I want new fronts but unsure which ones..by the time I buy the stands for the m22 its almost the price of the 50's..whats the main difference between the 2. Im using 15 yrs old Panasonics now with a large bass,a tweeter and midrange in it. I also have a VP100 center and QS4 sides and a yamaha sub..in about a 400sq ft room..thanks for your advice.Tom

It is my understanding that the m22's are much more detailed than the m50's. I think the general opinion from most board members is to stick with the m60's or m80's when buying towers. I know several people on here really love the m22's.

However, with the m22 you will want to consider a sub such as an ep350.

if you order from the factory outlet you can save an extra 10% too, so maybe that would help you if you decided to go with the m60's instead.

Hmmm..not sure what you mean by more detailed..I dont think I could swing the 60's but maybe the 50's.

Consider going thru the factory outlet, this brings the price of the M60s closer to the 50s (unless you use the outlet on the 50s also). I agree, about the stands, this goes for many manufacturers out there...buying smaller speakers in an effort to save doesn't really make too much sense if you have to buy stands as well, and the footprint remains the same.

What do I gain from the 60's over the 50's and the 50's over the m22..thanks,Tom

Hi OldLamps,

The bulk of musical instrument harmonic content lies in the midrange, where, incidentally, human hearing is also the most sensitive. Speakers like the M22s that have lots of midrange detail means you'll hear the pluck of acoustic guitar strings, the sibilants of singers' "sss" and "ttt" sounds (those can be exaggerated if the original CD has been goosed in the mids for airplay)---more detailed speakers also tend to have a greater sense of spaciousness with live or hall recordings.

The M50s are very pleasant but in that midrange area are slightly softer (duller) than the M22s. If you listen to cymbals on an M22 and switch to the M50, the cymbals are a bit less clear. But these subtle differences are really only easily noticeable on instantaneous A/B comparisons with a switcher.

The virtues of using a satellite "bookshelf" size speaker with a subwoofer include easier placement. You can actually put them on a shelf, close to the wall behind. You can even wall-mount them if you wish. With floorstanding speakers, sometimes putting them too close to a wall or corner will result in exaggerated or boomy bass. Since bookshelf size speakers don't have much bass response, that isn't a problem. The subwoofer reproduces the deep bass.

Regards,
Alan

Thanks for the info..will the m22 reproduce bass at all or will it be the all with the sub,Tom

They'll reproduce bass down to 60Hz, according to specs, but you'll probably want the sub to do the work below 80Hz or so.

Interesting....theres alot of info here and im a little ignorant on all the sound terms. Since my speakers will be near a wall im thinking that the M22 with my current sub will be fine. I sit approx 8-10' away from them so maybe the towers will be to overwelming

Nah, I've used M50s and M80s that close without issue. It's all a matter of where you set the volume knob.

I went with the M50's (backed-up by the EP-500 sub) and love it. With my budget tight, it won over the M22's in my case because with 3 kids <=5yrs old, I was afraid of having "top-heavy" stand mounted speakers. Plus, I didn't really have a set-up for placing speakers on bookshelves.
Maybe someday I'll join the M80 club, but for now I'm very pleased with the output and the warmth of my system in my ~1300ft3 room.

I use the stand argument to talk myself out of M22s and into M60s. Then I went and bought M80s.

Ill keep saving and try for the 50 or 60's.I know my receiver can only go as low as 6 ohms..Pioneer vsx1018, so the 80's are out.

If you are going to keep saving, I would go for the 60s. They really are an excellent speaker.

Hello

I own a set of 50's and their great. Don't be put off by what others say. Most have never listened to the 50’s and yet still have an opinion of them, doesn’t make sense.
I’ve mentioned in other posts that I have never heard the 60’s, but I think it’s safe to assume their excellent. My contention is this; I would wager the 50’s don’t sound that much different than the 60’s.
Your money and your choice, either way, Enjoy!!

Many that HAVE heard both the 50's and 60's, including Axiom company employees, have noted on numerous occasions that the 60's are more detailed with better bass extension by design, and the 50's have more of a laid back sound.

Whatever happened to a M70

"But these subtle differences are really only easily noticeable on instantaneous A/B comparisons with a switcher."

So how does this "subtle difference" become important if the difference is so understated that one can’t make a distinction under normal listening conditions?

