$600 for 2 speakers

[dem beats]

I am helping a co worker put together a home theater. He of course brough up the bose cubes and we talked. Said no go for those. Thank god.

After looking into prices for 5.1, then 4.1, I decided we had more questions to answer. He watches mostly drama and some action, but not too much sci fi. We discussed the room size. It's actualy quite a bit too small for what would lend itself to good surround.

We decided 2 chan. I told him if he wants later I can do a DIY sub for him, but at the moment 2 should fit the need. He also comes to find out likes blues and Jazz. Something with authority to give out some great stand up bass, and vocals. He specificaly mentioned the midbass instruments, being important. I think with nice imaging and great mid-midbass, he will be happy as a bug in a rug.

I need to find out what kind of receiver her has, but it came with his HTIB set. Sony of some kind. I hope it has a drop or 2 of power, but maybe to stick with more effecient designs would be the right way to go. Has to have a little WAF, as in no 8' horns.

Let me know what you guys think, I'm looking the av123 selection and axiom but I have no personal experience.

 

[Tex-amp]

See if Ascend Acoustics has any more of the Sierra re-certs available. Those will deliver exactly what he is looking for.

 

[Gimpy Ric]

I had a pair of these before I upgraded to towers. Awesome bookshelf speakers. This is a closeout deal, so act fast. You'll be impressed.

NEW IN BOX Intimus 632-LR Bookshelf Speaker - $269.00 each

http://www.aperionaudio.com/product/NEW-IN-BOX-Intimus-632-LR-Bookshelf-Speaker,17,65,32.aspx

 

[jcPanny]

AV123 bookshelf speakers

I have the AV123 Onix Ref 1's for my mains and they are very nice. The retial price is high, but you can find them for $5-600 used. I also have the ELT525s for my surrounds, they make a good, compact monitor speaker with real wood veneer for $300/pair.

Also look for Usher, Paradigm, RBH, Klipsch Reference and other bookshelf speakers in your price range.

On second though, I would rule out the Ref 1's and other 4 ohm speakers with the HTIB receiver.

 

[forkbeard]

I own the Axiom M22s. They measure well, of course, and I think they sound great. Do they have enough low-end for your friend? From what you say, I guess so. I run them with a pair of subs. I want that extra octave.

They are reasonably efficient.

WAF? Who knows? Who can know? Is that a knowable thing?

For the best results, you'd have to put them on stands and allocate space and money for that.

 

[j_garcia]

If you can't get a deal on Sierras, the CMT-340s would be a good bet for the money.

 

[dem beats]

Thanks guys for all the help!

I am going to see if he want's to go shopping to a local shop too. There is something about hearing them vs just looking at them too.

 

[jostenmeat]

dem beats, Im now an avid bandwagoner on the Ascend lineup. Just recently in fact. If I ever bought a pair of bookshelves at around this budget, I don't even think I would be bothered to audition anymore.

Another option regarding Ascend speakers, if our esteemed member here is willing, is to have a pair of 170 SE's directly shipped to WmAx's place to have him do the mods. It should still fit right around budget. I say directly shipped only to save on those shipping costs. But then again, it would be cool to hear the "before and after", even if our auditory memories are suspect. A speaker consists of three main components: drivers, x-over, cabinet. The first two in the 170 SE are top notch, and its only missing the top notch cabinet.

*FWIW, I've never heard the 340 or Sierras. In fact, I haven't heard any other speaker listed in this thread so far. I'm much more familiar with B&M brands, even if I haven't listened to Paradigm or Usher either.

 

[carolinablues]

The Swan D2.1SEs are on sale for $499 at theaudioinsider.com

 

[gus6464]

The Swan D2.1SEs are on sale for $499 at theaudioinsider.com

Damn that's a good deal.

 

[avaserfi]

I own the Axiom M22s. They measure well, of course, and I think they sound great....

I am not aware of any Axiom speakers that measure well [relative to other speakers in similar price class] as it relates to credible perceptual research correlated to listener preference.

