I was thinking that a tower similiar to a M40, but maybe an inch or so slimmer, and configured like a M22 would be a killer main. A little more bass extension but with similar detail and accuracy. I am not an audio expert and don't know if you would get the same kind of performance, but it sure sounds like a great idea. I would much prefer a sleek tower over a bookshelf and speaker stand. Anyone else had similiar thoughts?

It's called the M60.

Yes, that would definitely work. But, I am thinking of it as more of a replacement for, or in addition to, the M40 for those that don't want a full range speaker like the M60, but want the clear clean detail of the M22 or M60 in a smaller sleeker tower. Again, I am not an expert, but I think a tower of this type with the M22 configuration would provide a richer and fuller sound while maintaining the accuracy of the M22. I have a very good sub and would prefer something like this as a main instead of a bookshelf and stand....and at a lower price point than the M60.

AJ, I think that what you're proposing can be viewed as analogous to the M3/M40. The M40 can be viewed as a M3 in a bigger enclosure tuned for more bass. Something similar could be done to the M22 and would be interesting.

Exactly. Actually, I started to reference that comparison, but left it out. Anyone else, besides me, think this would be great addition to the Axiom family?

I would agree. A taller enclosure full box height on the M22 with still only 1 tweet and the same 2 main drivers same size. The width would be the same. Tall and skinny. That would look like a Totem speaker configuration. It would not have the same fullness of a M60. It would have the same tonal sound but just a tiny bit extention on the bass.

Works for me...I'd prefer a tower, but M60's are too much $ so I had to stick with the 22.

Just a little more bass extension for a slightly richer sound and no stands. Just a baby brother, or sister, to the M60. Maybe even a little taller than the M40 to get the drivers closer to ear level, if that really matters. I would love to hear that something like this was already in the works. Keep the opinions coming.

There's also room for the "M55", or missing link tower with one tweeter, one 6.5" woofer, and one 5" woofer, although how that would sound I haven't the foggiest.

Hi all,

Duly noted. I'll raise the subject at our big Axiom meeting up in the wilderness in May.

Regards,

I always wondered why this 3-way 1"/5.25"/6.5" configuration wasn't used for the M50 instead of the 1"/6.5"/6.5". The M50 really seems to be missing something in the midrange - to me anyway - that I figured the 5.25 replacement would add.

And the M22 tower (could be "M55"?) sounds really good. Great aesthetic with that slim design I think, to fit in to tight spaces, bedrooms, something like that. (In addition of course to what would assuredly be great sound.)

Can those of us that bought the M22 trade up to the new M22 tower if and when it comes out?

Now I have myself all worked up and I don't want to wait until May for this to be brought up. I want it now! uuuuuuuuugggggg

Both configurations mentioned sound like perfect additions, or replacements, to the line, although for me I really like the idea of a sexy sleek tower based on the M22.

Having said that and just to throw another option out there - to keep the sleek look you could go with 3 5.25" drivers instead of a 6.5". One for the mid and 2 for bass. I suppose this would be a skinny M60. Not quite as much bass, but I bet it would be really tight, fast bass. Boy, I am getting more excited as I type. Please do something quickly.

Keep the pressure on. Lets hear from all you Axiom fans.

Oh, and did I say I wanted it in a Natural Oak finish. Sort of a Honey Oak would be ok.

fhw...love your M55 idea...I would like to hear those! But, I would prefer an 8" woofer on the bottom

OK, what is taking so long? I don't see these on the Products page yet. How long can it take to run the CAD program, cut up some wood, slap it all together, run some audio analysis, pass it through the quality and safety processes, get the marketing stuff done, move them into production and sell, sell, sell. I can't wait forever.

A lot of you have read this post. I would really like to hear your thoughts or opinions on a tower version of the M22. I really think it would be a great addition to the line up for those who have a good sub. What do you think? Don't be shy.

Considering many of us have the M22s on stands in the $75-100 price range, adding that cost to the M22 towers shouldn't make the M22 towers cost much more. Additional drivers would though. I think it's a question of cost from the consumer side anyway.

