AudioCircle
Industry Circles => Bryston Limited => Topic started by: DaveNote on 13 May 2012, 06:36 pm
-
This is a review. Review readers beware! Never forget that all reviews are subjective, including this one. Reviewers can tart up assessments with lots of adjectives and rhetorical devices and refer to measurements they've done, but strip away the verbiage, and tech-speak, and the reader is left with this: that a reviewer, listening to selected music in a specific room with particular associated equipment, liked or didn't like all or part of the reviewed component.
But, that residue - an opinion, a subjective assessment - can be more or less valid to individual readers if they are fully aware of the general drift of a reviewer's preferences. And the result can be most useful. If, for example, he has shown in other reviews that he likes the kinds of things the reader likes, comments of such a reviewer can be helpful in terms of making critical purchasing decisions, especially in this era when it's getting harder to get equipment demonstrations.
Indeed, for this reason, such subjective assessments can be more helpful to non-technical readers (and non-technical audio buyers) than a confirmation of specs through reviewer measurements. Why? Specs help point readers toward, or away from, certain products, but ultimately non-technical readers, and more importantly audio users, need to know not what a component does on an oscilloscope, but if they will enjoy it, and, therefore, might be worth purchasing.
I firmly believe, the most important measure is how much a listener likes what he hears. If an ancient boom box gives him the sound he loves, then that ancient boom box is perfect - perfect for him. That's the bottom line, all that really counts. Specs are guides, not the final determining factor.
Because I'm an audiophile, I do read specs carefully, as guides. But as I have gone up the scale of high end, I also have found that sometimes even outstanding specs don't always mean a piece of gear with great specs is enjoyable to me. Sennheiser HD800 headphones, for example, which I bought, have outstanding specs and received many rave reviews. But to my ear, while they were very accurate, and technically superb, they were not enjoyable. I gave them to someone who would use them. I continue to find other less expensive headphones that are significantly more enjoyable - to me.
By enjoyable I mean making the music does what is supposed to do - attracts me, makes itself appealing, makes me stop, listen. Moves me. The Sennheisers didn't do that for me, they were correct, but cold and analytical. Like an English teacher I once had who really knew his stuff, but was a lousy teacher. He, too, was correct, but cold and analytical; not someone a student could come to like, let alone love.
I emphasize that what I enjoy, others might detest. What I like in my room, with my equipment, might be found wanting by other listeners - even those with tastes that are similar to mine - in their rooms and with different equipment. To the degree that this review might be a guide to their own possible purchase of the M80s, I ask that they remember how, like all other reviews they read, this one is no less subjective.
I want to put this review into context. Readers should know what my experiences, biases and tastes are so that they can judge how useful my comments might be to them.
I began to buy audio equipment around 40 years ago as a way not just to "play" music, but to get better sound. In all that time, I have limited myself strictly to two-channel stereo equipment.
Oddly, it wasn't until recently that I began to refer to myself as an audiophile. There's a explanation for why it took me so long "to come out" as an audiophile.
I was late in recognizing that being an audiophile is like being a butterfly collector who tries to collect butterflies that never can be caught.
Audio is the reproduction of a sound - a copy of a sound. It is a picture of an apple, not an apple. And there are so many factors involved in making that sound picture that one has to concede that the idea of getting a reproduced sound that is "just like live" is just plain silly. It can be great, but it never can be more than a facsimile.
So the first thing I had to admit to myself was that I was involved in an essentially ridiculous hobby - knowing one is searching for a Golden Fleece that never can be found, and, indeed, never existed.
But the admission didn't mean a resolution to be sensible. No. The quest is part of the thrill. The thrill of finding something that is better (to my ear) adds to my motivation to stay on the search.
Second, I had to understand that admitting to being an audiophile meant confessing to self-imposed insanity. You end up spending a lot of money for what normal people (i.e. non-audiophiles) see as an utter waste, and what I know is sometimes extravagant and even excessive.
As an audiophile you spend a lot of money, but it's worth it if you make a good choice because it knocks you out of your seat. And then you do it again and again. Being an audiophile is like Bill Cosby's "Little Old Man" song:
"A little ole' man was sittin' on a step
And a tear trickled own his cheek.
I said 'What's the matter?'
He said 'A train just ran over me.'
I said 'Hmm. How often does this happen?'
He said 'Everyday about this time.'
I said 'Well, why do you just sit out here then?'
He said 'Cause I cannot believe that this happened.'"
So what do I have to show for 40 years of being an audiophile?
For one, a lot less money than I might otherwise have had for my Golden Years, which I am now living.
For another, I have a number of expensive items that have been gathering dust for years. I find it hard to part with them.
Now I'm a little old man, and the audiophile train keeps running over me. Each success - the better sound that sends a chill up my spine - makes me think it can't happen again because this is as good as it gets. But it keeps happening again, and then I sit back on the tracks hoping I get run over one more time.
I was run over several times building an outstanding main audio system in a good 12X23 foot sound room (the most critical component in any audio system I've been told and have learned), which consists of:
Two 7BSST Squared monoblock amplifiers, a BP26 pre-amplifier, a BDA-1 DAC, and a BDP-1 digital player, a Torus power conditioner, and PMC MB2i speakers.
I also have a modestly priced small second system in the same room, which I have recently developed for a very specific application playing my music while my wife sleeps, without having to use headphones.
I was running B&W 685 stand mount speakers with a Harmon Kardon 3490 receiver. The speakers were delightful, but with too little bass extension at the low volumes I needed to keep from waking my wife. But I didn't want to go wild in spending more money on a second system. The second system started at about $250 using mostly old gear I had, then jumped to just under $1500.
Which is why I came to buy the Axiom M80s. I researched but did not demo, because of their unavailability, several other possible choices. Some were above my price point, some below. I considered especially the widely praised Revel F12 and the B&W 683, both of which were slightly above my price point.
Trusted advisors first brought the M80s, sold only online, to my attention. The specs also suggested to me that they might meet my application. Reviews also helped, especially one by Douglas Schneider posted on the Axiom site, whose reviews showed we share some common goals and tastes. Based on this research, I ordered a pair even though I had never bought a significant piece of audio gear from a strictly online company.
The online purchasing experience was outstanding. Lots of information on the website. Excellent help from telephone representatives to the point of going the extra mile to help me. On time delivery. Good follow-up. A small plastic medallion on one speaker grill had been broken, perhaps even by me. A new grill was shipped out immediately. Easy set up. Indeed, perhaps one of the easiest I've had.
Bryston service, for some 30 years, has been the very best I've received from any company, anywhere. It is the "above and beyond the call of duty" kind of service every consumer dreams of, but seldom, if ever, encounters. So far, Axiom's service has been very close to the Bryston standard.
Having been impressed with the online purchase and service experiences, I got down to the serious business of assessing the sound.
In my room, the M80s had to be placed next to the MB2is, which are 6 feet apart, meaning that the Axioms are only five feet apart, with their front grills brought to the plane of the MB2is front grills. I knew this would narrow the width of the M80s' soundstage, and I would have to live with that. It turns out it to be easily done.
The MB2is are well away from the wall facing the listener - over two feet. As a consequence, so are the M80s.
There's a long, raging debate among audio enthusiasts and technicians about whether or not speakers need to be broken in. I won't get into that debate. I say only that, technical measurements notwithstanding, it has been my experience that speakers with traditional drivers have a different sound after playing them for some hours; how many depends on the speaker.
I also believe that there is a psychoacoustic effect in listening to new speakers. One gets used to the sound of a new speaker. The corollary is that having become accustomed to our previous speakers we are resistant to the sound of new ones. Our knee-jerk response, then, can be disappointment. More simply, it also takes a number of hours of "getting used to" the sound of new speakers.
For these two reasons, it takes some patience before listening to new speakers closely or critically, and, therefore, before rendering any judgements. And my initial experience with the M80s reconfirmed and reinforced my embrace of these two breaking-in effects.
My out-of-the box reaction to the M80s was two-fold.
The first was reminiscent of my ultimate judgement of the Sennheiser H800: accurate, cold, and analytical. And, given that my ear had become accustomed to the B&W sound, hard edged.
The second was that the high end - I attend especially to cymbal work - was not merely bright (a comment made by some, but not by my trusted advisors), but downright harsh. In fact, playing one of my favourite cuts, Jennifer Warnes singing Leonard Cohen's "First We Take Manhattan," I could hear a high pitched rattle that to my ear was nothing less than that most dreaded of audio offenses: distortion. At that dreadful moment, I momentarily considered taking advantage of Axiom's 30 day trial return policy.
But it is a good thing to stick by one's beliefs, and in this case my belief in the "truth" of a break-in period was borne out - big time.
Having put more than 50 hours of play on the M80s, I think I now can assess the M80s.
So how do they stack up against the B&W 685s?
Before the M80s were delivered to me, I asked this question of Douglas Schneider, who posted my question and his answer in the Letters section of "SoundStageHiFi":
"You're likely to hear a much different sound for a couple of reasons. The most obvious reason is that the B&W 685 is a small, two-way stand-mounted speaker with just two drivers. Axiom's M80 is a three-way, six-driver floorstander. The M80 will sound much larger (and fill a room with sound much more), play much louder (providing you have enough amplifier power), and go much deeper in the bass. It's really an apples-to-oranges comparison."
He went on to write:
"But even if you were comparing the M80 to a similarly configured B&W floorstander, I still think they'd sound worlds apart. Axiom aims for strict neutrality (i.e., linearity) from the bass through to the highs, and that type of presentation can sound quite a bit more forward than speakers that are voiced for a more relaxing sound, which is what I've found with newer B&Ws I've listened to. I also find that B&W speakers have a distinctive midrange presentation that other speakers don't possess, and I think that has a lot to do with their consistent use of Kevlar-based midrange cones. It's what I consider to be B&W's "house sound." So even if the speakers' sizes were similar, it would be an apples-to-oranges comparison."
Listening to the M80s as well as the 685s using the HK3490, and receiving music from my BDP-1 through my BDA-1, Doug Schneider's description perfectly fit with what I found, with these exceptions and additions.
First, I do not find the M80 more forward sounding than the 685s. In fact, in my room, I find them to be a little more recessed sounding than the 685, but not excessively so. More on depth below.
Second, the M80s are intensely revealing. That is a good news, bad news story. The good - very good - is the audiophile's goal: getting everything that was put on the recorded piece. The bad is that if the recording has junk on it, the M80s mercilessly bang it out to you. For example, on one cut of mine they play back a hiss I never heard before. I think those who recorded it picked up the noise from an electric guitar amp.
The in-room performance of the M80s more than justifies my reason for digging deeper into my pocket to improve my second system. They give me the extended bass at low volume listening I wanted, and an overall better performing speaker than the 685s, to my ear in my room.
But they are better, much better, than that. For me, and paradoxically so, they are scarily better. Read on.
The ultimate test for me - in my room with the equipment I own - was comparing the M80s against my much-loved PMC MB2i speakers played with all my Bryston equipment, including my 7BSST2 amps. Frankly, I was a little reluctant to make this test, thinking, "What if they sound better than speakers that carry a sticker price of over $20,000?"
The remarkable thing - the scary result - is that in my room, and to my old tinnitus-plagued ears, the question is not which is better but which flavour I prefer.
Technically, meaning in the usual terms of assessing speakers, I think the M80s, in my room and to my old tinnitus-plagued ears, are overall better performers. I would even venture that this also might be the judgement of those with younger, healthier ears and better credentials, like those of my trusted advisors and maybe even Doug Schneider.
Specifically, this is what I find with my M80/Bryston to MB2i/Bryston comparison.
On all program material, the M80s have a deeper soundstage in my room, perhaps because of their rear ports. I like this quality a lot, and it is a greater depth than I've heard with any other speakers I've used in this room, which includes Hales Revelation Threes, PMC IB2s, MB2s, B&W 685s, Tangent TM3s, and, of course, the MB2is.
The bass reaches down as far as I've heard with my MB2is, which may mean simply that in this respect it is a draw since I don't think my hearing is good enough to hear the lowest notes of which either speaker is capable.
But the nature of the bass is different. The M80 I find to be quite a bit more controlled. Full and rich, to be sure, but leaner than that of the MB2is. There is some degree of greater percussiveness with the M80s, and the deep bass is a thrill. Listening to Ray Brown's big bass play such notes in "Starbuck Blues" items in my room rattle that never rattled before.
The MB2is have wonderful, huge midrange drivers, and the speakers show them off. Here, again, the M80s have an excellent midrange sound: clear and appealing only with a slightly harder edge to them than the MB2is.
The MB2is have been criticized for having a high end that is too bright. I disagree. Compared to the M80s, it is nearly mellow. The M80s, after break in, are not harsh or shrill, but clear and crystalline. They are reminiscent of very unique R. W. Oliver music man speakers I once owned that used horn high end drivers. Until now, they were the only speakers that played that first opening crash of Mick Fleetwood's cymbal on "Dreams" the way I thought sounded best. I've longed to have that sound back. With the M80s, it's back.
Because of how revealing the M80s are, this high end can be hard to take on some recordings. For example, Blue Rodeo's "5 Days in May" has a few passages that are very piercing on any equipment. With the M80s, these passages can make you cringe, which I think is what Blue Rodeo wanted listeners to do.
And what about the problems with "First We Take Manhattan" encountered before break in? I still detect what I first feared might be distortion, but with the Bryston electronics it is highly localized and, I believe, likely something in the recording. To put this another way, one of the things an outstanding speaker does is instill confidence. The M80s are the most accurate speakers I've ever heard. If there is a problem with the sound I'm hearing, I would tend to believe the source of it is not the M80s.
Then there are other M80 qualities that, technically, beat the MB2is in my room to my ears.
The definition of instruments and voices is incredible with the M80s. Each one is set out on the soundstage with pinpoint precision. For example, on pianos recorded where listeners hear the notes progress from right to left, the MB2is reproduce this well, but the M80s do it better. It's almost as if you can see the fingers move from one key to the next on the soundstage.
Here's another example. I love listening to the final "bell" sequence on Pink Floyd's "High Hopes" from "Division Bell" as it rings progressively into the righthand corner of the soundstage. The M80s reveal, in a way the MB2is do not, just how subtly that bell moves slowly while fading.
How do the M80s and MB2is compare when it comes to what separates great speakers from the rest?
My trusted advisors believe one of the things that make for a great speaker is "presence" - whether a voice or instrument sounds as if it is in your room.
The first time I heard this kind of presence was listening to a Paul Bley piano solo called "Owl Eyes" through my MB2is. There is a passage with low frequency notes that made me (and others who were there) say, "Hell, the damned piano is in the room!" It was a shock. It took decades for my gear to reach that point, but there it was: a great speaker, made great with no small contribution made by Bryston equipment.
Is there presence with the M80s. No doubt about it. Same effect, but a different kind of sound, with the Paul Bley solo. The MB2is have more weight, and a mellower edge, especially with the sound of the piano decay. Not being much a live music listener, I am not a good authority, but I would guess that the M80s are closer to being more authentic.
But for me the overall conclusion isn't about technical qualities, it's all about what I like, which I enjoy most.
There are two effects that I now hope for in an audio system.
First, I usually listen to music when I'm reading. When the music and the quality of the sound - as an audiophile I'm as interested in the performance of the gear as I am in the music - draws me away from my book, the system is telling me it's very good indeed.
Second, when I listen closely to favourite cuts, and get that shiver, that thrill up the spine, then I know I have something special. These are the moments that bring out all my audiophile smiles.
The great M80s do both. But do I like them more than I do my great MB2is?
After spending a boatload of coin, the answer to that question is a coin toss, right now.
At this moment, I am more familiar with the PMC sound than the Axiom sound, so my psychoacoustic self presently slightly tilts to the MB2is. Doug Schneider says there is a B&W house sound in its newer speakers. There is also PMC house sound, and like the B&Ws, it tends to be relaxed and smooth. As I understand it, this is typical of many British speakers, as opposed to Canadian speakers, where linearity and accuracy prevail.
But over time - with more breaking in of the M80s - my PMC leanings might change. But note this well: I'm talking about a coin toss, a slight leaning. I never believed that I'd own speakers to rival my beloved MB2is, let alone ones that cost a twentieth of their price. Astounding! Unbelievable!
For now I'll use the M80s when my wife sleeps, and think I'll probably crank up them up when I want to listen to rock music. They are particularly good at giving new life to older rock songs. I'm old so all my rock music is old. The MB2is will be used for my regular background-to-reading listening...for now?
And for now, I'll keep the M80s connected to HK3490 receiver. It does not bring out all their great merits as my Bryston 7BSST2s do so dramatically. Yet I'll take some comfort in knowing that I own two great speakers, one of which also just happens to be one of the best audio bargains I've ever had.
There you have it. The audiophile train has run over this old man once more. I'm not dead, I'm not flat broke, yet. So because I'm incurably still an audiophile I can't get this question out of my head - Should I find a way to buy a Bryston B135 integrated amp for my M80s to make them, and me, even happier?
That damned train just keeps rolling!
-
Great review. Please check back with us after 200 hours of break-in.
-
Yeah, cool review. I take it the Axioms are a bargain. However, the PMCs might shine better with the 28Bs.
-
Thanks for great review Dave.
On the subject of Sennheiser, have you heard 650 and if so what do you think about them in general and in comparison to 800?
-
Hi Dave
Great review - I was taken with the M80 as well :thumb:
James
-
Yeah, cool review. I take it the Axioms are a bargain. However, the PMCs might shine better with the 28Bs.
Hi Vegasdave: Perhaps you're right about the 28Bs making the PMCs sound better than they do for me now, although they perform marvelously. On the other hand, so might the M80s. It's not that the MB2is, to my ear, underperform with my 7BSST2s, but rather that the M80s punch way above their price class, and, frankly, my expectations.
Dave
-
Thanks for great review Dave.
On the subject of Sennheiser, have you heard 650 and if so what do you think about them in general and in comparison to 800?
Sasha, I have not heard the 650, so I can't make comparisons. I can say, however, one of the reasons, in addition to their cold and analytical sound, that turned me off about the HD800 is that the only way I could get them to produce any satisfying bass (to me) was to crank up the volume so high that everything else was too much, particularly the high end. My "go-to" cans are Audeze LCD-2s. Not as enjoyable to me, but more enjoyable than the HD800, are headphones that cost me less than $150: KRK KNS8400s and Shure SRH750DJs (bought on sale for $88). This should give you some idea of what I might think of the 650s. But headphones, like speakers, have flavours: some people like green beans, others (only God knows why) prefer Lima beans.
In any case, higher prices, like specs, at least in my experience - now enriched by the M80s - is not the be all and end of for determining what performs best. Bryston, which competes against other high end gear, often beats competitors in specs, but even more often in price.
Doug Schneider, referenced in my review, had some very good comments to make in answer to the question: "Does high price mean high performance?"
http://soundstagehifi.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=57&Itemid=24
Among other things, he writes: "Some reviewers (even our own) have raved about Wilson's speakers, but I see more attention being paid to putting on a fancy paint job than putting in topnotch engineering, which can also be seen in the measurements we have done on many of their speaker models (see www.speakermeasurements.com for our database of loudspeaker measurements). That's not to say they're really bad speakers, just that I believe them to be quite bad performers for the money."
