Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

The Official $3,000 Speaker Evaluation / Home Audition Event

152K views 287 replies 51 participants last post by  kingnoob 
#1 ·
The Official $3,000 Speaker Evaluation / Home Audition Event




Introduction

IT IS HERE! We are in the midst of the Home Theater Shack $3,000 Speaker Evaluation event, as I write this. Six pairs of speakers are on the premises, and over the next two days, Feb. 21 and 22, we will hear a lot of great tunes on them. There will be lots to report.

This is not a shootout. Each speaker will be set up for its best sound in this room and evaluated on its own merits.

For now, this post (#1) will be used as the summary post and will be updated through the weekend and beyond. Check back often - we will tell you ih later posts when this summary has grown.


The Speakers

The criteria for the speakers used in this event was floorstanding speakers with an MSRP between $2500 ($2499) and $3500 per pair as delivered for the event. Any finish was acceptable. Speakers requiring external DSP or an active crossover did not qualify. Since the emphasis is on 2-channel music use, speakers made for that purpose were favored, although some may be perfectly acceptable for home theater use as well.

Sadly, some of the speakers selected via the readers' poll were not available because the manufacturers chose not to participate. We cannot read minds to know all their reasons, but can only conclude that it is their loss not being included. We go above and beyond the call of duty to ensure that each model evaluated gets the fairest treatment possible by three sets of experienced ears. We will not, however, shy from the truth or be edited by the suppliers, even if they are HTS sponsors. In the end, we are confident that this serves all concerned in the best way possible.

We deeply appreciate those who DID choose to participate, some on short notice to fill in at the last minute. We ended up with a great mix, including some noteworthy technology offerings: one RAAL tweeter model and one concentric mid-tweeter model. We were looking forward to hearing every one of them by the time the big event arrived.

Here are the speakers included in the event:

The Room

Cedar Creek Cinema/Two-Channel Room, Luverne, Alabama. The most recent change to the room is that the equipment cabinet which used to occupy most of the space below the cinema screen has been removed. We deemed that removing the cabinet would improve the soundstage and imaging. Total changes relative to the diagram below:
  • Front equipment rack removed.
  • Corner traps added in rear corners.
  • Additional side absorptive panels.
  • Front subwoofer cabinets turned toward front corner traps with 4-inch gap (cabinets at 45° angle relative to the room) with dissipation panels on their backs (toward room center)..
  • Cutouts in stage structure allowing Left and Right Mains to be on the main floor within one foot of the front wall.


The room is heavily treated. Some might think the amount of treatment is too much for two-channel speaker evaluation, but I think it is just right. More on this in a summary post below. The measured RT60 is 0,2 to 0.3 second.




The Evaluators

The evaluators for this event have proven their ability to work together to provide what some describe as some of the most in-depth and worthwhile loudspeaker reviews on the web. They are:
  • Joe Alexander, Madison, Wisconsin. Joe is an avid audiophile and staff writer for Home Theater Shack.
  • Leonard Caillouet, Gainesville, Florida. Leonard has installed and set up speakers professionally for much of his life. He is a Moderator and Administrator and one of the chief technical gurus for Home Theater Shack.
  • Wayne Myers, Lincoln, Nebraska. A musician and lover of great sound, Wayne has a degree in Audio Technology and reviews speakers and headphones for Home Theater Shack.

Evaluation Tracks

We have gone back and forth a bit on how many test tracks to use. In the end. we decided that a certain number of tracks should be common, that all evaluators would listen to each pair of speakers with them. and that each evaluator could then have a number of tracks of his choice. We each have our favorites that we have used many times before and know exactly how they should sound. And each has his favorite music styles to listen with. Each evaluator spent one-half hour with every speaker pair at its ideal setup, plus brief listens close to the wall (zero toe and zero listening angle) and with Audyssey MultEQ.

No code has to be inserted here.


