Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Technical Questions HELP! Need Ammunition.

Recently, in two different threads about Axioms over at AVS, one vociferous poster has attacked Axiom based on his perceived discrepancy between the stated frequency response on the Axiom website and the accompanying graphs for the M22s, M60s, and M80s. I hesitated to post this, because I didn't want it to seem I was inviting people over to AVS to join in the unpleasantness. But both threads were eventually, and mercifully, locked by the moderators.

Here is one of his posts:

"So according to those graphs, as I read them:
m22ti are +/- 3dB from 77Hz to 18kHz
m60ti are +/- 3dB from 65Hz to 17.5KHz (or +/- 4dB from 37.5 to 18.5k depending on how you want to see it)
m80ti are +/- 3.5dB (I'm generous!) from 55hz to 17.5hz

Axiom's specifications (on their webpage):
m22ti: Freq Resp +/-3dB: 60 - 22kHz
m60ti: Freq Resp +/-3dB: 37 - 22kHz
m80ti: Freq Resp +/-3dB: 34 - 22kHz

no one explained that to me yet Axiom has the graphs on their webpage (graph link right next to their FR specs). Can they not read their own graphs?! I still don't get that, either I'm reading the graphs wrong, or Axiom is publishing false information...

Its very large differences... lower extension: 17 Hz for m22ti, 25+ hz for m60 and ~20 hz for m80... Highs, off by 4000Hz, as they all drop at around 17500Hz and not 22000Hz like spec'd by Axiom...

They don't say 'non-anechoic', but even if it did, it doesn't seem to hold up since I can't see a room which wouldn't mess up the +/- 3dB, & increase highs & lower extension..."

And from a later post:

'Just as a consumer, I don't enjoy being lied to... I believe that if you say your product does X and Y, it should do X and Y...."

It pains me to see a company I respect, and people I respect and like, being characterized as "liars" who are "publishing false information." I don't have enough technical expertise, or know enough about reading graphs to confirm or deny the person's assessments. So, I'd be grateful for any ammunition you can provide so the next time this comes up, and I suspect it WILL come up again (he seems to have made it his personal crusade to save the world from the evil Axiom empire) I can respond to him with cold hard facts.


M22 Freq Resp +/-3dB: 60 - 22kHz


M60 Freq Resp +/-3dB (Hz): 37 - 22kHz


M80 Freq Resp +/-3dB (Hz): 34 - 22kHz

I have been there and seen that post. I have actually read many posts there of people bashing Axioms without even listening to them. I have posted there several times in defence, but don't have the specific knowledge to deal with those graphs.

I think that is the same guy that Craigsub has battled against on many occasions in defense of Axiom. I believe he is using old charts.

Maybe we should all go on there and show him who the boss is

In reply to:

---

Maybe we should all go on there and show him who the boss is

---

No, that's what I want to avoid. The only way to win with guys like him is to refute his arguments with facts, not personal attacks.

Indeed, his usual opening gambit is the posting of links to the out of date graphs available on SoundstageAV.com. But his above posts are in reference to the current graphs I posted.

Actually, one never really wins with these guys. It can only be hoped that their agenda is transparent to the casual reader. The Pyrrhic victory comes in being sure that those casual readers, the ones who are just looking for some honest information, get exactly that; honest information.

And, yes, it's the same few guys that we have done battle with over and over again. It is, really, a waste of time. But, Craig is right. As his signature over at AVS says "All it will take for trolls to own the boards is for reasonable people to do nothing."

Ajax,

Inevitably this is the problem with posting graphs and why I really do not like doing it. Understanding how a speaker will perform and establishing its specifications requires interpreting a family of curves (amongst many other measurements and tests). In the case of the graphs in question here there are two issues that require further information than these graphs provide and one problem with this posters interpretation of the decibel spread. These are the standard on axis amplitude response graphs measured in the anechoic chamber at the NRC in Ottawa and represent what would arguably be the most important and most common measurements of a speaker’s performance. Below are the three issues:

