M50 vs. M60 Frequency Response - Bass
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
hobbyist
|
OP
hobbyist
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 23 |
I've gone and overlayed the M50 and M60 frequency response charts as semi transparent layers in Photoshop. From a comparison of the two, I noticed the following things:
1. (M50 is less sensitive) The M50 isn't as sensitive (db) as the M60 between the 40-400Hz range, you'd have to turn the turn volume knob up a little higher while using the M50s to to reach the same output as the M60;
2. (M50 is brighter) Because the M50 lags M60's sensitivity until around the 400Hz mark, the M50 would seem to have a subtle inclination across the chart, whereas the M60 would appear to be more flatter (ignoring dips and peaks) overall - suggesting the M50's highs would appear to be mor pronounced relative to its lows.
3. (M50 has better bass extension) Even though the M50 might seem a bit brighter (my assumption from above) than the M50 while playing at a similar volume, it's the M50 that will play bass audibly into lower frequencies as its rolloff starting at 90Hz is a LOT slower.
Comments/Corrections anybody?
|
|
|
Re: M50 vs. M60 Frequency Response - Bass
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 912 Likes: 4
aficionado
|
aficionado
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 912 Likes: 4 |
No doubt the extra midrange driver in the M60 makes a difference in the crossover settings, hence, the slight difference in response at various levels. I would, however, suggest, don't get too wrapped up in comparisons of frequency response charts, in "real world" use, these differences are subtle at best. Let your ears be the final arbiter of what sounds best to you. In either case, you can't go wrong.
|
|
|
Re: M50 vs. M60 Frequency Response - Bass
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654 |
GC, my first thought is along the same line as one of Casey's: don't try to evaluate relatively subtle sound differences between speakers in the same line by interpreting small variations in frequency graphs. As to 1., sensitivity, this is typically measured by using an average in the mid-range from about 200-2000Hz. The two appear to average about the same and Axiom rates both at 89dB for 1watt/1meter.
On 2., I'd be inclined to think that what you describe wouldn't be enough to make the M50 audibly "brighter".
3. Since the M60 uses the same two woofers in a somewhat larger enclosure than the M50, there's at least the potential to tune the enclosure to a slightly lower frequency and it'd be surprising if this wasn't the design. Axiom does rate the M60 2Hz lower in the specs. Note that the anechoic chamber isn't accurate below about 80Hz(one reason for measuring high in the air on the tower)and so especially in the bottom two octaves, comparisons can't be relied on.
-----------------------------------
Enjoy the music, not the equipment.
|
|
|
Re: M50 vs. M60 Frequency Response - Bass
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
hobbyist
|
OP
hobbyist
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 23 |
Weird why it always takes so long to log into the forum. Oh well...
Anyways, after trying to find listener (or pro) comparisons between the M50 and M60s, I was really only able to find a solid comparison between the M22 and the M60. In that well articulated review, it was said the M22s out performed the M60 in terms of definition, imagining and precision, but would need a subwoofer to match the M60s fuller presence. The M60s were said to be much more laid back and less clear through the midrange, but beefier and more spacious.
Well, that's all fine and dandy, but I would like as indepth a review between the M50 and M60. 2 things... looking at the frequency graphs, it would APPEAR that the M50s have better bass extention (regardless of their spec rating). AND... they being in a smaller enclosure, closer to the M22... I wonder if they'd articulate greater definition in imaging than the M60s?! Hmmm... if both of those proposals are on the money, then the M50 could be the best of both worlds, no? It just wouldn't have AS flat a response as the M60s, and have a little less power.
Does anyone have actual experience with both?
Last edited by GrnCdn; 09/05/11 08:51 PM.
|
|
|
Re: M50 vs. M60 Frequency Response - Bass
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,291
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,291 |
the only thing i can say to this is that a couple of dB more or less here and there makes a much smaller difference than the room where you install speakers. Every room is different; a speaker can sound bad or good, depending on the room. they're both (room/speaker) coupled together.
when you have good speakers, to get good sound, you need a room that's kind on the sound, which means a room always needs room "treatment", like rugs, soft furniture somewhere, etc. This tames the sound wave reflections in a room.
when you go in an empty room and you clap your hands, you hear an echo. this is how good sound can come out bad in your ears, too many reflections.
if you feel that a speaker will not go down in frequencies as much as you'd like, then you have a choice: 1: get large towers; if this is not good enough, then you can 2: get smaller towers and get a sub that will go down in frequencies to where you want.
hope this helps. :-)
|
|
|
Re: M50 vs. M60 Frequency Response - Bass
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044 |
You're printing weird data; by all accounts, the M60s are the superior speaker. I have M50tis and M80v2s, and I can tell you that the M80s far outshine the M50s. The M60s are widely considered to be more similar to the M80s than the M50s.
Having compared the M50s back to back with M22s, your cited comparo between the 22s and the 60s sounds much more like a comparo betweethe 22s and the 50s: 50s more laid back, beefier, 22s better imaging and soundstage.
I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
|
|
|
Re: M50 vs. M60 Frequency Response - Bass
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015 |
What if you have both? M50's with M22's mounted above them. How would that sound?
|
|
|
Re: M50 vs. M60 Frequency Response - Bass
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
hobbyist
|
OP
hobbyist
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 23 |
Perhaps I should share the M22/M60 link I make reference to. DanMagicMan7's second review, near the bottom... http://www.axiomaudio.com/boards/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Main=13539&Number=190284On page 5 of that forum string, Alan of Axiom (sounds like a Scottish title, lol) concurs with Dan's review. PS: Catbrat. You silly, you are.
|
|
|
Re: M50 vs. M60 Frequency Response - Bass
|
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,654 |
GC, my comment is that regardless of how "well articulated" a review is, its accuracy is still open to question. I'd be dubious of a review that finds so many audible differences between the M22 and the M60 except in the lowest bass.
-----------------------------------
Enjoy the music, not the equipment.
|
|
|
Re: M50 vs. M60 Frequency Response - Bass
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 23
hobbyist
|
OP
hobbyist
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 23 |
John K... when I say Alan of Axiom concurs, I don't mean someone agrees who's username is 'Alan of Axiom' - I mean, Alan, from Axiom, concurs. That's a pretty solid vouch for the review.
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,945
Posts442,487
Members15,617
|
Most Online2,082 Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
0 members (),
552
guests, and
4
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|