# The Morel MLP-403-5: stay away!



## Wodgy

There's been a bit of discussion here about the Morel USA MLP-403-5 speakers, which are currently on sale. It seemed like a very good deal at first, but it turns out that they're too good to be true. For those considering these speakers, Dennis Murphy has posted measurements over at Madisound. Check them out before plunking down your cash:






 In the actual discussion thread, Dennis comments that these are the worst measuring speakers he's seen this year:
http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/dis...gi?read=321166

 Measurements aren't everything, but it seems that it would be worth auditioning these speakers before buying them.


----------



## Unclewai

*puts his CC back to wallet"

 Phew... that was a close call.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Not so fast. May still be worth it for the tweaker: http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/dis...gi?read=321338

 With the phase nulls gone and (real) measurements of +/- 5db, this is pretty darn good for a commercial speaker in this price range. Up for debate, of course. Nothing I know of measures like a mbow1 or similar diy speaker in this ball park.


----------



## Wodgy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_With the phase nulls gone and (real) measurements of +/- 5db, this is pretty darn good for a commercial speaker in this price range. Up for debate, of course._

 

Even with the revised wiring and the new trap filter, this is mediocre performance for a commercial bookshelf in the $200 ballpark, let alone $600.

  Quote:


 Nothing I know of measures like a mbow1 or similar diy speaker in this ball park. 
 

Yes, but neither does this Morel!


----------



## ooheadsoo

What I'm saying is that "real" measurements, not manufacturer provided or heavily smoothed measurements by reviewers are rarely as good as the companies claim. Real +/-5 is indeed not too shabby. Or you could look at the $22,000 Wilson Watt/Puppy 7 that has a +/- of about 10db: http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/me...on_wattpuppy7/

 In short, for a commercial speaker, I think it's acceptable and far from the worst you can get. 8" 3 way with very good sensitivity and true +/-5db. For diy, ROFLMAO.


----------



## Wodgy

Wilsons are a joke (as are a lot of the boutique high end).

 Most modern commercial speakers do measure well, though some use smoothing. You may not trust any single measurement (from the manufacturer, from Stereophile, from SoundStage, or from The $ensible Sound), but generally they match more closely than you'd think. SoundStage's measurements are taken in Canada's NRC anechoic chamber in Ottawa. It's a quality measurement setup, and _they do not use smoothing_. Also, at least you get to see the off-axis curves. Are manufacturer's +/- 1.5dB (PSB) or +/- 2dB (Paradigm) quoted measurements believable? Not really, but I've rarely seen them measured as worse than +/-3 dB by any reviewer. These Morels, even after Dennis' modifications, are laughable really in comparison, especially for the price. The $600 is better spent elsewhere, especially since they're going to have close to zero resale value.

 There are also plenty of DIY designs that don't measure well. Most of the GR Research A/V speakers have a nasty hump as early as 30 degrees off axis, which causes reflections to affect the frequency response in a real room. Wonder why he's stopped providing off-axis measurements for the AV-3 and AV-3C, eh?


----------



## Sovkiller

Wodgy which is your opinion on the Axioms speakers, have you ever heard them, I would like to know to stop reco them in case of a non satisfactory opinion, IMO they do sound good, but I'm not an expert in any way...M3Ti, M2Ti, etc...bookshelves OK?


----------



## ooheadsoo

Nevertheless, Wilsons are reported to sound quite good. Heck, Norhs are reputed to sound good. Look at the silverline FR plots here? http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/speakermeasurements/

 Downright scary. Not everything is in the FR plot. I like to see waterfall plots as well, though they're pretty rare. Anything using a hiquphon ow1 tweeter with rounded cabinet edges is going to have a leg up on just about anything out there though, dispersion wise. Or some nice ribbons, but those are considerably more pricy.

 As for GR's speakers, I don't know of many commercial speakers in that price range that would beat the m130 woofer. The tweeter could use work, but it's par for the course, IMO. The mbow1 basically swaps the tweeter for a unit that's 3 times as expensive, and it shows. The series xover is also a factor in the overall sound of the a/v series. I've liked the properly executed series xovers I've heard, as far as openness, pinpoint imaging, and transparency. The off axis hump is probably a casualty of the series xover. You have to give somewhere.


----------



## Wodgy

I've never heard the Axioms. I'd like to though. Some people say they're bright, some people say they're smooth. I generally don't like metal tweeters, so for people interested in mail-order speakers, I'd probably suggest the Ascend CBM170s as a possible alternative to the Axioms. They're both about the same price.

 (PS. The "no crossover on the woofer" thing with Axioms is more marketing than an actual advantage. In my mind it would be better to have a crossover, if only to get rid of the woofer's breakup modes.)


----------



## ooheadsoo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wodgy* 
_(PS. The "no crossover on the woofer" thing with Axioms is more marketing than an actual advantage. In my mind it would be better to have a crossover, if only to get rid of the woofer's breakup modes.)_

 

I agree. Maybe on a paper woofer, but aluminum?


----------



## Wodgy

nOrhs are only reputed to sound good by the fanboys on audio forums, particularly the fanboys in the nOrh forum on AudioCircles (and Harmonic Discord before that). I confess, I fell for it once. If anyone wants to take a pair of Marble 3.0s off my hands, let me know.