Frank

IMHO it would be so similar to the M60 that it would not drive additional sales, but would cause additional customer confusion.

It would not be like the M60 since the M60 has 2 x 6.5, 1 x 5.25 and a tweet. It would be like the M50 2 x 6.5 and a tweet but with smaller drivers at 2 x 5.25 and a tweet. There would be confusion with the M50 but people who opt for clean clarity great mids and highs would go for the skinny M22 Tower for music and those who want oohhhmmmppff would go with the M50 great for HT. Its a matter of taste and setup.

See, it doesn't even exist yet and there's already confusion about where it fits in the Axiom lineup. :-)

I tend to agree with John. The configuration may not be like the M60, but everything I've read from reviews and even Alan and Ian's own comments seem to mention that the M22 sounds remarkably like an M60 but with less bass extension. Since the original post is asking for something that sounds like an M22 but has more extension, I'd think the M60 would be perfect.

Continuing down the negative road, i have to agree with JasonG.
The M60 is the tower version of the M22 but larger, as towers are supposed to be. Customer confusion on the minor differences is already seen as many people in these forums ask about the difference between the M60 and M80.

In having auditioned the both the M22 and M60s, i found them to be virtually identical in their sound signature except that the M60s obviously had more bass extension and a larger sound expected due to the larger drivers and enclosure.
Making a tower speaker, but keeping the same small drivers, might serve to make it sound boxy and thin, and i for one highly dislike the sound of a subwoofer pulling full time duty for everything under the 80-100Hz.
A good comparison to this design is found in Totem Acoustic speakers. I find the lower end Totem speakers have this thin, boxy quality even though their overall sound is still very good.
The M22s have been reported to be a great speaker but very room size dependant. Making them into a tower could lend to the idea that they are suitable for larger rooms, which as JasonG believes, would cause customer confusion, and again, i agree.

Jason,

I appologize for getting your name wrong. I try very hard to not do that. I was refering to you when I mentioned "John."

No problem. I'll answer to almost anything. :-)

In that case, I'm now calling you Bob.

In that case, I'm now calling you Bob.

--

Bob? Office Bob??

(sorry, Canadian joke )

Chesseroo, I would be curious to get your opinion of the purpose of the M40. If you feel that a tower version of the M22 doesn't make sense, why build a tower version of the M3 (the M40), or for that matter the M50. If you could retain the M22's sound qualities in a sleek tower, wouldn't that be worth it. It seems to me that with the M60 being the preferred tower, and the M40 and M50 not having as favorable a response by the folks on this message board, a tower version of the M22 would fill the position in the lineup the M40 and M50 currently fill, except hopefully do it a little bit better. I suppose some might argue why Axiom offers any tower model other than the M60.

Bear in mind, the M22 came out after the other speakers in the Axiom lineup (except the most recent M2i). The M3 was pretty much the reigning champion of bookshelf speakers prior to that time. In that context, the evolution of the lineup of towers, from M40 to M80, makes complete sense.

Don't discount the M40 and M50...they sound great, and depending on your room, budget, aesthetic and musical tastes, could very well be a better buy than the M22.

Good point fhw. I was just trying to make a case that a more slender tower configured like a M22 could easily fit in the lineup. I personally would prefer a tower and with all the raving about the M22, it sounded like it might fill a void in the lower end of the tower models. Actually, I don't know if there is a void, not having ever heard any of the Axiom speakers, but with all the talk of the M22 and M60 being Axiom's "best" speakers, and the M40 having a more laid back sound, maybe a tower based on the M22 would be a little better. In all honesty, I have been considering a M40 and thought it would be interesting to get the thoughts and opinions of others regarding a tower based on the M22 configuration.

