Axiom Home Page
Posted By: Potatohead W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/03/09 11:03 PM
85% home theatre and television, 15% music. I have a Velodyne 10" sub to go along with whatever I choose. I think the in/on wall is a cool thing and it would be nice to not have big floorstanders in the small room, but I don't want to sacrifice sound quality.

I guess my question is, are the M60's just total and complete overkill in a room this size? Either set would be with a W150/VP150 and a pair of QS8's.
Posted By: Adrian Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/03/09 11:17 PM
I'm sure you'd be happy with either set-up. I am using M80s in a room about 25% larger than yours, and don't feel it's overkill. I haven't heard either the 60s or the 22s, but judging from what others have said, the M22s(wth a sub) have a very similar sound to the M80s....the M60s, I'm sure, will provide a little more detail than the M22s. Unless you AB the speakers, you may not notice any difference, as all Axiom speakers are designed with the same goal of transparency and many use the same drivers as well.
Ooops, why did I think you were talking about the 22's? Doh!!
Posted By: Gieseman Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/03/09 11:45 PM
I have the 22's in my bedroom it is a little over 2000 cubic feet, and they sound wonderful. Either way you go, you can't go wrong with Axiom speakers they are truely great speakers.
Posted By: fredk Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/04/09 01:12 AM
I did an a/b comparison of the M22+ sub and the M60 and the sound almost the same. If you prefer the look of the W22 go with them.
Posted By: fredk Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/04/09 01:16 AM
 Quote:
the M60s, I'm sure, will provide a little more detail than the M22s

Not really. The 80s had a little more detail. The upper end seemed to open up on the M80s vs the M22 + sub, but not so with the m60.
Posted By: Potatohead Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/04/09 04:18 AM
So really, is the only advantage of the larger woofers in the M60 is to provide more bass? My sub will take care of that anyway. I just figured because they were three ways they would provide better coverage. I guess if that was the case Axiom could have made the M/W22 as a three way but they must not have felt a need.
Posted By: alan Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/04/09 02:38 PM
Hi potatohead,

The advantage of a 3-way system is not so much "better coverage" as it is better power handling in big rooms, because there are more (and larger) drivers. They will play much louder and cleaner in really big rooms than will smaller compact speakers with fewer drivers. Mind you, the M22s are no slouches in terms of peak dynamics in moderate-size rooms, especially when you couple them with a good subwoofer.

One other virtue of using compact speakers like the M22s with a sub in smaller rooms is that you have more placement options and versatility than you do with a big floorstanding speaker. You can locate the compact mains for ideal soundstage and imaging without having to worry about boundary effects from the low bass (because the M22s, M2s and M3s don't have the deep bass output of a floorstander, they aren't affected nearly as much by nearby walls, floors and surfaces).

Regards,

Alan
Posted By: Potatohead Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/04/09 04:44 PM
Thanks for the great response Alan.

I think I will stick with the W22's.
Posted By: Potatohead Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/07/09 02:36 AM
OK guys, here is the dilemma I am facing with this. I'm sure if I was in my darn house now I would just order something and be done with it, but the house won't be done for a couple months so I am killing myself thinking of all the possibilities before I move. I saw an older thread with someone posting pictures of a HG cherry M60, and it's freaking gorgeous.

I am still looking at two options. After actually looking at the blueprints of the room, and accounting for the soffit in it, it's actually more like 1600 square feet. I thought I was set on the 22's but I know if I buy the 60's I have something I won't grow out of and can use for a decade or more.

1. W22/W150/QS8's. I would love to do a real wood finish, but I don't know if it's worth it with the small amount of wood on the W series speakers. HG cherry vinyl is a very real option for this setup.

2. M60/VP150/QS8's. I would really want to do this in the HG cherry after seeing the picture earlier. This option is about 15% more than the real wood W22 setup, but in reality it would work out about the same because I wouldn't have to build a sub wall around the screen to mount the W speakers like I was planning.

So, I'll start a poll.

1. Real wood is pointless with W series, go with HG cherry W22's, they're plenty big with your sub.
2. Real wood adds class and exclusivity, do the real wood W22's, they're plenty big for the room with your sub.
3. Bigger is always better, and function is better than form (insert man grunt here), go with a factory outlet M60 setup
4. Get the best of both worlds, don't be so cheap and do the 60's in the HG cherry.