Mr. Schneider is one one of the few reviewers I'v seen not bowing down to the Wilson legend, I demoed Wilson Sashas driven by top McIntosh gear, which I thought were good, but I decided to upgrade from the MB2 to MB2is instead of buying the Wilson "marque." The Sashas had a lovely open and airy sound, but there was something off about the midrange. Jazz saxophone didn't sound right to me. Today, I breathe a sigh of relief that I didn't buy the Wilsons only to have to compare them to M80s, which I have no doubt are head and shoulders above them in terms of my preferences.
Dave
-
Thanks for an interesting and well articulated review DaveNote. Your conclusion has endorsed what the Axiom community has known for years...does a higher price always give you better performance in the world of loudspeakers? Not all the time. I currently own Axiom's M22 V3's and matched with the Outlaw LFM1 Plus sub is very similar to their M80's less the bass and overall dynamics. Axiom is huge on "measurements" as with most Canadian speaker manufactures and it shows. Enjoy your M80's.
-
+1 on the Axiom M80v3's. Welcome to the Axiom community.
-
Hi Dave
Great review. :thumb:
Do you feel better now?
I bet you do and I have been in those places not once but few times.
Now just wait till Diamond Dog show up. :duh: :lol:
-
Hi Dave
Great review. :thumb:
Do you feel better now?
I bet you do and I have been in those places not once but few times.
Now just wait till Dimond Dog show up. :duh: :lol:
Do I feel better now, you ask, Prelude? The answer is in the review: All audiophile smiles, ear-to-ear!
Dave
-
Do I feel better now, you ask, Prelude? The answer is in the review: All audiophile smiles, ear-to-ear!
Dave/quote]
An interesting response Dave, not too sure if people out there would be smiling ear-to-ear if there $1500 speakers rival for exceeded there 20k speakers. I think a person would have to start seriously questioning the silly priced audio and speakers that are out there and the money that has been invested.
Anyway, a great review and an even better experience iam sure - chalk one up for Canada's Axiom. :thumb:
Mark
-
Do I feel better now, you ask, Prelude? The answer is in the review: All audiophile smiles, ear-to-ear!
An interesting response Dave, not too sure if people out there would be smiling ear-to-ear if there $1500 speakers rival for exceeded there 20k speakers. I think a person would have to start seriously questioning the silly priced audio and speakers that are out there and the money that has been invested.
Anyway, a great review and an even better experience iam sure - chalk one up for Canada's Axiom. :thumb:
Mark
Mark, the audiophile smile is about a point I was trying to make in the review - Getting an improved sound after carefully done research, knowing what I was looking for, and then placing a bet that paid off, which is part of the rush and thrill of the hobby. I got the audiophile smiles after I bought the MB2is as well and for the same reasons.
I certainly was startled by the result, but I don't have regrets about getting my high priced speakers. Buying high priced audio is only silly when one buys higher priced gear thinking that a proportional or commensurate higher performance will be achieved. The only test that means anything is if a customer believes he has received value for his money, no matter what the amount may be. Therefore, if someone buys audio gear for prestige alone and he is satisfied with just "owning" and showing it off to the neighbours, there's nothing wrong with that. But such a buyer wouldn't be an audiophile as I understand the word because he really doesn't care how it sounds.
Taken these observations altogether, I'm not disappointed that the MB2is aren't head and shoulders better than the M80s - to my ears - others might disagree. I'm delighted, in fact, to have bought speakers that met my purchasing goals and far exceeded my expectations. I'm also tickled pink to have two top notch speakers in my sound room, each with a different kind of sound, and to be able to select one or the other to suit my mood or listening need...and to have achieved this terrific result at a modest price.
The thing that would have been most disappointing about this purchase would have been if it had not met my reason for buying them, which was to improve the bass performance of my second system played at low volumes.
BTW, Mark, what kind of speakers do you own? Are you happy you bought them?
Dave
-
Hi Vegasdave: Perhaps you're right about the 28Bs making the PMCs sound better than they do for me now, although they perform marvelously. On the other hand, so might the M80s. It's not that the MB2is, to my ear, underperform with my 7BSST2s, but rather that the M80s punch way above their price class, and, frankly, my expectations.
Dave
Ok, cool. Thanks for the clarification.
-
A question about my review hasn't been asked, which I should have posed and answered in the piece: If I wanted good bass extension played at low volumes to avoid waking my wife, why didn't I just use my main system with the MB2is played at lower volumes?
These speakers have very good bass extension, but I found that they do not reach a level pleasing to me until they are cranked up to volumes that would not be pleasing to a sleeping wife.
Dave
-
A question about my review hasn't been asked, which I should have posed and answered in the piece: If I wanted good bass extension played at low volumes to avoid waking my wife, why didn't I just use my main system with the MB2is played at lower volumes?
These speakers have very good bass extension, but I found that they do not reach a level pleasing to me until they are cranked up to volumes that would not be pleasing to a sleeping wife.
Dave
That PMC trait is well known I believe, and is not negative IMO, I find that many neutral systems behave that way.
-
That PMC trait is well known I believe, and is not negative IMO, I find that many neutral systems behave that way.
I agree entirely, Sasha, this trait is not at all a negative one about PMCs. In terms of this very, very specific use of the M80s, they fill an application nitch; they are not a substitute for my PMC, at least until my tastes change, if they do.
The trouble with some who contribute to forums is that they think in very narrow terms; for example, that if one compares two kinds of gear then it follows that one has to be good and the other bad, or one superior and the other inferior. (Fortunately we seldom see those kinds of views on this circle.) I happen to own a very good car that probably is technically better than other vehicles in many ways, and I prefer it to my wife's. But it would be a lousy vehicle for hauling rocks or a large screen TV.
And it is of course possible to like two different things that do essentially the same thing, but in different ways. But I can't pursue that facet of this point because the rules of this forum explicitly forbid me to talk about sex.
Dave
-
BTW, Mark, what kind of speakers do you own? Are you happy you bought them?
Hi Dave,
I have Martin Logan Spires. They are a great speaker and iam very happy with their performance.
Mark
-
Hi Dave,
I have Martin Logan Spires. They are a great speaker and iam very happy with their performance.
Mark
Thanks, Mark. Somehow, and I'm really not sure why, I've never been attracted to electrostatic speakers, which have a strong following. Years ago I listened to Dayton Wrights, which were very expensive. Also long ago I heard Martin Logans, but chose Hales instead. I should revisit them some day just to see if they, and I, have changed.
In any case, I have no doubt that your Spires are great in the most important way possible: because you are very happy with them.
Dave
-
A question about my review hasn't been asked, which I should have posed and answered in the piece: If I wanted good bass extension played at low volumes to avoid waking my wife, why didn't I just use my main system with the MB2is played at lower volumes?
These speakers have very good bass extension, but I found that they do not reach a level pleasing to me until they are cranked up to volumes that would not be pleasing to a sleeping wife.
Dave
The speaks look nice. I do most of my sweet spot listening late nite so I know what you are talking about.
I found getting a good preamp with a nice adjust able volume control helps. Something under 20db gain for lower noise. Lots adjustable low volume settings is a nice feature.
My acoustic Zens can fill a room nicely at a late nite low volume. Those are great for imaging with not much power. I am going to have to chase down those axioms and check em out.
-
I find that many neutral systems behave that way.
I agree.
-
I've decided to buy Axiom's DSP which is scheduled to be shipped next month. It will be designed to work with the M80 V3 to make it even more neutral. Axiom says it will produce a noticeable difference, but not a dramatic one. However, I'm told that what will be most noticeable will be more bass extension. That says something because it's very good now.
Dave
-
I've decided to buy Axiom's DSP which is scheduled to be shipped next month. It will be designed to work with the M80 V3 to make it even more neutral. Axiom says it will produce a noticeable difference, but not a dramatic one. However, I'm told that what will be most noticeable will be more bass extension. That says something because it's very good now.
Dave
What exactly is their DSP doing? Is it an active cross-over that would allow you to activate Axiom speakers?
If not, I would not expect dramatic improvement indeed. If you want one consider activating your speakers, including PMCs.
-
What exactly is their DSP doing? Is it an active cross-over that would allow you to activate Axiom speakers?
If not, I would not expect dramatic improvement indeed. If you want one consider activating your speakers, including PMCs.
Sasha: These are really good questions. In fact, it took me a couple of days of talking to Axiom to understand it. It was not their fault, but mine because I'm almost completely clueless when it comes to the technical part of this hobby.
Anyway, this is how I understand it, in terms of my own system:
I will be receiving an analog signal into my Harman Kardon 3490 receiver, usually from the analog out of my BDA-1 DAC. The DSP will be looped to my HK; that is, I will connect the pre-out of the HK to the input of the DSP. Then the DSP, which has two converters, will convert the analog signal to digital, then process that digital signal, then with its second converter, convert the digital to an analog signal. The DSP's processed signal goes back to the HK's main amp in connections and out to the speakers via the connections I already have. I was concerned that this might in effect negate the benefit of using my BDA given that all DACs are different. However, Axiom before doing anything else has tested the AD and DA elements of the DSP, and has assured itself that these to not change the analog signal at all.
But it is the processing part of the DSP that, in fact, does change the analog signal going out. The code, which is written to be speaker specific, is crafted to produce a flatter response than can be achieved by the speakers' passive crossover units. So, for example, the frequency response graph will show variances of + or - 1.5 dB rather than the present 3 dB. But Axiom isn't creating code based on a single graph reading, but rather a number of them, taking into consideration room effects, etc, to create its listening window graph.
I'm sure you're absolutely right about being able to do this via an active model of the PMC speakers. However, this, for me would be going in the wrong direction.
First, this is about a second system, meant originally to be a low cost one in the neighbourhood of $1000. The new HK and the M80 turned that notion into a cocked hat, and now it is a modestly priced system. The DSP will take the total cost even higher. But an active version of my MB2i speakers from PMC, or somehow retrofitted, if that can be done to accept a passive crossover, would be many thousands of dollars. I am, to be sure, nutty when it comes to audio, but not that crazy. Here's a car analogy strictly in terms of price, not performance: I started out to limit myself to a stripped down model of a Ford Focus. I now am into a well-equipped Toyota Camry. Going passive with my MB2is would take me into the Porsche range. And doing that would make no improvement to my second system.
Second, while I don't argue with the merits of active crossovers, I am one of those who really doesn't want the added complexity of an active crossover system. If you're following the topic of James Tanner's new speaker being built with Axiom, I believe he's said somewhere that he's hoping to get the benefits of active passovers without their complexity in terms of ease for users.
So I see the DSP as an improvement in the performance of the M80s at a higher, but not draconian, investment. And there's no doubt about it that buying the DSP is a bet that the cost is worth the noticeable, but not dramatic, improvement. But this would not be the first time I've done that. In fact, buying stuff, not just audio gear, usually is that kind of bet.
And I"ll refer you back to my review. I bought the M80s to get a noticeable, but not necessarily dramtic, improvement. Turns out I got a lot more. I've had that happen to me with several pieces of equipment in recent years: BDA-1, BDP-1, Torus C15, 7BSST2. I'm hoping my string of good luck holds with the DSP. And if it runs out, Axiom has a 30 day return option, which I feel I'm unlikely to use.
BTW, in deciding to pre-order the DSP is something of a testament to Axiom. The number of audio companies in 40 years to have instilled enough confidence in me to have pre-ordered a yet-to-be built product can be counted on a single digit: Bryston.
Dave
-
I am going to have to read up this DSP. It sounds like the signal is still being fed through the original crossover, therefore, the DSP must be acting as a very granular set of tone controls?
Scott
-
I am going to have to read up this DSP. It sounds like the signal is still being fed through the original crossover, therefore, the DSP must be acting as a very granular set of tone controls?
Scott
As I understand it, Scott, what the M80 crossover receives is a signal already processed by the DSP before it gets to to crossover. But that DSP processed signal, to be sure, is being fed to the M80 passive crossover. So, and I don't know how, I imagine that the code written for the DSP processor function makes alterations in the analog signal being received by the crossove in such a way as to make the output of the M80 flatter.
Axiom is working on an omnidirectional speaker that uses the DSP and they have the following expanation that may help. You will note in the following article that the DSP for the M80 and M60 is mentioned in passing:
http://www.axiomaudio.com/blog/audio-dsp/
Dave
-
Interesting, let us know how that works out.
-
However, Axiom before doing anything else has tested the AD and DA elements of the DSP, and has assured itself that these to not change the analog signal at all.
Dave
I cannot believe Axiom would say something like this.
There is no AD/DA conversion in this world that will have no affect on the signal and be transparent. There will be significant loss in resolution and dynamics.
A company that makes such silly statements does not deserve to be on my list of manufacturers potentially making good products.
What you describe is simply a glorified DSP based EQ.
If there was a way to bring digital signal in to avoid additional AD conversion I would consider trying it, otherwise no. There are no fundamental benefits in what you describe, only if it was DSP based cross-over that would allow you to activate your speakers with steep and phase correct crossover points (something that DEQX allows you to do) it would make sense to check it and see if benefits outweigh losses in your application.
Finally, the talk about benefits of active crossovers without their complexity in terms of ease for users is just marketing talk, it has no bearing in real life applications, if you want fundamental improvement in performance it does not come cheap or simple.
-
Dave,
This is a nice post you have been started and good luck to you.
I do not have the PMC or the AXIOM in my room that means you know it better then me but I know the drivers used in the PMC and they are not bad drivers at all.
I think you are going to make it more complex with no benefit but it is nice that they have the 30 days return option.
If I were you this is what I would do based on however you have in hand.
I would look for a used or a new 9BSST2 @ 4ch at minimum to use it for mid and tweeter and the 7BSST2 for woofer and a digital active crossover.I would disconnect the passive crossover on both speakers and turn them into the active and listen to both speakers for few months and see which one I like more.Lets say you would like the PMC more then put the passive crossover on AXIOM back and use it as your second system and you wont look for any improvement on your PMC for next 15 years if not more.
This is just my thought and you do not have to go this way at all. :thumb:
-
I cannot believe Axiom would say something like this.
There is no AD/DA conversion in this world that will have no affect on the signal and be transparent. There will be significant loss in resolution and dynamics.
A company that makes such silly statements does not deserve to be on my list of manufacturers potentially making good products.
What you describe is simply a glorified DSP based EQ.
If there was a way to bring digital signal in to avoid additional AD conversion I would consider trying it, otherwise no. There are no fundamental benefits in what you describe, only if it was DSP based cross-over that would allow you to activate your speakers with steep and phase correct crossover points (something that DEQX allows you to do) it would make sense to check it and see if benefits outweigh losses in your application.
Finally, the talk about benefits of active crossovers without their complexity in terms of ease for users is just marketing talk, it has no bearing in real life applications, if you want fundamental improvement in performance it does not come cheap or simple.
Sasha, I'm not going to respond to your heated reply with a heated reply of my own.
I was told by an Axiom person, with an engineering degree in his field, and decades of experience in it, after consultation with the engineer in the company working on the DSP, also with years in the field, that testing had shown (before coding for processing being done) that the analog signal going into the Analog Devices (which is to be used) AD and the analog signal coming out of the Analog Devices' DA are the same. Naturally, once the processing code is added, the analog signal going out of the DA will be different from the signal going into the DA.
I admit it is entirely possible that I got all of this wrong, but that is what I recall hearing.
As to whether Axiom deserves your custom, that, of course, is your call, based on whatever you want to believe. Setting aside the good experience I have had with Axiom so far, I have a lot of confidence in Bryston. It, in turn, would seem to have a lot of confidence in Axiom. Not only have two of Bryston's top people praised its products to me, but one of its best technical guys has told me that Axiom has very good engineers. And, of course, it is working hand-in-glove with Axiom in building the Model T.
And where did I get the notion that James Tanner is concerned about the complexity of active crossovers for users?
On March 16th on this circle he wrote this in response to a question about a DSP crossover and the Model T.
"No it worked really well but we realized that most customers would be intimidated by active systems so my hope is I can design something that would come close in performance but with a lot less complexity."
That was in reply to a question from you.
But maybe that's James engaging in "just marketing talk."
Dave
-
Dave,
This is a nice post you have been started and good luck to you.
I do not have the PMC or the AXIOM in my room that means you know it better then me but I know the drivers used in the PMC and they are not bad drivers at all.
I think you are going to make it more complex with no benefit but it is nice that they have the 30 days return option.
If I were you this is what I would do based on however you have in hand.
I would look for a used or a new 9BSST2 @ 4ch at minimum to use it for mid and tweeter and the 7BSST2 for woofer and a digital active crossover.I would disconnect the passive crossover on both speakers and turn them into the active and listen to both speakers for few months and see which one I like more.Lets say you would like the PMC more then put the passive crossover on AXIOM back and use it as your second system and you wont look for any improvement on your PMC for next 15 years if not more.
This is just my thought and you do not have to go this way at all. :thumb:
Prelude, I appreciate your suggestions, but they aren't for me, or for this second system.
No doubt I'm expressing myself badly, but I've tried to explain that the M80s are for a second system that already is way more expensive than I planned. The 9BSST2 idea, technically just might be a good idea, but in terms of price and for my application simply is out of the question.
Moreover, i've tried to explain that I'm not very technical. I'm the very opposite of a DIYer. The thought of my digging into my speakers to disconnect crossovers and then turing them into active sends the same kind of shiver up my spine as it would considering doing my own hemorrhoidectomy.
I'm one of the people James Tanner sees as intimidated by the complexity of active setups. The DSP involves making simple connections, which with luck I get right most of the time. For me it will be much less complex than active.
You may be right that the DSP might bring no benefit. One of the things I liked about Axiom's annoucement about the DSP is that it is totally without hype. Unlike so many who manufacturer accessories, add-ons, and tweaks, Axiom right off the bat is saying the DSP will not bring about dramatic changes. The honesty is not just refreshing; it also builds confidence. That, in my eyes, together with the performnce of the M80, makes it worth placing a bet on its new product.
Dave
-
Hi
Unfortunately Sasha has momentarily come out of his delusional approach of this hobby and is correct. If you are trying to incorporate a dsp by using a loop on your HK receiver you are just going to end up with a far less linear signal. Resolution and dynamics will probably suffer. You will notice this too at the playback volume levels you are going to use.
The volume you are using this system at really helps in rsolution prat and everything else. You really don't even need room treatments. Your receiver will be operating at low output and it won't suffer from compression. Adding more electronics to this will not make your bass better. That dsp is probably far better suited for loud playback then in a soft volume.
If you are looking to improve low volume playback try to move towards getting your system to sound more responsive at low volumes. Power cords help here and so does speaker cabling.
But I haven't heard this dsp so ultimately you should try this and see what happens. If it's good keep it. If not hopefully you can return it.
-
Sasha, I'm not going to respond to your heated reply with a heated reply of my own.
I was told by an Axiom person, with an engineering degree in his field, and decades of experience in it, after consultation with the engineer in the company working on the DSP, also with years in the field, that testing had shown (before coding for processing being done) that the analog signal going into the Analog Devices (which is to be used) AD and the analog signal coming out of the Analog Devices' DA are the same. Naturally, once the processing code is added, the analog signal going out of the DA will be different from the signal going into the DA.
I admit it is entirely possible that I got all of this wrong, but that is what I recall hearing.
As to whether Axiom deserves your custom, that, of course, is your call, based on whatever you want to believe. Setting aside the good experience I have had with Axiom so far, I have a lot of confidence in Bryston. It, in turn, would seem to have a lot of confidence in Axiom. Not only have two of Bryston's top people praised its products to me, but one of its best technical guys has told me that Axiom has very good engineers. And, of course, it is working hand-in-glove with Axiom in building the Model T.
