Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo Still waffling...

So, I'm sure the paradigm/axiom comparo's get beaten to death here, but I finally got a chance to listen to some speakers and I'd like to talk about my impressions, and what I might expect with axioms. If you're totally sick of the discussion, I apologize in advance.

No audio shops in my small town, so I found a Paradigm dealer near Columbus, OH about an hour away and made a trip. I was listening to bookshelves, both because of price, and because my wife is NOT having large speakers in our smallish living room. (probably around 10x15 with 9' ceilings) There's another 8 feet of length or so behind the sitting area, but it's vaguely divided by some architectural detail and we use that part as more of an entryway.

So, I listened to the Atom's, the Mini's, and the Titans. First impressions were positive in a general sense. The Atoms played fairly clear and loud, but weren't very smooth through the crosover frequencies and felt a little muddled in the lower mids. I suspected a slight artificial bump to make them sound warmer was partially at fault. I quickly moved on though, because I wasn't really shopping for bookshelves that small.

The Mini's at $479/pr. (US) sounded very pleasing to me. They reminded me a little bit of some B&W DM601 S3's I had demoed a year ago, but with much less low frequency extension, and slightly more detail. In fact, despite the published frequency response down to 43Hz, I don't think was hearing much of anything below around 90. It was like they weren't even trying. That's not an awful thing necessarily, because I'm going to be using a sub, but it contributed to a vaguely thin sound, despite the smoothness of the crossover. I played some heavier music on them (Pillar: The Reckoning, tracks 2 and I think 6?), and the kick drum was just barely percievable. Thankfully, most hard rock is mixed for some "click" in the kick drum track because the frequency ranges that fill out the kick sound can be crowded in a hard rock recording.

They got loud fairly easily on the marantz integrated amp they were connectd to, but when I started to crank it up a bit (not party volumes here, just sing-out-loud with it volumes) I could sense the woofer struggling, and some of those low-mid to midbass frequencies I mentioned above began to jumble together. I didn't really push them to audible distortion, but I suspect it wasn't terribly far off.

What I liked: There were good dynamics for a two-way bookshelf. I don't so much mean volume, but they didn't compresss the program material. The guitars and vocals leapt out at me during the heavier stuff and fell back into the sound stage during quieter passages. The acoustic half of the Foo Fighter's "In Your Honor" album has a lot of plucked acoustic guitar and soft vocals, and they reproduced them with flying colors. Lots of detail and separation, while sounding reasonably accurate and not tilted too far forward so as to fake it. (ahemcoughbose..) Coldplay's A Rush of Blood to the Head can really expose crossover problems on a bookshelf, and I was pleased there as well. Quite smooth for the price.

What I didn't like: A tad thin sounding, and disappointing LFE even for the size of the box. I'd have to cross over the sub higher than I'd prefer. Also I don't think they can play all that loud. The woofer didn't appear to be capable of much excursion and began to complain at higher volumes.

I dindn't really like the Titans. Not that much better low frequency response, (actually quite disappointing for their size) and there were tons of problems at the crossover frequnecies.

I also listened to a pair of Klipsch RB-61's, and I didn't care for them either. I didn't find them bright, however. The horns sounded unnatural for music. I am familiar with the sonic properties of compression drivers as I have a lot of experience with pro audio and live sound, so I was expecting a slightly forward sound with big dynamics that didn't really sound great until you start to crank it up. What I heard was a frequency response manipulated to be flatter, while still retaining the wide dispersion angles of a horn. It just came off a little wierd. Maybe it would work for home theater, but I'm 75% interested in music here, so I didn't pursue it further. We also hooked in a pdr-10 at this point. It was just ok. More on that later.

The next thing was interesting. The sales guy tells me, subs are a dime a dozen, so I should forget the sub and spend all my money on better fronts, and maybe save up for a sub later on. He persuaded me to listen to a pair of Studio 20's. We got them set up, and started playing the same program material. They were noticeably warmer and fuller than any of the monitor series. The tweeter wasn't any more detailed, but it was smoother at the top, and would be less fatiguing. Disk 2, track 1 of Foo Fighters In Your Honor was impressive, with vocals sounding just a smidge more natural and "real." The lower tones were now audible, but I still don't think they went down to their advertised frequency. At least not at less than -6db. I'm thinking it dropped below what I could detect during full range listening at around 60hz. Asking for lower is probably unrealistic in a bookshelf, and that's fine. I'm just noting what I heard. I was busy thinking "these are clearly better, but not $500 better, and there's no way I'm happy with these without a sub." But then they surprised me. I popped in the Pillar album to see what they could do with the more violent stuff, and I was immediately disappointed. They sounded compressed and flat. (a very transparent compression, mind you, but squashed nonetheless. maybe better described as a leveling amplifier than a compressor as the antagonist) Instead of coming to life, the track stayed back in the soundstage like a movie soundtrack that has been squashed so as to not crowd the vocals. I turned them up pretty loud, which they accomodated without complaint, but it just sounded louder. I never found that magical place where you stop listening to background music, and you're at the concert. (this can happen at much lower than concert volume levels if you're in a small room)

Maybe the tweets were too well behaved for me. Maybe I really want a sound more forward than accurate. I'm not sure that's the case though. I thought they reproduced everything beautifully individually at low volume levels, and was impressed by the realism. I just kept feeling like they sounded compressed and flattened. I should note here that they were not connected to the same electronics as the Monitor series I listened to previously, but it was actually much higher end electronics. (still marantz though) The salesman indicated that it contributed a small amount to the extra warmth. Still, I was perplexed.

