Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Center channel question

Howdy folks. I have a pair of M3s that I freaking love. My current center is not up to snuff and I want to replace it with an Axiom VP100. Also stumbled across the Byrston AC1 Micro which looks identical to the VP100 but costs several hundred dollars more. Is there actual differences between the two and if so what are they?

Thanks for any info.

At the price point of the Bryston I would look at the VP160.

Just for the record, the resemblance you noticed is by no accident, simply because, unless something has changed recently, Axiom builds speakers for Bryston and has done so since Bryston got into the speaker business a number of years ago. Although the tweeter seems to be identical, other than the obvious color differences between the two companies speakers, I can't speak for the differences in other design areas between the two so perhaps some of the other folks on site who might know that information could comment. Whether or not the price differential is justified, I can't speak to that, however, a couple of acquaintances I have known for a number of years who have been in the industry for a long time and carry the Bryston amplifier and their other equipment lines, don't think so.

Casey, Axiom owns Bryston. So...there's that.

Rodeo, VP160 all the way!

The VP150owV4 is very good too ... I have it setup with M2 bookshelves and a EP500 and I'm not in want of more.

You could use an M3 for a center too. Don't get too fixated on a "center" channel speaker design. The driver arrangement is kinda/sorta designed for center duty, but there is a bit of marketing BS with centers too. Center channels are generally designed in a horizontal configuration for placement considerations. But if you have room under the display for another M3 in the vertical position, and you enjoy your M3's, you'll enjoy another one in the middle.

The M3 is 2" taller. It's a good point Michael makes particularly given the fact the 160 and M3 are not timber-matched. The mid-woofer on the 160 makes mids a lot more clear. Highs and lows are more linear also.

Sounds like the 150 got fixed and then buried.

Never heard the older version ... from all the dissing it got I was really wary of it ... but it was a much better fit than the 160 and Ian thought I should try it ... glad I did.