Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater AB Comparison - Axiom M60 & Wharfedale Evo 30

Well, today I took the M60's down to the Wharfedale dealer in KC and did the AB comparison. I also had my cables terminated with bannana plugs while doing this....I couldn't stand using the bare wires any longer.

I have never posted any AB comparison threads, so please bare with me as I attmpet to convey my thoughts effectively and in good fashion.

We didn't use their sound room for the AB comparison, instead we decided to listen to them in a more natural setting (no enclosed room, no sound treatment, etc.). In one section of the main area, they had two mains up against a wall with a small audio stand between them supporting an Arcam CD player and an Arcam A80 amplifier. That is the place we choose. We did AB testing in mono also.

I am not going to post my impressions as some do...by listing each song I listened to and giving my impressions how each speaker sounded on that song, but I will hopefully give some examples. I will say that my impressions did not change or vary from song to song nor from music style to music style. The characteristic differences I could hear remained constant no matter what kind of music I listened to.

From the first time we switched back and forth, I noticed a difference in the way the two speakers sounded. The differences were very noticeable; so much so that I would assume if any of you had been next to me during this experience, you would have heard the same differences. They were that pronounced. I suppose that is a subjective statement, but that is just how I feel.

Impressions/Results:
When it comes to bass extension, both seemed in the same ballpark. However, bass on the Evo's was a tad tighter and certainly had more attack. I listened to a jazz piece that was using stringed bass and on the Evo's those notes had the attack/punch that let you know somebody was plucking a stringed instrument. The same bass notes on the M60 didn't have that initial attack. Instead, the notes seemed to ease out of the speaker...if that makes sense (this is harder to describe than I thought). Bass sounded much more alive, dynamic and real on the Evo's while it was more dull and flat sounding on the M60's.

I am not going to get into great detail and break down the high's and mid's, so I will just give you my overall impressions of what I heard when listening to these two speakers. The M60's sounded somewhat thin and flat compared to the Evo's. The Evo's were open and airy sounding compared to the M60's. When listening to the Evo's, the sound dissapeared into the room while the M60's were more localized and drew my attention towards the speaker box. The Evo's at times sounded like a live performance in front of me while on the same source material the M60's were not convincing at all.

The Evo's also revealed more detail than the M60's on everything I listened to. For example, there was a jazz song that had a lot of snare drum syncapation mixed with some wood block 'clucks' in the track. The wood clucks on M60's were duller sounding and for some reason less audible while they were crisp and alive on the Evo's..much more natural and realisitc sounding. Also, in some parts of the song, the snare syncapations were very fast (short of being a snare rattle at times) and during those parts the M60's muddled them together while you could clearly discern the individaul taps of the snare on the Evo's. Stringed instruments and piano were literally dazzling on the Evo's, but only good on the M60's. Whether it was Diana Krall's vocals, jazz persussion or horns, piano keys, stringed intruments, acoustic & electric guitar; the Evo's just did it better in all aspects.

I already called and got a return authorization and will be shipping them back. I don't regret trying Axiom on the 30 trial, it's the best decision I made because I will never have to wonder "what if". The Axiom experience has been very positive and their customer service is top notch.

I hope you fine folks don't hold me in contempt and will welcome my future participation in this forum; I am sure most of you, if not all, will.

That's excellent Mike. The whole HT thing is about what you did - make an informed decision that suits your ears, preferences and budget. Good for you.

Now - the other thing. "Don't hold me in contempt" - ????? That sounds dismal and final. I would be disappointed to see you stop participating here. Don't you dare be concerned because you chose other than Axiom!

Hi KC

I did an A/B between a pair of Wharfedale bookshelf speakers and M3Tis. I picked up the Wharfedales from ubid.com (back when they gave good stuff away) as a present for some friends. As some of you may know, the M3s are my favorite Axiom speakers. I hooked them up to my 5wpc tubie and was pretty stunned. The Wharfedales sounded great. All in all, I think they may have come out on top in a close comparison, in any case, they certainly didn't embarrass themselves.

