Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion The Water Cooler What is your favourite Axiom speaker?

Members here often collect Axiom speakers over time. Some members have examples of almost all models in their collection. I have to say after meeting several models now I continue to be impressed by the value and versatility of Axiom products.

Sooo…

What is your favourite Axiom speaker/product in your collection?

Depends ….

At the affordable end:
- M2/EP500. … both are really good in their range. Together they are fantastic.
- M22 (pretty sure you can request them). They sound like the M2 but are 3db more efficient. Save some $$$ on your amp for a slightly higher speaker cost.
- if a sub is too much then the M3. It’s a very slight trade off in mid clarity for some additional base but you won’t notice unless you A/B them with the M2.

At the high end:
LFR1100 actives can’t be beat at least for the money. I know 2x will tell me that I need to compare them to his Wilsons but at this level of audio it’s hard to imagine much room for improvement. They are magical to my ears and that’s all that matters.

I have to give a high- and low-end answer too.
I love my M80s, so that my answer up "high" (The only other higher end speaker I've listened to is the LFT660).
But dollar for dollar I love the M22v2. (I never heard the v3. And I didn't like the v4 version, it seemed to have muffled the highs.)

Ok, so you guys set a great tone.

If I’m going affordable I have to give it the M5HP bookshelves. Get the placement right and WOW! No sub required in a small room.

If I’m going to open up the budget I have to give the nod to the EP500 subwoofer. Again, WOW! Great dynamic lows in a small footprint. Pretty much anchor any system around a pair of these.

I wonder sometimes if Ian has set up an all M100 surround setup with subs. Now that would be something in a big room!

If you were getting muffled high with the M22 V4 then it must have been a bad copy. The M22 & M2 V4s shine in the mid to high as long as your not clipping your amp and not trying to fill a great room. I’m not even gonna qualify that with a IMO

I think I’d agree especially when priced against the M2/EP500 combo … that said I like the combo more.

Both are a bit pricey for low-end money … which leaves the M3 for that space …
And that’s especially true if you go for a refurb on sale.

Cant disagree with you. Those are just my faves so far.

Still have yet to meet the M100s and a VP180. And of course the LFRs.

Curious what Chesseroo has to say on faves. He’s had a few and has put effort into testing.

Don't want to divert the thread topic too much, but no, it was a small 12x13 room, a decent Yamaha receiver, I used an A/B switch, and this is critical - my wife agreed with me that the M22sv2 clearly sounded better than the v4's. I'm talking out my butt here, but I think Axiom was trying to address all the "bright" talk that was common back then and toned that down in the v4. Also, it wasn't only one speaker and what's the chance that both speakers were bad? If anyone has a more definitive knowledge of the v2:v4 differences I'd love to know the specifics.

As for the M3, I've never been a fan. They're decent enough (I kept mine for a bedroom system), but they sound like the old 'loudness' button got stuck in the on position. Great if you're listening to 70s classic rock, but not so great otherwise. In my case, definitely an IMHO!

Never heard a V2 but from what I've read many feel they are a bit bright. That said, a lot of people like it and there is nothing wrong with that,

When I first A/B'ed the M3 V4 against the M22 V4 I thought that the M22 V4 might have a bit of brightness. The M3 on the other hand seem'ed to have more base and a bit of haze in the mid's. When I A/B'ed both to my HD650 and DT700 phono's I decided that the M22 V4 was fairly accurate and the M3's had a base bump which, IMO, caused the mid haze and relatively made the highs a bit recessed. In any case this is being fairly critical and I don't think most will not notice either. IMO, given it's cost, playing the M3 alone is very enjoyable.

I get it, you like the sound of the M22 V2.
Using that as a reference the M3 and the M22 V4 will both have toned down highs
Which might make them sound a bit dull in relation.

P.S. When I get my actives setup again it would be interesting to see if I come to the same conclusion.

The m100s with vp180 was a good setup although I technically never heard them in a finished room. The LFR passives are definitely a step up and I'm sure the actives would be on a whole other level.

I like the m2s with my 600. Just a really clean sound overall. I still like the LFRs over the 100s.

Cannes,

What do like about the LFR that the m100 doesn’t have or does differently?

I think I can guess based on what I’ve gleaned from other threads but curious your first hand experience. Thanks.