You’re welcome to your opinion, as is everyone else. As far as the extra bass extension you refer to, it’s 2 Hz, not a great deal.

Anything has to be better than what Im using..im in a small room..probably 14 x 20 or so, I guess I probably wouldny notice the difference between them

Of course, at this point it may come down to personality. You may be the type to get the 50s and say "Wow, these are awesome!" and live happily ever after. Or you may be more neurotic and say "Wow, these are awesome! I wonder how much better the 60s/80s would be..."




I really wish I was in the first category.

haha,,you gotten all!

I'm in the first category.

I went with the 50s mainly for two reasons; I have a small living room and thought that the 60s would be too much, and I was used to listening to Cerwin-Vegas so I don't mind the "laid back" sound.

I got an SVS PB-10 subwoofer to go along with the Axiom 50s and hope to live happily ever after.

It is hard to say withought having listened to both as to how subtle the difference is. Subtle is a very relative term.

The M50 is the only speaker I did not audition when at Axiom, so I can't even tell you what difference I perceived. Perhaps most of my aversion to the M50 comes from listening to the Paradigm Monitor 7 vs anything in the Studio line. There was a BIG difference there and I did not like the 'laid back' (read muffled) sound of the Monitor 7.

I personally like to hear the string plucks and the details of a bass string vibration. That addition of texture is the difference between sounds good and sound real. It is what makes the speaker start to sound transparent: disappear so that you hear music from a band, not speakers. That starts to come through in the M60 and comes through in spades on the M80. I do not know how much of it comes through on the M50.

That is one of the differences I noticed between the M60 and M22. The upper end on the M22 was more transparent. I would imagine the difference would be more pronounced between the M22 and M50.

The down side of all this detail is that poor recordings will sound noticably poor. I notice it with two of my favourite recordings: Yes, Close To the Edge and Yes, Fragile.

I do not know if my ramblings are confusing or helping at this point so I'll stop.

Ramble on....I think after all the advice and such Ill give up on the M22 and at least go with a floor speaker..probably the M60

This is why this forum is dangerous... you end up buying way more than you thought!

I've tried to find the old comparison Peter, Adam and I did between the 50s and 22s, but I've had no luck with either search mechanism--I suspect the posts simply aren't in the system any longer. In short, they're both great speakers. The M50s definitely have a fatter sound, but the M22s have better imaging. Happily, I have the M80s now (as well as 22s and 50s), which combine the nice fat sound with incredible imaging and accuracy.

sorry, there we go again...

You are right..in my head Ive bought every speaker today..do you know of anyone with a set of used stands for my QS4's.Tom

Alan, I completely agree. I don't really have room for floorstanders, and my wife would probably find them offensive. However, my new Usher bookshelf speakers are quite small, and blend nicely into the background. I would have bought M3s but the Aussie dollar took a dive and they became too expensive

I'm very pleased with the Ushers though.

As for bass, I might look for a small sub some time, and the EP125 is certainly on my list. Too much bass gives my wife a headache though.

I've got NOTHING to say!

Too busy with your nose pressed up against the front window?

lol

Youve made some excellent points !!!!

Don’t give up on the M22s yet. In my opinion when matched with a subwoofer they rival the M80s matched with a subwoofer the M22s are that good. I’ve compared them both paired with a subwoofers and found that the only thing the M80+sub had over the M22+sub was more impact/punch around the 100Hz to 200Hz range. I only noticed this with bass heavy music (most of which I don‘t like), and some scenes in action movies when played loud. Whereas the M22s actually seemed a little more accurate sounding and also had better imaging.

I went through the same rationalization as below in choosing to upgrade from the M22s to the M80s for my initial “mains” purchase.





However, if I had it to do over again I wouldn’t hesitate to buy the M22s+sub over the M80s+sub for the 12x20 listening area I had in a 20x20 room. And if I ever needed the use of tower speakers up front (larger room, more punch) I would buy the towers and move the M22s to the back as rears in a 7.1 setup or just use them elsewhere as outstanding bookshelf speakers.

Unless you plan to listen to 2 channel music w/o a subwoofer or intend to use a lower than normal 80Hz crossover with your mains then the M22s will give you much more “bang-for-your-buck.” If you always plan on using a subwoofer, even for music, crossed over at 80Hz then IMHO your pretty much just turning your tower speakers into large overpriced bookshelf speakers.

