I don't see them under bookshelf, on-wall or in-wall any longer. What happened?

M50, 150 gone too!

I really like the M50. I felt it had a place with vintage gear and live rooms. It has a very nostalgic sound.

We wanted to simplify things a bit. In our bookshelf line we started with the M2, that really does need a sub, to the M3 which does not. Then we went to the M22 that needed a sub again and beyond that the M5HP which did not.

I'm sorry to see them go. I have a pair of M22s which gets rotated into the line-up every once in a while. They are wonderful sounding speakers.

I love M22's, I used the onwall versions for all my surrounds when I switched to ATMOS and added the ceiling speakers. Found they sounded better than my Qs8s for surrounds in my new ATMOS setup. I think Nic9k did the same but maybe used m3s onwalls.

sad day

Yes I notice that too ...

I was purchasing some M22 but now I'm having issues with my 25+ year old Mirage sub which was going to go there. It's well beyond it's lifetime so I'm not sure if I should take the time to fix it ...

hmmmm keep the M22 which can be driven by a cheap receiver and buy a new sub (or fix the Mirage). Get new M5's which might require a better receiver to be driven alone? or buy M5's, a new sub, and a better receiver/amp?

Problem is it's a square room, the setup is off center (for the TV), and no one will be listening critically (only used for the TV, background music, and maybe parties) ... a dilemma for sure.

The minimum a listener needs for 2-channel is the M5. For 2.1, the M2 may actually be a better bet because the M5 has a bass bump that may make integration into some rooms a bit tough.

The M2 is really an M5 without a woofer so with a sub, I'd expect it to sound close to an M5. I say close because the M5 has a lower crossover to the tweeter and that may make the M5 highs slightly more dispersive.

I certainly won't miss the 150 although I know that slimmer profile was the only thing that worked for some applications.

As for the M50, I'm willing to bet an M2 with a sub will fit the same needs.

Which Mirage sub, Rich? My buddy has one that he picked up for $200 new and I have to say, it's a good one for his 12x15x8 space.

Randy and Phil, this announcement must have to do with low volumes for all those models and with justification along the lines I presented in a previous post. During tonight's dinner, I will be toasting the demise of the 150 and the rise of the 160.

Yup. M3 On-walls replaced my QS8s for surround duty and for overheads in my 7.1.4 dual sub setup.

I remember back in early 2004 when I was going to "splurge" and buy M22s for my main speakers, but talked to Ian way back then and I was putting these in an open basement area and not a dedicated space and needed more capability and went with M60s instead. They both would have been nice upgrades from anything that I had previously.

I took Ian's advice and went M60s that I still use today.

Uh huh. So from this Nick, I intuit you need to trade those M60s for active LFRs, yes?

Mojo ... how would you compare the M2s to the M3s. Think there is a big difference between M2's + sub vs M3's + sub?

I've heard all the M3's except the in-cabinet ... but not any M2's

I like both the M3 and the M22 BTW.

Rich, I don't have the M2s and have never heard them. I expect them to be more linear than the M3s in the midrange. In that regard, I expect them to sound like M5s with no bass. And I think you can push them as hard as M3s and they won't melt like the Totem Dreamcatchers. The M5s with a sub can be pushed even harder of course likely to 6dBC more before they sound squirrely.

I am actually considering M2s for my living room and my friend's. I have the M5s in there with a Yammie aub. The sub is important not because the M5s don't have enough bass. Rather, in my room, it's too much. Maybe it's that hump around 100Hz if you look at their curve. No problem in my main room though.

My bass management is primitive because I have a minimalist receiver. I do have pre-outs though and I route those to the sub. Then I cut the bass by 10 using the receiver and another 6 on my Chromecast Audio EQ. Using the sub, I have wonderful bass and the very enjoyable and emotional experience I enjoy from the very refined M5s.

So what's the problem then? I want rosewood and if I can get a smaller form factor, that would help the decor. That's where the M2s come in.

