Hi, I have a question for bookshelf and floorstanding. If living at a small place, are there any benefits of getting floorstanding over bookshelf? I know the volume will be much bigger but anything else? clarity, contrast? For instance, how is M50 or even M80 compared to M22 in a small room? Thanks for the help.

If no subwoofer is used, the extra bass extension from a floorstander is your main benefit.
Many people here claim that, even though not identical, M22s + sub sounds very similar to M80s + sub (when crossed over at let's say 80Hz). The advantage of the towers is that you can cross them over much lower if you like their midbass better. The M80s go low enough to cover most music types, a sub adds little to it. For movies it's a different story. With the M22s, you need a sub either way as they are not full range. As for the M50s, from what I've read, they sound different than the M2s,M22s,M60s and M80s, they have a more recessed mid range, same as the M3s . Hope this helps.

It would help to know room dimensions and what kind of openings into different rooms it has. Everyone's idea of "a small place" may be different.

Thanks for the quick reply, bdpf. Then if I purchased M22s + sub, then there wouldn't be much benefit added if substitute for a floorstanding like M80 in a small room?

CatBrat, I am still living at a university dorm and will move out in 2 or 3 months. Let's assume the living room area is about 12*24?

If there is much benefit or not is for you to decide. There will be differences, if the differences are worth the extra $$$ is up to you. FYI, I have M80s in a room smaller than what you describe (my living room is 20*11) and love them. A few people on this forum have done a direct comparison, I am sure they will chime in.

Thanks for all the detailed explanations, Bruno. Judging from your signiture, you don't have a sub, right? Are these towers annoying your neighbours? Since this will be my concern if I live at an apartment.

I have 2 M80 TIs in my living room with no sub and a pair of M3s in my office along with an ep175.

The living room is pretty big as the kitchen and dining room are connected to it with no walls in the way. I sit about 12' from the M80s and am currently running them off an Onkyo 5007 in a sterio config until I can aford the rest of the wish list for the HT.

The office is small at about 9'x12'. The M3s are close to my desk about 3' back 3' over and 3' up on the walls pointed down twards my desk. They are running off a HK 3490 along with the ep175.

How do they compare. Well thats not the easist thing to answer. I am really happy with both setups. Both have great tight deep bass for music and sound really good. At first I thought I liked the m3s more but the M80s have really grown on me. I think the biggest thing I like about the office setup is the slightly elevated position of them. Feels like im in the front row and they are right up on a stage on my wall TBH I can't really pick the setup I like best and trust me I spend lots of time to trying to figure it out... I can tell you that before the Onkyo reciever came I tried the M80s on the HK and they did not sound very good. Once I hooked them up to something that could handle them properly they really came alive.

If you want to watch movies with it I think you might be better off getting the m22s and a ep350. For most music you dont need a sub with the m80s but if you want the rumble while watching a flic you need to go lower. Also keep in mind it is easer (cheaper) to get a reciever that can run m22s along with a powered sub then it is to get one that can drive m80s properly. If music is your primary concern and you dont mind them being more difficult to drive the m80s might be the better option and then later your all ready have the big boys to build a HT around.

Thanks for such a detailed answer, rneill!

I am currently interested in Onkyo TXNR808 so the the reveiver shouldn't be a big problem for me. However, the price in Newegg US is only 699.99 but here at Toronto, it is 1299.99 plus tax (newegg doesn't ship to Canada). Sigh.

I am more inclined to watch concert and docummentary on blu-rays and am not a bass head for action movies. In addition, I am afraid that my neighbours will knock my door if my sub is too strong.

Ahhh, I initially planned to purchase KEF 3005 but ever since I started looking into here, my budget increased so much. For 7.1 setup, Epic Midi - 125 is $1,757.50 but Epic Grand Master - 500 will cost $3,100.80 and Epic 80 - 800 will cost $5,316.20. Will I get goose bumps if I pay so much more:)

I dont know if they will ship to Canada but check out accessories4less(if you dont mind referb). I got a great deal on my 5007 referb and had no problems with them at all.

Well, actually, I just purchased a sub a couple of weeks ago, just forgot to update my signature. However, I've had the M80s for over a year without a sub and honestly, there is nothing missing for music (at least not what I listen to). For movies, yes, I was missing the deep rumbling also if you turn the M80s loud enough, they're still able to shake my hardwood floor, just not like the sub, they have some very good bass on their own. As for the neighbors, I live in a semi, I never asked but I am sure if I crank them, they'll hear the bass, I just keep it low at night.
I see that you're in Toronto, I'm in Stouffville (NE of Markham). This weekend, I happen to be by myself which doesn't happen very often (wife and kids going to the in-laws for the weekend). Also my room is far from being perfect, you're welcome to come and listen to my setup if you want, just to give you an idea. Just send me a PM.

