axiim Q
-
- Posts: 808
- Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 3:14 pm
- Location:
- HTPC Specs:
axiim Q
I think it's clear by now Ceton is done (for now) in the consumer space (at the very least). What's funny, a couple of the Ceton guys started a new company (axiim) whose first product seems to be exactly inspired by/came from the product this lawsuit with Gibson seems to be about. I wonder if their decision to spin off into this new company is because of the lawsuit (wouldn't surprise me). It's also called the Q (lol).
http://axiim.com/
http://axiim.com/
-
- Posts: 724
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:21 pm
- Location:
- HTPC Specs:
-
- Posts: 808
- Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 3:14 pm
- Location:
- HTPC Specs:
1 user isn't a substantial data set in all fairnessRyC wrote:http://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receiv ... s-avr.html
First impressions seem like it works
Last edited by Ed on Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 724
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 10:21 pm
- Location:
- HTPC Specs:
So far better review than the EchoEd wrote:1 user isn't a substantial data setRyC wrote:http://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receiv ... s-avr.html
First impressions seem like it works
-
- Posts: 808
- Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 3:14 pm
- Location:
- HTPC Specs:
-
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 1:22 am
- Location: Long Island, NY
- HTPC Specs:
My setup comes next week Also, a couple more people ordered them and joined that thread. When I read the review on MissingRemote, I had no clue it was from ex Ceton guys. Then I found the AVS thread and saw some familiar names, then realized the name (Q) was too ironic, for them not to be related. I always wanted a Ceton Q hehEd wrote:1 user isn't a substantial data set in all fairnessRyC wrote:http://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receiv ... s-avr.html
First impressions seem like it works
- mcewinter
- Posts: 999
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:33 pm
- Location: Chicago
- HTPC Specs:
I'd love to hear a veteran TGB member's review. The product does fascinate me but I have to admit, I would find it easier to run speaker wire to each location rather than A/C. Nevertheless, I'm intrigued.Diverge wrote:My setup comes next week Also, a couple more people ordered them and joined that thread. When I read the review on MissingRemote, I had no clue it was from ex Ceton guys. Then I found the AVS thread and saw some familiar names, then realized the name (Q) was too ironic, for them not to be related. I always wanted a Ceton Q hehEd wrote:1 user isn't a substantial data set in all fairnessRyC wrote:http://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receiv ... s-avr.html
First impressions seem like it works
- mcewinter
- Posts: 999
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:33 pm
- Location: Chicago
- HTPC Specs:
I got the same impression. That's why I wanted to hear from a TGBr.STC wrote:The AVS member review seems awfully like a plant to me but then again I'm always over cautious.
-
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 1:22 am
- Location: Long Island, NY
- HTPC Specs:
mcewinter wrote:
I'd love to hear a veteran TGB member's review. The product does fascinate me but I have to admit, I would find it easier to run speaker wire to each location rather than A/C. Nevertheless, I'm intrigued.
I'll let you guys know how it goes. I don't really write elaborate reviews, but if there are issues I'll be sure to voice my opinion.. I think I've mastered the art of buying and complaining about gadgets on the internet I'll have 30 days do decide if the setup is a keeper.
- STC
- Posts: 6808
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 4:58 pm
- Location:
- HTPC Specs:
Looks very cool, one concern is the speakers that won't have much r&d into the design of cans, amp and enclosure and getting them working together optimally.
I would personally prefer to route speaker cable in walls and ceiling as opposed to wiring AC up to every speaker position too.
I would personally prefer to route speaker cable in walls and ceiling as opposed to wiring AC up to every speaker position too.
By the Community, for the Community. 100% Commercial Free.
Want decent guide data back? Check out EPG123
Want decent guide data back? Check out EPG123
-
- Posts: 2893
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 2:31 pm
- Location:
- HTPC Specs:
Whatever, but any company that calls that a "subwoofer" AND dares to think their system is worth thousands of dollars doesn't get my business.Ed wrote:I think it's clear by now Ceton is done (for now) in the consumer space (at the very least). What's funny, a couple of the Ceton guys started a new company (axiim) whose first product seems to be exactly inspired by/came from the product this lawsuit with Gibson seems to be about. I wonder if their decision to spin off into this new company is because of the lawsuit (wouldn't surprise me). It's also called the Q (lol).volfan6415 wrote:I have a pacer login through my work and can get the pleadings if anyone is really interested.
http://axiim.com/
It's a bass module, nothing more. Marketing to ignorance.