Associated Equipment


  • OPPO BDP-105 Universal Player - We will be using the 105 as the source for this evaluation. All of the tracks used during this evaluation event were extracted using either dBPowerAmp or Exact Audio Copy (EAC) from the original CDs, and were written to a USB flash drive and accessed for playback via the 5509's front-panel USB port. We appreciate OPPO being a sponsor here at HTS.


  • Onkyo PR-SC5509 9.2-Channel Network A/V Preamplifier - Our preamp/processor for the event: Onkyos' 5509. It is a highly capable processor and very well regarded as one of the top preamp processors available. We decided in this speaker listening event to include a brief evaluation for each speaker pair with Audyssey MultEQ engaged to see how it affects the soundstage and image clarity and "evens out" the room's influence on frequency response. The 5509, with MuiltEQ XT32 capability, made this a breeze. Of course, its 192kHz/32bit Burr-Brown DACs and specs like 0.05% total noise plus distortion (20 Hz–20 kHz, Half power) ensure it to remain completely transparent. We appreciate Onkyo being a sponsor here at HTS.


  • Emotiva XPR-5 Five-Channel Reference Power Amplifier - The XPR-5 is a fully discrete, dual differential, high current, short signal path Class A/B amplifier with a Class-H power supply. The power supply rails are modulated to stay a minimum number of volts above the amplifier's output. This yields an efficient design that will stay cool while driving a pair of 8 Ohm speakers to 500 W or a pair of 4 Ohm speakers to 750 W. Having lots of clean power available is important when evaluating two-channel speakers. With the XPR-5 there is never a question or concern about being able to drive the speakers under test cleanly and reliably. Thanks to Emotiva for being a sponsor at HTS.


Thoughts On Placing Expensive Speakers Close To A Wall

Most speakers in most rooms will not sound that great when placed close to a wall. Remember that we are talking about fairly serious, discriminating listening, mainly to music, with roughly $3,000 worth of speakers. Our belief is that anyone willing to spend that kind of money on speakers will be serious enough about good sound to find the best possible way to set them up and get the absolute best performance from them, even if it means moving them to that desired location temporarily when said listener feels like getting a serious dose of great music with great sound.

There are speakers that do not sound too bad close to the wall. But none, in our experience, can give a deep, engaging soundstage when too close to the wall. If one has to place a pair of speakers close to a wall, it would be better to save money and buy a pair for a few hundred dollars - check out our Reviews Area for candidates - and call it good. A $3,000 pair of speakers might sound a little better there, but will not sound great and it is highly doubtful you will be getting your "money's worth" from those speakers with them shoved up against a wall.

Having said all that, some readers have expressed interest in doing exactly what we do not suggest, or they are at least curious enough to ask about it, and may place an expensive set of loudspeakers - like the ones we evaluate here - next to a wall. After all, it is their money to do with as they please. So, having made our recommendation, we have chosen to be as helpful as possible and briefly listen to these speakers close to a wall. This information will be included with the individual reviews.


Thoughts On Equalizing High-End Speakers

There was a time when it simply was not done. That time is past. There are numerous ways it can be accomplished these days...
  • With pinpoint frequency precision.
  • Using exactly the type and amount of correction desired.
  • With phase/time correction if desired.
  • Without adding noise or distortion.
  • Without adding audible artifacts.
We performed extensive listening tests with carefully-applied Audyssey MultEQ correction and with sparingly-applied Parametric EQ (PEQ) correction and are convinced that correction can be achieved without negative effects, and that categorical claims that such correction causes audible corruption are not provable in blind testing and are without merit. As a matter of fact, we are witnesses to some who actually prefer equalized sound.

In our case, we chose to finish the evaluation sequence by applying Audyssey MultEQ XT32 to see how well it could accomplished the following:
  • Lift drooping high frequencies resulting from off-axis listening angles.
  • Even out room-interaction frequency response variations.
  • Tighten and improve soundstage and imaging.
The results are reported with each evaluation.


