Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo Out with the new and in with the newer

bman reminded me of Fkoyd Toole's presentation on youtube. Very interesting what he said about home auditions. You learn nothing from them other than whether or not you can adapt to a speaker's problems. What I can say about the actives is that they became a seamless system with my living room. No other speaker has managed that.

I finished watching Toole's video earlier today. He was waxing poetic about Harman speakers and showing off the curves of one. The listening window and sound power were at least 3dB apart and the listening window was flat. These apparently were state of the art and as good as it can possibly get. They looked worse than the M5 actually. That M5 is probably as good as any passive speaker can possibly get. Enter the active LFRs with aligned, declining curves and that should make everyone out there take note and question what the hell they've done for the audio world lately.

He also totally trashed Martin Logan. Their curves looked like the Rockies.

Below is a link to the video. Floyd does an excellent job of getting to the core of the science in 75 minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrpUDuUtxPM&t=2s

And starting at 37:30 he makes a good point about the onboard AVR room correction software that makes you think twice about what it is actually doing to "help".

Let me point this out. I'll repeat it again and again until folks get it. "Room correction", in my main room, brought out the best v2 could do. This included all my v2 which included the 600, M80, 150 and QS8. Without it, the v2 were blah but better in almost every respect than the Boses, Polks or Klipschs I tried in there.

Fast forward to v4. The "room correction" improvement is not as great, but it's there. No question for anyone who has heard it. This is the case with M100, M5, M50 and M3. I could live without it for the v4 with a bit of bass EQ but why would I when it sounds better?

I will also say all speakers I have heard in my living room could not play nice with it...until the active LFRs! This is what I absolutely did not expect. I wasn't even going to try them in the living room. There is absolutely zero correction required. ZERO...in my acoustically damned living room!!!

I now expect that when I place the active LFRs in the main room, they will not need "room correction". We shall see.

So what is there for folks to get? v4 is not v2. I have heard so many times from so many listeners that v4 is the same as v2 but just more bass or better treble. That is simply not true. The whole FOCing thing is different. They are better in every conceivable way.

The active LFRs are better yet because look at the listening window and sound power curves. Just look at them. Go compare them to every other Axiom. Go compare them to any other speaker if you can find the curves for other speakers.

Axiom 15 years ago is not the same Axiom as today. There have been many learnings on many fronts. The learning is not done.

So any Axiom customers out there who have old gear and are looking at today's speakers thinking "That looks like what I have", I agree but...it does not sound like what you have.

P.S. "FOCing thing" is Family of Curving thing.

I'm not sure that addresses what Dr. Toole was saying in regards to the effectiveness, or lack thereof, with the room correction software but kudos for taking the time to write that rant.
It must have taken you awhile.

LOL

It just sort of all spilled out.

Let me paraphrase what Dr. Toole said: "Apply "room correction" to a speaker with excellent directivity, and you screw it up".

Is v2 a speaker with excellent directivity? Hell no! Is v4? Hell no but it is much better! Is the active LFR1100? Oh yeah baby. That is the real deal. And you are paying for it.

All that just kinda spilled out too.

Another way of thinking about "room correction..."

If one had someone playing acoustic guitar and singing in one's main listening room, would there be an attempt made to "correct" the performance with eq?

The more accurate the overall performance of the speaker, the less likely one is to experience improvement through room correction.

As Connor Macmanus said to his brother Murphy, "Mmmmmmm. That is nicely put. Thank you very much."

I need to point out, again, that even though the v4 M3, M50, M5 and M100 aren't as excellent as the active LFR1100s (see above), there are no flaws. Ditto for v4 subs, QS10 and VP160. I cannot say that about the v2. The v4 are examples of as good as you can get with the chosen technology and architecture. The quality, in all aesthetic, functional and performance respects is exemplary (with the exception of the fabric grills but I like them naked anyway). We shall see if I perceive any flaws with the M2s I'm receiving on Monday.