I wondering if there's anyone that can make a fair comparison of a new set of M100s or LFR1100s and a set of current M80s or M60s in regards to the amount of audible difference made from the additional 6.5" driver. Upgrading my M60v2s that I've had for about 5 years. I'm very curious on what the LFRs sound like. But If I choose to opt for M100s I'm wondering how much more bass can be really observed from the extra driver. If I opt for LFRs, given my size room of 2700 cubic feet the 880s seem to be a more logical choice to me after reading how big some of the listening spaces are for LFR1100 owners. I intend on using the high powered woofers also.

There's also a factor to consider of power I would assume. Given that the LFRs require their own amplification it stands to reason that the 1100s would require more power than the smaller 880 or 660s and that more power would be needed to play at louder volumes, perhaps more than the ADA 1000-4 wanted to provide as easily.

Thanks.

I can't speak for the difference, if any, in bass response between the LFR1100 and M100, however, a couple of years ago I moved from the M60 to M80s and, in my opinion, added bass response is generated as much or more so from the increased size of the enclosure as opposed to adding an additional driver. The additional driver normally is added to primarily provide higher power handling.

I must admit although I was doing a trade at the time and I couldn't make a direct A/B comparison between the two, bass response, in my opinion anyway, was not that much different between the M60's and my newer M80's. Once you get in to floor standing speakers of this size, I would suspect there is somewhat of a law of diminishing returns even in the bigger models, so, I guess to try to answer your question, I would suspect because of similar cabinet sizes and even with the additional drivers in the LFR 1100, the M100 would more than likely have similar bass response.

As to expecting "more bass" because of the extra driver, as Casey pointed out, an extra driver generally results in having a greater power handling capacity and can therefore play more loudly at a given frequency within its range. There wouldn't necessarily be any lower bass extension, and the Axiom spec is in fact identical for the M100 and M80.

As to power requirements, "reason" can't be applied. Often the larger speakers in a given manufacturer's range of speakers are slightly more efficient than the smaller speakers and therefore require less, not more power. This is the case with the 1100/880/660 range, as the Axiom spec shows the 1100 to have a 2dB higher sensitivity than the 660 and 1dB more than the 880.

Yeah I was reading earlier about sensitivity levels and that seems odd that a bigger speaker with more drivers would require less power than a smaller one with less drivers. Perhaps having a lot of drivers working together to share the load would not require as much power as, say, only two drivers working a lot harder by themselves trying to produce the same output.

My old speakers were a pair of m60ti's, and I upgraded to the LFR's. I have the same power for the LFR's as I did the m60's. To be honest both speakers play at my desired level (90db) quite easily. I would say that I like the LFR's better over all, mainly due to their omni directional design. Right now my DSP is in Canada for a re-program. So, I'm just running the front drivers. Going off of my current set up (front LFR drivers and dual EP600's). There isn't a quantifiable difference between my current set up and the M60's + a pair EP600's.

That's very interesting. Kinda makes me consider the value of an upgrade right now, at least in the towers.

The pair of EP600'S make a HUGE difference in the low end. I think I have thir crossovers set to 80hz. This is why I think I didn't notice a huge difference.

When I did an A/B comparison of the M60 and M80, the difference in bass in favour of the M80 was quite noticeable. I would imagine there is a law of diminishing returns.

As others have pointed out, with a sub, it becomes moot.

Edit: there was also a difference in the mids and treble between the two, though it was more subtle.

From what others have posted, there is a noticeable step up between the V2 and V3 in general.

Personally, I would love to hear the LFRs. I can't afford them, but it sounds like a completely different speaker in the sound stage it produces.