Axiom M100 (m80 sequel)

[deltadube]

HI Garbulky..

have the speakers on the long wall.. will give that acoustic guy winer nightmeres..

speakers should be on the short wall and fire down the length of the room for best acoustics from what ive read..

cheers..

[ocezam]

Jul 27, 2013 16:17:39 GMT -5 @rlw said:

I would much rather have (and I do, heh, heh!) fewer, better-matched drivers with minimal or no crossover networks smearing the sound and soaking up energy. The Axioms prey on most folks' feelings that more is necessarily better. In the case of speakers, very much the opposite is true. The *ideal* speaker would have a single, full-range driver that accurately covered the entire audible spectrum from 20-20k Hz. Since this goal is virtually impossible to achieve, the closer you can get to this ideal, the better the speaker.
-RW-

Words of wisdom. Couldn't agree more.


...

[boomzilla]

Aw geez, dudes. Have y'all even HEARD the Axiom M80s? Yes, simpler is better in theory. Yes a point source is best in theory. That said, speakers (in particular) provide MANY paths to nirvana. I LOVE listening to big old Klipschorns even though their problems would fill pages if listed. I LOVE listening to Magnepans even though their back wave is a curse in ANY reasonably sized room. I LOVE listening to Garbulky's Axiom M80s (yes, even at "near-field" distances) because in SPITE of their problems, they still sound WONDERFULLY neutral, delicate, and alive.

Music is where you find it & Garbulky's M80s dish it out in spades! Might another speaker do better in his room? Absolutely! But with the results he's getting now, I wouldn't spend a single buck to change speakers. If Garbulky likes the sound of his rig (and he'd be insane not to), then I'd say that despite the theoretical advantages of other speakers, despite the fact that Garbulky's rig would sound better in a much bigger room (which he'll eventually get), and despite the fact that he can occasionally hear the vertical separation of the drivers, I'd think that he'd be wise to sit back & enjoy what he's got.

Now if only I can convince myself to take the same advice...

Boomzilla

[ocezam]

Jul 28, 2013 11:40:59 GMT -5 boomzilla said:

Aw geez, dudes. Have y'all even HEARD the Axiom M80s? Yes, simpler is better in theory. Yes a point source is best in theory. That said, speakers (in particular) provide MANY paths to nirvana. I LOVE listening to big old Klipschorns even though their problems would fill pages if listed. I LOVE listening to Magnepans even though their back wave is a curse in ANY reasonably sized room. I LOVE listening to Garbulky's Axiom M80s (yes, even at "near-field" distances) because in SPITE of their problems, they still sound WONDERFULLY neutral, delicate, and alive. Music is where you find it & Garbulky's M80s dish it out in spades! Might another speaker do better in his room? Absolutely! But with the results he's getting now, I wouldn't spend a single buck to change speakers. If Garbulky likes the sound of his rig (and he'd be insane not to), then I'd say that despite the theoretical advantages of other speakers, despite the fact that Garbulky's rig would sound better in a much bigger room (which he'll eventually get), and despite the fact that he can occasionally hear the vertical separation of the drivers, I'd think that he'd be wise to sit back & enjoy what he's got.
Now if only I can convince myself to take the same advice...
Boomzilla

. . . .?. . . .


Nobody's taking a shot at his speakers.

The thread was about M100s. They beg the question "what do more drivers get you", and what's the cost monetarily and sonically.


...

[boomzilla]

Sorry - I didn't mean to come across as defending Garbulky's M80s, but I guess I did.

As to the questions "what do more drivers get you?" and "What's the cost?" I'd say:

More drivers get you more ultimate volume with less distortion. They also get you less TIM distortion because they need move less to produce the same SPL.

What's the cost? Well, if you're near-field listening (like Gar is just now), you're likely to be more aware of the speakers failure to blend. You can also spend a lot more $$$ for capabilities you may not need or use.

If I had a HUGE room, the M-100s could be GREAT (but I'd probably opt for K-Horns or La Scalas instead).

Cheers - BZ

[garbulky]

I would be interested in hearing them but I was sort of hoping for some sort of different drivers too. The entire axiom range share the same drivers but for the price I would like a little bit more in terms of driver quality. Maybe a different set of tweeters.... or three 8 inch woofers etc.

