Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo M22's: Impressively neutral

Bias is my middle name
I must have at least 50 hours of heavy music-listening use on my new M22 speakers by now. Initially I found the M22's to be less bright than my Paradigm Mini Monitors, overall, though on some transients and at high volumes I noticed a real edginess / brightness / sizzle in the treble. Yes, I went into this with the belief that component break in does exist, having heard the effects first-hand in the past. Yes, I also read countless arguments in this forum claiming that break-in is purely psychological. I pondered the referenced scientific evidence, I considered the theories as to why break-in is unlikely or illogical. Then I listened.

I will break you!
After just a few CD's, the treble seemed to tame quite a bit at moderate volumes. After 30 hours, most of the harshness was gone from the treble: SSSs, cymbal clashes, high vocals, and bright guitars no longer screamed for attention or distracted from the music. After 40-50 hours I really don't notice any of my intial problems with the treble, even on notably bright recordings. The bass has filled in appropriately, though the M22's aren't as bass-saturated as the Paradigms. This is a good thing for me, particularly having a sub, as they give a better rolloff and aren't exaggerated in the upper bass.

What I have deemed the break-in period has mostly finished, leaving these speakers amazingly neutral. So much so that it has given me a better understanding of music dynamics and what makes for a satisfying balance between loudness and clarity. I can't help but wonder how many people have tweaked their Axiom tweeters unnecessarily, based simply on performance within the first 5 or 10 hours of listening. I should note that I believe proper break-in requires playing at loud volumes; I don't count my ~50-70 hours of TV listening as "break-in" time because it doesn't strain the speakers at all.

I would not even call these speakers bright! I think they are neutral throughout the audio spectrum, and if people call them bright, it's probably a response to a) lack of break in, or b) bright or "hot" modern recordings. My Grado SR60's are one of my reference points, and they have a reputation for a laid back treble. I still will not call the M22s bright in the absolute sense. Comparatively, my Mini Monitors have a serious tonal problem in the lower treble (they are very bright in that area).

Subtle and dynamic
Okay instead of dragging it out, I'm going to put my conclusion here in the middle: I love these speakers! They match my system very well, they are hugely revealing at low volumes, yet they manage loud volumes with little strain or distortion. They have given me an appreciation for what gives me satisfaction in music listening, and demonstrated the weak links in my system.

I like to listen to music as loud as possible, to enjoy the dynamics and feel the bass. Generally this has been around 85dB sustained for me, which is the approximate threshold for hearing damage. Retrospectively, I think that two things were holding me back from higher volumes with the Paradigms: the bright tonal balance, and the amount of distortion produced at high power levels. With the Axioms, the limiting factor seems to be simply the overall loudness; there is not this huge mass of distortion that clouds the music and hurts the ears. It has a funny effect, because it seems like I still listen to the Axioms at a slightly lower volume, while still extracting significantly more detail from the music. The M22s are more satisfying at any volume level, and I am not punished for playing them loud.

Recording bottlenecks
There is a very tangible resolution to any audio component in the chain, as the Axioms have shown me. I am still as pleased as punch with my Yamaha cd changer, because these new speakers have exposed all the detail formerly hiding in the shadows. That is to say that the M22's have much more resolution than my Mini Monitors, yet this was only revealed to me because my Yamaha has great resolution as well. Some of my really poorly recorded CDs don't seem to get much benefit from the Axioms because they're already so fuzzy. Smashing Pumpkins / Mellon Collie was one example, and a handful of others. The surprise to me was how many of my recordings benefitted from my speaker upgrade. The M22s simply gave me more resolution than I realize lay in my CD player and old discs.

