Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Future Active Options

I'm not sure what plans Axiom has for future active offerings, but I like the idea of active M2s all-around for a home theater in a small room, for people who don't want to spend such a fortune but still like the idea of active tech. I'm assuming DSPs would still help in tailoring the output, even if it's not to the same level as required by omnidirectional speakers. I'm also curious how much DSPs would assist the on-wall and in-wall models. What performance gains for those could be realistically achieved through finer control?

Just looking for discussion from people who understand the science a lot better than I do.

Love your idea! As a fan of axiom for many years and a pure marketing guy at heart, I can say that a cosmetically improved cabinet would go a long way as it seems axiom is in need of a cosmetic upgrade more than anything. Axioms sound amazing, and no one argues that fact, even the haters... love listening to the haters complain about price increases and lack of cabinet upgrades but confess to an amazing sounding speaker! Personally, for axiom to move forward in 2020 they need a new heritage line (heritage meaning they go back to their roots as a HUGE industry disrupter, as the original ID value speaker company) I think the active book shelfs would be the perfect speaker, but it's important that they go to their roots and figure out how to offer this as a value line. Book Shelfs with a DSP and improved cabs is a tough order, but I know it'll pay off much better than the axiom air. (as a business owner, I hate it when people make obvious suggestions discounting the work and cost involved and their like "you'll do amazing!".... yeah I just did that and couldn't even stop myself! lol

Axiom's roots were based in the retail world in the 1980's. I bought my first pair of AX3's in an audio store in the late 1980's and visited the factory around 1990 - search the Water Cooler for pictures.

They remained in this model into the early 2000's, when they transitioned into their current model.

I'll admit I don't know what I'm talking about. Just a fun suggestion. From what i've read they were not the first ID but the first great VALUE ID company for sure. That was the "Heritage" reference. Amazing sounding, looking, performing speaker at an amazing price.

Back to our playful speaker design idea's CV.... curved front face so driver has minimal reflection which should help give it a great look and a spacious sound. Plus I think Andrew could design a new port tube that has an expandable mid section to allow for mid range absorption. TMI?

DIY flatpack versions of their speakers you can assemble and finish yourself.

Good way to save money and spend time in the hobby crafting your experience. Pretty neat feeling.

I cant afford LFRs or even M100s with all the things in my life competing for my fun money. But... winter is long here. Lots of time to putter around in the garage...

I’ve wanted to have speakers with a leather faced baffle and stone sides. No way to buy those.

Charles, the big improvement from active M2 would be a 3dB boost to sensitivity. Linearity can be improved but the audible benefits would be minor.

Not sure it would be worth the 3 grand they might cost (DSP and amp included).

Active M5 OW may be a good thing though. The OW are very under-rated. Now that I have M2OW for 2-channel, I can hear how good they are and it is so cool to have great-sounding speakers that are out of the way. I'd have never believed it if I had not tried it.

The M22 is 3db more sensitive then the M2 ... so I'd go that route over making an M2 active (factoring in the $)


We assume that everyone knows what the sensitivity spec means (which may not be as useful as you would think as I will discuss below). To keep it simple a speaker which is 3db more sensitive then another will need 1/2 the power to play just as loud. So a M22 with 50Watt amp will preform equivalently to an M2 with a 100Watt amp.

When combined with a decent sub , the sensitivity and the linearity of the M22 makes it one of the best options in the Axiom space for receivers

Now, for comparing SPL numbers ... I'm ok with comparing the SPL specs of the M2 and M22 because they are spec'ed by the same manufacture (measured in the same way) for the same frequency range.

To compare the M2/M22 sensitivity to other speakers in the line up you need to understand how it was measured. One may note that the M5 and the floor standing models claim that they are just or even more sensitive as the M22 ... this might be misleading as it can measured at just one frequency (some manufactures might measure it at the speakers most sensitive frequency), or a average of many frequencies or with pink or white noise. Changing how you measure it will effect the numbers. So you might not be comparing apples to apples. As far as Axiom is concerned ... I have no doubt that we can compare these speakers to the M22 if we stayed in the M22's frequency range ... But, I guarantee you the the low-end on the floor standing models will increase the power needs by quite a bit. I.E. you may find that you start clipping at way lower volumes playing an M100 (spec'ed @89db) then the M22 (spec'ed @88db) on your average receiver.

I may have to buy the M22OW and compare against the M2OW in my living room. As much as I love the M2 sound, I find I have to cut the mid-bass by a few dB because it sounds too resonant. That's evident by the M2's frequency response curve. The M3 and M5 are even worse in that department and the M80 and M100 are wayyyyy too boomy. BTW, in the basement the M2 bookshelves aren't over-the-top in the mids and do need subs to supplement them.

My concern with leaving the M2OW behind is the soundstage. Nothing in my living room has ever sounded like the M2OW when it comes to soundstage - not even the actives. Another concern is that they're not too detailed nor too dull but just right. They keep me in the music and don't distract me.

So maybe the flatness of the M22 in the mids will work better in my living room. And hopefully the dual mids will play nice with my room and give me at least as good soundstage and imaging as the M2.

I've discovered the ultimate Nirvana when it comes to frequency response is active LFRs. Admittedly in the basement, I've had to supplement their low and mid-bass response with sealed subs but then again, it's a large room. They don't sound unnatural though in the bass and mid-bass department like most other Axioms do in that room (the exceptions are the M2 and M50). Anyone who's heard them without a sub couldn't tell they were missing anything BTW...until I turned the subs on. BTW, I am still not using Audyssey XT32 with the actives unlike all the other Axioms I've used.

I spent only a few minutes of A/B listening when I swapped the M22's out for M2's. I literally just took the banana plug and moved it a couple of times between the two while the music was on. Not a very good A/B comparison ... That said ... the M22 were definitely louder and seemed remarkably similar in sound. Image wise I achieved about the same results.

As I see it the M2 has only two claims over the M22 ... price & size. The M22 has only the sensitively claim over the M2 (I actually like the look a bit better too) but that can mean a lot sound wise when driving them with a marginal amp.

Going back the the subject of this thread I'm not sure when active crossovers start to pay off. I'd imagine that 3x and 4x crossovers have more to gain from active crossovers then M2/M22's 2x.