I should also note that I am much more familiar with PA gear than with high end home audio. I've heard $3500 pa cabinets, $4000 amps, and half million dollar systems, but I'd never listened to a $k bookshelf before, so maybe my expectations are skewed. I want great sound to put me there; to simulate as accurately as possible the band playing the music - NOT to simulate as well as possible the way an engineer mixed it. That's not even really what the engineer intends when it is mixed. I want the bass to kick me in the junk, and the screaming guitars to rip my face off. (quoted from a guitarist I worked with for a while) Do most audiophiles want everything to be really smooth and well behaved like soft jazz? Am I alone in wanting some hard edges when the music requests it? Are the Studio 20 v5's just not that great? I do have nice JL Audio XR series components in my car and I'm quite happy with them.

This is where you come in. I'd like to know what you think of my observations, and even more importantly, help me understand how any of these would compare to M3's or M22's. When people call the M3's laid back, do they refer to this squashed and compressed nature I noticed, or just that they aren't super crisp and bright? Are the M22's that way? Will the M3's compare favorably based on my desired traits to the $150 more expensive Mini Monitors?

Sorry for the novel of a post. I just wanted to discuss specifics finally rather than "which is better." Thanks for all your feedback.

I'm off for work, and for some reason I get errors when trying to post from there, so I'll be able to see responses but not reply. I'll be able to when I come home for lunch, though.

Check the hearing things thread and see if there is anyone in you area who can give you an audition.

Your waffles need some tasty Axiom syrup.



Well, a disc can only sound only as good as the mixing engineer makes it. A good speaker will be completely honest with you: if the mix sucks you'll know, and if it doesn't it should take you to audio nirvana. Both the Axiom M3s and the M22s easily do this. As for bass that kicks you in the junk, the M3s have a slight edge over the M22s in that department, but you really need a sub for a proper junk-kicking. (And they are not a dime-a-dozen if you avoid the kinds found at Best Buy or Circuit City.)

From what I can see, I think the M22s are the kind in-your-face, hold nothing back speaker you're looking for. Their flat response curve help them stay true to the source. If, on the other hand, you don't plan on adding a sub any time soon, the M3s may serve you better since they have a slight hump around 100Hz that help them sound fuller in the low end.

Really, though, you can't go wrong with either.

Woofersus. I think you are expecting too much from a small bookshelf. I liked the sound of the studio 20 exept that they sounded small.

Its a shame you didn't go one step further and listen to the Studio 40. They give a much bigger sound than the 20 and much more bass extension. I think the vocals may have been a little more forward and certainly more real.

From a review I read at audioholics, the M22 will be closer to the Studio 40 with less bass extension. They will definately give you a bigger sound than the studio 20.

I personally like what a sub adds to the sound of music and the M22 plus sub will give you much more bass extension than the Studio 40 for around the same price or maybe a little less.

Of couse, you can't go wrong with the M80...

Of course you're right, there are always limitations based on the recording. I just meant that I felt like the Studio 20's were flattening out some things that weren't meant to be flattened. It just didn't feel lively. I'm curious whether anybody else has heard them and can tell me what they thought. I want to know if axioms will give me better "jump up and slap you in the face" dynamics when I turn them up, without sounding like the treble is "hyped" or the upper mids are bumped for effect. The JL components in my car, for example, do a great job with dynamics, but can sound sibilant at times. I had to adjust the tweeter levels at the crossovers to counteract it.

I absolutely plan on adding a sub with anything I'm considering here. I was mostly marvelling that the salesman seemed to think that the Studio 20's with no sub had plenty of bass, because they most definitely did not. I never did go into detail about the sub, but he always adjusted the volume so you could barely tell it was there. Not in a seamless blending sort of way, but in a "now I can tell there's a kick drum but it sounds pretty anemic" kind of way. Maybe he just didn't care for bass. Now, I did pick up that the pdr-10 has more bloom than punch, and while it was fairly smooth and detailed, it didn't have the oomph I needed. I know he was downplaying subs a bit unfairly, but I was curious how good these bookshelves were that would cause me to not desire one, lol. I'm considering something from HSU or SVS. The VTF-2 mk3 is attractive because it gets me into a 12" driver just at the bleeding edge of my price range. Of course I'm willing to consider used, but I haven't seen many deals out there that would top what's available direct from those two. Not a lot of HSU or SVS on ebay. Axiom's either for that matter, except for the axiom ebay store, which is the same price as the website.

I'm a touch concerned about the size of even the M22's to be honest. 19" tall right? My wife could care less about audio, and getting any electronics into the living room can be a battle. (I know, I know, sell the wife) I would be setting M3's on some existing furniture that happens to be about the right height and at symmetrical locations to the tv. M22's would likely require stands. The anticipated unobtrusiveness would be hampered. Still, if I wouldn't be happy with M3's I might try to make the M22's work.

Well, I expected them to sound small. I guess what surprised me is that, sans bass extension, I thought the mini monitors sounded bigger. The mini's certainly had more faults to pick at, but they just came out of the box towards me instead of back into the room if that makes any sense. They were more fun. I guess if you guys are saying that to get the qualities I liked so much in the minis's I should go with M22's then that answers a lot of my questions. I don't want something that won't sound full, but I don't need low bass from it. I'm adding a sub.

Of course I'd just love a pair of M80's, but both price and WAF prevent that. Maybe down the road when I've got a dedicated room...

Sorry, the M80 thing was ment as a bit of a joke because they are getting so much play on this site lately. I am lucky enough not to have WAF issues.

M22+ sub gives you some pretty big sound. Enough to compete with a floorstander like the M60. Maybe you can do some barter with the SO. Is there something she really wants?

I would pair the EP350v3 with the M22s for an outstanding combination. this sub blends so nicely with Axioms products and still has good punch to it.

hrm... I remember thinking the ep350v3 was well over $600. That's definitely too much for me.