Axiom vs Klipsch vs JBL

U

u2generator

Junior Audioholic
Here's the deal,

I currently own JBL L830 speakers for my music room. I drive them with a Harmon Kardon HK 3490 receiver. They sound great at low volume but seem to compress when I try to drive them and don’t get very loud. I’m talking about turning the amp up to -18. I also have a sub. I am considering either a set of Axiom M-22’s (which I have in my Home Theater) or Klipsch RB-61’s. I like the idea of the efficiency of the Klipsch but like the sound of the Axioms. I don’t have the opportunity or the drive to try and compare them.
My music room is approximately 12’ X 15’. I am 55, so my hearing isn’t the greatest. I don’t remember the model of my Yamaha receiver for my Home Theater but it gets LOUD running the M-22’s in a large room.
So, should I go with the efficient RB-61’s or M-22’s?

Thanks,

TW
 
zieglj01

zieglj01

Audioholic Spartan
Always, go with what sounds best to you. The Klipsch will play loud - however,
the horns were too much for my ears, and I find the midrange does not have
good resolution. A lot of people like the Klipsch, and they have many fans.
 
GranteedEV

GranteedEV

Audioholic Ninja
Getting more axioms would be boring.
low end klipsches don't sound that great imo.


I reccomend a pair of powered JBL Pro LSR2328s

not to be confused with JBL Home stuff.... LSRs are great.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I’m talking about turning the amp up to -18.
So how loud is that exactly on the SPL meter?

On my Denon 391, a -10dB gives me 85dBA on the SPL meter.

On my Denon AVP + AT3007 amp, a -18.5dB gives me 85dBA.

I think you need tower speakers if you want less "distortion" at higher volumes. I recommend the Infinity P363 towers (same family as JBL/Harman).
 
Last edited:
M

Midwesthonky

Audioholic General
Last year I was looking at Axiom, Klipsch, and a few others. But I was looking at towers.

I went with the Axiom M60v2 towers and have been very pleased with them with both the sound quality and how "loud" they can go without distortion. I was looking at the RF series of Klipsch either the 52 or 62 (I couldn't decide). Ultimately, the horns fatigued my ears and I chose not to go with Klipsch. My personal preference.

I went with Axiom and have been very happy.

I second the vote to go with what you enjoy listening to.
 
M

MDS

Audioholic Spartan
So how loud is that exactly on the SPL meter?

On my Denon 391, a -10dB gives me 85dBA on the SPL meter.

On my Denon AVP + AT3007 amp, a -18.5dB gives me 85dBA.
Interesting but inconclusive without more information. What was playing when those measurements were taken? If it was real music the meter would be bouncing all over the place as the level drops below or rises above the average level - unless of course the music was squashed to death and it pretty much always right at the average level (ie. limited dynamics).

If those measurements were taken when playing a test tone then it depends on the level of the test tone:

- If the test tone was -30 dB (receiver test tones) then the receiver is calibrated to play 20 dB louder than 'reference level' because it should read 75 dB at 0.

- If the test tone was at -20 dB (AVIA), then the receiver is calibrated 10 dB louder than reference.
 
U

u2generator

Junior Audioholic
Thanks for the responses.

I am strictly going by ear for the loudness levels.

I am looking for more effecient speakers. I have the M-22's in my home theater and like them. I am considering Klipsch because-well you get the idea.
 
B

Brahms

Enthusiast
I reccomend a pair of powered JBL Pro LSR2328s

not to be confused with JBL Home stuff.... LSRs are great.
Pro active monitors would fit for HT purposes? what about its bright and directional sound, and ear fatiguing?

And considering monitors, what about the Adams A7X over JBL? I've read good opinions on LSR6328P as well.
 
GranteedEV

GranteedEV

Audioholic Ninja
what about its bright and directional sound, and ear fatiguing?
A proper directional sound is desired. It gives a wide sweet spot, tight imaging, and reduces the earliest room reflections giving a lifelike presentation.

Good Pro monitors are not bright. They are intentially FLAT and often even have treble controls.

Some however use metal dome tweeters, which can be fatiguing because they are possibly even starting to break up in the audible passband. The only metal tweeters I would mess with would be ribbons and beryllium. Metal is useful because it lets you extract some detail, but the drawback is the likelyhood of breakup.