And where did I get the notion that James Tanner is concerned about the complexity of active crossovers for users?
On March 16th on this circle he wrote this in response to a question about a DSP crossover and the Model T.
"No it worked really well but we realized that most customers would be intimidated by active systems so my hope is I can design something that would come close in performance but with a lot less complexity."
That was in reply to a question from you.
But maybe that's James engaging in "just marketing talk."
Dave
What is so heated in my comments if I call things by their real name?
My comments are not directed at you, I am not questioning your honesty or interpretation, but what Axiom is telling. You did not get anything wrong.
When I say “I cannot believe” I do not mean you are not telling the truth but that I cannot believe that any reputable manufacturer could make such statement which is as far from the reality as it can be.
You do not have to have an engineering degree to see right through such marketing nonsense.
Think of the following, you have two products in your hands, one is BDA-1 (DA converter), the other is this Axiom DSP device that is both AD and DA converter and on top of that a quite sophisticated DSP processor.
According to Axiom their product is so transparent that their entire AD>DA conversion process is not degrading the sound. This raises a question in my mind.
If this is true then why is Bryston BDA (which is only a DA converter) costing so much more than Axiom’s entire AD>DSP>DA device?
Is Bryston product a rip-of or maybe a poorly designed and engineered product that in the end it costs them so much to make that they have to charge so much more?
If we go by what Axiom is saying, logic would dictate it is, because there is no need to apply all the engineering in BDA-1 and charge so much when a DA converter of such tremendous transparency such as Axiom’s could be built and had for so much less?
Or could it be that Axiom statement is nothing more but marketing nonsense and they really did not make a technological breakthrough that allowed them to create such transparent AD/DA conversion stages for so much less?
You cannot have it both ways, I hope you realize that? You cannot justify the comparative difference in the cost under the pretense of Axiom’s transparency.
You see, statements like the one from Axiom about transparency of their AD/DA process I find insulting, I am educated in the field of electronics, experienced in my work, and experienced in my hobby, and I do not swallow such nonsense so easily.
Since you like the analogy with cars, here is one for you, Axiom is essentially telling you that they developed a car that can reach top speed of 300km/h, accelerate to 100km/h in 3 seconds and consume 3 liters/100km.
I on the other hand am telling you that Axiom statement is unfounded.
You may end up ordering their DSP processor and liking it for whatever reason, as I said many times subjective assessment is not always based on the same criteria and not everyone seeks improvements in truthfulness to good recordings and their dynamic range, resolution, etc.
But the fact remains that additional AD/DA conversion will compress the dynamic range and destroy resolution, that is undeniable, we are all bound by the laws of physics.
Finally, your quote from James is taken out of context.
His sentence was his answer to my question in regard to the reasons for passive speakers considering all the effort put into active ones up to that point.
So his answer goes precisely in line with what I am saying, it confirms my argument entirely, you cannot have it both, a simplicity and fundamental improvement, is that not the obvious from James’ answer?
-
Dave,
This is a nice post you have been started and good luck to you.
I do not have the PMC or the AXIOM in my room that means you know it better then me but I know the drivers used in the PMC and they are not bad drivers at all.
I think you are going to make it more complex with no benefit but it is nice that they have the 30 days return option.
If I were you this is what I would do based on however you have in hand.
I would look for a used or a new 9BSST2 @ 4ch at minimum to use it for mid and tweeter and the 7BSST2 for woofer and a digital active crossover.I would disconnect the passive crossover on both speakers and turn them into the active and listen to both speakers for few months and see which one I like more.Lets say you would like the PMC more then put the passive crossover on AXIOM back and use it as your second system and you wont look for any improvement on your PMC for next 15 years if not more.
This is just my thought and you do not have to go this way at all. :thumb:
Words of wisdom.
-
Werd If I remember correctly you said you would no longer engage in discussions with me, so why don’t you stick to it?
-
.
-
What is so heated in my comments if I call things by their real name?
My comments are not directed at you, I am not questioning your honesty or interpretation, but what Axiom is telling. You did not get anything wrong.
When I say “I cannot believe” I do not mean you are not telling the truth but that I cannot believe that any reputable manufacturer could make such statement which is as far from the reality as it can be.
You do not have to have an engineering degree to see right through such marketing nonsense.
Think of the following, you have two products in your hands, one is BDA-1 (DA converter), the other is this Axiom DSP device that is both AD and DA converter and on top of that a quite sophisticated DSP processor.
According to Axiom their product is so transparent that their entire AD>DA conversion process is not degrading the sound. This raises a question in my mind.
If this is true then why is Bryston BDA (which is only a DA converter) costing so much more than Axiom’s entire AD>DSP>DA device?
Is Bryston product a rip-of or maybe a poorly designed and engineered product that in the end it costs them so much to make that they have to charge so much more?
If we go by what Axiom is saying, logic would dictate it is, because there is no need to apply all the engineering in BDA-1 and charge so much when a DA converter of such tremendous transparency such as Axiom’s could be built and had for so much less?
Or could it be that Axiom statement is nothing more but marketing nonsense and they really did not make a technological breakthrough that allowed them to create such transparent AD/DA conversion stages for so much less?
You cannot have it both ways, I hope you realize that? You cannot justify the comparative difference in the cost under the pretense of Axiom’s transparency.
You see, statements like the one from Axiom about transparency of their AD/DA process I find insulting, I am educated in the field of electronics, experienced in my work, and experienced in my hobby, and I do not swallow such nonsense so easily.
Since you like the analogy with cars, here is one for you, Axiom is essentially telling you that they developed a car that can reach top speed of 300km/h, accelerate to 100km/h in 3 seconds and consume 3 liters/100km.
I on the other hand am telling you that Axiom statement is unfounded.
You may end up ordering their DSP processor and liking it for whatever reason, as I said many times subjective assessment is not always based on the same criteria and not everyone seeks improvements in truthfulness to good recordings and their dynamic range, resolution, etc.
But the fact remains that additional AD/DA conversion will compress the dynamic range and destroy resolution, that is undeniable, we are all bound by the laws of physics.
Finally, your quote from James is taken out of context.
His sentence was his answer to my question in regard to the reasons for passive speakers considering all the effort put into active ones up to that point.
So his answer goes precisely in line with what I am saying, it confirms my argument entirely, you cannot have it both, a simplicity and fundamental improvement, is that not the obvious from James’ answer?
Sasha, you've written: "I cannot believe that any reputable manufacturer could make such statement which is as far from the reality as it can be. You do not have to have an engineering degree to see right through such marketing nonsense."
That's the second time you've suggested or implied that Axiom may not be a reputable company...based on what I've written. Except for saying I may have erred in even passing on what I have heard, I want no part in this kind of back-handed sullying of reputations.
I think it is both unwise and unfair to render judgements about either Axiom or a product yet to see the light of day based on what is indisputably a second hand account. I am an intermediary in this exchange, and a non-technical one to boot. For all you know, I just may not be that good of a reporter. Yet you have jumped on it, not to fault me, but to come to conclusions about Axiom's description made through me.
What you've written is unwise because I may have mis-stated Axiom's position, notwithstanding your belief - it can be only a belief because you cannot know what exactly what was said (and it is only my memory of what was said) - that I got it right. You write that you cannot believe any reputable manufacturer could have said what I reported. In fairness to Axiom you shouldn't believe it unless you hear it from Axiom itself.
It is no different than if I had had a conversation with you, and then reported it to Werd, who based on that reporting, stated that he could not believe a reputable person had said what I told him you said. I can't imagine you would consider that either wise or fair.
The Rules of AudioCircle start off this way:
"AudioCircle is a place for audiophiles to share experiences and knowledge with each other about their hobby in a friendly and helpful atmosphere. The name of the site invokes the well-known phrase "circle of friends." You should treat other people on the site as though they are your friends (even if you disagree with them). That is, you are expected to treat other people in a friendly manner and with some respect. We're not concerned if people disagree or get into arguments, just don't get too carried away."
Your technical points may or may not have merit, but you in effect are having an argument, through me, with Axiom, and in doing so suggesting that Axiom is doing something wrong.
You have made many contributions to this circle, no doubt many more than I, and as a "circle friend," I feel obliged to say that in this instance, I feel you got too carried away.
Dave
-
Sasha, you've written: "I cannot believe that any reputable manufacturer could make such statement which is as far from the reality as it can be. You do not have to have an engineering degree to see right through such marketing nonsense."
That's the second time you've suggested or implied that Axiom may not be a reputable company...based on what I've written. Except for saying I may have erred in even passing on what I have heard, I want no part in this kind of back-handed sullying of reputations.
I think it is both unwise and unfair to render judgements about either Axiom or a product yet to see the light of day based on what is indisputably a second hand account. I am an intermediary in this exchange, and a non-technical one to boot. For all you know, I just may not be that good of a reporter. Yet you have jumped on it, not to fault me, but to come to conclusions about Axiom's description made through me.
What you've written is unwise because I may have mis-stated Axiom's position, notwithstanding your belief - it can be only a belief because you cannot know what exactly what was said (and it is only my memory of what was said) - that I got it right. You write that you cannot believe any reputable manufacturer could have said what I reported. In fairness to Axiom you shouldn't believe it unless you hear it from Axiom itself.
It is no different than if I had had a conversation with you, and then reported it to Werd, who based on that reporting, stated that he could not believe a reputable person had said what I told him you said. I can't imagine you would consider that either wise or fair.
The Rules of AudioCircle start off this way:
"AudioCircle is a place for audiophiles to share experiences and knowledge with each other about their hobby in a friendly and helpful atmosphere. The name of the site invokes the well-known phrase "circle of friends." You should treat other people on the site as though they are your friends (even if you disagree with them). That is, you are expected to treat other people in a friendly manner and with some respect. We're not concerned if people disagree or get into arguments, just don't get too carried away."
Your technical points may or may not have merit, but you in effect are having an argument, through me, with Axiom, and in doing so suggesting that Axiom is doing something wrong.
You have made many contributions to this circle, no doubt many more than I, and as a "circle friend," I feel obliged to say that in this instance, I feel you got too carried away.
Dave
Dave,
Once again, I am not saying Axiom may not be a reputable company based on what you have written, the contention as far as I am concerned is the claim itself.
It is very simple, a statement from any company in which they claim their AD/DA conversion is completely transparent I would consider marketing nonsense because it cannot be true, not today and probably never.
You say it is “unwise and unfair to render judgments about either Axiom or a product yet to see the light of day”, but I am not talking about the product, I am talking about nonsense in the claim.
The subject is not the product itself, I do not have to hear the product to know that additional AD/DA conversion will not be transparent.
And being on the subject of the fairness, I think it would be unfair to a much larger degree if companies used false and misleading information in the advertising of their products, and claim that someone’s implementation of AD/DA conversion is completely transparent would fall into such category easily.
You put far too much importance to what we do here, it is just an exchange of opinions and experiences, do not be so concerned about what conclusions I or anyone else may draw from what is written on the forum.
The way this whole discussion is developing is quite strange, it sounds to me as if you are facing some legal threat from Axiom and you are retracting from this exchange?
Manufacturers should be open to criticism of their products, and should demonstrate a degree of honesty in their marketing, that is my opinion at least.
So can we put it to the rest, can I simply say that if the information on the transparency of AD/DA conversion in Axiom’s product is indeed Axiom’s position and approach in their marketing, then I believe Axiom is very dishonest in their marketing campaign?
-
Dave,
Once again, I am not saying Axiom may not be a reputable company based on what you have written, the contention as far as I am concerned is the claim itself.
It is very simple, a statement from any company in which they claim their AD/DA conversion is completely transparent I would consider marketing nonsense because it cannot be true, not today and probably never.
You say it is “unwise and unfair to render judgments about either Axiom or a product yet to see the light of day”, but I am not talking about the product, I am talking about nonsense in the claim.
The subject is not the product itself, I do not have to hear the product to know that additional AD/DA conversion will not be transparent.
And being on the subject of the fairness, I think it would be unfair to a much larger degree if companies used false and misleading information in the advertising of their products, and claim that someone’s implementation of AD/DA conversion is completely transparent would fall into such category easily.
You put far too much importance to what we do here, it is just an exchange of opinions and experiences, do not be so concerned about what conclusions I or anyone else may draw from what is written on the forum.
The way this whole discussion is developing is quite strange, it sounds to me as if you are facing some legal threat from Axiom and you are retracting from this exchange?
Manufacturers should be open to criticism of their products, and should demonstrate a degree of honesty in their marketing, that is my opinion at least.
So can we put it to the rest, can I simply say that if the information on the transparency of AD/DA conversion in Axiom’s product is indeed Axiom’s position and approach in their marketing, then I believe Axiom is very dishonest in their marketing campaign?
Sasha, I believe you have claimed to have credentials in matters electronic. My only credentials are that for 30 years I worked as an analyst and writer, which means that I read and write with the same care you must use in reading technical measurements.
This is strange exchange, I grant you. It is strange since you seem to be missing my points and you insist that I am missing yours.
You seem intent on reading into my report of a conversation with an Axiom person (which may or may not be an accurate report) a claim and marketing strategy that is dishonest. The only claim (if it can be called that, as opposed to a generalized report made to me of testing results) which I may or may not have muddled. It is nonsensical to raise my report to the level of an Axiom claim until Axiom makes it a public claim. It was not and is not a marketing claim. The only "marketing" claim made by Axiom to date about the DSP that I know of is that the product will produce a noticebale but not dramatic change. No reference to transparency. No reference to AD/DA conversions.
There is a very consistent theme in your posts where marketing claims seem to raise your hackles. I think it's sensible to take any and every marketing claim with a grain of salt. But you are supposing that Axiom has made claims it hasn't or will make claims that it has not expressed. This is carrying skepticism of marketing claims to an extreme: it is an accusation made against claims that aren't there. If Axiom ever makes marketing claims that you believe can be refuted, then, fine; fire away. But until then, you only have the slender thread of my report on which to make unfounded assumptions that Axiom "might" make claims, which you have deemed to be dishonest.
If you read what I have written with the same care you read technical material you will find that I am "retracting from" (sic) nothing. This would appear to be reading into what I have written what you want to read.
I am under no legal threat from Axiom. I take the comment as impugning my integrity, which should come as no surprise since you are intent upon impugning Axiom's honesty. You would have readers believe that I would not defend a company unless it is threatening me. What next? Are you going to accuse me of being on the Axiom payroll?
I am defending Axiom for a very simple reason. By taking some long and unsupported jumps to a conclusion about the honesty of Axiom's marketing practices in which it has not engaged and intentions that you cannot know, you are engaging in a slur under the cover of forum anonymity. It is unfair and unseemly behaviour, and I don't want to stand by while you engage in it. I won't sanction it by my silence.
Since you have yet to understand what I have written earlier, I have little hope that you will understand, let alone accept, that it is unfair and unseemly to use loaded words like "dishonesty" (even with the qualifier "if") when writing on a public forum about third parties.
I'm willing to give this strange exchange a rest. But if you persist in implying or suggesting a third party might be, or at some mythical point in the future, will be dishonest, this exchange will continue. If you want to use the cloak of anonymity to engage is not-so-subtle slurs, I will use that same cloak to call you on them.
Dave
-
Sasha, I believe you have claimed to have credentials in matters electronic. My only credentials are that for 30 years I worked as an analyst and writer, which means that I read and write with the same care you must use in reading technical measurements.
This is strange exchange, I grant you. It is strange since you seem to be missing my points and you insist that I am missing yours.
You seem intent on reading into my report of a conversation with an Axiom person (which may or may not be an accurate report) a claim and marketing strategy that is dishonest. The only claim (if it can be called that, as opposed to a generalized report made to me of testing results) which I may or may not have muddled. It is nonsensical to raise my report to the level of an Axiom claim until Axiom makes it a public claim. It was not and is not a marketing claim. The only "marketing" claim made by Axiom to date about the DSP that I know of is that the product will produce a noticebale but not dramatic change. No reference to transparency. No reference to AD/DA conversions.
There is a very consistent theme in your posts where marketing claims seem to raise your hackles. I think it's sensible to take any and every marketing claim with a grain of salt. But you are supposing that Axiom has made claims it hasn't or will make claims that it has not expressed. This is carrying skepticism of marketing claims to an extreme: it is an accusation made against claims that aren't there. If Axiom ever makes marketing claims that you believe can be refuted, then, fine; fire away. But until then, you only have the slender thread of my report on which to make unfounded assumptions that Axiom "might" make claims, which you have deemed to be dishonest.
If you read what I have written with the same care you read technical material you will find that I am "retracting from" (sic) nothing. This would appear to be reading into what I have written what you want to read.
I am under no legal threat from Axiom. I take the comment as impugning my integrity, which should come as no surprise since you are intent upon impugning Axiom's honesty. You would have readers believe that I would not defend a company unless it is threatening me. What next? Are you going to accuse me of being on the Axiom payroll?
I am defending Axiom for a very simple reason. By taking some long and unsupported jumps to a conclusion about the honesty of Axiom's marketing practices in which it has not engaged and intentions that you cannot know, you are engaging in a slur under the cover of forum anonymity. It is unfair and unseemly behaviour, and I don't want to stand by while you engage in it. I won't sanction it by my silence.
Since you have yet to understand what I have written earlier, I have little hope that you will understand, let alone accept, that it is unfair and unseemly to use loaded words like "dishonesty" (even with the qualifier "if") when writing on a public forum about third parties.
I'm willing to give this strange exchange a rest. But if you persist in implying or suggesting a third party might be, or at some mythical point in the future, will be dishonest, this exchange will continue. If you want to use the cloak of anonymity to engage is not-so-subtle slurs, I will use that same cloak to call you on them.
Dave
Dave,
I understand perfectly well the point you are making, it would seem I am just much less doubtful of your ability to convey technical type of information than you are.
In your post you did not come across as someone who did not command any knowledge in the matter, on the contrary, the information was very well conveyed and your description of the product was very clear.
I had no reason to think about possibility that you may not have understood correctly what was communicated to you, and I still think that such possibility is very remote.
That is where our seeming disconnect is coming from.
Anyway, you are clearly irritated and you are blowing this out of proportions, even implying that I am accusing you of something and I got engaged in slurs?! Up till now this was an exchange of opinions, but now your comments have become indecent and insulting. I will no longer reply to any of your posts as it does not seem civilized exchange is possible.
-
Dave,
I understand perfectly well the point you are making, it would seem I am just much less doubtful of your ability to convey technical type of information than you are.
In your post you did not come across as someone who did not command any knowledge in the matter, on the contrary, the information was very well conveyed and your description of the product was very clear.
I had no reason to think about possibility that you may not have understood correctly what was communicated to you, and I still think that such possibility is very remote.
That is where our seeming disconnect is coming from.
Anyway, you are clearly irritated and you are blowing this out of proportions, even implying that I am accusing you of something and I got engaged in slurs?! Up till now this was an exchange of opinions, but now your comments have become indecent and insulting. I will no longer reply to any of your posts as it does not seem civilized exchange is possible.
Finally, we have found common ground: the desire not to have exchanges with one another! Something it seems you and others have had to do. I wonder why? Thank you for your promise not to reply to any of my posts. I am delighted, whenever possible, to reciprocate.
