Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners Speaker face-off this weekend

I've come to believe that the power of suggestion is a huge factor here. My M60s so impressed me immediately, not only did I keep them I ordered a complete Axiom HT system. Later I read someone state that Axioms sound metallic and tinny. I listened for that and started to believe he may be right. I tried playing all sorts of music to determine if this were actually the case.

I came to this conclusion: the strings on guitars (usually) are metallic, cymbals are metallic, the little springs under a snare are metallic, tambourines are metallic, etc... My M60s let me hear that they are. Bongo drums on the other hand have such a soft, well rounded sounded through my Axioms - not a hint of "metallic" sound because they shouldn't. Neither do violins or any other non-metallic intstrument sound "metallic".

My Axioms do not make all music sound good, but I wouldn't want a speaker that glosses everything over and makes it all sound the same.

Furthermore, a better speaker comparison would involve using a recorded piece of music with the performer on hand to play it live. Which speaker sounds most like the performer? Not... Which speaker makes this recording sound most palatable to my ears? Maybe you can get Norah Jones to stop by next time, Curtis.

Geesh, seems like this little speaker face off is being taken a bit too personal.

Bottom line is that people like different things. I LIKE crisp, detailed highs. Many people do not. It's as simple as that.

It sounds like they had a great time, and I wish I could have been there!

Hello Curtis,

I feel I should weigh in here because I did do many years of truly scientifically controlled double-blind listening in professional surroundings at Canada's National Research Council in Ottawa, Canada, where over the course of 13 years I reviewed (with colleagues) various speakers for test reports published in Sound&Vision magazine Canada. These sessions were supervised and designed by Dr. Floyd Toole, a scientist and psycoacoustician (also an audiophile) who, over the course of 25 years running the Acoustics division at the NRC, explored exactly how subjectivity in listening tests influences our conclusions--and how these relate to the frequency response measurements taken in an anechoic chamber at some 220 positions in a sphere around the speaker.

Here are some controls that must be in place if you are to reach anything other than anecdotal conclusions that have no scientific validity.

You must conceal the brand, the price, and the physical details of the speakers from the listeners with a visually opaque and acoustically transparent curtain. If you don't, listeners' preconceived expectations will hopelessly bias the results.

The speakers should be listened to in mono first, to avoid small variations cause by placement/room effects of stereo listening. The switching between speaker brands must be instantaneous, and volume levels must be adjusted to within 1/10 of a dB. If not, listeners will always perceive the louder speaker as "better," or give it a higher ranking even if it doesn't subjectively sound any louder. The switching should be done by a person with no interest in the test outcome, who is unrelated to any of the listeners. The technician should collect the scoring sheets and keep track of the data. No discussion during or between listening sessions is allowed..

Trying to assess more than four different speakers accurately is impossible in less than several days of concentrated sessions of about 20 to 25 minutes each, followed by a break, for 6 to 8 hours per day. For greater numbers of speakers, I used to spend 3 or 4 days of full 8-hour sessions.

Stereo listening does not change the ranking order of speaker preferences. Stereo is a flattering effect, and scores will be higher, but the order of preferences does not change. Mono testing enables rapid pinpointing of speaker distortion and colorations. A wide variety of listening material--pop, jazz, classical and rock--should be sought out and tested as to its ability to distinguish good from bad speakers. Many electric rock selections are not useful in this regard.

You must exchange and rotate speaker positions and listening seats to randomize out the effects of the room. If not, many of your judgements will be a product of a given speaker's position in that particular room, rather than intrinsic qualities or liabilities of the speaker. I cannot emphasize enough how important this is. Just a difference of one or two feet in the placement of two different speakers will cause a bigger change in the scores than differences in the actual speakers themselves! What you end up reviewing are the acoustic properties of the room, rather than the speakers!

From what I've read, few if any of these controls were observed or even possible in your admittedly amateur assessments. Thus your conclusions are really casual anecdotal opinions--I'm sure it was pleasant, but it's unwise to make any final conclusions about the inherent virtues or limitations of any of the products under review.