One thing that is cool about the m100 is that it is able to be installed with a active external dsp that axiom can provide for extra. This DSP performs an AD conversion from the pre-amp followed by a DA conversion on the output. The DSP attempts to modify the sound signal to provide a more neutral sound. They said their active dsp is able to do more than their passive cross overs are able to do.
I personally don't like the idea of a DSP in the path as then all your quality from your DAC is then bottlenecked depending on the DAC quality of the DSP but it's neat they offer it.

[garbulky]

I recieved an email from axiom. They confirmed that it is not simply an additional set of drivers.
They have improved the cross overs, they have built a new upgraded sort of drivers and tweeters with better components, voice coil, more glue, more flexible rubber surround and heat dissipation. This is likely the "v4".
More here
www.axiomaudio.com/blog/building-a-high-powered-woofer/
www.axiomaudio.com/boards/ubbthreads.php/topics/395609/8

Most interestingly (cgolf, pcguy, solarrdad are you listening?)
They are offering an upgrade to the m80's as a sort of trade-in plus some money to switch out your m80's to m100's or LFR 1100 depending on age and condition of m80's. It's on a case by case basis.

[cgolf]

Aug 1, 2013 13:47:53 GMT -5 garbulky said:

I recieved an email from axiom. They confirmed that it is not simply an additional set of drivers.
They have improved the cross overs, they have built a new upgraded sort of drivers and tweeters with better components, voice coil and heat dissipation.
More here
www.axiomaudio.com/blog/building-a-high-powered-woofer/
www.axiomaudio.com/boards/ubbthreads.php/topics/395609/8

Most interestingly (cgolf, pcguy, solarrdad are you listening?)
They are offering an upgrade to the m80's as a sort of trade-in plus some money to switch out your m80's to m100's or LFR 1100 depending on age and condition of m80's. It's on a case by case basis.

Quite interesting. It is certainly worth a look see and to ask about the trade up program...

[Porscheguy]

I think Axiom is just praying you have a bad case of upgrade-itis

[Porscheguy]

Jul 26, 2013 19:37:48 GMT -5 GreenKiwi said:

Just a few drivers... I love the white drivers with the "Red" wood.

I think the drivers are Al you mini umm...

[boomzilla]

Hey Gar - If you want to upgrade, sell ME your M80s!

LOL - Boomzilla

[jjmatrix]

The difference in price is not because two extra bass drivers are added and certainly not because the improved/larger cabinet. These are for sure factors, but the most important one is this (quote from Ian, owner of Axiom Audio):

"This new 6.5” driver incorporates a much larger motor, larger diameter voice coil, and much longer excursion compared to the current LFR1100/M80 woffer. After a lot of modelling on the FEA (Finite Element Analyses) software and a lot of physical samples built, this new driver is complete. This new 6.5” woofer has much more power handling and stronger bass; which will complement the sheer output capabilities of the LFR1100/M80 perfectly. Existing LFR1100s can be upgraded to these woofers. In addition there will be a new model that incorporates this driver called the M100, but more on that soon."

I believe the upgrade price to be around $75 per driver, depending on condition; the upgrade is only available for the LFR1100. I called Axiom inquiring if I can upgrade my M80s, but they said it won't work as the new drivers will need new crossovers. So, the second important reason for the price is increase is new and improved crossovers.

I have seen the new drivers, and indeed the magnets are huge, way bigger than the M80s ones; does the reasons above warrant almost doubling the price? I'm not sure since I haven't heard the new speakers, but knowing Axiom these may as well be in a different class the the wonderful M80s.

[garbulky]

JJmatrix, they mentioned on their forum. They are working on a trade in program where you trade in your m80's for an m100 depending on their condition and age. I think it's a case by case basis and I assume you have to pay some money to do so of course. But that is interesting they thought about their customers there.

[cgolf]

Aug 2, 2013 12:06:14 GMT -5 garbulky said:

JJmatrix, they mentioned on their forum. They are working on a trade in program where you trade in your m80's for an m100 depending on their condition and age. I think it's a case by case basis and I assume you have to pay some money to do so of course. But that is interesting they thought about their customers there.