I just listened to an old Rush album from the late 1970's, Caress of Steel. It was another recording that just sucked in my attention like a tractor beam; not only is the music much simpler and more "honest" than modern Rush, but the recording is equally impressive. Over the M22's, every nuance of the quiet passages came through with unshakable detail, and all the dynamics were more realistic than you get in virtually any modern rock recording. To get loud, they play loud. This reminds me of an English professor I had: he said there's no need for italics in writing when you want to emphasize a point. The words should make that emphasis on their own! Analogously, to make music sound loud, you should play with dynamic range instead of relying on sound compressors that boost the treble and clip dozens of samples within a second.

Gamecube DACs
My Gamecube did not show any significant bump in quality through the M22s, presumably because its DACs have such low resolution. No big loss, though this is one reason why a digital output would be nice.

By the same token, I recently realized how weak my DVD player's DACs are. I have a Panasonic RP-82 DVD-V/Audio player that does progressive scan. The other day I popped in a Dream Theater concert DVD and was really thrown off by the sound quality. I thought something was wrong. I ended up playing that concert in CD format, while manually synching the video to get it to look right. What a mammoth difference! Resolution, clarity, dynamics, bass, you name it. The reason this particular DVD hit me was probably that I know the CD recordings so well, and I scrutinize audio more on music albums, particularly familiar ones.

I also just watched Die Another Day on DVD, and was underwhelmed by the audio, especially now that I was scrutinizing the audio. So the M22s have revealed the extreme differences of DACs in my system. Some of the difference may be dolby digital vs. CD, but I'll bet the DAC is more important.


So I'm thrilled, and relieved that the treble relaxed after extended listening. The best part is the low price of Axiom speakers. I would guess that Stereophile would put them somewhere between class B and class C, which is very good company.

Thank you Axiom!

-Cooper

Glad you like them! I loved my M22's as well.

You said the DAC's on your DVD are weak. Someone refresh me, is this where whether the DVD/CD is hooked up digital vs. analog determine which DACS are used, either the receivers or the DVDs? I know my Onkyo SR600 has good DAC's so I would rather use those (have the Panasonic RP62 Progressive Scan). I believe I am using the Onkyo's (hooked up digital to the DVD) and would be using the DVD if I hooked up analog. Is this correct, or am I getting mixed up with something else?

Sounds right to me. By necessity, for the analog outs on the DVD/CD player to be used, Digital to Analog Conversion has to take place inside that component. By comparision, if the digital outs are used, no digital to analog conversion is done. Unless the designer is really, really stupid.

This is correct. It's usually better to go straight to the receiver via digital connection. My stereo receiver has no DACs, and even surround sound receivers have no digital connection for DVD-audio or SACD, except in super high end, proprietary units. So you have to fall back on DVD DACs again.

So my question is: how much would I have to spend on a receiver or DVD player to match the DAC quality from my $300 Yamaha CD changer? I'll be it's something absurd, maybe $1000 to $1500 each.

-Cooper

I don't believe my RP62 is capable of either of these two formats, so I've never had to worry about it. Never heard a SACD or a DVD audio disk, and I'm not sure I really want to...it'll probably just make me want to buy one along with a player that can handle it!

Cooper, I'm glad to see that you're now able to enjoy the wonderful sound of the M22s, as I do. On the DACs in the receiver or DVD player, DACs these days are cheap and good and it doesn't require spending any unusual amount to get essentially perfect conversion. So, get a receiver or player with the features you want and don't worry about the DACs.

Cooper,

For SACD/DVD-A playback, the i.Link digital connection rules, from what I've heard/read.

Hi Cooper

Another M22 fan !!!

I have a Panasonic DVD-RP82 and I dont feel that the DAC's are that bad. I am sure you know more about audio than I do, but let me take a shot at this....

To really test the DAC's of the DVD-RP82, you have to use either the 2-channel analog output or the 5.1 channel output (which will be hooked to the 5.1 analog inputs on your receiver - if it has these). ALSO you have to enable either the 2-channel mode or the multi-channel mode in the menu of the DVD Player (depending on your setup). Your HK3470 receiver does not have 5.1 channel analog or digital inputs. Basically you can ONLY use this receiver for stereo 2-channel sources.

