Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners New M3s - 1st impression with questions

Just got my M3s yesterday and have been listening to a lot of CDs to get a feel. Here are my first impressions, plus a couple of quesitons.

This is my second system, and I have been trying to keep it as cheap as possible. I'm using a Cambridge Audion A300, bought on eBay and a cheap DVD player, which is, believe it or not, not so bad. I'm using Axiom's bulk speaker cables and some silver interconnects I got off Audiogon. Room is 13x25x9. Speakers along the short wall, about 7 feet apart.

Two most obvious strong points: Treble and soundstaging. The high end is lovely. Lots of presence without being the least bit harsh. The soundstaging is terrific markedly better than the speakers in my main system. I'm a tad disappointed in the midrange, given the reviews and what I'm used to in my main system. The mids are not at all bad, mind you, but it tends to be outdone by the sparkle of the treble. I keep wanting to turn up the vocals, bring them forward. At least on some recordings. Others, no prob. But my only real complaint at this point is the bass. Not the lack of it, as I might have expected,but its boominess. It is not blended into the mids and highs but seems kinda tacked on, if you get my drift, and the detail is muddled over. This especially stands out in contrast to the treble, and so the bass seems like it's from a different speaker. On a bassy track, it can be downright distracting.

Now this bass issue might be a matter of speaker placement, but there I'm limited. What I might be hearing is less the speaker than the reverb in along the back wall. But I can't bring them out into the room any more than they are. It's also possble that the cheapo DVD is at least not helping if not to blame. I plan to bring out my Music Hall CD25 at somepoint to test that possibility, but haven't done so yet.

Now what I don't want to hear is "move up to the M22s." I'd love to, really, but the very existence of this second system is pushing it for me. So what I want to hear is either "everything will gel with break-in" or "try the M2s, which will have more forward mids and eased off bass." But I'm open to any responses or thoughts.

Despite my complaints, I really am impressed by these inexpensive little speakers. With the right CD, they sound fabulous. And did I mention the soundstaging? Vocals and piano spread out over 10 feet of the room!

dont worry everything will gel with break-in


Well.. maybe not but at least that made ya happy. And by the way, how close are they to the back wall?

Things may not "gel with break-in", but I'd give yourself a few more days to get used to the new sound you're experiencing, and to mess with the speaker placement as much as you're able to. If after that time, you're still not happy with the M3s, you may want to consider returning them or trading them in for something else.

Whatever you do, don't settle for less than you expected.

I started a thread about my speaker placement here a couple of weeks ago. It's a bit hard to describe. The speakers are on a cabinet that comes out about 24" and behind them are built-in shelves up the ceiling that come out 12" from the wall. So they're on the front edge of the cabinets, and there's about 3" behind them up to the edge of the bottom shelves, and those are about half empty, creating perhaps a bit of an echo chamber. That really may be my bass problem, but that's my set up. (Is that more info than you wanted? Probably.)

BTW: Right now I'm listening to Stacey Kent and the M3s sound beautiful: full and present mids and the bass is just where is should be.

definitely go for the M2i instead, it sound more forward, has better mid and "more in your face" than the M3. Base on what you wrote either the M2i or M22ti will make you very happy, just don't expect them to have any better bass respond than the M3ti.

As for break-in, I won't even go there. But don't be surprise IF you didn't hear any difference afterward. :-)

Hey judasmac, it really sounds to me like this could be a placement issue in a big way. If you're looking for more midrange and up then by all accounts the M2's will likely give that to you ( although the M3 aren't supposed to be slouchers in this area either ). Base is a bit more of a problem. The M3 are supposed to have more base than the M2's and you may be going in the wrong direction with the M2's if this is your primary concern.

I realize this may not be in the cards but my recommendation would be to add a sub. I just got my Axiom sub this week and I'm using it now with some old mission bookshelf speakers ( these are likely hopelesss compared to the M2 or M3 ) and I have to say the difference is very drastic. The whole sound is very much more authorative and full. And the bookshelves not having to produce the LFE sound more open and clearer, its quite a pronounced change.

Now I can't say you'll have as drastic an improvement but I do believe a sub would give you what you're looking for.