Our Test Sequence

Here is the sequence that each speaker pair went through:
  1. Close-To-Wall Evaluations 1 & 2.
    • Set up 1.
      • Speaker Location - Set close to the front wall, pointed straight at the Listening Position (LP). We used a previously-decided-upon setup location typical of a home theater environment or a general-purpose room where speakers have to be close to a wall for some reason.
      • Distance from back of the speaker to wall: 2 ft.
      • Distance from center of front baffle to side wall of the room: 5 ft.
      • Distance apart: 9 ft 4 in.
      • Zero Listening Angle (speakers pointed straight at the LP).
    • Run REW Sweeps L & R, check for good matching and proper function.
    • Set up 2.
      • Same as above.
      • Zero Toe In (speakers pointed straight at the back wall).
    • Run REW Sweeps L & R.
    • Evaluate 2. Three to five minutes listening time by each evaluator.
    • Set up 1
    • Evaluate 1. Three to five minutes listening time by each evaluator.
  2. Ideal Location Evaluation 3.
    • Set up 3.
      • Ideal setup location is determined for deep soundstage and sharp imaging. This could take from a few minutes to 45 minutes.
    • Run REW Sweeps L & R.
    • Evaluate 3. Thirty minutes listening time by each evaluator.
  3. Audyssey MultEQ Evaluation 4.
    • Run MultEQ Setup
    • Run REW Sweeps L & R.
    • Evaluate 4. Three to five minutes listening time by each evaluator.
  4. Record physical measurements.


Initial Results

As usual, there were some surprises. We heard some soundstage and imaging that were to die for. While we did not expect any of them to sound terrific in a close-to-the wall setting, a few actually sounded fairly good there, and one sounded VERY good. One model sounded downright awful close to the wall, and then had its revenge by giving us one of the better soundstage / imaging performances in its final setup that we heard over the weekend.

We were amazed to see how a very small difference in listening angle - one degree - that's right, one single degree - could transform a soundstage from lackluster ho-hum to WOW.

Some of these are beastly heavy monsters. And some finishes were eye-popping.

It has been invaluable to have the three sets of ears and listening perspectives together for these events. One evaluator will hear a certain quality and be ready to rave about it, making note of some other "minor factor," and another evaluator will have found that "minor factor" to be more like a showstopper, adding in his notes only a mention of what the first evaluator was crazy about. All in all, our perspectives came to rest with a great deal of consensus, but the contrasting views will no doubt stand out in our final write-ups.

One of the early pairs we listened to - I will never reveal which - got a mixed set of reactions initially. A few hours later, one of the group said he thought they might deserve a second listen in a different location. So we investigated further and found that they did, indeed, give a better performance there. We keep each other grounded, providing checks and balances and perspective balancers at every turn.

In the end, loads of fun were had by all. Terrific hosts and savory grilled meats did not hurt one bit. Cheese curds from Wisconsin and chocolate meltaways from Nebraska made their way to the snack bar. I doubt anyone lost weight with all the treats and good food available. The moderate Alabama weather treated us nicely. Gracey, the Cedar Creek Cinema cat, reminded of us her mascot status and insisted on a scratch or two whenever we came out for a break.

And discussions are under way for what our next evaluation event might entail.

In the mean time, stay tuned for our detailed results. We sill start feeding them into the following posts in the next couple of days.
 
See less See more
8
#120 ·
Then you don't have to read the reviews. You are welcome to audition the speakers for yourself and report your findings with whatever music you choose. It just so happens that most of what the group of reviewers listen to is not classical. We all have some in our collections but it does not represent the bulk of our preference. We report our experiences with music that we are familiar with and listen to. Certainly there are much better reference recordings than many of our test tracks. We try to select music that reveals something about the speaker and is fun for us to listen to.

You are welcome to suggest some tracks for the next round of evaluations, if there is one. We will consider it.
 
