I will list the quick setup info here. Much of this method has been used in the past and remains similar with some changes. Previous setup info on the auditioning methods can be found here:
https://www.axiomaudio.com/boards/u...nnoy-vs-axiom-vs-monitor-audio-very-longMethodsTwo setups.
The first uses a Russound 2.1 speaker selector. It has volume adjustable knobs to adjust for differences in speaker efficiencies and can connect two amps and two speaker sets with easy push button selecting between them (no more than 0.5s to switch between speakers or amps).
The second setup uses two Sonos boxes connected directly the amps with each Sonos box playing the same songs, synced, but as different 'rooms'. Two tablets running Sonos but with different rooms selected were used with the mute function as the 'switch' (pressing mute on one while unmuting the other). The switch occurred with less than 0.5s turnaround. As such, Sonos software was used as the pre-amp and the Sonos boxes were the processors. In the instance where the Axiom LFR were used for comparisons, different amps had to be used for different speakers to accommodate all the amp channels for the Axiom LFR speakers. For any listening sessions without the LFR, speaker pairs were run off the same amp, not different amps. It is a caveat for those who believe amps impart such a different sound that will somehow invalidate the listening test results with the LFR tests. However, we will be following up with amp vs. amp listening tests using the same speaker set to eliminate this factor.
The test songs were played through the following:
Source: Sony UDP bluray or Sonos (all songs ripped from original discs in FLAC)
Preamp/receiver: Denon X4400H (HT room) or Sonos (main floor)
Amps: Anthem MCA30 (HT room), two Musical Fidelity Model T (for LFRs), Parasound Halo A21 (main floor)
Cabling: standard 12ga or 14ga copper generic and mixed common brand name interconnects (like that matters). All speaker wire runs were under 15 feet.
These auditions were done in two separate locations to provide a subjective comparison of a large, uncontrolled vs. smaller, more sound-designed room. The listening auditions took place in two rooms. The first is a sound controlled home theater about 16 ft by 13 ft with heavy carpets, big lounge chairs and curtains over the doors. The second is a typical living room with hardwood floors, some seating and some curtains and a size of 18x16 ft with 10-ft ceilings and open to one side into other rooms.
Listening sessions were done using the same test songs and SPL levels were matched with pink noise from the seated position prior to listening. Songs were heard in stereo (not mono) while A/B switching, using only single speakers from each pair located 10 feet (HT room) or 12 feet (living room) away from the central listening position. Only “direct” mode was used in the preamp/receiver for these sessions
Speakers were setup staggered with one inside and one outside each pair. Although this shifted the stereo image slightly from the listener's perspective, it did not help the listener determine which speaker set was playing, nor did it change the evaluation of overall soundstage.
Primary Test music:
Holly Cole Trio- I Can See Clearly Now (vocals, bass, clarity, sibilance, live sound, piano)
Ambrosian Junior Choir- Sao Gan (vocals, pitch, echo)
Eric Clapton Unplugged – Signe (midrange guitar, brightness on whistle, live sound)
Future Sounds of London- Calcium (range of mid to low bass notes, detail in midrange knocking and low end, stereo imaging)
Secondary Test music:
Patricia Barber – Nardis (complex midrange, drums, various instruments, clarity)
Jesse Cook – Switchback (stereo imaging)
John Hiatt – Cry Love (vocals, midrange, stereo imaging)
Rainmakers – Different Rub (mid bass, low bass)
Martin Sexton – Black Sheep (vocals, live sound)
Stevie Ray Vaughn – The Sky is Cryin (guitar, live sound, fun)The speaker brands compared were:
- Tannoy Definition D700s
- ADS 1590
- Axiom Audio LFR880
- Axiom Audio M60 v4
- Axiom Audio M60 Ti
The listening auditioners include three people, one female and two males in the 40 plus age range (and nothing more will be said about that). All three are long time stereo or audio files and are accustomed to doing critical listening having heard dozens of speakers over the years. At least two have had multiple trips to the Axiom factory and all three have undertaken blind AB audio listening sessions.
There are no ‘winners’ in the audition just to be clear. I’m only reporting what I perceived as sound differences in character between these sets of speakers. I will however state what my/other auditioners' preferences were after everything was done.
Axiom M60Ti vs M60V4 Usually I save the summary for the end but for this one the summary will come up front. I was quite surprised after even a very short AB listening between these two, to hear such a distinct difference rather than a more subtle difference that I observed when hearing the v4 for the first time but NOT in an AB fashion with the earlier Ti model.
Unfortunately I do not like the new tweaks!
It is quickly at this point I will note, the second person male auditioner was in agreement with all of these same observations which he made independently and he made blind as he did not know what speaker was playing and had no idea what was the original or what was the new Axiom M60 was regardless. He had never heard Axiom speakers before.
As mentioned I was not going to drone on too much about my new details so the short version of the differences from my observation and opinion are:
• The v4 mid-range and vocals are more recessed, pulled back compared to the original Ti.
