I just received my M2v4s as the Christmas gift to myself thanks to Axiom's generous discount. Enjoying M22V4+ EP500v4+VP150+QS8 for a while, I was always wondering what would be the ones for my second system in the bedroom.

Currently I use M3v3 pair with a small sub. It sounds good but I knew it could be better. Mojo and other guys are absolutely correct, M2v4 is what you need for a small room, near field listening or even larger room with a sub.

First impression is the big surprise that how come the big sound could come from the little pretty boxes. I could push the volume up without too much worry about the distortion.

Secondly, the soundstage is so wide and tall. Imaging is very steady and accurate.

Regarding the quality of the sound, it is very smooth and clean. One thing I noticed is that the bass is very noticeable even though it is not supposed be according to the specs. Then I realized that it is because the sound is so clean so the bass is clearly separated from the mid-range. Once you could clearly hear the drum and bass, I guess that mentally you feel the bass and are satisfied. This could explain why some viewers said that a sub is not necessary.

Comparing with M3v3, the improvement is apparent and justifies the upgrade. M3's sound is not as clean and the soundstage is narrower. Don't have a chance to check M3v4 so can't comment it. However I assume that M3v4 would have less clean mid-range because of the larger woofer but you get lower extension right?

Didn't see too much comparison between M2v4 and M22v4, so it is always my question, which one is better?

They both have neutral frequency response with 3DB (half power requirement) different efficiency. When adjust 3-5 db SPL, I don't find too much difference on treble and mid-range. Adding a sub, the difference is even smaller. However they are still different. Subtle but you can feel that M22 is little bit fuller. Is it because of the higher crossover? Maybe that's why I feel the SPL difference is 5db, not 3db. I will keep M22s as my stereo and HT FLR in my 1500cu sound treated theatre for better dynamics. M2 is so small, like others pointed, it is easy to place and disappear in non-dedicated areas without worrying bass management too much. Wife-approval as well:)

Keeping a low level listening volume, M2v4s would make you smile!

"One thing I noticed is that the bass is very noticeable even though it is not supposed be according to the specs. Then I realized that it is because the sound is so clean so the bass is clearly separated from the mid-range. Once you could clearly hear the drum and bass, I guess that mentally you feel the bass and are satisfied. This could explain why some viewers said that a sub is not necessary."

This is a very good observation. I like this about the M50s too. The dual 6.5" in the M50s allow more linear bass and mid-range.

You get lower extension with the M3 compared to the M2 but I feel like the M3 is being asked to do more than it really can down there. With the M2 though, you know the designer had linearity as the ultimate goal and killed the lows that the M2 just can't handle. The end result is greater emotional satisfaction because the M2 is not trying too hard to please in a band that it simply can't handle.

The M3's midrange is less detailed but that's not necessarily a bad thing. It can be very relaxing.

I think the narrower soundstage is a v3 characteristic.

Glad you're enjoying yourself.

P.S. I still maintain that within a 12 foot MLP, the M2v4 and sub can work in a large room like my 4200 cu ft. Even without a sub, music is very satisfying. It disappears acoustically and is very easy to place.

Thanks Mojo, I do enjoy the new speakers.

You are correct, I am using the M2 with a sub in the bedroom which is larger with higher ceiling than the home theatre room. It works well for casual listening as background music. I would like to add a condition for it to work, at least based on my experience.

The small bookshelf speakers can handle less "crowded" music quite well even with high SPL. Something like vocal, jazz, blues, solo instrument and so on. Once you play "crowded" music like symphony or action movies where multiple instruments sing at the same time occupying frequencies across mid-range to hi-range, I have to lower down the volume to make it enjoyable. I don't call it distortion but rather too loud too busy. Even M22 would have the same issue. Technically I guess that the single tweeter and the single mid-range woofer are struggling with the over workload.

I guess that is when the larger size floorstanding speakers should come to play with more workers (drivers).

M3v4 could be very good relaxing speakers without a sub. Even the M3v3 works for me quite well.

The M22 and M2 are very similar with respect to how they sound. As you pointed out the M22 is 3db more sensitive ... so, you'd need twice the power for an M2 to get as loud as a M22. The M2 will top out before the M22. Both play well in small and medium sized rooms ... have no complaints with M2's in a 18x18x9 space.

The M22 is a great speaker and Axiom will make one if requested. It's my first choice if you're running a receiver and a sub. If cost or you want something smaller the the M2 is also a great choice.

OK, I will buy M22v4 in Burmese Blackwood finish come spring.

I used to have a pair of floorstanding speakers 20 years ago. So didn't have a chance to compare them with bookshelf+sub.

Let's assume you play them with a low to medium volume, in a sound treated room, at the triangle listening position, could you hear much difference in terms of sound clarity, soundstage?

I feel that the dynamics of volume and frequency have different impact. I would start a new thread to discuss this topic so experts or even speaker designers could shed some light on it for me.