Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Advice from Axiom Owners Questions for all you M60 Owners.

Whoops, sorry about that. Forgot that F107 was an "almost M50-er".

The M60s are bright, annoying and make a constant "ssssss" noise whenever you turn on the amp. My ears get tired just looking at them.

Seriously, I think the M2s and M60s have almost the same response above 100 Hz -- just that having some decent bass really filled out the sound and made it sound more mellow.

Sounds like your new listening room is just too big for M3s. I would say think back to the old room. If they were fine there then 50s will probably sound great in the new room. If you would like a bit more "crispness and clarity" the M60s will give you that.

What shop sell Bose, PSB, Sony, and Polk all in the same building?

Seriously, he can pick whatever he wants... no skin off my nose! I just think it's funny that he was the loudest M50 proponent, having never heard them, and now he's thinking M60!

Hi guys-right you are, I deserved those responces.

A history of Axiom, compressed and maybe a bit one sided:

In the beginning, of the new Millenium, the M3 was king,
cost was important to what seemed the majority of forum
members. The logical step-up was to the M40-which was well
respected, and of course the M50. The M22 came out and had
a couple of warts; a long break-in was noted on one review
when Ian said that a few hours was sufficient.(this cast
doubt of ear break-in instead) another review listed
sibilence as a problem; Warmer electronics was suggested.
Nobody, in any of the reviews had anything but positive
things to say about the M3, and there were a dozen reviews
throughout numerous on-line publications. They were even
used as a reference monitor for comparing other speakers
and electronics.-it was cool.

Anyway, up until reciently the M50 was the obvious update
to the M3, the M40 was still ok in many eyes, but the M50
was a bit better-Alan even posted that the "M50 has quite
a bit more clarity and detail than the M40, but not quite
as much as the M60". That's good. Now to the present:

Look at the Axiom web site and see how the M40 and M50 are
presented. A new viewer of the site would in no way even
consider a purchase of either! Alan also stated, or perhaps
suggested, that the M40 may be eliminated(with just a little
reading between the lines) in a post questioning the missing
Epic 40 package. Enter the M60:

The M60, im my eyes had a rocky road to travel, many folks
had the complaints I'd voiced comments about, maybe they
were one in a hundred, but they were there and they cast
doubts, at least in me. Then Ian gave us the plots in
December showing the M60 in a much better light. Was the
M60 updated reciently to bring it to a flatter less
foreward state? It dosen't have the classic low bass/high
treble plot of a foreward speaker. Does the plot look any
different than a year ago? Don't know, never saw one. If it
always looked like that then I owe the M60 a great appology
as it's a really nifty "looking" plot!

Then Alan made his "Missing First Reflections" post...and
the M50 suddenly looks less like it belongs in my system,
right when I'm defending the beseiged M50 the most!!

Now dosen't That make a person feel silly??

Bottom line-to me anyway-the M50 looses some, the M60 gains
some and I'm in the middle. Rats, what's next?


Sittin on the fence

Rich

hi , whay i can see whit the choice of m50 or m60, depend of what floor you have in your room, take m50 whit wood floor ! and m60 whit carpet floor ! what you do you thing !!!!!

Rich,

I liked your compressed history of Axiom.

I won't add anything except to say that the M60ti has not been modified in any manner whatsoever since I joined Axiom three years ago. At that time, I did extended A/B listening comparisons to all of the Axioms (except the M1), in mono, stereo, and 5.1-channel configurations with and without subs.

When I heard the M60ti, I stood up, raised my arms, and in preacher fashion, pronounced it essentially perfect. "Don't touch it!", I said. "It has perfect spectral (tonal) balance."

Regards,

Hi! Willso and Alan;

We have carpeted floors, so that's one more solid vote for
M60! Thank you for your input; makes sense.


No changes in three years? Not even a little x-over change?
Oh darn, I was hoping that all that double-blind testing
caused at least a little change reciently to get rid of some
of the (few) complaints I'd read about in these posts. Oh
well, I guess you can't argue with perfection.

Good description of a near-religious event though, I can
easily visualize the Rev. Mr. Lofft making an epic
proclomation to the assembled flocks. How could I argue
against such furvor?

Your comment about the First Reflections a few days ago did
a lot to push me toward the M60 and away from the M50. I
have a listening room that needs all the help it can get.
I still have a "warm" spot fot the M50 design, but the M60
may be the better bet.(a ten to one ratio of M60 to M50 is
also hard to ignore) ALL those M60 owners can't be wrong.
It does seem a bit strange to realize that the "What If"
syndrome will apply to the less expensive less complex
design. I do like my M3s however, and hope that the M60s
don't sound TOO different. The word on the street is that
they actually sound quite similar, that'd be good.

Well, that's two more votes for the M60 with no decenting
comments so far. And I guess these aging ears could stand
some additional "crispness and clarity" too. So...

Thank you for the additional inputs, much appreciated.

Rich.

F107,

Take it from a guy who went from having two M60s and a reciever sitting on the floor in the middle of an empty room with hardwood floors for a few months, to having some carpet, drapes, and furniture in the room. In an empty room, the high end was greatly enhanced. As the "soft" stuff got put back into the room, the high end softened along with it.

sibilance? not really. I have (while messing with my sub) managed to end up with too little bass, giving the appearance of a borderline sibilant sound to them. I often wonder if some folks who have the brightness/sibilance issues just have a bad room that dampens the low & mid ranges too much. If you remove those, the highs might seem out of line. They would be.

To me the cymbals, chimes, flutes, and those clocks (and money) on Pink FLoyd DSOTM are just as loud, clear, and "bright" on my M60s as they are in real life. Not louder, not altered in any way. The same. Just right.

The only thing that just slightly (and I mean very slightly) bothers me is that they seem to be a little sensitive to placement and positioning. Too close or too far from the wall behind them can cause emphasized or lost bass. (Maybe all speakers are like this?) Too much, or too little toe in can cause a "confusing" image, or no image at all. No worries now - I have measurements, and I know how to use them! I can tell immediately when an M60 has been moved by as much as 1/4" when I listen from my seat.

Ear fatigue? only once. I don't care how cute she is, hip hop is now banned at my place.

I am 100% happy with mine.

"Ear fatigue? only once. I don't care how cute she is, hip hop is now banned at my place."


!!!!!

Hi Michael; Thanks for the response.

One thing in particular makes a very good point! Do the
sounds we hear everyday sound the same on the speakers or do they sound "Like Speakers" Yes! Better to sound like
the real thing. Good point.

Our livingroom is carpeted and well stocked with the "soft
stuff" We do however have a brick fireplace on one side
which will have to be treated to some "softening-up" to
keep the current reflections under control, but with a
large open area to the other side, so reflections should
not be a problem in that direction.

So, no sibilance, and usually no ear fatigue, unless...
cool, Then a good test disc and rat shack meter to help
with positioning, which could be critical, should then do
the trick. Outstanding!

AND 100% happy, Who could ask for more?

Thanks for the good info, another vote for M60.
Thanx
Rich