Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Does this sound like a decent set-up?

I realize I'll probably get some biased answers, but also some fairly pertinent responses too. Here's what I'm thinking to match with my HK 330 receiver. The room is 15x18x9 and the speakers will be used almost exclusively for movies and tv.

Fronts - M22s
Center - VP100 or V150 (I've read there's little difference between the two at normal levels...is this right?)

Are these speakers a good match for the Harmon receiver? Is it worth the extra $100 or so for the VP 150?

I'm already well over my budget, so M60's are out of the question. Plus, I'll be matching them with a decent sub.

Thanks for the recommendations.

you are definitely gonna need a sub with the 22's. i think that receiver would work very well with any speakers you hook it up with. you have enough space, to where most of us would recommend the M60's, but we all understand the limitations of a budget. the 22's will be fine, but you are gonna need a sub to pick up the lower end.

i notice you didnt mention any surrounds. that is an essential part in creating the complete HT experience. if you can, i would go with the VP100 center, and try to get some QS4's. or even, get the QS4's(or QS8's) now, and get the center channel later. you can always run the receiver to create a 'phantom' center, until you can get one for real. i think you would get much better benefits from the surrounds than you would the center. just my opinion.

but, overall, you will be extremely pleased with the axiom line. ALL of their speakers are top-notch, and that HK will power them well.

good luck in your final decisions.

bigjohn

Thanks, john.

How would the M2s or M3s work as surrounds? Do the dedicated QS4s and QS8s work better for surround imaging? You've made it sound like I wouldn't get much of a benefit by upgrading to a VP150 from the VP100.

I hate to cheap out on things, but what was originally a "don't want to spend more than $3K on the everything including the TV" has quickly turned into "I'm closing in on $5K now"...LOL.

you can use the M2/M3's as surrounds, but i think you like the performance of the QS series MUCH better. their quad-polar design does a great job of projecting the sound in all directions which really create an enveloping sensation. i often compare it to being 'in' the movie, instead of just watching the movie. but, to answer your question, if a budget is in consideration, you will get good performance from the M2/M3's, but BETTER performance from the QS series.

i have never heard the VP100, but i really like my VP150. i know ray has the 100, and he is very pleased with how it sounds. so, i think you going with the 100 will be fine. but, as i stated before, i really think you might wanna consider getting the surrounds first, then getting a center later. thats just how i would do it. then again, i use blackberry jelly on my PBJ's, so what do i know?

$3K including the TV...... yes, i can see how you are having a hard time with that. i have had to piece my system together over time. and i still just have a basic 36inch tube.. i am waiting for the LCD prices to fall a bit here in the next few years to get the TV. patience i have, money i dont!!

bigjohn

Don't feel bad about working within a budget. Most of us are doing that... sometimes even buying one speaker set at a time over a year or so as budget permits. Just means you need to plan further ahead.

My QS8s just showed up yesterday so I'm still playing with them. What I can tell you is that there is a lot more apparent difference between QS surrounds and M2 surrounds than there was between VP100 center and M2 center (I had the M2s in every position at one time or another). [EDIT] I think the same would apply to the VP100 vs. VP150 difference, ie your money would be better spent upgrading the surrounds rather than the center.

In addition to the more obvious benefits, having QS surrounds gives you the same advantage as having a good center -- the sound doesn't change so much as you move around the room, ie all seating positions are good.

I would cast another vote for VP100 over VP150 in your case, spend the $$ on surrounds.

Excellent. Thanks for the tips.

John, I've worked in the reverse from your schedule. First came the beautiful 65" Mitsy Diamond. That blew the $3K budget right out of the water. Now I'm scrambling to piece together a decent HT system. From the way these axioms are described, I won't be disappointed with their performance.

Thanks again.

Sounds nice. If I were you I would just get a nice sub and some good fronts. No center, no surround until budget permits. The combination of a good sub and the clarity of the Axioms (or any equally good speaker) will astound you even without surround...