Julian, welcome. As is so often the case, one of the things that you "know" isn't so: a floor-standing speaker doesn't necessarily play louder than a bookshelf. The bigger enclosure is tuned to a lower frequency, so the bass can extend significantly lower, but this has no effect on the mid-range and treble. If the drivers in the bookshelf which handle the mid-range and treble are the same as those in the floor-stander, then the bookshelf can play the frequencies above the bass just as loudly and isn't at a disadvantage there in a large room at a farther listening distance. An Axiom example would be the little M2 and the much bigger M60, both with the 5 1/4" mid-range and the same tweeter. Above the bass the M2 plays just as loudly for a given distortion level.

So, a "big room" vs "small room" doesn't necessarily put a bookshelf at a disadvantage when a sub is handling the bass frequencies. My personal choice is the bookshelf(M22)plus a good sub(EP500), and of course this combination can deliver more volume than I can safely(for my hearing)use.

Incidentally, the Accessories4less Onkyo dealer that Rob Neill mentions does offer great buys, but unfortunately can't ship to Canada.

Thanks for the kind explanation, John.

If I want to set up M22 plus EP500 for a 7.1, then Epic Grand Master - 500 will be the choice and it's sold for $3,100.80. Actually, my initial plan was KEF KHT3005 which has uni-Q technique and it's sold for $900 at 2001 Audio Video. The problem is that the package sold there substitutes the sub and actually is not the original model that has won numerous awards. Therefore, I can't compare the quality of the sound. Anyone here has the chance to audition the 3005 model? How is it compared to Epic Grand Master - 500 or simply M22 and EP500? Does the extra 2K dollars spent on Axiom justify the sound quality overall?

Yeah, Accessories4less ships everything to Canada, only except for Onkyo@#$%^&

Depending on what you want to do there are lots of different configurations that will give you great sound for much less, espicaly since you are concerned with to much bass living in an apartment.

Couple possibities
m2 center, m60 or even 80 mains, qs8 sides, m2 backs or no backs

7 x m2s with a reasonable for your situation sub

5 x m2s m22 mains with a reasonable for your situation sub

7 x m3s might get away without a sub, i dont mind listening to mine without one but it does add to the sound when I turn it on.

3 m2s or m3s with qs8 sides with or with out sub

Or switch any of the above mains to m2 based setups to use m22 mains and or center

I would not substitute M2's for side surrounds. get the QS speakers, they are amazing surrounds.

Hello Julian,

Re. a post of yours, you'll get goose-pimples from an Epic Grand Master 500, which JohnK recommended and which I use much of the time in my living-room (19 x 13 x 9.5) in my NY apartment. I also have M80 v2s on an A/B switching system and much of the time, switching between the two systems with the EP500 sub running, they are almost identical. I often forget whether the switch is on "A" (the M22s/500) or "B" (the M80s/500). In addition, in modest-size rooms, the M22s are easier to ideally place for a great soundstage than a big pair of floorstanders.

As a former editor of Canadian audio magazines for 13 years, in which role I was able to do controlled blind comparisons of Canadian brands (Axiom, Paradigm, PSB, Energy/Mirage) against British (KEF, Celestion, B&W etc) and American brands, and I can assure you that Axiom will give you greater musical accuracy and neutrality than Kef "Uni-Q" models, which I always found somewhat colored in the midrange. Moreover, the best Canadian designs often equalled or bettered the Brit and US competition for a lot less money.

As to bass output and neighbors, you can always adjust the subwoofer level or overall loudness level if you get complaints. I lived in a semi-detached house in Toronto for a decade and if I ran the subwoofers too loud, the lay order of nuns next door complained. So I'd turn it down; likewise, in a Toronto high-rise in a poorly insulated building sound-wise, I really had to be careful or the neighbor across the hall would pound on my door.

For your application, the M22s plus a sub will deliver loud, clean playback to the levels I've measured in Carnegie Hall and the Metropolitan opera in very good seats (peaks of 98 to 100 dB SPL, which is very loud).