• The bass is more fat and pronounced in the v4 compared to the original Ti and it does not sound as well defined. Both of these qualities in my opinion make the M60 v4 sound like they have a lot less clarity than the earlier Ti model. Note that I'm
not using the word accurate because you can still hear small details during music playback with the v4, but you just cannot hear them as clearly. It can be described as listening to two speakers that are identical except one, the original M60Ti, has the treble setting at +2/+3 with a bass at 0 while the other speaker, the M60 v4 has its treble setting at 0 and it's bass at +1. There's no doubt that the original M60Ti is forward, more open and on some songs or in some instances can still be considered bright. Our M60Ti also still uses a resistor on the tweeter which reduces its output by a decibel to two.
In contrast, our third (female) listener actually preferred the new M60 v4 but only because of that difference in what they described as the original M60Ti having too much treble. They preferred the more toned down high end and also liked the slightly heavier bass but did note that it seemed less defined as well.
A perspective on listener preferences for treble and bass is noted here in part by a journal article written by Dr. Floyd Toole.
https://www.axiomaudio.com/boards/u...re-starting-to-oggle-new-gear#Post444000I actually went looking online and found an audio reviewer blog (not a scientific opinion) but seems to describe what my impressions were when you compare a more forward vocal and mid-range versus a more recessed speaker and what that seems to do to the sound.
https://audioaural.com/should-treble-be-higher-than-bass-the-3-reasons-why-you-should/The short summary of what they say, why treble should be more apparent than bass, is as follows:
To balance the low-end rumble
To reduce the mid-frequency muddiness
To project vocals better in the mix
From my evaluations, i couldn't agree with this more. If you go too far with treble, then you get an overly bright speaker like the Ti was commonly described.
On other notes The finish of the new v4 speakers is outstanding and I'm excited to test out the new surrounds especially the QS10s. However, considering that the M60s anchor the sound for music, I feel like I would be giving up that fantastic clarity for something less if I were to keep the new versions of the M60. Consequently, if I don't keep the new M60 v4 then that means the VP180 would also have to go back and maybe even all of the surrounds as well!
The Problem with Speaker Comparisons - Push and Pull Between Positive and NegativesMy conundrum now is trying to decide if I'm going to keep any of these v4s or whether everything would go back and I would hunt for some older versions of QS8s (Boston Cherry vinyl wrap) to round out the extra two surrounds that I wanted to add to the system. I would also have to keep the smaller VP150 center channel because it tonally matches with the original M60s (the VP180 has the same pulled back midrange and vocals). About the only thing I might consider keeping right now is the new EP500 sub which although would have a slight color difference from the rest of the speakers in the room this is not an uncommon thing for many subwoofers. If people were to buy any other subwoofer such as an SVS you would be stuck with black or some other color anyway. And if I get a second EP500 in the same color then the two subs would match and the rest of the speakers in the wall would be the old original Boston Cherry vinyl wrap. Following this path would save us a ton of cash!
On the other hand, the new v4s are a beautiful speaker. The wife is happy with the sound and prefers the tonal difference. The new surrounds (QS10s) i expect will be an awesome fit and the much larger VP180 centre channel now finally provides a more expansive centre sound for the big tv that doesn't anchor the sound only right in the centre. But, who listens to the speaker more in the media room? (not the wife). Do you buy a speaker set for its looks or sound quality? Which is more important? For our main floor i would say aesthetics plays more of a role but for the home theatre, i'm less concerned. Where is most music played? On the main floor, not as much in the HT room but recessed vocals for movies?
There is a constant back and forth on the decision making process and i never thought i'd be in this position with the V4s.
This whole experience hearing the new Axiom v4 versions was very surprising and very unexpected. I had expected to hear changes that would have made the speaker very similar to the original version but perhaps with a bit more tamed high end. I could probably consider being satisfied with the fatter warmer bass, but the loss in clarity of the high end vocals and mid-range is exactly the opposite of what I was seeking. Unless I can somehow adjust the treble a bit on the Denon AVR to see what that could do, I’m very much leaning towards returning the v4s.
Newer is not always better. Perhaps they’ve made the v4 speaker flatter in response, but small peaks before that gave it a forwardness and clarity in the midrange and vocals, or a heavier low end bass taking over, have now reduced what I find to be the best sound for clarity.
When I put a pair of Angstrom Legatos (bookshelves) on the main floor, and more recently these ADS-1590s, when our Tannoy speakers we're being repaired, both of us were shocked at how much clarity there was in the sound without even having sat down and done any critical listening. It was so noticeable I said out loud “geez that’s clear and sounds so detailed”. It is what sent me on the hunt to consider moving on the Tannoy speakers to something else (the Angstroms are too small for the room, the ADS belong to a friend and will go back, plus are older vintage speakers and I fear turning them up too much for my liking).
Today I will be testing out the LFR 880 against the Tannoy just to see how the new Axiom v4 sound pits for clarity against the Tannoy. I already tested the original M60 versus the Tannoys many years ago and you can see the results in this thread
https://www.axiomaudio.com/boards/u...nnoy-vs-axiom-vs-monitor-audio-very-long