M2s and a big sub work surprisingly well, but if you can do M22s they would definitely help in your big room.

And now for the other side of the coin.

I'd be more concerned about setting up a full soundstage (did I just use that buzzword? I'll pay the fine!) before adding effects (which is what a sub really is). But I'm definately in the minority in the "home audio" crowd - it's driven by people who want the most junk-jiggling bass (as the expense of all else - SPLs are king!)... the most compressed sounding CDs. What, dynamics? Pffftt... loud - all the time - gimme 0 dBFS. Mezzopiano? I can't play the piano!

Ever seen an engineer mix with a sub? You won't... and if you do, and he's not mixing an electronica / house / dance / trance / prance / sh*t your pants album and you see him using one, walk out of the studio. Ever seen a field engineer wearing a set of cans and sitting on a sub because he's worried he might not be getting the full experience?

Again, I'm not the poster boy for who BestBuy is trying to sell to. And most here wouldn't agree with my position, but if you're looking at a 2.1 system, you've got stereo. For about the same cost (depending how much you're looking at for a sub) you could have 4.0 (is that the accepted name for fronts and surrounds?) or 5.0 - and actually be immersed in your listening experience, but your trouser train wouldn't be vibrating. There is a quick fix for that, it'll cost you about $20 and 3 D cell batteries, but I won't get into that.

Bren R.

I agree completely on the music front, but the system is targeted "almost exclusively for movies and tv".

For music I would buy a sub last, not first.

Thank you for not exploring the more unhygenic options for "bass you can feel"

In reply to:

---

I agree completely on the music front, but the system is targeted "almost exclusively for movies and tv". For music I would buy a sub last, not first.

---

Forgive me for challenging what's just widely regarded as the gospel on this by the marketing types - but, if I understand correctly:

For TV and Movies - which are naturally and often mixed and presented multi-channel (unless you're watching off-air stereo TV or older movies presented in 2 channel or mono) - the natural instinct would be to put together a stereo system w/LFE.

For music - which is almost always mixed and presented in stereo (there are some SACDs that are recorded multi-channel, I understand, but those are much less than 0.1% of available albums today) - people would lean towards a multi-channel system.

Does sound backwards when someone challenges it, don't it?

Bren R.

My head hurts. I'm going for coffee...

Does that mean either way you will want a sub?
Personally I'd say yes. I love my M22s and don't see myself giving them up (even if upgraded they will be used elsewhere). But music goes from sounding amazingly clear and foward to imadroolingidiot when I add in my sub for the low end.
Stevie Wonder's Master Blaster makes you wanna shake it on my M22s. With the sub added its like having a priest throw holy water at you saying "The power of Stevie compels you!" (to shake your booty)

jr

Yes, as another poster highlighted, this will be used mainly for movies. I've been running a 5.0 system with JBL e60 towers and it's just not cutting it with regard to bass output. There are distinct parts of movies where a 10-12" sub is required to vibrate the air in the room.

The six inch woofers in the JBLs just don't present certain lowend effects as they were intended. I imagine an m22 with even small woofers would have a tougher time creating the subsonic effects. Just my 2 uneducated cents.

>>For TV and Movies - which are naturally and often mixed and presented multi-channel (unless you're watching off-air stereo TV or older movies presented in 2 channel or mono) - the natural instinct would be to put together a stereo system w/LFE. For music - which is almost always mixed and presented in stereo (there are some SACDs that are recorded multi-channel, I understand, but those are much less than 0.1% of available albums today) - people would lean towards a multi-channel system. Does sound backwards when someone challenges it, don't it?

Well, yes, but there are mitigating circumstances

I have to admit I don't understand why people are leaning towards multi-channel systems for music but I do agree that it is happening a lot. There's no question that taking a good 2-channel system and adding the other 3.1 can make it sound even better, but I still think that FOR THE SAME MONEY you can do better with 2 channel. My receiver is set to kick into "Surround Off" for music sources.