----------



## Wodgy

BTW, ooheadsoo, do you find the highs on the MBOW1s bright? I'm considering building Murphy's newest design, the CA01. The guy who makes Ellis 1801s says that Murphy's tastes lean a bit towards the bright side, and he suggests toning down the tweeter a bit. What is your feeling about that?


----------



## ooheadsoo

They actually scored some good reviews as well, including a TNT audio reviewer who declared the 9.0 the best 2 way he's ever heard.

 I considered the caow1 as well, but I plan on eventually upgrading to the 3 way so that was out for me.

 The brightness of the ow1, hm. This is an interesting issue. I've read again and again that the detractors of the ow1 say that it doesn't have enough zing up top. When I first heard the mbow1, comparing to my nht pro a-10, I thought the tweeter wasn't working. In fact, the first time I listened to my speakers, something had shorted and the tweeter was indeed not working, but my impression of it stayed afterwards. However, putting on some tweeter intensive material like violins and high screeching trumpets quickly cleared up that misconception. It's working, alright.

 I don't find the tweeter to be offensive. I also sit very far off axis (45 degrees or so) most of the time. Of course, with such good dispersion, it doesn't affect the HF all that much, but even so, it does affect it slightly. There's practically no musical material at 20khz. I've found that I don't particularly favor the sound you get directly on axis with tweeters in general, and this generally holds true for the mbow1 as well, though, as I've mentioned, the off axis response is very close to the on axis.

 In short, I don't mind it at all. I've never considered modding the xover. Your preferences may vary. I think you can just drop the value of the parallel resistor by 5 ohms or so across the tweeter's leads to soften it up if you want to. The mbow1 is very clear, I'll tell you that much.

 I can give more impressions in a bit, I'm late for a physical...


----------



## Wodgy

Thanks for the impressions! I think I'd like the Hiquphon tweeter, as I do generally like soft dome tweeters. That's one of the major reasons I'm interested in Murphy's designs. Why do you listen so far off axis? At 45 degrees it looks like the highs are 6dB down from Murphy's website. Maybe it would be worth trying Murphy's tweak to attenuate the highs a bit so you could listen a bit closer to on-axis?


----------



## ooheadsoo

It is technically down, but I really don't feel like I miss anything, seriously. There's precious little sound up there. I usually sit that close because I'm at my computer, and that will never change. If I want to have a dedicated listening session, I'll back my chair up and listen on axis. It barely sounds different, frequency extension wise, but it is a bit less detailed compared to when I'm closer. I think I'm technically still "nearfield" even when I've backed myself up to the equilateral axis position with the speakers on axis (about 5 to 6 feet.) I've considered toeing the speakers in more, but I've been lazy since I really don't feel like I'm missing anything in the first place.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wodgy* 
_(PS. The "no crossover on the woofer" thing with Axioms is more marketing than an actual advantage. In my mind it would be better to have a crossover, if only to get rid of the woofer's breakup modes.)_

 

What you mean with "woofer's break up modes"? Would you mind to explain a little bit about that? I'm trying to get as much info as I can about small bookshelf speakers, reading in different websites, and even through different froums in Parts Express and Madisound, etc....and is the first time I heard that term.... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 BTW the former owner of the Axiom company IIRC has access to the best labs in Canada, and some of their best anechoic chambers, equipated with the best equipments for testing purposes (AFAIK he even worked for them) so the reliability on their mesuremnts and numbers, are IMO out of question....


----------



## ooheadsoo

Sov, just about every manufacturer in Canada has access to those labs 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Break up modes are basically inherent to these more massive materials like aluminum, carbon fiber, kevlar, etc. Due to their physical properties, at higher frequencies, the response starts to oscillate out of control, which are called break up modes. Paper typically has the most benign break up modes and if I were to do a xoverless speaker, I would probably go for paper. But these exotic materials start breaking up at higher frequencies and if you don't use a xover to pull the response down before it gets to that region, you're going to hear it. The upshot to using these exotic materials is that they're a little stiffer than paper and so they can produce more detail. But not a good candidate for no xover. Unfortunately, I don't know the math behind the break up.


----------



## Wodgy

All drivers only work nicely within a specific frequency range. Beyond that, they start to misbehave. Different driver materials disbehave in different ways. Paper cones tend to just roll off because paper is well damped. This is why you still see paper in many high end speakers, even though it's the cheapest driver material. Aluminum woofers tends to break up violently; aluminum tweeters have a resonant peak. For a woofer, the breakup mode is maybe -16dB or -20dB down, but it's still there, interfering with the upper midrange unless you get rid of it with a crossover.

 Axiom speakers obviously measure well and get good reviews. I would consider them myself if I was in the market for speakers like that. But don't believe all the marketing you read. Like all inexpensive speakers, the Axioms are designed to a price point; the crossover is as simple as can be to save money (two electrolytic caps, two resistors) and there is no damping material in the cabinet. You don't expect PPA level performance from a CMOY. It's the same with speakers. Also, you should audition rather than just reading online reviews. This is particularly important for speakers with metal dome tweeters, as they can measure perfectly flat and still sound harsh and irritating to some people.

 Edit: ooheadsoo beat me to the punch about the breakup modes!


