Any thoughts on axiom audio speakers? - Page 7

The very first production runs used a different supplier for the crossovers and the inductors were not laid out in a way that I wanted. They were facing the same way but were about 2.5" apart. It is far enough to have minimal effect, but I didn't like it and it was corrected on the next runs.

Check the writing on the crossover and you'll figure out what it went to.

Here, you can see all of the parts better in this pic.

Gotcha Danny it was the AV123 x-ls speakers. The Encore version was really incredible for the money. Too bad about Shifty. AV123 made some nice products when they didn't arrive with the crossovers wired wrong.

Unfortunately their production house had some QC issues, no fault by the Designer as I'd imagine its difficult to maintain QC when producing products overseas without having someone sit over their shoulders continuously.

Companies like Axiom, Paradigm, etc that have their own production houses overseas solely for this purpose are likely on top of this constantly minimizing QC issues.

Too bad very few USA/Canadian based speaker companies don't do everything in-house and locally these days.

How, if I may ask, are our ears stimulated by these "effects", yet no microphone is able to record them?

How would you describe the waveform nature of these audible effects as it exits the loudspeaker?

I know that AJ and the rest of the guys in the objective camp will jump all over this one, but I know quite a few people that have witnessed this including myself.

It doesn't sound different because the color is different but because of the materials used in the dyes that make the color.

The dielectric material is one of the things that has almost as big of an impact on the performance as anything else about it. Materials vary from air, cotton, silk, PVC, polyethylene, Teflon, Nylon, etc. Even liquid materials have been used. All have an effect on the sound and all sound a little different.

AJ don't waste yout time asking for double blind, proof of measured data, and figures.... We have been down this road before. A waste of time is it not?

Sounds like you had some experience with early made in China models.

Later production of that series made in Colombia were very nice and I rarely ever heard of any wiring issues.

You have to keep in mind that a capacitor is really an energy storage device. It stores and releases the signal with a slight time delay or smearing effect to it.

Materials used in the caps from sprayed on conductive material, to rolled film, thickness, and size all have effects too. The same goes for the dielectric material. Polypropylene is inexpensive and commonly used. Teflon, paper, and many other types of film are used as well. Each has a slight effect on the sound. Some are oil filled, coated in bees wax etc.

Some discharge very cleanly and fast, imparting little coloration on the signal. Some caps (like various oil filled caps) will have a soften effect as they tend to reduce rise and fall times (slight smear).

To me the really cool thing is when you find a lower noise floor and more clear space between notes with some of the better capacitors. Now, how would I measure that? Hmmmm.....

Here is a little capacitor comparison information: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=54218.0

If it's a delayed release of stored energy, then why exactly can't an anechoic time domain analysis display this?

More importantly, if we're talking about the speakers most commonly affected by caps(tweeters), then tell me this.

What is more important for the response of a tweeter, lower diffraction effect (a completely round / teardrop tweeter housing a la B&W or alternatively an intricate, smooth waveguide a la Geddes) or a superior capacitor?

I notice that none of the speakers offered by GR research seem to do much about baffle diffraction beyond the ordinary corner roundovers. I assume this is because GR believes the sound of capacitors have more effect than control of diffraction?

Instead we heard about veneering issues among other things.

I use to hang out at that place all the time, and at that same timeperiod. I remember the occasional 'controversy', but it was usually the same 8 or 9 people beating the dead horse day-in, day-out, seven days a week. Risch would occasionally peek his head in, but he would be practically trampled by the peanut gallery.

One of the guys would always go on there, claiming with regularity that he had an EE, and provide his "expertise". Someone finally outed him, shortly before the forum changed. There were all kinds of characters on there.

I know I may be throwing gas on this already explosive thread, but I was just wondering about your views on speaker cable, the brand you mentioned goes for $300 to $400 per 6 feet. How is this superior to some low gauge cable from blue jeans or monoprice. Have you seen measurable differences in performance and been able to tell the difference in blind listening?

What kind of veneer sounds best?

