Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater VP160 Concept Discussion

Could a M40 or M50 sized cabinet do?

Mindless question as my only claim to fame was installing RadioShack drivers in oak barrels and using them for end tables, ...well that; and numerous colour organs. Just shows how bizarre the 70s were.

Andrew, several suggestions for changes of varying degrees of complexity have been made. The simplest change to eliminate the 4 ohm "problem" would be to introduce the VP180-6 and M80-6, involving no changes whatever, but rating the speakers at a 6 ohm nominal impedance, rather than the 4 ohm minimum impedance, in accord with typical practice in the industry. This would also have the substantial benefit of reducing the time and space wasted on the boards in discussing whether certain receivers would "work" with certain speakers.

If the M60 is to be modified, again the WTMTW configuration proposed would most nearly follow the VP180 pattern.

If the M60 enclosure(which would have to be modified in any case)could be increased about 1" in height(when horizontal), the 5 1/4" mid-range and the tweeter could apparently be placed in the desirable vertical orientation, especially if the tweeter mounting plate was partially cut away to allow for closer placement.

And to toss out something totally different, with the present sized M60 enclosure a triangular configuration in the middle, composed of the tweeter directly above two side-by-side 4" mid-ranges would be feasible and undoubtedly would astonish Axiom critics on certain other forums.

I have always liked the sound of the WT/MW designs I have heard and would like to see/hear one from Axiom.

I really dislike the look of the WT/MW designs, but that's just me.

Although not a "complete match" to the M60, this is an interesting concept JohnK. So is this the driver layout right here W(6.5") M(4") ^T(1")^ M(4") W(6.5"). What would you have in mind sealed or ported? One thing for sure this would be one cool looking design.

I’d just go W – M – T – M – W and call it a 6 ohm speaker. The cabinet would be about 4” longer than the M60 (or taller standing on end). Pretty much the same thing as the VP180, but with one, centered tweeter verses two tweeters. Some folks (actually a lot) do not like the idea of a center with more than one tweeter. I’d play around with the porting some too. Seeing how it’s a center, and placed horizontally, you could port it downward, or at the ends. I’d rather the ports be downward as I would not be able to see them and if the center was mounted above the screen, just flip it over and the ports would be up, and again, not visible. If the cabinet depth could be reduced a few inches by porting or some other form of CAD wizardry, it may be possible to mount the thing with two or three FMB’s (especially if the ports were on the bottom verses the back).

Edit: I keep forgetting that some folks need to lay the center on a shelf or on the top of a TV. Ports on the bottom wouldn't work too well for these situations. I wonder if ports could be on the ends and the bottom and simply plug the ports that would not be usable?

See, I think that's a problem. If Axiom is going to introduce a FOURTH center channel (not including the inwall/onwall stuff), it should be sufficiently different in form factor to warrant interest from people that don't find the other, existing options appealing.

If the impedance is the ONLY factor driving the issue, then Mike's scenario is a no-brainer. But I think that anybody with the money and real estate for a center that big is probably going to also be able to find a way to drive a 4-6 ohm speaker and can just get a VP180.



Right. Users should be able to wall-mount OR shelf-mount it easily and elegantly. Honestly, I don't think having ports on the back is a big issue at all.

Lots of existing and potential customers want to "step up" from the VP100, but the VP150 and VP180 may both have some fatal flaws for them (the misplaced perception that having two tweeters is "bad", the large size of both). I think Axiom can address ALL of these factors, but not by making yet another exceedingly long speaker. It should be something geared toward people that have narrower spaces to work with, either in the room or in their equipment racks. Not much wider than a VP100 but a bit taller to accommodate the larger woofers.

I think you make some excellent points tomtuttle. A different form factor should be considered here that is different from the VP150 and VP180. The VP100 has a nice small footprint but is limited to smaller/medium rooms so anyone with a seating position that is far away the VP100 is not ideal. Anyone looking to trade up for better performance or a bigger room and if there is a 4th centre (which is a lot of centres btw ) a cabinet that is not as long as the VP150 but with a trade off in added height would be ideal. I would think this would give an individual as much choice as possible when considering what centre option one wants.

I don't think there is a problem with rear porting either, dual front ports could be a consideration as well.

Would a variable port option be possible, where you would just remove a cover at the place you would want a port? Whether what was front, side, back, bottom, etc.

Just for clarity, I'm thinking of an Axiom treatment of something similar to this...