Build or buy inexpensive stands locally and the M22s become even more cost effective. Nothing against tower speakers I own 3 M80s but most people, probably me too, just don’t need towers and would be better served by getting high quality bookshelf speakers and a subwoofer or two.

So I was going to cross off the sub but now I should just cross off the M80's.

Up until now my recent previous posts were half in jest. Those are some strong statements above. Starting from the bottom up, I was originally planning on listening to music without a sub. I mentioned about 2 weeks ago how I had a perception that a sub added too much bass and that a good full range speaker was suppose to have a more "natural" bass. (or at least that was the thinking 25 years ago)

Still going from the bottom up, the last thing I want to say is "if I had to do it all over again". That is the reason why I torture myself on these forums all day. (well not ALL day) The more I'm on the forums the more I second guess myself. I've upped my budget so many times I can't keep track. oldlamps you're NOT alone!

And last but not least: the M22's with a sub "rivals" the M80's with a sub. My room layout is pretty lousy. The M80's are very deep. The speaker on the left will have concern at being too close to the wall. The speaker on the right will almost be out in a walkway. Didn't think much about bookshelves. I went from thinking about the Orb speaker to full blown towers. Figuring in the footprint and expense of stands just seemed to make better sense to go for the towers. Not I'm not so sure.

One of the good (or bad depending on how you look at it) things about the wait time from the Outlet Store is the time you have to iron everything out.

For the most part I do not beat myself up on this one, but I somethimes wonder.

I still remember differences between the M22 and the M80. The most striking one was how much more forward the M22 was. That really surprised me. I do not see it as a negative, just something I was not expecting.

I think that the M80, with its dual tweeters, had a little more detail than the M22. Memory is a funny thing though. I would love to have the opportunity to do level matched a/b comparisons again.

I never thought of looking locally for less expensive stands and the stand was the biggest thing that pushed me to look at floor standers. If I was not in an apartment, it would have been easy for me to build my own stands, but the inconvenience of finding space for such a project eliminated it from available options.

All that said, I still really like all 3 speakers, so no matter which you choose you are not really loosing.

The stands for the M22 can be had for 50.00 its the ones for the QS4 that gets me..thats a new speaker price..the wife dosent want them on the walls so I need the stands..just seems like thats a silly price for something like that

Someone once posted pictures of some nice DIY stands for QS4/8s but I’ve never been able to find them again. Maybe I saw them on another forum. Anyway if your at all handy you can make some very nice ones real cheap assuming you already have some tools handy.


I found the opposite that the M22s had a little more detail at the 65dB to 75dB I usually listen at. Where the M80s dominated all the competition for me was when the volume was turned up. Only the M80s retained the detail while all other speakers I listened to had the lower frequencies start dominating.


No regrets here either as I would have upgraded to M80s when I bought a house anyway which was the deciding factor in just getting them upfront. I didn’t want to end up with a couple M22s sitting around if I didn’t want to use them as rears. However, now I know I would have been very happy having the M22s here in the apartment and even if I didn’t use them as rears would gladly use them anywhere else as mains. In fact they are my mains now in my temporary bedroom setup.



A subwoofer like a full range speaker will only play the bass that is available to it from the song being played it won’t add anything to the music unless you are running it hot (upping the volume on the sub) to get more bass.

There is an argument for having stereo sources for bass even though it’s generally considered to be non directional at 80Hz and below. However, I only think this “need” applies to a small group of people and if one is going to be this serious then I would why bother with towers, just get bookshelves + stereo subwoofers.

There’s a huge amount of information on the bookshelf + subwoofer vs tower debate on the internet which I won’t bother to repeat here. After comparing the M22+sub vs the M80 and the M80+sub it’s my opinion that for multi use systems (music, HT, gaming) most people 95%+ are better off with bookshelf + sub systems.


If you already have a subwoofer as part of your order I suggest you just add 2 M22s to what you already have ordered. The only way you will know which you prefer is to compare them yourself. Axiom estimates 30 USD/ pair of bookshelves and 60 USD/ pair of towers shipped back but you can call Axiom and they can tell you how much it should actually cost, a relatively small price to pay for peace of mind.

