Hi Whip, Axiomman, JohnK and all,
I will tell you that I have both the M22v3s and M80v2s operating with an EP500 sub in a living room that's about 20 x 13 x 9 ft (L, W, H) with the bookshelf 22s and M80s on an A/B switcher. I think the Miller & Kreisel theory is perhaps based on the fact that because bookshelf speakers are small and also have narrower front baffles (hence fewer interference effects from the cabinetry), they can be positioned for an ideal soundstage more easily than can large floorstanding speakers.
That's certainly true in my setup: the M80s are NOT ideally positioned, whereas the M22s are. Consequently I'm able to achieve a wider more spacious soundstage with the M22v3s than with the M80s. Now, there is another factor here as well. I find the M22v3s just an itsy-bitsy bit smoother than the M80v2s on well-recorded female vocals, both pop and operatic, and on brass instruments. We're talking nuances here, but they're audible with critical listening. I suspect that if I replaced the M80v2s with a v3 pair, which are more linear and smoother through the mids than the v2, those differences would disappear.
Yes, the M80s are a bit "fuller" in the upper bass with certain music than the M22s (both are crossed over at 80 Hz to the EP500), but I don't find any audible sacrifices watching movies with the M22s and the sub (and QS8s) or listening to music in 5.1 (I rarely listen to music in 2-channel stereo, except for testing).
In a much larger room than mine with ideal setup, a pair of M80s can sound spectacularly good. However with the compromises inherent in setups in many smallish living rooms, the sat/sub setup with very good bookshelf speakers and a sub can yield wonderfully fine reproduction with movies or music.
Regards,
Alan
