though decent, didn't have the clarity of the Axioms. (and cost twice as much!)

Unlike electronics where the distortion is in the 0.0x% range, distortion in speakers can go up to 5%,10%,20% or even higher, particularly at the low frequencies. That's why speaker manufacturers do not generally publish distortion data, unlike electronics makers.

Canada's NRC has generated accurate data on thousands of speakers, but manufacturers rarely publish them. I applaud soundstage.com for having these speakers tested at NRC and publishing the results, which will undoubtedly benefit the consumer.

you cannot measure soundstage

you cannot measure effortlessness

you cannot measure smooth sound

you cannot measure how dynamic a speaker is

you cannot measure enough --- specs are fun but how it sounds is the bottom line, period.

I do think ravi and 2x6 have good points- we're pretty sure, but can't be completely sure, that we can measure everything speaker/amp related.

However, our ear can measure everything audible, including soundstage, effortlessness, smoothness, etc-- so I'd conclude that with much care (which various engineers may or may not take) and technology that's probably fairly close to what we have now, everything true word in a speaker/amp review can be measured.

Reading closely, I do think 2x6 in another recent post about measurements does have a good point about the problems of measurement. Language is tricky...