No Chu, I don't. I have seen many threads over the years where audiophiles can "hear" wiring color, but do not recall this of Risch. What I do recall of his particular disorder, was "hearing" dielectric materials...and having done top secret/classified blind tests for "proof of concept". It was all listed on his site IIRC, but I think it's no longer around. What does exist however, is posts like this, revealing the scope of the disorder.
No details of his system, especially cost, since that is always tied to resolvingness, is listed.

cheers,

AJ

Of course. I believe both you and them, that improvements are heard. If you took fMRI scans of the respective brains listening to the Sonicapped/NoRez versions and then the stock versions, but being told they were the modded ones, you would see the exact same thing. It is as real in the mind as if it were in the soundfield (which it isn't). And we all listen at home non-blind, don't we?


Well, what I meant was his home, where he offers free in-patient treatment for audiophiles, using the same equipment and untreated (pardon the pun) sidewalls (though the front wall is LF lossy IIRC), etc. Some of the post therapy testimonials can be found here.


And this revealingness/detaility doesn't show up in measurements, but are somehow design engineered into the products correct? They certainly don't teach that in engineering school!
"Today I'm going to design/engineer my amp or wall plug to sound better using unmeasurable parameters". I don't think SPICE is used for that stuff.
Maybe real spice, like cinnamon...or sage? Hmmm.


Well now let's not forget imagination. We wouldn't want that to be a limiting factor either.


You should give Bob Carver a call. See if he want's to come over with a cheap mid fi amp of similar power output, for an evening of fun.
One of these days I'll get to hear a V. Hopefully with my speakers in Tow.

cheers,

AJ

I tend to keep answering questions as my time allows but you guys are getting the thread way off topic. There is nothing to gain by this turning into a subjective verses objective debate (AJ).


You can see a time related measurement on the impulse response, but that doesn't tell you anything. You won't know if there is or isn't a related effect there because it will be buried by the decay rate of the driver.


Both are important but are different.


Keep in mind that because I do design work for many companies in designing or upgrading products that they sell in the retail market, I don't offer completed speakers so that I don't compete against my own clients. So our products are only offered as kits. And most hobbyist aren't going to get into cutting modified tear drop shaped cabinets or tweeter pods. That is beyond their abilities.

Secondly, the few tweeters that I use, like our soft dome, has a rolled face plate that minimizes some surface reflection issues and are fine on baffles no wider than 8", especially with rounded corners. Likewise the shape of the face plate of the Neo's that are used in many of our kits are fine on the small baffles as well.

I have used products like diffraction be gone be gone in designs that use tweeters that show greater sensitivity to baffle size or with wider baffles. The Vifa ring tweeter for instance is very sensitive to the front baffle size.

Even worse are the effects of the grill frames. Resent design work for one of my clients uses a thick felt strip about 1.5" wide to either side of the tweeter to do away with the effect of the grill and some surface reflections.

So I certianly don't overlook those things.

I look at cables a little differently than most.

I was over at a friends house about a year ago on an audio related trip. I think he was using Blue Jeans speaker cables at the time. I swapped them out for one of Electra Cables cheaper speaker cables and he just about fell over. It was like upgrading his amp or something.

To me, the stuff from Blue Jeans is a good value for a real budget system but is night and day different from the performance that is possible from some of the better cables. To me the Electra Cable is up there with the best Kimber Kable or Shunyata Research cable but for a fraction of the price. So to me it represents a great value. To some it's crazy to spend even that on speaker cables.

Seeing measured performance data is a whole different story. AJ get ready to start bantering around again. I can measure LCR on any cable. But that is not what is having a big impact or making a big difference. There is no sense in going deep into here. It will fall on deaf ears.

In short, the jacketing is as big of a deal as the wire.

And this is over simplifying, but think of each speaker cable as not just a wire carrying the signal, but as an antenna and a filter. Each cable is actually a varying amount of each. Some wire will carry all the trash on it that it picked up from the gear plus RFI and EMI from other sources. Some wire (because of braided geometry) will filter out various ranges with often fairly significant impact on the sound.

I love avsforum.