Another option regarding Ascend speakers, if our esteemed member here is willing, is to have a pair of 170 SE's directly shipped to WmAx's place to have him do the mods. It should still fit right around budget. I say directly shipped only to save on those shipping costs. But then again, it would be cool to hear the "before and after", even if our auditory memories are suspect. A speaker consists of three main components: drivers, x-over, cabinet. The first two in the 170 SE are top notch, and its only missing the top notch cabinet.

Such modification as recommended will result in an inert cabinet which will increase clarity and insure no coloration is created by cabinet wall vibration and increase listener preference, but it certainly does have a cost: low frequency extension. After modification it is extremely unlikely that the Ascend CBM-170s will have sufficient low frequency response due to diminished cabinet volume. To remedy this the user would need to integrate stereo subwoofers. This will allow for maximum sound quality, but would likely exceed $600.

An alternative would be to purchase a pair of Behringer 2030P Truth monitors whose measurements are superb. A pair of these speakers can be purchased online for about $130 and if modified properly have potential to be superior to the Ascend CBM-170 [and most other commercial/DIY monopolar designs] at moderate SPLs, again if properly integrated with stereo subwoofers such as the 10" Dayton 100 on Parts Express (part number 300-633).

The modification referred to would involve use of a constrain layer and rigid bracing [among other things] to minimize internal volume used while maximize ability to reduce cabinet resonance. Essentially a more simplistic version of my personal current, custom, speaker build would be done along with some other minor modifications specific to the Truth monitor or Ascend to increase sound quality:

 

[fredk]

I am not aware of any Axiom speakers that measure well [relative to other speakers in similar price class] as it relates to credible perceptual research correlated to listener preference.

Funny, that statement is in stark contrast to the creadible reviewers out there, including those at audioholics. Myabe all reviewers are, um, less than capable, but somehow I doubt it.

 

[avaserfi]

Funny, that statement is in stark contrast to the creadible reviewers out there, including those at audioholics. Myabe all reviewers are, um, less than capable, but somehow I doubt it.

There is a large difference between subjective reviews and the objective nature of the studies I refer too. Bias is an incredibly powerful phenomenon that cannot be forgotten when reading a subjective review. Either way, I have no interest in arguing this point and derailing the thread. I will be more than willing to address any questions regarding my speaker suggestions and/or modifications [based solely on credible research], but will not let this thread drift further off topic with my participation.

One thing to note, you quote Floyd Toole in your signature, he was one of the major trail blazers with the research that I am referring too.

 

[forkbeard]

"Either way, I have no interest in arguing this point..."

Then why did you argue it?

"I will be more than willing to address any questions regarding my speaker suggestions and/or modifications [based solely on credible research], but will not let this thread drift further off topic with my participation."

The OP asked about Axioms. Talking about them IS on topic. You introduced the idea of custom mods. Exactly how do you intend to keep this thread focused on your agenda?

 

[WmAx]

quality:

Uh.... you sure you have enough concrete slabs in there? I mean, it might not break a back yet....

-Chris

 

[avaserfi]

"Either way, I have no interest in arguing this point..."

Then why did you argue it?

I simply pointed out misinformation with the post regarding the subjective nature of reviews.

"I will be more than willing to address any questions regarding my speaker suggestions and/or modifications [based solely on credible research], but will not let this thread drift further off topic with my participation."

The OP asked about Axioms. Talking about them IS on topic. You introduced the idea of custom mods. Exactly how do you intend to keep this thread focused on your agenda?

I was not the user who initiated conversation of modification. My initial post in this thread was number 11 replying to a post by another user (jostenmeat in post number 8) which introduced the topic of modification. I merely expanded on this subject.

To keep this post on topic I will expand on my previous comments:

The majority of people in the audio community believe loudspeaker choice is a subjective judgment. Despite this prevailing theory credible perceptual research has shown that loudspeaker preference can be directly correlated with loudspeaker measurements. These studies were done by different researchers with various types of listeners and all achieved similar results. All of my speaker recommendations, comments and designs are based solely on this credible research. It is in no way meant to inflame.