Talked with Brent at Axiom about this and yes, they will look up your purchase date and then give you an adjusted price on the 100s. You have to pay for return shipping but they will help with those rates and include that in their new pricing. I have to find the original owner's name of my speakers and give that to them. If I can find it, I'll do that next week just to get an idea on price.

[biggar]

I took delivery of a pair of M100s just yesterday. I spend all afternoon yesterday and a couple of hours today (so far!) listening to them with classical, jazz, folk and rock. My previous speakers were the M80s. I find that the M100s have a demonstrably greater dynamic range. Even though the80 are very confident at high volumes, the 100s display an even greater confidence. I'm currently listening to Clapton's Layla - a rock record that is not just bunched up in a 10 decibel range. The 100s are throwing music at me in such a way that I cannot hear the separate speakers, rather, I can hear the music nicely separated into different instruments across the soundstage.

I think that positioning is important with these speakers. Mine are not in their final position by a long shot. My wife and I started that conversation this morning and our negotiation is going to take some time. In any event, my questions about the 100s are as follows. First, I'm used to the Axiom sound, these do sound like Axioms - is that too much for me - do I need a complete change - I don't think so. I had my KEFs for ten years, I'm a long term lover so if I keep these big guys they will be here for an long time. Second, am I drinking my own cool-aid when I say that these speakers are great - I don't know. I keep wondering what the Bryston Model Ts (made by Axiom at the same plant) sound like. The Bryston's not only look the same as the 100s, they have exactly the same number of drivers (although their woofers are 8" rather thn 6.5") and they use the identical Axiom tweeter and midrange to the 100s. However the Brystons are trip-amiable rather than bi-amiable like the 100s (I have mine bi-amped - after a fashion). The stupidity in these things comes to light when you look up reviews of the Bryston. Talk about over the top glowng reviews from all of the high-end mags and dealers. Turn the page and find peope who have not heard the Axioms criticizing them to the nth degree. Not sure how to explain the implied statement that Axiom made an excellent overachiever for Bryston and a dog for themselves. Yes, the Bryston has a different crossover arrangement to the Axioms but I ask again, why would the chief engineer at Axiom breed a top class crossover for the Bryston and a crappy one for themselves! Third, I've played lots of women's voices over the past 24 hours. I cannot detect any of the sibilance that some complain of in Axiom's. Both the "s" and "t" are pronounced with recision (except on a Joan Baez live album on which the sibilance is present regardless of the player and speaker). Mind you, I have to say that there was none of that sibilance or over brightness with the 80s either.

Lots of drivers, fewer drivers - in my opinion, it's just a matter of opinion and desired dynamics - how do you like your music delivered to your brain. I happen to like a big and well articulated bottom end, others like theirs to be subtle nobody is right or wrong on this. I'm sure that there are very many speakers that are better than the Axioms. When I bought the 80s, I looked at speakers in the $5,000-8,000 range and said no. Unless I'm completely wrong, that calculus will maintain itself with the 100's.


Parts of Chopin's piano concertos bring me close to tears. I can actually feel the emotion welling up in me. These speakers do not disappoint on this matter, the emotional grab of the old romantic is very much there. Violins high (as they should be) and totally in control. On that subject, there seems t be little to no dynamic compression in these speakers physiognomy. They seem to be relatively free of artifact.

Listening to the Moody Blues "Every Good Boy Deserves Favour". I've listened to these Moody Blues albums on everything from a clock radio to the highest end speakers - i know every note. Fantastic lower-mids drawing me right in. The speakers jump from high to low with great agility nothing seems to be compromised.

As you can tell, I'm not into the numbers when it comes to music. I just love music (39,000 tracks on my Sonos, hundreds of vinyl albums and still have my CDs). Someone would have to explain to me what the problems are with these speakers. I'll let you know more in the coming weeks.

