8964 Members
11 Forums
22102 Topics
390676 Posts
Max Online: 378 @ 02/24/13 04:33 PM
|
|
|
#119991 - 12/10/05 02:25 PM
M50s?!
|
shareholder in the making
Registered: 05/03/03
Posts: 17375
Loc: NoVA
|
Anyone notice that on the new manuals page, the M50s are conspicuous by their absence? Does this mean (gasp!) the end?!
_________________________
DON'T... call me stupid!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#119993 - 12/10/05 03:35 PM
Re: M50s?!
|
shareholder in the making
Registered: 05/03/03
Posts: 17375
Loc: NoVA
|
Yeah, they're still listed, but it was little hints like this that let us know the M40s were going away.
_________________________
DON'T... call me stupid!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#119997 - 12/11/05 09:32 AM
Re: M50s?!
|
aficionado
Registered: 07/13/04
Posts: 828
Loc: Newburgh, NY
|
Though if they were considering getting rid of m3's why would they bother making wm3's?
_________________________
------------------------------------------------ Leave the gun, Take the canolis.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#119998 - 12/11/05 09:46 AM
Re: M50s?!
|
connoisseur
Registered: 01/29/02
Posts: 3127
Loc: Toronto/New York/Dwight
|
Ken,
Relax. The M50 is not going to go away, nor is the M3ti. Both have lots of bass output because of the larger 6.5-inch woofer(s), and the M3ti in particular (and W3) is an ideal bookshelf speaker for those who want to listen in stereo without a subwoofer. The M3 has that little lower bass hump that makes it sound as though it has more bass output than it has any right to. But lots of non-subwoofer-listeners hear that hump and think it is "richer" or "warmer-sounding" than the rather leaner M2i or M22ti.
As to the M50, I haven't listened to it (sigh. . .) for a few years, but since it has two 6.5-inch woofers, I bet it has a little (or big?) hump way down. What do you think, as pres. of the M50 Club?
Regards,
_________________________
Alan Lofft, Axiom Resident Expert
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#120000 - 12/11/05 12:36 PM
Re: M50s?!
|
shareholder in the making
Registered: 05/03/03
Posts: 17375
Loc: NoVA
|
Well, there goes my conspiracy theory.  I've only directly compared the 50s and the 22s; there was significantly more bass from the 50s (surprise!), but the soundstaging on the 22s was better. Given that the 50s were poorly placed at the time, the most I can say is that the 22s are more flexible, not that the 50s have poor soundstaging. I'm not sure about the bass hump; I'm afraid I'm not a terribly scientific or precise listener. I'd be interested in hearing your perceptions, Alan.
_________________________
DON'T... call me stupid!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|