Of course the actives are coming and I'll be trying them in the livingroom first. If I like their sound in there, then I am going to have a major crisis...lol!

I forgot to mention the M3s have a more mellow, less accurate, less detailed sound than the M5s and likely the M2s.

My neighbour purchased M2's last year during the Black Friday sale. He was ready to replace an old pair of bookshelf speakers and I suggested that he go with the M2's. He is very happy with the quality and sound. I have listened to them a few times and would definitely purchase a pair if I was in the market for a bookshelf speaker.

Most likely you would find a richer sound with the M3 as it has a bit of a Bass bump with larger cabinet\driver and tuning.

My first Axiom was M3 and second set was M22. Never heard M2. My M3 plays deeper than my M22. I also highly regard M22 for any surround position. My M22 have been front on wall height 5.2.2. position for a couple years. DTSX everything the sound stage is massively awesome.

Thanks for that feedback, DeltaDweller.

I heard the M22ti and I found them very thin. I really did not like them. Also when pushed, they were skrawnky.

The M22s are flat to 100Hz and then slowly drop off. But look at those M2s. They're flat to 100Hz but then have this cute bump to 70Hz. Then they drop off a cliff. Both of those are good things. A small little bump to give them a bit of pop in the mid-bass and then no pretending on their part that they can go lower. So because of that cliff, they can be pushed without wheezing down low.

At least that's what they sound like on paper.

The M22s did not pair well with a 5 watt per channel single end triode tube amp. But, they sounded great with a 28 watt per channel vintage Harman Kardon amp. (Recapped and retubed of course)

I have the M22 v4 and they really need a sub. The M3 v4 are fairly good without a sub as long as you're not a bass loving kind of guy. Although I'd should listen to them again sans sub.

A few years ago I compare them (with sub in place). Going by memory, dangerous thing to do since I sure many of those brain cells self destructed long ago ... at first I thought that the M22's sounded slightly sibilant compared to the M3 but after comparing each to my "reference" (headphones) it was actually that the M3 bass boost was hiding a bit of the high mids. Even so, I'm splitting hairs here the M3 is a very pleasant speaker. The M22 or M3 with an EP500 is a great combo. I'd have to give the M22 a bit w/the ep.

Bah, what's $8,800 for 2 new speakers, right?

All speakers should have a sub either way. For the bookshelves I think the 350 would be sufficient unless you like deep. While I used M3 M22 mains a SVS PB1000 was great. Then I got M80 to which you'd need at least an EP500.

Brendo, I fully agree. I remember when I first set up my M100s. I said to myself "These don't need no stinkin' sub". Then I hooked up my 800 and set my brain right. LOL!

And six grand for amplification. And forty grand for sources. Bawahahaha!

Here in Vancouver you could easily spend that much and plenty more on sources. Gryphon audio has a C.D. player for 36K.

My local shop whom had Bryston for the last couple years { HiFi Center}. No longer see it on their site, has gone really high end. Sadly it's the stuff most can only dream of having one day.

Ha ... I think I’d feel foolish if I owned most of that “high end” stuff.

Its kind of like owning a Rolex.... more about advertising your wealth then about telling time. If you tell me it’s jewelry ... so is high end audio

That said there is one item that I would buy if money had no meaning to me ...
might make a fun thread to let you guys guess what it might be ...

Here, here, Rich!

Where do we start? How about a category?

I'm extremely disappointed. I had a pair queued up for my retirement present to myself. (Was spending an inordinate amount of time comparing various woods and finishes.) I think Axiom made a mistake, as I think the M22s are better than the M5s, especially for music. (I have M5s, M22s, M3s and M2s, and the M22s were my favorite.) I never thought I'd be looking elsewhere.

It would have been nice to have been informed of a "last call" too.

Okay, from the time I started the email to now I went from sad to ticked off. Damn.

Cork, send Ian an email. It's not like he burned the plans.

Cork, are the M2 and M22 you compared both v4?

That would make it too easy

Well, it's obvious then isn't it?