On the movie side, the big issue there is that DVDs bring two good things -- LFE and surround. A nice sub costs about the same as a nice center + surrounds, so someone on a budget either has to cut corners in both areas or choose between LFE and surround. Based on my own experiences and speaking with friends listening to different systems, I would take a good 2.1 system over a good 5.0 system for movies on most days. Then again, the movies I watch tend to have more big explosions and "high tech unspecified bass drone" than delicate soundscapes, and the same goes for most of my friends

I can defend 2.1 for movies but not 5.0 for music.

See, now that's a well developed and thought out response, which I really appreciate. Just when my eyes had rolled back into my head at the thought of being surrounded by braying AuD1oFil3z (which is all I think about when I see the sh*thawks in Finding Nemo chattering "mine" - I laugh every time I see that), and I was second guessing why I come back here every month or so.

The aural experience is so individual that these dogmas really don't necessarily apply to all - take for instance, the audio suite here. I come in after bro's been cutting and the monitors are all set to rel. 0 dB on the bass pot and -9dB on the treble pot. Some people have AM Radio ears. *laughs*

He says it's because he was spending long hours on voiceovers and the treble was "fatiguing" but I've seen his home speakers too... circa 1982 - 8" paper cones... and we don't need no stinkin' tweeters.

Bren R.

A friend and I used to do synth repair and mods back in the analog age, just as the world was starting to make the first moves from US analog to Japanese digital synths.

Doing sound in one of the local dives (the Horseshoe for anyone in TO area) for one of the local bands (FM). Nash (sort of the guitarist except he played electric mandolin and violin) kept storming out to my buddy on the board and complaining that the levels were too low. My friend Rob was one of those "slow boil" kind of people so he just kept raising the levels a couple of dB each time trying to keep the sound clean.

First complaint on the second set my buddy snapped. Nash walked back to the stage; Rob pushed all the sliders up to the top and left them there. The sound was awful -- distorted, feedback coming in and out, you could barely hear the instruments.

After the second set, Nash asked my friend if he would do sound for them all the time. He was the only guy who "understood what he wanted". Go figure...

The Horseshoe isn't... that much of a dive.

You've obviously never been to the Royal Albert Arms or the Collective Cabaret in Winnipeg. The latter of which had a dead DJ stuck in it's wall rotting for a year and no one noticed the smell!!! Not that I'm against DJ death... I mean there should be a national holiday where they're beaten to death with the disembodied limbs of Nu Country artists and their heads left spinning on their turntables with the L33T B33T KRUE mats. But I digress.

Bren R.

OK, I've gotta know the story on that one. Or are you just pulling our legs?

Here's the Fascional, er, National Post's story on it:

"DJ's mummified body found behind wall in club - Winnipeg mystery

Chris Wattie, National Post

Saturday, December 06, 2003

Some time in the early hours of a cold October day last year, a young disc jockey stumbled into a Winnipeg cabaret and disappeared. This week, police found the mummified body of Eduardo Sanchez entombed behind a wall in the basement of the popular nightclub, 14 months after he was last seen alive. While the case is reminiscent of an Edgar Allan Poe story, police say there was no foul play in the 21-year-old's death, just the lingering question of what exactly he was doing behind the wall where he became trapped and died.

"The cause of death was determined to be positional asphyxiation," said Constable Bob Johnson, a Winnipeg police spokesman. "We don't know for what reason he went between these two walls, but some time while he was in there he either fell, [or] passed out -- we don't necessarily know the circumstances -- but he got himself positioned in a place where he was unable to breathe properly due to the restrictions on his chest.

"It wouldn't have taken a long time ... He probably would've been dead within minutes."

Police were called back to the nightclub -- the last place Mr. Sanchez was seen alive -- when neighbours complained about a foul odour coming from the Village Cabaret. If not for a recent citywide ban on smoking in bars, investigators said, they might never have found the body. Neighbours of the club, in a trendy downtown Winnipeg neighbourhood, said they noticed the foul smell more than a year ago, but put it down to spilled beer and stale cigarette smoke.