[garbulky]

Aug 17, 2013 13:10:46 GMT -5 biggar said:

I took delivery of a pair of M100s just yesterday. I spend all afternoon yesterday and a couple of hours today (so far!) listening to them with classical, jazz, folk and rock. My previous speakers were the M80s. I find that the M100s have a demonstrably greater dynamic range. Even though the80 are very confident at high volumes, the 100s display an even greater confidence. I'm currently listening to Clapton's Layla - a rock record that is not just bunched up in a 10 decibel range. The 100s are throwing music at me in such a way that I cannot hear the separate speakers, rather, I can hear the music nicely separated into different instruments across the soundstage.

I think that positioning is important with these speakers. Mine are not in their final position by a long shot. My wife and I started that conversation this morning and our negotiation is going to take some time. In any event, my questions about the 100s are as follows. First, I'm used to the Axiom sound, these do sound like Axioms - is that too much for me - do I need a omelette change - I don't think so. I had my KEFs for ten years, I'm a long term lover so if I keep these big guys they will be here for an long time. Second, am I drinking my own cool-aid when I say that these speakers are great - I don't know. I keep wondering what the Bryston Model Ts (made by Axiom at the same plant) sound like. The Bryston's not only look the same as the 100s, they have exactly the same number of drivers (although their woofers are 8" rather thn 6.5") and they use the identical Axiom tweeter and midrange to the 100s. However the Brystons are trip-amiable rather than bi-amiable like the 100s (I have mine bi-amped - after a fashion). The stupidity in these things comes to light when you look up reviews of the Bryston. Talk about over the top glowng reviews from all of the high-end mags and dealers. Turn the page and find peope who have not heard the Axioms criticizing them to the nth degree. Not sure how to explain the implied statement that Axiom made an excellent overachiever for Bryston and a dog for themselves. Yes, the Bryston has a different crossover arrangement to the Axioms but I ask again, why would the chief engineer at Axiom breed a top class crossover for the Bryston and a crappy one for themselves! Third, I've played lots of women's voices over the past 24 hours. I cannot detect any of the sibilance that some complain of in Axiom's. Both the "s" and "t" are pronounced with recision (except on a Joan Baez live album on which the sibilance is present regardless of the player and speaker). Mind you, I have to say that there was none of that sibilance or over brightness with the 80s either.

Lots a drivers, fewer drivers - in my opinion, it's just a matter of opinion. I happen to like a big and well articulated bottom end, others like theirs to be subtle nobody is right or wrong on this. I'm sure that there are very many speakers that are better than the Axioms. When i bought the 80s, I looked at speakers in the $5,000-8,000 range and said no. Unless I'm completely wrong, that calculus will maintain itself with the 100's.


Parts of Chopin's piano concertos bring me close to tears. I can actually feel the emotion welling up in me. These speakers do not disappoint on this matter, the emotional grab of the old romantic is very much there. Violins high (as they should be) and totally in control. On that subject, there seems t be little to no dynamic compression in these speakers physiognomy. They seem to be relatively free of artifact.

Listening to the Moody Blues "Every Good Boy Deserves Favour". I've listened to these Moody Blues albums on everything from a clock radio to the highest end speakers - i know every note. Fantastic lower-mids drawing me right in. The speakers jump from high to low with great agility nothing seems to be compromised.

As you can tell, I'm not into the numbers when it comes to music. I just love music (39,000 tracks on my Sonos, hundreds of vinyl albums and still have my CDs). Someone would have to explain to me what the problems are with these speakers. I'll let you know more in the coming weeks.

Nice review! Welcome to the lounge!
As a fellow axiom m80 owner, would you mind going into a bit more detail about the sound differences?
I like to talk about specific songs or parts where I heard differences. For instances the intro cymbal on come away with me on Norah Jones stuff. Etc.
Really appreciate the review. I find very few people out there that own axioms. And I concur on the trouble with placement. It sounds good nearly anywhere but tiny changes in position make really significant differences. For me it's been about exactly how toe in it needs and how far away from the walls.

