I'll let you know next week!

What did you not like about the Infinity's? They seem like some exceptional performers at their price point. If you were not using a sub I can see where they would fall short though. The M3's might be able to fill this void.

Apparently, some places sell the 150 at much less than $200.

Here is a review of them. While they are budget in price, they are certainly not crappy speakers.

http://www.stereophile.com/budgetcomponents/404infinity/

Those graphs are from the ti series and may not be highly relevant to the much newer V3 model you are getting.

And graphs don't really tell you diddly-squat about how your ears are going to perceive music in your room.

For two-channel without a sub, I would certainly highly recommend the M3's, perhaps over anything else I can think of in that price range.

Plug in, relax and enjoy.

Great mantra!

The M22 is not "better" than the M3, or M2, just different - as already been pointed out by many. I have both. I enjoy both of them equally. They both impress the hell out me and I often find myself in a state of disbelief that speakers so small can sound so good and fill up a space much larger than one would think. I've heard a few Polk and Infinity. I don't like either, but that doesn't mean anything as my tastes are mine, not anyone else’s.

They are still relevant. Just compare them to the graphs on the website. The M3 still shows that midbass hump which is exactly the unique sound characteristic of the M3 coupled with a more recessed midrange. The M22 graph looks very close to whats posted on soundstage. So when comparing the graphs they are not far off at all.

Objectively the M22 is the more accurate speaker. How one defines better is ultimately up to the end user and the application its being used for. I agree, the M3 is probably the best choice to standalone without a sub.

To endorse kcarlile, yes the M3 V3 is the way to go w/o a sub. That engineered midbass hump (in my opinion) gives the speaker a unique level of smoothness and sense of sophistication. Although not quite as linear as the M22's they articulate sound astonishing well. I still can't believe Axiom can do this for the price. I've considered an upgrade to the M22's but haven't yet acted...just don't want to part with the M3ti's. I think that non-action says something. It may change however when I make the trip to the factory in Sept. I'll be able to then hear them first hand.

Anechoically, measured with a microphone.

My room isn't anechoic and I listen with my ears.

Room acoustics and speaker placement make a huge difference in frequency response and listening enjoyment.

Continuing to harp on "accuracy" and "objectivity" while simultaneously admitting that enjoyment is subjective and that some listeners prefer clinically "less accurate" signatures doesn't make sense to me.

Fundamentally, I just don't believe you can measure and quantify everything about the listening experience.

Many speakers that are widely regarded as excellent have truly crappy looking graphs.

I can attest to that. I have a sprinkler that is widely regarded as excellent but have crappy looking grass.

Then pick out the seeds and stems or start growing better stuff.