1) Since the anechoic chamber at the NRC is rated to be accurate to 85 Hz we also look at measurements done in free space to figure out the true response of the speaker below this frequency. There is a correction curve written for the chamber at the NRC below 85 Hz and it does work fairly well (it is incorporated into these graphs) but not to the point of being able to rely on it within a few db.
2) Multiple microphone positions within a narrow range, which we refer to as the listening window, will also create small changes in the response including some fairly high Q changes above 14 kHz. These sorts of changes need to be interpolated to eliminate anomalies that are not part of the actual listening experience and to decide on the specifications.
3) +/- 3 db means 6 db from the highest point on the curve to the lowest point on the curve. This would mean that since the highest point on both the M22 and M60 curves is 90 db the lowest allowable point would be 84 db. This would be 70 Hz on the M22 and 40 Hz on the M60.

In the case of the M80 I would come up with 55 Hz also within a spread of 86 db to 92 db. And here we have an excellent example of why the family of curves is so important when figuring out how a speaker will actually perform and establishing its specifications. As I am sure many on this board have experienced first hand, the M80 has more and deeper bass than the M60 (a quick listen test will show that clearly), but if we only look at these graphs then our specifications would have the M60 going down to 40 Hz and the M80 only going down to 55 Hz. Specifications that most closely represent the performance of the speaker cannot be built on a single graph.

Another reason why i have pretty much given up on the audio section of avsforum. I find this forum and audioholics much better for all around advice and opinions. Too many jerks on avsforum. A shame too because there are some really nice and helpful people there if you can find them.

Interesting this topic should arise. I found a similar thread 2 days ago on Audioholics. Link Gene at Audioholics added some clarifing information to the thread that you might find informative. ...Oh, never mind, Ian posted more useful information.

While the discrepency between test condition results and real world is interesting, I found the discussion just a little too technical for me to feel like digging into. Specifications aren't everything. I'd swear my M22's provide more base than the Energy C-3's I was using even though the published specifications are the opposite. However, I have yet to run direct comparison tests to verify my first impressions.

On the treble side, I found something interesting with the Energy C3. The "listening window" curve for the C3 was reasonably flat up to 20 KHz while the corresponding curve for the Axioms dropped a fair amount between 15 and 20. The listening window is several curves averaged together so I took a look at the individual curves. Aha -- the C3 spikes UP fairly sharply between 15 and 20 KHz on axis, is flat slightly off axis and rolls off sharply further off axis. The result is a flat curve when you average together at the cost of pumped up high treble when listening on axis (which IMO is what matters).

Thank you, Ian, for taking the time to clarify things. Unfortunately, playing devil's advocate for a moment, all this guy is gonna see is that, in his opinion, the graph doesn't match the published specs. Whenever the Axiom name pops up in a thread he will continue to attack and point out speakers, like the Ascend CBM 170, whose graph confirms their published specs. Interestingly, I find the Ascend graph considerably more confusing than any Axiom graph due to the weird vertical dB scale.

Ascend CBM 170 Frequency Response (Anechoic) 69Hz - 20kHz +/- 3dB



Perhaps it would be worthwhile to clearly differentiate between an anechoic frequency response graph, and in-room, or other, frequency response specs.

Montclair, thanks for posting that link. I can't get over the difference between the civilized Audioholics thread, and the vicious AVS thread. Reading Gene's comments sure helped.

After that thread got locked, I decided to do some more investigation myself, and pretty much got the same explination that Ian gave. Unfortunatly, if I post it, it will create another bad thread because I have no hard evidence.

I will have to disagree with Jack, he just used Axoim as an example, also, the thread was about Axiom. When you get in to a defense mode(a bad mode to be in especially when you are defending) you tend to think it is all about you.

As I see it, just like Jack's example of using Ascend(that is Ascend's own published graph although the Soundstage graph is similar), Soundstage and the NRC need to publish measuring anomalies and, IMO, comparison to spec and reasons for discrepency. Otherwise, the issue will never be put to rest.

In reply to:

---

I will have to disagree with Jack, he just used Axiom as an example

---

I'm not quite sure what you are disagreeing with. Are you saying you don't think he has singled out Axiom? If this is your meaning, we WILL have to disagree. Two threads within as many weeks? I haven't done a search, but I have not seem him posting graphs for every other company who's graphs don't exactly match their claimed specs.