Dave
-
He won't keep to that promise. He will follow you around and bug you. That I know. Or try and bug you....lol
-
DaveNote : If I might be so bold as interrupt in an attempt to re-direct this back to your original intent - that being a speaker review as I recall, are you doing the comparison between your new Axioms and the PMC's in the same room and at the lower volumes which ensures continued co-habitation with your better half ? I'm unclear on this as I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer by any stretch, a fact no AC member familiar with my cheap chicanery would dispute... :wink:
D.D.
-
Werd, by your immature comments you are proving nothing else but your inability to comprehend technical, engineering and scientific foundation of this hobby of yours.
In your lack of comprehension you resort to insults and personal attacks on anyone who wants to take nonsense out of it, and try to impose you religious like approach to the hobby on others as it is all that you are left with.
In essence you are a taliban of audiophile community.
When someone challenges your primitive taliban like views with reason, logic, facts, you become agitated. Stick to your promise to refrain from further interaction with me.
-
DaveNote : If I might be so bold as interrupt in an attempt to re-direct this back to your original intent - that being a speaker review as I recall, are you doing the comparison between your new Axioms and the PMC's in the same room and at the lower volumes which ensures continued co-habitation with your better half ? I'm unclear on this as I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer by any stretch, a fact no AC member familiar with my cheap chicanery would dispute... :wink:
D.D.
D.D., I'll be very glad to return to the original intent of this posting!
My review is based on a comparison between the M80s and MB2is played sequentially and playing the same tunes in the same room on the same equipment at the same volume. I believe I did say in the review that the speakers are not the same distances apart. The M80s are about 5 feet apart and the MB2is are 6 feet apart.
The comparisom was not the best A/B comparison in the sense that I could not simply use a dial or switch to compare one speaker to another. I had to listen to one, then set up the connections to listen to the other. But this was done quickly enough for me to make a reasonable comparison.
More importantly, the comparison was made easier by the fact that these two speakers have a very different kind of sound.
As a small addendum to the review, I can note that I'm still getting used to the M80 sound, which reveals so much I continue to hear things I've not heard before. One of them is background talk on jazz cuts. Yes, I've always been able, unfortunately, to hear Keith Jarrett's "singing". But now every once in a while I hear new voices (Sasha, if he's still reading this thread will say, "Dave's always hearing voices even when the music stops"). At times I've found myself immediately thinking it's my wife calling from upstairs and I turn to reply.
But these new sounds also from time to time include faint rasping, which makes me think "distortion". Axiom suggested I bring the M80s a bit forward of the MB2is. I tried several distances, and settled for 2 inches forward. This has, noticeably, but not dramatically, improved the soundstage, while reducing what I heard as unwanted rasps. I'm now convinced are part of the recording.
Hope this helps.
Dave
-
In essence you are a taliban of audiophile community.
My understanding is that the Taliban are not particularly big on music...not that a lot of what goes on here has much to do with music. Sometimes it has nothing to do with the reproduction of music, either.
Nice day for a walk...
D.D.
-
The comparisom was not the best A/B comparison in the sense that I could not simply use a dial or switch to compare one speaker to another. I had to listen to one, then set up the connections to listen to the other. But this was done quickly enough for me to make a reasonable comparison.
More importantly, the comparison was made easier by the fact that these two speakers have a very different kind of sound.
Dave
Hi: I was reading the comments you've made about the different speakers and it occured to me that one reason why you may find the Axioms better suited to your application might have something to do with the low-volume issue. Living in a condo, I know a bit about that and what I haven't learned on my own, my wife has helped to teach me...( actually she's an angel and far too good for my motley sort :inlove: ).
Anyway, as I built my current system, a prerequisite was that it would have to sound good even at low volumes and I think speaker choice has a lot to do with the achievement of that goal. I've always thought that big speakers with their attendant big drivers and big cabinets don't really seem to give of their best without being given "a bit of Welly" as our British friends say. One of the things that really impresses me about my current speakers is how good they sound in terms of detail, bass extension, etc. without having it flogged out of them. Your MB's have got pretty big drivers, etc. and maybe the Axioms are just better-suited to how you listen to music.
I'm just spit-balling here and really haven't spent enough time with either of your speakers (none at all with the Axioms ) to be considered any type of authority. Congrats on what appears to be a super buy on some gear which makes you happy ! :thumb:
D.D.
-
Hi: I was reading the comments you've made about the different speakers and it occured to me that one reason why you may find the Axioms better suited to your application might have something to do with the low-volume issue. Living in a condo, I know a bit about that and what I haven't learned on my own, my wife has helped to teach me...( actually she's an angel and far too good for my motley sort :inlove: ).
Anyway, as I built my current system, a prerequisite was that it would have to sound good even at low volumes and I think speaker choice has a lot to do with the achievement of that goal. I've always thought that big speakers with their attendant big drivers and big cabinets don't really seem to give of their best without being given "a bit of Welly" as our British friends say. One of the things that really impresses me about my current speakers is how good they sound in terms of detail, bass extension, etc. without having it flogged out of them. Your MB's have got pretty big drivers, etc. and maybe the Axioms are just better-suited to how you listen to music.
I'm just spit-balling here and really haven't spent enough time with either of your speakers (none at all with the Axioms ) to be considered any type of authority. Congrats on what appears to be a super buy on some gear which makes you happy ! :thumb:
D.D.
Yes, this is how i came to love my speakers. If i wasn't into late nite listening i would probably move into a speaker that uses dedicated bass drivers. The Acoustic zen use smaller drivers and a transmission line to form bass deeper bass. They sound good loud but you lose out on the bass impact. In lower volume those smaller 6.5 inch drives can really form out the instruments without trying to power a dedicated bass driver. They are tall and they fill the room with music at low volume.
The trick i have found with low volume is you have to listen for the instruments. Bass shy speakers i think are better here since you need to listen for the bass instruments. Bass shy speakers will form out bass instruments but they don't have the impact or low resonance. You dont really want that anyways when your better half and kids are upstairs sleeping.
-
Yes, this is how i came to love my speakers. If i wasn't into late nite listening i would probably move into a speaker that uses dedicated bass drivers. The Acoustic zen use smaller drivers and a transmission line to form bass deeper bass. They sound good loud but you lose out on the bass impact. In lower volume those smaller 6.5 inch drives can really form out the instruments at low volume with out trying to power a dedicated bass driver. They are tall and they fill the room with music at low volume.
The trick i have found with low volume is you have to listen for the instruments. Bass shy speakers i think are better here since you need to listen for the bass instruments. Bass shy speakers will form out bass instruments but they don't have the impact or low resonance. You dont really want that anyways when your better half and kids are upstairs sleeping anyways.
I've heard those Adagios of yours when they had a dealer here - they were the speakers that sold me on the transmission line concept. They were gorgeous, too - in that red finish. Ended up buying transmission line speakers in the end but ugly ones ( FB1i's :lol:). Eventually got settled with fact.8's -sort of the middle ground, I guess.
Speakers like yours ( and mine ) don't move the kind of air that a speaker with big drivers and cabinet volume does so it's a different sound but not without it's charms. You end up being a different kind of listener ( and perhaps with more of our listening intact...If I had DaveNote's PMC's and amps in a secluded home, I'd be deaf as a post. It would be like going to see Rammstein every night! :green: ).
D.D.
PS: Nice avatar. He sleeps with the fishes...
-
D.D. and werd, your experience listening to speakers that work well at low volumes is certainly beng borne out with me and the M80s. However, unlike werd, I don't have to listen for bass instruments playing the M80s at wife-sleeping volume levels. In fact, I've been finding that wife-listening levels work fine even when she's wide awake and I have the option of blasting away.
I'm still getting use to the different kind of sound which I understand is often typical of very linear speakers and ones with high resolution. It is very different than the relaxed and, by comparison, mellow sound of the MB2is. But unlike human relationships, familiarity with speakers doesn't breed contempt, but rather preference.
Yesterday, I tried my MB2is, again, and compared to the M80s with which I am growing much more familiar, I have to confess that the MB2is, although enjoyable, now seem a little veiled, and lacking in definition and in imaging.
In an important way, I am the poorest possible judge of audio in general and speakers in particular because I seldom hear live music. So for example, I can't say with any confidence that the fuller and fatter tenor sax on the MB2is or the leaner more defined tenor sax on the M80s is closer to a live tenor sax.
My suspiction, not knowledge, is that the M80 just might be closer to the mark. If I were to have this verfied, then what? It may be that I might not want to have these two different "sound flavours" from which to choose, but rather the more accurate, all the time.
Dave
-
D.D. and werd, your experience listening to speakers that work well at low volumes is certainly beng borne out with me and the M80s.
Dave
I am not sure what that means?
-
I've heard those Adagios of yours when they had a dealer here - they were the speakers that sold me on the transmission line concept. They were gorgeous, too - in that red finish. Ended up buying transmission line speakers in the end but ugly ones ( FB1i's :lol:). Eventually got settled with fact.8's -sort of the middle ground, I guess.
Speakers like yours ( and mine ) don't move the kind of air that a speaker with big drivers and cabinet volume does so it's a different sound but not without it's charms. You end up being a different kind of listener ( and perhaps with more of our listening intact...If I had DaveNote's PMC's and amps in a secluded home, I'd be deaf as a post. It would be like going to see Rammstein every night! :green: ).
D.D.
PS: Nice avatar. He sleeps with the fishes...
I am trying to get the local dealer to bring in a pair of those fact.8s. They look to me like they would play at all volumes with no compromise. I have been buggin him for months. 20 year warranty on them also reduces the price tag shock too.
-
I am not sure what that means?
Perhaps I misread your earlier message, and D.D.'s but I read them as your having experience with your Adagios at low volumes and D.D. having heard them, as well his own as a sort of middle ground.
Dave
-
DaveNote: As I have posted before, the Axiom M80v3's need tons of break-in time. With this debate not withstanding, time is on everybodys side. As "FireGuy" has stated eariler in this thread that the more expensive a speaker is, equates to a better "sound." Nothing could be further from the truth. I wish I had your experience with both speakers companys. :D
-
DaveNote: As I have posted before, the Axiom M80v3's need tons of break-in time. With this debate not withstanding, time is on everybodys side. As "FireGuy" has stated eariler in this thread that the more expensive a speaker is, equates to a better "sound." Nothing could be further from the truth. I wish I had your experience with both speakers companys. :D
Milford, every day I listen to the M80s (and I listen all day long - the joy of retirement), they seem to get better and better. I think you're right about long break in, whatever that may be.
I haven't a hot clue whether that's because I'm just getting used to the different sound or the drivers are breaking in. Axiom I think believes it's mostly the psychoacoustic effect. In terms of enjoyment, what difference does it make? You might have a loved one who is by "standard measures" butt ugly, but if she's beautiful to you, she's beautiful. Period.
BTW, I found something new about the M80s just this aftenoon. I already know that these speakers are placement sensitive. Slight movement produces noticeable changes in the sound. But today, I changed the chair I used. I have been sitting with ear level slightly below the top tweeter. Now ear level is between the lower tweeter and the top midrange driver. And once more I hear a difference. Midrange is somewhat smoother, less hard edged. Bass is extended a bit, and I'm getting quite a bit more slam.
I've had seating height make a difference before, but usually it has involved greater heights, and without changes that are so great. I'm checking with Axiom about this because I'm not sure I'm not just dreaming it all. Could be. Dreaming is another retirement benefit.
Dave
-
Dave, you created such a buzz about Axiom M80v3 I am now considering it for my home theater. I'm currently using an
Onkyo 5508 preamp along with a Bryston 9BSST/2. I have been thinking of upgrading my front speakers. The M80's seem very efficient and at 4 ohms I'll get 200 watts out of the Bryston which should be enough.
-
20 year warranty on them also reduces the price tag shock too.
No it doesn't! :lol:
The new HL is a vast improvement over Osama Bin Pollutin'-the-ocean BTW. :thumb:
Perhaps I misread your earlier message, and D.D.'s but I read them as your having experience with your Adagios at low volumes and D.D. having heard them, as well his own as a sort of middle ground.
Dave
Actually I was referring to the appearance of the fact.8's coming in somewhere between the-ahem- purposeful look of the PMC i-Series and those super sexy Acoustic Zen Adagios.
So how long until someone comes along and starts a brawl about speaker break-in? I'm trying to plan out my
evening... :jester:
D.D.
-
Dave, you created such a buzz about Axiom M80v3 I am now considering it for my home theater. I'm currently using an
Onkyo 5508 preamp along with a Bryston 9BSST/2. I have been thinking of upgrading my front speakers. The M80's seem very efficient and at 4 ohms I'll get 200 watts out of the Bryston which should be enough.
Hi bjski: At this very moment I'm listening to the M80s through my 7BSST2s via my Harman Kardon Pre-out, and I'm getting a darker soundstage and quite a bit more bass than using the amp section of the HK. Maybe your 9Bs would give them something extra, too.
I know nothing about home theatre, but your Bryston amps must make it terrific. I understand that a lot of home theatre fans look for a different kind of sound, and want to get not only surround, but heavy duty bass to catch every movie crash and boom. I know less about woofers than I do home theatre, but I did notice when I was researching the M80s that Axiom has a monster woofer that seems to have received a lot of praise. But I've also read that B&W has an excellent woofer in its higher price range.
At the risk of my being seen as a shill for the company, it seems to me that Axiom's speciality is home theatre. My HK, at 4 ohms, is suppose to produce 150 watts and it sounds very good. I can't imagine that your Bryston would not be even better. If you have any doubts, check the site.
Dave
-
No it doesn't! :lol:
The new HL is a vast improvement over Osama Bin Pollutin'-the-ocean BTW. :thumb:
Actually I was referring to the appearance of the fact.8's coming in somewhere between the-ahem- purposeful look of the PMC i-Series and those super sexy Acoustic Zen Adagios.
So how long until someone comes along and starts a brawl about speaker break-in? I'm trying to plan out my
evening... :jester:
D.D.
D.D. I'm sorry I didn't get it about you and the speakers you described. I'm with you about the break in debate, and in fact all the other debates in audio that go around and around. I don't know why and can't explain so-called break in: technical? mental? illusion? Most of the manufacturers of the speakers I've had have recommended break in time, some of them saying that drivers have to be worked in. True or not, I can't say. All I know is that speakers sound better to me, for whatever reason, after listening to them for some time.
After my contretemps yesterday on this thread with one of the strong techies, I'd prefer to leave these disputes to others, especially the fundamentalists on each side of them that keep them going on and on and on. I'm too old, too tired, and too uninterested to try putting my hand in them again.
So, if I get notices that resignite the endless and boring break in debate, I, too, will move on to better things: music, staring into space, toe clipping...anything else.
Dave
-
After my contretemps yesterday on this thread with one of the strong techies, I'd prefer to leave these disputes to others, especially the fundamentalists on each side of them that keep them going on and on and on. I'm too old, too tired, and too uninterested to try putting my hand in them again.
So, if I get notices that resignite the endless and boring break in debate, I, too, will move on to better things: music, staring into space, toe clipping...anything else.
Dave
T'would indeed be nice if the evangelists, the proselytizers and the junior debate team would just leave a tract in the mailbox and move on. As if...
Unless, like say, for James, this is your bread and butter, hi-fi really is an adult ToyLand and there should be room in the sandbox for all of us. Sometimes I think there's something about "The Hobby" that just makes folks grumpy. Maybe younger people avoid hi-fi because they're afraid it'll turn them into a cranky, over-opinionated, under-socialized...ahhh never mind. I'm not getting mired in that morass.
I take great joy from music. I take great pride in having put togther a system which pleases me in that it allows me to take all the spiritual nourishment from music that it offers me. And the sucker's paid for.
With that said, I am content.
Hope it spreads.
D.D.
-
T'would indeed be nice if the evangelists, the proselytizers and the junior debate team would just leave a tract in the mailbox and move on. As if...
Unless, like say, for James, this is your bread and butter, hi-fi really is an adult ToyLand and there should be room in the sandbox for all of us. Sometimes I think there's something about "The Hobby" that just makes folks grumpy. Maybe younger people avoid hi-fi because they're afraid it'll turn them into a cranky, over-opinionated, under-socialized...ahhh never mind. I'm not getting mired in that morass.
I take great joy from music. I take great pride in having put togther a system which pleases me in that it allows me to take all the spiritual nourishment from music that it offers me. And the sucker's paid for.
With that said, I am content.
Hope it spreads.
D.D.
The Gospel according to Diamond Dog! I like all of it, chapter and verse. Sign me up. :D
Dave
-
The Gospel according to Diamond Dog! I like all of it, chapter and verse. Sign me up. :D
Dave
he'll take 10 percent of your income.
-
http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_rodajealtavoces.htm
-
http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_rodajealtavoces.htm
Thanks, Prelude. This was a wonderful alternative to firing up another senseless feud. The surveyor's comments, I thought, were not as helpful as seeing how the manufacturers are all over the map about burn in.
Milford, who believes the M80s require a lot of burn in, is supported by the manufacturer who says that cones with different materials require different burn in, noting that metal ones take the longest. The M80s' cones are all metallic.
If I had to tilt in any direction, and thank God I don't, I'd say that even this survey shows that some kind of burn in, even very short, and depending on materials used, may be technically justified, and that the rest, in many, if not all, cases is really burning in one's head in getting used to the new sound. I can buy into that because at my age I have to burn in my head every morning just to get it started. Three seconds of cable news blather usually does the trick.
Dave
-
DaveNote: I'm just being a music lover here. Please listen to this song by Vince Gill and compare the mid-range between PMC's and Axiom M80v3's. This song always puts a tear in my eye.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jXrmAKBBTU
-
he'll take 10 percent of your income.
I said earlier that the sucker was paid for. Well my brothers, it didn't pay for itself...How would you feel about shakin' a tambourine down at the airport ? :eyebrows:
D.D.
-
DaveNote: I'm just being a music lover here. Please listen to this song by Vince Gill and compare the mid-range between PMC's and Axiom M80v3's. This song always puts a tear in my eye.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jXrmAKBBTU
That's a nice piece of work, milford3. Country needs more guys like Vince Gill to keep the flame alive.
D.D.
-
Dog. I concur, concur. This song by Vinnce is about the death of his brother. The details of his brothers death I do not know.
-
DaveNote: I'm just being a music lover here. Please listen to this song by Vince Gill and compare the mid-range between PMC's and Axiom M80v3's. This song always puts a tear in my eye.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jXrmAKBBTU
Milford, this link doesn't load on my iPad. What's the name of the song? Never have listened to Gill. I'll see if I can find a way to get it playing om my audio system, if I can find it on youtube, or elsewhere. Unfortunately, that also means having to crank up my PC, which I now loath. Do you have any other title where I might do the comparison you're looking for im case I can't find the Gill track?
Dave
-
Dave Note: The name of the song is "Go rest high on the mountain." Gills best. Just want to know how this song compares to the PMC's to the Axiom M80v3. Enjoy the music my friend.
-
I said earlier that the sucker was paid for. Well my brothers, it didn't pay for itself...How would you feel about shakin' a tambourine down at the airport ? :eyebrows:
D.D.
Ok I was at the airport where were you?
-
Ok I was at the airport where were you?
I was here listening to the system all my tambourine-shakers paid for. Now where's my money?
D.D.
-
Dave, I also have the 7bsst/2 but like you in a different system. The big system has been relegated to it's own room in the basement. :duh: Gotta deal with the WAF.