JohnK is incorrect in stating that the M80s offer no advantages over the M22s in delivering maximum clean loudness levels. The M80s have dual 5.25-inch midranges, dual 6.5-inch woofers and dual tweeters--six drivers per speaker vs. the M22's three--and when pushed, there are limits to smaller speakers. I recall writing notes in blind listening tests with Dr. Floyd Toole, Ian Masters, Sean Olive and others to the effect "sounds like a smallish 2-way speaker working hard at high volume" when we'd do comparisons at loud (but not deafening) levels.

In a practical sense, the M22s and a sub have excellent power handling and such comparisons as the above would only become audible in a very large room at very loud playback levels.

Regards,
Alan

Thanks for the detailed clarification, Alan. By the way, I watched all your videos on YouTube last night and they are really useful and practical, thanks a lot!

Now I have a question for Epic Grand Master - 500. Since the center in the package is VP150 but I am kind of intrigued by VP 180. How are these two centers compared to each other in terms of sound quality in a living room about 12*24?

I also noticed that the impedance for VP180 is only 4 Ohms while that for VP150 is 6 Ohms. I've heard that low impedance speaker will lose details and clarity due to high currents. Is that correct? What are the advantages for low impedance speaker?

That's incorrect.

Check out this thread, it should be a few comparison: http://www.axiomaudio.com/boards/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=310941&page=1

High current demands can cause speakers to lose detail or clarity. This would be caused by the amplifier or receiver running out power which results in clipping (nasty distortion) coming out of the speakers. As one of the advantages of low impedance speakers is that they can draw more power from the amplifier, the disadvantage is that it can be more demanding on the power supply either causing the electronics to go into clipping more quickly, overheat and possibly shut down. Electronics that have high quality power supplies and lots of headroom will not run into this problem.

Now impedance is only one factor that determines how difficult or easy a speaker is to power. You also have the sensitivity, phase angle as well as the users listening habits (how loud) and room size/listening distance. The speakers specifications are all determined by the designer -# and type drivers, crossover design etc. Sensitivity is self explanatory, the phase angle which is sometimes shown with impedance draws current above what the impedance is at a given frequency. The more negative the phase angle at a given frequency the more current that will be needed to meet the power demands. All in all it is a pretty complex subject that combines many factors.

Julian,

Ignore impedance ratings; "impedance" is an electrical trait of speakers and has nothing to do with sound quality. It tells you only if a speaker will draw more current from an amplifier at some frequencies (impedance varies with different frequencies) and therefore be a more difficult load for some amplifiers/receivers that might be unstable driving 4-ohm loads. Larger multi-driver speakers like the M80s tend to have lower impedances in the region of 4 ohms, so we recommend some brands of amplifiers and A/V receivers that have been proven to be stable driving 4-ohm loads.

Higher-impedance rated speakers (6 ohms, 8 ohms) are an "easy" load for any receiver or amplifier; for example, the M22s are rated at 8 ohms and are easy to drive.

As to center channel speakers, the VP180 is a no-compromise center speaker that is spectacularly good for any type of music or dialogue. I'd call the VP150 "pretty good"- but not in the same class as the VP180. Note that the VP150 is perfectly satisfying for movies and home theater. It's just that when it comes to nuances of, say, male and female vocals, the VP150 isn't as smooth and totally free of flaws as the VP180. But understand that I'm a bitchy critic of loudspeakers and sound quality--one of the reasons Ian hired me--and in the double-blind listening tests, the VP180 was the first center-channel speaker I found completely free of any sonic flaws. It's essentially an M80 on its side with the drivers rearranged and the crossover modified significantly.

Alan

Thanks for the help, kcarlile, bdpf, Dr.House and Alan.

Alan, your description on VP180 is sooo alluring which makes me decide to purchase this model rather than VP150.

In my experience and deciding on two models that I think I would enjoy, if there is going to be a "what if" going on in your mind about the VP180 if you purchased the less expensive VP150 then go with the VP180. In the short run you might think you are saving money but in the long run you wind up spending more money than if you went with the VP180 in the first place.

Alan, that wasn't the point that was being made. The comparison was specifically the M2 and M60(not M80)above the bass area, because both used the same single mid-range and tweeter there. Certainly, as you point out, the M80 would have the capability to play louder and cleaner there because of the multiple drivers.

It's a curse quite a few of us share with you Alan!

But you're a very knowledgeable and admired "bitchy critic"!

Dang, you beat me to that quote from Alan. I too think it is fairly representative of the populace here on the Forum.

Another question, guys. I find that VP180 can be bi-amped. Anyone happened to compare the conter when it is bi-amped to none bi-amped? Is it a huge improvement?

