Axiom M22ti vs Dahlquist QX6 (1 Viewer)

[James Bergeron]

Ernie, that is really odd. I have Studio 40's and The Dahl's and don't find them rolled off as well. Odd to say the least. I also have some Atoms hmmmm

 

[ernie.bin]

you're telling me. The dahls fit my budget quite nicely compared to the paradigms, so I was really hoping they would do it for me. I was extremely close to phoning in an order to marc on friday unheard based on reviews, but managed to hold off for a listen first. Right now I'm glad I did. Again, I think the paradigms are more to my tastes, and I wouldn't say the dahls aren't good speakers. When I listen to the studios (or even my titans), one of the best ways I can describe it is that they "sing".

If you lived near me, you better believe I'd bring over a set of qx6s or qx9s and walk off with your studio 40s though =)

 

[Max.D]

I've been looking into Paradigm, Axiom and Dahlquist speakers. From what I've read (not heard), the Paradigms are mentioned as being a bit bright (not a criticism). I personally don't care for a bright sound which is why I chose HK over Denon and from what I gather, the Dahlquist's over the Paradigms and Axioms for the same reason. I do imagine somone else having entirely different listening needs and going one of many other ways

 

[Jeff Kohn]

Well, one man's brightness is another man's accuracy, and what person describes as "rich, laid-back" another person may describe as "dull and lifeless". Looking at the NCR data, the Dahlquists seem to have a bit of a mid-bass hump that may explain the warmth some people seem to like. The M22 appears flatter overall, albeit with a very slightly recessed midrange that may come across as a bit thin with certain types of music depending on your taste. The Axiom's are not harsh based on my experience, though. They're slightly forward, but the accuracy is very good and IMO imaging is also excellent, at least with my M60's.

 

[Kincade]

FWIW, i wonder if the dahls you demoed were completely broken in?? i can say that between hour 1 and now (hour 80), that the speakers have changed quite a bit in their sound. out of the box, they were somewhat boring (not muffled like the deftechs i had heard, but just EXTREMELY laid back). but they have become one of the best speakers i've heard anywhere in that price range.

i just posted my experience in another thread here (originally posted by donnie), but i'm thoroughly impressed with the qx10 mains, qx4 surrounds, and qx60c center channel. i'm very glad now that i didn't go with the monitor 9 fronts, minimon surrounds, and the cc370 center - i paid less money and got a higher quality speaker, IMHO.

also - marc at the audioshop was fantastic to deal with - better than any dealer in utah that i went to, and i recommend him hands down. the exhange rate helps too! (.64:1).

 

[ernie.bin]

I can't say if they were broken in at all. Visions isn't really a high end audioshop. The soundrooms I was in were subpar both times, lacking the ability to even place the speakers properly. (both times overly wide, and a bit too close to the rear walls)

I'd love to give a well set up pair another chance, so if one of the higher end dealers ever start carrying them I'll give them another shot. But in the meantime, due to the two experiences I've had with them, I'm going to start planning an upgrade to paradigm studios.

Jeff makes some great points though. I think once we're used to a particular sound that's pleasant to us, it's hard to go to a speaker with a much different tone. Some might find the same pair of dahls I listened to as being more natural or smoother than the digms I preferred. My take on dynamic and lively sound may be considered shrill or harsh by others.

Hopefully, we'll all just find what we enjoy as cheaply as possible =)

 

[Kincade]

You know, i had the same type of experience w/ the JBL s series - I demoed them at two different stores, and at both of them, the S's sounded harsh, with NO bass at all, and overly bright highs - this was completely contrary to most reviews of them i had read here...

I loved the paradigms i demoed, to be honest - i didn't find them to be overly harsh or bright, and i would have bought them had i not ran across the dahlquist @ audioshop. I find my QX10's to be a little more laid back than the mon9's or minimonitors, possibly less fatiguing, but more transparent, with better imaging and a better soundstage. Marc's explanation of these having excellent timbre accuracy suits these well - they are quite revealing, and on a good recording, you can pick out the different brands of percussion, etc...

All in all, i don't think you can go wrong w/ the paradigms either - i personally think they're excellent speakers for the money.

 

[ernie.bin]

one great thing for me since I live in canada, is that a pair of studio40s aren't much more than qx9s.

QX9s were $800 and studio40s are about $800-900 + stands.

