I second moving the speakers further back. About 6 inches from the back wall is good for increased bass response.

I'll give it a shot. Thanks for the suggestion.

D

Take a look at this graph of the Era 4. The - 3dB roll off appears to be around 80Hz (I'm eyeballing it), but there is a pronounced hump in the 100Hz to 200Hz range. That could account for some of the perceived difference.

The M3s actually go lower (closer to 60Hz), and have also have a hump, but again lower than the Era 4 as seen in this M3 graph [Crud, that only gets you to the M3 page, but click on the link labeled Graph in the specs section]. On paper, you would think the M3 should outperform the Era on the low end. But there may be some midbass emphasis in the Era 4 that you prefer.

Do you really have the M3s set up in the (exact) same place you had the Era 4s? As was mentioned, you could definitely move them closer to the wall to gain some reinforcement. But it could be that you just prefer the sound and character of the Eras.

Rich

Rich,
Thanks for the info. The M3's are in the exact spot as the Era 4's. I'm going to try to change the placement to see if I can get the bass a little closer to my preference.

I really want to make the Axioms work because they are about half the price of the Eras. It might just be that I like the others better but I'm going to take advantage of the 30 days just to make sure.

D

Richard is right. And what's important to note is that the Era 4 response was measured quasi-anechoically. The M3's response was measured anechoically. So the M3 has much better low frequency response. Moving them closer to the wall should improve the bass.

I agree with the others, since you have a larger room it will be harder to fill the room with the low bass. Try moving the speakers closer to the back and side walls if possible.

Not likely the problem, but worth mentioning... make sure the M3s are in fact wired in phase with each other.

I've had that issue, and it's bloody obvious that there's a problem when you do. Worth looking into.

The 1st thing I checked was that they were wired correctly as I've been known to make mistakes. The speakers have been moved closer to the rear wall and it made a significant difference.

I really think the biggest problem was my expectations. I've heard so many great things about these speakers that I figured they would be perfect in every way. There is plenty of time for me listen and figure out if the Axioms are for me.

D

Are they sitting on stands?

They are not on stands. They are sitting on a BDI A/V cabinet that is 23" off the ground. It actually keeps the tweeters about ear level in my normal listening position. While stands might give me better performance, my wife has exercised her veto power on the issue. This adds to the difficulty of moving the speakers around to a better location.

D

If they are enclosed in the A/V cabinet, you will suffer some loss in performance. Try isolating them from the cabinet surface with some raisers. Also, try to bring the front of the speaker to the front of the cabinet to minimize diffraction effects.

Are the M3's isolated from the cabinet? I found the bass improved significantly for my M22's once I put little rubber feet on the bottom of them.

Just wondering on what your thoughts are for the Era's versus the M3's? Are they as detailed, more detailed or is it just the better bass that you prefer. Maybe an off the cuff review would be in order here. I for one am interested, I would bet others would like to hear your thoughts comparing the 2 as well.

My speakers are on top of the cabinet. The top is 23" off the ground. It is designed for a flat panel monitor.

The Era 4's are very impressive but are also $600 vs $330. As far as detail, I think both are very similar. The bass response is what sets them apart. The speaker is tiny but sounds huge. The only thing I didn't like was the size, almost too small. They looked odd sitting next to my TV.

One other issue I've heard with the Era's is that they need a solid amp to push them. My Cambridge Audio amp is 60 watts with a 8 ohm load and worked well. I'm trying to get a set of the Era 5 which is a little bigger than the 4 and might be more what I'm looking for. At $900, I'd hope they'd blow me away.

The bottom line is that I think the Era 4 sounded a little bit better than the M3 but I'm not purchasing them just yet. The price of the M3 is so good that I might deal with a little less bass. I can always add a sub down the road.

D

Put the money you'd be saving with buying M3s towards a sub.