Hi Cork,

We can still make M22s, in fact the product pages still exist but they are hidden:

https://www.axiomaudio.com/m22-bookshelf-speakers

https://www.axiomaudio.com/m22-on-wall-speaker

https://www.axiomaudio.com/m22-in-wall-speakers

Hi rriev

Last night, at Excel Audio, I listened to a pair of Wilson ALEXX speakers, with a pair of Giant Wilson subwoofers, d'agostino Momentum amps, and preamp, Wilson stereo cross over for subs, a top of the line Clear Audio table with Goldfinger cartridge. The subs were driven by a pair of d'agostino amps. Nordost Oden cables all around.

Well, let me report, in my life, I have never heard anything like this system. An evening of Chet Baker. Glen Evan's, Harry Belafonte ... the closest to live perfomance I've ever heard.

AMAZING! And, amazingly expensive.

I can understand that if someone loves music, has a room large enough and is wealthy enough, this system would be a great choice.

I'm not saying that all high end stuff is not incredible ... I just think that one does not have to spend Lamborghini pricing to get that performance ...

Now that said, you might have to spend as much as a new Toyota Corolla depending on what your goals are. I think that is why most of us hang around here and not the Wilson site.

The M22s are v2 - and just so you know, your frequent praise of the v4 driver is one of the things pushing me to get a new set of M22s. That and I really want the wod finish.

Not sure of the M2 and since it's mounted I can't look. They're newer so I'm guessing yes, v4.

Also, to be fair I never really compared the M22s and the M2s, the M2 were strictly for surrounds.

Well this is great news, thanks Ian! I'll now get off the pot and pick a wood/finish. I was originally aiming for Mar2020, but I'll just get them and wrap them for myself for when the times comes.

I'll also miss posting on other forums how much I like the M22s Well, I'll still love them, but they may be harder for people to get. (When you see an M22 post on HTF or AVS, it's probably me.)

No question. I'll never own a system like that, but I sure could appreciate it. You could spend that much more and get much less than I heard last night.

The trick is to get the best sound for what you are willing to spend.

I went by Excel Audio today to pay for the records i picked up last night, and listened to what I previously thought was an excellent system:

Wilson Sabrina speakers,Luxman 900u amp, and C900 preamp, Clear Audio Concept turntable and Koetsu Blue cartridge.

This system, no slouch, sounded like I was sitting in the bleachers. Last night, front row, live performance.

Listening to the ALEXX system ruined me. I can't wait until I can forget what it sounded like so I can enjoy audio again.

Correction about the ALEXX system, it used the Master Innovation turntable, not the Statement.

Thanks. I fully expect the v4 to put the v2 to shame. Walnut and Rosewood are my faves.

All is well, I placed the order for my long-awaited wood M22s! They'll probably be the last speakers I need, unless we get a retirement house with some sort of mini great room, then maybe M80s.

I do like the Walnut, Mojo; but I went with Cherry:Nutmeg.

For no particular reason I'll add that another reason Axiom should continue to prominently offer the M22 is that besides sounding awesome, they're aesthetically beautiful. The H-W-D proportions are perfect. I've found no other speakers that that look as refined as they sound. If anyone has any other interesting speakers they've seen, post a link.

I'm with you there Cork. I love the M22s as well. My pair is white and they look great.

I'm gonna buy an M22 and an M2 and compare for 2.1 against each other and against M5.

Cork, I find your comments about proportions and refinement interesting. I'll have to contrast against the M5.

I'm getting the M2 in rosewood and the M22 in walnut.

I'll likely buy both in on-wall as well and try them all out.

Looking for some advise. I thinking of purchasing a preprocessor or would it be worth purchasing a preamp and add it to my Yamaha RX850A. I looking at the Emotivo XMC -1
or the Marantz 8002 11.2 Channel. I would need to purchase a new am for the side and rears. Pre amp I was thinking Parasound Halo 6 with home theatre bypass.

Thanks
Bob M

So I received my wood V4 M22s. (The 24th actually, but it's been busy and I didn't have a chance to swap them in.)

