Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Technical Questions Good receiver for M3's?

no need, the more input the better around here. I will also say at louder levels my monoblocks do much better than the Denon alone with no clipping.

Jason is right. I have M22's as my main 2CH and HT speakers(Pioneer 1015) and love the clarity. My sub makes up for what the 22's lack in bass.

I also have a set of M3's (with Denon 297)in the family room/kitchen area for casual listening and background music while cooking/entertaining. They do sound more laid back, but when I use them to watch movies in 2ch, they are amazingly clear and fit the bill for what I wanted in speakers with no sub.

At the listening session we had at Mojo's place I found I liked in order, the M80's, 22's, 60's and finally M3's the best. Audition some 22's, or just send them back and get the 22's. If you like "brighter" and detailed without being shrill like Klipsh.....you will love M22's.

I too have always thought that speaker break in was a myth. But I'm starting to wonder based on tests performed for Audioholics:

"After about ½ hour, the tonal characteristics of the speakers began to change. There was no smell of burnt VC, so I assumed this was a result of a large change in the DCR of the voice coils with its subsequent changes to the speakers frequency response. What was also clear from watching the speakers is how much more the white noise speaker was moving just a ½ hour after the beginning of the test compared to the beginning of the test. (Compliance increase due to break-in I theorize.)"

See the complete tests results here:
http://www.audioholics.com/education/lou...he-test-results

BTW: These test were done on an Axiom M3 speaker.

Slo, welcome. This is the Audioholics article that actually discusses speaker break-in in detail, rather than making a passing comment. Also, in Dr. Toole's new book(p.353)he points out that slight measurable changes resulted in no audible differences in careful blind listening tests, and that it's reassuring that the performance of speakers remains stable over time.

I wonder if the significance of "burn-in" (or perhaps "break-in"), depends on the design of the speaker, especially the material used in the cone surrounds. Some materials may become more flexible with use.

What really makes me laugh is the idea of burning in a solid state amp Valves maybe but ???

Shane

As I have said before, the theory of break-in also suggests the speaker makes a measureable amount of wear. If my speakers have a measureable amount of wear after, say 100hrs of use, how bad are they going to be after 200 hours of use, twice the amount of breakin/wear, the tonal changes should be just as much after 200hrs as they were in 100hrs and imagine the amount of breakin after 500 or 1000hrs of wear. I would hope most speakers built these days are able to withstand the test of time better than that.

I believe if there is any actual speaker break-in it would happen from a few milliseconds to a minute or so, just to unseat a stuck voice coil or something, possibly due to shipping or poor parts; and that would indeed be a noticeable change.

Hi Slopoke, welcome to the forms.

I'm guessing you read the whole article you linked, but just to be sure, that article discussed how hard the tester had to push the speakers (using a free-air pink noise test, not real-world audio material) before he destroyed them due to pushing them well past their intended limits with source material that is designed to stress speakers.

Given the goal of the test, I'm not sure it is a good source to quote when comparing it to the topic of normal speaker break in and the resulting changes in audio characteristics under normal listening conditions.

Either way, the article you linked was an interesting read, but I'm not sure it directly applies to speaker break-in.

Jason

I agree that me speakers sound different after a few moments after turning them on but I don't believe it to be break in. Simply because it happens every evening.

I am an almost constant music listener. I listen to the radio or my Zune plugged into the CD deck of my Jeep on the way home then I get inside and I turn on the Squeezebox and M60s. The first few songs I play always have a certain 'feel' to them. Very quickly though, it seems to magically improve a little bit, things get more detailed and instruments sound more pronounced.

Because this is consistent, every night, it can not be the gradual break in of my speakers so I write it off to my ear and brain getting re-accustomed to the sound of the M60s.

That is just a viewpoint on how consumers can easily be convinced of the 'break in' story to assist in getting them past their return policy time period or just get used to them enough they won't bother returning them.

just my opinion. I am relying on more scientific articles like the ones quoted above to assist my opinion.

I'm with Jason on this one. That test was about breaking speakers by driving them well beyond their capabilities. The author expected them to die much sooner than they did.

"That is just a viewpoint on how consumers can easily be convinced of the 'break in' story to assist in getting them past their return policy time period or just get used to them enough they won't bother returning them."


I'd totally agree with that. Back in the day, I used to work on dedicated word processing systems. We always got complaints when a keyboard died. We'd tell the customer that there was a "break in" period on the new keyboard and to call us back in a couple of weeks if they still had a problem. We never got that call.

I also agree with the continious break in theory. i.e. if it's different after 100 hours what's it like after 200 or 1000?

I just found it interesting and something to look into further that after 1/2 hour of destruction testing the speaker had an audible difference in tone. If this had happened just before it died then so what. But it was well before that point and possibly something that could be encountered in real world usage. Why? Enquiring minds want to know.

I will also point out the the M3 woofer got a rave design review from this guy and operated well beyond the point that Axiom specs it for.

Thanks for welcoming me to the forum. I may be new here but have been a happy Axiom owner for quite a few years.

HT - M22ti, VP150, QS8 surround sides, M2ti surround backs.
LR - M3v2s