This past Saturday, Mike (
mwc) very kindly invited me to his home to let me listen to his M22ti's and Magnepan MG12's. We had a very enjoyable time listening, some beer, listening, some Pizza, and some more listening. My cordial thanks goes to Mike for his wonderful hospitality!!!
So, here are my comparative impressions of these loudspeakers...
First of all, I have to say that we did not do an instantaneous A/B comparison, since my main purpose was to get a general idea on the tonal character of the Axioms. However, as a bonus, I could also listen to the Maggies to satisfy my curiosity. We listened to both pairs of speakers with his
pair of slave subs hooked up and level-calibrated, with crossovers at 75Hz. His electronics has been described in detail
here. We mainly listened to an assortment of classical CD's I brought with me, plus several of Mike's Jazz CD's (a trio featuring Herbie Hancock, and John Coltrane's SACD).
We started with the Maggies first. I always had some prejudice against planner loudspeakers: their weak dynamics; jet-coaster frequency response; super-picky requirements for positioning, etc. Indeed, I recently listened to Martin-Logans in several local audio shops, and I did not like their sound very much. But honestly, his Maggies surprised me; I felt that the timbre balance was quite faithful for various solo instruments, solo vocals, orchestra, and chorus; except for a bit of boominess in the mid-bass region, which was, according to Mike (and I agree), in part due to room modes. The mid-highs and highs might be on a slightly laid-back side, but not to the extent that the "bite" of brasses and attack of cymbals were noticeably blunted. The only recording in which I detected a slight coloration was Indermuhle/Brizi's Bach Oboe Sonatas (Camerata). Indermuhle’s oboe sounded with a slight tint of a soprano sax, a minute coloration that I have never felt with my own Hales System Two on this recording. However, in the same recording the harpsichord’s complex timbre was very naturally presented.
But the real virtue of the Maggies was the highly three-dimensional, life-size presentation of soundstage. In the middle of session, Mike moved the Maggies a bit further from the back wall, and that did improve the soundstage even more. In Kissin/Ozawa/BSO's Rachmaninoff Concerto No.3 (an excellent live recording from BMG), the piano was depicted so real, clearly positioned in front of the orchestra. The size of the soundstage was highly realistic, just like what you perceive at about the 10th-row floor seat of a concert hall; neither too big/blurred nor too tiny/distant. Maggies' ability of creating a realistic soundstage greatly helped in Midori & McDonalds' Franck Violin Sonata (a nice recording from Sony), too, where I could literally "see" Midori moving her body during passionate passages. Again, McDonald's piano was presented life-size, behind and partly overlapping with Midori. From lowest to highest registers, the piano sounded consistent, without any unnatural shift of soundstage or timbre (a huge difference from the Marin-Logans!). Renee Fleming's soprano voice also was imaged highly enjoyably in one of her Decca recordings.
The worry I had about the possible lack of dynamic capabilities in planners was nicely eliminated when we played the humongous finale of Inbal & Frankfurt Radio Symphony's Mahler Symphony No.8 (my favorite recording from Denon). Although we were listening to the climax fairly loud (at the sound level that I would expect in a live concert), these panel speakers effortlessly reproduced the entire ensemble, which consists of a large orchestra with a huge percussion section, 8 vocal soloists, two full sets of mixed chorus, a children's chorus, an additional brass section set outside the stage, and an organ. In the midst of fortissimo tutti in the climax, for example, I could still clearly hear the fff smashes of the Chinese gong with its full details of timbre. I knew that playing back this recording properly is a very difficult task for loudspeakers, and I was positively impressed.
Okay, so much for the Maggies. Now on to the M22's...
My very first impression looking at the M22's was: "Wow, they are tiny!" I do not know why, but obviously I had created in my mind a somewhat bigger illusion of M22's (okay, I revisited the picture of Ian sitting with a pair of his M22's on Axiom's front page, and they now look pretty small. LOL). Looking closer, I felt that the construction and fit-and-finish was excellent. They felt very solid, and the veneer appeared to be applied seamlessly (they were black).