I've owned 6 pairs of Axiom speakers and another 15 Axiom made speakers, so I consider myself something of a fan. That having been said, I hope the wonderful people at Axiom do not rest on their laurels. I hope they identify best in class speakers and come out with Axioms which compare favorably in terms of sound quality yet at Axiom prices.

The new subwoofers are very expensive, and may well outperform the much less expensive SVS 20-39 and similar subs, but frankly, anyone can buy great stuff by paying a lot of money.

Here's what I hope for from Axiom:

1. a book shelf speaker which can compete with the Reference 3a de capo mm-i for well under $1,000.

2. a tower speaker which can compete with the Thiel CS2.4 or the Meadowlarks at Axiom tower prices.

Aim for best in class and whup their butts as to price.

I suppose I should have put a "lol" after that comment, but hoped most would know I was aiming for a bit of humor.

Finding something you are happy with is the ONLY goal, Mike. Hope you'll stick around.

The Evo's seem like mighty nice speakers. I have seen other highly positive reviews of them as well.

Always had a soft spot for Wharfedale -- back in my university days I had a part-time job at the Woolco stereo department, and got the boot for shipping back all the crappy speakers and bringing in decent products like Wharfedale speakers. We had the highest stereo sales of any store in Canada -- at least until we all got fired ;(

Turned out the head buyer for Woolco in Canada had a sweetheart deal with one of the crappy stereo distributors and was getting big kickbacks -- when his kickbacks went to zero for our store he came in and had us all fired.

Thanks for the report on the Evo's. I always like them but they do seem to be an esoteric brand here on the West Coast. One thing I found difficult was trying to figure out how to mount their direct raidiating surrounds. They're odd shaped (almost teardrop?) so there's no standard speaker mount, plus they're quite big, close to an M22. But I liked the sound on the Evo 20's, I'd guess the 30's would be slightly better.

Wharfedale does make what they call a DFS surround. It is a bipolar surround and is designed to be wall mounted.

Just curious.
What does a pair of Evo 30s go for?

MSRP is $899 and any reputable dealer will come down from there.

I would imagine you can get them for $775 or so at a local dealer....maybe less if you already already do business with them. They can be found at significantly discounted prices on the internet. For example, look at this:

http://www.aboutgizmos.com/wharfedale.html

They don't list the Evo 30's but have the Evo 40's. They are not exaggerating the MSRP either. My local dealer also has MSRP for the Evo 40's at $1200. I wonder if they are an authorized dealer?

Ah..doesn't matter to me. I personally wouldn't buy speakers off the internet unless it was directly from the manufacturer.

Mike, I appreciate the detail and candor in your review, and always enjoy your participation here. I hope you'll stick around. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts about the Wharfedales; you've certainly piqued my interest.

Love the sig Tom, but couldn't you replace beer with sex and it still be a true statement?

Mike...just out of curiosity, and in case I missed it, were the listening levels matched when you switched speakers? Even just a couple of dB could make a different perception.

Yes, they were. All switching was done on the fly while the volume remained the same. In other words, in the middle of a song the guy assisting me with the AB comparison would push a button at my signal and instantly switch from one speaker to another. At times, I would listen to a short section of material and then have the guy switch the speaker and quickly replay the same section. The poor guy stood and kneeled in the same spot both switching the speakers and manning the CD player for at least two hours with a few short breaks where he left to retrieve a different CD. I had the A80 remote in my hand during the comparison so the only person that could have changed the volume was me.

I think it was a very fair comparison. Nobody in the shop said a word to me during the AB comparison and just did what they could to assist me. After I was done, I offered my candid impressions and asked for theirs.

When I was done, the owner came by and pulled the grille off the M60 and took a gander at the drivers. He said the tweeter was a Vifa and thought the woofers were likely made by Thompson.

That reads like the speakers were not level matched. Simply keeping the volume dial the same does not account for the different speakers having different efficiency ratings. In a sense, it is like speaker level matching your system during HT setup.

If one speaker is slightly more efficient than the other...it will play louder when fed the same volume.

