Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Hearing Things M80s vs. M50s vs. M3s vs. Incompetent wiring

Ken,

Nice review.

Let me say right off....I KNOW, JohnK WILL approve your choice of receivers...AND the 16ga wires.

I almost got the M80's, back when I got my M60's......but, after talking to Alan on the phone, and the Yamaha A/V receiver thing, and the 4 ohm thing......well, it was the M60's for me..(no regrets).

I think your kind of "testing" is overall, the best way, and...MOST people will relate to it.

I'm not as sure, about the "ipod" as a source...(we all know that, source material is huge,... as to how good a system can sound).
However, I think the point is moot...the M80's would STILL have won out.

Larry

You guys all suck.

Just jealous. Hope you had a good time. Wish I'd been there.

Seems like positioning and amplification are the variables. I've never really subscribed to the "some sand sounds special" theory, but is it *possible* that the HK sounds different than the Marantz?

I guess I'll wait to look at the pictures before I start blabbering about positioning.

Cool.

Feel free to bring your stuff over anytime, Adam! Well, ok, a little notice is good...

I remember when I had both the M3's and M22's. I thought overall the M22's were better speakers (and perhaps some of the best bookshelves I have ever heard), but the M3's had a certain sweet sound.

Having never heard M50's, I can't comment on those, but yeah, my M80's are definitely well worth having over M3's or M22's, provided you have a strong amp and decent space to put them in. I tried the M80's in a small room once (12 x 10 I think), and they didn't sound quite right. A tad thin, and no imaging. You need something bigger to take advantage of them.

Pictures!

Gypsy and the M133s. Gypsy is Not Amused.



The room really isn't as messy as this picture makes it look, but here it all is...



Right M133 with the new/old Marantz.



Me, looking like an idiot. But an idiot with a tasty beer!



The Brothers Not-So-Grimm.

It's my turn the chime in, I suppose. My impressions are the same. The M80s were hands down winners. I am very lucky to have absolutely no room for tower speakers in my current home so I can be very happy for Ken without the slightest hint of jealousy or upgrade-itis on my part.

I'll comment more about the wiring thing. Before we started the listening session, I was pretty sure the M3s would sound the "least best" - meaning they'd be good, just not as good as the others. When the M50s turned out to sound pretty nasal and anemic, especially in the bass area, I started to suspect something was wrong. I suggested that Ken switch the M3s and the M50s on the back of the Marantz. That was when he discovered the M50s were wired out-of-phase. Now it made complete sense why the M50s had been sucking (and simultaneously blowing, actually).

After the wiring was remedied, the M50s popped back into focus. But the not-so-little speakers that could -- the M3s -- still seemed to best them on punchiness in the bass area. It could be the difference in crossover and cabinet volume. I'm not sure, but there was that little extra magic in the M3 sound that just wasn't in the M50s. Now if we only had a tube amp and some Oil Impregnated Metallized Polypropylene capacitors to swap into the crossover... THEN we'd have the perfect speaker. (hi 2x6!)

About the possible difference contributed by the separate components, all I can tell you is that when playing tracks from the iPod, the M80s sounded less better than the other speakers than when we played tracks from the CD player. Since the M80s are more revealing, it seems logical that this was the case.

Omigosh. Photographic evidence that you guys suck (beer).

Explore diversity in facial hair configuration.

I think positioning of the cat is critical.

You guys are fun. Bring all your speakers to Washington and we can build a M193. I'll tell the posse to give you safe passage. In.

But every man needs a goatee.

Sorry, Tom, no way am I lugging 2 pairs of towers to Washington. Oof.