On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall"

Posted by: jb1677

On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/07/10 08:56 PM

Sonically how would the new M2 on wall compare to an M2 on wall/in wall or an M2 In Wall (aside from the obvious no hole, small hole, big hole)

Any pro's and Con's between thse speakers? The cutting of a hole is of no concern nor is the protrusion from teh wall - just looking for what sounds best.
Posted by: michael_d

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/07/10 09:16 PM

Iíve only heard the on wall M0ís and M22ís. But, Ian mentioned that they all sound very similar. The main benefit with the in wall and on/in walls is they do not protrude from the wall as much as the on walls. The on wall M22ís are pretty impressive when considering what they are and just how small the cabinet is in comparison to the book shelf versions.
Posted by: jakewash

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 04:48 AM

I would bet, as Alan likes to say, "they are similarily good", meaning unless side by side comparisons happen one would be hard pressed to tell the difference between them.
Posted by: Murph

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 08:07 AM

In reading this thread, I realized that a new thread I just started would have fit in this discussion nicely as an FYI piece.

Completely Hidden HT


Posted by: SirQuack

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 08:13 AM

I've compared my new m22s to the new onwall 22's side by side, personally I like the regular m22's a lot better. The onwalls alone sound very good, but a sub is a must. To me they sound hollow or thin compared to a full bookshelf. Even with a sub, they don't have the same presence in the mid bass and lower mid frequencies that a full speaker enclosure can give you.

I'm not trying to say they sound bad, they don't, but physics can't be cheated.
Posted by: cb919

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 08:24 AM

As you say SirQuack, the physics can't be cheated. While I haven't had the opportunity to demo the different 22 versions as you have, a simple browse of the specs shows the differences that cabinet volume make.

Both the in wall and on wall 22's state 70Hz-22kHz FR.
The full M22 and in/on wall 22 (formerly known as the W22) have stated FR's from 60Hz - 22kHz. These two both have the larger cabinet volume.
Posted by: SirQuack

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 09:19 AM

I'm still a little suprised by the frequency specs. I had to bump up the crossover on my regular 22's to about 150hz to even get them close to the same sound on the low end. I don't have an anechoic chamber, but the 70hz seems like a stretch.
Posted by: pmbuko

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 09:46 AM

The on-wall M22s have been growing on me. I think the major differences in comparison to my bookshelf M22s are the tweeter and crossover, though. My bookshelf M22s are seven years old (wow!) so a number of improvements have been made to the design since then. Even though I know I'm losing out on some bottom end with the on-walls, I think the other improvements more than make up for it. With an EP500 in the mix to take care of that bottom end, I'm pretty satisfied with the sound.

This is a good thing, since my wife likes the aesthetics of the on-walls about 300% more than the bookshelves. ;\)
Posted by: cb919

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 10:04 AM

I agree Sirquack - my W22's do sound great, but I have a hard time in my room thinking they'll go down to 60Hz within 3dB. I have my x-over set at 80Hz which works well, but there's no way I would consider crossing at 60 Hz - I'd have a big hole in my system flatness.
Posted by: CatBrat

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 10:05 AM

I have the bookshelf M22's and am still waiting on the on-wall M22's. It sounds like a subwoofer will be in my near future, but I'm tempted to just hop over to BB or similar and get a cheepie to get by for a while, since I have some other projects going on right now and don't want to keep putting them off any longer.
Posted by: MarkSJohnson

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 10:26 AM

Is there a web page for the on-walls yet?

There's a link from the home page, but it doesn't work. You guys must be getting the info from somewhere...
Posted by: EFalardeau

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 10:38 AM

There was a link from the owner's club.
Posted by: MarkSJohnson

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 11:56 AM

Got it! Thanks, Eric!
Posted by: Micah

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 12:22 PM

Sounds a bit backwards to only be able to see the specs if you're an owner, doesn't it?
Posted by: Murph

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 12:45 PM

What use is joining a club if there are no secrets?? LOL
Posted by: cb919

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 01:28 PM

Actually I just followed the regular product links.
Posted by: EFalardeau

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 01:33 PM

The regular links are working fine. Murph was hallucinating, I guess! \:\)
Posted by: MarkSJohnson

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 01:34 PM

Dan, you're right.

The link from "On-Wall Speakers" in the upper-left of this page is broken.

I'll let someone know.
Posted by: Micah

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 01:42 PM

 Originally Posted By: Murph
What use is joining a club if there are no secrets?? LOL


Well that's why they should put naked pics of the M22's in the 'Members Only' page. ;\)
Posted by: MarkSJohnson

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 03:26 PM

On this page, when you click on the "photos" tab, some of the speakers show a protrusion in the back that will obviously require a cutout in the wall.

Am I correct in assuming that these are the "In Wall/On Wall" speakers that are incorrectly being shown and not the full "On Wall" type?
Posted by: Jc

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 03:53 PM

Hi,

Some "W" (In/On Wall) photos were temporarely used for a few of the new "M" and "VP" On Wall models. Axiom will correct the situation shortly.

All the new "M" and "VP" On Wall models are truly on wall which do not require wall openings for installation.
Posted by: MarkSJohnson

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 04:50 PM

 Originally Posted By: Jc

All the new "M" and "VP" On Wall models are truly on wall which do not require wall openings for installation.

