Hello all,

Just received my first set of Axiom's...a set of Boston Cherry M40's. Has anyone else compared the M40's to something like the M22's? I'm just fishin' for opinions. I just want to be sure I've made the right choice before my 30 day trial ends.

Next up will be a VP100 and 3 QS4's...

How about some pictures, then maybe we'll consider telling you whether you've made a good choice or not.

It's like extortion...:)

I'm sure you'll be ecstatic.

Why three QS4's? Does your receiver not output 7 channels? If not, you'd probably be best served sticking with 5.1. If I'm not mistaken, having only one channel behind you will make it sound like those effects are actually coming from the front of the room, rather than behind you. Two channels in the rear fixes that illusion.

Oh, I don't about that - A good friend of mine has his home theater set up kitty-corner, and in the corner opposite the TV, he's got a 6th front-firing speaker. I dont' think that it sounds like it is coming from the front of the room.

But, in any event - I think that the solution is to place a single QS in teh rear, which gives it a more spread out sound, especially if your amp will only handle 6.1 sound.

Another option would be to run a pair of M2s in the rear in parallel. If your amp only has hook-ups for 6.1, then the fact that the rears will be playing the same sounds won't be an issue. And if you find that you don't like the 6.1/7.1 sound, then you have a couple of direct firing drivers to place in room #2.

But, then again, Spiff's been at this way longer than I have, for what it's worth.

Actually, I think with 6.1, that problem only occurs when you're using a direct radiator for the rear cc.

ah...I guess that would make sense.

This happens because, to paraphrase Dark Helment, "Your ears ...are dumb. {whish, whoosh}"

I have a Yamaha RX-V740, which is 6.1. That's a good suggestion about running 2 speakers in parallel in the back. I'll try 1 QS first, hopefully it will disperse the sound enough to blend in.

I just want to get opinions on differences/similarities between M40s and M22s. It's been 3 days with the M40's and so far I'm happy.

Sorry Capn. No pictures yet. Not until I get the rest of my speakers. I'm too embarrassed to show the crap I currently have (not the M40s, the other speakers!). I'll give you a hint...starts with an "S" and ends with a "ony".

I'd love to hear a comparison of these two, as well. However, I only remember one such comparison happening (if that) and it was quite some time ago. Sounds like it's time for a shootout!

Hey, Chess, aren't you going up to the factory soon? (hint, hint) I'd like a comparison of all the mains, please!

From what I have heard (I have only heard the M22's), the M22's have more midrange clarity while the M40's have more bass. The only Axiom speakers to really have the best of both worlds is the M60 and the M80.

The M40 sound is much more similar to the sound of the M3.

Supposedly the speakers do sound different, but one is not technically better. It just depends on whether or not you enjoy a little more bass at the expense of a loss of midrange. Where as the M22's give you more midrange but less bass.

Your best bet is to compare the two to decide on what type of sound is best for you. However, if your like the sound you are getting, then why bother?

Being as I'm not getting any sound whatsoever from Axioms (I haven't gotten them yet!), I'd like to hear about comparisons. And there's no one listed in the SF Bay Area with the M3, M40, M50 line.

Thanks Snippy, I think I'm just going thru a "shoulda-coulda-woulda" phase. So far, I am happy with the M40's. I like the extra (smooth) bass. I like the look of the M3s and M40s, but not so much of the M22s (too tall and skinny for a bookshelf!). That's it...I'm sticking with the M40's and nobody can talk me out of it! (Unless somebody can come up with a good reason for me to switch!?)

I agree w/ kcarlile...let's get full blown comparison going. (But I'm not going to change my mind!)