First off - they're beautiful! I'm sure no one's surprised, but I've only ever had the vinyl and had to see for myself. On the other hand, when I asked my wife what she thought of the finish she said they were great, but what was wrong with the other wood pair? She sits three feet away from them when she's at her desk and she never knew they were vinyl; so a tip of the craftsman hat to Axiom - both for the old vinyl and the new, awesome, wood veneer!

As for the V4 (vs my old V2) they are everything I was hoping for, the tweeter is much more noticeable. No such thing as a shy cymbal now. I have to say ... I'm hoping this isn't a case of being careful what you ask for, they definitely are more "crisp". I hope I get used to it (I'm enjoying the sound, so I think I will.)

I found the v4 tweeter was a very big improvement over the v2. My v2 was breaking up and was not as "airy" or clear. I wish I could contrast the M22 against the M5 and M3.

What I hadn't realized previously is how much the version (tweeter & crossover I presume?) plays a part in the comparison. I was freely comparing M2, M3, M22, and M5; but I have different versions of each and it wasn't until I got the M22 that I realized how much that plays into things (because for the first time I have two versions of the same speaker.)

I definitely like the tweeter/crossover combination better on the V4 M22. What I'm still on the fence about is the woofer/low performance. At first blush it seems like the V4 M22 is missing something, I'll call it "harmonic nuance"; for instance, when I listened to Rachmaninov's Piano Concerto #2 & #4 (two of my favorites) they felt less "complex" than previously. It's not all one-way though, with the V2's I would listen to 'In Memory of Elizabeth Reed' and be thinking there's something missing from Duane's high chord sliding, now that sounds about perfect.

Of course, I only have a about 4 hours listening on the new speakers, and for the first hour I had forgotten to recalibrate with the new speakers. Another issue is I'm running a V2 VP 100 and I'm not convinced mixing on the front is a good thing. (I listen to music in 5 channel stereo on a Yamaha V681.) In fact, it sometime sounded better when I went to straight 2-channel stereo (I forget what tracks drove that conclusion).

I was thinking of investing in an A/B switch and setting both the V2 and V4's up at the same time, but they probably both require their own calibration so that wouldn't be a fair comparison.

Here's another thought I had, maybe Axiom was mucking around in their secret laboratory (queue evil laugh) and when came up with the V4 they said, "the highs are great, but we lost some of the the low end. I know, let's swap in a six and a half inch for one of those five and a quarters." And viola - the M5! It would certainly explain a lot, including the phasing out of the M22. But I watch a lot of cynical TV, so don't mind me.

In any case, the M22s are a better fit for my music room so I'm definitely staying with these; and I have a lot of tweaking left to go before I declare a personal winner.

It could be the M22v4 is more linear, and hence introduces less harmonic distortion, which you interpret as less involving.

I've tried 5-channel stereo and find it kills the soundstage. PLII works very well for a lot of tunes. Even though the 160v4 is great, I find many songs benefit from PLII with no centre.

If you can, even temporarily, move the M22s into the room and see how soundstage width and depth may differ between the versions.

As for the M5, my theory is it was on the roadmap for a long time but a few things had to come together for it to be a worthy introduction. The HP driver, the v4 tweeter, improved mid-woofer, improved understanding of The Family of Curves, improved cabinet bracing and improved cross-overs all were necessary to get to the M5.

The M5 is, in my opinion, the most refined speaker Axiom makes. It takes very little to get them to disappear. The soundstage and imaging is absolutely spectacular rivaled only by my actives. Unfortunately that HP driver's coil is massive and is loaded with inductance which makes it unusable much above the crossover frequency of 250Hz. Therefore unlike the non-HP woofer, it can't be used to aid the mid-woofer. This lowers the sensitivity of the M5 requiring large amounts of power to drive it.

The M5 is truly a marvel and an absolute bargain.