[biggar]

I'll give you a few examples. There is a relatively new artist named Ana Egge. My wife likes her, my daughter hates her. Anyway, with the M80s, the bass was fairly present but not what I would call driving. At the same volume with the 100s, the bass was almost scary it was so pronounced. All in all, i think that that the recording was put through a huge amount of dynamic compression (a fairly new concept for me) in order to achieve the result. For reasons that I cannot divine, that compression was not as noticeable on the 80 as it is on the 100s. I have heard the album elsewhere on good quality speakers - the 100s sounded more like those speakers. I'm thinking that the compression was deliberate in the recording and that is evident on the 100s. In listening to Handel's Coronation Anthems I found that there was far more "music" than with the 80s. Now what I mean by that is that the 100s gave up more spirited musicality in the recording right across the dynamic range. In relation to the highs to the left of the soundstage, the 100s put me up next to them and they were incredibly clear. In relation to the choir I noticed something interesting. In listening to concerts in churches, I am always aware of how this building or that building sounds. It seems to me that human voices are more susceptible to changes in buildings than some if the instruments. That was so with the Handel - I could hear the effects of the building in a slight muting or dulling down of the choir's voices. So how do I know that muting was not the speakers - well, it was not apparent in the Purcell choral work that I subsequently played - nothing there, that recording, I believe, was made in a studio rather than a church. In relation to the bass on the Handel, it was incredibly realistic. I could not only hear it, I could feel it too - but then, I have felt the bass in concert halls. It seemed to me that the notes because they were bass notes were very precise no undue lingering. For a few years now, I have been thinking about bass notes in speakers and recordings as a sign of quality. It far more recently that I read in several places that the hardest thing to get right in speakers is the bass. To my ears, these speakers have it right. Even a loud volumes (the terrifying opening track on the Ana Egge album) the bass was clearly under control, it got louder not less clear.



I'm a longtime Moody Blues fan. Today I played Every Good Child Deserves Favor and A Question of balance. When I was a kid, a few friends of mine and I would sit in the basement of one of our number and listen to the Moody Blues all night. We believed that we could pick out new instruments just about every time we hear the albums. Today's listening was like that - not as though I was hearing the albums for the first time but hearing parts of the instrumentation that I had long forgotten. i thin that the Axiom people did some fiddling when they produced this new crossover because, with what I think is the same tweeter and the same midrange, they have produced a slightly increased vivacity - and that's really distinct from brightness, it's more a quickness in the top end - very much apparent in the Moody Blues recordings. The Moody Blues pretty much always used to start their albums off with some etherial sound coming out of space and rising to a crescendo. At the beginning of their albums, see how early you can hear those notes. On the 80s it was early on the 100s it was early and clearer. 

One artist who I thought would be challenging for the 100s is Joan Baez, she sings in a very high voice that can sound naturally sibilant sometimes. With the studio recordings that I played - no sign of trouble however, the live recordings did contain a little sibilance - not so annoying that I wanted to turn it off but it was there. As I said earlier, that sibilance is there in that recording anyway. Its has been there in my car, on my old KEFs , on the M80s and on my old PSBs. Yet another test was an Ella and Louis album - great test because you have Ella singing high and Louis singing low - both within the midrange. This album almost had me in tears it as so gorgeous. (I just remembered what I said to my wife about the Handel last night - it sounded lush - that was the sense - lush). Tonight I am going to listen to Cecelia Bartoli- now, she's challenging.  When she sings castrati and in high coloratura, speakers have got to be in total control. The 80s loved Bartoli -  let's see what the 100s do.



If you have not done so, you should download a copy of the Sheffield Drum Test and or the longer Sheffield Test Disk - both on iTunes. Although the music is dated, it puts speakers through their paces in terms of the placement of instruments, the clarity of notes and the dynamic range of music that is moving around the scale with alarming speed. I listened to both of these albums on the 80 and w amazed at how those speakers handled the drumming - largely because of reworked lows on the 100s, I'm even more positively effected by the sound of these records, snare drums sounded incredibly authoritative, brushes sounded as thug they were in the room and bass drumming sounded really urgent and close by. Not amazingly different to the 80s at the high level but startlingly different on the lows. The blended result was very well balanced. 

