Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Hearing Things M5HP “Review” on YouTube

Not sure if this is posted anywhere else in the forum……

First time I’ve ever seen Axiom make it onto a YouTube Review. You’ll notice I put “review” in quotations.

https://youtu.be/XzX-1tTQqsM

PS only other time I’ve come across Axiom on YouTube is an Audioholics chat about class d amps and they used the Ada-1400 as the example.

The reviewer is based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, in case anyone was wondering.

He mentions the ep800 in the comments. Would be cool to see an ep800 get reviewed.

Gene Descala was talking about Class D amps and how they have improved over the years to the point they will probably eventually replace Class A, A/B. Of course, he was talking about the problems of the original amps(the Axiom he reviewed was 12 years old). I immediately wondered why he didn't get a new Axiom amp to review, but those of us that have been around this forum for awhile, know there were issues between Descala and Ian that I assume were never fully resolved, in which case, I doubt Axiom would send him one to review anyway.

I wondered that too. I was like hey he should have a new ADA-1500 or something. Oh well. If I recall correctly, he did actually say the ada-1400 measured pretty well anyway.

I wonder why the reviewer didn’t like the m5? Cuz I really like all my axiom speakers. I think they sound great. Especially with well recorded material.

Kodiak, here are some reasons I can think of why he didn't like them.

He made a few comments that suggest they may be too neutral for his system (which includes him). He compared them to the Polks which he perceived had more authority to the bass in the Eminem Killshot song. He also said the sound seems to be generic.

He perhaps enjoys a "colored" speaker as evidenced by the comment "...the lows, mids and highs haven't jumped out at..." him.

Perhaps they have a defect.

Perhaps the amp cannot provide the requisite power down low. It's really impossible to tell from the specs although the stated design, with a linear power supply, should do very well unless there's a design implementation or other defect in the amp.

As for soundstage and imaging, it's hard to tell if they are positioned properly.

The treble being a little bright was very interesting. I can't possibly imagine Axiom spending any more time tweaking the M5 design given everything else it has going on. This is either a listener preference within his room or something is wrong with the M5.

First off I didn’t listen to the review … just giving an option on why bad speaker reviews are often given.

Everyone has their own expectations and tastes. If used to a bass heavy speaker which accentuates the boom in your music a flatter response may sound/fall … well … flat to you. I think this is especially true for headphone. Also it depends on what you drive it with … if you like it loud and drive it with a low wattage amp you’ll get distortion … Next up is how some speakers lack detail … a good speaker can show flaws in your music that your old ones didn’t. I’m sure other can come up with more reasons …

To sum it up … the speaker is often the first thing blamed when the resulting sound does not meet expectations.

I don't have a high opinion of his content, it's right down there with Darko, Joe N Tell, Steve Guttenberg, PS Audio, Andrew Robinson, Cheap Audio Man and Audioholics.

He appears to buy his own equipment to review; I've seen several of his Calgary Kijiji ads trying to resell them for 70 cents on the dollar. Good luck that. I rarely bother buying used unless it's 20 cents on the dollar or less.

Social media is a tough market to stand out in. My nephew's wife has 4 million Tik Tok and close to a million YouTube followers, and it's lucrative at that scale, to the point that she's turning down offers of hosting her own television show because the cost/benefit doesn't work out.

Ok I watched more of his content. The m5 review was first time I’d seen him. I can see why he may not have liked them based on his other content and obvious preferences. Each to there own I guess. It certainly solidified my opinion of YouTube audio reviewers. You have to take it all with a grain of salt or big amount of salt sometimes.

I mean,to be honest it takes time to get a new set of speakers sounding good. Especially if you’re a preferences listener like May enjoy or gave a bias towards a more V shaped sound ( to steal a YouTube reviewer term). It may be the first time he’s heard a linear or flat and true speaker. I absolutely admit that my axiom speakers ( m60, m3 and m2) all faithfully produce what’s on the recording. And if it sucks then it’s gonna sound shitty. But when it’s a good recording or mastering or whatever the term is ( full dynamics?) then watch out bc it’s REALLY good and addictive. I’m always on the hunt for great recordings for that reason.

In my last response, I assumed he gave them time to break in and is still not satisfied based on his latest comments.

Judging by the comments, at least one person has been convinced to not try Axioms and a few more are knocking the brand. This is very unfortunate not only for Axiom but also for those who are missing out. They are not only missing out on the great performance but also on the loyalty benefits.

Those who start a social media channel should understand they take on an important responsibility and should question if they have the right skills, education and communication abilities to fulfil their role.