And, yes the thread WAS about Axiom. That just backs up my suspicion that he is angry enough that he will show up in ANY thread about Axiom to make his point. What I hope for from this thread, is enough hard facts to effectively refute his arguments.

I made only one post in that thread where I pointed out he was linking to out of date graphs (which he is does with the full knowledge that more current graphs exist), and I posted current graphs. Is that what you mean be being "defensive"?

I don't quite understand your reference to the Ascend graph. It was one posted by him in the AVS thread, and I only posted it here as an example of a graph that DOES match the companies claimed specs. In addition, I wanted to show that Ascend labels the claimed specs as "anechoic." I consider this a positive, and would like to see Axiom do the same thing.

At one point you have to step back and realize that paying any mind to this guy is only going to make people think he has a point. It comes down to trust. A lie about speaker specs is not compatible with Axiom's business and research philosophy. That's enough for me to know there's no fudging of data here. What someone else thinks does not concern me, and trying and failing to provide proof that meets his very exacting standards will only make his point seem all the more valid.

Now take a deep breath, in through the nose, out through the mouth. Life is good.

Jack
I've read both threads you are speaking of, and I have to agree that "that guy" is out and out calling Axiom liars. I actually did post earlier in the thread (I,m Seamus over there), but didnt read it again until last night when it was already closed, otherwise I would have posted the answer given at Audioholics (another thread witch I followed closely)
I think with what Ian has stated and with the statements from the thread at Audioholics, you should be able to put together a very factual rebutle to the derogatory comments made over at AVS.
I really dont think your going to change the guys tune, but at least some of the other people reading will consider what you have to say.
I rarely post over there because it seems like the same guys jump in and start calling everyone idiots for not agreeing with their opinions.
In short, I pick my battles well, and some of those guys just arent worth the time or energy.
After spending an hour reading on AVS, I always come back here to where the sensible people hang.

Jack,
He posted and mentioned other companies in the thread.

I went through the thread again, and if you think he singled out Axiom...I won't argue. I will point out that he did mention other companies that do not have matching specs to measurements.

In reference to the Ascend graph, I just meant that all the graphs should come from one source...ie. Soundstage/NRC.

The idea is not to take offense and say he is wrong, the idea is to find out what is going on and prove he is wrong. My research and Ian's post adds up to measuring issues...so the people that took the measurements need to step up and explain. Otherwise it is an arguement with no solution. You have to admit, without an explanation from the folks that took the measurements, there is nothing you can argue with him about.

I was just being sarcastic, yes Jack I realize the best way to handle people like that is with Tact. Factual information doesn't hurt either.

Well I think others, like Craig, mentioned other companies. He acknowledged there were other companies about whom he had the same complaint, and then went right back to bashing Axiom exclusively. If you'll remember, in the first thread, he even suggested that the graphs on the Axiom web site should be disregarded because the possibility existed that Axiom manipulated them.

(Not meant as a challenge, but rather a genuine question) Don't the Axiom graphs come from the NRC? Aren't they valid? Same questions for the Ascend graph. I most certainly agree there should be a standardized methodology for measuring speakers. If different methods are used, we lose the ability to make valid comparisons.

Well, I plead guilty to taking offense at his use of the term "lied to" in reference to Axiom and saying "Axiom is publishing false information." I would also take offense if he was saying it about Ascend. However I will again point out that I did NOT engage in argument with him. I only posted current graphs to offset his malicious posting of links to graphs he knew were outdated.

I agree that the best case scenario is to prove him wrong. I started this thread in the hopes of obtaining information to do just that. BUT, his posting wild speculation and accusations of wrongdoing by Axiom, or any other company for that matter, WITHOUT PROOF, is irresponsible at best, and libelous at worst. It is HE who should have to PROVE his implications. If that is not required, then I could say "Curtis is a wife beater," and then require you to prove me wrong.

Disclaimer: To the best of my knowledge, Curtis is NOT married.

not married....and not gonna be married any time soon. If someone did say I was a wife beater, I would know that for the people that mattered, they would know it is not true. Or, I would let my wife post...and she could say that I wasn't a wife beater, but that I was spectacular in bed.

