Can anyone tell me if there is any reason for me to upgrade my 4 year old MT80's to the new Mt80's.
Like say I sell my 80's for $650 and put the extra towards the v2. or is this just wasting money
Not really that many differences I am aware of but enough minor things that they decided to go with the V2 designation. Whether or not it would be worth upgrading is your call. The High Gloss Cherry is back in stock till the end of the month......that alone is almost enough to make me reorder all 6 of mine.
Yes, that high gloss finish is what I was wanting also. I love the HG Piano Black but, not at an exta $1000
Is there much of a diff between the HG Cherry and the Boston Cherry? I just ordered my Boston Red M50's...it's not too late to change. Are they redder or roughly same colour but just glossier?
My first set of Axiom speakers were the Boston Cherry and I really liked the color. I am just going by the custom shop view and it looks the same just a shiny finish. I have the Black Oak and I know the Piano Black is really wicked. You should really spend the extra $30 and get a sample , cause you may kick you butt later. Sorry I cannot be of more help.
This is another reason as to why I should upgrade to the v2s'
What is your driver configuration? My original 80's were TMTMWW, where the the later v1 & current v2's are TTMMWW. If you have the "original" layout, I'd say go for it. They were a great speaker, but the revised layout does improve the overall sound.
As often as this ? comes up, maybe one of them thar sticky posts otta go up describing the changes. Amie?
it is the TTMMWW layout and the main question is ot what are the difference, but more are the changes really worth the $900 I would spend to upgrade just the Mt80's. That doesn't include the VP150 or the 4 QS8's
I had asked this question before. I believe the M80s from late 2002 to the present are pretty much the same. Mine are going on 4 years old, I bought them 6/03, and I was told the new crossover design was already implemented at the time I purchased them.
Hi Wid,
Not from late 2002. The crossover changes in the M80, which resulted in a more linear and audibly smoother upper-midrange response, were implemented in mid-2003, after a series of double-blind listening comparisons of an M80 "A" version (the original) and the modified "B" version. The "B" version won the tests by a slight but statistically significant margin and the changes were implemented immediately in on-going production of the M80s.
Regards,
Thanks Alan. That pretty much clears that up.
So only the M80s changed slightly....what about the M60ti from mid 2003 and the new V2? Did that change as well?
I asked a similar question about the M22's , but didnt get a response. Actually i revived an old thread, maybe that was my problem. my m22's were purchased on 11/23/2004
Hi ereed,
I liked the M60 a lot from the time I first auditioned the entire Axiom line in 2002 and did not suggest any changes to the M60.
I believe the M60's tonal balance has remained essentially unchanged, however, I once asked Ian last year if he'd made any changes to the M60 and he replied, "Oh, yeah," but didn't elaborate. I'll question him more closely and report back.
No audible changes have been made to the M22s. We did try a different configuration of the tweeter and midrange drivers last fall for a listening test, but the current array won the contest and stayed the same.
Regards,
MTM tried for the M22, Alan?
Nah, they put the tweeter on the back and the port on the top. Revolutionary, I tells you.
Thanks Alan,
Now I can say definitively that my m22ti's have the same sonic characteristics as the currently selling model.
Quote:
No audible changes have been made to the M22s.
Hi JohnK,
Yes, Ian was curious to try the well-known D'Appolito array, so he had some M22s built with the MTM (Mary Tyler Moore?) configuration.
He didn't tell me what I was going to be listening to--he never does, because he wants the listening comparisons to be entirely unbiased, which is the only way to make such judgments--and there was really no significant difference between the two. I seem to recall a slight preference for the non-D'Appolito but the scores were so close, it just was not significant.
Regards,
Randy,
Absolutely. We've played around in the lab with the M22's crossover to remove a slight non-linearity in the midrange, and it measured smoother in the anechoic chamber, but when the double-blind listening comparison was set up, we all preferred the existing M22's crossover! So nothing was changed. It was an interesting exercise in design theory and real-world listening.
Regards,
Alan,
If ONLY you had posted that moving, M60 tribute in the "For M60s owners only" thread!
Larry
Larry,
I remember that thread but maybe I was busy with something else--likely the build-up to the Interior Design Show in Toronto. I admit that at times my monitoring of the boards is spotty
and I often let threads run their course without comment. I'll have to go back and read through the "For M60 owners only" thread.
Regards,
Quote:
Hi JohnK,
Yes, Ian was curious to try the well-known D'Appolito array, so he had some M22s built with the MTM (Mary Tyler Moore?) configuration.
Did you and Ian consider the fact that you could market the M22 MTM as a centre channel and for the mains? This would effectivly cut down on production costs for having 2 models of MTM centres. Just curious. I love my M22s, don't get me wrong!
-Hutz
I'm not sure what the difference would be between that and the VP100--other than orientation and lesser magnetic shielding.
Quote:
I'm not sure what the difference would be between that and the VP100--other than orientation and lesser magnetic shielding.
instead of having 2 lines, one line making the M22, one line making the VP100, just make the M22, you effectivly cut down on a production line eliminating it entirely.
Except for the shape of the cabinet. The VP100s are awfully large on end, and the M22s are not ideally suited in shape to put on their sides.
Seems like RBH didn't have a problem with it...
RBH doesn't have an anti-standing-wave cabinet design like the Axioms. It's one of the signature pieces of Axiom speakers.
I am sure Axiom could come up with something, why not the VP series cabinet design with an unsealed cabinet?
Sheesh, whats up your arse today?
Quote:
Sheesh, whats up your arse today?
{real80sman clears calendar for rest of day, starts the popcorn, and waits for Ken's reply} 
Nothing, just debating.
I'm just wondering about your opposition to the VP100. Wouldn't making the line unified essentially turn the M22 into a VP100, especially to the point of changing the cabinet?
I did forget about the port difference between the two. Nevertheless...
Well it's been 8 hours, I'm out of popcorn and beer, and frankly you have both let me down. I was anticipating an entertaining afternoon! I guess I'm going to have to send Jinx a PM inviting him back....
Quote:
We've played around in the lab with the M22's crossover to remove a slight non-linearity in the midrange, and it measured smoother in the anechoic chamber, but when the double-blind listening comparison was set up, we all preferred the existing M22's crossover! So nothing was changed. It was an interesting exercise in design theory and real-world listening.
This was one of the many questions i never got around to asking during my first tour. I'm compiling a list of questions for the inevitable tour #2.
I too would be interested in hearing about changes to the M60 since i bought ours, out of curiousity.