-
Dave, I also have the 7bsst/2 but like you in a different system. The big system has been relegated to it's own room in the basement. :duh: Gotta deal with the WAF.
bjski, this is a great option if one spends a lot of time in a second room listening to the big system. My two system, in-the-same-room, arrangement is presenting me with a bit of a conundrum. I think my M80s undoubtedly sound better with my 7BSST2s, but I've yet to figure out how I can do setups that let me listen to the MB2is and switch to the M80s easily, meaning without connecting and unconnecting cables. And there is an even more scary potential choice to make. If I decide I like the M80s using the 7BSST2s more than the MB2is - not entirely impossible - then what? No need to answer this mostly rhetorical question rattling around my head today.
Dave
-
bjski, this is a great option if one spends a lot of time in a second room listening to the big system. My two system, in-the-same-room, arrangement is presenting me with a bit of a conundrum. I think my M80s undoubtedly sound better with my 7BSST2s, but I've yet to figure out how I can do setups that let me listen to the MB2is and switch to the M80s easily, meaning without connecting and unconnecting cables. And there is an even more scary potential choice to make. If I decide I like the M80s using the 7BSST2s more than the MB2is - not entirely impossible - then what? No need to answer this mostly rhetorical question rattling around my head today.
Dave
That's a dilly of a pickle you find yourself in there, Dave. Hmmm....
Tell you what I'm gonna do for you today : I'll take those PMC's off your hands if they're just gonna clutter up the joint. You paid, what, about $1400 for those Axioms,no? I'll give'em a good home and I'll give you, oh, let's say $1350...I'd pay more but- well they're not quite as good as those M80's are they - so I guess the offer should reflect that, huh? I mean Momma didn't raise no fools, right ? Am I right ? Sure I'm right ! Hell, I'm feeling the love today...I'll even throw in the shipping charges ! Whattaya say there, Sport ? It'll be like gettin' those new speakers for free !
But hey, Bud - pitter patter, let's get at 'er ! I hear somebody's about to post about a pair of something that's gonna really shake up the ol' audio world for under a grand fer cryin' out loud and well that ain't exactly gonna help yer resale...
So...we got a deal?
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=62909)
Tongue firmly in cheek,
D.D.
-
D.D. I thought someone might want to make me an offer I couldn't refuse, and I had an inkling it might be you.
Which raises this question about your chosen avatar: Is he trying not to see the reaction of people to whom he has made such offers? Or is he just trying to hide from his victims.
Dave
-
D.D. I thought someone might want to make me an offer I couldn't refuse, and I had an inkling it might be you.
Which raises this question about your chosen avatar: Is he trying not to see the reaction of people to whom he has made such offers? Or is he just trying to hide from his victims.
Dave
A little from Column A and a little from Column B, Dave. :D
Actually, it's David Bowie circa Heroes
D.D.
-
Dave,did you get the better woofers and the dual speaker wire inputs?
Thanks
-
Dave Note: The name of the song is "Go rest high on the mountain." Gills best. Just want to know how this song compares to the PMC's to the Axiom M80v3. Enjoy the music my friend.
Milford, I found Gill singing this song, but could only set it up to listen to it through my iPad to my M80s, not my PMCs. So in terms of the comparison you wanted, I'm sorry it was a no go.
I am not much of a country music fan, so the Gill cut, I'm afraid, did not move me.
The only country tilting piece that is among my favourite songs is Lyle Lovett singing North Dakota. Hopefully, this link will get you to the YouTube version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvTvnltNmfc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Dave
-
Dave, I listened to Lyle Lovett - North Dakota through my Axiom M22v3's. What a great song. Cheers!
-
Dave, I listened to Lyle Lovett - North Dakota through my Axiom M22v3's. What a great song. Cheers!
Milford, glad you likemit. I have only one Lovett album. Big mistake. There's a lot of country and western stuff he does I don't care for, but some others I like a lot.
This one is Ballad of the Snow Leopard, which I heard for the first time tonight blew me away:
httrp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tdIkj_DJLQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player
One more famous is his She's Already Made Up Her Mind.
Dave
-
Dave,did you get the better woofers and the dual speaker wire inputs?
Thanks
bjski: I don't know exactly what you mean by better woofers. Axiom gives customers a choice of cast baskets or stamped steel. Axiom is very big on testing, and its tests say there is no detectable difference between them. But it knows some people want casts, so like a good and smart company, it offers them as an option. I bought the stamped steel baskets.
It also offers dual connections. There is a big debate about the merits of bi-wiring. I've done it, without noticieable effect. On the other hand I knew I would not be bi-amping. So I bought just the plain jane connections.
Dave
-
bjski: I don't know exactly what you mean by better woofers. Axiom gives customers a choice of cast baskets or stamped steel. Axiom is very big on testing, and its tests say there is no detectable difference between them. But it knows some people want casts, so like a good and smart company, it offers them as an option. I bought the stamped steel baskets.
It also offers dual connections. There is a big debate about the merits of bi-wiring. I've done it, without noticieable effect. On the other hand I knew I would not be bi-amping. So I bought just the plain jane connections.
Dave
I would consider bywiring on those speakers if available. They use a more complicated speaker array with a subsequent x-over circuit But not if I am trying to keep the costs down while using a receiver.
-
Interesting article by Alan Lofft on biwring:
http://www.axiomaudio.com/tips_biwiring_and_biamping.html
-
Those who have been following this topic since I posted my review of the M80s will have seen that I have compared them very favourably to my PMC MB2is. I have now listened to them for, I guess, more than 100 hours, and that opinion only has been reinforced. Growing accustomed to their sound, I prefer the M80s' high end and the bass; the high end is brighter than the MB2is, the way I like it, and the bass is tighter and more defined. The imaging is distinctly better IMO. I say this recognizing that the PMCs are terrific. I am certain that others do, and would prefer, their sound.
And now I have little doubt that M80s are "uber-revealing" compared to any speaker I've had, including the MB2is. But that quality, as is well-known, is double-edged. Good recordings sound better, but bad ones can sound awful. And I'm finding that a lot of recordings I formerly thought were good, aren't so good, and in certain passages, are very bad indeed.
In particular, on some recordings, on some passages, I have been hearing a kind of rasping, new to my ear, that until yesterday, I worried might be distortion caused by the M80s. It happens with some voices, some piano passages played in the upper registers, some sax, and some combination of instruments. The sound is unpleasant to my ear.
Yesterday, I tried these same recordings and passages on my MB2is, but this time at higher volumes, knowing that these speakers need to be cranked up to get them to work best. And there it was - the rasping sound, which I hadn't noticed before when I had listened to the MB2is at less than very high volume, which is my usual practice. Conclusion: the recordings are at fault, and the M80s don't need to be cranked up to produce it.
Readers of this topic also will have noticed that I have been a little shaken at the prospect of confronting the possibility that I might prefer the Axiom sound to the PMC sound, which in my case cost me many times more than the price of the M80s. I've asked, "Then what?"
The eventual decision, if I have to make it, could be a big one. Keep both, sell the MB2is, something else. Or, I might just get used to it; indeed, I probably will over time. But like Scarlett O'Hara, I'm going to think about a big decision "tomorrow."
Still, the occasional rasping, the byproduct of the M80s' extraordinarily faithful reproduction, is not pleasant to my ear. I am waiting to receive Axiom's DSP designed to improve the performance of the M80s, which should come to me in the next several weeks. It may soften the rasp or make it worse; can't know for sure now.
In the interim, I want the choice of addressing that rasp until the DSP comes. My Bryston preamp, like really good ones, has no tone controls. My lesser device, the Harmon Kardon (HK) receiver has old fashioned tone controls, and I've found that dialing back the treble softens the rasp, which helps me get past the recordings and passages I now find difficult. But as Axiom has made clear to me, although receivers do a good job with the M80s, they cannot bring the best out these speakers the way my Bryston would amps would.
So, as an interim step, I have decided for the next several weeks to use my big 7BSST2s and, at the same time, have access to the HK's treble control. Therefore, I've detached my MB2is from the 7BSST2s - "The horror, the horror" - it felt a bit like taking them off life support. I've hooked up the M80s to the 7BSST2s, and I've used the HK pre-out to connect the receiver to the 7BSST2s, which allows me to use the HK treble control when I need it.
Not the ultimate solution. But one I can live with for the moment. The solution, if I can decide on one, thankfully, I can think about tomorrow.
Dave
-
Just out of curiosity what source are you using upstairs? Also since you moved the Bryston Amps you may as well move the pre IMO and the source too. It sounds like the the big system is on hold. Curious about the pre amp in your upstairs system with the bcd
Tired yet? Hehe
-
Just out of curiosity what source are you using upstairs? Also since you moved the Bryston Amps you may as well move the pre IMO and the source too. It sounds like the the big system is on hold. Curious about the pre amp in your upstairs system with the bcd
Tired yet? Hehe
I'm sorry, werd, I may not have made myself clear in the OP, and subsequent postings. I have two systems in one room. Until now, I've been using the M80s on the HK receiver and the MB2is on the main system, the one with all the Bryston amps and pre-amps. I have done a lot of connecting and reconnecting to compare the speakers, but today I opted for the HK pre-amp section and the 7BSST2 amps to drive the M80s. I could have tried to drive the MB2is from the HK's second set of speaker connections, but that would have been going backward, and risk clipping my PMC speakers. But I wanted, at least for now, to drive the M80s with the Bryston amps, and they have only one speaker connection. Had to make a choice, and this is the one I made pending the receipt of the DSP.
Hope this helps explain my setup.
Dave
-
Davenote, interesting comments above regarding rasping etc. Have you ever analyzed your audio room in respect to frequency response? I wonder if certain frequency ranges might be a bit "hotter" than others causing some of the above mentioned issues?
-
Davenote, interesting comments above regarding rasping etc. Have you ever analyzed your audio room in respect to frequency response? I wonder if certain frequency ranges might be a bit "hotter" than others causing some of the above mentioned issues?
Haven't anayzed my room. My wife would say my head comes first. :D
You might be right. However, I just detected today similar sounds in my car system which is a pretty good one, when playing in in higher volumes.
I'm wondering, therefore, if the source is distortion in the recording process, perhaps in microphones - what kind, how used?
Dave
-
I'm sorry, werd, I may not have made myself clear in the OP, and subsequent postings. I have two systems in one room. Until now, I've been using the M80s on the HK receiver and the MB2is on the main system, the one with all the Bryston amps and pre-amps. I have done a lot of connecting and reconnecting to compare the speakers, but today I opted for the HK pre-amp section and the 7BSST2 amps to drive the M80s. I could have tried to drive the MB2is from the HK's second set of speaker connections, but that would have been going backward, and risk clipping my PMC speakers. But I wanted, at least for now, to drive the M80s with the Bryston amps, and they have only one speaker connection. Had to make a choice, and this is the one I made pending the receipt of the DSP.
Hope this helps explain my setup.
Dave
Oic.... Got ya. Abstinence will either make your heart fonder or clear up some confusion in what to do next. Hopefully the m80s come out on top so you can free up some cash.
-
Oic.... Got ya. Abstinence will either make your heart fonder or clear up some confusion in what to do next. Hopefully the m80s come out on top so you can free up some cash.
Good observations, werd. My dilemma is this, perhaps. These are outrageously accurate speakers: my guess is that they are telling, unmercifully, the truth of what went into a recording. And as I've mentioned to someone today, it's like being in one of those fantasy movies where everyone has to tell the truth 24/7. It's usually good to tell the truth, but sometimes it can get ugly. I'm trying to deal with the M80s' relentless audio truth-telling.
Dave
-
Good observations, werd. My dilemma is this, perhaps. These are outrageously accurate speakers: my guess is that they are telling, unmercifully, the truth of what went into a recording. And as I've mentioned to someone today, it's like being in one of those fantasy movies where everyone has to tell the truth 24/7. It's usually good to tell the truth, but sometimes it can get ugly. I'm trying to deal with the M80s' relentless audio truth-telling.
Dave
Bring it on! Give me a sterile audio neutral sounding system stock and then tweak inwards (so to speak) and warm it up. Aside from the speaker position. Which is the biggest tweak and free you should look at cabling the bcd and as important racking it or platforms. (i am just trying to the get nasties out of the bcd). If its in the recording this harshness you dislike you won't mind if it isn't amplified with noise attached to it.
I spent a couple of years with my bcd and know how it sounds. I have always though that the only thing wrong with the BCD is brystons short and wide chassis. The piece likes to be mass loaded underneath or elevated. This stuff really helps with noise and glare getting amplified and getting rid of it.
Also mains cabling into the bcd is a must over stock. It's a place to start anyways.
Of course I am assuming you haven't done this yet and you may have, if so I don't know what to say about the added harshness.
-
Bring it on! Give me a sterile audio neutral sounding system stock and then tweak inwards (so to speak) and warm it up. Aside from the speaker position. Which is the biggest tweak and free you should look at cabling the bcd and as important racking it or platforms. (i am just trying to the get nasties out of the bcd). If its in the recording this harshness you dislike you won't mind if it isn't amplified with noise attached to it.
I spent a couple of years with my bcd and know how it sounds. I have always though that the only thing wrong with the BCD is brystons short and wide chassis. The piece likes to be mass loaded underneath or elevated. This stuff really helps with noise and glare getting amplified and getting rid of it.
Also mains cabling into the bcd is a must over stock. It's a place to start anyways.
Of course I am assuming you haven't done this yet and you may have, if so I don't know what eto say about the added harshness.
Thanks for the suggestions, werd, but I must give them a pass. I'm going to try the DSP, but not go the tweaking route. I don't do tweaking for the reasons Sasha opposes them, but just my experience. I appreciate that many love tweaking and see it as part of the fun of the hobby. But it's not for me. Put a lot into tweaking at one point, and it never gave me the improvements or solutions I was seeking.
Tweaking, for me, at my age, is a lot like asking me to date, again. A whole lot of money, time, and effort for a boatload of disappointment.
But if it works for you, then to be sure: you should bring it on. :D
Dave
-
Hi Dave,
Although not too happy for you about this experience, I am glad I've finally found someone hearing the exact same distortion I do, listening to certain recordings, and being able to describe it so understandably as you do. The other day I mentioned the Norah Jones recordings, and I meant this exact rasping effect. It is quit unpleasant to to the point you start to doubt your system....
I hear those on my Quad ESL's and am certain I had them revised already once or twice without them being in need of that.... :cry: just because of this rasping effect.
Then again, when you hear the good recordings in total transparency bringing audio-bliss into the auditorium, that stress (and costs) is soon forgotten.
Please keep us up to speed with your Axioms.
Thanks,
Marius
In particular, on some recordings, on some passages, I have been hearing a kind of rasping, new to my ear, that until yesterday, I worried might be distortion caused by the M80s. It happens with some voices, some piano passages played in the upper registers, some sax, and some combination of instruments. The sound is unpleasant to my ear.
Yesterday, I tried these same recordings and passages on my MB2is, but this time at higher volumes, knowing that these speakers need to be cranked up to get them to work best. And there it was - the rasping sound, which I hadn't noticed before when I had listened to the MB2is at less than very high volume, which is my usual practice. Conclusion: the recordings are at fault, and the M80s don't need to be cranked up to produce it.
Dave
-
Hi Dave,
Although not too happy for you about this experience, I am glad I've finally found someone hearing the exact same distortion I do, listening to certain recordings, and being able to describe it so understandably as you do. The other day I mentioned the Norah Jones recordings, and I meant this exact rasping effect. It is quit unpleasant to to the point you start to doubt your system....
I hear those on my Quad ESL's and am certain I had them revised already once or twice without them being in need of that.... :cry: just because of this rasping effect.
Then again, when you hear the good recordings in total transparency bringing audio-bliss into the auditorium, that stress (and costs) is soon forgotten.
Please keep us up to speed with your Axioms.
Thanks,
Marius
Thanks Marius. It is a comfort to know that others have experienced this sound. Hearing it without third part verification can make you think you're, literally, "hearing voices."
There is as you say a bright side to this kind of revealing speaker. In fact, if the M80s didn't have so many vital merits, the rasp would not be so bothersome. Terrific sound breeds a demand for it all. But engineering and speaker design means making choices, trade-offs, and consumers, including me, can forget that they have to live with these. For example, the B&W 685, which have been replaced by the M80 in my second system, is very good; in fact what it has what I thought is a better sounding tweeter than in my MB2is, but lacked something I wanted. Trade off, choices.
Yes, I'll try to keep you up to speed on my evolving impressions, and particularly how DSP sounds to me in my room when I receive it.
Dave
-
:cry: :cry:
One of the tweeters on my M80s has gone bad. Axiom sending out replacement ASAP. Wondering if this may be the source of the rasping sound I've been hearing.
Stay tuned.
Dave
-
:cry: :cry:
One of the tweeters on my M80s has gone bad. Axiom sending out replacement ASAP. Wondering if this may be the source of the rasping sound I've been hearing.
Stay tuned.
Dave
Did you stay tuned? Update. Subsequently spoke to Axiom and since driver faliure is rare, they suggested I check the leads from one of the tweeters to the other on the affected speaker. One lead was, in fact, dangling. Axiom has seen these connections pulled, but this one looked as if it originally had been crimped too tightly. No way of knowing at this this time what happened. My guess...only a guess...is the wire had been crimped tightly and that subsequent movement, perhaps by me, finally snapped it. This is something Axiom has never seen before, and will be investigating.
In any case, and more importantly for me, they will be fixing the connection or send me a new speaker.
Dave
-
Axioms customer sevice is excellent. One of the best in the industry. Either Allan or Brent will fix any problem.
-
Thanks for the suggestions, werd, but I must give them a pass. I'm going to try the DSP, but not go the tweaking route. I don't do tweaking for the reasons Sasha opposes them, but just my experience. I appreciate that many love tweaking and see it as part of the fun of the hobby. But it's not for me. Put a lot into tweaking at one point, and it never gave me the improvements or solutions I was seeking.
Tweaking, for me, at my age, is a lot like asking me to date, again. A whole lot of money, time, and effort for a boatload of disappointment.
But if it works for you, then to be sure: you should bring it on.
Dave
Well put Dave, and I concur with your findings also
Mark
-
Axioms customer sevice is excellent. One of the best in the industry. Either Allan or Brent will fix any problem.
I couldn't agree more. My speakers are scheduled to be fixed tomorrow afternoon. :D
Dave
-
If you sell the PMCs, try ATCs. You might dig those like I do. However, they are soft dome tweeters, so maybe not enough treble for you?
-
If you sell the PMCs, try ATCs. You might dig those like I do. However, they are soft dome tweeters, so maybe not enough treble for you?
I've heard very good things about ATCs. Selling the PMCs is doubtful unless I were willing to sell them for what looks like the going rate - less than half of what I paid for them. But if I were to change speakers, even with taking a bath, I'm more likely to demo the passive Model T before I would ATCs, if there is an ATC dealer here.
I've thought about the Model T this way.
As good as the PMC is, its house sound, in fact, makes it less consonant with every thing Bryston is about - neutralitty, accuracy, gettng out of a recording exactly what was put into it - than Bryston is with Axiom. Axiom, also just happens to have the same incredible commitment as Bryston (See Sasha's thread on his amazing experience with Bryston in the past couple of days, as well as mine with Axiom).
Looks to me like a match made in neutral heaven. The M80s have blown me away. Imagine what an Axiom-based speaker designed under the hand of James Tanner (acting the role of Steve Jobs in the process saying yeah or nay to every element) will sound like!
Before my Axiom experience (conversion?) it never occurred to me to consider the Model T. But with it, and James looking hard at a passive version, I'm anxious to see him decide to make it a product and put it into dealers' demo rooms.
