Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Technical Questions Frequency respone chart

Wid... Response curves are actually no mystery. If you have a receiver/amp that has its increments in dBs (I have a Denon 5800 that does, for example) and something like a Stryke Audio disc, you can actually get an idea for yourself. Play a 1000 Hz signal at, for example, -25 dB on your receiver... then increase it to -22 dB ... the is a 3 dB "peak" ... then play -28 dB ... that is a 3 dB "valley" ... Now when you look at a response curve, you can have an idea what it means when you see these 5-6 or higher peaks and valleys... in the midrange and treble, it is pretty signifigant.

For now... try that experiment... and see what you find out.

John K ... It is also interesting to take an ETF room corrected response and compare that to a raw in-room respone... just so you know how badly your room is messing with you ...

Craig,
I understand what you are saying and I can also can make sense of the graghs enjoythemusic did.What I can't make much sense of is the graghs that soundstage did.They just seem to be WAY to erratic on the charts so much so they really didn't make sense to me.Is that what you meant by the wrong method being used?

Wid... I won't go so far as to say that was an erratic response... the average anechoic response was about +/- 4 dB ... And I think the M-80 as it exists today is a lot flatter... The M-80 has 6 drivers along a 39 inch or one meter (roughly) line array... getting a smooth response at 2 meters (less than 7 feet) would be tough.

An open question... All M-80 owners sitting 6.5 feet from your speakers please speak up ...

I don't know about anyone else but I sit about 13 feet away,6.5,Craig I don't think so.

As you get further away from the speakers, the response will smooth out, think of the sound coming from all 6 drivers, and the angle each driver is relative to your ears. At 13 feet, you are likely getting the sound Axiom wants you to.... measuring a response (Ala SoundStage) in an anechoic chamber at 6.5 feet will tell you nothing about how the speaker sounds at 13 feet in room...

What do you think of this review? Absolutely terrible?
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/energy_c9.htm

The reviewer, comparing the C9 with the B&W Nautilus 804:

The Energy C-9 and B&W Nautilus 804 are opposite ends of the price scale -- $1300 versus $3500 -- but such a comparison proved to be time well spent, largely due to the high level of performance offered by the C-9s. In fact, the C-9s stood toe to toe with the Nautilus 804s and certainly weren’t about to back away from the comparison

Here is the link for the Energy's.

I have auditioned both the C-9's and the 804's.... Now it could be that neither store had them set up properly... But I thought the C-9's were a terrible sounding speaker. The store was using Arcam electronics, and it was awful. Even the store manager thought so.

They also sold Totem, and the Hawks were better, bit still not great. Based on my experience with M-22's and a decent sub... I think the M-80's would walk the floor with the C-9's.

You guys have probably demo-ed a lot more speakers than I have, but I know what I like when I hear it.

I heard the MA Silver 8s in the same room with the Veritas 2.4s (supposedly better than the C9s?) and the MAs were far and away clearer, better speakers. I had previously liked the Veritas 2.4s, but they had a wooden, wooly and boxy sound in comparison to the MAs. The Energy tweeter seemed a little zingier, too (I mean that in a bad way).

In the one listen I gave the B&W 804s, I thought the upper midrange was ridiculously over present, but it was a crappy listening room. I imagine the M80s are easily worthy of being discussed/compared with this group of speakers.

I have not heard the MA's ... I do agree with you on the B&W's ... They benefit in the high end from the same type of marketing that Bose does in low-fi. The salesman literally said "Hey, these are B&W's, which makes them worth $4000" ...