#137 · (Edited)
You don't need "oodles" of time. It takes less than 30 seconds to perform a simple head area sweep. I'm not sure what is giving you guys the impression that you need some insane amount of time.

However, the semi-anechoic on/off axis measurements would take more time. I won't get in to it here but the short story is it would take at least 20 minutes per speaker and the design would dictate that. That said, your efforts would be much more improved doing this and providing a spatial average. Those two sets of data is all anyone needs to make a strong and more objective correlation between what you fellas are reporting in your subjective analysis as it tells you what the speaker is doing more than a single point measurement. If you haven't read the link I provided previously, please do. It's an excellent summation of the pros and cons of various speaker measurements.

I know you're trying to cram a lot already in to a relatively short weekend. Next time, I'd be more than happy to help if I'm available as I'm within a few hours' drive of Sonnie. I'm genuine with that offer. Sonnie and I have discussed me possibly joining you guys in the future. I'd be more than happy to pick up the measurements end if it helps lighten your load and means getting even better data on the speakers tested.

If you'd like to understand my background, here's my test site. I'm not some kid spouting off buzzwords to look cool. I do have a legitimate interest in bettering our communities' understanding of speaker performance.
http://medleysmusings.com

Regarding OT: I really don't want to keep going over this here just as you guys don't. It is better suited elsewhere. I definitely don't want to take away from the subject of this thread but my points are not invalid and I really think we can work together on this to make these shoot-outs you're doing have even more weight for the objective crowd. However, I'm responding to you in this thread because the response to me was written here. Porting all of this convo to a new thread isn't something I can easily do, but I'd imagine a mod should be able to (based on my experience as a mod on other forums). If you guys want to carry this over to another thread feel free to do so and we can pick up there. I imagine Sonnie would be more than willing to do so if you guys don't have those mod privileges. Just let me know if you do. Or , shoot me a PM and we can chat that way.

Edit: I am NOT trying to be 'that' guy who pops his head in and tells you how you're doing something wrong. Trust me, I deal with that stuff all the time with my measurements, so I know how it feels. I am trying to help, though, with constructive feedback and we can carry on discussion on how to perform said measurements or possibly how to let me help you guys and maybe perform the measurements, with Sonnie's permission, in future tests. I shot Sonnie a message asking if he can help split this to another thread so we don't keep mucking this one up. :)

- Erin
 
#138 ·
You don't need "oodles" of time. It takes less than 30 seconds to perform a simple head area sweep. I'm not sure what is giving you guys the impression that you need some insane amount of time.
You have taken my statement out of context. I am well aware of the time it takes to make several measurements around the head area.

However, the semi-anechoic on/off axis measurements would take more time. I won't get in to it here but the short story is it would take at least 20 minutes per speaker and the design would dictate that. That said, your efforts would be much more improved doing this and providing a spatial average. Those two sets of data is all anyone needs to make a strong and more objective correlation between what you fellas are reporting in your subjective analysis as it tells you what the speaker is doing more than a single point measurement. If you haven't read the link I provided previously, please do. It's an excellent summation of the pros and cons of various speaker measurements.

I know you're trying to cram a lot already in to a relatively short weekend. Next time, I'd be more than happy to help if I'm available as I'm within a few hours' drive of Sonnie. I'm genuine with that offer. Sonnie and I have discussed me possibly joining you guys in the future. I'd be more than happy to pick up the measurements end if it helps lighten your load and means getting even better data on the speakers tested.

If you'd like to understand my background, here's my test site. I'm not some kid spouting off buzzwords to look cool. I do have a legitimate interest in bettering our communities' understanding of speaker performance.
http://medleysmusings.com

Regarding OT: If you guys want to carry this over to another thread feel free to do so and we can pick up there. I imagine Sonnie would be more than willing to do so if you guys don't have those mod privileges. I'm responding to you in this thread because the response was written here and me trying to port all of this convo isn't something I can easily do. But a mod should be able to (based on my experience as a mod on other forums). Just let me know if you do. Or , shoot me a PM and we can chat that way.