Keep in mind that the M5 is a 3-way design while the M22 are only a 2-way design.
Forget the crossover.
Having a dedicated midrange driver makes a huge difference in the detail and sound signature.

I went from a 3-way Technics system (Japanese speakers) to M22s and i returned the M22s. I found them anemic and without detail. We bought the M60s (not a bookshelf size of course) and its detail and low end filled everything we were looking for. Since then i've been a convert that 2/2.5 way systems just don't have the same detail as dedicated midrange driver systems. Acoustic research i read years ago was looking at covering a room 360 degrees with speakers and found that the more speakers presented, the more detailed sounds were to the human ear (today's premium 'standard' of Atmos 10.2, 11.4... ring any bells?).

I often thought what it would be like if Axiom had a 3-way bookshelf unit to truly compare to my age old Technics system and now they finally do (about 15 years after i sold the Technics unit).

The dual mids don't know if they should squawk or woof. It's sort of a similar limitation with the M3 and M50 but it seems more natural for a woofer to try to squawk than a mid to try to woof. I find the M3s and M50s are soothing while the M22s are irritating even with a sub. I'm hoping the M2s are better.

Interesting thoughts, and fuel for more system twiddling.

Mojo, I'm not sure I follow, "If you can, even temporarily, move the M22s into the room and see how soundstage width and depth may differ between the versions." Do you mean compare the V2 vs V4 M22s for depth and soundstage? And if so, what sound mode would you recommend, stereo?

"It could be the M22v4 is more linear, and hence introduces less harmonic distortion, which you interpret as less involving."
That could very well be what's happening. I always liked the M22s "linearality"; maybe I just went past my limit on that particular good thing.

"I went from a 3-way Technics system (Japanese speakers) to M22s and i returned the M22s. I found them anemic and without detail."
Ouch. I feel like I'm getting one or the other (depending on version), just not both at the same time. But damn chesseroo, that was brutal!

"We bought the M60s (not a bookshelf size of course) and its detail and low end filled everything we were looking for."
I'm jealous. Unfortunately, I like to listen to music in my study and it's only 13x14, so towers are out of the question. One day though I'd love to get M60s, or ideally M80s, in my family room.

That's what I meant. Yes, stereo.

Try them with their backs 3 feet away from the front wall, 10 feet apart and sit 10 feet away. In other words, make an equilateral triangle with 10 foot sides. Experiment with sliding your MLP forward and back from that 10 foot reference.

I bought an A/B switch and I finally had a chance to set the V2 and V4 up side by side.
It wasn't an ideal test, the V2 location was jury rigged (sitting on top of the shipping boxes), and the V2 must have a higher SPL because they were 3 -6 db louder,.
But it didn't have to be ideal conditions because the differences were not subtle.
The sound stage, which Mojo asked about, was leaps and bounds better on the v4. And by better, I mean more precise location and better able to pick out instruments. On the other hand, the v2 gave more of a concert hall sound if that's your thing.
The high end was, as expected, also much, much better. I knew this already, but comparing A/B made it even more noticeable. Cymbals and cymbal brushes were noticeable on some tracks where they had been muffled or even buried before.
Of course, I still had my problem where I thought the v4 lost something. I even drug in my wife, who in a semi-blind comparison, also liked the v2's better.
I did some more playing around and I think I narrowed it down to mid-range performance. I think the v2 is much more pronounced in the mids.
To test this theory I set up a manual equalization exaggerating of the mid at +3.5 at 1k, and then outward from there at +3.0, and +2.0. (This is with a Yamaha RX-681.) Then I switched between the 681's 'natural' setting and my manual setting on both the v2 and v4's. On the v2 the difference was relative slight. On the v4, using my crude mid enhancement dramatically made the V4 sound more like the v2.
So I'm going to leave the v4's up and play around with a more precise mid boost.

Bottom line though, the M5's are the way to go for any future purchase. I'd be inclined to return the M22s if (1) I didn't need a hobby, (2) my location wasn't perfect for the M22's and (3) I didn't go out of my way to virtually hold my breath and say I wanted the M22's.