Not trying to invalidate your session, just want to make sure it is known that when comparing speakers, it is important to make sure are putting out the same SPL. The slightest difference can give a speaker an advantage.

This hits on a question I always have during speaker comparisons. Where they each calibrated for their optimal performance? Who says the room doesn't suit one speaker better than another? Is each speaker placed in its optimal location? I am not dismissing the results in this comparison, I just never know how to tell when comparisons are really meaningful.

For example, if you look at Axiom reviews on other websites, criticisms range from too bright to "lack of good highs - pair with a bright receiver". To me, this must be a calibration, room variable, etc. issue, not just speaker performance.

KC_Mike,

While I applaud your efforts to do a controlled comparison, you absolutely must measure the total SPL using pink noise with a Sound Level Meter, and calibrate the volume levels to a fraction of a dB. Moreoever, you must conceal the speakers with a visually opaque but acoustically transparent curtain.

In the 25 years I've done double-blind A/B listening tests, if these testing protocols are not followed, you will always choose the louder speaker (and louder by 0.5 dB even if they subjectively sound the same volume) as the "better." Likewise if you know which speaker is which, it's uncanny how psychological biases will cause you to pick the speaker you "think" you like more. Furthermore, differences in the two speakers locations in a given room will result in different ratings because of placement differences and room effects. I can assure that even seasoned professionals like Dr. Floyd Toole (with whom I served on many listening panels) have documented the biases that result from non-blind listening. In our tests, each speaker was rotated into different listening locations, as each listener sits in different chairs in the room, so that each speaker has been auditioned in several locations by the same listeners, in each of four different chairs. This effectively removes the variables of room placement which, in a simpler test, may cause you to choose one speaker over the other.

Failure to observe these testing protocols reduces the results to anecdotal data.

Regards,

While I am sure the Alan's comment regarding bias can be true and his comment regarding volume difference is also likely to be true in most cases, I wonder just how much it can account for. Just to reiterate, I believe Alan stated there could have been two causal factors present that might have skewed things. One being a difference in volume and the other being a psychological bias where a person picks the speaker they 'think' they like more.

The M60 and Evo 30 have the same efficiency rating according to published literature. The M60 is 89 anechoic and 93 in room response. The Evo 30's are listed at 89 but it doesn't say if that was anechoic or in room response. If it was anechoic, then they are the same. If it was in room response, then the M60's are more efficient and would have been the louder speaker at a given volume.

I had the Axioms hooked up in my home for two weeks before I did the AB comparison and I went into the comparison with the gut feeling the M60's would fair better because I perceived they were better based on my memory of the Evo's; which I hadn't heard for months until this past weekend. Alan can in no way ascertain for himself whether I had a bias for one or the other going into the AB comparison; so I thought his mentioning it somewhat implied a bias did exist.

Even though their efficiency ratings are the same, let's assume there was still a small difference in SPL and for the sake of exploration let's say the Evo 30 was .5 to 1db louder than the M60. Can that difference account for detail missing in one speaker yet present in the other? Can a minor SPL difference account for one speakers lack of bass attack as opposed to the other? Can SPL difference account for my finding the M60 to be more localized (sound coming from the box instead of dissapearing into the room)as opposed to the Evo; which dissapeared into the room? When I heard the detail of a guitar pick strumming the strings on the Evo 30 that I couldn't hear on the M60 on a particular track, could that be due to SPL difference? Also, even though I was bias towards the M60's, let's assume the oppostie was the case for the sake of exploration. Could a bias manufacture and introduce things into the source material that didn't exist to begin with? Could a person imagine detail that really wasn't there only because they had a bias? Imagine any of you doing an AB test in mono and hearing detail in one speaker that wasn't present in the other and then somebody suggesting to you that the difference(s) you heard could be due to your bias and/or uneven SPL.

In my original post, I made reference to a jazz song that had a lot of snare syncapation which the M60's muddled together while the Evo's clearly intonated each tap of the snare. Would anybody suggest that had I turned up the volume on the M60 (assuming it wasn't as loud as the Evo)during the same track, that the muddling of those snare taps would have suddenly dissapeared and become distinctly separate?