Regards,

Hey chesseroo,

I did end my previous post with saying in my humble opinion

Yes I agree that Axiom R&D team new what they were doing when they designed all of these crossovers. I did not change the values of any of the crossover components (I completely accept that the experts knew what they were doing) I merely duplicated their crossover design and rebuilt using point to point wiring and substituted high end components (except inductors) for the factory ones.

I had the benefit of evaluating my work in my own home with my own system doing an A/B comparison with the factory crossovers. The improvement in sound quality with my new crossovers (again I used the exact design and component values as the factory - I just totally rebuilt them from scratch)was huge.

If one was just to take the factory crossover out of the M22 and compare it to the factory crossover on the VMPS 626 there is just no comparison. The factory cost (and customer cost) of that VMPS 626 crossover is substantially more. I am pretty sure that VMPS factory crossover upgrade options alone cost more than a pair of new Axiom M22's. I am certain that the Axiom factory crossovers are designed properly for each model. However, it is clear (to me) upon close visual inspection of the factory crossover that certain financial based decisions were made by Axiom when selecting the crossover components. I mean come on these speakers are very resonably priced - thats one of the reasons why I bought them!

Based upon my own substantial results, I am positive that if the M22's would have had a crossover of similar factory design but with high end components the face off reviewers would have abolutely raved about the sound quality.

I would be interested to hear from Axiom if the R&D team or anyone else at Axiom ever tried high end components in their crossovers. If not someone should figure out how to give it a listen. I would be happy to lend assistance.

Even you Cheeseoo might (would) be amazed!

you got Norah's number?

Alan,

Thank you for the education.

"From what I've read, few if any of these controls were observed or even possible in your admittedly amateur assessments. Thus your conclusions are really casual anecdotal opinions--I'm sure it was pleasant, but it's unwise to make any final conclusions about the inherent virtues or limitations of any of the products under review."

Did we ever imply that they were not casual? In your statement then, is this how someone should come to a conclusion? So anyone who has speakers in their home, but has not reviewed them in your manner, should not voice an opinion?

We stated, over and over again, these were our opinions. We never claimed to be professional. I never claimed anything more. Oh..by the way..we had an SPL meter to get levels even.

I think, after reading these posts, that many people will not want to listen to these speakers under one roof and then voice a opinion.

May I suggest that you get samples of all the speakers in question, do your review in your conditions, and then maybe you and others may be satisfied with the results.

Some of you are as bad as the hyping Rocket people.

my review of the Axioms.....

"Axiom Audio M22Ti – This speaker sounds pretty good to me and I think it would appeal to a lot of people. Detailed with good clean midrange and highs. It does sound bright to me, and a bit metallic, and those characteristics showed themselves a lot with the Norah Jones CD we were using, but when playing classical music, they seemed to sound much better. Good imaging and soundstage. In my home, when turned up, the metallic characteristics seem much more prominent. I didn’t like the finish that was sent to us, but there are other finishes on their website that look nice. More efficient than the Aperions. If you like the bright sound, you should definitely try to give these speakers a listen before you buy."

So my guess is that all the unhappiness is because I used the word metallic....because as I read it, that it the only thing that made come across negative.

This thread reminds me of a great debate I saw on TV the other day. It went a little something like.....

Tastes Great! Less Filling!
Tastes Great! Less Filling!

In the end it didn't really matter because they were both hot and I got to see them wrestle in the water. (Those of you who have seen the Bud Light commercial know what I'm talking about!)
So I guess it all boils down to whether you like the blond or the brunette better.

Yeah, the original is a great commercial, but the new one is not PC. It ends with the big fat guy standing menacingly over the little guy in the fountain. The implication is clear. Being a big fat guy myself, my feelings are hurt. Of course, that is my own biased opinion.

huffer...so true...

by the way, Amie sent the blonde (light maple, light colored grill)