Strat, welcome. As the graphs which Rich Goldstein linked illustrate, it could reasonably be argued that the M3s have slightly better bass response than the Era D4s, aside from the effect of the even more pronounced upper-bass boost which the Era has around 100-200Hz. This gives an impression of better bass, both for bass fundamentals in that range and the upper harmonics of weak lower bass notes being louder lending an impression of lower extension than actually exists(a well-known effect which makers of small speakers often employ).

As was already suggested, a little more room reinforcement can be had by placement 3-4" from the wall behind, which is still enough "breathing room" for the ports. Generally, with room reinforcement speakers such as the M3 and M22 will have good response down to at least the 50Hz area and users(including me)find that reasonably adequate for most music(pipe organs excluded)even without a sub. Of course, as was said, a sub helps even on music.

I wonder if the v2 has less bass emphasis than the earlier legendary SE and previous models of the M3...?

The newer v2 graphs shows the bass at about the same level or just a bit below the upper mids, while the earlier NRC published graphs through SoundStage show the bass to be about 2db higher.

It could be that the overall response is flatter than the older M3s, but that the bass is a solid but silly 2 to 3 db less.

Maybe what the OP needs is a set of older M3TiSEs.

.....sorry....mine ain't for sale.

I might be losing my mind, but I think the M3's are starting to sound better. They've been moved around a bit and the bass is now satisfying.

I wanted to thank everyone for the help.

D

Your Brain is breaking in.

Peter,

Your durn lucky you put that in thar.

Could break-in theoretically happen with speakers made from unconventional materials? Is it known for a fact that no material has a gradual break-in period? Just curious.

I'm not sure what you mean by "unconventional materials". A traditional electromechanical speaker takes less than a minute to break in initially. During this period, the spider compliance changes. After that, it takes a few seconds of play each time you use it to break in again. Your ears would never notice the difference. I do believe however that the human auditory system becomes accustomed to the sound and the more you listen, the more details you will hear.

I own a pair of M3's that are used in a large basement. Up until recently, I was powering them with a Denon DRA-685 receiver. I love the M3's, but I do feel that in a large room (at lower volume levels) they need a bass boost. The Denon receiver has a "loudness" button which boosts the bass at lower listening levels. Some audiophiles will "cringe" at the thought of using the "loudness" feature, but I found it added immensley to the sound of the M3's in a large listening area. If you don't have a loudness feature, have you tried increasing the bass with the tone controls? Again, some will say you should always listen with the tone controls flat. I would try it and see how it sounds. My speakers are currently about 24" from the back wall. Yes, moving them closer to the wall gives them more bass, but at the expense of better imaging and soundstage. I'd play with the tone controls and see if that helps. Also, do you get better bass response when you turn up the volume, or is it lacking at all volume levels? Good luck.

Instead of messing with tone/loudness controls, you would be much better off treating your room with acoustic bass traps and panels. Second only to proper position.

Hi,

RobH raises an important point on which I've commented previously--that our hearing sensitivity to low bass at lower volume levels diminishes very rapidly, much faster than our response to midrange and high frequencies.

It's perfectly legitimate to at least try the bass control on your amplifier to see what 3 dB or 5 dB bass boost will do to your M3's bass output. Depending on the "hinge" point of the bass control circuit, it may provide an enjoyable lift in deep bass output without any significant coloration of upper bass such as male vocals.

The idea of never touching tone controls grew out of a misguided British notion that tone controls add distortion to the audio signal. Well designed ones do not, unless you consider a deviation away from flat frequency response a "distortion". And here's the irony: some of the earliest really good tone control circuits were designed by a British engineer, Peter Baxandall.

The M2s, M3s, and M22s will accept 3 to 6 dB of bass boost with ease, and, depending on the room and setup, it may nicely compensate for any perceived bass losses. Older stereo intergrated amplifiers and receivers almost always had a "Loudness" control in addition to the volume control. The Loudness control automatically boosted bass by increasing amounts to compensate for human hearing's loss of bass sensitivity at lower listening volumes.

Regards,

I have some exotic dark matter speaker drivers which definitely took time to break in.