Cork, have you read my comments on the M2?

When I heard the M22ti, I thought it was crap. The M2v4 is like an M5 except it has better bass response in smaller rooms.

Cork, when you say the v2 gave more of a concert hall sound vs. the v4 presenting more precise imaging, that is what I call improved spatial resolution. This is due to greater linearity in the family of frequency response curves from multiple improvements Axiom has made particularly in the last 7 years. This spatial resolution arises naturally when you produce a very linear speaker and then place two of them in a room and feed them stereo. Positioning within the room is quite important to get as much out of them as the design allows.

There also appears to be a movement in the speaker industry as of maybe 7 years ago that Axiom has embraced. This is the practice of defining the soundstage as being resolved behind rather than in front of the speakers. With well-recorded material, I hear the front of the soundstage behind the rear plane of v4. From there, it extends backwards. This is not the case with v2. V2 is forward. This is actually something Craig pointed out to me before I bought v4 and it was one of the features that made me upgrade my M80v2 to M5. The M5s were better in all respects.

A good question is how exactly does Axiom achieve this effect. One of the variables in the equation must be the midrange. They likely manipulate the family of curves to shape the midrange response and push the soundstage back without affecting fidelity. This is perhaps why you are hearing more mids with the v2.

Are you hearing a difference in depth of soundstage between the v2 and v4?

How do the phase vs frequency plots of the speakers compare?

To really figure this out measure phase differential or transfer function between 2 speakers over the same frequency range.

Make sure the mic doesnt move and the mono speaker is in the same position for each test.

Axiom has this info Im sure.

A speakers relative phase to a boundary vs frequency or another speaker can throw its perceived location. This is used routinely in mixes to create spacial effects between channels. Doing this intentionally with placement or messing with phase (distance) processing can also create this effect.

I don't know the answer to those questions and have never asked Axiom for comparative plots. I don't have the equipment for these measurements. Even if I had the plots, I'm not sure I'd know how to interpret the effects they have on ears-brain. I'd sure like to learn though.

I've always wondered how height is encoded in stereo. Do you know?

I'm back, and I'll try to be terse because I know I've gone on a bit in this thread.

First off, I'm a hypocrite. Even though I complained about the M22s going away, and later said I wouldn't return them because I ordered them knowing they were discontinued ... I wound up not being able to tune them to my liking. So I upgraded to M5s.
Axiom was great as always, giving me full credit even though I was over by a few days.

My final word on the M22s is I think the v2 was more enjoyable than the v4. I can't say better, but I definitely preferred listening to the old version more.

But the M5v4s take the prize across the board. I won't list the categories, but the M5's win in all of them. When I was talking to Debbie@Axiom at one point during the upgrade she mentioned she considers the M5's towers disguised a bookshelves, and I completely agree; they are powerful full-range freakishly awesome speakers!

So anyway, my missing harmonic during Rachmaniov's 2nd is back - and I'm a happy camper!

And on a completely unrelated topic, as part of my birthday present my wife said she's okay with putting towers in the living room. So now I have to decide between M60s and M80s. Such a decision, this will take months!

With a sub, I hear no difference between M5 bookshelves and M2s. I'd even say the M2 soundstage and imaging is slightly better.

I'd be very interested to hear what you think of M5s compared to M60s or M80s. I can tell you that I take M5s over M100s. Yes the M100s can go louder and sound more like instruments and voices but, in my spaces, the M5s image and soundstage much better than the M100s. They completely audibly disappear and so do the M2, M3 and M50.

Relative to your ears, what is the height of your M5 tweeters? Did you place the M5s "into" the room?

Wow Mojo, your claim for the M2's boggles my mind. I just can't fathom the small M2's have that kind of performance. I have M2's, but they're the surrounds on my HT system so I'm only hearing secondary performance. We'll be redoing that room sometime over the next year and when they come down I'll try them with a sub in my music room and get back to you.
I'm curious, what kind of music do you listen to on the M2's, and what size room? (I'm mostly listening to blues, jazz, and classical, in that order; and in a 13'x14' room.)