I'd love to hear a pair of axioms too if I could find a local place to audition them. I think I should also find a set of energy connoisseurs to check out too. so many good canadian brands to check out =)

 

[David Lorenzo]

ernie.bin

Would you say that there were details missing in the upper end? I was just about to order the QX6's over the Mini Monitors and I'm looking for all the comparisons possible. Could you please explain a little more exactly how the highs sound to you? Are the details all there but lack sparkle? Or are the details muddied and laid back at the same time? Any help would be appreciated.

 

[ernie.bin]

Again, I can't be sure the speakers are to blame entirely for my experience. I'm tempted to bring a pair home for a week to see how they sound in an environment I'm familiar with but:

If you've heard the paradigm minis and like the particular sound that they offer, the dahls might not be your thing. I didn't feel the dahls offered as much separation between the vocals and instruments (in disagreement to many others). The high end for me definitely lacked the sparkle that paradigm titans or studios offered. By not having that top end sparkle, it felt like details were being lost. The plucking of a classical guitar didn't ring and voices didn't have the airiness that I am accustomed to. Listening now to clapton's unplugged, his voice is clear and distinct from the guitar and piano on my titans. On the dahls, they seemed to blend together a little bit more, not quite offering the distinctiveness. I wouldn't say the highs were muddied though, they just didn't sparkle.

A friend noted the soundstage of the dahls was excellent and said he thought the studio20s had no soundstage whatsoever (which I disagree with. He was also mildy drunk at the time =)), but I was too busy listening for the highs that I didn't quite notice about the dahls as well as I should. The situation with the highs severely affected my response to these speakers. As well as they could image, or as smooth as they were, the issues with the rolled off highs made them a speaker I could not own. When listening to the chilli peppers, the QX9s couldn't replicate the same "slam" and impact that I had experienced with studio40s. I could feel the drums kicking me in the chest when I listened to those.

I think the biggest thing I learned was to go and hear the speakers myself and look to others for recommendations of what to hear, but to make the decision to buy based on your own ears. I don't think I'd be willing to buy speakers unheard after this (which I almost did), simply because they might not fit my particular tastes.

If you like what you hear in the mini monitors I'd go with them or something else you can hear first that you like. If you can find a pair of dahls to audition, definitely do. You may like them much more than I did.

As well, if you have the opportunity, listen to a set of titans alongside the mini monitors. I've heard some people prefer titans (maybe) or atoms (not me) to the mini monitors and I definitely appreciate these little guys much more after some time with some higher end speakers.

 

[David Lorenzo]

Thanks for the quick reply. Your analysis was just what I was looking for.

Just out of curiosity, how old are you? Maybe the other people who listened to Dahls are a litle older and thus don't hear the lack of upper frequencies. Thus the slight lack of upper range wouldn't bother them. I know it sounds weird but it's a fact that as you get older the abilty to hear the highest frequencies is diminished. This is just a complete guess though. I just find it somewhat strange that nobody else hears what you hear.

 

[ernie.bin]

I'm 24. another 28 year old friend who owns studio40s was along for the ride (he bought his without reading reviews. he just went to various shopped and listened to speakers in his price range until he found the paradigms) and came to much of the same conclusion. (we both could just be spoiled on the particular paradigm sound)

But again, these are opinions of the dahls in sound rooms unfamilar to me. It's a little nervewracking going against the dahlquist favorable current, but my advice really just is to go with whatever sounds good to you.

 

[Paul_Fisher]

Well, my pair of Dahlquist QX6's arrived last night to replace my Axiom M3ti's.

Here is my short review.

Receiver: H/K 120

First of all, I only listened to the Dahlquists for about an hour or so, keep that in mind.

The first thing I noticed about the Dahlquists was how great the instruments sounded. Much more lively than the M3's. But then when the voices started, I noticed something that I had never noticed with the Axioms. The singers seemed to be standing behind the instruments when listening to the Dahlquists. I don't really know how else to explain it. With the Axioms it felt like they were standing right in front of me. But with the Dahlquists it sounds more "airy" like they are behind the instruments. This troubled me greatly, as I already sold my Axioms. But anyway, I swithed CD's to Shania Twain, and it sounded much better. I don't know whether to attribute it to the speakers or to the recording. The only thing is, I didn't notice it before with my Axioms. I also feel the highs aren't as "high" with the Dahlquists. I'm attributing this to the supposed "laid back" style of the Dahlquists, and I was used to the more bright style of the Axioms.