I'd probably argue that it's more important to be right than to be popular or entertaining. I'm still waiting for someone to prove that the NRC audio research, the Harman target curve, the Olive score, and double blind testing is complete BS. I'm totally open to better ideas if they're out there.

But I expect those breakthroughs to come from researchers, not influencers.

Hambrabi, I’m assuming you are referring to the NRC Research ,blind listening and olive scores as being right versus the reviewer being right.

I agree with you. In terms of axiom being correct and using research and blind listening. I also agree if you meant the opposite. The reviewer is free to say anything and be correct in his mind and his preferences.

How are other manufacturers making speakers without the science and research and blind testing? And then selling lots of speakers that the masses like? If the Harman curve or Floyd toole curves and blind testing lean listeners to objectively picking a certain speaker as most enjoyable when not sighted, are we saying our human nature of choice of what is better is that impacted heavily by what something looks like or is being sold to us by way of entertainment and subjective reviews? Wow. That’s a scary thought. I guess a speaker maker or audio company has to choose: be a best seller in the market , or actually sell the best ( or one of the best ) well researched and produced products out there. Kinda like books, there’s really great reads out there and then there are best sellers for the masses.

It’s soooo subjective overall as the average consumer doesn’t really understand it all. I’m not saying I do either but as I’ve slowly accrued some experience I see what I used to think sounding good and real was not even close. It was just loud and boomy, but entertaining. But learning more and trying new things and understanding more of audio knowledge is shaping my idea of what sounds good and how to get there for more. I’m always searching the what I’ve learned to call emotional impact and realism.

Im not really sure where I’m going with this rant but I guess I question the subjectivity of the you tube reviewers. A real review should show or speak about how they set the speakers up, comment on the room, comment about reference points against the product being reviewed etc. and the reviewers preferences.

While I admit to being biased towards loving Axiom speakers and not having heard many more, ( klipsch didn’t like , psb which I did actually like a lot , Polk which I did not like, vintage Sansui are ok, paradigm older models not great). I still think the axiom sound the best to my ears in a variety of different locations too with a few different amplifiers too.

Ok end of rant. I guess I was just disappointed in the review as I was maybe seeking some confirmation bias now that I’m thinking about it. But one poor review ( poorly executed at that ) is not going to change my mind. I just listened to some ultra clean and clear and dynamic Brian Bromberg, some Lee Ritenour and dare I admit it , Miley Cyrus ( select cuts) and I still say WOW out loud while I’m listening. ( on my m60s with my new to me amp ).

Carry on and enjoy the music.I’m happy with my setups. I digress….

Kodiak, you need to stop wrecking your brain with that reviewer. Try reading some stuff I wrote for a good frontal lobe cleansing. Because I fearlessly, frankly, fluently fuse fragmented figments, facts, figures flawlessly.

Ha ha ha!!! I know I know. Im trying to be too diplomatic.

There’s so many things wrong with that review. Huge screen in the important space between the speakers, they need to be out in the room etc etc. and on and on. Like why comment / make a review if you’re still not done the review or barely started broken in and trying to set them up properly. Some guys just like sparkle and boom I guess.

Im just loving my setup and he’s missing out. !!

I’ve added an old sub to the mix here in the big room. So satisfying. It’s all there. But I need twin sealed subs I think. These m60 ti with power behind them really makes a world of difference.

Mojo, I’ve read all your really reasonable relatable reviews religiously. Rigorous reviews receive rewards.

I guess the comments irked me too. People saying “ oh well thanks for saving me the trouble. I won’t try axiom now. “.

I think his pants would fall off if he rocked out to some LFRs at someone’s house. Not saying who. But someone.

Edit: the Eminem test track is laughable. Great for vocals as it’s a very “spoken” rap. But the bass is sub bass. Ie bass that is meant for a sub. Not sure why anyone would test with that song. Ok I’m done with it now. I swear. I’m all verklempt….. yeesh, ock yoy

I'm glad to hear you added a sub. Even an old, cheap sub is better than no sub with your M60s in that big room. I lived with a cheap Sony sub I bought at London Drugs for 100 bucks for 11 years. Still rockin' with my Audiobytes.

It's difficult to say if you need twins. Dual 600v4 are not as great in my room as a single 800. Neither are quadruple 500v4. The 800 ought to get more love than it does in this industry.

An 800v4 with M2v4 is a damned good end game!

Gonna try the sub with m2s at some point in here.

Before I added the sub just adding more power dramatically improved everything. It’s an older amp but is really clean and effortless if I had to pick some words.

So many details are now present that I didn’t even know were there in my favorite songs. It’s so dam satisfying.

The sub makes the room feel smaller a bit. It does the trick for now.