On sort of a side note, has anyone else noticed that black M40's have been on the Factory Outlet page for what seems like a good month or so at a lower than normal discount. I am guessing it could be a few things. An unusually high level of defects (I wouldn't think so). Or, no one is buying black M40's. Or.... they are unloading inventory before the introduction of a sleek and sexy new model based on the M22. How's that for positive thinking.

ajb,

fhw has it right.
The M40 was made prior to the M22, hence the 'purpose' of the M40 is the chicken before the egg kind of thing.
Both the M40 and M50 have been recommended to many people who have asked for the Axiom sound in a tower but a little less bright in the tweeter (hence no M60 or M80 would be desired).
They do fill a role quite nicely i would think.

As for the comparisons being made between the M3 and M40 tower, these are not apples to apples. Take note that you want to have an M22 in a tower version, but you want to keep the 'slim' tower yet the M40 (tower version of the M3 as you say) has larger box dimensions (width and length) over the M3.
If the M40 were the exact tower version of the M3 then, why would its dimensions be larger?
As in my previous post, a slim tower design tends to sound thin, for lack of a better word. If you have the chance to compare a Totem Acoustics speaker to the Axioms, you may hear what i have heard (or perhaps not). Of course the best test of keeping such a slim design would be to take an M40 speaker and pair it up against the M3 which had been modified ONLY by giving it more height to its dimensions.
My guess is that the sound from the M40 would be more full, more robust than the modified M3.
Hence, keeping the M22 configuration for a tower would be interesting, however i think the best sound would probably come from increasing the tower dimensions along with it.

You wanted opinions, that is mine.

Chesseroo, you bring up some good points and some history which I was unaware of, and I appreciate that.

To clarify things a bit, I wasn't advocating a tower with the same width of the M22, just a little slimmer than the current towers. I have always thought, maybe mistakenly, that the volume of the box was the critical issue on how you tune the sound for any given speaker (obviously based on the drivers used). I suppose there may be an optimized width to depth ratio (along with the volume) that Ian feels gives his speakers the characteristics he is looking for. Maybe a slightly narrower width and deeper depth causes problems of some kind. I was viewing it from a visual point of view. If you are using smaller drivers, why not make the cabinet a little narrower, which would look nice and not be quite as intrusive or imposing. It would be very interesting to hear some of Ian's thoughts on this issue.

I do enjoy, and learn from, all of the comments by everyone in this thread and all the others. Keep up the good work.

ajb,
If you haven't checked it out, take a look at the Totem Acoustic speakers that i mentioned earlier. Those speakers are virtually identical to your idea that you have with the M22s. A small footprint speaker but obviously not with Axioms drivers.

ajb, it is interesting that you mention width to depth ratio, and the effect it has on the sound. The older "Millenia" series had a far more aggressive taper front to back than the current line. During testing, I wonder if Ian had found some sonic benifits in reducing the taper, or whether it was simple asthetics. The old line just looked awkward.

Sorry, made a mistake - it was the old AX line that had the aggressive taper, NOT the "old" Millenia line.

Chesseroo,
I finally took a look at the Totem Acoustic speakers you mentioned. Some of those towers are quite thin. Even more so than the M22. Actually, I sort of got the idea after looking at some Paradigm Monitor 7's. They are a lot taller than I would propose for a M22 style tower and they use 6 1/2" woofers, but they are only 7 5/8" wide. That is just 1/8" more than the M22. Interesting, since they use bigger drivers. I really like the look of these. Actually, the Monitor 11's are the same width as the 7's. The current Axiom towers are almost 1 3/4 inches wider, which makes them look a bit fat in comparison. The Studio 60, which does sound better than the Monitor 7 and also has 6 1/2" woofers, is only 8 1/4" wide. Still an inch less than the Axioms. Other than the slimmer look, I don't know how this impacts the sound. As far as Axioms are concerned, my guess is that since they taper to a smaller width in the back, the front needs to be wider to get the volume of the box correct without making them taller than Ian wants. Buts that's just a wild guess.