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wodgy* 
_All drivers only work nicely within a specific frequency range. Beyond that, they start to misbehave. Different driver materials disbehave in different ways. Paper cones tend to just roll off because paper is well damped. This is why you still see paper in many high end speakers, even though it's the cheapest driver material. Aluminum woofers tends to break up violently; aluminum tweeters have a resonant peak. For a woofer, the breakup mode is maybe -16dB or -20dB down, but it's still there, interfering with the upper midrange unless you get rid of it with a crossover.

 Axiom speakers obviously measure well and get good reviews. I would consider them myself if I was in the market for speakers like that. But don't believe all the marketing you read. Like all inexpensive speakers, the Axioms are designed to a price point; the crossover is as simple as can be to save money (two electrolytic caps, two resistors) and there is no damping material in the cabinet. You don't expect PPA level performance from a CMOY. It's the same with speakers. Also, you should audition rather than just reading online reviews. This is particularly important for speakers with metal dome tweeters, as they can measure perfectly flat and still sound harsh and irritating to some people.

 Edit: ooheadsoo beat me to the punch about the breakup modes!_

 

Well about the damping material, yes they have, and the geometry avoid the standing waves, so even if they do not have it, there is no need for it IMO, here are the curves, finally I found them, I don't hear any anomaly like the the ones you describe, but who am I? Well about the metallic tweeter all I can tell you is that cymbals and metal instruments never sounded that real here, and I had a few Vifa and Scan Peak tweeters in several speakers I had before those, it is a budget speaker, but my room is small, so no need for bigger guys here, pair them with a sub and bingo, one thing I would like to do is to improve the crossovers if possible. 

 BTW Wodgy I PMed you, if you can give me a hand, I really appreciate it, the caps are nothing spectacular there, I could get some Solen or even better to see what can we do....


----------



## ooheadsoo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wodgy* 
_
 Axiom speakers obviously measure well..._

 

Hm, I dunno, is that +/- 5db that I see right there?...


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_Hm, I dunno, is that +/- 5db that I see right there?... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

As you stated above, you have to hear them, at the end is your ear what will tell you if you like them or not, IMO they do sound very good, and not because they are mine, I had a few before, and now I feel that I will not change them for a while......I have heard a few more expensive is different show rooms, better damped and acoustically treated, and out of very good amps, and none of them sounded even similar....if you have the chance of audition one, just for curiosity, try them and let me know later what do you think, not in vane they have gotten all those reviews, BTW I'm not a believer of some specs, or reviews, sometimes they do not reflect exactly what you are hearing, and details, micro-dynamics, etc, are not shown on those graphs.....


----------



## ooheadsoo

Actually, that was _my_ earlier point, but ok, nevermind. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I'm always interested in hearing more speakers. Too bad the axioms are mail order only.


----------



## stromie

As a newbie to speakers and only having heard lesser speakers (Klipsch ProMedia 2.1, 5.1 and Swans m200) I would say that the Axiom m3ti sound great. I have been perfectly satisfied with them through a Panasonic XR25 and I have no interest in sending them back. I did feel bad about not trying others first but these met all of my expectations for how much I was spending on a college budget.

 Just my opinions.

 -Stromie


----------



## ooheadsoo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_Real +/-5 is indeed not too shabby._


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_Actually, that was my earlier point, but ok, nevermind. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I'm always interested in hearing more speakers. Too bad the axioms are mail order only._

 

Their price includes the shipping, they also offer 30 days to audition them, if you do not like them, send them back, what you loose? Just the cost of the shipping back, you want to know why they do that, becasue rarely someone return them after hearing them....for that price they are a steal indeed....


----------



## ooheadsoo

Hehe, I'm a poor college student and don't need speakers since I'm darn happy with my diy speakers


----------



## hella

By the by, I just bought a pair of these Morels and I too freaked out when I saw the FR as ooheadsoo will tell you. However, I have been emailing back and forth with Dennis Murphy and I have it on his authority that these speakers sound good. He specifically instructed me _not_ to return them. The FR plot can be smoothed out/flattened using a cheap solderless mod.

 Given the reviews and word of mouth that these things received WITH that huge hole in the FR, you've got to figure that with the mod they must sound pretty good.

 That having been said, I won't be purchasing or upgrading to commercial speakers again anytime soon.


----------



## Wodgy

Regardless of whether they sound good once modded, if there is some way you can return them, it may still be worth considering, just so that you don't end up with something that lacks tangible resale value.


----------



## ooheadsoo

I think only big fat consumer products have tangible resale value


----------



## Wodgy

This is a consumer product. If I sunk $600 into speakers, I'd want to be able to get some significant fraction of my money back upon resale. All of the mainstream speakers I've bought so far have met that criteria.

 Even DIY speakers have good resale value if they're built from a recognized plan. The Ellis 1801s go for near their full retail price (this may have something to do with the waiting list for those speakers being something like 14 months).

 Speakers are such a personal decision, and depend so much on one's room, that most people will have to swap a few pairs before deciding on what they like. It just makes sense for people buying commercial speakers to buy used so you don't lose money. If you're not buying used, make sure you buy something that will have a decent resale value.


