Get Free, Friendly, Expert Advice
Call 1-866-244-8796 or email

Designed and Manufactured in Canada Since 1980


AxiomAudio Blog

Blind Listening Tests

Sneak Peek into Axiom’s Current Research and Development

Axiom’s Newest Speaker: The In-Ceiling M3

Wall'O'Fame
Experimental Atmos
Greetings fellow Axiom owners...
Who's Online
3 registered (richeydog, a401classic, fredk), 152 Guests and 5 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Financing
Forum Stats
13323 Members
11 Forums
22902 Topics
404785 Posts

Max Online: 378 @ 02/24/13 04:33 PM
Top Posters
Ken.C 17783
pmbuko 16283
SirQuack 13337
CV 11212
MarkSJohnson 10911
Meanwhile On Facebook

Ian and Andrew join in the debate about whether or not people want uncompressed...

󾓶 The first review of the LFR880s is out! "If you are adding or upgrading stere...

So much going on in this month's newsletter - new product announcements, a new v...

Page 4 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#190243 - 01/01/08 03:52 PM Re: 2nd comparison QS8s vs. M22 as surrounds [Re: Mojo]
chesseroo Offline
connoisseur

Registered: 05/13/02
Posts: 4829
Loc: western canada
Yes bring it along and we'll compare it with the enthusiast standard Radio Shack unit.
_________________________
"Those who preach the myths of audio are ignorant of truth."

Top
#190582 - 01/04/08 05:49 PM Re: 2nd comparison QS8s vs. M22 as surrounds [Re: chesseroo]
Mojo Offline
connoisseur

Registered: 01/21/07
Posts: 3292
I forgot to pack it \:\( .

Top
#257245 - 04/18/09 05:37 AM Re: 2nd comparison QS8s vs. M22 as surrounds [Re: Mojo]
davekro Offline
aficionado

Registered: 02/12/09
Posts: 562
Loc: Discovery Bay, CA
I have my new QS8s mounted on 8' stands to find the best position. I will be mounting them mid ceiling in the room. MOst of you know the loooong story and (too) many pics have been posted elsewhere. I finally decided to pull all banana plugs from my 1909 except for the 7.1 backs and test them on their own. I had concern when I finally ran Audyssey and the Denon 1909 set the x-over at 150Hz! ! That is disappointing. They are out in mid air (will be ceiling mounted) with back wall 11' away and side walls about 6' away. It seems to really dissipate the lows. I tried my (M2) sized Bic V52 book shelf speakers o the 8' stands. The V52s base was improved enough to be much preferred from what the Q's allowed to my listening pos. in my large open room. While the back sound stage was very much nicer than the DF V52's, the sound location of each speaker was not bothersome, but it was more from two locations, than a wall of sound behind.

W/ Qs up on stands (tilted at 27º), Dire Straights Money for Nothin' (remastered) was disappointing one minute in when the drums slowly come in, then hammer you. I listened from vol. level (on display of 1909) at -35, -30, -20 and -15 (very loud!). the drums with the Q's hanging out in the air were very thin to the point of sounding pretty bad. I plugged the subs in to see if that would make this a non-issue. The bass from the subs was nice, but the thin high pitched drums from the back Q's was still imposing itself onto the sound stage. The drums sounded harsh and still dominant even with the subs. Putting the Bic V52's back onto stands, the base w/o subs was noticeably improved. With the sub added, it sounded very good. Except that the two speaker locations were noticeable. The QS8' sound GREAT flush mounted for my sides. (I got 4 QS8's)

It is not an easy choice to make: Thin but with a good back sound stage that the subs don't 'fix', or two DF speakers with the localization that they come with. I should note that during this backs only test, Audyssey was run with the DF spkrs and x-over was set at 120Hz, not the 150Hz, the Q's would be set at.

My neighbor is a drummer. He will come over tomorrow morning to give a listen. I look forward to his more discerning ear for a second opinion.

Te V52's are a decent $75 speaker, but I wish I had ordered a pair of M2's to try for backs. I may order some new ones to see if I can get them in time to test with Q's before the 30 day deadline passes.

Does anyone have experience with having had decent DF speakers (M2's???) for 7.1 backs mounted mid ceiling with no reflective walls any where near? Some one who has also tried QS8's in this type of location would be great to hear from. My room is pretty large (31x23x 9'), so the Qs are being absorbed into the ethers back there. :o(




Edited by davekro (04/18/09 05:39 AM)
_________________________
Dave

"In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice they're not."

Top
#257246 - 04/18/09 08:04 AM Re: 2nd comparison QS8s vs. M22 as surrounds [Re: davekro]
MarkSJohnson Offline
shareholder in the making

Registered: 09/27/04
Posts: 10911
Loc: Central NH
Dave, I haven't heard the M2s, but my feeling is that ANY small speaker in open space, without a wall to increase bass from the "boundary effect" is going to sound thin. Your older speakers might be putting out a little more bass than the QS8s, but ultimately, the sub is going to come into play below 120Hz or 100Hz with any small speaker hung in free air....

I think you're overthinking it a bit. I know you want to make the right decision with the rear speakers, but listening to them by themselves without all the rest of the speakers running is not really how the system will work in the real world.
_________________________
::::::: No disrespect to Axiom, but my favorite woofer is my yellow lab :::::::

Top
#257247 - 04/18/09 09:57 AM Re: 2nd comparison QS8s vs. M22 as surrounds [Re: davekro]
fredk Online   happy
axiomite

Registered: 12/06/07
Posts: 7059
Loc: Canada
Dave. If I understand correctly you are listening to the surrounds/rears by themselves. Why?? You are supposed to listen to the music not the speakers or just one component of the music.