While I have not seen any credible measurements of the specific pair of Axioms previously mentioned in this thread I have seen credible measurements of both the Ascend CBM170 (before and after modification) and the Behringer 2030P Truth monitors (only before modification). These two speakers perform superbly especially for their price (and well above) and based on the credible measurements I have seen of Axiom speakers are likely to far exceed Axiom performance if comparing the pairs unmodified and even more so if modified. Please note, both the Ascend and to a lesser extent the 2030P will require some attenuation of the treble response (supported by credible perceptual research). This is so because the speakers are so linear they can be perceived as harsh - this is not a bad trait, but rather a positive one as with proper DSP application virtually any tonality can be achieved.

I have made my recommendations to the original poster. I have no agenda but to recommend the highest quality speakers within his budget. I am not a 'fan boy' of any specific brands, just the best speaker [as correlated with perceptual research and listener preference] at each price point.

Apologies to anyone who feels as if this discussion is derailing this thread. I am trying to keep it as on topic as possible while addressing all issues raised with my recommendations.

Uh.... you sure you have enough concrete slabs in there? I mean, it might not break a back yet....

-Chris

Due to a last minute change in design and increased rigidity of the new material used I had a large amount of extra volume that needed to be used. Thusly, I added a second constrain layer rather than let that space go to 'waste'.

 

[fredk]

There is a large difference between subjective reviews and the objective nature of the studies I refer too

Indeed there is. Unfortunately you have not given any evidence to show that someone has directly applied that "credible perceptual research" to show that any given speaker produced by Axiom is measurably inferior "relative to other speakers in similar price class"

Having written that, I point you to the Soundstage Network.
http://www.soundstageav.com/speakermeasurements.html
These fine folks have actually done the empirical measurements (at the holy grail of said perceptual research, the NRC) that one can apply the "credible perceptual research" to in order to bring real value to "subjective reviews".

For whatever reason they seem to have applied the appropriate metrics to a number of Axioms offerings and found them to be a very good to exceptionable value. Now, it is possible that they are either biased, incompetent, or both, but given that they have done the empirical measurements in a credible way at a well respected institution and seem to have a good handle on the research you refer to, I highly doubt it.

Now, to bring this back to the topic at hand and the original comments. There is a review of the M22 here at Audioholics written by two of the senior editors, one of whom (I believe) is an engineer who has spent considerable time in the audio field. Both of these gentlemen have shown through their many and various articles that they also have a good (probably much better than average) understanding of the perceptual research (as well as the basic principles of bias, room/speaker interaction etc...), came to the conclusion that the M22 is an exceptional value. Again, perhaps they are biased, incompetent, or both, but I doubt it.

One thing to note, you quote Floyd Toole in your signature, he was one of the major trail blazers with the research that I am referring too.

I understand who Dr. Toole is and have read a number of his papers/articles including the one I quoted from. If you read the quote and the part of the article it came from, you will see that there is a very good reason for using that quote on this particular site. I would post the link but I don't have it handy on this computer.

 

[avaserfi]

Indeed there is. Unfortunately you have not given any evidence to show that someone has directly applied that "credible perceptual research" to show that any given speaker produced by Axiom is measurably inferior "relative to other speakers in similar price class"

The process of correlating perceptual research to listener preference is not something that can be simply explained to another. Rather an intimate knowledge of the research in question must be had to fully understand such a technique.

I did miss the Axiom M22ti measurements being on Soundstage. After comparing these measurements to the Ascend and Behringer measurements I can fully say that the Axiom is the lowest quality offering. Just looking at the on/off-axis response it is clear that the Ascends are far more linear as they do not contain a midrange bump (well within audibility*) as well as rising treble (again well within audibility*). Also, note the Ascends far more linear 'listening window' measurements as well as superior off-axis response. Both speakers seem to have THD well below audibility at measured levels.

*As these measurements correlate to credible perceptual research and its findings on audibility of different Q peaks and notches.

Having written that, I point you to the Soundstage Network.
http://www.soundstageav.com/speakermeasurements.html
These fine folks have actually done the empirical measurements (at the holy grail of said perceptual research, the NRC) that one can apply the "credible perceptual research" to in order to bring real value to "subjective reviews".