JBL uses a soft fabric dome on their tweeters, and a waveguide to smooth out HF response. Adams use a ribbon and I can't comment on what they are like, period.
 
B

Brahms

Enthusiast
A proper directional sound is desired. It gives a wide sweet spot, tight imaging, and reduces the earliest room reflections giving a lifelike presentation.
I've always heard one of the cons of pro active monitors for home listening, since they're designed for working on complete dedicated and treated rooms/studios and near-field, are they sound is too directional for home purposes and unpractical. This is, theres a narrow sweet spot and you move a few inches from it and the good sound may go away.

On HiFi gear its said this is not much of a problem becouse it sounds generally in a more omnidirectional way than monitors.


But I really dont know, Im just talking from what I read on other sites, like gearslutz. In fact, one thing I notice is audio recorders or mixing engineers who work with monitors, use to listen music/HT at their homes with HiFi speakers, not monitors.
 
GranteedEV

GranteedEV

Audioholic Ninja
I've always heard one of the cons of pro active monitors for home listening, since they're designed for working on complete dedicated and treated rooms/studios and near-field, are they sound is too directional for home purposes and unpractical. This is, theres a narrow sweet spot and you move a few inches from it and the good sound may go away.
Depending on the specific speaker. A narrow sweet spot is most a function of poor off axis response. A great speaker has smooth transition from on-axis to off-axis.

The JBLs I recommended are directional. Directional does not mean the off axis response is poor, but rather the well, well off axis response is minimal while within a nice window, the off-axis response is smooth. Power response is smooth and flat, directivity is controlled, frequency response is flat, distortion is low.

Horns can have diffraction effects and resonances, but can also help mate a tweeter to a woofer or take away room effects.

On HiFi gear its said this is not much of a problem becouse it sounds generally in a more omnidirectional way than monitors.
Funny, every time I hear about "Hi-Fi gear", it's accompanied by "Make sure the room is treated with acoustic panels" :rolleyes:

"hi-fi" speakers are often anything but omnidirectional. They usually have wide dispersion that doesn't even match the on axis response. All that does is color the sound because as soon as that non-matching off axis response bounces off the nearest wall or ceiling it hits your ears and confuses your mind.

That's not to say typical speakers are all bad. Not necessarily. But you have to take what you hear with a grain of salt. Usually, if you need to compromise the WAF of your room because the speakers need this or that, perhaps something else is wrong.

But I really dont know, Im just talking from what I read on other sites, like gearslutz. In fact, one thing I notice is audio recorders or mixing engineers who work with monitors, use to listen music/HT at their homes with HiFi speakers, not monitors.
Great speakers are great speakers, with their own pros and cons.
Poor speakers are poor speakers, with their own cons and few pros.

To pidgeon-hole something is to be closed minded. Go to DIY Audio and look at the guys building public address speakers with compression drivers in 90x60 horns, and 15" midranges.... for low-level living room listening. Others use the most expensive Seas and Scanspeak drivers and make great Hi-Fi style speakers. Others are just insane with line array open baffle dipoles and things like that 8O Until we've actually tried it all I don't we're in any position to really comment on it beyond the theory of "why".

Speakers are very complex. I wish I understood them but I don't. You can't believe everything everyone tells you. There's many ways to skin a cat, and maybe they are ALL wrong! Just remember that even studio engineers are people like you or I. Often they buy monitors that impress them in some facets that have nothing to do with accurate sound reproduction (IE "translating to the speakers in a Honda Civic") or "Finding noise problems in a recording". That doesn't mean all studio monitors are even close to the same. Nor are PA speakers or Hi Fi speakers.

Most "hi fi" boutique speakers are the ones with a narrow sweet spots and poor engineering because they are made to sell to dumb rich people who see a pretty, big box with shiny drivers. Try listening to a Wilson some time. :D
 
Last edited:
gtpsuper24

gtpsuper24

Full Audioholic
I am looking for more effecient speakers. I have the M-22's in my home theater and like them. I am considering Klipsch because-well you get the idea.
I had the Axiom M22s and replaced them with the Arx A2 LCRs and will never hook the Axioms back up again. IMO head and shoulders above the Axioms.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top