Thanks guys
Posted By: BlueJays1 Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/07/09 02:47 AM
Well if budget allows I would go 4 then I would go 3 but 1 and 2 would be fine as well. It is all just a matter how much you are willing to spend. You could also choose 5 which is the M80's/vp150/QS8 from the factory outlet which would be similar in price to 4. Confused yet? ;\)


Posted By: JohnK Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/07/09 03:01 AM
Tater, the W22s are plenty for 1600 cubic(not square of course)feet and the HG Cherry is very attractive without going to the expense of the real wood veneer. So, go with Option 1.
Posted By: fredk Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/07/09 03:12 AM
Potatohead. I have heard the M22s and I have seen the HG cherry. Go for the W22 in HG cherry

I saw the Vinyl HG cherry next to the real deal in the factory. Unless you put your face up against the two (well ok, maybe from a foot or so) you cannot tell the difference. The HG vinyl is really that good.
Posted By: Potatohead Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/07/09 04:19 AM
Obviously in the other post I meant the room is 1600 cubic feet, not square feet.

 Originally Posted By: Dr.House
Well if budget allows I would go 4 then I would go 3 but 1 and 2 would be fine as well. It is all just a matter how much you are willing to spend. You could also choose 5 which is the M80's/vp150/QS8 from the factory outlet which would be similar in price to 4. Confused yet? ;\)



When I started all this I was hoping to keep it to $1400. We all know how budgets tend to work out, lol. The HG cherry M60 setup is almost 70% over that, but this is also a house and theater room I plan on being at and using for at least 8 - 10 years and that extra money over that length of time isn't exactly a lot.

I would be 100% set on the W22's except the sub wall for them I was going to build. If I just mount the screen on the normal wall and place the M60's to the sides (which isn't as clean looking, but still nice) I save a lot on material costs and the difference is about halved. I am afraid to mount the W22's onto the normal wall because their centreline will only end up being about 8 - 9" from the side wall. With a sub wall I can face them inwards a touch. If I really wanted I could probably make a small wedge shaped piece of wood that I could mount to the wall, and then mount the speaker to that, which means the sub wall can go...

Hmm
Posted By: fredk Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/07/09 01:49 PM
Opportunity cost. What could you do with that $1000 in the mean time?

8-10 years is a long time: almost the life of a set of speakers.
Posted By: Potatohead Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/07/09 09:03 PM
True enough.

Doing either setup in the upgraded vinyl is a $630 difference.

I tend to keep coming back to the W22's though. Most people are telling me to go that way, even Axiom tech support. I guess I should just listen... Heh.

I think honestly I am just totally over - analyzing anyway, because clearly either setup is going to be a massive upgrade over my current entry - level Boston bookshelves.

It would be nice if they would run the HG cherry promo again in the next 4 - 8 weeks...


EDIT: I do have one more question. I see the M22's are a version 2, and the W22's are not. Are the W22's a new enough design that they have the same parts as the M22 V2, or are they using the V1 stuff? I researched a bit and it seems the V2's are a little less bright and forward than the V1's.
Posted By: doormat Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/08/09 01:55 AM
Yeah, the W series came out after the M series went v2.
Posted By: Potatohead Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/08/09 02:41 AM
I contacted Axiom today and I would like to thank them (Brent especially) for such great service. I posed the same question again about which main speakers to use in the room and Brent stated the W22 was plenty for the room, which is what just about everyone here was also saying. He also stated they do use the same components as the M22 V2. It's nice to have an honest opinion without feeling you're just trying to be upsold.

Anyway, I ordered the W22/W150/QS8 combo in the HG cherry. They said about a 3 week wait before they ship, but I am not in a big hurry so not really a big deal.

Thank you everyone for all your help! I will definately post pictures once they are here... Maybe Axiom will want to add them to the vinyl picture page also.
Posted By: BlueJays1 Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/08/09 03:18 AM
Very nice Potatohead. The pictures I have seen of the HG cherry are stunning. I think you will be very pleased. Congrats!
Posted By: Murph Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/08/09 01:18 PM
I'm jealous every time I see pics of the HG Cherry. So do post pics, but expect me to be angry. \:\)
Posted By: fredk Re: W22 vs M60... 1700 cubic feet - 06/08/09 04:46 PM
Nice! I really want to see what the HG finish looks like on a wall.
© Axiom Message Boards