It seems to me that one of driving factors in the sat+sub v. tower debate is the quality of the sub and size of the sat. Integration is the key. Assuming a prefect roll off from the sat to the sub, it should sound better as the sub goes lower than the tower. That takes quality at both ends, and that aint cheap. But out of the theoretical and into reality, I think towers are a much safer bet on music because the tower is designed to be intergraded fully down to the bottom of the tower's range. Good speakers should do that well. Sat+sub makes a complicated formula that changes in each home. HT, you can easily go either way. Good luck figuring out what range was missing in the two second sound blurb that bounced through that range in a movie score.

A poor subwoofer integrated with tower speakers won’t sound good either. So assuming your buying a good subwoofer no matter what, then you can get likely get awesome sounding bookshelf speakers for the same price you could get good sounding towers.



One of the assumptions I made was that the bookshelf+sub combo was based on a multi-purpose system. I agree that adding yet another crossover to the mix complicates things but even for music an integrated sub+bookshelf system can often outdo towers in many if not most untreated rooms do to more flexible placement options allowing the bookshelves to be best placed for imaging and the subwoofer for flatter bass response.

Again there is a valid if not somewhat esoteric argument for stereo bass. But without using treatments and something like a BFD most people would likely get better results by using multiple subwoofer placement to even out the bass in their room while using bookshelf speakers for their often better spaciousness and sound imaging potential rather than using towers or stereo subwoofers.



Assuming your using a subwoofer for HT as most people do then you still have the same potential for missing information at the crossover to the subwoofer with towers as you do with a bookshelf speakers. The tower does give you the option to use a lower crossover and push any potential missing information lower but it’s still missing, plus bass room resonance issues start becoming more complicated when playing tower full range.

Clearly there is no one correct answer but for most people (maybe not be those of us who hang out on audio forums) buying tower speakers is likely a waste of money, and due to placement constraints and costs may not sound as good as a bookshelf + subwoofer solution.

I don't disagree with any of that. I guess my point is simply that sub+sat takes more work to sound good, where a tower is, normally, going to sound pretty good out the box. But, as you say, the lower you can push the crossover point the better. A sub+sat setup has a high (relative) cross over point, as compared to a good tower. I think (not an acoustician but I slept at a Holiday Inn Express) that holes, peaks, etc at 30 or 40hz are harder to detect than those same anomalies at 80 or 120hz. I think that is why I hear so many bad sub-sat setups. The integration of the two is more easily screwed up.

But yes, with work sub+sat can sound better than a tower of equal quality parts, no doubt. I'm surprised we have not seen the birth of satellite mids as well. Place the highs where needed and aimed as needed, same for mids, same for bass. It is done in car audio every day, and the results in SQ would blow many minds in the home audiophile world. But home P-EQ and crossover functions are drastically price limited compared to that market so I don't expect my idea to take flight soon.

It would certainly be hard to double blind test that; if you're using the same sub, you'd have to be adjusting the crossover between the speaker changes. And audio memory is short.

That would be interesting, Alan told me that the M22/sub has a very similar sound to the M80/sub. They should in fact, because they use the same drivers and tweeters, presumably without the sub though there would be a greater difference as the M80 also has what? dual 6.5 woofers?

The M80s have an extra tweeter, extra dual 6.5" woofers, and a huge amount of additional cabinet volume. Plus 2 extra ports.

Yeah, I meant to mention the cabinet size too...although I've heard some speakers from other makers with comparatively huge cabinets (4ft high!) that did not go very deep at all.(I know that's not the case with the M80s though).

Spoke with Brent at Axiom today and I believe he stated that the "dynamics" could be dramatically different. He specifically mentioned the cabinet size havind a lot to do with dynamics and the extra tweeter adding to detail. He felt the M22/sub is an excellent combo but (and I would like to make this statement precise but I will not doubt fail) (maybe I'll just leave it as "but" so that I don't misquote.)

Would be nice if anyone from Axiom ever visits any of my questions. I feel left out and I am very sensitive!

Out of curiosity I went back to review my original comments on the M22 vs M80 on the day that I did the Axiom Audition.


Here is what I wrote:

Next up, M22 +ep 400 sub vs M80. We started the sub of low, turned it lower, and then turned it to minimum.