Great thread idea Trevor!

Mostly the listening area. I no longer have to sit at the MLP to get the same soundstage and imaging. The bass and lower end seems to be increased as well. I didn't realize my sub was unplugged the other day and was enjoying a listening session and I couldn't believe how much bottom end it had with the sub off. With the 100s I could tell a difference between the sub on and off. But to be fair and honest I never tried the 100s with no sub after I got the 1500 hooked up. I'm positive that would have made a noticeable difference.

I agree with rrlev

I have a pair of M22Tis. Out of rotation, but what a great speaker. The M3Ti was my introduction to Axiom speakers. They went for $275 back then and along with a 5 wpc SET tube amp and a little Velodyne sub they were a revelation. Got rid of my Infinity Composition Overture IIIs (nice speakers) and started down the Axiom road. I don't remember which iteration of M80s I had (V2 of V4), and loved them.

I love my LFR1100 Actives. The only potential weakness is that you need the 10 channels of dedicated digital amplification. The weakness is not the speakers. Maybe my amps or maybe the DSP preamps are atypical, but I hear digital haze.

Yes, the Wilsons are also terrific, but they have the advantage of Balanced Audio Technology 110 wpc tube VK56SE monoblock amplification and their wonderful VK33 tube preamp.

So, for music, for me, the call goes to the Wilson system. For home theater, no question, the LFR1100A system. (VP160 center, twin EP600 subs and 8 M2OWs, a real Axiom system!

Looking back, I have to say the M3Ti, Velodyne, Antique Sound Labs MG Si 15dt integrated tube amp (KT88s and 12ax7s), Mapleshade Audio Double Golden Helix speaker cables, gave me the most music delight of any Axiom 2 channel system. In that room it produced a most wonderful WALL OF MUSIC.

PS I don't have the M3Tis or the M80s anymore, but I still have the Antique Sound Labs tube amp. I upgraded it with VCap capacitors, Telefunken black diamond 12ax7s, and NOS Gold Lion KT88s. What a fantastic little integrated, but nowhere to put it.

PPS Hi Kodiak!

I had a pair of M100s. Gorgeous speakers, they sure didn't work well with the Conrad Johnson MV60SE 70wpc amp and Jadis preamp, so I can't really compare to the LFR1100As. They should be like the M80s but more and better, and the M80s are pretty terrific!

I just placed a set M22ti's in my home gym, after I bricked my Axiom Air. I have not listened to them in years..... I forgot what great little speakers they are. I have to give them the nod over my other Axion speakers, cause they do so much, and at a very reasonable price point. JohnK has been right all these years.....

My favourite is the M22ti. I managed to get just one three weeks ago. I ripped the drivers, terminals and cross-over out of it and threw it in my firepit. Hot damn! That M22ti burns real nice.

Haven't any Axiom but, I have joined to find the best one. Currently, VP150 is on the wishlist.

No, you wouldn't ... Aieeeeee!

Love my v4 stuff. Really despise that M22. Maybe the M22 v4 is better...dunno.

Notice however there is a wide price gap between the M3 and the M5 that begs to be filled. That used to be the M22...until it was taken off the site. It appears no matter what they threw at it - v4 tweeters, improved mids, improved cross-over - its curves brought shame to the family.

You know what though? If you are enjoying your old M22s, that's all that counts. Don't listen to me.

I don't.

The M22 v4 sounds great … it’s a M2 with a 3db boost in efficiency

Michael, you of all people should. If you had, you'd be enjoying M5s right now instead of suffering brain damage from your M22s.

Michael found the M22v4 gave him more brain damage than his old M22v2. So he punted the v4 back to Axiom.

I have never heard M22 V4's. Only my old, brain-damaging TI's. I like them. It will do no good to try and convince me otherwise. It's my opinion to have, not yours to discard.

I have M80Ti's and M80V4's. I've listened to both extensively. There are elements and characteristics of both that enjoy and do not enjoy equally. Both are currently in use in my home.

Well Michael, I do apologize. I thought it was you who tried M22v4 and did not like them against the M22ti. I have you confused with someone else.

It is impossible to argue against opinion of taste or preferences. Enjoy them as many others do.

