Why do people hate Axiom Audio?

[rebulx]

Axiom Audio has been around for many years, but when I make a post about my amp flaking out many people see the Axioms and say hey "Those are white van speakers". What does that mean exactly. Then someone says look at the readings, those speakers suck. I have a few pairs of Axiom and I like them. I have many others, Elac, KEF, B&W, and more. They all sound pretty good. The Axiom M100's are some of the best i've heard.

I''m a chef, so i'll put this in something I understand... I can't look at a piece of paper with an entire recipe and know if tastes good. I've tried, i've been surprised so many times. Whats the difference?

 

[shadyJ]

Axiom Audio has been around for many years, but when I make a post about my amp flaking out many people see the Axioms and say hey "Those are white van speakers". What does that mean exactly. Then someone says look at the readings, those speakers suck. I have a few pairs of Axiom and I like them. I have many others, Elac, KEF, B&W, and more. They all sound pretty good. The Axiom M100's are some of the best i've heard.

I''m a chef, so i'll put this in something I understand... I can't look at a piece of paper with an entire recipe and know if tastes good. I've tried, i've been surprised so many times. Whats the difference?

Axiom makes some speakers that have some very bizarre design choices. It basically ignores any effects of comb-filtering between drivers. There is a good reason why speakers only use one tweeter, and it is because that the wavelengths of treble are so short that there is not really a good way to stop them from interfering with each other. To a lesser extent, that is true of midrange drivers too. Axiom thinks that more is merrier and throws as many drivers as can fit on a speaker baffle without regard to the acoustic consequences.

I think they do this because they believe that comb-filtering between drivers isn't a big deal, and they can just charge more for speakers with more drivers even if it is a haphazard design. Some of their speakers look reasonably designed, but others have fundamental, glaring problems.

The problems with their designs might not be evident until you A/B them next to a better speaker and know what to listen for.

 

[slipperybidness]

@shadyJ have you actually heard any Axioms?

I have heard a set of their towers many times, my Bro in Law has had a set in service in his living room for many years. I can't remember for sure, but I think his are the M80 model. He is running his setup off a mid-range Denon AVR and has a Rythmik FV15HP. His setup actually sounds very good! It certainly does not compete with the likes of Philharmonic nor DCM, but very good nonetheless. The caveat is that I have listened to more HT content than music content on them, but I have listened to music on them many times too. And, I have never done an A/B comparison as you mentioned.

@rebulx I hear that Axiom is not the value that they were maybe 10+ years ago, so I think they take some flak for that, and I do think you can find speakers that are objectively better for similar $. And, I also question some of their design decisions. I also personally see the "white van vibe" (White Van = scam, look it up on wikipedia) when you look at them in pics. But, when you see them and hear them, they are most certainly NOT white van speakers. To me, they have more of the Home Theater Direct Speaker vibe vs. white van.

 

[lovinthehd]

Don't know much about Axiom, never heard one. I have seen comments not too kind yet many owners being fans....go figure. Speakers affect people differently because of/despite different designs I suppose....look at Tekton.

 

[slipperybidness]

For what it's worth (may not be worth much), Axiom is also the OEM for Bryston speakers.

Loudspeakers – Bryston

bryston.com

 

[ryanosaur]

@shadyJ
I know you've had, literally, metric f-tons more experience listening to a wide range of gear in different places...
In your opinion, how audible is comb filtering in most situations?
The Master Handbook Of Acoustics identifies it as a potential problem, but even there, the author's comments indicate it may not be that significant overall (much the same way we try to avoid diffraction events in how we set up our gear, next to surfaces like TVs and such, yet there seems to be know real definition of what threshold such distortion becomes audible).

That said, I agree... Best practices dictate better design principles than what is being employed, there.

Thanks!
R

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

I''m a chef, so i'll put this in something I understand... I can't look at a piece of paper with an entire recipe and know if tastes good. I've tried, i've been surprised so many times. Whats the difference?

