Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater VP160 Concept Discussion

A friend just bought a set of QS8's and i thought they would be bigger so yes a pair with 6 inch woofers would be nice .

I am loathe to reward Steve's threadjacking, but...

If you really want full-range surrounds, just get M80's for surrounds.

Done.

Thanks everyone for the excellent comments and discussion so far. Keep those ideas coming!
It's interesting that the VP160 discussion seems to be settling into two camps: Make it the same driver complement and cabinet dimensions as the M60 so that it matches closely in terms of bass/timbre or change the driver complement and/or the form factor into a taller, narrower cabinet to allow for smaller TV cabinets and possible wall mounting. It looks like I'll be busy with drawing up a few CAD designs and having prototypes built over the next few weeks! One thing to keep in mind is that our decision on what version to produce will be based on the outcome of our blind listening tests, even if the result is something that does not follow conventional "wisdom". That being said, we always try to take into account functional requirements and it's pretty clear that a centre channel with a smaller form factor than the VP180 might be very desirable. The porting arrangement is also something we will be taking a close look at and a sealed cabinet might be possible, the only downfall being a reduction in bass extension.

Andrew

Andrew, I don't feel I have anything worthwhile to add to the discussion but did want to mention, as others have, how great it is that you and Axiom in general are soliciting opinions here.

Sort of been done before by Infinity:

http://reviews.cnet.com/separate-speakers/infinity-il36c/1707-7869_7-6899676.html

The Infinity IL36c was my old center. It was good, but the VP150 was better. The VP180 even better.

Now wait a minute... the point has been explicitly made on here time and time again that there is no difference between a ported design and a sealed design, only in the enginering of the two designs. So why couldn't the new center just be a sealed design to negate any and all problems with where the ports are placed, and enginered to hit the same bass extension as the ported center?

It has?? The point of a port is to extend the bass response of a speaker. Get rid of the port and you raise the low frequency 'cut off'.

yep, now as Cam mentioned why can't the ports be placed on the sides? Would this reduce the overall integrity of the cabinet? Or, possibly would there be room on the front?

There is a difference between ported and sealed as Andrew and FredK state. There are always trade offs Micah.

I think you might be confused with posts made by the likes of myself and Johnk that debunk statements and other subwoofer myths that are commonly thrown around like sealed subwoofer designs automatically "sound better" because they are "tighter" and "faster" for music than a ported subwoofer design. I know those issues on ported vs sealed have repeatedly come up here many times on the forum regarding subwoofers.

I've seen that discussion regarding subs, but not about speakers. Something else that comes up often is how close to a wall a sealed or ported speaker can be placed, and the answer is pretty much the same if my understanding is correct.