ajb,
fhw has it right.
The M40 was made prior to the M22, hence the 'purpose' of the M40 is the chicken before the egg kind of thing.
Both the M40 and M50 have been recommended to many people who have asked for the Axiom sound in a tower but a little less bright in the tweeter (hence no M60 or M80 would be desired).
They do fill a role quite nicely i would think.
As for the comparisons being made between the M3 and M40 tower, these are not apples to apples. Take note that you want to have an M22 in a tower version, but you want to keep the 'slim' tower yet the M40 (tower version of the M3 as you say) has larger box dimensions (width and length) over the M3.
If the M40 were the exact tower version of the M3 then, why would its dimensions be larger?
As in my previous post, a slim tower design tends to sound thin, for lack of a better word. If you have the chance to compare a Totem Acoustics speaker to the Axioms, you may hear what i have heard (or perhaps not). Of course the best test of keeping such a slim design would be to take an M40 speaker and pair it up against the M3 which had been modified ONLY by giving it more height to its dimensions.
My guess is that the sound from the M40 would be more full, more robust than the modified M3.
Hence, keeping the M22 configuration for a tower would be interesting, however i think the best sound would probably come from increasing the tower dimensions along with it.
You wanted opinions, that is mine.