I agree he could have worded what he was trying to get across differently....but he did lay out his evidence, and even used the graphs you posted....that was a tough one to swallow.

I am not sure if different methods were used, but I think it has more to do with proximity of the drivers to the microphone. The more drivers there are, it looks like the more the measurements are off. I think that the more drivers their are, the more distance is needed for them to "gel". Make sense?

Jack
I admire you for wanting to take up the fight and I think it's noble of you to want to set things straight. I read both of those threads prior to the shut down. I think craigsub did a great job of presenting the "other" side. The main thing I want to say is people like that thrive on those kind of threads. Your not going to change that even with hard facts because then he will find something wrong with those. I read through the entire threads but I gotta tell ya I tired of this guys chest pounding very early on. It is always easy to detect when someone keeps repeating the same crap over and over and refuses to address the other posters(in this case craigsub) points directly. Craigsub showed himself to be knowlegable about many speaker brands, generally unbiased and accepting of the fact that hard facts were hard to come buy because graphs don't tell the whole story. This guy showed himself to have an obvious agenda, narrow minded and not very effective at getting his point across. I found it very obvious and I'm sure most people who read that will too. Don't let this guy get you fired up. He is not worth it, eh?
oz

I see I still have not made my point.

Curtis you seem to think this guy proved his point, to whit, there is a discrepancy between the graph and the specs. However, I have never disputed that point, and it's not that to which I object, nor for which I demand proof. Absent the FACTS of WHY that discrepancy exists, stating, WITHOUT PROOF, that Axiom "lies," "publishes false information," and "can't read their own graphs," is unconscionable. It is THAT to which I object, and of which I demand proof. And, Grandarf CANNOT, and DID NOT, PROVE those implications.

I'm not the least bit interested in convincing Grandarf of anything. I'm interested in the inexperienced newbie who has come to AVS for some information. His head is swimming with all these acronyms and terms that make no sense, dB, Hz, SPL, ohms, wire gauge, digital coax, digital optical, phase, crossover, slope, and on and on. He's been researching for weeks, he's confused by all the options, and he's finally reached the point where all he wants is for someone to say "here is the 'best' speaker!" How may threads do you see over there where it's "Speaker A, B & C: WHICH IS THE BEST"?

This is the guy I'm worried about. This is the guy who very well may buy into whatever the loudest voice says. And if we sit back and, without challenge, let the loudest voice make unsubstantiated pejorative statements, then we are abandoning the newbie to the malicious, and irresponsible among us.

Craigsub had a good summary of this in his sig -- paraphrasing, "the trolls win if we don't do anything"

Jack, I understand what you want.

The only way to get it is through fact and explanation. That goes back to something I posted earlier, there needs to be explanations from those taking and posting the measurements.

In reply to:

---

...there needs to be explanations from those taking and posting the measurements.

---

On this point we completely agree.

What I WANT is for him, and others, to back up irresponsible, malicious accusations of unethical behavior with proof, or refrain from making them. What facts and explanations do I present to achieve that?

I forget who first said this, but :

"It is impossible to reason a man out of a position which he did not reason himself into in the first place".

This is usually the point where we would take the other party outside and beat some sense into them. This is not practical on the Internet so the threads go on forever. I don't think there is a good answer other than trying your best then walking away.

Well now... wait a minute! Is it really not practical? Let's think about this for a minute.OK the minute is up.I'm ready, who"s with me?
oz

Road Trip !!

avsforum is not a bad place to get advice. But their are people there who are quite intent on bashing products. I saw the thread and i take it just how it is. Just a guy with nothing better to do. He has no crudentals to be making any comparisons for any products. If it was a sceintific finding done by electronic enginers. Mabey then it would have some merit.
I find it funny that people are able to post such things without having consulted the product owners. The worst thing about it is who is this guy to post any tests. At least if your going to do tests have a degree stating you can do this properly. Or else keep it to yourself.
i not to long ago had a run in with outlaw fanatics. I stated i prefered my avm30 and mca30 amps instead of the outlaw 990 and all hell broke out. But to stay on topic its just a bunch of he said she said stuff with very little merit. The guy who posted this thread on avs. is probaly watching the axiom board loving how he ruffled everybodys feathers. i love the sound my axioms have and thats the main thing. But it drives me nuts to see stuff like that too. but what can you do.

