Hey there, just wondering if anyone has any experience with the in wall M3 and VP100? I've read many articles/reviews on the box version of the those two speakers, but nothing on the in wall. I want a very good clean sound, but am not looking for a 'blow you away' type of system. I understand I am buying $200 speakers. With that said, how are they? I was also considering Emotiva's new in walls, but they don't have a back enclosure so I'm sure the sound could vary depending on the wall cavity.

I will be pushing them with an Onkyo PR-SC886 & Emo LPA-1. Lastly could I use the M2's for rear surrounds? I will be 50/50 music & HT.

Sorry for all the questions....

Trav

There will be a fairly large timbrel imbalance between the M3 and the VP100. If I was to go the M3 route, I'd use 3 M3's instead. That way the sound would be seamless across the front.

If at all possible, use either the QS4 or QS8 for surrounds. Otherwise, if you use M3's on the front, then use M3's on the rear.

If you are going to get a sub, then I'd choose the M2's over the M3's for a more accurate and linear sound.

One other thought, the M2 would be a better match with the VP100 than the M3, if your bent on going that route.

+1 to what Cat said about the timber match and the QS and the M2s are even cheaper.
In your case I would do (in order od preference) either:
3 x M2s + QS8s
2 x M2s + VP100 + QS8s
3 x M3s + QS4s
which is in the same price range of what you're planning on doing.

Trav, welcome. I'm essentially in agreement with Brian and Bruno on this: I'd suggest that you consider M2s across the front if you'll be using a good sub. Also, QSs should be definitely given the preference for your side surrounds for their greater surround spaciousness.

You haven't fully described your setup, but it appears that you may be somewhat over-buying the amplification relative to the speakers. A mid-range Onkyo model such as the 708 or 808 should be entirely sufficient in most cases.

You'd think the M3's were trash after all that. ;-)

Seriously thou, if you are going to have a sub you might as well go M2's all around. Thou I'm running a VP150 with my M3's and the sound stage matches well IMO. A fellow Axiom owner brought his M22's over one day so we could compare and I will admit they had a more pronounced midrange sound. The M3's have a much better low end thou. Anytime I play the M3's by themselves people can't believe all that sound is coming from such a small speaker.

Ben, that illustrates how we can be fooled by a speaker which has a hump in the mid-bass response. Measurements by the NRC showed that the M22 enclosure was actually tuned about 5Hz lower than the M3, giving a slightly better bass extension. The "hump" both makes mid-bass fundamentals louder than normal and increases the relative loudness of the upper harmonic of a low bass fundamental.

Fooled or not the speaker that had the "fuller" sound running by itself is the M3. The M22 by itself sounded very detailed and forward, but also shallow without a low end.

It's like your signature says, right?

I'm sure that's the case, but "fuller" isn't good if that isn't the way that the music actually is.

Wow thanks for the great responses. I already have purchased the amp and pre/pro so I'm money in - can't get around that. I bought that amp originally b/c I had an AV123 X-Statik & X-Voce setup, but I sold those. The extra power wont hurt though right :-)

I will be using a sub, even for music, so it sounds like the M2 is the better choice. Is the only time a M3 would be preferred is if not using a sub? I'm a bit confused, everyone seems to think the M2 is the more refined speaker but it's smaller and cheaper to boot!

I've always liked the idea of having the same LCR across the board, but the models I've looked at in the past were specifically designed for this, with the tweeter off-set from the mid drivers. How will the M2 perform as a center - my biggest concern with any set up is dialog reproduction. That was my biggest gripe about the X-Voce. It could get a little muddy sometimes. 3 M2's would sound better than 2 M2's and 1 VP100 - All in wall models?

I took a second look at the QS4's. That is definitely the way to go. For some reason I thought they were more expensive. I can get 3 M2's and a pair of Qs4's for under 1K! That's a steal.

tb, the M2 vs M3 really comes down to personal preference. You'll see that there is several db's boost from 90-150hz on the M3 which MAY lend itself better to those who don't have, or do not wish to use a sub. The M2 is the more linear speaker of the two according to their graphs and where a sub is used, the bass boost of the M3 becomes moot. Again, it's personal preference though. A sidenote is that the M2 will be the better timbral match if you get into any of Axioms other speakers(ex M3) if you expand your system.

About the only thing that the M3 matches, sound wise that I've been told, is the M50 tower.

Also, if you can spare the extra $120, consider the QS8s instead of the QS4s. They use the same drivers as the M2s (and M22s, M60s, M80s) and would have a better timber match (although the surround is not as critical as the front). If not, I'm sure the QS4s will still do a fine job.