----------



## ooheadsoo

Yeah, it does make sense if you're a careful player. Hella can return the speakers if he wants to (there's a long trial period.) In the meantime, he should probably contact morel about the speakers and ask them why the response is so whacked, ask them whether he can do the murphy mod on them or just return the speakers, and see which option morel prefers. A big company will just take them back, a small company may be more flexible.

 The Ellis is different because it's basically a commercial kit. Murphy's personal designs are free. FWIW, Dennis does consider the Ellis to be his finest 2-way design


----------



## Wodgy

The reviews on the Ellis 1801 are definitely incredible. It's a testament to how good Murphy's crossovers are, really.

 My gut feeling would be to encourage Hella to return them, unless he *really* likes their sound. It is true that it's hard to get good commercial sealed speakers and good commercial speakers with soft-dome tweeters these days, but they are out there. The NHT SB3 is the sealed design I'd consider in this price range, and the Ascend would be the soft-dome tweeter monitor I'd consider, if either of these is important to him. It's even harder to get good commercial 3-ways, but this Morel is clearly not one either!


----------



## ooheadsoo

I hesitate on that NHT recco for your tastes. I haven't heard the sb3 but I did own its cousin for a good while, the A-10 which cost roughly twice as much as the sb3. It too used a soft dome tweeter. And it was very bright and zingy compared to the hiquphon OW-1 tweeter. I've found that soft dome, metal dome, the material doesn't particularly dictate the sound quality. As Dennis says, people sometimes tend to hear what they see. Maybe the sb3 really is nice and supple up top, but I don't know if I would take it without auditioning.


----------



## Wodgy

The SB3 uses a different tweeter. It's very different from the old NHT designs, including the old SuperOnes. The change is the inverse of what PSB did when they went from the old Alphas to the new Images (going from soft and reticent to crazy bright).

 I'm convinced that I can hear the resonance peaks of metal dome tweeters. People claim that you can't hear at 22kHz, but apparently researchers have shown that many people _can_ if the SPL levels are high enough, and a resonance will do that. I used to own the PSB Stratus Minis, which had a fairly decent metal dome tweeter, and it had the same "excess energy" feeling that I got from the new Alphas with the metal tweeters. The thing is, the Minis were _not_ bright, not at all, while the Alphas were, but the "excess energy" feeling was still there. It's hard to explain, but I've written off metal dome tweeters unless they're exceedingly smooth and I can audition them for those reasons. I'd also consider a metal dome tweeter that was crossed over to a supertweeter at about 16kHz, similar to what KEF does to get rid of the resonant peaks. I auditioned a pair of the KEFs that was out of my price range and they didn't have the "excess energy" going on.

 This is why I'm so interested in designs that use the OW1 tweeter.


----------



## ooheadsoo

I felt the PSB Image series was seriously bright as well, but the FR plots don't really show that. On the other hand, have you heard the NHT Pro A-20? Metal dome tweeter, looks like a seas unit, but I'm not sure, sounds great, deatiled and not bright and harsh at all. I also didn't mind the metal tweeters in the Mackie monitors at all. Ultimately, I think an audition is still called for because soft cloth/silk domes aren't all one way or the other either.


----------



## Wodgy

Sometimes you can see the resonant peaks in Stereophile's plots, since they measure out to 25-30kHz. It's cleanly visible in the FR graph for the Alpha Bs. Soundstage only plots out to 20kHz, but even there you can see a resonant peak at about 19kHz for the Axiom M3ti.

 There are good and bad soft dome tweeters, but at least they don't resonate! I seriously think that's what bothers me, more than brightness. The FR of the Stratus Minis is actually slanted downwards, but I could still hear something odd. The resonant peak for those speakers shows up in the Stereophile measurements as just starting at 25kHz (where the graph cuts off).

 Haven't heard the NHT Pro A-20.

 My current speakers are old PSB Century 500is, which use the Vifa classic series 3/4inch soft dome. They're very smooth, but not bright enough. The 8 inch woofer also muddies the midrange, but this is a compromise I live with since the internal volume is just right for transforming the speaker into an acoustic suspension with a Q around 0.65 when you stuff the ports, plus they still have enough bass to get away without a subwoofer. In this sealed configuration the bass is very fast and punchy, as one would expect.


----------



## ooheadsoo

I find I can't listen to my music without bass any more 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 It sounds ok in the short run but in the long run, I just feel short changed. I'm planning on building the GR Research sub in a few months after I've recovered from my unexpected parking tickets. You know that there is a large portion of people who don't believe that a well designed bass reflex sub has audible GD effects, right? I feel that as long as the peak in the group delay is pushed under 25-28hz or so, I should be just fine 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Stuff down there is rare and is really just rumble more than a note. At least to my ears.


----------



## Wodgy

I get too much low frequency room gain with my current speakers to use a sub. I agree with you though, bass is important.

 As for low frequency group delay, I have to say that in my mind I'm biased towards sealed because I've heard too many poor commercial designs and because you're not only pushing group delay up, you're also pushing distortion up. It just seems more elegant to go sealed. But I'm also not into home theatre.


----------



## ooheadsoo

The key is to not stress the woofer past around 1/2 xmax to keep the distortion down. That's one of the reasons why I decided to settle for this diy dual woofer sub I've got. Though I'm not sure how well it works with my particular cabinet and woofers


----------



## hella

I sent an email to Justin, my contact at Morel, which included a copy of Dennis' FR measurments. I basically asked him why it was so f-ed and whether or not he would be cool with the mod.

