Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners Underwhelmed by the M3 on-wall speakers

Same question turned around -- do you have the M3 in-walls actually mounted in the wall ? Not sure if they're sealed or open at the back so this might be a non-issue.

One other thing that's worth mentioning is that Energy C-3's are pretty nice speakers, and IIRC used to be almost 2x the price of M3's back when they were selling against each other... so if the M3's are sounding better than the C-3's you're doing pretty well IMO.

I would expect the C-3's to have better bass and to sound "bigger" than the in-wall M3's as a result -- I imagine you would need bookshelf M3's to get comparable bass -- but I don't yet understand why you're hearing the difference in soundstage unless the two speakers are mounted differently as well.

EDIT -- just saw your comment about the C-3's being $400 less than the M3's, so maybe $125 ?? IIRC C-3's were $500 US a pair back in 2002/2003 when the M3's were selling for a bit over $300, so sounds like you got one heck of a good deal.

BTW if my post sounds a bit defensive that wasn't my intention -- I was just trying to make it clear that the C-3's you're using as a reference were both fairly expensive and quite well regarded at the time.

I have never heard M22's (bookshelf, in- or on-wall) so can't comment intelligently on whether they would be sufficiently better than the M3's to justify the price difference, but since you're planning on using them as rear surrounds I would be looking real hard at using the C-3's I already had.

The M3's that I have are the on wall style, and yes I did hang them on the wall to get the sound.

My comment about the cost of the C3's.. It's a bit of a poke as I was saying that I already own them, and have had them for the past 10-12 year. So they have already been paid for and enjoyed for many years, so the on book cost for those speakers is now $0

The speakers that if I do replace these will cost real money out of my bank account, so logically, if you are spending money you would want them to be better than what you currently have. The plus side to the M3 was that they are slim and mount directly onto the wall and they do look really nice. The down side is that they don't sound any better and in some cases sound worse than the C3 that I currently own.

That is not saying that the M3 wall mount are bad.. it more goes to show how good the C3 that I have stood up to the test of time. But that does not change the fact that it makes no economic sense to spend money on new speakers if you don't really gain anything.

I have both M3 in-wall, M2 on-wall and M22 on-wall (and some M2s and M22s regulars) for the non-Home-Theater rooms. I did not notice much (if any) difference between M22 on-wall and regular.

Because of look and integration, the on-walls is now my favorite avenue for future.

Of course, I would love a M100 on-wall!

I've used both the wall mount M22 and the bookshelf M22. I much, much, much, much prefer the boxy speaker sound.

My M22 on walls can not hold a candle to the bookshelf M3's. Imaging, bass, volume, it is not even close. I was actually hoping to try some m3 on walls myself for surrounds. I have M2 on walls in a smaller room for surrounds and they are excellent for that purpose.

Make sure you got the polarity correct?

I believe that you are finding the same thing that I found when auditioning many different brands of modern, decent speakers a while ago - they were all 'similarly good' within their price point & class. They all sounded fine, although each had it's own sonic character; however, I could have lived with any of them.

I think your expectations of on-walls as contrasted to your full towers are a little high. The only way to level the playing field is to add a bunch of low end...

TAM

It is the fun side to hifi audio. The speakers that I have sound great. but you simply don't know if they could sound better until you go out and try something else to have a point of reference to compare to.

In my case, I have C3's that sound pretty darn good. I used them as my main's for quite some years. Then when I tired the M80's I realized that yes I could do better. They I got the LFR1100's and they were a bit better in some respects, and a bit different in others. If I was asked would I do it again. I would probably take a look at the M100's and say they offer the best bang for the buck, but the M80's are really close.

With these M3's they just don't offer anything more that what I have already got so if I want better then I now have another reference point to work with. I believe that the standard style M22's will be my next choice. Not that the M3's are not a great speaker. I am really looking forward to getting my computer speakers that are based on the M3. But for how I was using them and what I was looking for, I think there are better options out there.

I have a pair of V4 M22s (in HG Rosewood) that are on the FMS-16 stands. Unfortunately, I really don't know how they sound without my subs because in my HT, I just don't use them any other way. They sure blend nicely with the EP-800s though.

I think that the M3 bookshelf style would sound a little fuller than the M22s due to the mild bass hump around 100Hz; however, the M22s are unforgivingly flat & accurate if that is what you are after. I use my M3s as ambiance speakers more for background music & they work well for that.

As I've stated before, I prefer the M2 & M22s with subs but the M3s do just fine without them for most music...

TAM

Hi Matt, I have M3 Outdoor, M3 OnWall and had M3 Custom Wood Finish which I regret selling every day.

In my experience, the M3 OnWall run without sub fall a little short compared to the M3 bookshelf. They sound good, but you don't get the same richness or nearly the bass output.

In my case, I stole the M3 OnWall from the B Stock for under $200 if memory serves and for that they are worth every penny and more. They are great garage speakers!