Original query:

"Any thoughts on axiom audio speakers?

Was looking at axiom audio speakers , specifically either a bookshelf or possible one of their on wall speakers for front left and right and center. Would anyone have any experince with them? Thanks in advance."

And now we have all this additional info-good read!

AJ, nice try on your last post, but I don't see any value in getting in the mud with you any more. You just don't get it and I don't see you ever getting it. Boy if I just had you here for one day, I'd have so much fun with you.... I could change one power cable on my system for a stock power cable and you'd fall over. It would burst everything you ever believed in.


That's funny, I have a couple of those old amps of his around here. I use one of them on my measuring system because it has meters on it and a gain control for each channel. It's a nice linear amp and good for what I use it for. Dropping into my listening system though is about like hooking up an 8 track player.

Absolutely Danny! Haven't I always insisted that instead of all that, we get medical/mental health professionals immediately involved and proceed directly to fMRIs???
Why would we go of on (yet another set of) wild goose chases with measurements and DBT's guaranteed to create nulls (and "prove" nothing), when we know where the event is actually taking place? fMRIs of psychogenic maladies is the place to be, not the electrical or soundfield domains....but alas, they are rather expensive.

Btw, why are you contending that there is measured data reasons for hearing inductors and capacitors (amp noise floor too?), etc....if that is irrelevant??
Seems a bit odd to be trying to connect objective data to support your subjective impressions (when convenient)....and then saying "don't ask for proof of"...no?
Hmmmm...

cheers,

AJ

So why wouldn't that be measurable? "We" don't know how to measure RFI/EMI?
And why do blind tests "mask" this "about fell over" effect? The guy who about fell over sighted goes stone deaf unsighted? That's pretty odd.

One of these days Dan, one of these days I'll make the pilgrimage to the mecca in Texas.
Almost made LSAF this year.
Btw, you know what would be equally fascinating?
You demonstrating one single thing you claim to "hear" when "limited" to just listening...with your ears. Because that's the definition of blind....listening...with your ears. Nothing else. No system price. No sight of amplifier. No knowledge of capacitor. No brand recognition.
Just the sound, listening...and your ears.
We can all dream, can't we?

Sighted and uncontrolled of course. Well, assuming that there is an actual difference, Bob could fix that for you also, as he did previously.
Of course, it will never happen...but alas...

cheers,

AJ

When listening in stereo moving your head 6 inches moves you 6 inches closer to one speaker and 6 inches further away from the other. This will make the first tooth of the comb centred at about 1200 Hz. The beginning of the destruction will start at around 600 Hz. Below is a graph of what happens when you move the microphone 6 off centre.

Been there, done that, even with groups of people. Comparing a whole list of things.

Nope, he was certain that he wouldn't notice anything. And then he did, because it was very obvious.

Haven't we been here before.... Wasting time AJ. Until you sit down in front of a real system or have your ears cleaned then you aren't going to get it.

Oh, so we are talking about a 12" change in distance between sources. That would get you centered around 1,200Hz alright. This was direct waves only measured in your chamber right? This wasn't a total power response (including off axis and room reflections) taken in a room.

Flyod Tool and I both tried to explain to you that our ears hear those differently because it is coming from different sources. The rest of the room responses will not mirror image nulls in the same places either. The comb filtering coming from one source is heard quite differently, and the overall power response that it creates in the room is quite different too.

So, let's see the same measurements with your VP150 center channel.

How about standard on axis, 10, 20, 30, and 40 degrees off axis?

Below are the amplitude response graphs, taken in an anechoic chamber, for a VP150 current production and one measured at the NRC back in 2003.





I think this illustrates the problem with relying on in room measurements. Comparing these graphs to Danny's graphs of the VP150 shows his amplitude response measurements are not accurate. This can lead to a lot of erroneous conclusions. As a side note to this; if comb filtering was the problem it is claimed to be by Danny, Paul, and Gene on a VP150 it would cause cancellation of the higher frequencies. This would make the VP150 sound dull, not bright. You cannot suck and blow at the same time.