I’ve got the m60 running full range and the sub playing 60 hz and lower. Connected via a second pair of full range preouts to the sub from my preamp. Does the job. Sub has a high pass as well if I use speaker level inputs. Might give that a go at some point too. Maybe I’ll try that with the m2s.

I also have pre-outs running to my subs. Why/how does the sub make the room feel smaller?

I didn’t explain it very well. The room doesn’t feel smaller hmmmm how to explain…… I guess what I mean is the acoustic cues are there and complete sounds are now there. Everything is more “‘ethereal”. There’s more “impact “ and solidity to everything. Everything is more grounded. It’s just more real. It makes the highs and mids and mid bass better too somehow. I can’t explain it.

It’s just better. And that beautiful Center image and soundstage and depth is still there. Even that is better somehow. I don’t know how to verbalize it. And I’m not pumping the bass. It’s blended pretty good. The towers and the sub just disappear. It’s really good. And it’s not even a “ really good “ sub at all I dont think.

Yeah and you don't even have decent speakers since they're Ti.

Hmmmm...come to think of it, maybe you're just smokin' some real fine weed out there, huh?

I haven’t touched the stuff in like…….I can’t remember when. I’m a little foggy.

Well if v2 or ti is not very good, my god v4 m60s will blow my pants off. !!!!

( I’m actually waiting for v5, I read somewhere on the forum that is the gonna be the best, maybe….)

My m3 v4 are definitely better in some respects if I was to loosely compare them.

Regardless of my suspected inebriation, my m60 are just rocking with this amp. Good amplification absolutely matters , quality and quantity and reserve. It makes a huge difference.

I think you just need to enjoy now. You're in a very happy place. You won't need to upgrade for 2 weeks.

Haha ha!!! At least 2 weeks!! Good one. Yeh I’m happy with it for now. It’s still pretty unfinished and not really decorated in here. So lots of improvements to be made in the room, I’m looking forward to it.

Still on the hunt for a new one box solution for the bedroom for the M3s.

And need something for the m2s in the office too. All in good time.

Gonna just enjoy the living room setup for now, for at least 2 weeks.

For God's sake don't do anything more to the room. You may end up wrecking the experience you're enjoying. Besides, you can steer the money towards M60HP and ADA-1250 instead of girly-girl stuff like room decor.

Ha! No. I need furniture and a big carpet. It’s pretty barren in here!!! We haven’t even hung up any pictures yet. Too dam busy! But when I do have a few spare minutes and motivation, I play with my stereo. I think a big thick carpet over some of this hard wood will be good.

When it comes time to do it I want to get m60hp and m100 and do a comparison. The curiosity of m100 is still strong.

We desperately need a new couch and big comfy chairs. But I did buy a new amp and pre first!! So at least I got my priorities straight.

That would be a very interesting comparison.

If one was to judge just by the frequency response curves, the M60 is more linear at the tested SPL. That's it. The M60 even goes as low as the M100. The difference is in how loud they can each go and still remain linear. The M100 can hit about 3dB higher.

The science hasn't led me astray yet. There's a lot of things that have become less accessible, but good sound for a reasonable price isn't one of them.

The BS of the subjectivists won't go away, all we can do is educate ourselves of their lack of credibility. That's a lost cause, if this article "Basic issues of equipment reviewing and critical listening", page 25 of the PDF, is any indication. And it was written 32 years ago!

https://www.biline.ca/audio_critic/mags/The_Audio_Critic_16_r.pdf

He claims differences in electronics can't be heard if they are level-matched and played within their specs. Yet he also claims humans can discriminate a level change as miniscule as 0.2dB as a "subtle difference in quality". But one can never level-match gear to within 0.2dB across the entire frequency range. And the frequency response of a lot of electronics has greater than a 0.2dB variance. Ergo, differences in electronics can be heard which is counter to his original claim.

Have I misinterpreted something?

My interpretation of the article is a variation of Richard Feyman's maxim: "The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool." Double blind testing, statistical analyses, and large sample sizes (as much as 5 Sigma for theoretical physics) are just a tool to stop us from fooling ourselves.

Agreed but nonetheless, the author has contradicted himself as I've pointed out.

On the subject of double blind testing, I'd love to know what the protocol is (i.e. international standard), and who follows it for product design.

With regard to electronics, it appears the author has conducted some characterization and managed to convince himself subjectivists are deceiving themselves. I could say the same about objectivists.

First, no two amps will ever measure the same - even ones from the same production line; unless the parts for that line are screened to strict standards.

Second, even if two amps measure the same, the devil is in the details. For example, identical THD+N for two amps does not mean identical harmonic components and magnitudes that comprise the THD+N figure.

