I'm considering using M2 or M3 as a center, and either the onwall or the inwall/onwall.

So, based on fit, cost, compatibility, and whatnot, I'm considering a single of one of the following for a center:

1. M2 onwall
3. M2 onwall/inwall
4. M3 onwall
2. M3 onwall/inwall (this probably doesn't fit)

I have M60ti's as mains. Currently, VP100v2 as a center. It sounds fine, but...

I've never been delighted with the presence and clarity of the center channel. Now, part of this is my fault, because I am inflexible relative to speaker positioning. The VP100 (and any successor in this system in this house) has to be positioned in/on a low-wide equipment rack on which the TV sits.

This is an old, bad picture of the furniture from a previous house and a components from a couple generations ago. It's what I had handy, and I figured you would find it amusing.



So, the center channel has to pretty much go in - or on the front of - that top-center cubbyhole. Form factor (fit) is more important than fidelity. This is our living room, we have kids and dogs and stuff.

I think I can get a Good-Enough installation and improve the fidelity because:

* Vertical Center channels FTW
* in-front-of the cabinet is better than in the cabinet
* Frequency Response of any of the four options (60-80Hz) is lower than the sealed VP100 (95Hz)
* V3

The idea is to "hang" the new center speaker on a hinge (pivot) from the front top edge of that rectangular opening. I would either attach directly to the speaker or make a small piece of finished oak as a fake "wall". I would then have a small foot or spacer on the back/bottom of the speaker to angle it slightly upwards toward the listening position. The bottom of the speaker will extend into - and perhaps beyond - the fixed shelf in the middle.

Of course, I thought about doing this with a standard bookshelf, but it's just too big and cumbersome. Sticks out too far. Non-starter.

That's not a big space. A VP180 in-cabinet doesn't come close to fitting. I don't have the exact measurements handy (I think it's about 19"w x 8.5"h). I don't think I can fit the vertical inwall part of the iw/ow M3 in there (so that's probably not really an option, but I haven't definitively ruled it out, yet).

So, I guess I'm looking for input on:

* Does anyone have direct experience on tonal match between those speakers and the M60?
* Does anyone have direct experience between the inwall/onwall and onwall versions of the M2 or M3?
* Does anyone have an opinion on whether the 60-80Hz response difference between the M2 onwall and M3 inwall/onwall is meaningful enough in my situation to warrant consideration or consternation?
* Is this madness?
* You know, riff on this. It's cyber Monday. You're not working anyway.

Thanks, friends.

Well, if it were me and I was willing to spend the money. I'd build a new cabinet that would house an in-cabinet VP160.

To do this and save some money, I'd use the existing outer shell of the cabinet you currently have, and rebuild the interior of it to house the in-cabinet VP160, and the rest of my equipment. I see that would require modifying, or replacing the doors also.

At least the end result would be a better sounding system that using a smaller center.

Brian, I appreciate the reply and the suggestions. I've certainly considered those things.

But I'm looking for a low-hassle, $300 upgrade. I'm not looking for a project. I don't want to buy more (or reconfigure old) furniture.

For me, a move to a VP160 (or VP180) is going to also include a move to a projector, which is impractical in our current home.

So, you know, smaller bites. Evolution not revolution. Form-factor over fidelity, for now.

You could accomplish the current furniture rebuild project by hiring a professional carpenter using money from a loan against your 403b, Tom.

Yes, clearly I just failed to appropriately prioritize this whim. Thank you.

Tom, with adequate subwoofery, I think you would be ok with the center. My fear (after having used on-wall M22s) is that there is not much bass out of those enclosures. So I would strongly recommend a) a subwoofer good in the upper range (how one determines this, I haven't a clue) and b) a receiver with multiple crossovers (which I think you already have.)

I think I'm just going to make my sig consist of parentheses. (Love 'em.)

I get the feeling an M2 or M3 might be a downgrade from the VP100. That has been my experience anyway with an M2. YMMV. Others like it. (Or do they really?)

Yes, I am used to this kind of sarcasm. (But Tom may not have seen the other comments. He has me on ignore.)

So, Brian, you've heard both a VP100 and M2 as a center in your home?

Ken, I have an older SVS-PB12NSD. Always pondering a second sub. And, yes, the Onkyo 805 I am using sets separate crossover points for L/R, Center and surrounds.

I guess I'm wondering why I'd be MORE concerned about the low end with the M3 onwall (which is rated by Axiom at -3db at 70Hz) compared with my VP100 (which is rated -3db at 95Hz). Axiom did adjust the published frequency responses for the M3 for the various form factors (60Hz for the bookshelf and iw/ow).

Here's my center combos, so far.

1) VP100
2) M2
3) M2 + VP100
4) VP150
5) VP160
6) VP160 + M22

In my opinion, the higher priced Axiom speakers sound better than the lower priced Axiom speakers. This includes the comparison between M2 and VP100. Also the bigger the box, the better the overall sound. Bookshelf vs on or on/in wall.