For whatever reason they seem to have applied the appropriate metrics to a number of Axioms offerings and found them to be a very good to exceptionable value. Now, it is possible that they are either biased, incompetent, or both, but given that they have done the empirical measurements in a credible way at a well respected institution and seem to have a good handle on the research you refer to, I highly doubt it.

These are the same measurements I refer to. You will note the Ascend CBM-170 is also listed in the measured speakers. As far as "bring[ing] real value to 'subjective reviews'" this is your own statement, not mine. I see absolutely no need for subjective reviews. At best if one comprises a large amount of subjective reviews on a specific loudspeaker they might be able to discover some flaws of said loudspeaker and perhaps some positive attributes although the latter is less likely.

Rather than focusing on the subjective reviews I only look at the measurements as it seems, often times, reviewers who correlate these measurements with credible research underestimate thresholds of certain aspects [resonance] while overestimating audibility of others [distortion]. Thusly, rather than relying on others to make these judgments I have spent [and still spend] a large amount of time studying this research to attain full understanding of said studies.

Now, to bring this back to the topic at hand and the original comments. There is a review of the M22 here at Audioholics written by two of the senior editors, one of whom (I believe) is an engineer who has spent considerable time in the audio field. Both of these gentlemen have shown through their many and various articles that they also have a good (probably much better than average) understanding of the perceptual research (as well as the basic principles of bias, room/speaker interaction etc...), came to the conclusion that the M22 is an exceptional value. Again, perhaps they are biased, incompetent, or both, but I doubt it.

While I respect the Audioholics staff for what they do and being able to turn a great hobby into a career I again have no interest in comparing subjective reviews. When the proper measurements are supplied there is no need for a subjective review, presuming that the proper knowledge of perceptual research is had. The issue with this of course, is having the means [both time and environment] to properly take such measurements which is why they are so rare.

 

[dem beats]

Leave you guys alone for a couple days..... sheesh.

Thank you all so much for the suggestions. Those swans are a HECK of a deal.

 

[jostenmeat]

avaserfi,

Thank you very much for your informative response, and picture!

I have a question, or maybe a couple, regarding speaker design, particularly the x-over. So, you take some excellently linear drivers and x-over, and start tailoring the cabinet. Are there thresholds of cabinet volume where the x-over must be redesigned? IOW, is there a limit to what you can do before any such consideration comes into effect? I make the assumption that the answer is "No", just by looking at your work.

Or is it that the x-over dealing with higher frequencies (between tweet/mid) are rather immune to cabinet volume, and that perhaps the x-over between mid and bass drivers would more likely need to be re-desgined/configured? (Such as with an outboard unit you must be using). I'm sure there must be another can of worms when considering room interaction...

I presume that at this price range ($125-350) that only very minimal research on cabinet performance/suitability has been done, if any at all. Which leads me to ask:

for those very large companies that have a lot of funds for R&D, such as B&W for instance, how much will tweaks in cabinet volume affect the design of their x-overs? I know this might appear as a loaded question, for if the answer was, "yes, a great deal", that would be contrary to my assumption made above. I guess my question is that if funds were "unlimited", would there be any benefit without any bang-for-buck consideration as to the very specifc effect the cabinet might have on x-over performance itself?

A parting shot/opinion regarding any "arguments" above. Its been said by members, who are perhaps the most familiar with meaurements, that the time it takes to understand the phalanx of such measurements and accurately judge its performance is formidable. IOW, might as well just use our ears... unless you want to get reeeaaaaallllyy deep into such territory. Would you agree, avaserfi, or is that just another loaded question? I assume it is.

I guess, in slight defense of those who use fallible and subjective ears, I have seen some number-lovers strongly opining on speaker performance based on measurements, just to be immediately corrected by a more versed number-lover. (Reminds me of an Annie Hall scene). I remember a sig I've seen, a quote by Andrew Lang, "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts-- for support rather than illumination". I definitely wouldn't be referring to you, Andrew, but I know a lot of people who have done that once or twice. It's hard not to, to be honest...