Third, the details may matter depending on the system under test. Two competently designed amplifiers, that "measure the same", may sound different because the seemingly trivial details - which may not be well understood or characterized by the designers - heavily influence the sound signature due to their interaction with the specific characteristics of downstream equipment.

That equipment consists of cables and speakers that are a complex load of resistance, capacitance and inductance. Once out in the wild, an amp no longer encounters a resistor that is used for lab testing. To add to the complexity, that resistance, capacitance and inductance is not constant. It is ever-changing as the speaker is playing.

Getting back to my third point, if the amps sound different, one has to probe the system to understand how the amp and downstream equipment influence each other. Measurements have to be taken and then correlated to subjective observations to understand the relationship between system behavior and subjective impression. To my knowledge, this has never been done.

With the above as context, what does the author mean exactly when he writes "...amplifiers must have high input impedance, low output impedance, no frequency response anomalies, and be at all times operated within their voltage and current capabilities in order to sound the same"?

I think there's a lot we still don't understand. For example, what amplifier characteristic causes a lack of transparency in the highs? Could it be high frequency and phase distortion, however slight, that goes unmeasured?

Then there is that which we do understand but ignore either consciously or unconsciously. How many reviewers drive their amp into (slight) distortion but don't know it? How would they know? Slight distortion can be misinterpreted as ill-defined imaging or a reduced soundstage. Perhaps one amp doesn't distort and the other does even though they both have the "same" specs. One might be slightly more performant with the same speakers and cables because it has slightly lower output impedance or open loop gain (which the manufacturers typically don't spec and some may not even measure).

We need more science to appease the objectivists and subjectivists.

I watched the vid and he makes it clear it isnt a review. It is also clear from the video (and scrolling through others) he is a gear cycler and doesnt really understand audio reproduction…. His setup/layout is kind of terrible. None of the folks following his channel understand audio either, or they would take his views with a grain of salt.

I wouldnt get too worked up over it. I was going to reply to his comments section but it wont benefit my life in any way. You cant reason with the unreasonable mob, and seems like the priority of most is “winning” even though audio reproduction isnt a contest. Lol.

GoodcommentsTrevor. Thanks. I’m calm now. I guess I felt abit defensive. Not much gets me worked up but ignorance really fires me up for some reason.

Party on Wayne, Party on Garth.

I’m carrying on…..

Actually we don't.
This is all jargon.

Blind testing should become the standard. You will find the simplest answer there.
Within its tolerances, and when comparing solid state amps, i've never heard a difference. Neither have the uber audiophiles i know around here once the switcher got built and tested.
Amazing how that little device ruins the 'subjectivist' entirely, until another lame excuse with jargon based reasoning is spouted.

I used to think the same for sure. But that is why blind testing isnt always best. An amps use is not always static, and the best setup for one amp is not always the same as another.

They can sound different. And by varying the input voltage from a preamp you can definitely make an amps signature change vs itself. It stands to reason that amps can sound different if you can vary their gain vs input voltage. Different amps mixed in the same setup will cause spl imbalances when input volume is varied. In extreme cases it breaks the experience (think subs and mains at crossover)

You can do this test yourself in your car. Connect your phone to your car stereo. Bluetooth or wired (doesnt matter). Listen to a song loudly with sharp deep impulses. I suggest Phil Collins “I dont care anymore”. Now turn your phone volume down and car stereo up to match volume. Now turn your phone volume up and car stereo down to match volume. Report back…..

This is exactly why calibration is needed when setting up subs properly. You can do the same test as above by changing the sub gain vs AVR output trim. There you go.

Ultimately, when it comes to evaluating speakers, it always comes back to the same "tried and true" method of making a decision on whether or not to buy. Prior to making the commitment, If you locate the speakers in your space, listen to some of your favorite music and/or watch some of your favorite movies and you like what you hear, go for it.

The problem though is a person like me who shows up and says what you ought to be hearing is this and therefore your stuff or the way it's set up is crap. Most times not knowing is better so now I just keep my trap shut.

Not knowing is called ( politely) , ignorance. There was many and still are things in audio I’m ignorant of. Learning and expanding one’s knowledge should be fun. I’ve learned a ton on this forum and in my experiences with audio and it brings great joy and satisfaction. I say tell it like it is and keep the knowledge and opinions coming. And theres one don’t like it then they can……remain ignorant.

I know a guy who wired his amp to the wrong speakers once and found how stout the power supply actually was, by accident. That’s called active learning and he added that to his knowledge base I bet. :), just saying.

He actually wired two different amps to two wrong speakers. He was only half bright and learned twice as much.