John, that was Peter's sig for a while. I like it too.

Anybody remember GeneticDrift, ProTech, TechPro, MarkB, TonyGeno, Streem speakers, et al?

Jack, you've got to let it go. Briefly point out the logical incoherence of casting such ridiculous aspersions and move on. Let your eloquence and concision prevail, but don't wallow in the minutiae.

Never try to teach a pig to dance; you both get dirty, but the pig likes it.

i see the post has been closed by the administrator. Which is very good. Must have stepped on to many toes with there so called graphs. Half them are probaly salesmen for competing speaker companys.

Hi!
Don't know if I am entirely correct here,factually or politically, but anyone who's nit-picking on the response curves of a loudspeaker, not caring how it sounds and goes far enough to say,"Just as a consumer, I don't enjoy being lied to... I believe that if you say your product does X and Y, it should do X and Y....", is missing the whole point! Still, I commend Ajax for taking the time to respond,with facts, and Ian for explaining how things work!

Not to worry I got my nephew Vito and a couple of his goombah's takin care of it.
Road kill?

In reply to:

---

Inevitably this is the problem with posting graphs and why I really do not like doing it.

---

I find it to work the exact opposite. If they were never posted, and this issue were not brought up, I would not have learned all of this nor have seen a newer anechoic response for the speakers. More information IMO is a good thing even if it brings out trolls such as this person from AVSforum.

There is this cadre of trolls over at AVS, who seem to have agendas that are less than legit. They are either employed in, or are a supporter of, the B&M side of our hobby. One guy, who is apparently a recording engineer in Toronto, seeks out any negative he can find about Internet direct companies, and then starts a thread deploring how terrible this graph, or those specs are. Of course the thread, inevitably, ends up in a train wreck of insults and get locked or deleted by the mods. He just went after SVS in this thread. Both Tom and Ron of SVS got involved, and the thread only lasted 2 pages before the mod locked it down, deleting some of the worst posts.

He got on a kick with The Rocket 750, and started the same thread on, at least, 3 different forums. On one forum, the mod chastised him, and quickly deleted the thread. A thread was started about the whole issue on av123, and he actually came over there, joined up, and tried to defend his position. He ended up spewing the vilest profanity I've read anywhere on the internet. He's been banned so many times, from virtually every forum worth reading, that it's difficult to keep track of him. He doesn't care. He just adopts a new name and starts right in again.

Another of these guys, is a B&M dealer (as are several of them), who must be feeling the pinch from the success of internet vendors. He doesn't start that many threads, but he is quick to join in and add to the attacks. He too has been banned a number of times, and has had many incarnations. Interestingly, these two guys loathe each other.

It is these guys, and their ilk, to whom I don't want to abandon the forums.

As with all trolls, attention = power.

Still i find it hard to believe. That these people can post such things and not be held accountable. I mean such as the post we were dicussing that is damaging to a persons business. You did that to major corparation you would have a team of lawyers breathing down your neck. But all that happens is thread gets closed. Then the same jokers start another one all over again.

No such thing as bad publicity.

How about Rafael Palmeiro? I'd consider what he is going through now to be bad pub for his Hall of Fame chances.

I have to admit, every time I see the title of this thread my first thought is "sure, what kind of ammo d'ya need ?" :

We'll see. HOF may seem less doable now, but what about book deals? movie career? endorsement deals for supplements?

One of my dear female colleagues reminded me that Palmiero was, at one time, shilling Viagra. Maybe that's his juice.

Hey Tom! I remember seeing one of those ads. Seemed a little embarassing for him. I guess the money must have been right.

Or his wife encouraged him!

Luckily I can't listen to the graphs or I am sure I would be really disappointed with my speakers. Decent price and sound damn good to my ears, good enough for me. Sounds like that guy has something against Axiom for some other reason. Who knows. Who cares. Tell him to eat a fat d@*#! and you will feel better about yourself. Not very mature but it makes me feel better.

Oooh. If you told me to eat "datstaroctothorpe!", I might have to track you down and leave a flaming pile of dog doo on your welcome mat.

You do have a welcome mat, don't you?