Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater VP170?

Not really, but theory says it should. That said, if it isn't noticable to me in real world listening then it doesn't really matter as much, at least to me.

Well, I do get some dropoff, but nothing I can't live with. The thing is, the VP180 sounds so good and matches the M80's so well that I don't think I'm willing to sacrifice the sound just to address the dropoff. In my mind, there'd be no point to having great off axis performance if the sonic match isn't as good. Hence my desire for a VP170

Again, there doesn't appear to be a good reason to believe that the sonic match wouldn't be at least as good.

I do not own a VP180 but last year I tried out the VP180 and I said the 180 had some off axis limitations like all other inline horizontal designs that I have tried, the db level was down 1-2 at my one seat; the VP160 reaches this area and only down by less than 0.5 db. But let it also be said I am not measuring scientifically, only using the trusty ol' RS meter held in front of me while listening to various movies and music and averaging the readings, so YMMV.

Yep, I got pretty much the same results you did with the VP160, at most -1db substantially off-axis. With reference to the 160, I am curious to know what design changes that the guys at Axiom made to improve on this since one would think with the dual tweeter design of the 150 and 180 and their placement in the cabinet that any off-axis issues would be pretty much eliminated. I haven't had the opportunity to compare the 160 to the 180 but it certainly is noticeably superior in this area to the 150.

It has to do with the all horizontal alignment of the drivers on the VP150/180. With all the drivers in the same plane it has a beaming/straight out horizontal pattern, the trade off is this design offers good vertical dispersion for top or bottom mounting of the speaker over/under the screen. The VP160 and its WT/MW design offers better off axis horizontal dispersion like a standard vertical speaker but doesn't offer the vertical dispersion of the horizontal layout, so some may find the sound doesn't come from the center of the screen but below/above where the speaker is located; I notice this from time to time with my VP160, depending on material, I think an M2 above the screen would anchor dialogue to the center.

Casey, as Jason points out, contrary to what might be expected simply by looking at them, speakers with drivers aligned horizontally have good vertical dispersion, while speakers with drivers aligned vertically have better horizontal dispersion. This has been well-recognized in the industry for years and has been adopted by competitors well before this. For example, note the Paradigm line-up of center speakers here , which use this configuration in even the less expensive models.

So, no entirely new technology is involved here, although as Ian has explained, changes, including crossover slopes, were necessary in adapting the M60 components to the W T/M W configuration.

From my own experimentation over the years with several center channel models(including a VP150), regardless of size or configuration, placing the center channel above the screen as opposed to below it and tilting it towards the listening position, in comparing one design to the other, seems to negate many of the limitations talked about here. Combine that with the superior horizontal dispersion of the VP160 and I believe I have the best of both worlds. I, personally in my setup, never really cared for the sound of the speaker below the screen anyway and it never seemed to sound as good to me. I guess it always gets back to Alan's previous article of how center channels can be affected by positioning in various environments. I know it is not possible for everyone to be able to place a speaker in this elevated position, especially ones of the size of the 160/180, but if you can, I believe it provides better overall dispersion.

I have tried the dual method as well, above and below, and in the end, I always went back to the tried and true method above(speaker above monitor, tilted towards listening spot).

In the end, with this hobby, it always boils down to experimentation and playing around until one is satisfied with what sounds best to them.In this case, luckily, we have the tools with which to play.

I'd agree. Tilting up or down can be very helpful in cases where placing the speaker at ear level may be impractical or(as I pointed out in another thread)where raising the speaker may create a problem with room boundary reflections.

I just got my 160 set up, because I had to reinforce my stand on top of my TV. "It's like lifting a little kid up there".

My first impression is" WoW, this thing is huge" it's two !50's put together.BUT......the sound it creates, with the M80's is WoW again. The seamless sounstage (I have only heard of this before!)and it seams to make the M80's have an even more powerful sound...if that can be had.

I have it above my 55"TV on an Omni stand, with my M80's ontop of my subs on each side.I am in heaven, and Rick...I think I have #1 because my serial# is 001. thanks Axiom, you made my year again, it is that good!