http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeakerreviews/303/index6.html
The level mismatch between the midrange diaphragm and the ribbon tweeter is still evident, but I wonder how this will manifest itself at a normal listening distance. (Circumstances dictate that I use a 50" microphone distance for my acoustic measurements.) The logistics of the magazine's relocation to New York meant that I could not perform in-room measurements in BD's listening environment, but I suspect that the MG3.6/R's behavior will be better behaved in a room.
Then the graph you quoted follows this statement and not in a anechoic chamber.
I am not bashing any brand. I love experimenting with diferent type of speakers over the years including Axioms. But I find it ironic the people who do own Axioms are bias themselves and that they bash other brands too.
For instance the comment on the Maggies (and I don't own one now so I really dont care) that the frequency response for the Maggies is not flat in a anechoic chamber proving to you guys that Axioms is superior but the Maggies are not because it is not flat. But then a Axiom owner on this site actually recorded as in home response and it doesn't come out as flat as the anechoic results.
In the end it is really how the speakers perform in your environment. Graphs and measurements are a great start but not the means to say that it brand A is better than brand B because of frequency response charts.
