I'm looking to upgrade my centre channel. I'm currently using an old Mirage one, and it's the only part of my system that isn't timbre matched - the rest are M60 V1's in the front and QS4 V1's for the surrounds. Am looking to get either the VP150 V4 or VP180 V4, and am leaving more towards the latter, but I worry that it might be overkill when the fronts are M60's. Has anyone had a chance to hear how they perform in this kind of setup? Do they sound overpowering compared to the M60's? And should I be concerned about a V4 speaker not being well-matched to a system of V1's?

I have heard the VP160 and it was simply amazing! It blew my VP150 away. I haven't heard the VP180 but after owning the VP150, I would stay away from that type of tweeter configuration.

Having done some blind tests with the VP180 and VP150 with both M100's and M50's, the VP180 is a more powerful performer.

Based on the results of the blind tests, I would recommend using a 100 Hz crossover with the VP150, while 60 Hz is fine with the VP180.

Both the 150 and 180 sounded great (the tweeter arrangement in the 150 works just fine in real rooms), but the probable best choice to go with your M60's would be the VP160. The difference in timbre matching won't be as much of an issue as you might think. For the $$$, a good choice.

Thanks, Mojo. What was it about the tweeter configuration that you didn't like on the VP150?

Craig, I don't know what your definition of a "real room" is. It's certainly NOT your ginormous man-cave...LOL!

I sit exactly 8 feet away from the 150 and on centre. It sounds alright...certainly nothing like the VP160. If I sit anywhere to the left or the right, all bets are off.

Mdavis, the 150 and the 180 have an unconventional tweeter location. The 160 is a D'Appolito configuration which is proven in the industry.

Andrew from Axiom did a beautiful job on the 160. I'd love to hear the opinion from someone who has heard the 160 and 180 in the same environment.

Honestly, just buy the 160. You'll love it. And I'll envy you .

Thanks for that, Craig. I'm tempted to spend a bit extra and go for the VP180 as it seems like such a great speaker. Why do you feel the VP160 is more likely to be a better match with the M60s?

The 160 is quite a bit less expensive than the 180, and is essentially an M60 in center channel format. IT's objectively the best choice to match your mains.

I run a VP180v4 center with M60ti mains (older than your v1's) and am very happy with the combination. Guessing you're looking at 180 rather than 160 because of height ?


No risk of this -- just make sure levels are set correctly and everything will be fine. IIRC the VP180 was a couple of dB more efficient than the VP100 it replaced, but what that meant was that rather than having to boost the center channel a few dB like I did with the VP100 I could set everything to the same level and get matched SPLs.


I found the matching was very close with pink noise testing (which really exaggerates even tiny differences), and no distinguishable difference with normal content.

I went from VP100 to VP180 and the difference was huge (duh ! :)). IMO it really helps having a full-range center channel even if you are crossing over at 80 Hz like me.

I purchased my VP180 before the VP160 was introduced. I probably would have gone with a 180 anyways (I lean towards the view that if anything the center channel should be even more capable than the mains) but AFAICS I would have been really happy with either.

For what it's worth, the VP160 is actually the center channel that I (and a bunch of other people) were bugging Axiom to produce. And they did !!

Bridgman, how does the 180 sound off-axis?

Can't comment on Vp180 but the drivers on the VP160 and an M60 are identical.
I have the 160 with M80s and the 160 is phenomenal, No trouble at all with my M80s. Even of axis at low volume dialogue is crystal clear.
Have read in other forums the driver configuration of the VP160 has best of axis response.
But with the size and beauty of the VP180 I would think the off axis sound would be pretty close.

How does the off axis on the VP180 perform???

I'll go do some testing. Never really thought about it before -- the VP180 is so wide it pretty much reaches both sides of my HT area anyways

Thanks a bunch, Mojo. I hadn't realized that the 150 and 180 were using non-standard tweeter placements for centre channel speakers. Off-axis performance is important to me as well.

Aesthetically, I'd have preferred a centre speaker that was less tall, but that's not the end of the world, if the performance is everything it appears to be, and certainly, the fact that it matches with the M60's is a major reason to go that route.

I'm convinced!

Placement-wise, it will be going in front of a large front projection screen. Because of this, I'll need to have it on the floor and not on a stand (which would put it too high). Given this, I presume I'd be best off going with the "inverted" option, that angles the components slightly upwards?

I have to admit, the long width of the 180 (which I presumed ensured a crazy good range for off-axis listening positions) coupled with it being lower in height were two of the reasons I was strongly leaning towards getting them.

I hadn't realized that until tonight. It definitely makes sense for me to go with the 160.

Thanks a ton, everyone!

Amazing post, Bridgeman. Thanks!