 Wodgy - I'm wondering why you keep reiterating that these have no resale value? Are you saying this simply because of the recent FR discovery? I don't see why this speaker would have any more or less resale value than other commercial speakers... If you could elaborate that would be great.

 Again, I will say that Dennis specifically told me to keep these things. I don't think their value will depreciate that much, especially with modding, but what do I know? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 P.S. - Wodgy, where were you last week *before* I dropped the 600 bucks.
 P.P.S. - I'm this close to just going DIY.


----------



## Wodgy

My guess is that you'd only have luck selling them on eBay. People on all the other major audio forums have pretty much heard about what a false deal these speakers are, and so few people will be looking to buy them. "Renaissance" is not a well-known name in speakers anyway, and people tend to purchase used speakers from reputable names. For people who are thinking of buying them, they'll just Google the speaker name, see the controversy, and be turned off. There are also reports of other Morel USA "Renaissance" speakers being bad. There is a post on Madisound by a guy who tried to re-engineer the crossover to one of their bookshelves and was largely unsuccessful.

 Then there's the whole issue of Morel USA's questionable reputation in general. It doesn't matter who is right in that conflict; it taints both sides. (Personally I think the notion that a guy trained in sales and marketing miraculously "helped design" some of Morel's most famous drivers is ludicrous, but that is a matter for another thread.)

 As I understand it, Murphy's mod turns these speakers from "the worst measuring speakers of 2004" to merely adequate speakers. There is still the issue of the treble response being uneven because something was wrong with this batch of tweeters.

 The whole situation just smells bad. I just can't see you getting a decent price on these speakers on the used market. Maybe you might, but it would have to be on eBay and to someone who doesn't take the time to do a search to find out about the whole debacle.

 I like sealed speakers. I like soft dome tweeters. But since there is a return policy I probably wouldn't keep these speakers unless I had to and I _really_ liked them. For the money you spent you could easily DIY a pair of MBOW1s, which would have a great crossover, the best tweeters in the world, and a very credible midwoofer. That would include buying a pre-assembled and finished cabinet. The whole thing wouldn't be time-consuming. If you don't have time for DIY, I'd either audition speakers locally (this is best), or try the Ascends or Axioms which both have a generous return policy too.


----------



## ooheadsoo

I HIGHLY recommend the mbow1. I'd be more than happy to walk you through it, but it's pretty self explanatory once you get the hang of point to point soldering.

 Unless you are a METICULOUS worker, avoid saving money by trying to finish the speaker cabinet yourself. Bad mistake on my part. I spent over 20 hours on it and it looks like crap. What's more, the paint and materials I bought cost more than the extra for the veneered cabinet would have. You may want a sub in the long run though.

 On the other hand, if you had nice looking cabinets, you probably wouldn't want to apply this nasty looking great sounding wool felt that I have on the baffle 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 But you know what, be aware that the mbows are not the most sensitive speaker in the world and the bass you get from the 8" woofers will most likely be deeper and more taut than from the m130 in the same situation.

 Last of all, you won't be saving all that much money. But you will have the satisfaction and bragging rights of having built it yourself. Good luck selling it though, I don't think it will have much resale value, honestly.


----------



## Wodgy

If for some reason you can't sell the MBOW1s, you can easily take out the tweeters and sell them. You'll get at least $150 just for those. I'd imagine that there would be buyers for the finished cabinets as well, if you bought them from a quality manufacturer.

 My guess is that they would be easy to sell though. For a fair price, I would definitely consider buying a used pair.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wodgy* 
_All drivers only work nicely within a specific frequency range. Beyond that, they start to misbehave. Different driver materials disbehave in different ways. Paper cones tend to just roll off because paper is well damped. This is why you still see paper in many high end speakers, even though it's the cheapest driver material. Aluminum woofers tends to break up violently; aluminum tweeters have a resonant peak. For a woofer, the breakup mode is maybe -16dB or -20dB down, but it's still there, interfering with the upper midrange unless you get rid of it with a crossover._

 

Well regarding that concern, I emailed Axioms looking for an answer, I was worried about that, and among other things what they say is basically what I was assuming while I heard them the first time, and honestly I do belive what they say, at least their speakers do sound good, OTOH, while I was trying to get some drivers for DIY use, some time ago, I never founded those break up modes IIRC in any graph or measurements I saw, well i was looking for good drivers, and maybe this is the case, one thing is sure, IMO, to achieve the perfomance of those little bookshelves you have to pay a lot of money, IMO they know what they are doing.....not the case of many manufacturers as you probably know looking at this graph of this Morel....here is a part of the email I received....

 "....Here is the standard problem with these kinds of discussions on forums. The opening statement about "All drivers only work nicely within a specific frequency range. Beyond that, they start to misbehave." has launched this entire debate on false pretenses. Well designed drivers do not misbehave at any frequency regardless of cone material. The half truth buried in this argument is that the easiest material to design proper woofers from is paper but if you know what you are doing you can also achieve proper response with aluminum (with superior other results). There is no question that aluminum woofers and tweeters are the most difficult to design properly but also yield the best results if you do it right. We were one of the pioneers in aluminum driver technology and have been using them since 1984 (in fact we won a CES design innovation award for it in 1986). So it always comes back to the same thing; that a well designed speaker is not recognizable or achievable by some material or another that is being used. It is a matter of using your ! materials correctly...."


