Hi: I've been considering purchasing the Mt3i or M22i but have recently come across rave reviews for the Ascend CMB-170. Has anyone been able to compare the two? Just going by the reviews, it seems like the Ascends may have an edge, as there weren't any negatives (e.g., bass hump, sibilance) to report, except for the lack of bass, which could apply for any small speaker. The M3s seem to have a slight exaggeration in the bass and the treble in the M22s seem to get slightly edgy at times. I know that at this price point you can't get close to perfection. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks.

This may not be the answer that you are looking for but, I think you will be surprised at how close to perfection you can come at this price point. You are looking at some fine equipment.

I did a head to head with them awhile back. here were my thoughts.

Thanks tinfoilhat for responding so quickly. When you mention that "they" are close to perfection, you were refering to the Axioms or both? By the way, what's cooking under that oven you're wearing?!

Thanks to you too spiffnme. Actually, the pic looks like the bear belongs in my son's collection. Anyhow, thanks for your detailed observations. I guess it comes down to slightly smoother highs (Ascends) vs slightly more detailed highs (Axioms),and pretty vs ugly looks. I can live with ugly. I like smooth and velvety sound, since i can listen without worrying about being irritated by crashing cymbals. On the other hand, i know the "live" quality is somewhat diminished with smoother presentations. I find it harder to relax and listen when speakers are detailed, because I'm anticipating harshness. Well, I'll figure it out. Thanks, again.

I'm referring to the Axioms based on personal experience, and the Ascends based on current reviews. Approaching perfection requires huge amounts of cash, but if a designer makes smart decisions early on, then the consumer can approach perfection when their budget allows. Bass costs money, so design speakers that do a good job on the midrange and high end and then the consumer can fill in the bass with a subwoofer which will do a better job anyway. I'm partial to small speakers. I listen in fairly close quarters and at lower volume levels. Small speakers image like champs.
Nothing is cooking under the foil. That is the point - you want to avoid those nasty government rays.

The difference between the M22 and the 170 is more subtle than what it sounds like you're thinking. The two speakers are VERY similar sounding. The M22 has just that tad bit more detail. It's not a night and day difference.

leader,

I own the CBM-170's and have heard the M22, would agree pretty much with what Spiffnme has said about the two. You say that you are looking for a smooth, velvety sound, not sure you will find this in either speaker.

Thanks all. I appreciate the input. I guess I can't go "wrong" with either it sounds, especially for the price point and 30 day return policy for both brands. I'll return after I purchase one of them and share my 2 cents. Tinfoilhat...government rays?

Old paranoid fantasy joke.
You may want to try the M3s. Reviewers usually use the word smooth when they describe the sound.

I'm with Casaba on this one. I have posted thoughts on these speakers, and own the CBM-170's that spiffnme heard. These are not smooth and velvety, they are accurate and detailed.

Some smooth and velvety speakers I have heard and enjoy are Sonus Faber Concertinos, which can be had used for about $600-$700 pair.

Also looking into ACI Emeralds could be an option. I have heard the ACI Sapphires...and they are smooth.