From your profile, I see that you dont have any surrounds / center speaker listed but maybe you already have these. I may be wrong here, but please check if you have multi-channel enabled in your setup menu. There is a day and night difference between the 2 modes.

The multi-channel mode should be enabled only if you have all the speakers setup and if there is a 5.1 connection (analog or digital) to the receiver otherwise the decoded signal will be sent to the respective centre / surrounds which are missing.

The only way I can play my DVD-Audio discs is using the analog out route on the DVD-RP82 i.e. using the DAC's of the player. It sounds absolutely amazing.

My receiver is a Yamaha RX-V2095 with 20-bit 48k DAC's. The DVD-RP82 has 24-bit 192k DAC's in 2-channel mode.

You write :
My stereo receiver has no DACs, and even surround sound receivers have no digital connection for DVD-audio or SACD, except in super high end, proprietary units. So you have to fall back on DVD DACs again.

So my question is: how much would I have to spend on a receiver or DVD player to match the DAC quality from my $300 Yamaha CD changer? I'll be it's something absurd, maybe $1000 to $1500 each.

Your stereo receiver has no DAC's because it has no digital inputs. You need to upgrade to a receiver that has either optical or coaxial digital inputs. Your DVD / CD players dont need to be upgraded.

Denon AVR1803 will set you back USD 300 or so and it will give you decent 5.1 channel decoding with digital inputs.

But if you need 5.1 analog inputs for SACD / DVD-A, you have to look for a receiver that has 6 or 7 or 8 channel inputs. e.g. Harman Kardon AVR525

Of course the sky is the limit. You have receivers ranging from USD 500 to USD 5000 that match this criteria. Good luck and hope this answers your question.

Cheers

Hi Mahesh,

I appreciate the response. However, I should state that I have no desire to go multi-channel at this point. It's not practical in my apartment, and why expand to 5 channels when I can't even get my mains to sound good?

I do think the DVD-audio discs sound pretty good from this unit; in general, I found them to sound a bit smoother than CDs from my Yamaha, though they also had less detail.

It's the analog two-channel dolby digital output that I have a problem with; I am convinced that DVDs are performing well under par for my system. There are two things I could do: spend $500-$700 on a refurbished HK 325 or 525, or spend the same amount on a better DVD player.

Both would give me new, better DACs. However, since I have no use for surround sound at the moment, I would rather get the Denon DVD-2200 because a) it supports SACD as well as DVD-A, and b) it provides bass management for both hi-rez formats, which avoids an additional analog->digital->analog stage.

I guess there's not a lot of general awareness of DAC differences, but it's hard to ignore after you live with it first-hand. My whole point was that the M22's revealed this huge discrepency to me; they gave me much more resolution from CDs, but only marginally more resolution from my DVDs.

-Cooper

Hi Cooper,

Is the Multi-channel LED (next to the power button) lit up on the front of your RP82 when you are playing DVD's ?? Did you turn off multi-channel in your remocon's menu ?

You already have digital outs on your DVD player. So I feel a receiver with digital inputs is what you should be aiming for.

Good luck.

I dont find the M22's too bright either.. seems just perfect.

Actually I got these speakers because of their neutrality and I now use them in my home studio setup, and I must say they work very nicely.

I have my DVD player setup as "multi-channel," but then I set up my front speakers as large, set rear speakers to none, center to none, and sub to none. I think I did this to get the sub channel to redirect to the mains. I should probably try setting it to 2-channel mode in case it makes a difference.

The multi-channel LED simply refers to the source. When it's playing DD 2.0 (my preference), it's off; when it's playing DD 5.1, it's on.

Digital outputs would allow me to use receiver DACs, if I got a surround receiver, but there is no digital connection for DVD-Audio or SACD. So if I upgrade my DVD player, I can improve DVD-V DACs, as well as DVD-Audio DACs, and maybe have the addition of SACD support.