"Sometimes it reeked of sewage when you came in in the morning," Kerrie Drine, a business owner in a neighbouring building, told The Winnipeg Free Press. "We had to light incense to get rid of it." But when the municipal smoking ban came into effect in September, the smell persisted and someone eventually notified police. "They took the whole wall down," Const. Johnson said. Using a special camera borrowed from a local duct cleaning company, police found the body wedged into a narrow space between a stone foundation wall and a newer wall. The camera was snaked into the claustrophobic gap between the old wall and the newer one, which police said was built several years ago. Officers soon spotted the badly decomposed body of Mr. Sanchez.

"It was pretty close to mummification; it was certainly in the early stages of it," Const. Johnson said.

He said Mr. Sanchez had entered the gap between the walls from an opening at one end and had managed to wriggle through almost its entire 23-metre length, through a gap ranging from 20 to 60 centimetres wide. "In some places there was enough room to move around, in others it was a very tight fit." Mr. Sanchez, also known as DJ Phonosys and Grandmasta Sanchez, was last seen by friends in the early morning hours of Oct. 12, 2002. He made an $80 withdrawal from his bank account at 12:48 a.m. from a bank machine in the front entrance of the nightclub. Just before 3 a.m., he spoke with three friends not far from the club and was last seen walking back toward the building.

Family, friends and police searched the Winnipeg area for weeks after his disappearance, but found nothing. Abbey Sanchez broke down in tears while reading a statement on Thursday about the discovery of her brother, which she called "our family's worst nightmare."

"This news definitely is not what we had anticipated," she said.

Const. Johnson said there is some evidence Mr. Sanchez had been drinking on the night of his disappearance and tests are being conducted to attempt to determine whether alcohol was a factor in his death. "But the body had degraded so much that the quality of the samples was very,
very poor. We may not get anything at all."

He said the question of why Mr. Sanchez crawled behind the wall will probably never be answered. "People will, I think for years, be asking the question: What the heck was he doing in there?" Const. Johnson said. "And we just don't have a good answer to that, to be honest. We
don't know why he was there ... and likely will never know." He said police considered the possibility that he was looking to retrieve something left or somehow dropped there earlier, but they found nothing behind the wall other than Mr. Sanchez's body."

Though the term "trendy downtown neighbourhood" isn't how I'd describe Osborne Village, unless trendy means hangout for the urine soaked dregs of humanity and rich kids who want to piss off mommy and daddy by slumming.

Bren R.

that is simply an amazing story.. i am completely beside myself? thats the kinda stuff that urban legends are made of. but this one is for really real... WOW?

bigjohn

The irony here is that before the place was called Village Caberet, it was named Die Machine ('die' being the German term i believe).

Perhaps the next local story Bren could comment on is the one about young teenage kids stealing cars and putting ice blocks on their gas pedals as the unmanned vehicle goes ramming into apartment buildings or off bridges.

Welcome to Winnipeg.

Bren speaks the truth on this one, a pretty amazing story really. I confess that I've been to the Cabaret a number of times when I used to live close to Winnipeg. My brother lived nearby and it was the only bar in the neighbourhood that didn't play ear-shattering dance or country music.

They had me hooked the first time I walked by it on a Friday or Saturday night and I could hear the Buzzcocks coming from upstairs....

(it certainly is not the nicest looking place though)

oh and i should add another great thing about the Cabaret was that any time I was drinking there, my "party" was likely to have been the only ones in there. It's like having your own personal DJ!

I wonder why nobody went there.....

In reply to:

---

I wonder why nobody went there...

---

Cholera, diptheria, bovine anthrax, avian bird flu, African swine fever, rodent parvovirus, ebola, necrotizing fasciitis (Rita McNeil caught it there, doctors gave her 10 years to live!), the common cold, the uncommon cold, uncommon valour... etc.

Bren R.

Did you think you could just sneak back in here without any fanfare?

Nice to see you back, chess.

Nothing gets past you Peter.
NOTHING.