Dave
-
I've heard very good things about ATCs. Selling the PMCs is doubtful unless I were willing to sell them for what looks like the going rate - less than half of what I paid for them. But if I were to change speakers, even with taking a bath, I'm more likely to demo the passive Model T before I would ATCs, if there is an ATC dealer here.
I've thought about the Model T this way.
As good as the PMC is, its house sound, in fact, makes it less consonant with every thing Bryston is about - neutralitty, accuracy, gettng out of a recording exactly what was put into it - than Bryston is with Axiom. Axiom, also just happens to have the same incredible commitment as Bryston (See Sasha's thread on his amazing experience with Bryston in the past couple of days, as well as mine with Axiom).
Looks to me like a match made in neutral heaven. The M80s have blown me away. Imagine what an Axiom-based speaker designed under the hand of James Tanner (acting the role of Steve Jobs in the process saying yeah or nay to every element) will sound like!
Before my Axiom experience (conversion?) it never occurred to me to consider the Model T. But with it, and James looking hard at a passive version, I'm anxious to see him decide to make it a product and put it into dealers' demo rooms.
Dave
Cool. Are you saying the PMCs don't have good resale value? No problem about the ATCs. I have every reason to believe the Model T's are gonna be something special.
-
Cool. Are you saying the PMCs don't have good resale value? No problem about the ATCs. I have every reason to believe the Model T's are gonna be something special.
I did a quick search online and based on it looks like I'd get less than half my original cost for the MB2i.
Dave
-
I did a quick search online and based on it looks like I'd get less than half my original cost for the MB2i.
Dave
Geez...that's too bad. I'm sorry to hear that.
-
Geez...that's too bad. I'm sorry to hear that.
Thanks for the condolences. But they may be premature. I have yet to decide whether or not to given them up.
Dave
-
You're welcome. Ok. Well, whatever you decide, good luck. 8)
-
Did a little closer listening today. Here's an update.
Main system, MB2is, with all Bryston 7BSST2s and BP26
Second system M80s with HK 3490
The MB2is have more bass, no doubt about it. The extension is greater. However, it is not as good as the M80s, IMO, for these reasons.
First, it is not linear. By that I mean that the MB2is' bass is more prominent among the various frequencies. The Axiom frequencies are more balanced, no one range predominates over another. So by comparison, the MB2is seem bassy. Many would prefer them for that reason, but I think that makes them less accurate.
Second, and equally important, the MB2is bass is somewhat smeared and less well defined than the M80. For example, listening to a good acoustic bass recording (Ron Carter, The Striker), the M80 produces that bit of thump or percussive plucking sound that should be present, which is largely masked by the MB2i.
The DSP that is coming is suppose to extend the M80 bass which should make the M80 even more of a competitor.
The MB2is midrange, especially in vocals, is very sweet and appealing in the MB2is. The M80s' midrange is less appealing, but I believe may be more accurate.
The high end of the MB2is is good, but not as bright or nearly as revealing as that of the M80. On the plus side, for listeners like me that means great cymbal smashes.
The rasp I've been hearing I think is neither a problem with the M80s, or as I feared, ear fatigue (having now rested my ears), but rather a kind of sound that I may not have noticed before, but which has, through long and very close listening, been brought to my attention by the revealing M80s. Now I hear rasping everywhere when I listen for it. In other words, it may have been there all the time in but I just may not have noticed it until the M80s "revealed" it to me.
Playing at the same volumes, the rasp can be heard on both the MB2i and the M80. However, it is more distinct on the M80.
Finally, I again connected the M80s to my Bryston amps and preamp. Blacker, quieter soundstage. With these electronics, the M80s have a more relaxed sound, without losing resolution and detail. My guess? Lower distortion from the electronics.
Dave
-
Wow, that's quite amazing. PMC just got embarrassed by the low cost M80. Shame on you, PMC. hehe. :D
-
Hi Dave,
I've been away on vacation and then extremely busy upon my return, so not much time for AC. I've been reading through this and find your experience to be interesting to say the least.
Your comparisons and descriptions seem to cove things as detail portayal, frequency balance, low level and high lllevel dynamics but you don't touch on soundstage, imaging, separation, nor harmonic, tonal, timbral accuracyand distortion atreference levels. When you get a chance could you provide your impression of the differences on these areas? Glad you've been enjoying this sojourn.
-
Hi Dave,
I've been away on vacation and then extremely busy upon my return, so not much time for AC. I've been reading through this and find your experience to be interesting to say the least.
Your comparisons and descriptions seem to cove things as detail portayal, frequency balance, low level and high lllevel dynamics but you don't touch on soundstage, imaging, separation, nor harmonic, tonal, timbral accuracyand distortion atreference levels. When you get a chance could you provide your impression of the differences on these areas? Glad you've been enjoying this sojourn.
SoundGame: Because I am not a professional reviewer, a musician, or have any experience with or knowledge abut professional audio or speaker design and development. I am nor familiar with all the terms you have noted. But if you keep these critical caveats in mind, and with me looking up some of the terms, I will, as an amateur, and with apologies to those, like yourself, more knowledgeable than I, give it a try.
Soundstage: I think I have mentioned that I have been compelled to position to the M80s only five feet apart. This, naturally has narrowed the soundstage, which I don't find to be much of a problem. On the other hand, the M80s give the pleasant allusion that music is slightly extended beyond the edges of the soundstage, something I don't find with the MB2is.
Imaging, with Stereophile defines as "The measure of a system's ability to float stable and specific phantom images, reproducing the original sizes and locations of the instruments across the soundstage." I think I've written earlier, perhaps in my own terms, that the M80s are quite a bit better in pin-point definition of instruments across soundstage. Strangely, the M80s leave far less of the impression than the MB2is that music is coming out of a box.
Separation: If this refers to the directionality of the various sounds on the sondstage, I would say it is good on both speakers. The separation left and right is good, and to the degree that one gets the sense of instruments and voices being softer or louder as if they were nearer of farther from the listener, I would have to give the M80s the prize, by a margin, in this category. The closing bell on Pink Floyd's High Hopes fades and recedes better than on the MB2is, even though the soundstage is narrower.
Stereophile's glossary says timbre is "The recognizable characteristic sound "signature" of a musical instrument, by which it is possible to tell an oboe, for example, from a flute when both are sounding the same note." Again, I find the M80s superior in this regard. I have always found, depending on the player, that it can be difficult for me to detect the difference among soprano, alto and tenor saxophones when playing about the same notes. This is somewhat easier for me listening to the M80s than the MB2is.
The tonal quality, meaning the accuracy of the tone when comparing the reproduced to a live instrument, is hard for me to judge with any confidence since I very seldom listen to live instruments. But based on my shaky memory, I think the M80s do this quite a bit better than the MB2is. For example, with acoustic bass and tenor bass. I believe the M80s also have more accuracate tonal reproduction of piano decay as well as piano resonance.
I'm flummoxed when it comes to harmonic accuracy because I couldn't find an explanation that would define it in terms I understood. If you can help me out on this one, SoundGame, maybe I can attempt an answer.
Distortion at reference level is another term with which i'm not familiar. I did find this definition; "Reference level is the volume at 75db (decibels) in your room using full band pink noise. When you set up your system and you run pink noise through your speakers one at a time setting each level using an SPL meter to 75db you will (after all channels are done) and your volume control is set to 0db you will achieve "reference" when playing back movies or music. Movies will tend to reach peaks of 115db with your system set up properly."
This may not be what you had in mind, but if it means using pink noise, my answer is that I have not used pink noise on either speaker. In terms of decibel levels, I have only iPad apps with which to measure them in my room. I have listened for relatively short periods of time in the 80 db range, with peaking to the low 90s, without distortion that I could detect on either speaker.
I hope these comments are of help.
Dave
-
SoundGame: Because I am not a professional reviewer, a musician, or have any experience with or knowledge abut professional audio or speaker design and development. I am nor familiar with all the terms you have noted. But if you keep these critical caveats in mind, and with me looking up some of the terms, I will, as an amateur, and with apologies to those, like yourself, more knowledgeable than I, give it a try.
Soundstage: I think I have mentioned that I have been compelled to position to the M80s only five feet apart. This, naturally has narrowed the soundstage, which I don't find to be much of a problem. On the other hand, the M80s give the pleasant allusion that music is slightly extended beyond the edges of the soundstage, something I don't find with the MB2is.
Imaging, with Stereophile defines as "The measure of a system's ability to float stable and specific phantom images, reproducing the original sizes and locations of the instruments across the soundstage." I think I've written earlier, perhaps in my own terms, that the M80s are quite a bit better in pin-point definition of instruments across soundstage. Strangely, the M80s leave far less of the impression than the MB2is that music is coming out of a box.
Separation: If this refers to the directionality of the various sounds on the sondstage, I would say it is good on both speakers. The separation left and right is good, and to the degree that one gets the sense of instruments and voices being softer or louder as if they were nearer of farther from the listener, I would have to give the M80s the prize, by a margin, in this category. The closing bell on Pink Floyd's High Hopes fades and recedes better than on the MB2is, even though the soundstage is narrower.
Stereophile's glossary says timbre is "The recognizable characteristic sound "signature" of a musical instrument, by which it is possible to tell an oboe, for example, from a flute when both are sounding the same note." Again, I find the M80s superior in this regard. I have always found, depending on the player, that it can be difficult for me to detect the difference among soprano, alto and tenor saxophones when playing about the same notes. This is somewhat easier for me listening to the M80s than the MB2is.
The tonal quality, meaning the accuracy of the tone when comparing the reproduced to a live instrument, is hard for me to judge with any confidence since I very seldom listen to live instruments. But based on my shaky memory, I think the M80s do this quite a bit better than the MB2is. For example, with acoustic bass and tenor bass. I believe the M80s also have more accuracate tonal reproduction of piano decay as well as piano resonance.
I'm flummoxed when it comes to harmonic accuracy because I couldn't find an explanation that would define it in terms I understood. If you can help me out on this one, SoundGame, maybe I can attempt an answer.
Distortion at reference level is another term with which i'm not familiar. I did find this definition; "Reference level is the volume at 75db (decibels) in your room using full band pink noise. When you set up your system and you run pink noise through your speakers one at a time setting each level using an SPL meter to 75db you will (after all channels are done) and your volume control is set to 0db you will achieve "reference" when playing back movies or music. Movies will tend to reach peaks of 115db with your system set up properly."
This may not be what you had in mind, but if it means using pink noise, my answer is that I have not used pink noise on either speaker. In terms of decibel levels, I have only iPad apps with which to measure them in my room. I have listened for relatively short periods of time in the 80 db range, with peaking to the low 90s, without distortion that I could detect on either speaker.
I hope these comments are of help.
Dave
Hi Dave,
Without getting hung up on terms (the terms are meant to facilitate the discussion and help impart the experience that you're having to others), you've done a fine job in explaining what you're hearing as the differences between the two speakers. Harmonic, tonal and timbral qualities are very much related and overlapping and difficult to exclusively - I'm no professed expert but you've done a great job with it.
Tone would decribe the correct overall pitch (or dominent first harmonic) timbral / harmonic accuracy would involve not only the domient first harmonic but also second and perhaps third that make instruments actually sound different. Like you described - different sax ie. barritone, tenor, alto and soprano could play the same note but with a revealing speaker sound different based on the timbral/harmonic accuracy.
On the point of distortion, you've got it basically right. It's about listening for the level of distortion at a reference volume (75 to 85 dB on average continuous). The speaker with the lower distortion will generally be the preferred. There is always distortion in speakers, so you want to get to the speaker that has the least, though in your case it sound like at the reference level neither speaker is an overt offender.
Finally, on soundstage. Soundstage is essentially the three-dimensional image of the acoustic environment that you perceive. It involves the width, depth and height limits/boundaries of the acoustic image, which is generally more clear when you're eyes are closed. The soundstage is the realm in which the audiophile/listener excapes to. Placement of all instruments, including reverberation effects of the recording venue all lie within the soundstage. So when you're listening and close your eyes, the deepest, highest and broadest sounds you hear - at their lmits/boundaries define the soundstage. Some speakers can throw a soundstage that goes far deeper than your back wall and far wider than their left and right placement as well as higher than themselves. Compare the speakers with similar placement and determine the difference.
Soundstage is different but linked to imaging and the other aspects of image placement, image definition (pin-point accuracy) etc. All of which come together to give a lifelike portrayal of the performers in front of you.
Cheers.
-
Very good analysis there.
-
Hi Dave,
Without getting hung up on terms (the terms are meant to facilitate the discussion and help impart the experience that you're having to others), you've done a fine job in explaining what you're hearing as the differences between the two speakers. Harmonic, tonal and timbral qualities are very much related and overlapping and difficult to exclusively - I'm no professed expert but you've done a great job with it.
Tone would decribe the correct overall pitch (or dominent first harmonic) timbral / harmonic accuracy would involve not only the domient first harmonic but also second and perhaps third that make instruments actually sound different. Like you described - different sax ie. barritone, tenor, alto and soprano could play the same note but with a revealing speaker sound different based on the timbral/harmonic accuracy.
On the point of distortion, you've got it basically right. It's about listening for the level of distortion at a reference volume (75 to 85 dB on average continuous). The speaker with the lower distortion will generally be the preferred. There is always distortion in speakers, so you want to get to the speaker that has the least, though in your case it sound like at the reference level neither speaker is an overt offender.
Finally, on soundstage. Soundstage is essentially the three-dimensional image of the acoustic environment that you perceive. It involves the width, depth and height limits/boundaries of the acoustic image, which is generally more clear when you're eyes are closed. The soundstage is the realm in which the audiophile/listener excapes to. Placement of all instruments, including reverberation effects of the recording venue all lie within the soundstage. So when you're listening and close your eyes, the deepest, highest and broadest sounds you hear - at their lmits/boundaries define the soundstage. Some speakers can throw a soundstage that goes far deeper than your back wall and far wider than their left and right placement as well as higher than themselves. Compare the speakers with similar placement and determine the difference.
Soundstage is different but linked to imaging and the other aspects of image placement, image definition (pin-point accuracy) etc. All of which come together to give a lifelike portrayal of the performers in front of you.
Cheers.
SoundGame: Thanks for your very detailed explanation of terms. Even though you've addressed the harmonics thing, I have to confess it goes way over my head. My fault. Not yours.
In terms of depth on the soundstage, the M80s, again, do a better job than the MB2is. I've never been able to detect a difference in height of instruments whatever the system I've used, and this is true of the two speakers I'm using. Moreover, I get the effect of depth with my eyes open, not closed. And this, too, has been my experience with not only the speakers I'm using but all others systems I've had.
Since my last posting, I have made the BIG plunge. Something I would have said was impossible before I got the M80s.
I have positioned the M80s on the outside of the MB2is, so that the M80s are now just over 7 feet apart. I tried toeing them in, but they sound better facing straight ahead. As woud be expected, the soundstage is even better. The M80s are now being powered by the Bryston 7BSST2 amps, which gives the soundstage a darker background, and overall the sound has improved.
But the truly BIG thing is even more unexpected. I have disconnected the MB2is from my Bryston amps!!! To my ears, when I count up all the ways the M80s are better than the MB2is, I've found myself not listening to the PMCs
I feel as if I've committed heresy, treason, or betrayed an old love. Unbelievable and bewildering. Haven't a clue what I'm going to do next with these great and expensive speakers.
Dave
-
Soundstage is different but linked to imaging and the other aspects of image placement, image definition (pin-point accuracy) etc. All of which come together to give a lifelike portrayal of the performers in front of you.
Except that live music doesn't sound like that. That terminology is useful is describing how well a given speaker or system reproduces the construct that is a recording, but "lifelike"? Live music doesn't allow itself to be so neatly defined and categorized. Nor does it confine itself to a "soundstage". That's why no matter how good a pair of speakers are or a system is, they/it may shine in terms of reproducing a recording and all the illusion and construction that goes into it, but they are a pale imitaton of the real deal. Tonal accuracy is one thing but a lot of what audiophiles claim makes for a great speaker has little do with the actual experience of being present at a musical performance. It's different.
D.D.
-
Except that live music doesn't sound like that. That terminology is useful is describing how well a given speaker or system reproduces the construct that is a recording, but "lifelike"? Live music doesn't allow itself to be so neatly defined and categorized. Nor does it confine itself to a "soundstage". That's why no matter how good a pair of speakers are or a system is, they/it may shine in terms of reproducing a recording and all the illusion and construction that goes into it, but they are a pale imitaton of the real deal. Tonal accuracy is one thing but a lot of what audiophiles claim makes for a great speaker has little do with the actual experience of being present at a musical performance. It's different.
D.D.
D.D. I'm the last person to compare live musical performances with what any audio system does. As I've said above, I just don't hear enough live music to make any credible comparison. In may case, then, when I comment on audio systems, it is always about how they reproduce what has been recorded.
I'd be interested in SoundGame's comment.
Dave
-
I won't ever be one to say that with current technology - both recording and playback, that we can reproduce the live "unplugged" event. It just can't be done YET.
However, we can reproduce what the recording engineer heard in the control room - at least come very close AND with sufficient power, recreate what a live "amplified" event sounds like - almost spot on. Heck in such case you are only hearing their amps and speakers in a large venue with often horrible acoustics. I would say that such amplified event can be surpassed with high quality recordings, playback and a quality listening room.
On live, unplugged, a recoding can also surpass in terms of detail retrieval when you're talking about listening to an artist from a distance. Case in point, onrecordings I have, I can hear the breath of the singer, the puckering and smack of their lips and even the spit in their mouths. In a live, unplugged, event, at 20 ft, this can't be heard. Close miked recordings can provide the detail if not a recreation of reality.
-
I won't ever be one to say that with current technology - both recording and playback, that we can reproduce the live "unplugged" event. It just can't be done YET.
However, we can reproduce what the recording engineer heard in the control room - at least come very close AND with sufficient power, recreate what a live "amplified" event sounds like - almost spot on. Heck in such case you are only hearing their amps and speakers in a large venue with often horrible acoustics. I would say that such amplified event can be surpassed with high quality recordings, playback and a quality listening room.
On live, unplugged, a recoding can also surpass in terms of detail retrieval when you're talking about listening to an artist from a distance. Case in point, onrecordings I have, I can hear the breath of the singer, the puckering and smack of their lips and even the spit in their mouths. In a live, unplugged, event, at 20 ft, this can't be heard. Close miked recordings can provide the detail if not a recreation of reality.
Very interesting, D.D. It reinforces this sensible response to those that say, "my system is just like live:" What do you mean by live? Live in the back of an auditorium? Live very close to the performers? Live at an an all electronic driven badly amped outdoor concert?
And with respect, D.D., I believe we can potentially reproduce on our systems what the sound engineer heard in the control room only if what he heard is what ends up on the end product, what goes onto the CD. If what the sound engineer heard is subsequently processed further, then what he heard is not what we will hear. For me, this is much like the books we read. We don't see the original manuscript. We see draft XXX, which has been edited, copy-edited, etc. The book we read is a true representation of what the author, his editors, and his publisher decide in the final analysis to print. So I think the best we can hope for is to get out of the CD a faithful representation of what those who produced it decided to put on it.
Dave
-
However, we can reproduce what the recording engineer heard in the control room - at least come very close AND with sufficient power, recreate what a live "amplified" event sounds like - almost spot on. Heck in such case you are only hearing their amps and speakers in a large venue with often horrible acoustics. I would say that such amplified event can be surpassed with high quality recordings, playback and a quality listening room.