Bass is extremely good on the Dahlquists. The are only about 1 foot away from the back wall, and man do they put out some bass. I don't even need to use my sub anymore with music.

As of right now, I must say I'm a little disappointed with the Dahlquists. Maybe I'll get used to them, maybe they need more break in time, maybe its the placement, I'm not sure. I'm at the point right now where I'm looking for good stuff to write about to make myself feel good about my purchase.

Take this short review for whats its worth. Just my .02.

 

[James Bergeron]

Ok guys, I'm still puzzled by the "they don't seem to have highs theory". So here's my solution.

List some tracks I should listen to, to compare. Eric Clapton unplugged? Etc. I do agree with Ernie that they don't "slam" like the 40's. I feel I need a sub with the QX6's, I don't really listen to rock with the QX6's when I do I feel something is missing. But my amp's are ASL Wave 8's so they just don't have the power for slam and I relize this is part of the issue.

So give me a list, tell me what to listen to in what song (IE. What your interested in.) I'll grab a pair of studio 40's and a pair of QX6's, heck I can even grab a pair of Atoms.

And I'll let you know which one has more highs, which one has more slam etc.

P.S. I'm 24.

 

[Paul_Fisher]

Kenny Chesney's new CD No Shirt No Shoes No Problem. That CD in particular Kenny sounds like standing "behind the music". If you have that take a listen. Sorry if you don't like country, I'm a big fan.

 

[ernie.bin]

Paul reiterated a point I don't think I emphasized much. With the dahls, the voices just didn't leap out at me. I generally put this into a lack of seperation between instruments, but in listening to vocal tracks like fragile (Jesse Cook / Vertigo), holly cole's voice didn't stand out like it does on my digms. On my digms, the voice is projected outward more, and the classical guitar has more high end detail in the way the strings sound (making them more realistic).

With Garbage's Androgyny (Garbage / Beautiful), shirley's voice sounded boxy at one point. The odd electronic sweep sound at the very start of the song didn't stand out well at all, especially compared to the studio20s.

an hour isn't much to break in a speaker though, so hopefully paul can give them a week and give us more feedback and see if the dahls broke in well and whether the pair I listened to hadn't seen proper break in.

 

[Jeff Kohn]

Interesting, some of the early posts in this thread claimed that imaging was the strong point of the Dahquists, now we're hearing just the opposite from others. Vocals are usually put up-front in the mix, not behind the instruments, so this sounds like it could be a weakness of the Dahlquists. My experience with other warm/laid-back speakers bears this out. For instance when listening to an all-Mirage setup a friend of mine has, the soundstage was very large, but also a bit muddy, without the more precise separation of the vocals and individual instruments. This is precisely the area where I feel the Axioms really excel (and it sounds like the Paradigms do pretty well in this regard to).

To the person who thought the Axioms sounded harsh; what music where you listening to? One thing I've noticed is that the Axiom's are extremely unforgiving of poorly recorded material. If the source recording is overly bright, it will sound harsh on the Axioms; but that's not the speakers fault. The same unforgiving accuracy is what also makes high quality recordings and home theater sound so good.

 

[ernie.bin]

as another note, while my speaker experience consists largely of paradigms, I use grado sr-60 headphones as well that sound more similar to the digms than the dahls. Voices and instruments stand out, and that high end sparkle is not a problem.

also use a pair of sony ex-70s on the road, and while they're not the greatest sounding earphones and the highs are a little harsh, it reaches up there and still delivers the highs closer to the digms than the dahls.

 

[Mark Leitch]

I think this is a very good discussion... I also like a lot of James B's comments (Marc from audioshop directed me to them when considering the Dahlquist's.. and I think JB provides a good assessment). One thing I find interesting on your website JB is your 2 channel room appears to be *very* live.... wood floors.. bare walls.. open window. I am not sure how accurate this is... but it would explain a lot of difference in how the highs are perceived. I put a lot of effort into my room, and it is quite simply a much different environment than yours...

Mark.

 

[James Bergeron]

Mark, yes I do have a "live" room in my 2 channel setup(although it isn't overly live sounding), but my Theatre in the basement is very dead. My 2 channel setup is in my living room, so no treatments or anything can go there, although there are curtains on the windows that are fairly heavy, there are 2 area rugs and the walls are no longer bare .
Maybe I should do the comparison in my theatre, it would be easier anyways, since the 40's are there already, and the Atoms.