In my two experiences with M80s in different rooms I have been pretty impressed. Begs the question what the M100s bring to the table in addition in real world use. Harder to push them in installs. Pretty big. Havent met the right room yet.

Still think the M5s are an endgame speaker for all but big and dedicated rooms. Give them power and holy cow! Mid sized rooms and dens. Slam dunk.

I can only comment on M80v2 vs. M100v4. The M100 was more pleasing in absolutely every way. And so was the M5. In my 4200 cu ft room.

Youve owned a few. Which one gets your nod, all things considered?

Hi Mojo

Yes, the M22s fit nicely between the M3s and M5s. There was another, unsung but reportedly wonderful Axiom speaker, the M40. It was a small tower version of the M3. I've never heard them, but the reviewers thought highly of them, and folks who had them, loved them.

Hello my dear friend Ian!

Perhaps it's time for a reprise of the wonderful M40s!

With the HP 6.5" driver and the V4 tweeter, it might just give the M5 a run for the money!

I am a fan of every single v4.

I put down the M3v4 a lot but that's only because it isn't linear and it shows. Nonetheless, like vinyl, tape and tubes, it is very enjoyable. I'm not kidding when I say I'd like to have a DSP that allows me to set between modern and retro hi-fi. All it would have to do for retro is boost channel cross-talk, add some white noise, and attenuate the top and bottom end. You could even add a tube mode that adds harmonic distortion and glows the DSP with the blue lasers that Andrew loves to blind us with.

The biggest shock of my life was the sound quality of the M2 and M5 on-walls. I still haven't picked my jaw up from the floor.

I'll leave the centre, subs and surrounds out of it. Out of the v4 M2, M3, M5, M50, M100 and active LFR, the M2 takes top honors. OW and bookshelf. Easy, easy, easy system integration, acoustic holography with no revealing of the speakers, and audiophile-level sound quality within its operating specifications. All at an extremely affordable price, in choice of finishes, great member benefits and delivered to your door.

BTW, the easy integration with the room is largely a function of the vicious cut-off below 60Hz. They can still be enjoyed without a sub though with room support. The easy integration with electronics is due to their impedance and sensitivity. Their characteristics makes them a great match for those applications where room correction isn't available or desired.

Now some will say it's thin-sounding. Fair enough. Add a sub. Or go M3 for warmth or M5 for warmth and more linearity. But those aren't perfect within their operating specifications like the M2 is.

Agreed on your points on M2s. EQ not required. Very well behaved and easy to enjoy without fuss.

Andrew posted up a vid applicable to the M2s appeal here:

https://youtu.be/dwUcGkBFpX8

The holography you experience can possibly be explained by low distortion and lack of timing masking explained here:

https://youtu.be/jnEGWFEGpmw

These vids may help others get or understand strategy for your results in their spaces.

If I had a 'need' for another set of speakers, or two sets, I'd buy M2's and M5's just to hear them.

I am quite happy with the M3 on-walls I have in my theater room, but they are surround speakers, and I have not heard them in a propper two channel set up as L/R mains.

Trevor,

Andrew's video on "punchiness" was interesting in that I never thought of it in that light before.
His videos on terms are good. It's too bad that audio examples can't be included because would require everyone to have systems that could reproduce them ... i.e. something halfway close to a perfect system.

The other video is interesting but too long for me to watch completely at the moment.

I really like his videos. I would love it if he got more technical…. From a selfish stance.

Active LFR1100s are still making me happy, certainly the nicest speakers I see myself owning for the foreseeable future. I simply can't afford to chase a higher ideal. Granted, they're part of a home theater system with M5s as the other channels and dual EP800s handling bass, so I don't know how much of the effect would be lost going to 2.0 stereo. I spent some time listening to music today, which I haven't been doing enough of, and they're just so articulate and powerful when called on, no muddiness at all. Finally watched my UHD Blu-ray of Dune the other day as well, and I think back to how much I had to slum it when starting down this HT path, first with hand-me-down Polks. The experience now is such a far cry from my initial setups. Thank you, Axiom.

M80s

If you haven’t tried them in two channel you’re missing the magic.
As far as finding a higher ideal, I’m not that compelled to look further.
For 2ch listening I can not imagine there is much improvement to be had. I think I’m done.