Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Another Axiom review

Funny thing is that since Axioms are not sold in retail stores, most folks rely on reviews to assist them in choosing Axioms. I read a few reviews of the M3Tis years ago, and that planted the idea in my audiosotted brain that these were desirable speakers. Which ever review it was that I read is the reason I finally tried some Axiom products and glad I did. That's why a review like this one can do a lot of harm to Axiom.

On the other hand, great as our speakers are, there are more and more good competition for Axiom and Axiom can't stand still with its product line. So here's hoping for quality upgrades at the same price or only the smallest possible increase in price. Heck, Axiom could make upgraded cross over kits available to us with fancy capacitors and resistors maybe even drivers and keep us current without having to buy new speakers.

If a "pro" reviewer is "breaking in" speakers before listening to them, I'd love to pop him/her an email and ask why... is it to quiet down the believers in speaker break-in (selling one's soul for readership)... or does the guy actually believe in it?

Bren R.

Some speaker manufacturers recommend breaking in the speakers. Lowthers are notorious for requiring breaking in. It's not a question of the ears breaking in because no one has to be around for the procedure.

And any good reviewer follows manufacturers' recommendations, whether it be a break-in period or smearing jelly over the midrange - minimizes the chance of a manufacturer whining about their recommendation not being followed. Also, the more difficult the manufacturers' stipulations, the easier it is for them to weasel out of a bad review... "Well, John Smith DID say our speakers sounded like someone playing a carp with xylophone mallets, but he did not follow the required steps of speaker break in, we recommend that our patented "Brake-Inn SeeDee" be played for 3 months straight with the speaker in an absolute vacuum, had he done so, we feel he would have experienced a much different sonic soundscape - one that more resembled a trout being played by xylophone mallets!"

Bren R.

I don't mean to get into the "break in controversy." But could it be possible (whether speakers actually do break in or not) that speaker companies recommend a break in period so that, if a customer is dissatisfied with what he/she initially hears at home, he/she, rather than returning them, says "Oh well, they just aren't broken in yet. They'll sound better after awhile," thereby maximizing the purchaser's potential of becoming acclimated to the speakers sound, and thus increasing the likelihood that the purchaser will keep the speakers?

By the way, should anyone be interested, Craigsub is testing the "break in" theory in this thread over at the AVS Forum. Bring your flame retardant underwear.

I think Ajax hit the nail on the head.

You make a valid point about "break in". Many reviewers simply connect the pieces to be reviewed, and let them play - without paying much attention to them ie. UHF Magazine.

I am not inclined to put much stock in reviews from magazines. I do however, like to know that the reviewer is using equipment that would not hinder the sound - ie. 22g speaker wire, and interconnects that were "thrown in".

Regards,

BBIBH

I'm not saying that I believe in break-in myself, it's just that in most every review I've read (the absolute sound, Stereophile, and Home Theatre Sound-over the last two years) somewhere in the first two paragraphs I read something along the lines of

"After 40 hours of break-in, the bass sounded tighter and the highs appeared to be less harsh and abrasive"

My origninal point was that if someone is going to believe that a reviewer loses ethos simply because "he believes in break-in" then he must not believe in very many professional reviews at all. I was referred to Axiom myself by professional reviews (as well as board recommendations on Audioreview.com) and I must say that Axiom's reputation does rely somewhat upon professional reviews.

It's been many years since I had my logic and critical thinking class, but I believe that getting everybody to believe something by simply repeating all the time is known as the "ad hominem" fallacy. Like how the media keeps calling the situation in Iraq a "catastrophe".

I would agree with you - on both counts...as break in seems to be subjective to each listener.

To simply dismiss the review because the person did allow, or did not allow, for break in time would also be subjective, and in my view not allow the reader to proceed with an open mind.

Regards,

BBIBH