Hi,
The timbral balance of the Axiom M22ti and M60 in the midrange and highs is extremely similar (likewise the current M80ti) so much so than in immediate comparisons, conducted with a subwoofer (not at extremely high SPLs) and at listening levels of about 85 dB SPL with occasional peaks to 95 dB or so, the two speakers are virtually identical.
In stereo, without a sub, the M22ti has limited bass, usable to about 40 Hz. And of course it won't have the same power handling as the M60. But in my view it gives up nothing in terms of transparency and timbral neutrality to the M60 or M80.
With the qualifier that Axiom does not design speakers intended for the pro market, I think the M60 would make an excellent monitor. If anything, they'll be easier to drive than the M22ti's. As to compression in the mid-bass with the M22s, being a compact speaker with fewer and smaller drivers than the M60s, that would not surprise me. But compression is a fact of life in any compact speaker driven to high levels. I think the M22s are less susceptible than many others because of the dual woofers.
Re Bridgman's comments, the M2i has far more midrange and upper mid clarity and detail than the fabled Rogers LS3-5A, which I owned for many years. The Rogers, in their time, were certainly a very nice and reasonably accurate speaker, but they had a kind of swayback dip through the midrange, which made them sound quite distant on vocals and choral works. They also had terrible power handling; indeed the Kef T27 tweeter used to change shape at high power levels--it actually began to melt-- which radically altered the dispersion and high-frequency response. When it cooled down, its performance would improve.
By the way, in general I've found B&W compact speakers to be somewhat muddy and colored through the midband, not at all neutral. That is not true of the 700 series, which seem to be quite good. I've not kept up on current Wharfedale models. In years past (pre-1996) they fared rather poorly in our NRC tests.
Regards,