- Erin
I am aware that you are a very capable tester. So, we believe, are we. We are also painfully aware of the real-world extra time it takes to add a single seemingly simple step to our process, how that will shorten our already short nights of sleep, and how an additional person, however capable, may or may not be helpful in getting more done. Sincerely, there is no disrespect intended, and as I have already said, we are considering how best to expand our review coverage for future events. Your input IS appreciated.
 
#141 ·
Looks like a lot of thought went into this and I will spend some time going through the whole thread for details, but I came up with a question pretty quickly.

Yuri Honig Trio's Walking on the Moon is a piece that I use for evaluation as well (although apparently looking for different things than the reviewers) and looked at the comments on how it was perceived and I became confused.....

Is there more than 1 version of this?

I'm familiar with a Saxophone version and kept seeing comments about the Trumpet. :scratch:
 
#142 ·
Great job on the Phase Tech review guys! My taste in music leans toward vocals, and especially female vocals, as well as piano and percussive instruments. My experience with this speaker at RMAF, particularly with vocals and delicate percussion, lines up pretty well with your observations. This probably explains why I like the speaker so much. It was interesting that Joe thought for vocals it sounded almost like a ribbon tweeter.

How often is it that the speaker position that offers the best imaging and soundstaging characteristics also exhibits the best low-frequency performance? Like, never! While reading Wayne's comments, I kept wondering what would happen to the low-frequency anomalies you experienced if a little EQ were applied. I'm glad you guys went ahead and did a little testing with Audyssey for all the speakers, and it sounds like that pretty well took care of the bottom end nicely. Is that a fair assessment of your experience?

I suspect you found low frequency improvement in all the speakers with Audyssey, and that it was by far the most beneficial change.
 
#144 ·
That is pretty accurate. At home when I have more time with a speaker setup, it is fun to see how little EQ is needed, using parametric EQ, to tame the response. A soundstage (SS) is a terrible thing to waste, and it seems the better it is the more delicate it is and the easier it can be disrupted. Often only a few bands is all it takes:
  • A HF shelf to lift the HF droop from off-axis listening position
  • One or two broad bands to tame the overall profile of LF room effects
Right now a setup at home is giving killer results with only 3 bands of correction (foobar2000 + VST Wrapper + PEQ plugin).
It is actually quite impressive that Audyssey MultEQ can even out a speaker's response without destroying SS/imaging, can even improve them sometimes. And it is so easy.

Naysayers will insist that correction drains the life out of the sound, and I will agree that a supersoundstage (SSS:bigsmile:) might be disrupted by anything but the more sparing correcting, but for 99% of applications MultEQ or PEQ can give fantastic results.
 
#143 ·
Nice job guys, your speaker reviews are excellent IMHO. I have two pair of Ascend Towers w/RAALs, one of which will be used as surrounds when I finish a dedicated A/V space. I sure wish I had made plans to get a pair out to you folks for evaluation purposes. I don't know how Joe got out there, if he drove he could have picked them up from me, I'm in Northern IL. In fact, I met Joe at one of the SE WI GTGs at Terry's place.

In any case, if we can make arrangements, and you'd be interested in reviewing a pair of Ascend Towers in the near future, I'm game.

Jay
 
#153 ·
No offense taken at all. I just don't want anyone to think that I am in any way influenced by any manufacturer in what I write.

Those who know me at all will know that I am no shill for anyone and will speak my mind. But guests might get the wrong idea when the words are so similar.
 
#154 ·
This is part of the reason why I (and I think many others) put so much stock in what you all have to say. I feel confident that you will be forthcoming in reporting your impressions and opinions, both the good and the not-so-good. Carry on!

