I am always wondering which one is better, bookshelf+subwoofer and floorstanding speakers. The common answer is depends. With low to medium volume in a small listening room, bookshelf+subwoofer could perform as good as the floorstanding. In a large room, especially when playing dynamic media, you are better off with the bigger boxes. Here we assume that you have the room treated for sound reflection/ absorption, enough amp power and same pre-amp/DAC/media source.
Years ago, I paired M22V4s with 80wpc NAD integrated amp. It sounded good but distortion prevent me to push higher the SPL. I was told that the amp was taxed. So I replaced it with 250wpc Bryston 4b ST and add one EP500. It sounds better at high volume but there are still times I feel harsh sound for certain music.
Few days ago I tested M3V4s. There were few findings that made me think how the different media impact the performance.
1. How come the big sound could come from the little pretty boxes? I could push the volume up without too much worry about the distortion. I could play vocal, jazz, blues, solo instrument and even pop music with deep bass without issues.
2. The bass is very noticeable even though it is not supposed be according to the specs. Then I realized that it was because the sound is so clean so the bass is clearly separated from the mid-range. Once you could clearly hear the drum and bass, I guess that mentally you feel the bass and are satisfied. This could explain why some viewers said that a sub is not necessary.
3. But, the similar issue still exist when the volume needs to be turned down to play certain music, like symphony or something very “busy”.
So the question is: why? Why the "crowd and busy" media, like symphony or action movies where multiple instruments/sound sources produce different sounds at the same, would push the speakers to the limit, especially in high volume? While at the same time “less crowd and busy” media have no issue.