It can't actually be bi-amped, because it has a passive crossover network.

Axiom charges extra for the dual binding posts in an attempt to discourage people from getting them. A few of us have wondered why they don't remove the option completely, but it's a box that needs to be ticked to match the competition.

Don't waste the few extra dollars, and just get the normal connection.

Julian, again here what you "find" isn't really there. The fact that the VP180 has two sets of terminals would be only a minor convenience on the road to the modest benefits that would be realized from true bi-amping. This would require two separate amplifiers(as the term "bi-amping" implies)and a separate electronic crossover preceding the amplifiers so that each would receive only the desired frequency range to amplify. The internal speaker crossover would have to be removed or at least by-passed, as Chris's comment implies.

These steps are nearly never taken in home audio use. Your question of a possible "huge" benefit suggests that you've read the advertising nonsense put out by some receiver manufacturers touting an alleged "bi-amp" option. A receiver can't bi-amp; it has only one amplifier outputting through several channels. The power is limited by it's single main power supply section. Distributing this power to a speaker by way of two sets of output transistors(which have no power of their own and simply act as valves to distribute the required amount of voltage to the speaker from the power supply section)instead of one can't double the available power or increase it by any amount.

I was dismayed to note the $40.00 additional that would be charged for the second set of terminals; I'd suggested that $1000 would be an appropriate premium.

Like the others mentioned the only way to truly bi-amp is with an active crossover and separate amplifier channels for all the drivers. First you would need to bypass the internal crossover and program the active crossover using a loudspeaker management system. To do this you would need some knowledge into electrical theory, crossover and loudspeaker design. You would also need schematics and/or measuring equipment.

There are benefits to this but it is not a novice project and quite costly as well. I have seen this used in a commercial efforts that have been modded but mostly for DIY speakers built from the ground up for home use.

I bi-amped my last car setup with fantastic results. I never actualy heard it with the passive crossovers so I cant say how much of an improvement the active crossovers really made in my setup but the shop that did the install did lots of A/D/S installs with the passives and they were very impressed with the final result of my setup. I used a zapco 50w x 2 for the tweets, a zapco 100w x 2 for the mids, and a alpine amp for the sub. The zapcos have a nice dsp that you can control through a pc hooked up via usb to adjust everything. Its the geek factor in me and prolly most of us that something like an active crossover / bi-amp setup really apeals to.

There's no doubt an appeal of a truly active crossover with multiple, separate amps, one connected directly to each driver. But the cost alone is a deterrent. Then the ability to design a crossover curve to exactly meet the passive network built by the speaker's designer is pretty daunting. The network is not simply a point and a slope. Care is put into controlling resonance, and other non-linearities of each driver and the cabinet.

One, good, single amp channel per full speaker inclosure is really enough for the home environment, for people using already complete speakers.

Thanks for all the detailed answers, guys. Correct me if I am wrong: since VP180 is passive biamped and most receivers are not capable of sending different frequencies through the two biamp channels, it is no big difference whether VP180 is biamped or not, right?

I have another question which may sound silly. If the HT setup is 7.1, the resource is 5.1 lossless sound (DTSHD MA/DolbyHD/LPCM) and the reciever is able to decode this sound, then the two remaining speakers are mute? Or receivers (like Onkyo 808, Yamaha RXA1000) can mix the sound and transmit to these two speakers without downgrading the sound quality?

right, don't worry about biamping, as that is not true biamping and you will be accomplishing little.

Julian, the VP180 isn't bi-amped in any way. Paying $40 extra for two sets of terminals would simplify the process of having to re-wire the speaker to by-pass its internal crossover. The second set of terminals has no active function otherwise. No receiver has an actual bi-amp capability; what some of them term a bi-amp option is meaningless, as previously discussed.

If a mode such as DPLIIx is applied to 5-channel material, then portions of the content in the 4th and 5th side surround channels(the front channels aren't affected in any way)which should be imaged in back are extracted from those side surround channels and directed to the back surrounds. The effect can be quite worthwhile if there're at least a few feet behind the listening position for a rear sound field to form.

Thanks for the clarifications, sirquack and JohnK.

By the way, I had two auditions from 2 nice Axiom owners today and was really impressed by how the system sounded. Both owners have towers (M60 and 80) rather than shelves and their living rooms both "seem" more suitable for shelves. However, after the auditions, I changed my mind and began to consider towers although I haven't auditioned M22 yet

In addition, one owner has VP180 and I think VP180 is wonderful even if it is non-biamped.