Now, where are those other reviews?? :foottap:

:bigsmile:
 
#168 ·
As if I have ever had any real control over anything in my life!:rolleyesno:

Truly, this is such a team effort. Without the wonderful efforts of Leonard and Joe, and of course Sonnie's hosting and room and the inertia he has given the entire series and HTS as a home for it all... it would be a pitifully empty effort. Hats off to all involved.

Nice review. I haven't noticed this "wander" with Dynamic EQ. Sounds quite strange to me. I wonder (haha) if it has more to do with the dipole design of the MLs. Variations might be heard at the MLP that are exaggerated by the boost. Maybe a comb filtering effect? Just a guess, but I intend to test tomorrow to see if I hear what you're talking about.
I will test at home with the same tracks and another set of speakers.

Would the Axiom bass boominess benefit from plugging one or more of the ports?
I was wondering the same of the Phase Technology. I owned the 9.1's and if I recall they came with port plugs.
I had artificial bass reinforcement with my Axiom M3s on stands due to their placement in in corners (close to 2 walls) requiring a -6 Db Bass EQ in my AV receiver. After reading an article at Axiom about their new Port Plugs (availability TBA), I fashioned my own to see if they would help. They did in spades.

The M3s' bass became tight again & I was able to remove all EQ out of my system & return it to flat. I would think that Port Plugs would work with the M100s as well in rooms that reinforce bass response.

BTW, this phenomena was not just for my M3s. Other speakers that I had used there exhibited the same type of behavior...

TAM
Excellent info. Alternate port tuning might be just the ticket for the Axioms in some setups.

I want to be clear that I did not find the Axiom boomy, once it was placed optimally. I found the balance a bit more to the bass than I would prefer, but not to a degree that I would find bothersome. A speaker, for me, can have a bit too much bass and not be boomy. Boomy to me is a combination of excess bass and smearing of bass detail, uncontrolled and/or under damped sounding. Near the wall the detail was lost but out into the room it was quite good. The difference was quite striking. I would consider the performance near the wall one of the poorest and out into the room one of the best.
Well put, Leonard. To clarify my own assessment, in the final position the M100 bass was tight and controlled, just stronger in balance than I would have preferred - NOT boomy.
 
#162 ·
Would the Axiom bass boominess benefit from plugging one or more of the ports?
 
#166 ·
I had artificial bass reinforcement with my Axiom M3s on stands due to their placement in in corners (close to 2 walls) requiring a -6 Db Bass EQ in my AV receiver. After reading an article at Axiom about their new Port Plugs (availability TBA), I fashioned my own to see if they would help. They did in spades.

The M3s' bass became tight again & I was able to remove all EQ out of my system & return it to flat. I would think that Port Plugs would work with the M100s as well in rooms that reinforce bass response.

BTW, this phenomena was not just for my M3s. Other speakers that I had used there exhibited the same type of behavior...

TAM
 
#169 · (Edited)
Great review of the Axioms! I always go back and forth when considering purchasing Axioms, because I'll read 7 "A" reviews of their products and then 2 "B-minuses". It really sounds like the M100's are solid performers.

lcaillo, you had me until you started comparing Dickens to Hemingway. :heehee: It's not Dickens if it isn't a run-on sentence a paragraph long. I mean, Hemingway's dry, but at least he knows how to be concise. :) Anyway, great insights by each of you and I appreciate your dedication.

I also enjoy the tone you've collectively taken with this $3,000 evaluation. You kept saying at the beginning that this wasn't a shootout or a competition, and I kind of took it with a grain of salt. I mean, what's the point of listening to a bunch of speakers at the same time if not to see which one's the best? Plus we had just seen the $2.5K and $1K evaluations, which really had more of a shootout feel(especially the $1K, which involved the "winning" speaker becoming Sonnie's purchase). The word "shootout" was used in those reviews more than once.

