Well I can´t tell much about B&W and M3´s since I only have M22´s, QS8´s and just got my KEF Q300 yesterday. My initial considerations were B&W 685 and the M3´s for a 2.0 system. AFter reading some reviews online heard good stuff about the KEF Q300 having a slight better sound than the B&W. The thing is that the Q300 is not as that appealing to the eyes as the B&W you are considering. Looking at the pictures thought they weren´t really nice. After getting them on my home and setting up on the stands, which receive them for free (B&W STAV24), they really look nice. The sound is very similar to the M22´s ( just listened to 1 day, so can´t give you much info), but they have more bass. Taking in consideration you will be getting a sub if your speakers lack a bit of bass is not a issue. For 2 channel mode I do believe that the M22´s lack a bit of soundstage. If I were you I would be then considering getting the floorstanders. Well, this is my opinion only. Pretty sure other people will have different opinions and may give you a better advice though.
I would like floorstanders, but my wife is tired of seeing huge speakers on every floor of the house (RTia9's in basement HT/media room and JBL floor standers upstairs in bonus tv room). So my compromise is bookshelves on stands with a modern elegant look.
Korie, welcome. Yes, I certainly would recommend the M22s which I use, especially with the sub that you mentioned. It's puzzling why you comment about the appearance in comparison to the M3s, since the only significant difference would seem to be the height.
IMO the height of the M22's is what makes them awkward looking, especially on stands.
How do the M3 and M22's compare for sound imaging and soundfield? I want something that I can just sit and listen to and get a real 3d immersive feel to them too...
Am I asking for too much at this price point?