Speaking of balance, while my wife and I were listening earlier today - it was to a Bonnie Rait album ( my wife loves her) we both agreed that in terms of how one hears music at a concert - that ever present bass, the pattern setting rhythms and her wonderful voice - it would be hard to ask for better balance in the preproduction. I really would like to know how different these 100 are to the Bryston Model T. I imagine that in the coming weeks someone is going to arrange a shoot-out. My guess (without knowing) is that the Model T will present a slightly "smoother" image than the 100s - that's probably what you are paying the extra 4 to 6 thousand for. On the other hand, I really have no idea - never having heard the Model T.

Next week, I'm going to work on placement but as I said earlier - that is a matter subject to serious negotiation!

Oh well, back to the music! 

[biggar]

Forgot to mention that I have a pair of original Rogers LS3/5As in my breakfast room. They are connected to the whole 2-channel system. I've been going back there and listening to the Rogers then back to the living room to listen to the 100s. It really is like comparing apples to oranges in some respects but in other respects not. The Rogers are proven performers. Is the quality displayed by the Rogers similarly displayed by the 100s, is the clarity there, within the dynamic ranges of both speakers can I tell that the music is being handled well - any mud in either speaker and over brightness setting my teeth on edge. Which speaker is more enjoyable within the range of their separate purposes. I have to say that they both pass the tests with flying colours.


Now listening to Handel's Water Music on vinyl ( got a new Grado Gold 1 cartridge two days ago. amazing sound reproduction and the whole system is up to it begging for it. the amps love it and the speakers effortlessly reproduce this complicated music - no vocals in Water Music or Fireworks so, slightly limited trial. Let me try Bartoli while i'm writing.The low end of the 100s really makes itself felt in a way that is absent from the Rogers but that low end is clear and subtle. No rumble

So the Bartoli album contains music by Steffani and its called Mission. You really have to be into high coloratura mezzo-soprano in order to like it. This is the sort of music that really turns off most of the population. On the other hand, I'm telling yu, if there is any falsity in the treble or the upper mid-range, this music is for absolutely sure going to show it - none! In terms of your Nora Jones track, I can tell that the high hat is being hit with a cotton covered drumstick or whatever they are covered with. The imagery is so strong, so real. I cannot remember how the same notes sounded on the 80s.

[biggar]

I keep coming across stuff. Most of us have listened to Enio Morrocone's music for The Mission. It's got everything in it. Full orchestral music, guitars, you name it. On the track Gabriel's Oboe, you can tell the difference between the 80 and the 100. On the 80 the bass is credible - on the 100 it is fantastic - it feels as though its pulling you though the floor! On the track refusal, the continued urgency of the lower notes combined with the high notes gives rise to an even greater emotional pull than when I heard it on the 80 s. Those drums are menacing! Further up the album on the track Carlotta, I think it is, you can sense this music is to cheap speakers. I've heard it on crappy and medium priced stuff, those women's voices approach a squeak and only well rendered speakers can keep them under control to the point that they are articulate very, very alluring. The 100 seem to walk through the track without effort.

[garbulky]

Aug 17, 2013 18:04:26 GMT -5 biggar said:

I keep coming across stuff. Most of us have listened to Enio Morrocone's music for The Mission. It's got everything in it. Full orchestral music, guitars, you name it. On the track Gabriel's Oboe, you can tell the difference between the 80 and the 100. On the 80 the bass is credible - on the 100 it is fantastic - it feels as though its pulling you though the floor! On the track refusal, the continued urgency of the lower notes combined with the high notes gives rise to an even greater emotional pull than when I heard it on the 80 s. Those drums are menacing! Further up the album on the track Carlotta, I think it is, you can sense this music is to cheap speakers. I've heard it on crappy and medium priced stuff, those women's voices approach a squeak and only well rendered speakers can keep them under control to the point that they are articulate very, very alluring. The 100 seem to walk through the track without effort.

You delivered and then some. I'm listening to Gabriel's Oboe right now and I shall try to listen to some of the other music you listed to hear the parts you mentioned. You're right about that drum. It is impresive on the m80's. I can only imagine what it's like on the m100. Thank you very much for such a great review.
BTW, I had the pleasure of hearing spendor's version of the same Ls monitor you mentioned. It's a very fast monitor is what I remembered from it. It had some cons to it but I enjoyed the experience.
What kind of amp and source DAC/CD player are you using for your m100's?