The science of looking at the "recipe" for a speaker and knowing 100% if it will be good or not is NOT yet fully accurate due to the complexities of human hearing, both ear structure and more importantly our brain interpretation.
There are however some existing studies (like ones done at Harman) that show that in general people prefer speakers with a flat (neutral) frequency response. We could extrapolate a lot from looking at various speaker measurements (if done correctly and the method fully explained)

Understanding Loudspeaker Review Measurements Part I

Audioholics’ speaker reviews often contain detailed measurement graphs. In this article, we explain frequency response and the set of curves known as the 'Spin-O-Rama' to help you pick better product.

www.audioholics.com

Understanding Loudspeaker Review Measurements Part II

The waterfall plots and polar maps often seen in Audioholics' speaker reviews are colorful and visually interesting, but what can they really tell us about a loudspeaker's performance?

www.audioholics.com

Going back to the recipe analogy, I don't need to be a 3-star Michelin chef to know for example that 1 cup of salt for 1 cake is probably not going to taste great (even if you throw a proverbial mountain of sugar to hide the salt). So we do know what some design choices aren't ideal, like woofer/tweeter placements which WILL cause the comb-filtering issue, like VP150(older design) and currently VP180

VP180 Center Channel Speaker

Enter the new VP180 center channel speaker. This 56-lb beast is made for the home theater addict who wants to hear it all.

www.axiomaudio.com

 

[shadyJ]

@shadyJ
I know you've had, literally, metric f-tons more experience listening to a wide range of gear in different places...
In your opinion, how audible is comb filtering in most situations?

I have only heard simulated comb-filtering. I can't recall ever hearing something severe from a loudspeaker setup, because no sensible person would commit such an obvious error. I don't know how clear it would be from a speaker like those Axioms. But another question would be why two tweeters? A single tweeter should have enough dynamic range to keep up with the rest of the drivers, unless it is a bad tweeter. Why risk comb-filtering effects blurring out the sound when it gives you no advantage? I think they are banking on uninformed customers thinking, "oh wow, 2 tweeters? This must be some kind of super speaker!"

It can't be good for imaging either. Most loudspeakers are designed for the acoustic reference point to be roughly at the tweeter point. They are made to behave like point source speakers. Well, how is that affected when the "point" is starting to get spread out between multiple tweeters? There is just no good reason to do that.

 

[shadyJ]

@shadyJ have you actually heard any Axioms?

I don't recall having heard any Axiom speakers. I think I have heard some Axiom-designed Brystons at a trade show once. I don't remember how it sounded though.

 

[Alex2507]

I can't look at a piece of paper with an entire recipe and know if tastes good. I've tried, i've been surprised so many times. Whats the difference?

I think where Axiom ran into trouble was their listening tests being done by listeners trained to pick out Axiom sound and then reporting a preference over the competition. Unbiased listener preference is ... rare.

If you look at a recipe and it calls for 3 gallons of vinegar ... you know what to expect.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

If you look at a recipe and it calls for 3 gallons of vinegar ... you know what to expect.

A 31-gallon barrel of pickles?

 

[TankTop5]

Dynaudio dropped two tweeters in their Confidence line right after Jupiter (and redesigned Contour) so I’ll take that as a good sign it’s not the best practice.

 

[TankTop5]

What about Tekton or McIntosh with their arrays?

 

[ryanosaur]

I don’t know how Tekton wires their arrays, but in the hexagon arrangement, the central point is the actual tweeter, while the surrounding 6 are the mid-range array.
If the six are the correct wavelength apart, then they will not, theoretically, interfere with each other.
Using the DI as the example, you have two bass woofers at the bottom, then up top you have an interesting version of an MTM where the “t” is supposed to operate as a mid +tweet concentric driver/point source, with two mid-bass woofers above and below.
I would love to see his XOs and wiring!
And I still hope to hear these one day.

 

[lovinthehd]

LOL this is a Teton which has its own "thing" going

 

[TankTop5]

LOL this is a Teton which has its own "thing" going
View attachment 43845

Tekton, lol

 

[mazersteven]

But another question would be why two tweeters?

Dali uses 2 tweeters

 

[lovinthehd]

Tekton, lol

I know but thought that one fit well into the conversation

 

[3db]

LOL this is a Teton which has its own "thing" going
View attachment 43845

A small bookshelf on Viagra!!! Who'd thunk it??

 

[rebulx]

The people that dislike AXIOM only understand what's on paper and have not actually listened to the unit before commenting. People just like to hate. They don't understand all the hard work and honest people that went into the design. They bring up science as a backer to their views, yet our science as of today doesn't understand how our ears translate audio. But everyone is an expert....myself included lol .. guys just listen before hating so much!!!