I don't think there is much more I can add here. I have given a brief synopsis of where we are at on our research and our product design decisions and hopefully dispelled at least some of the muck being thrown at us by Danny, Paul, and more subtly Gene.

This thread all began with a simple question from robretpd who was thinking of checking out our products. I completely understand that not everyone is going to like what we do; that is what makes a marketplace and the resulting wonderful array of choices. But it also does not mean we are hornswoggling ignorant people. We make product design choices that we feel will suit our current and potential customers. These are the people we are interested in serving, as we should be, and it has proven to work very well for both them and us. We do not take the design and engineering of our products lightly. We also go to great lengths to deliver quality and consistency and do it with market-leading value. This, coupled with a wider design palette, is why we make all of our own woofers, tweeters, cabinets, plastic parts, amps, and x-overs. Axiom is a company that has made significant capital investment in laboratory equipment, plant, and machinery year after year for 31 years. Hopefully this fact is not lost on people. A big thanks to everyone who has taken the time to read and post throughout this discussion.

Ian

Ian, both of those measurements are taken from dead center. The mic is equal distance from both tweeters and will not show cancellation effects because the signals are arriving in phase.

Now go get you a fresh one out of the box and try not only on axis, but 10, 20, 30, and 40 degrees off axis, and let's see what happens.

Ian, my measurements used a 4ms gated time window with no reflections. And the measurements were taken at 1 meter. This would match exactly with measurements taken in a chamber.

Actually Ian, Dr. Floyd Toole pointed out the problem was acoustical interference by having two tweeters on opposite sides of the cabinet, NOT comb filtering.

The question is whether or not it would be audible in a real room depending on room acoustics and/or where the listener is seated. Part of Dr. Floyd Toole's premise of his incredibly extensive research is all about creating speakers that provide uniform dispersion for a consistently good sound over a wide listening area for all room types not just for the money seat or an overly ambient room that masks loudspeaker design issues.

While I don't speak on behalf of Paul or Danny, I am certainly not throwing around "muck" about Axiom. In fact I routinely recommend our readers to consider your products b/c of your great customer service and support. In the end if the customer is happy with the sound and their buying experience, that's what really matters.

I'd be happy to continue this discussion with you via phone if you like. You know how to reach me.

Hey Ian, on second look at your measurement, you have about an 8db swing from 15kHz to 20kHz than the NRC did not show. So your mic was not perfectly dead center on the speaker either. It could have been off by about 1/4" and it would cause that cancellation at 20kHz. A 20kHz wavelength is about 5/8" long.

Whats with all the negativity? If your not a Axiom owner or never have been or never plan to be why bother posting? I've been a Axiom owner since 2008 and couldn't be happier with my purchase and I even plan on upgrading to M80s and the VP180. This discussion comes up about once a year or so, so why is it that the same people go on this crusade against Axiom? During get togethers never once has any one complained about the sound of my Axioms or any thing similar. I feel many people have been happy with their Axiom puchase I never see them for sale used on sites like ebay, audiogon, or avs classifieds. Hopefully Axiom has another great 30years ahead.

I think about all these revealing systems I've read about or seen and I wonder. I wonder if the person is just overly suggestible...vastly overestimating their ability to regulate conscious and subconscious biases...overly susceptible to selective auditory focusing. Or maybe it truly is real and if one day I were to sneak into their room and switch some power cords they'd immediately know that someone had changed something. Or maybe they just are afflicted with some sort of OBCD. I mean, if it's really real, is that a good thing? Does it mean your system is revealing or just so marginally designed that every little thing matters? Kind of like a carefully constructed but unstable house of cards.



It's like if you had to go into a hospital for some medical tests. Maybe some PET scans or some elemental analysis. Or maybe you're looking for data to confirm or deny an athlete has been juicing and you're searching for the presence of trace metabolites. Wouldn't you expect the instruments were robust? I know I would seriously question things if I heard someone say, "See what happens when we try the new cryo treated, platinum plated outlet over there." "What do you mean you didn't find any EPO? Rerun the analysis using the Shunyata power cord."