----------



## bundee1

Very well said. I prefer 2 way designs because there is only one crossover to get right. A properly designed metal tweeter can sound very sweet and sometimes too polite as is the case with the Chorus 706 and the new 706s. The older 706 had a titanium tweeter while the redesigned 706s has a titanium alloy tweeter that most people are calling too warm. The original speaker was Stereophile Class D while I see the new one up for sale all the time on Audiogon. 

 Like the guy in the previous post said, its all in the design and implementation of the materials.


----------



## Wodgy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* 
_Well designed drivers do not misbehave at any frequency regardless of cone material._

 

This is simply not true. It ignores the laws of physics. You can either have a well damped system, or you can have a more rigid system with poorer damping. It is impossible to have both. The severity of a driver's breakup modes are inversely proportional to the driver's damping. Aluminum as a material is not well damped.

 You can quote marketing guys all you like, but the laws of physics remain the same.

 Don't get me wrong; I have never said anything negative about the sound of Axiom speakers. But you'd be crazy to believe that you're getting PPA-level performance at a CMOY-level price. The Axioms were designed to a price point, and like any product designed to a price point, they involve compromises.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wodgy* 
_This is simply not true. It ignores the laws of physics. You can either have a well damped system, or you can have a more rigid system with poorer damping. It is impossible to have both. The severity of a driver's breakup modes are inversely proportional to the driver's damping. Aluminum as a material is not well damped.

 You can quote marketing guys all you like, but the laws of physics remain the same.

 Don't get me wrong; I have never said anything negative about the sound of Axiom speakers. But you'd be crazy to believe that you're getting PPA-level performance at a CMOY-level price. The Axioms were designed to a price point, and like any product designed to a price point, they involve compromises._

 

I asked for the graph of the woofer, they may have it, do you really believe that they would ignore the laws of Physics, with an speaker company that sells thousands of pairs a year, and have won all those reviews and prices among a lot of manufacturers, do you know who is behind Axioms?

 I'm not saying that you are not right to a certain point, and that they may have compromises, I know that, the crossover parts are cheap, I saw them, I'm looking into Solen caps, to replace them, but maybe they have a good woofer, with those break up modes far below of the listening level, and maybe they are not so noticeable.

 BTW those break up modes that you are talking about (if they are what I'm suspecting in those graphs) usually begin at 15-20db under the standard sensibility of the speaker (in the good ones) and usually there is another driver supplying the same freqs at the same time, do you really believe that you will hear that effect so easily in that case.....


----------



## bundee1

It is possible for those and many other speakers with dips in the FR to sound good. Here is something that may cause a few flames but we audiophiles are always looking for the best sound. The best sound may not always match up with the best measurments, just look at all the people who buy Bose speakers. The reason we are audiophiles is that we are always searching for the way to get the best sound out of our recordings. What if what sounds best cuts out a huge chunk of the audio spectrum? Its a conundrum. I chosse to pursue to hear everything on the recording in the best way possible which sometimes includes harshness.


----------



## ooheadsoo

The sad truth is that most drivers measure like crap, especially the cheap ones under $25-30. Especially if they're not paper. What that axiom guy is saying clearly doesn't make sense in an absolute sense, otherwise we wouldn't need woofers. Is he saying that a tweeter can produce 20hz at reference level? Well, yes, that's what he's saying and we know that's not true.

 Yes, if you know what you are doing, metal cones can potentially be much better than paper drivers. Because all metal drivers have those problems we talked about, nowing what you're doing means using a crossover to deal with those problems right? Doesn't axiom claim that they don't really mess with a xover? I bet the ringing also has a time domain factor as well and that won't show up in a FR plot. This stuff needs to be controlled. That means a xover. We're not saying that metal drivers can't be used, just that they typically need a xover, which axiom claims isn't necessary in their speaker.

 I just don't think any commercial sold for profit speaker with big research costs and rent and employee salaries in this price range can really make a speaker approaching the ideal. Those are just costs, we haven't gotten into profit yet. 

 No one's saying that axiom makes a bad speaker. In fact, I'm the one who said that +/-5db isn't all that bad, all things considered. If you're happy with it, then that's great! Don't become unhappy with the speaker just because a couple fools on a forum start talking about the pros and cons. Like we said, the metal drivers have the potential for better detail and things like that. That's a big plus, right?

 bundee1, are you saying that bose measures well? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Bose has such a distinctive sound that I recently walked into a good guys demo room and called it within 10 seconds, "eww, this must be bose." I have no doubt that their FR is anything but flat. Also, it has often been said that sins of omission in audio are much less objectionable than sins of commission. A stereo should only be harsh if the recording engineer mixed it harshly. In order to reproduce that faithfully, you probably want flat FR, right? The exception is if you like harsh stuff. If so, to each his own.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ooheadsoo* 
_The sad truth is that most drivers measure like crap, especially the cheap ones under $25-30. Especially if they're not paper. What that axiom guy is saying clearly doesn't make sense in an absolute sense, otherwise we wouldn't need woofers. Is he saying that a tweeter can produce 20hz at reference level? Well, yes, that's what he's saying and we know that's not true.