Some of those Totem speakers are ridiculously thin.
The sound is nice and not unexpected from good drivers but there is simply no 'fullness' of sound in their smaller series. I would say that even the M22 had more oomph than that little Arrow speaker. The larger Wind model was certainly alot more bassy and heavy all around. I almost equated it to a Paradigm speaker but it was no where near as boomy and the sound was much cleaner, smoother.
Still, the little Totems can serve a purpose not unlike your M22 tower idea.

Although the tower volumes will make a huge difference in the type of sound that is emitted, so will the type of materials used to construct the tower as well as thickness, density (hence weight), internal bracing, etc.
The basis for my thought on the M22 tower (potentially being boxy and thin sounding) comes from the fact that i've seen and heard the Totem speakers, and that i know they are made out of similar materials and thicknesses as the Axioms (although very different drivers). I was making a relative comparison between the M22 as a tower and the Totem Arrow which is how i described the idea in my original post.

I'm sure if Axiom were to make them, they would adjust for any boxyness in sound, maybe even make them more tapered at the back eh?

Well, this has really turned into quite an interesting post, and all just from not wanting to use a speaker stand. Thanks to everyone who participated.

Now it would be really cool if Ian were to pop in with his thoughts.

Chesseroo,
I would like to ask you an off topic question. It sounds like you have listened to Paradigm speakers. Have you done any direct comparisons to the Axioms. If so, which speakers did you compare and how would you characterize the differences in sound.

I have not heard any Axioms yet, but I have compared the Monitor 7's and Studio 20's to the new Wharfedale Evo 30 and 40. The Wharfedales have more detail than the Studio's and you can't even hear the same detail in the Monitor's. The Wharfedales seem to have a more pristine sound, for lack of a better word. I am very curious to know if the Axioms also have more detail than either of the Paradigms lines. It is obviously very hard to compare without you hearing the Wharfedales, but I was hoping you could give me some insight into the Axioms.

ajb,
First off, here is a link to my first post on the comparison i did when i was looking for speakers.
post of Axiom vs. Angstrom audio

That should help to give you an idea of my very first impressions when i heard Axiom speakers, about a day after i received them. My opinion now hasn't changed much but first impressions are always the most interesting.

Second, i have listened to Paradigm Reference speakers in a local audio shop. In fact, this was the same day, same room and same shop that i first heard those Totem speakers as well.
Note that i did not listen to these speakers at home on my own system. I also do not remember offhand what solid state amps were used to drive the speakers when i 'auditioned' them but i did bring along my own cd of music so i was familiar with the tunes.
With all that in mind, my general thoughts on the Paradigm Reference speakers went something like this:
Negatives
far more boomy in the bass compared to my Axioms, bass was no where near as tight
the midrange was more pronounced i would say
the high end was not nearly as bright or clear as the Axioms
more pricey

Positives
equivalent finish
more laid back highs (not as forward/bright as Axiom)

I cannot say which is a better speaker. I have a friend who likes the mainstream dance beat kind of music and for him, i recommended he look at Paradigm and Energy speakers for his home system (he ended up buying the Energy).
For myself, i like the extra clarity and tight bass. I've always been one to turn up the treble knob in the car, searching for better clarity. For home theatre the Axioms are excellent, but for a 50% portion of my music, they are bright. Sometimes the extra detail overrides the brightness but my more mainstream music just suffers.
My wife notices this a fair bit and again, loves them for home theatre but would prefer something less bright for music. I have since put in the resistor though and it has worked out a bit better. The volume of the highs has been dulled a bit and my wife likes it better.
At some point the Axioms will be powering my home theatre anyway and i knew this. They are still by far an awesome choice, price for performance for either music or HT but be warned, they WILL show you the obvious flaws in bad or hot recordings.

In case you want to see some reviews on other Axiom speakers, check out these lengthy blurbs from
randyman
and
fhw
and
sonicfox

Sorry if i missed anyone.

Hey Semi, you gonna post a review someday or what eh?
Or are you still waiting for the speakers to arrive? According to your profile, you are still waiting.

Maybe after actually getting his setup...he now has no comment. [joking]