On live, unplugged, a recoding can also surpass in terms of detail retrieval when you're talking about listening to an artist from a distance. Case in point, onrecordings I have, I can hear the breath of the singer, the puckering and smack of their lips and even the spit in their mouths. In a live, unplugged, event, at 20 ft, this can't be heard. Close miked recordings can provide the detail if not a recreation of reality.
G: OK - first off, unless we were sitting next to that engineer, we don't know exactly what he was hearing. That's an assumption. What he was hearing then gets mixed down etc and then goes through mastering where all kinds of pixie dust gets sprinkled around because it's the last chance to dance.
The rest of your post just smacks of audiophile disease where you prefer to have all the rough edges smoothed off a performance and hear artificially spotlit details like the spit and lip smacking and super-clean sonics and such which, by your own admission, you wouldn't hear if you were actually at the performance. I'm not here to say which is better, the live performance or the dolled-up quasi-reproduction - that's utterly subjective. I myself enjoy both. But, whether we're discussing a guy sitting in your living room singing and accompanying himself on a flat-top or if you're at a full-on concert, the two aural experiences ( live vs. plunked down in front of a system ) are different. And the reproduction will never be as "lifelike" as that which is actually alive. Hairy legs and all. :green:
I'm not being snarky here, just curious...do you get exposed to a lot of live music in whatever form? Nothing wrong with not hearing live music or for that matter not even enjoying live music, I'm just looking for context.
D.D.
-
G: OK - first off, unless we were sitting next to that engineer, we don't know exactly what he was hearing. That's an assumption. What he was hearing then gets mixed down etc and then goes through mastering where all kinds of pixie dust gets sprinkled around because it's the last chance to dance.
The rest of your post just smacks of audiophile disease where you prefer to have all the rough edges smoothed off a performance and hear artificially spotlit details like the spit and lip smacking and super-clean sonics and such which, by your own admission, you wouldn't hear if you were actually at the performance. I'm not here to say which is better, the live performance or the dolled-up quasi-reproduction - that's utterly subjective. I myself enjoy both. But, whether we're discussing a guy sitting in your living room singing and accompanying himself on a flat-top or if you're at a full-on concert, the two aural experiences ( live vs. plunked down in front of a system ) are different. And the reproduction will never be as "lifelike" as that which is actually alive. Hairy legs and all. :green:
I'm not being snarky here, just curious...do you get exposed to a lot of live music in whatever form? Nothing wrong with not hearing live music or for that matter not even enjoying live music, I'm just looking for context.
D.D.
Hey there DD:
Curious is fine...and I'm not profaning to be an expert on this - this is just personal opinion but to answer your question, yes, I get out to hear live music whenever I can - not a whole lot but three or four times / yr at least which is enough over time to build an impression.
I've been to full out large venue concerts - 17th row centres at Pink Floyd and 5th row floors at Pheonix - listening at up to 110 - 120dB plus smaller amplified arrangements and then a number of unplugged, up close and personal. Then there is camp fires with family, friends and lets not forget my harmonica and bongo drums at home.
In my not above, I say, that we can't get a recording / playback system to sound like a true "unplugged" live event - we are agreed there; however, there are aspects of the recording/playback that we can appreciate - such as close miked recording or even sythesized recordings like Radio Head OK Computer and the like. I'm not saying these would fool you into thinking it's real but it is a quasi though spot-lit facsimilie of the real thing. And definitely can be appreciated from an audiophile perspective.
It's with amplified mid to large venue live music that the quality, I believe, on a quality system with sufficient power, can be very closely reproduced, if not beat. I'm not talking about the emotional connection with the music due to the live performance - you can't beat a pumping audience, the visuals of the performers, the smell, the heat the flashing camera, lights etc. Such live events are a total emotional experience and therefore, not a fair comparision and not a truly objective comparison. But the sound, well, if the band is using Marshall amps and Marshall speakers - go out and buy the identical system that they have, put it in your controlled environment, and then use the latest in recording techniques - mastering quality recording - and you're going to get extremely close to the base performance (sans venue and emotion). The difference is the quality of the recording vs. the speed of the actual live mics / pick-ups - and that would be it.
-
Hey there DD:
Curious is fine...and I'm not profaning to be an expert on this - this is just personal opinion but to answer your question, yes, I get out to hear live music whenever I can - not a whole lot but three or four times / yr at least which is enough over time to build an impression.
I've been to full out large venue concerts - 17th row centres at Pink Floyd and 5th row floors at Pheonix - listening at up to 110 - 120dB plus smaller amplified arrangements and then a number of unplugged, up close and personal. Then there is camp fires with family, friends and lets not forget my harmonica and bongo drums at home.
In my not above, I say, that we can't get a recording / playback system to sound like a true "unplugged" live event - we are agreed there; however, there are aspects of the recording/playback that we can appreciate - such as close miked recording or even sythesized recordings like Radio Head OK Computer and the like. I'm not saying these would fool you into thinking it's real but it is a quasi though spot-lit facsimilie of the real thing. And definitely can be appreciated from an audiophile perspective.
It's with amplified mid to large venue live music that the quality, I believe, on a quality system with sufficient power, can be very closely reproduced, if not beat. I'm not talking about the emotional connection with the music due to the live performance - you can't beat a pumping audience, the visuals of the performers, the smell, the heat the flashing camera, lights etc. Such live events are a total emotional experience and therefore, not a fair comparision and not a truly objective comparison. But the sound, well, if the band is using Marshall amps and Marshall speakers - go out and buy the identical system that they have, put it in your controlled environment, and then use the latest in recording techniques - mastering quality recording - and you're going to get extremely close to the base performance (sans venue and emotion). The difference is the quality of the recording vs. the speed of the actual live mics / pick-ups - and that would be it.
Thanks for your thoughts, G. Welcome back!
D.D.
-
Thanks for your thoughts, G. Welcome back!
D.D.
Thanks D.D. I've been around, just no time to post. Will try to keep a little more connected. Cheers!
-
Hi DaveNote-- My name is Bob Oliver (RW Oliver) was reading your post --Have we met before --Did you purchase your music man system from me?
-
Hi DaveNote-- My name is Bob Oliver (RW Oliver) was reading your post --Have we met before --Did you purchase your music man system from me?
This could be interesting - Dave, you know this guy?
-
Hi DaveNote-- My name is Bob Oliver (RW Oliver) was reading your post --Have we met before --Did you purchase your music man system from me?
Hi Bob: Absolutely incredible to hear from you after all these years. And to hear this way! I bought your music man speakers at a kind of garage sale/auction at Oakwood Audio many years ago. I got them for under $100 and used them for several years. I loved those speakers, and once spoke to you about them. You told me that you found some very strong woofers, I believe in Europe. I remember the wonderful high end from the horn drivers. But my real desire was your top end speakers, which I think were the LS3s.
Are you still building speakers?
Dave
-
Hello Dave --- The world is certainly a small place -- My health went bad some time ago ,so I quit building, but am feeling much better now. I am working on a field coil tweeter,mid and woofer so am turning lots of metal on the lathe-- also I am picking up a Sansui 250 in the next few days so I have to build something that will hum along with about 6-10 watts (will be fun)
http://www.facebook.com/bob.oliver.395-- This is my facebook page drill down through all the old posts,I have been posting a lot of pictures in the last month or so lots of stuff on there to talk about.
I must have missed something because I could not see how to reply to your message --- also I was going to put up an avatar but I guess I have to get permission first?
If any of your friends on here wish to poke through my page feel free--some of the comments are inside remarks with people I have worked with over the years
If you have any questions ask away --- Am I violating any posting rules by doing this post?
Talk to you later Dave
Bob
-
Hello Dave --- The world is certainly a small place -- My health went bad some time ago ,so I quit building, but am feeling much better now. I am working on a field coil tweeter,mid and woofer so am turning lots of metal on the lathe-- also I am picking up a Sansui 250 in the next few days so I have to build something that will hum along with about 6-10 watts (will be fun)
http://www.facebook.com/bob.oliver.395-- This is my facebook page drill down through all the old posts,I have been posting a lot of pictures in the last month or so lots of stuff on there to talk about.
I must have missed something because I could not see how to reply to your message --- also I was going to put up an avatar but I guess I have to get permission first?
If any of your friends on here wish to poke through my page feel free--some of the comments are inside remarks with people I have worked with over the years
If you have any questions ask away --- Am I violating any posting rules by doing this post?
Talk to you later Dave
Bob
Hi Bob: I think others might have an interest in the work you're doing on drivers, so the Facebook link might be useful to them. I am not a Facebook member, and apparently am one of the handful of people on the planet who has no interest in joining.
I guess my refusal to join facebook is what ruined Zuckerberg's IPO :lol:
I have no idea for sure if your post is with in the guidelines of this forum. But I think a general appeal is to try not to get too far off topic, so I'll send you a private message to catch up.
Dave
-
Hey Dave, have you heard this model?
http://www.axiomaudio.com/lfr1100.html
-
Hey Dave, have you heard this model?
http://www.axiomaudio.com/lfr1100.html
Vegasdave, no I haven't heard these speakers; they are omnidirectional.
Dave
-
Vegasdave, no I haven't heard these speakers are omnidirectional.
Dave
yes,they are omnidirectional.This is the picture of them with DSP in center and 2 4BSST2. One on each side.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=63429)
-
Hi Bob: I think others might have an interest in the work you're doing on drivers, so the Facebook link might be useful to them. I am not a Facebook member, and apparently am one of the handful of people on the planet who has no interest in joining.
I guess my refusal to join facebook is what ruined Zuckerberg's IPO :lol:
I have no idea for sure if your post is with in the guidelines of this forum. But I think a general appeal is to try not to get too far off topic, so I'll send you a private message to catch up.
Dave
I would love to see his work on drivers but unfortunately I am belong the group of people that are not facebook member and refused to be.
-
yes,they are omnidirectional.This is the picture of them with DSP in center and 2 4BSST2. One on each side.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=63429)
Cool, nice photo. I bet it sounded great! Did you hear them Prelude?
-
Cool, nice photo. I bet it sounded great! Did you hear them Prelude?
Yes I did hear them and I had a plan to go back and give a good listen to them but never happened. :duh:
-
So how did they sound to you?
-
So how did they sound to you?
Sound was like a regular tower speakers to my ears but it just me and other folks might think different.The first problem is I do not like ports and I do not like to force the lows. when I speak about bass,I just think 10" drivers and up with nice punch and kick drums and the second problem was,when I walked in the room I thought they were active speakers so I got exited but when I found out they not just like somebody hit me with hammer but still I would like to give a long listening to them but never happened.
-
Sound was like a regular tower speakers to my ears but it just me and other folks might think different.The first problem is I do not like ports and I do not like to force the lows. when I speak about bass,I just think 10" drivers and up with nice punch and kick drums and the second problem was,when I walked in the room I thought they were active speakers so I got exited but when I found out they not just like somebody hit me with hammer but still I would like to give a long listening to them but never happened.
Sorry, Prelude, you couldn't follow up in listening to them. I would have been very intersted in your opinion. It took me some long and careful listening to discover the comparative merits of the M80s...ports and all. Interesting I find they have more punch than the MB2is with both playing at the same volumes. Frankly, it's still hard for me to believe. In fact, given my investment in the MB2is I really didn't want to believe that the M80s sounded better to my ear on just about every count.
Dave
-
Sorry, Prelude, you couldn't follow up in listening to them. I would have been very intersted in your opinion. It took me some long and careful listening to discover the comparative merits of the M80s...ports and all. Interesting I find they have more punch than the MB2is with both playing at the same volumes. Frankly, it's still hard for me to believe. In fact, given my investment in the MB2is I really didn't want to believe that the M80s sounded better to my ear on just about every count.
Dave
I know Dave unfortunately did not happen.This is something new that they are doing and it is hard to judge before listen to them.
-
Sound was like a regular tower speakers to my ears but it just me and other folks might think different.The first problem is I do not like ports and I do not like to force the lows. when I speak about bass,I just think 10" drivers and up with nice punch and kick drums and the second problem was,when I walked in the room I thought they were active speakers so I got exited but when I found out they not just like somebody hit me with hammer but still I would like to give a long listening to them but never happened.
Ok, thanks for your assessment. Much appreciated.
-
Just a quick update on my M80/MB2i journey.
After discovering, with great sadness and reluctance, that to my ears - emphasis my ears - in my room playing my music, that the Axiom M80s sounded far more accurate and uncoloured, I disconnected the MB2is. Then I couldn't stand having them in my sound room as a reminder of an expensive purchase having been superseded, something that has happened before, but not to this degree.
So I paid a mover (don't have the skill or strength to do the job) to move them upstairs so I at least could get some remaining value out of them...as external speakers for out TV.
My wife wants to put flower pots on them. A very sad ending for a great speaker.
But now that the M80s are now positioned some 6 feet apart and slightly toed in, they sound even better.
Next, attaching the Axiom DSP designed for the M80s in the next few weeks.
Dave
-
Just a quick update on my M80/MB2i journey.
After discovering, with great sadness and reluctance, that to my ears - emphasis my ears - in my room playing my music, that the Axiom M80s sounded far more accurate and uncoloured, I disconnected the MB2is. Then I couldn't stand having them in my sound room as a reminder of an expensive purchase having been superseded, something that has happened before, but not to this degree.
So I paid a mover (don't have the skill or strength to do the job) to move them upstairs so I at least could get some remaining value out of them...as external speakers for out TV.
My wife wants to put flower pots on them. A very sad ending for a great speaker.
But now that the M80s are now positioned some 6 feet apart and slightly toed in, they sound even better.
Next, attaching the Axiom DSP designed for the M80s in the next few weeks.
Dave
Dave,
It's grat that you've found a speaker to surplant the PMC's at such a modest price but your comments on how you are sunsetting the PMC's is surprising.
Why not just sell them for a fair market value and cut your losses. Many, as I, could only dream of having them.
Cheers
-
Dave,
It's grat that you've found a speaker to surplant the PMC's at such a modest price but your comments on how you are sunsetting the PMC's is surprising.
Why not just sell them for a fair market value and cut your losses. Many, as I, could only dream of having them.
Cheers
SoundGame, no one is more surprised about my sunsetting the MB2is than I. The analogy is not retiring a Triple Crown winner to stud, but to be a milk horse. Pathetic! I would, in fact, sell them in a second, but I'm one of those old codgers who won't use ebay or other online alternatives. Another disability that comes with being an old codger. The only alternative, other than giving them to someone who would give them a good home, is to do a trade, and lose another bundle, or sell to a known or trusted person privately, which right now looks unlikely.
Dave
-
Dave,
I thought there were a lot of PMC fans on this site and that would seem to enhance your chances of selling the speakers.
Your thread came two or three months late for me. I would have definitely given the Axiom's a chance before I pulled the trigger on the B&W 803 Diamonds. I might have saved myself a nice chunk of change.
Mike
-
Dave,
I thought there were a lot of PMC fans on this site and that would seem to enhance your chances of selling the speakers.
Your thread came two or three months late for me. I would have definitely given the Axiom's a chance before I pulled the trigger on the B&W 803 Diamonds. I might have saved myself a nice chunk of change.
Mike
I own very little brothers of your beautiful 803s - the small and realtively inexpensive 685 stand mounts. Like the PMCs they have a smoother more relaxed sound than the M80s. And the tweeters are bright, but very sweet sounding. Very nice. My guess is that the M80s might be more accurate and neutral than 803s. But as a consequence they have a harder edge especially in the high frequency range. Some people find them much too bright. Therefore, it is possible that you would find your 803s more to your taste. I have not heard many people regret buying B&W. Indeed, I don't regret buying my PMCs, which I thought was the right choice when I made the purchase. I would have gone a lot more crazy than I have become if I regretted every audio purchase that subsequently has ended up gathering dust, or which ended up in returning very little in a trade. Recently, for example, I made trade a long unused Theta DAC for very few dollars on a piece that itself is now unused.
Enjoy your B&Ws, and if and when you move to another speaker, remember the joy they gave you.
Maybe the best way to think about this hobby is that in a way its like golf where you may over time spend a fortune on club and/or green fees, and end up with nothing more tangible than memories, hopefully good ones.
Dave
-
Davenote,
I sent you a PM.
-
Just a quick update on my M80/MB2i journey.
After discovering, with great sadness and reluctance, that to my ears - emphasis my ears - in my room playing my music, that the Axiom M80s sounded far more accurate and uncoloured, I disconnected the MB2is. Then I couldn't stand having them in my sound room as a reminder of an expensive purchase having been superseded, something that has happened before, but not to this degree.
So I paid a mover (don't have the skill or strength to do the job) to move them upstairs so I at least could get some remaining value out of them...as external speakers for out TV.
My wife wants to put flower pots on them. A very sad ending for a great speaker.
But now that the M80s are now positioned some 6 feet apart and slightly toed in, they sound even better.
Next, attaching the Axiom DSP designed for the M80s in the next few weeks.
Dave
Well, it's final then...the PMCs have been beaten. So, now the Axioms take their place in the main system with Bryston, true?
-
SoundGame, no one is more surprised about my sunsetting the MB2is than I. The analogy is not retiring a Triple Crown winner to stud, but to be a milk horse. Pathetic! I would, in fact, sell them in a second, but I'm one of those old codgers who won't use ebay or other online alternatives. Another disability that comes with being an old codger. The only alternative, other than giving them to someone who would give them a good home, is to do a trade, and lose another bundle, or sell to a known or trusted person privately, which right now looks unlikely.
Dave
So you're definitely letting go of the PMCs, or?
-
So you're definitely letting go of the PMCs, or?
Vegasdave, I have, in fact, taken my PMC MB2is out of my main system. I am using them now as external speakers for my TV (not home theatre). And if I can sell them under the right conditions, I will.
They are wonderful speakers, but no longer are what I have come to prefer. Happens all the time to audiophiles. I still have unused gear that used to meet my preferences, but no longer do: Examples: Z-Systems digital equalizer, Theta Jade CD transport, Sony ES CD player, high end AM/FM tuner.
So the Axioms are my main system speakers now, and with the MB2is out of my sound room, I have been able to position them better, which has improved the soundstage, of course, but also has given them an overall better sound.
Nevertheless the subject title of this thread says it all: "I cannot believe that this happened."
Dave
-
Ok, that's cool. If I liked PMC, I would gladly take them off of your hands!
I'm not too surprised really. PMC is highly overrated and overpriced, IMO. I always thought this.
I'm kind of glad that Bryston is no longer affiliated with them with the exception of having them as a UK distributor.
I wouldn't get too cozy with those Axioms, though. Because James' speakers are gonna blow those out of the water! Just a little prediction here. hehe. :D
-
Ok, that's cool. If I liked PMC, I would gladly take them off of your hands!
I'm not too surprised really. PMC is highly overrated and overpriced, IMO.
I'm kind of glad that Bryston is no longer affiliated with them with the exception of having them as a UK distributor.
I certainly rated my PMCs highly, and still do rate them highly. But as you say on another thread each to his own - megabuck or entry level. No question about PMCs being pricey. But "overpriced" I suppose is in the eye of the beholder. My Bryston gear in the eyes of people who like some else that is less expensive probably looks overpriced. It isn't cheap, but I see it as a relative bargain. PMC lovers probably see BB5s as a bargain compared to top end Wilsons.
I share your belief that James' speakers might be outstanding. All the more reason to sell my PMCs.