Excellent! Thanks, JC! I might have a good use for a pair of those if I don't have to cut into my old horsehair plaster for installation!
Posted by: EFalardeau

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/08/10 04:55 PM

Oops! Sorry Murph, it was Mark that was doing the "hallucinating", not you!
Posted by: jb1677

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/09/10 12:19 AM

Wow, lots of repsonses to the thread but not a lot of comparisons between the 3 "non standard" lines. I can accept the fact that the stand alone bookshelf is better than the three on/in/onin combo speakers but I am still lost on deciding between the 3 choices.

Is there any guidance on the sound differences between the "In Wall", "On Wall" and "In Wall/On Wall" speakers? I suppose I could order a pair of all three and try them out but the holes in the wall for the tests would surely anger the wife :-)
Posted by: spiffnme

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/09/10 01:41 AM

wow...I'm glad I read this thread! I was just about to purchase the W22 and W150, but what's this I'm reading about "ON wall" speakers? I go away for a year or so, and Axiom's making new products without telling me???? Speaking of which, I haven't received a "owner's club" email in AGES.
Posted by: JohnK

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/09/10 04:04 AM

Yeah, Craig; now you have a choice of speakers entirely within the wall, about half in and half out, and entirely out but fitting flush up against the wall. Apparently the best sound would still be found in the traditional bookshelves.

There was an Owners Club email a few weeks ago, but they're very infrequent.
Posted by: spiffnme

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/09/10 05:41 AM

I'm guessing that if putting a hole in your wall isn't an issue, the on/in hybrid would be the better sounding option?

I'll also see if keeping my current M60's mated with an in/on-wall VP150 may work (aesthetically).

Lot's of options, just want to be sure I pick the best one, as knocking holes in walls and then realizing that wasn't the best choice would suck. \:\)

If I get a chance I'll take a photo of the space as it is, and let you guys give me your ideas.
Posted by: michael_d

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/09/10 10:19 AM

 Originally Posted By: jb1677
Wow, lots of repsonses to the thread but not a lot of comparisons between the 3 "non standard" lines. I can accept the fact that the stand alone bookshelf is better than the three on/in/onin combo speakers but I am still lost on deciding between the 3 choices.

Is there any guidance on the sound differences between the "In Wall", "On Wall" and "In Wall/On Wall" speakers? I suppose I could order a pair of all three and try them out but the holes in the wall for the tests would surely anger the wife :-)


I asked Axiom that question and was told that they all sound very similar. You have different choices for differing aesthetic demands, not necessarily different sound characteristics. Plus, an in wall VP150 would be too wide to fit between wall studs so they do not make one. If you wanted to the look of in walls, you are limited the VP100.
Posted by: Micah

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/09/10 11:09 AM

With the differences being very minimal, my advice would be to get the pair you most covet. Once you have it installed it's highly unlikely you would ever miss anything any of the other options might have had over the pair you want. In other words, say you got a pair of in-walls and your neighbor got a pair of on-walls, if you went back and forth between houses you'd likely not be able to tell a difference between the two, everything else in the room being equal that is. Perhaps if you ordered two or all three versions, lined them all up and did some blind testing, then maybe, MAYBE you'd be able to pull out some tiny differences between them, but I don't think it would be so noticable that you'd say, "wow, I'm glad I didn't go with THOSE".

But of course I've never heard any of them, so that's all strickly theoretical guess work I'm spewing out here. What I'm likening it to is my 65 inch 60 hz LCD. Sure at the store when t was sitting right next to the 120 hz model I could tell a tiny bit of difference between the two models during very quick moving scenes, but now that I have it in my living room there's no way I'll ever notice anything's lacking. Because it's a great tv in its own right. Sure the 120 hz model may be ever so slightly better, but they're so close I don't think anyone could go wrong with either.

That's the way I assume the speakers you listed to be as well. Close enough that you can't really go wrong with any of them.
Posted by: Murph

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/09/10 01:16 PM

 Originally Posted By: EFalardeau
The regular links are working fine. Murph was hallucinating, I guess! \:\)


Links? I didn't mention no stinkin links!!
Posted by: Potatohead

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/09/10 02:07 PM

I have the in/ons (W22's at the time) and a W150 and I like them a lot. They definately do need a sub and I have mine crossed at 90 hz if I remember correctly. I tried it at 80 hz but there was a big dip in volume in the 80 - 92hz range or so which I guess in my room they could not cut it at that range. I don't doubt for a second the regular M22's will do better at a lower range but I much prefer the look of the W's in my situation. I use the theatre 90% of the time for movies and TV so I don't need the absolute best sonic performance.

Picture whoring alert:


Posted by: pmbuko

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/09/10 02:09 PM

Ohh yeahhhh. Home theater porn. \:\)
Posted by: alan

Re: On Wall vs In Wall vs "In-Wall/On-Wall" - 04/09/10 02:12 PM

Hi spiffnme,

Nice to see you back. And yes, you're correct, the in-wall/on-wall hybrid would be the better option because you will get more bass extension and a fuller-sounding upper bass.

That's because the enclosure is larger than the strictly on-wall version, which require no hole-drilling.

All my listening tests to these various models are done without a subwoofer operating. The midrange and highs are very similar to identical from all three. But on A/B comparisons (to the stand-alone equivalents), there is less upper and lower bass from the on-wall models.

Regards,
Alan