I am perfectly willing to go back to the dealer and borrow one of their SPL meters and see if both speakers are true to their claimed efficiency (there shouldn't be a singificant difference if any at all since both claim to be exactly the same). If I found a discrepency, I would be willing to do the AB comparison all over again; but I suppose at this point it wouldn't matter because anybody could claim, since I professed my preference for the Evo's after Saturday, I will have a psychological bias that will cause me to pick the Evo's regardless.

I respect Mr. Loft and am aware of his industry experience. I also don't disagree with his comments regarding the louder speaker bieng perceived as better or that people can have a bias. However, my bias was towards Axiom going into the comparison. Secondly, these two speakers have the same efficiency rating providing Wharfedale's rating was done in an anechoic chamber. If Wharfedale's rating was in room response, than the M60 would have been the more efficient speaker which means it also would have been the louder of the two at a given volume. Only two scenarios are possible regarding efficiency based on the specifications; either they were exactly the same or the M60's were more efficient. Other than that, as I eluded to in the previous paragraphs, I am very skeptical that a small (or any for that matter) SPL difference can manufacture something that already isn't there...whether it be detail, attack, etc. Conversely, I remain skeptical that a small SPL difference can cause those same characteristics to dissapear.

That is like hearing detail on speaker 'X' that isn't there on speaker 'Y' but thinking by turning up the volume on speaker 'Y' the detail will be revealed. Conversely, by turning down the volume will the extra detail revealed by speaker 'X' no longer be present?

In summation, I wasn't biased towards the Evo's and the efficiency ratings of these speakers dictate that they were either the same or the M60's may have been the louder of the two. For those reasons, and the others I eluded to in the previuos paragraphs, I stand behind my findings.

So, (he says in a valiant attempt to defuse the situation), we all agree that we'd likely pick the speakers that sound best to us, regardless of how we got there and, as a result, feel good about the money we spent feeding this relentless and absolutely subjective hobby?

No response is really needed.

KC- i was scared that alan's post might put you on the defensive. i went back and read what you had wrote on the first review, and i agree that a slight difference in volume would not account for all the variying factors that you perceived when you heard the two speakers. plus, i see what you are saying when you went into it expecting the axioms to be better.

i dont think alan was knocking your conclusions.. rather, with his technical background, i think he is more interested in the clinical/measurable aspect of the whole session.

i can dig what you were saying, and i am glad you were able to find the speaker that was pleasing to your ear. i think you have made a solid decision, and i dont think any of us are trying, nor would we attempt to change your mind.

i hope you still hang around and have conversation with us.!!

bigjohn

Mike:
I'm not refuting your points or being argumentative. Really, I think you make a reasonable argument.

But, it is true that the one standard industry-wide is a double-blind comparison of two pieces of equipment with their levels matched exactly. In this case, your comparison does not meet those standard criteria.

I honestly don't know if the "louder is better" argument would show up as detail, timbre, "boxiness" or whatever... I don't know how it manifests itself. Maybe those characteristics are how a slightly or softer or louder speaker presents itself. I really don't know.

As far as the efficiency ratings go, it's frequently mentioned in magazine tests that speakers do not meet the efficiency ratings that the manufacturer provides. That's another variable thrown in that could very easily result in a volume mismatch.

Testing only in that one room could skew the results as Alan said. Maybe the Axiom has a slight rise at a certain frequency that the room emphases, or the Wharfedale has a shortcoming that the room "masks" a bit. Again, I'm not saying that's the case, but it is a factor.

The Wharfedale sounds like an excellent speaker. Is it better than the Axiom? I dunno... it might be...especially for your preferences. But without that standard, matched double blind, no one could say for sure.

I know it sounds like I'm picking on you. I'm really not. I applaud your excellent review…. We need more reviews here! It sounds like you had a good listening session and found a speaker that you prefer in those circumstances, and very possibly in your home as well... But Alan's points are correct that what you heard and the results you reported may not be accurate.