Though the winner here was very clear, this was an interesting listen. There was a BIG difference between the vocals on the two. With the M22 and sub, the vocals jumped forward (literally) but were not as clear. ELP track 4 was a different story. The bass REALLY opened up with the M22 + sub. Flipping back and forth was cool. Flip to the M80s, the vocals and upper end open up, flip back, the bass really opened up. What a difference!

M80 definitely wins.

So there you have it Bob. I sure heard a difference between the M80 and M22+ sub. This was a proper a/b comparison as we made sure tha the two systems were volume matched before comparing. I just kept flipping the selector between the A and B channel.

I wonder if you would notice the 'opening up' of the M80s if you were stopping the music to swap speakers.

So basically it would appear that the M22/sub would be a consideration mainly for HT over music, the M80s (no sub) would be the best for detailed music and M80+sub the best of both worlds. Keeping in mind of course that these comparisons are done within the 'family' of Axiom speakers, so that does not mean that the M22/sub combo wouldn't outperform many other brands, just not it's big brother (M80)!!

If you believe me that would be a logical conclusion. Others seem to view the comparison differently.

I suspect that it would be much harder to identify differences between the two setups if you had to move between two rooms to listen to each one.

I really need to go back to Axiom to try this again.

Well I think Fred just about settles it then. I can't go against what he says, can I?

I hear ya Fred!!

Hey Adrian,
When are you making the trip over there?

I'm gonna try for a weekend trip, weather permitting, Fredster may be coming along to, to help me spend more money!! he's about an hours drive from me and we're about 3 hrs south of Dwight. I told Fred that Ian had a free nudie-girl 'Axiom' inscribed pen waiting for him.

Wish I could go. I'd love to have an opportunity to get a free nudie-girl 'Axiom' inscribed pen.

This could be added to the online store...hmmm...Ian, if your reading, have your people contact my people....

Hey oldlamps, for what its worth, I've had M50's for a few years and love the sound.

I experience complete 'disappearing' speakers and killer soundstage all the time with quality recordings-- even more so with SACD and DVD-Audio.

I have them with a SVS Ultra 13 sub, and cross at 80Hz. Audyssey thinks they should be crossed at 40 or 60, but I think its a bit more natural sounding with 80Hz.

Who knows, maybe someday I'll decide to give my M50's to a needy person, and get M60's or M80's, but so far I've not had any urge whatsoever to want something new. I love the sound, and am extremely happy with them compared to all my friends' much more "expensive" brand speakers.

Well since my orignal question Ive got alot of good info here..I will mainly be listening to HT so right now today, today at this particular moment (it will change again) Im considering the M22 + Sub set up. For the money seems Ill get more out of this than getting the more expensive set up.
Tom

Taht does give you more ease in upgrading later. Hard to move M80 to a bookshelf in another room. Then again...

They will stay where I put them as I have a modular rancher and the wife was so kind to give me my own(I share) family room..since Im only about 10' from the front speakers..I think I will go with the M22..I cant see where spending the big bucks will make a difference here.

I'm sure whichever choice you make, you'll be happy with either. Both of these speakers are highly rated. The M80s, I'm sure would still work for you even in a small room at reasonable volume. Just don't crank'er up too much unless you want a Kim Jong Il hairstyle!!

You will love the M22 speakers. I have a pair and an inexpensive yamaha sub. The combo sounds great. I listen to all kinds of music but mostly trashy heavy metal. I have a Yamaha RX-V2700 reciever and these M22 speakers take a beating. Well, you can't call it a beating cause they have no trouble playing the music at very loud volumes. The detail is incredible. My ears are the bottle neck in how loud and clear they can play.

I am glad we were able to help you figure it out with all out babbling. It can be very confusing. I am sure you will be very happy with the M22+ sub combination.

I don't know how you were able to figure out anything. All these guys do is confuse me.

Just kidding. Brent assured me that the M22 and a sub is a great set-up!

This thread made me think hard about what I wanted and how much I was getting for my $$. I was also considering the M22's and M50's. In the end I want M80's but I also want a Ferrari, a beach house on Virgin Gorda and private chef. The M22's seem like a great deal for mains.

Thanks for the help guys!