I have a VP180 paired up with my V2 M60s and LOVE it. Of course, I jumped on it at eh "pre-order" price and before the VP160 was announced. I have heard great things about the VP160 as well.

This, for me, was an upgrade from my original V2 VP150. Night and day difference.

I would say that if your room is moderate but not super huge, go with the VP160. Save the $$$ vs. the VP180 and be happy knowing that it is a great center speaker.

My 0.02$. I'd buy the 160.

I dont know if this is possible in your setup or not, but raising the center channel to the position your mains create their 2ch phantom image makes a huge difference in creating a seamless and realistic frount soundstage. (Tweeters aligned). This is especially true for bluray concerts. Game changing.

I'd also agree with bridgman that a center channel should be as capable if not more than the mains and carefully level matched with a measuring device. (Not just by ear.). This also helps reach that smooth seamless soundstage up front.

Most importantly, enjoy your new kick ass center channel!

Agreed and please don't place your beautiful $900 center in a cabinet!

My previous theater spaces had the VP150 either above or below my 104" screen, and with the right angling up or down, it sounded pretty good, but now with the VP180 beast and a 138" screen, I put it directly behind the screen. Here is a recent picture with my screen wall town down a bit. I have the M60s on small risers to get the tweeters at a better height, and the VP180 up at a height to match those tweeters. Sounds amazing. Just do the same, if at all possible, with the VP160.


Here are some pictures comparing the VP180 size to the VP150. These are from back when I first go the VP180:




And the VP180 next to a pair of M60s:




So what I am saying here is that the VP180 is a beast!

I'd still go with my last statement, and what others said, and go with the VP160 as it is a great design and should be matched super close to your older M60s.

I agree that the 160 might be your better bet, though I have not heard the 180.

In either case, though, I don't think you will get the best performance by placing the speaker on the ground.

I agree with others that say that the VP160 is the best choice. It seems to be like a superior design and is cheaper, which makes it really nice.

However, placing a speaker meant for a stand on the floor is a really compromised placement. It might be that you may not like the sound of even a well designed speaker if it is poorly placed. Even if you can get a stand to get it 12 or 18" off the floor would probably be fine. Or you may want to consider an acoustically transparent screen. But, if you go that route you can get a single M60 and just put that behind the screen.

Thanks, everyone. I'd love to raise it a little, but I've only got 17 inches to play with below the screen. Given the height of the VP160, that would only realistically allow me to raise it by about 5" or 6" at best. Would that, combined with the "inverted" option, be a worthwhile thing to do?

I've currently got my Mirage centre channel on the floor, and while I've no doubt that it could be made to sound better, it sounds very good even in such a compromised placement.

IMO yes, I would raise it as much as possible even if that is only 5-6 inches.

Ditto BridgDude.

If you need ideas for raising a speaker 5" off the ground, I humbly offer the following:

Definitely going to raise it by 5". Possibly not via the tin can method.

mdavis ... something like this:

http://www.auralex.com/product/propad-propad-xl/

Those look great, Craig. Given the unusual dimensions and weight of the 160, I'm thinking the best route may be to go with Axiom's official stand at a custom height of 5".

After searching for it, I see that the custom height option is cleverly hidden in plain site on the main product page for the stand.

Definitely the best approach. In fact, I need to get taller posts for my VP180. Thanks to you, now I know this option exists.

Nice speaker stand you have there. Personally I find that Campbell's Tomato soup gives the richest sound, but the Habitant is a fine choice as well.

Absolutely agree.

Timbre matching used to be all the argument years ago but i haven't heard much about it in years.
Overblown indeed, esp. when you are talking about speakers from the same brand that use the same parts.

I have heard both in my home at the same time. I found the VP180 was not as good for off axis listening in my room but it offered slightly better lower mid range performance than the VP160, ie. the gunshots in U-571 during the boarding scene had more impact with the 180 vs 160. If I recall there were some other minor sonic differences much like M80 vs M60.

Prior to my 180, I had the 160 as well and I found much like yourself, the 160 to have a little better off-axis performance than the VP180. I believe the design difference, although subtle, is to provide slightly better vertical(up/down)sound performance in the 180. Although I never listened to them at the same time, based on my best memory and to my ears anyway, their differences are really quite minor. The only reason I made the change was that because at the time, there was a sale on custom finish upgrades(my VP180 is piano gloss black)all to match my L/R M80s along with receiving real good trade-in value for my VP160, otherwise, I really doubt I would have made the change. So, in other words, strictly to satisfy my vanity.

Now that I am going through a major entertainment/rec room renovation, for the sake of handling ability, weight and space, in some respects, frankly, I wish I had the 160 back.