It's not a matter of who's right; it's a matter of finding the equipment that you prefer, and it's very likely you've done just that.

KC_Mike,

Yes, the "detail" you may hear in a speaker that is very slightly louder will indeed disappear when its volume is reduced, even by a fraction of a dB relative to the other speaker.

If you prefer the Wharfedales, that's fine. They may be building good speakers now. I have not heard them in a careful comparison so I can't comment.

But the reason you cannot use published sensitivity figures is that unless Wharfedale adhered to industry standards in doing an anechoic measurement of sensitivity (SPL at 1 watt, 1 metre, anechoic), which it appears they did not, then you cannot make those comparisons and assume the sensitivity of each speaker is identical. Furthermore, the off-axis dispersion at all frequencies and the absorption/reflection of a particular room will affect the speakers' relative sensitivities, which is why you have to use a pink noise signal in that particular room with the measurement mike at your listening position to equalize volume levels within a fraction of a dB.

Such seemingly inconsequential variables may, in fact, cause you to choose one speaker over the other. Now, it could be that the Wharfedale is a very good speaker and a fair competitor of the Axiom M60, which might put it into the category of what, in the past, I've termed "similarly good."

These are often two speakers which, although not identical sounding, are suffiently close that your preferences may change with each musical selection--or listening location. In any case, this cannot be resolved without a blind and controlled comparison. If you prefer the Wharfedales in your test, that is entirely your choice. I simply wanted to point out the variables that may influence or change preferences when comparisons are conducted under less than optimal conditions.

Regards,

Mike, ditto what bigjohn said. What you hear is what you hear and don't let anybody tell you any different. Bravo!

I am going to agree with Alan on this point.

I have come across speakers with the same efficiency ratings....and when played back on the same equipment, the loudness was very different.

In the end, I am glad you found what you want. I just want to make sure people understand the importance of some setup items when comparing speakers. Sound level is crucial.

Now....I heard some Evo's last year....they sounded good and looked good too.

I didn't mean to be defensive, but perhaps I was a little.

Mostly, I was simply skeptical if minor SPL level could change things such as detail, etc. I hoped Alan would reply and explain whether or not it can account for any difference (which he did).

I was also glad Alan touched on the efficiency topic. It would be nice to know how Wharfedale arrived at their figure (anechoic, etc.).

In reply to:

---

I didn't mean to be defensive, but perhaps I was a little

---

It didn't come across that way to me. I think you stated your side of the debate elequantly! It's all good!

I agree with Alan about the loudness, and also about different speakers not matching their published efficiency specs.

In a recent extensive test I compared M60s to $12000 Meadowlark Blue Heron 2 speakers:

http://www.axiomaudio.com/boards/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=Advice&Number=73201 (sorry, can't get hot link HTML to work).

The test wasn't blind, but I used pink noise and a meter to normalize the volume.

The M60s had a better efficiency rating, but at a given power level the Meadowlarks were louder on the meter. I assume Axiom's numbers were correct, but Meadowlark just underrated theirs. It was a very significant difference -- about 4.5db at normal listening levels.

For the first few tests I didn't normalize the volume and the M60s sounded absolutely puny -- muddy, blurry, etc. Then I fixed the levels and it was a more even match, although the Meadowlarks were better to most listeners (though not all) on most material. At that price they'd better be.

Speaker choice is very personal. Speakers truly do have different sound. If you are happy with one make/model, then get that.

However when doing stereo A/B comparisions some basic steps must be taken:

- All amp DSP modes should be disabled. Ideally use "direct stereo", or "pure direct stereo".

- Don't use a subwoofer. Otherwise you have to somehow match relative sub levels for each speaker, and somehow switch when doing the A/B switch.

- Normalize volume levels using pink noise and a meter. Actually this will be different at different volume levels.

- Doing a fair A/B test of two 5.1 systems (not stereo) seems extremely difficult. Much more complicated than stereo, since you can't use "direct stereo" modes to quickly defeat DSP, digital time arrival, EQ, plus must worry about subwoofer crossover, etc. If using analog high-res sources (SACD, DVD-A), that's yet another variable.