Having said that, you all really seem to be letting each speaker so far stand on its own merits. I hope this will encourage other manufacturers to be more willing to contribute their offerings for future evaluations. Also, has Sonnie given any thought to throwing in a few comments at the end? I know he opted out of the reviews, but if was there and he listened to them, I for one would love to hear a word or two.

One last question: At what volume are the tones played to determine in-room freq response? I freely admit I'm not an expert here, but reading the three evaluations so far($1K, $2.5K and $3K, plus some other Cedar Creek reviews), I'm really surprised at how many speakers have been deemed harsh or bright when pushed.....some of which do not have a reputation for being bright. I'm just wondering out loud if the sonic characteristics of that room in particular have a multiplicative response to high frequencies at higher SPLs? if a test at reference level shows a flat response, does it show a flat response at higher than reference level? Again, I have the highest respect for you guys and what you're doing here. It's refreshing to have a forum that has such a positive vibe.
 
#174 ·
One last question: At what volume are the tones played to determine in-room freq response? I freely admit I'm not an expert here, but reading the three evaluations so far($1K, $2.5K and $3K, plus some other Cedar Creek reviews), I'm really surprised at how many speakers have been deemed harsh or bright when pushed.....some of which do not have a reputation for being bright. I'm just wondering out loud if the sonic characteristics of that room in particular have a multiplicative response to high frequencies at higher SPLs? if a test at reference level shows a flat response, does it show a flat response at higher than reference level? Again, I have the highest respect for you guys and what you're doing here. It's refreshing to have a forum that has such a positive vibe.
Very good questions. As far as the room goes, it really does not seem to be brighter than other rooms I have worked with. If anything, the treatment keeps the highs pretty well under control.

My own ears are fairly tolerant of extended highs if they are smooth and if the distortion is low. The others seem more sensitive than I am, Leonard a little and Joe moreso, and either will catch any significant amount of mid/hf distortion - in Leonard's case it is more like a superpower.

So remember that sensitivities and preferences vary - we are reporting what we hear and telling you our sensitivities and preferences the best we can for the sake of context.

Joe & Leonard, please speak up if I have misrepresented either of you.:innocent:
 
#170 ·
UPDATE concerning the Axiom M100 Review:

UPDATE: Axiom has contacted us with a very kind reminder that they recommend plugging the bottom three ports on the M100 when locating them close to a wall, and that port plugs are supplied with the speakers to accomplish it. There is even a demonstration video concerning this linked from their website. This would certainly have made a big difference in their performance close to the wall in our review, and might even have given us an easy way to modify their bass response in their optimum setup if we had desired. We simply did not notice the port plugs as we unpacked the M100 speakers.

Our thanks to Axiom for pointing this out and our apologies to Axiom and our readers for the oversight on our part. Please keep this in mind as you read this review.
 
#185 ·
You're welcome for the 'heads up' on the plugs. :sn:

Now I have to really consider Axiom speakers into my upgrade list along w/my beloved at first listen, but out of my pocketbook range ATC SCM40's and some near to home Von Schweikert VR-22's...

Your reviews are going to cost me money! You are doing excellent work! However, I'd avoid my wife if I were you three. :yikes:
 
#171 ·
Glad you brought that up and it's great of you to put it in the review text. I wonder how the near-wall performance would have changed given the use of those plugs. The bass was the one detracting element to the review; does that mean the Axioms(with plugs) have no real weaknesses?
 
#177 ·
My own assessment: Take the accentuated bass and the against-the-wall muddiness out of the equation and they are very special speakers. No real weaknesses? Flawless? As in perfect? Maybe close, from my perspective, at the ideal location. Hard to say without another listen, especially for close-to-wall performance.

Edit: I would love the opportunity to give them another chance, heh, heh. But that is unlikely, short of buying a pair.
 
#172 ·
Nice to read that review on the Axiom's....although, I owned some briefly I never found the critique often associated with them on these forums mostly unfounded. Many of the guys ripping on them where just piling on....as people generally like to do.

Now hurry up with the last 3 reviews...:)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top