I have the M5's a little high, the woofer is at ear level. I'm thinking of getting angled isolation pads to tilt them down a bit, but they sound good so I'm in no hurry.
I do have them horizontally toed in toward the center point of my chair. I might as well add that they're about 8' from the listening position and about 6.5' apart.

Let me first tell you about the M5s. If you can, even temporarily, get the tweeters 6" below your ears, and move them at least a couple of feet away from the front wall, you'll be rewarded with a deep soundstage as if they are projecting into the space behind them all across their width and beyond. I can achieve this in any room. See photos below. You can click on the photos to make them bigger. Look how low the M5s are placed.

As for the M2 bookshelves and on-walls, you can read my reviews at the links below. I was shocked when I heard them. That's when it finally hit home for me that larger Axioms are "nothing more" than spectrum and SPL extenders. The actives go further by increasing low end range and accuracy across the entire spectrum which results in greater spatial resolution and a more life-like presentation. They can also hit very high SPLs for large MLPs (more than 18 feet).

https://www.axiomaudio.com/reviews/index/list/product/301/

https://www.axiomaudio.com/m2-on-wall-speaker

I've placed them in my 1900 cu.ft. living room and 4200 cu.ft. main room (not shown). They sound at home in both locations.

I listen to blues, jazz and rock.

I went from M3 to M22 then to M80.
I never found the M22 to lack in any way aside from low end. I used mine with a SVSPB1000.
I've never heard the M5 but I ogled over the Bryston model of M5 in store for the couple years my local shop called Hifi center carried them.

M2's with a sub are extremely good IMO, both for music and for movies. Incredibly clear, just not quite enough bass without a sub, at least for me.

I used to switch back and forth between M2ti's and M60ti's in my home theater system as a demonstration and you could only really hear a difference at high volumes, which makes sense.

Yup, as John said. And those are the ti he's talking about. V4 has the OhSoSweet tweet, an improved mid-woofer that makes you want to break down and cry because it's so emotionally wrenching and a real cross-over to boot.

I used the M2 bookshelf in my 1900 cu.ft. living room on stands with no sub for 2.0 music. No problem and far more SPL than I can handle. Then I went to the M2OW for that space with dual subs. I use the dual subs because I had bass interaction with the OW that I could not control. So I cut them off at 80Hz and hand off to the sub in 2.2 with each sub fed from its own channel off my Pioneer pre-amp outs. Deeeeep, wiiiide soundstage and better than any other Axiom I've used in that room including active LFR. They acoustically disappear.

I can use M2 bookshelves in my 4200 cu.ft. room for music and movies along with my subs. No problem as long as my MLP is within 12 feet of them. Deeeep and wiiiide soundstage down there too and a total disappearing act. But, in that room, the actives are superior in almost every way.

I'm looking forward to a bunch of M2OWs which are now in production.

I have a pair of M22Ti's, not currently in service. The last time I used them was about 2 years ago when my Klipsch Fortes were being refinished after a flood.

I drove them with a Conrad Johnson Classic 60se tube amp and Jadis preamp. The M22s produced beautiful music. They are clear, and detailed, the mids were excellent, the highs are airy, and the bass was honest and surprisingly deep, although it sure benefited from an EP500 which I later added to the system.

These M22s were the first generation and I'm sure the most recent versions are even better. I'm glad to hear they are still available on special order. They are terrific speakers.

This is how M22s and M22 wannabes ought to be treated. One smack from a gunstock war club prevents brain damage.

I always loved M22s, all my surrounds are now M22 onwalls.

Randy, did you smack your M22s with a gunstock war club? I ask because my M22 wannabees sound so much better now after their smacking.

Smack a wannabe all you want Mojo, but never the real thing

I used a solid oak Samarai sword back when I was a student of RuKyu Karate. It is still under the bed if someone breaks in the house.

Up here, perps have more rights than prey.