Also, if you find the bass thin, why do you continue to use the Audissey settings?

Listen to all the speakers with the surrounds/rears crossed much lower.

Last. The surrounds are there to add depth to music and give it an immersive sound, not to add meat/oompf/kick to your bass. If you have an issue with the bass, you should be taking issue with your mains.
_________________________
Fred

-------
Blujays1: Spending Fred's money one bottle at a time, no two... Oh crap!

Top
#257248 - 04/18/09 10:14 AM Re: 2nd comparison QS8s vs. M22 as surrounds [Re: fredk]
chesseroo Offline
connoisseur

Registered: 05/13/02
Posts: 4829
Loc: western canada
 Originally Posted By: fredk
Dave. If I understand correctly you are listening to the surrounds/rears by themselves. Why?? You are supposed to listen to the music not the speakers or just one component of the music.

Also, if you find the bass thin, why do you continue to use the Audissey settings?

Listen to all the speakers with the surrounds/rears crossed much lower.

Last. The surrounds are there to add depth to music and give it an immersive sound, not to add meat/oompf/kick to your bass. If you have an issue with the bass, you should be taking issue with your mains.

Mark and Fred have nailed it on all counts.

Surrounds are not for presenting bass. If you want bass from surrounds, go to a full range speaker.

Angle at which the QSx are placed is not how they were designed. Normal, flat surface placement with options for height or distance front to back along the sides.
That's about it for optimizing location.

A xover of 150Hz is ridiculously high unless you have main speakers the size of a baseball.

And yes, if you listen to the surrounds on their own, it does sound weird.

Lastly, forget about the notion that because your neighbor is a drummer he has a special ability to better discern sound. It is a fallacy. If anything his hearing is shot from playing drums.

I recommend you try some reading from Dr. Toole's book. It will clarify many questions if you are concerned about so many small details that may or may not mean anything at all.
_________________________
"Those who preach the myths of audio are ignorant of truth."

Top
#257250 - 04/18/09 10:44 AM Re: 2nd comparison QS8s vs. M22 as surrounds [Re: chesseroo]
Adrian Offline
axiomite

Registered: 12/27/08
Posts: 6613
Loc: It's all about the location.
Audyssey set my 5.1 system with some odd crossovers.

Aud settings: Fronts.....Large.....40hz

Centre.....Small.....60hz

Surrounds..Small.....120hz

I have since changed these settings to "Small" all around with the Fronts crossed at 60hz and the Centre and Surrounds at 80hz which to my ear, sounds better. I also boosted the centre by a couple of Db's as well as the R Surround. As some have noted on other threads, Audyssey will get you in the ballpark, but then you might want to make some further adjustments. Also I agree with other posts here, that surrounds are more there for ambient sound as opposed to the mains.
_________________________
Half of communication is listening. You can't listen with your mouth.

Top
#257253 - 04/18/09 11:12 AM Re: 2nd comparison QS8s vs. M22 as surrounds [Re: Adrian]
SirQuack Offline
shareholder in the making

Registered: 01/29/04
Posts: 13337
Loc: Iowa
Adrian, per Audyssey, you don't want to reduce the crossover settings that Audyssey finds, it is ok to increase a value. Davekpro's Audyssey set is side Q's to 90hz, and rears to 150hz, because the rears had no wall behind them and didn't get any reinforcement like the side surrounds which were wall mounted.

Per Audyssey:

"Raising the crossover frequency from the calibrated setting does not affect the channel correction implemented by Audyssey.
Lowering the crossover frequency from the calibrated setting is not recommended. Audyssey will not provide correction to the satellite speakers lower than the frequency it measures as the -3 dB point.
_________________________
M80s-VP180-QS8s-EP600-2xEP350 Denon3808 Outlaw7700
M22-OWM22-VP100-Denon2805
Audio Nirvana

Top
#257254 - 04/18/09 11:26 AM Re: 2nd comparison QS8s vs. M22 as surrounds [Re: SirQuack]
fredk Online   happy
axiomite

Registered: 12/06/07
Posts: 7059
Loc: Canada
It seems to me that there is a trade off here. Either you have Audyssey auto-eq the full range of the surrounds, or you get lower extension on the surrounds.

Does it really make that much difference to the sound field to not EQ from 150Hz down to the crossover point on your surrounds?

Given Dave's issues with bass and the surrounds is it worth it to try the lower crossover to see how it sounds?

Will moose and squirrel...
_________________________
Fred

-------
Blujays1: Spending Fred's money one bottle at a time, no two... Oh crap!

Top
#257258 - 04/18/09 11:38 AM Re: 2nd comparison QS8s vs. M22 as surrounds [Re: fredk]
SirQuack Offline
shareholder in the making

Registered: 01/29/04
Posts: 13337
Loc: Iowa
He can try it, however, the subwoofer MultEQ filters have 8x higher resolution than the satellite channels, so room correction in the bass (where it is most needed) will be much better.

Audyssey will not provide correction to the satellite speakers lower than the frequency Audyssey measures as the -3 dB point, so if he changes it lower, your defeating the whole purpose of having Audyssey engaged, might as well not use it then.
_________________________
M80s-VP180-QS8s-EP600-2xEP350 Denon3808 Outlaw7700
M22-OWM22-VP100-Denon2805
Audio Nirvana

Top
Page 4 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >



Moderator:  alan, Amie, Andrew, axiomadmin, Brent, Debbie, Ian, Jc 

Home  |  Corporate Info  |  Products  |  Message Board  |  FAQs  |  Warranty  |  Site Map  |  Privacy Statement   |  Contact Us

©2014 Colquhoun Audio Laboratories Limited
All Rights Reserved.