I was going through a similar comparison between CD players -- actually between my CD and DVD players with the same CD. I was convinced that the DVD player sounded MUCH better (more "open", clearer vocals, better bass, yadda yadda) until Alan gave me the "match the SPL" lecture. Went back and marked the volume control with the right settings for the players and twiddled the volume at the same time I hit the source switch -- wouldn't you know it, nearly ALL the differences went away. In my case the difference was just over 2dB.

When I was A/B-ing between M2 and M60 I ran into the same thing (only the difference was more like 4dB) -- if I didn't match the levels exactly the louder speaker (M60) sounded all-round better. I would never have believed it.

I know you can't go back and repeat the tests, we're just trying to say "don't underestimate how much difference the level settings can make".

Anyways, don't lie awake at night wondering if you got the wrong speakers or anything, there are other good reviews of the Evo 30s on the net. Sounds like Wharfedale did a good job with these.

KC, it may be that Axiom overstates how loud their speakers are - when doing A/B comparisons between M3s and a slew of competitors, none were less loud (more quiet?) than the Axioms.

In the in-store demo room that would seem to be the key to sales - being louder, therefore better, than everybody else. Wharfedale has to take that into consideration, while Axiom does not (to some extent).

I haven't heard those Evo 30s, but Axiom M60s are excellent speakers that will keep you glued to the sweet spot of your couch for many months as you rediscover your CD collection. Do what you think is best, but please report back months from now with any updates to your findings.

Good Luck.

KC Mike, thank you for such an interesting and detailed post. This is very interesting to me about the discussion of what can cause bias or affect perception in A/B testing. It is striking to me that many consumers (I am only guessing here) choose speakers based on A/B/C etc comparisons in those screening rooms of electronics stores (I've always done it that way). Of all the electronics store I've visited no store has offered me an SPL meter. Looks to me like KCMike has made a very careful study (even more so than) the same way that most people chose between different speakers. The loudness factor really makes sense to me. Should we bring SPL meters to B&M stores while we stand in those A/B/C etc. cockpits?

>>Should we bring SPL meters to B&M stores while we stand in those A/B/C etc. cockpits?

A really good audio shop will do it for you. Some have a two-part switch box -- one set of connections between the amp output and the speakers, and another set of cables between pre-amp and power amp to fine-tune the level for each speaker. Flipping the switch does two things -- selects a pair of speakers AND switches in the level control which has been fine tuned for those speakers.

Haven't seen one of those for a few years now, but then again I haven't had time to play in the high end audio shops either.

Absent that, yeah either bring your SPL meter or just preface your testing by some A/B switching focusing on figuring out how much to tweak the volume control when you go back and forth.

CJ, maybe your suggestion to bring an SPL meter with you was a bit tongue-in-cheek, but as other replies have pointed out, differences in sound level can invalidate any conclusions which may have been reached. In a properly controlled blind listening test levels should be matched to within 0.1dB. When this is done electronic components such as players and receivers/amps which have have had sound differences described in rather poetic terminology suddenly become indistinguishable when their name plates and price tags are concealed. Speakers of course will differ in sound, but the point of comparative tests there is to determine a preference, not difference, and should likewise be free of influences such as difference in sound level or speaker position. Even better, the complication of a blind test is still useful with speakers to remove preconceptions as a factor in the evaluation.

Hi JohnK, actually I did not mean my suggestion of bringing an SPL meter to be tongue-in-cheek, I meant it literally. Sorry if my tone was unclear. Is that not a viable option? I'm trying to learn. And...I see what you mean (and what Alan and others in this thread meant) about the other bias of "name-branding" (my quote-not theirs) and affects of speaker position. I guess now I'll need to bring an SPL meter (not tongue-in-cheek) and a blind-fold (IS tongue-in-cheek ) and audition them ALL in my home (even MORE tongue-in-cheek ) Sounds like a fun afternoon to me!!!!

Seriously, thanks for the info, this is very informative.