 Yes, if you know what you are doing, metal cones can potentially be much better than paper drivers. Because all metal drivers have those problems we talked about, nowing what you're doing means using a crossover to deal with those problems right? Doesn't axiom claim that they don't really mess with a xover? I bet the ringing also has a time domain factor as well and that won't show up in a FR plot. This stuff needs to be controlled. That means a xover. We're not saying that metal drivers can't be used, just that they typically need a xover, which axiom claims isn't necessary in their speaker.

 I just don't think any commercial sold for profit speaker with big research costs and rent and employee salaries in this price range can really make a speaker approaching the ideal. Those are just costs, we haven't gotten into profit yet. 

 No one's saying that axiom makes a bad speaker. In fact, I'm the one who said that +/-5db isn't all that bad, all things considered. If you're happy with it, then that's great! Don't become unhappy with the speaker just because a couple fools on a forum start talking about the pros and cons. Like we said, the metal drivers have the potential for better detail and things like that. That's a big plus, right?

 bundee1, are you saying that bose measures well? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Bose has such a distinctive sound that I recently walked into a good guys demo room and called it within 10 seconds, "eww, this must be bose." I have no doubt that their FR is anything but flat. Also, it has often been said that sins of omission in audio are much less objectionable than sins of commission. A stereo should only be harsh if the recording engineer mixed it harshly. In order to reproduce that faithfully, you probably want flat FR, right? The exception is if you like harsh stuff. If so, to each his own._

 

Remember that Axioms has no distributor, if they would use one, the speakers will cost you far more, that is why that price....

 About the drivers what they say is that the good driver reproduce with no anomalies the whole spectrum that they "are able" to reproduce, we have a lot of drivers that are full range and sound good, the Moth is one example, but there are others, but this is not the case of course, and that is why they used a xover (crappy or not) they never expecteded their tweeters to reproduce the bass freq, they are not stupids.....
 In fact, I have seen (and owned) a lot of speaker two and three ways, with second and third order xovers (and multiple orders, even more complex) and sounded like crap (and after a lot of research made by them, and not only on the commercial side, also on the DIY, one) and OTOH I have seen a lot of vintage speakers, that sounded really good, and for my surprise while opening them, the only thing I could found a 4.7uF paper cap inside, nothing else, where is the magic then, in the xover? Of course not, the bagic is in the use of the drivers, selection and implementation of the whole speaker...


----------



## ooheadsoo

I surrender.


----------



## Sovkiller

Sorry, but it was not my intention to make you feel bad, so please you don't have to act like that, we are all stating our opinions, and I agree with you in some points, and maybe you are even right in this case, just that we don't know for sure what they have gotten on those woofers, or how they had designed them, the only fact for me, is that they sound very good....the rest is just theory and speculation, for good or bad, I'm not even 100% sure of the xover design they have.
 BTW if you go to studio monitors you could find around this price some that has inside very good and well designed crossovers, so IMO the crossover cost is not an issue in the speaker manufature, you cna make a good crossover for 10.00 using cheap parts, and get a decent performance, IMO the most expensive part in an speaker, is the cabinet, and not even the drivers...


----------



## hella

I heard back from Morel yesterday and they told me I could keep the speakers for another week. The company president apparently replied to Dennis' measurements and said that he may have a messed up driver or something. It read like complete BS. They basically told me to continue to break them in. However, I've only been able to listen to them at the Hi-Fi shop because i don't have an amp yet. Suggestions are welcome.

 ooheadsoo - Regarding the MBOW1, how much work is it? Assuming I purchase the drivers, the x-over components, fully finished cabinets and such, what is required to actually assemble these things? Am I going to need to purchase a whole bunch of tools like multimeters and soldering irons and stuff (not that I'm averse to doing so)? Would I have to drill stuff? Is there I chance that I could blow up my room or electrocute myself or short something?

 Also, it's going to cost me quite a bit to send these speakers back to Morel. Taking that into considerations, as well as Dennis' mod and earlier advice, is it still worth it to just scrap the Morels and start from scratch to build the MBOW1s?


----------



## ooheadsoo

Sov: don't worry, I'm not upset. The cabinet is definitely the most expensive part of a speaker because of how expensive labor is. Doesn't that make you more worried about the price of the drivers and amount of research that went behind a speaker? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 hella: Depends on your priorities, I'd say. If you value fuller bass, more extension, stick with the morels, I'd say. If you value the other stuff, detail, transparency, etc, it's a toss up because of the hassle. Bass is vital to music, imo, so it's an important consideration. The audiophile tendency is to scorn bass, but not so fast...