Dave
-
Ok, fair enough. Exactly. Bryston is a bargain compared to many other high end brands. We're not talking about $80000 amps from the boys in Peterborough.
Wilson is absolutely overpriced, IMO. They always have been, really, but more so here in 2012.
Cool. Yeah, if you dig those Axioms, James' speakers would be a good choice for an upgrade, imo.
-
Ok, that's cool. If I liked PMC, I would gladly take them off of your hands!
I'm not too surprised really. PMC is highly overrated and overpriced, IMO. I always thought this.
I'm kind of glad that Bryston is no longer affiliated with them with the exception of having them as a UK distributor.
I wouldn't get too cozy with those Axioms, though. Because James' speakers are gonna blow those out of the water! Just a little prediction here. hehe. :D
I would not go as far as that - (Blow away) - any quality piece of gear (speaker) is not going to 'blow away' another quality piece of gear. We are dealing with very sophisticated gear here and believe me the PMC's I know and love are a tough competitor. I really think at this level you are choosing performance that fits in with the rest of your gear and the room and type of music you listen to.
I have listened to the same speaker in hundreds of different rooms over the years that I have been doing shows in hotels and believe me sometimes you do the setup and its magic and sometimes its crap :duh:
james
-
I would not go as far as that - (Blow away) - any quality piece of gear (speaker) is not going to 'blow away' another quality piece of gear. We are dealing with very sophisticated gear here and believe me the PMC's I know and love are a tough competitor. I really think at this level you are choosing performance that fits in with the rest of your gear and the room and type of music you listen to.
I have listened to the same speaker in hundreds of different rooms over the years that I have been doing shows in hotels and believe me sometimes you do the setup and its magic and sometimes its crap :duh:
james
Ok James, granted. I may have been too hard on PMC, but that's just my opinion. However, it looks like you have something special with your speakers, true?
I can believe that.
-
I would not go as far as that - (Blow away) - any quality piece of gear (speaker) is not going to 'blow away' another quality piece of gear. We are dealing with very sophisticated gear here and believe me the PMC's I know and love are a tough competitor. I really think at this level you are choosing performance that fits in with the rest of your gear and the room and type of music you listen to.
I have listened to the same speaker in hundreds of different rooms over the years that I have been doing shows in hotels and believe me sometimes you do the setup and its magic and sometimes its crap :duh:
james
James, because of your experience with speakers and speaker setups, I have a great deal of confidence in your opinion. Just to make the record abundantly clear, I agree with you about PMC speakers. Those who think I have dumped on them because I prefer the M80s have missed all my critical qualifications:
1. It is a comparative thing, not an absolute judgement for M80s and against MB2is in all rooms with all gear. For example, I accept that if I owned 28BSST2s, I might have come to a different conclusion.
2. The comparisons I made were in a particular room playing certain music. I accept that I might have come to a different conclusion if the comparison had been made in different rooms with different music.
3. The measures against which I made the comparison were my own tastes and preferences. I accept that others easily would have come to different conclusions based on their tastes and preferences.
My only point in starting this thread was to share an experience, which has been changing since I received the M80s and may change again when I receive the DSP designed for these speakers. It was never intended to slight PMC speakers, nor do I believe I have done that.
Dave
-
James, because of your experience with speakers and speaker setups, I have a great deal of confidence in your opinion. Just to make the record abundantly clear, I agree with you about PMC speakers. Those who think I have dumped on them because I prefer the M80s have missed all my critical qualifications:
1. It is a comparative thing, not an absolute judgement for M80s and against MB2is in all rooms with all gear. For example, I accept that if I owned 28BSST2s, I might have come to a different conclusion.
2. The comparisons I made were in a particular room playing certain music. I accept that I might have come to a different conclusion if the comparison had been made in different rooms with different music.
3. The measures against which I made the comparison were my own tastes and preferences. I accept that others easily would have come to different conclusions based on their tastes and preferences.
My only point in starting this thread was to share an experience, which has been changing since I received the M80s and may change again when I receive the DSP designed for these speakers. It was never intended to slight PMC speakers, nor do I believe I have done that.
Dave
Agreed.
-
Agreed.
Agreed 2.
I would imagine the PMC's would have the ability to load up a room in a hurry. Perhaps in a larger venue the PMC's would be more appealing than the M80's, given your listening criteria. Now I say that, having no idea how big your current audio room is :thumb:
-
I would imagine the PMC's would have the ability to load up a room in a hurry. Perhaps in a larger venue the PMC's would be more appealing than the M80's, given your listening criteria. Now I say that, having no idea how big your current audio room is
... main audio system in a good 12X23 foot sound room (the most critical component in any audio system I've been told and have learned)
...and indeed therein lies the rub. I'm using lil' ol' fact.8's in a room bigger than that with 7BSST2's and could easily liquify all my internal organs without my amps even getting warm to the touch. I find the idea of having MB2i's in a room that size baffling, frankly. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should...
:scratch:
D.D.
-
...and indeed therein lies the rub. I'm using lil' ol' fact.8's in a room bigger than that with 7BSST2's and could easily liquify all my internal organs without my amps even getting warm to the touch. I find the idea of having MB2i's in a room that size baffling, frankly. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should...
:scratch:
D.D.
Haha
Well you know how civil those salesman are. Probably only went in looking at ob1s until the very civil salesman through out a couple Jesus quotes and wham bam thank you maam he bought the MB2s.
-
...and indeed therein lies the rub. I'm using lil' ol' fact.8's in a room bigger than that with 7BSST2's and could easily liquify all my internal organs without my amps even getting warm to the touch. I find the idea of having MB2i's in a room that size baffling, frankly. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should...
:scratch:
D.D.
So you're saying the room's too small, true?
-
That is low indeed...
-
So you're saying the room's too small, true?
No, I'm saying the speakers are too big. Or at least to my ( addled ) way of thinking.
Look, Vegas - I'm running the same amps in a bigger, carpeted, furnished and treated room with fact.8's and I have absolutely no trouble whatsoever achieving punishing volume levels with tons of headroom to spare. You've gotta think that to get satisfying bass out of those size-XL MB's would be pretty tough when the cones are barely vibrating. And by the time you get to where those MB's like to play and sound the way they can and should, in a room that size the SPL's would be, at best, uncomfortable. That's fine if you like getting pummeled but...
So you bring in a pair of whatever halfway decent speakers that are actually in their comfort zone in that particular environment and presto - they sound good in comparison to a pair which are barely even running. And you can't believe it? Really? Your MB2i's are "milk horses" now? Really?
Page after page in two threads of "OMG! OMG! OMG! I CAN'T BELIEVE IT !"
Makes two of us.
And what the Sam-Hell is a " milk horse "?
D.D.
-
Hmm...I see your point(s) Now do you feel his PMCs need a bigger amp, say the 28BSST2?
-
Hmm...I see your point(s) Now do you feel his PMCs need a bigger amp, say the 28BSST2?
No he needs compression added like in a bar or nightclub.
-
Ok, haha.
-
"DaveNote
I own very little brothers of your beautiful 803s - the small and realtively inexpensive 685 stand mounts. Like the PMCs they have a smoother more relaxed sound than the M80s. And the tweeters are bright, but very sweet sounding. Very nice. My guess is that the M80s might be more accurate and neutral than 803s. But as a consequence they have a harder edge especially in the high frequency range. Some people find them much too bright. Therefore, it is possible that you would find your 803s more to your taste. I have not heard many people regret buying B&W. Indeed, I don't regret buying my PMCs, which I thought was the right choice when I made the purchase. I would have gone a lot more crazy than I have become if I regretted every audio purchase that subsequently has ended up gathering dust, or which ended up in returning very little in a trade. Recently, for example, I made trade a long unused Theta DAC for very few dollars on a piece that itself is now unused.
Enjoy your B&Ws, and if and when you move to another speaker, remember the joy they gave you.
Maybe the best way to think about this hobby is that in a way its like golf where you may over time spend a fortune on club and/or green fees, and end up with nothing more tangible than memories, hopefully good ones.
Dave"
I couln't agree more with you... I still remember the joy my first "mid-fi" stereo system Pioneer/JBL gave me back in 1985 *teenager). I couldn't be any happier back then....
"
-
Help! I am going to replace my front speakers in my home theater system. My amp is the 9BSSST/2. After reading Dave's review of the Axiom M80 V3 I moved the speakers to my short list. I like that M80's are so efficent and at 4 ohms the Bryston will deliver 200 watts a channel. I was also thinking of the Emotive 6.2 XTR on sale $629 each. My wife dosen't like the Martin Logan. She like's the more traditional looking tower speakers. She also gave me a budget of $2000 or less. It's all about the WAF and good cheap sound. :green:
-
Sounds like the M80's might be a good choice, they seemed to be getting great ratings in the sub $2k range. They also offer free shipping (one way) and a 30 day money back trial. May want to check the return shipping costs in case you don't like them. One other thing they offer, which wont improve the sound, but will likely appeal to the wife is the the custom finish options available. Get her involved in the finish selection, they will end up sounding and blending in better better that way :wink:
Axiom also have center and rear speaker models which should integrate nicely with the M80's.
Cheers, and happy listening!
-
Sounds like the M80's might be a good choice, they seemed to be getting great ratings in the sub $2k range. They also offer free shipping (one way) and a 30 day money back trial. May want to check the return shipping costs in case you don't like them. One other thing they offer, which wont improve the sound, but will likely appeal to the wife is the the custom finish options available. Get her involved in the finish selection, they will end up sounding and blending in better better that way :wink:
Axiom also have center and rear speaker models which should integrate nicely with the M80's.
Cheers, and happy listening!
It's always good advice to involve a wife in selecting finishes if speakers are going to be in places she shares with you. But the standard vinyl finishes of the M80 are very good, so good that they might even pass muster with most very particular wives.
I had my PMC MB2is and M80s side-by-side. Both are in Black Ash. The PMC is a veneer. The M80 is vinyl. I showed them to my wife. She could not tell the difference. And if I had a wife who put me on a budget, I think she would opt for the vinyl and save $245.
In looking up this figure, I noticed that Axiom "From time to time we have selected products available that have minor scratches or dents, not visible from more than 4 feet away," which it sells as B Stock and costs about $150 less.
Out of curiosity I called Axiom about its 30 day return policy. I was told that the buyer is responsible for shipping costs in sending the speakers back. But apparently if you check with Axiom they will explain how the cost per speaker can be lmited to $45 per speaker if shipped in North America.
-
Got my Axiom M80V3 today. Hooked them up to my surround sound system amp a Bryston 9BSST2. I'll give them a few weeks before a serious listen. I don't think I'll ever hook them up to my 7BSST/2. (too much of a hassle) Now if I bought the model T it would be a different story. Lol! James if you need any Beta testers. :D
-
Got my Axiom M80V3 today. Hooked them up to my surround sound system amp a Bryston 9BSST2. I'll give them a few weeks before a serious listen. I don't think I'll ever hook them up to my 7BSST/2. (too much of a hassle) Now if I bought the model T it would be a different story. Lol! James if you need any Beta testers. :D
Yes please let me know what you think of the 80's - should I ask them for a commision on this sale :lol:
james
-
Got my Axiom M80V3 today. Hooked them up to my surround sound system amp a Bryston 9BSST2. I'll give them a few weeks before a serious listen. I don't think I'll ever hook them up to my 7BSST/2. (too much of a hassle) Now if I bought the model T it would be a different story. Lol! James if you need any Beta testers. :D
I hate hassles, too. But I use my 7BSST2s to drive my M80s, and even for someone as lazy as I am it has been worth the effort. I plan to upgrade to the Model T basic passive strongly believing that it will be a major upgrade. But the M80/7BSST2 sounds so good to me, even with Internet radio stations, that I am struggling in trying to imagine the Model T/7BSST2 combo. Puts a very big smile on my face just thinking about it! :D
Dave
-
Did you dump the PMCs?
-
Did you dump the PMCs?
I'm hoping to sell them. They are great speakers, which is why it's a crying shame that they are now being used as two-channel speakers for our TV. :cry:
Trying to recover a bit of my original investment while reminding myself that it makes no sense to cry over spilt milk. Don't need more crying beyond how I'm using them now. :cry:
Dave
-
:thumb:(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=63734)
Nice Axiom tweeter supply...... :thumb:
-
Did you dump the PMCs?
Why are you interested? By the way did you manage to dump your umbrella speakers :lol:
-
Yes please let me know what you think of the 80's - should I ask them for a commision on this sale :lol:
James, my thoughts are Dave and you should split the commission! :lol:
I could not wait so I gave the new Axiom M80v3 a listen. Equipment Bryston 9BSST/2,Denon 2500 blue ray transport and a Onkyo 5508 preamp processor/dac.(I know sacrilege) My wife and I with a couple of martinis.
First, I bought the speakers in the standard black finish and believe it or not the speakers had WAF. They were not "furniture" but they had a smaller footprint than the speakers they replaced and she was happy.
My wife's first comment to me was how alive the Axioms sound. Yes, they sounded very clean and life like,not listening to speakers. The speakers faded away by that I mean they weren't directional it was more a wall of sound for a pair of speaker approximately 13 feet apart. The Axioms out of the box are bright but accurate. What they did lack was the deep bass for us. These speaker are in a good size room for which I needed to turn on my Earthquake sub. My reference speakers are Legacy Focus SE which have 4, 12 inch woofers. I was missing the deep bass with the Axiom's.
I did push the volume and the Bryston never clipped nor did the speakers distort. The amp was hot,not like my 7Bsst/2 which run cool with the Legacy's. The Axiom's reminded me of my Legacy's in terms of both rated 95db 1 watt. They sound great at low volume but yet beg to be turned up.
My initial thoughts are very good speaker for the money. I do think mine would benefit from better electronics. They do present a very big sound for such a small speaker. I have not done any serious listening. (soundstage,depth,etc) I'll wait for the speakers to break in and for the wife to be out. I do think the speakers need to be brought into the man cave and fired up. The speaker's there are a more reasonable 8 feet apart. :)
If the Model T sounds like the Axiom's on steroids Bryston has a winner!
-
James, my thoughts are Dave and you should split the commission! :lol:
I could not wait so I gave the new Axiom M80v3 a listen. Equipment Bryston 9BSST/2,Denon 2500 blue ray transport and a Onkyo 5508 preamp processor/dac.(I know sacrilege) My wife and I with a couple of martinis.
First, I bought the speakers in the standard black finish and believe it or not the speakers had WAF. They were not "furniture" but they had a smaller footprint than the speakers they replaced and she was happy.
My wife's first comment to me was how alive the Axioms sound. Yes, they sounded very clean and life like,not listening to speakers. The speakers faded away by that I mean they weren't directional it was more a wall of sound for a pair of speaker approximately 13 feet apart. The Axioms out of the box are bright but accurate. What they did lack was the deep bass for us. These speaker are in a good size room for which I needed to turn on my Earthquake sub. My reference speakers are Legacy Focus SE which have 4, 12 inch woofers. I was missing the deep bass with the Axiom's.
I did push the volume and the Bryston never clipped nor did the speakers distort. The amp was hot,not like my 7Bsst/2 which run cool with the Legacy's. The Axiom's reminded me of my Legacy's in terms of both rated 95db 1 watt. They sound great at low volume but yet beg to be turned up.
My initial thoughts are very good speaker for the money. I do think mine would benefit from better electronics. They do present a very big sound for such a small speaker. I have not done any serious listening. (soundstage,depth,etc) I'll wait for the speakers to break in and for the wife to be out. I do think the speakers need to be brought into the man cave and fired up. The speaker's there are a more reasonable 8 feet apart. :)
If the Model T sounds like the Axiom's on steroids Bryston has a winner!
I'm glad that you're happy with your new M80s so far. i found that the sound improves after using them. I don't know whether this is true burning in or just getting used to a very linear sound. In any case, at first I, too, thought they were a very bright speaker, but now find the high end outstanding. I don't really play my music loudly, but at normal volumes, peaking in the low 80 dbs range, The bottom end is quite good and very accurate. But the M80 is a relatively small speaker and doesn't have the kind of overall weight and body to its sound that a bigger box would provide. Which is why the Model T is likely to be even better.
Dave
-
Why are you interested? By the way did you manage to dump your umbrella speakers :lol:
Why not? And umbrella speakers?
-
I'm hoping to sell them. They are great speakers, which is why it's a crying shame that they are now being used as two-channel speakers for our TV. :cry:
Trying to recover a bit of my original investment while reminding myself that it makes no sense to cry over spilt milk. Don't need more crying beyond how I'm using them now. :cry:
Dave
I see. Well, whatever you do, good luck!
-
I was up north this week and was lucky enough to go on a tour of the Axiom plant. Extremely interesting to see how their speakers and electronics were developed/made, tested and shipped. I'm heading back in a few months for a demo listening, looking for a 5.1 system for upstairs. However, I will be purchasing a set of their computer speakers next week!
-
HI,
just today I stumbled upon this: http://www.goldenear.com and their Towers, http://www.goldenear.com/index.php/products/triton-towers. Complete HT-sets built around those.
Don't want to hijack this thread, but had not noticed any earlier posts and would like to know if there are any AC members in the Bryston Circle that play those.
They seem kind of interesting, and very nicely priced...
Marius
-
So Dave
whatever happened to the DSP review ????
Did you ever get the DSP, actually I see this post is now 3 yrs old do you still have the M80's ? do you still enjoy them or have you moved on ?
What ever happened to the DSP
-
So Dave
whatever happened to the DSP review ????
Did you ever get the DSP, actually I see this post is now 3 yrs old do you still have the M80's ? do you still enjoy them or have you moved on ?
What ever happened to the DSP
If you try to bring this post back to life, you are most likely declare on war again.
I think the DSP was meant for, DEPRESSED SOUND PLEASURE :lol:
-
I signed up to audiocircle specifically to respond to a few comments I had seen earlier. Especially around the "DSP", and the speaker performance. Firstly, the "DSP" does, very subtly, adjust the signal pattern between the source device, and the speaker. Each speaker from different manufacturers has unique crossovers, drivers, and cabinet design. It's unavoidable. I have yet to see a speaker system deliver a perfectly flat response curve. The engineers at Axiom know sound. So, they basically took a few of their speakers into an anechoic chamber and measured their response. The solution is an external signal processing device that ensures the speakers themselves deliver a nearly perfectly flat response. I'm guessing these run at microprocessor speeds in the gighertz range, which is far beyond what human hearing could possibly detect. IIRC correctly, the M-80 and M-100 models are already neutral within 1/2 or so DB. The DSP? is just an ever so subtle nudge at some well defined frequencies to get them to achieve even better music delivery. It's a rather miniscule adjustment that. frankly, most people except sound engineers and the "cost is no limit" audiophiles would be able to hear. I've compared my Axiom M80's with several different combinations of audiophile speaker combinations, and they are still the top of my list.
-
The M80 is a GREAT speaker and was what sold me on working with Axiom to develop our Bryston speakers.
I listened to them in my sound room, and god knows I have over these many years had all kinds of exotic speakers in my home. I thought "if Axiom can achieve this kind of performance at this price range I want in"
james
-
I have all of Axiom's bookshelf models up to Version 3... and love them. Shockingly good for the $$. V4 I hear with the much improved, higher output tweeter is every BETTER. Too bad Axiom does not attend the more audio shows other than Montreal. They need more exposure to showcase their products. Their design is about the family of curves. Clean and neutral sound. Pristine for sure.