-
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 1:22 am
- Location: Long Island, NY
- HTPC Specs:
A 10 inch subwoofer is fine for me, and what I would call a subwoofer.... not sure what your post is about.adam1991 wrote:Whatever, but any company that calls that a "subwoofer" AND dares to think their system is worth thousands of dollars doesn't get my business.Ed wrote:I think it's clear by now Ceton is done (for now) in the consumer space (at the very least). What's funny, a couple of the Ceton guys started a new company (axiim) whose first product seems to be exactly inspired by/came from the product this lawsuit with Gibson seems to be about. I wonder if their decision to spin off into this new company is because of the lawsuit (wouldn't surprise me). It's also called the Q (lol).volfan6415 wrote:I have a pacer login through my work and can get the pleadings if anyone is really interested.
http://axiim.com/
It's a bass module, nothing more. Marketing to ignorance.
- mcewinter
- Posts: 999
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:33 pm
- Location: Chicago
- HTPC Specs:
"Bass Module" is a term that Bose came up with to seperate their product from the rest. A bass module is a subwoofer.
-
- Posts: 2893
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 2:31 pm
- Location:
- HTPC Specs:
A bass module is not a subwoofer. It provides bass, not sub-bass. There's a difference.
"Bass module" may or may not have come from Bose, but it's accurate. Don't dismiss it just because of its source if it's accurate.
"Bass module" may or may not have come from Bose, but it's accurate. Don't dismiss it just because of its source if it's accurate.
- mcewinter
- Posts: 999
- Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:33 pm
- Location: Chicago
- HTPC Specs:
Okay, it's a bass module. Explain.adam1991 wrote:A bass module is not a subwoofer. It provides bass, not sub-bass. There's a difference.
"Bass module" may or may not have come from Bose, but it's accurate. Don't dismiss it just because of its source if it's accurate.
-
- Posts: 2893
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 2:31 pm
- Location:
- HTPC Specs:
I did. It provides bass, not sub-bass.
End of story.
The ignorati of the world are easily convinced that because they see a separate module with a woofer in it, it must be JUST like the other stuff they've been seeing--which were, at the time, subwoofers.
The ignorati of the world came to equate "separate box that provides low frequencies" with "must be a subwoofer".
Any company that follows that line, is marketing to the ignorant--the low-hanging fruit of the audio market.
You laugh at Bose (no doubt because you think it makes you fit in with the "cool crowd"), but at least they didn't fall down the ignorance hole and declare their module to be a "subwoofer". They were honest: "our small speakers can't produce bass, therefore we need a separate bass module. It's OK that bass isn't produced in the separate speakers, because bass isn't directional." In other words, Bose was being honest. Everyone else who calls it a "subwoofer" when it isn't? Not honest.
The q "XM101.SW" provides 20-100Hz. It's not a subwoofer.
And that means it really isn't a "5.1" or "7.1" system. The .1 refers to sub-bass, not just "we had to make the bass outside the main speaker".
Axiim's whole business model seems to be aimed at audio-ignorant smartphone fiddlers who love to hear the word "wireless".
End of story.
The ignorati of the world are easily convinced that because they see a separate module with a woofer in it, it must be JUST like the other stuff they've been seeing--which were, at the time, subwoofers.
The ignorati of the world came to equate "separate box that provides low frequencies" with "must be a subwoofer".
Any company that follows that line, is marketing to the ignorant--the low-hanging fruit of the audio market.
You laugh at Bose (no doubt because you think it makes you fit in with the "cool crowd"), but at least they didn't fall down the ignorance hole and declare their module to be a "subwoofer". They were honest: "our small speakers can't produce bass, therefore we need a separate bass module. It's OK that bass isn't produced in the separate speakers, because bass isn't directional." In other words, Bose was being honest. Everyone else who calls it a "subwoofer" when it isn't? Not honest.
The q "XM101.SW" provides 20-100Hz. It's not a subwoofer.
And that means it really isn't a "5.1" or "7.1" system. The .1 refers to sub-bass, not just "we had to make the bass outside the main speaker".
Axiim's whole business model seems to be aimed at audio-ignorant smartphone fiddlers who love to hear the word "wireless".
- Scallica
- Posts: 2799
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:09 pm
- Location: USA!
- HTPC Specs:
Isn't sub-bass defined as 20-60Hz?adam1991 wrote:I did. It provides bass, not sub-bass.
The q "XM101.SW" provides 20-100Hz. It's not a subwoofer.
HTPC Enthusiast / Forum Moderator - TGB.tv Code of Conduct