At any rate, once we started to audition the M22's, I was again pleasantly surprised by their sound quality even though my expectations were pretty high after reading through all the rave reviews on the Axioms. They did not sound like a pair of bookshelves at all! However, at first I felt that the soundstage was not quite right; the image was split into three chunks -- left, center and right, and nothing in-between. Mike had a fairly big entertainment cabinet along the center of the front wall, which had full wooden cover panels; I thought that the reflection from them might be the culprit, and moved the M22's a couple of feet further upfront. Indeed, it worked! Now the soundstage was seamless and airy, perhaps not as tall and three-dimensional as that from the Maggies, but still very realistic and enjoyable to me. By the way, the M22's are of course nearly 10dB more efficient than the Maggies, requiring us to hugely change the subwoofer calibration.
Once correctly placed and calibrated with the subs, the M22's produced, as already told by numerous people here and elsewhere, a highly accurate and transparent sound. We re-ran the same tracks of all the above recordings, and in my opinion, the Axioms were more accurate and linear than the Maggies with respect to timbre balance. For example, the slight saxophone-like coloration of the solo oboe, stated above, was nicely gone with the Axioms. Also, the mid-bass boominess, if any, was considerably reduced as compared with the Maggies; I guess that this really depicts the complex pattern of interactions between the dipole planners and the room, which the Axioms do not suffer from. Appropriate for made-in-Canada loudspeakers, tracks from my favorite album of Canadian Brass (the classical brass quintet) were reproduced with a superb accuracy; the trumpets were brilliant without being harsh, the “indirect” timbre of French horn pleasantly delicate, and the tuba simultaneously powerful and hilarious. Overall, highly enjoyable. This recording was done in a church hall with an extremely live acoustics, and the reproduction of the ambience was excellent, too.
While the M22’s presented all materials we fed with an effortlessness that I would expect from much larger loudspeakers, I did detect a slight sign of stress during the above-mentioned massive finale of Mahler’s 8th Symphony. It manifested as a slight graininess in the mid-high region, which I did not hear with the Maggies or my own Hales. With the exception of this single sign of “small speaker” symptom, the M22’s reproduced all the classical CD’s I brought with a highly pleasant and enjoyable quality, both in terms of soundstaging and tonal balance. Mike mentioned to me that he sometimes felt that the sound from the M22’s could be a bit fatiguing for him, and that it was one of his motivations to buy the Maggies. However, through the entire listening session (which lasted for over 4 hours, divided roughly equally between the Maggies and Axioms), I did not detect any fatiguing quality in the Axioms. I guess this depends strictly on individual tastes.
Finally, a word about the often-mentioned “brightness” of the Axioms: I did not find the M22’s inherently bright at all. Just out of curiosity, I played a tune (Conga) from one of Gloria Estefan’s “greatest hit” albums, which I consider is an example of the typically “hot” pops recording. Yes, it did sound hot and EQ’ed, but both on the Maggies and Axioms. I did not think the Axioms were “guilty.”
So… here is the bottom line of my personal impressions:
(1) Tonal balance/accuracy -- M22’s had an edge here.
(2) Soundstage -- Maggies won with a taller, more 3D imaging.
(3) Overall enjoyability -- I felt that Maggies would have lots of potentials here, with respect to positioning and room calibration, etc, which I understand Mike is still experimenting. Maggies are, as expected, clearly quite picky in terms of its strong interactions with the listening room. But with everything optimized, the Maggie would provide an immensely enjoyable music, I guess.
Finally, I would like to repeat that this comparison is truly Apples versus Oranges:
(1) Price – Maggies are nearly 3 times more expensive.
(2) Size – Maggies are much larger, with a 4.25’ x 1.5’ panel and a large “effective” footprint.
(3) Drivers – Dynamic versus planner dipole; they are totally different beasts.
All in all, I thoroughly enjoyed the comparison. Thanks again, Mike!
Cheers!