 Dennis does like the morel now and, after all, he does know the price of his own mbow1 design. Why don't you ask his opinion on morel vs mbow1? I may have lived with my mbow1's for a few months now, but he's surely lived with them longer 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 If you buy the cabinet prebuilt and finished with terminals and everything, all you'll need is maybe a drill, zip ties or goop, and a soldering iron. It's not precision drilling so dont' worry about that part, it's just holes in a board for the zip ties. Or if you just use goop to glue everything down, then you won't need a drill and zip ties, but more on this later. You can probably borrow the tools if you're really short on money. The first xover took me about 5-8 hours to assemble because I hadn't soldered anything since high school, which was about 9 years ago for me. I was nervous. Managing the wire lengths can be tricky as well. Best to get plenty of extra wire. It gets a bit faster after that. Also, I forgot to buy zip ties, even though I visited home depot several times. That really really hampered me because I couldn't secure the components to the board. I tried using nylon fishing wire. Don't do it. It doesn't work.


----------



## bundee1

> bundee1, are you saying that bose measures well? Bose has such a distinctive sound that I recently walked into a good guys demo room and called it within 10 seconds, "eww, this must be bose." I have no doubt that their FR is anything but flat. Also, it has often been said that sins of omission in audio are much less objectionable than sins of commission. A stereo should only be harsh if the recording engineer mixed it harshly. In order to reproduce that faithfully, you probably want flat FR, right? The exception is if you like harsh stuff. If so, to each his own.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ooheadsoo

Wait...you don't have an amp yet, hella, but you bought the speakers already? You should at the very least borrow an amp and form your own opinion on the speakers. Also, asking Dennis's opinion on mbow1 vs. morel would be interesting.

 Do you have a link to Mike's comments?


----------



## hella

Yup. The sales fell through on the AR Complete and the Cambridge Audio amps I was looking into because my wallet was stolen so all my credit cards and such are in limbo right now. I took the Morels down to the local Hi-Fi and gave them a listen, but they hadn't been broken in at all so I can't really speak to how they might sound after a healthy break-in period. They were pretty good though. I'd borrow an amp, but I don't know anyone that has anything even remotely listenable in Chicago.


----------



## Wodgy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *hella* 
_I heard back from Morel yesterday and they told me I could keep the speakers for another week. The company president apparently replied to Dennis' measurements and said that he may have a messed up driver or something. It read like complete BS. They basically told me to continue to break them in._

 

IMHO, I wouldn't necessarily trust anything Mikhael Shabani tells you. He has made a lot of claims in the past that don't necessarily hold water, like claiming he designed the MDT-30. While it is possible that a man trained in sales and marketing could have successfully designed such a good tweeter (anything is possible), the whole matter doesn't pass the gut test.

 If you don't have an amp to thoroughly test these speakers, I'd really suggest you return them. Otherwise you're keeping what's essentially an unknown quantity. Asking Dennis Murphy to decide for you whether you should keep them is a sensible move, but you're essentially trusting someone else's ears to make a decision for you.

 There are plenty of good speakers to choose from out there. Getting stuck with something that's dubious at best when you can return them just doesn't seem wise to me.


----------



## hella

Morel guy's response:

http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/dis...gi?read=321431


----------



## Wodgy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Sovkiller* 
_Remember that Axioms has no distributor, if they would use one, the speakers will cost you far more, that is why that price...._

 

That's what Axiom's marketing department tells you. They even print it on their web page. It's not really true. The Axioms are fairly priced for what they represent.

 Every manufacturer claims they have some "special edge" that allows them to produce great quality at a budget price. For Axiom, it's "we sell direct." For Infinity and Energy, it's "we build our drivers in house so we don't have to buy them from anyone." For Wharfedale, it's "everything's made in China." For PSB it's "we use the same parts in every speaker so we get volume discounts."

 Take marketing with a grain of salt.

  Quote:


 About the drivers what they say is that the good driver reproduce with no anomalies the whole spectrum that they "are able" to reproduce, we have a lot of drivers that are full range and sound good, the Moth is one example 
 

There are no full range drivers that measure truly well. This is the laws of physics at work. The Moths are a joke. Like all Moth gear, they're designed more for looks than for performance, by a pair of guys who design sets for a Hollywood movie studio. Go read the Stereophile review of the Moths and look at the measurements. They're among the worst I've ever seen.

  Quote:


 Of course not, the magic is in the use of the drivers, selection and implementation of the whole speaker... 
 

You're right about that.


----------



## Sovkiller

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Wodgy* 
_The Axioms are fairly priced for what they represent._

 

And why not reserving this opinion until you hear them?

  Quote:


 Every manufacturer claims they have some "special edge" that allows them to produce great quality at a budget price. For Axiom, it's "we sell direct." For Infinity and Energy, it's "we build our drivers in house so we don't have to buy them from anyone." For Wharfedale, it's "everything's made in China." For PSB it's "we use the same parts in every speaker so we get volume discounts."

 Take marketing with a grain of salt. 
 

Well maybe this is true, marketing is everywhere, but their price is not bad, again I have heard a lot more expensive speakers, that do not sound even on the same class...of course there are a lot better out there also...


  Quote:


 There are no full range drivers that measure truly well. This is the laws of physics at work. The Moths are a joke. Like all Moth gear, they're designed more for looks than for performance, by a pair of guys who design sets for a Hollywood movie studio. Go read the Stereophile review of the Moths and look at the measurements. They're among the worst I've ever seen. 
 

Well this is the first time I saw someone stating anything disfavorable about Moth speakers, I ahve not read too much about them, as i never was interested on them they roll off at 16k, but maybe it is true...


----------