My recommendation would be stick with the M3 or try another entirely different speaker if a sub isn't a possibility. If a sub is within reach then return the M3 and get the M2's. Then when funds permit get a sub like the EP125 from the factory outlet or keep an eye out on Ebay or Audiogon.

The very best of luck, Jag

First thing you need to do is figure out whether it's the speakers or the placement. Is there some spot where you could TEMPORARILY set up the speakers so they are :

~ 6-8 feet apart
~ 2 feet off the ground (stack some small cardboard boxes or something)
~ 2 feet from the wall, with empty space behind them
- front of speakers protruding over whatever is holding them up

You might need some extra speaker wire for the temporary hookup but it's worth it. If you like the sound of the speakers in this position then we just need to play with your cabinet setup to reduce its impact. If you don't like the sound of the speakers there, then think about exchanging for M2 or M22. M2 has more midrange and less bass; M22 has more midrange and about the same bass but a bit "flatter". My first thought is that you sound like an M2/M22 listener with M3 speakers

If you are listening mostly to jazz, chamber music or comparable pop / rock then you will probably be OK with M2s sans sub. Believe it or not I would even include a lot of 70s "progressive rock" in that category... Dance on a Volcano and Echoes sound better than you would think on M2s. ELP-type groups will suck a bit on M2s, as will most orchestral works including most opera.

If you live near Toronto we can swap M2s for M3s and see how they sound.

I have M60s and I had M3s for awhile. I know what you're saying about the M3s - they're excellent, but the midrange doesn't come all the way up to the tweeter. Good for some material, bad for other stuff.
It sounds like you would be happier with M22s or M60s.
M22s with a KLH sub from Costco = <$500.

It's the room, or the amp or processor or source. I had a pair of M3s driven by a 5 wpc integrated tube amp and the mids were exquisite. There was a slight audible dip in the upper mid range but that's what separates the M3s from the Reference 3a de Capos, that and an additional $2,200.

Thanks for the replies. I've done some more tinkering, and it's pretty clear now that the main problem is speaker placement. I hooked moved the speakers to my main system (Marantz 2 monoblocks, Marantz 7 preamp, Music Hall CD 25) and two things happened: The midrange was far more integrated with the treble and the boominess of the bass disappeared. The soundstaging was even more dramatic and impressive. I DID notice some shortcomings I had not before, in comparison to my main speakers (Tangent RS4). More on that in a moment, just FYI.

That experiment leads me to believe that the bass problem comes from the placement -- the little echo chambers behind created by the lowest shelf. And I supsect that the slightly recessed midrange comes from the Cambridge Audio amp's relation to the M3s.

Okay -- so that still leaves me the question of what to do. I'm inclined to order the M2s and just see how they compare, and return the loser in the head to head. If reports are to be believed, I'll be happier with the mids in the M2s. My concern is that the bass boominess will be solved simply by reducing bass output, whereas the better solution would be to somehohw tighten up the bass. But I don't know how to do that without moving the speakers, which won't happen.

Maybe some sort of sound baffling behind the speakers? To soak up some of that bass reverb? Anyone have experience with that sort of thing.

Now, if you're interested the M3s vs the Tangents. Tangents are rare. Sold in the US briefly in the 1980s. I believe I read somewhere that the Axiom is somehow a descendent of Tangent. The one clear advantage of the M3s is soundstaging. THe music was all over the room in a way the tangents couldn't match. The treble on the Tangents also at times had a slight harshness when turned up to a high volume (they're very insensitive speakers, rating 84 or 85, I think). But the Tangents had a much fuller sound, with the bass and especially the mid and treble more seemlessly integrated. But the main advantage of the Tangents was that everything sounded more natural, real. I noticed this first on drums. Drums sounded like they were in the room, whereas on the Axioms they seemed like a good reproduction. Probably another way of saying the same thing, the Axioms by comparison (note: I didn't notice this before a direct comparison) seemed to have a slightly grainly film. So with the soundstaging, it seemed that "particles" of music were all over the room. WIth the Tangents, less presence, but no "particles." Just clean sound. Now these speakers wouldn't be considered competitors in any real sense, so all this has to be taken with a big grain of salt, and overall the Axioms did great, esp considering the price. But I thought this comparison might be of interest.