NULL
1 people found this helpful
Price
Quality
Value
This is a review of the M2v4 bookshelf. I am a very satisfied owner of M2, M5, M100, M3, M50, QS10, VP160, 2xEP500, 1xEP800, active LFR1100; all v4. I also run ADA1000-8, ADA1000-3x2 and ADA1500-3. I am a previous owner of M80, VP150, QS8x4 and EP600, all v2, which I didn’t find so great. I have had the good fortune of running all this gear in my 1900 cu. ft. living room and, with the exception of the active LFRs, also my 4200 cu. ft. home theater. If you don’t want to read this long post, know that my buddies and I are simply stunned with the M2. You will be emotionally rewarded. One of my buddies, who is very familiar with all my speakers, thought the M100s were on when it was actually the M2s. He didn't believe it until he checked for himself. The M2s elevate my respect for Axiom's speaker design capabilities even more.
Before I begin describing the M2v4, I need to point out that even though the v4 M2, M3, M50, M5 and M100 aren't as excellent as the active LFR1100s, there are no flaws. Ditto for v4 subs, QS10 and VP160. I cannot say that about the v2. The v4 are examples of as good as you can get with the chosen technology and architecture. The quality, in all aesthetic, functional and performance respects is exemplary (with the exception of the fabric grills but I like them exposed because they look and sound better).
----- Listening Impressions ----
The first thing I noticed when I positioned the M2s in my living room and home theater, was that no "room correction" was needed. The only other speaker I can claim that doesn't need correcting besides the active LFRs is the Bose 601. The big difference though is the M2s actually image, are high fidelity and have both highs and lows. In fact, in my 1900 cu. ft. living room, a sub is not required for an emotionally rewarding music experience. The second thing I noticed was the M2s are extremely easy to place compared to larger speakers. The third thing was their ability to acoustically disappear with more recordings than other Axioms. It made me wonder if anyone actually needs M5s. The fourth was they cast a much wider soundstage in my 1900 cu. ft. living room than even the active LFRs. In fact, one of my buddies said it was just sick how the M2s were projecting right out to my side-walls. He asked me to turn off the sub so he can hear just the M2s. But the sub wasn't on; no cable going to it and not plugged in. This of course he had to check for himself. He was amazed how song after song, he could not locate the M2s because they acoustically disappear. And why shouldn't they? With the effort Axiom put in to their amplitude responses, and diminutive size, they are like a point source. He saw the espresso finish in daylight and fell in love with it. He swore he'd never put speakers in his living room but these M2s have now changed his mind. This was when I had an Aha! moment: I never quite clued into the fact that Axioms midranges are really mid-woofers until I got these M2s.
One of my friends, who also has M5s, was over to so some switching between the M2s and M5s with all three of my subs going and crossed over at 80Hz in my home theater. With no Audyssey, the M2s sound better. With Audyssey, she describes the M5s as slightly warmer but admits this difference is very minor. She too was wondering why she bought M5s which are larger and more expensive. I reminded her however that she lacks the subbage I have.
I found the M2s are no different than the M5s when it comes to dispersion and sound projection. I can place them 6 feet apart or 12 feet apart and I get a wall of 3D sound from 10 to 12 feet away. With their backs 42" away from the front wall, we can see the highs from Jimmy Sax being sprayed across the space between their backs and towards the front wall and the sides. All images are behind them. The effect is just unbelievable. They have no problem performing in this 4200 cu.ft. room. From 12 feet away, I can push them to 103 dBC peaks without a problem (3 subs included). They can likely go louder but I held back for fear of vaporizing those beauties with my 1500. I am in awe of the clarity, soundstage and imaging.
I've noticed when using the M2s and M5s as my fronts, my QS10s cast images towards the front that were not there when I was using the M100s as fronts. This is a very, very cool effect for both music and movies. I perceive PLII and other surround formats as more natural; almost like there is more space for each speaker to do its job. I surmise the large soundscape from the M100s is drowning out some of the surround radiation even in my large 4,200 cu. ft. space.
------ Build -----
Some may be led to believe the M2, being the lowest-priced model in the line-up, is cheap. It is not. It is very solid and has the same asymmetrical cabinet (as all other Axioms) to attenuate standing waves. It contains more than a handful of stuffing, a real cross-over and cast baskets on the wee beastie of a mid-woofer and tweeter. The tweeter is the same highly dispersive, high-power design as the one found on all the other models including the active LFRs. This is also the case with the mid-woofer which rewards you with SNAP! and SMACK! when drum skins are hit or the brashness of the sax due to its good half inch peak-to-peak excursion.
As for aesthetics, most of my speakers are walnut natural satin which is a finish I love. My M2s are walnut low gloss espresso which is darker than natural walnut and mutes the natural walnut grain. This suits my living room just fine. I’ve also seen the bordeaux stain which is very red and results in more muting. It’s worth pointing out the walnut natural satin takes on a more reddish tinge under halogen lighting but not nearly as red as Bordeaux.
----- M2s or M5s? -----
So do you need M2s or M5s? I cannot hear a difference between them with a sub. At times I thought the M2s image better but I cannot be sure. I pushed both from very quiet to very loud (103dBC peaks at 12 feet away). I also think the M2s are more linear as evidenced by the fact they don’t need Audyssey and can play well in 1900 cu. ft. rooms and smaller. In those rooms, they don’t need subs. The M5s do even worse in smaller rooms because their bass is over-whelming and needs to be managed. You can see evidence of this as a bump around 100 Hz on the M5 frequency response curve. The M2 with a sub is just as dynamic as an M5 within their SPL-distance limit.
----- How about M3 or M50? -----
Where does the M3 or M50 fit in? The M3 and M50 are warmer and they reach lower than the M2s. But even with the M3, when you start pushing it, a sub is a must. I can hear it distorting at around 95dBC peaks at 10 feet away. The M50, which reaches lower than the M3, starts distorting at around 100dBC peaks from the same distance. The lack of a bass bump in the M2 is indeed very important. I can't put the M3 in my 1800 cu. ft. living room without cutting the bass by 16dB never mind an 800 cu. ft. room. Not so with the M2. But the M3 and M50 present fuzzier (warmer) images relative to all other Axioms because they're missing the mid-woofer. Their images have lower “spatial resolution”. Some, me included, say that the M3 and M50 allow you to listen to the performance and not the equipment. When I listen to any other Axiom, I tend to analyze where all the instruments and voices are located. Not so with the M3 or M50. This may of course be just my problem although I am also noticing the same behavior now from a few of my friends. If you want low spatial resolution, you would choose an M3 or an M50; an M50 if you don't want to use a sub and an M3 with a sub. A good question is "When might you want low spatial resolution?" I've tried to answer that question. I've listened to vinyl on Spotify, tape and bad recordings on the various speakers. I've also listened in the background while cooking, reading etc. I've found that low spatial resolution is actually more satisfying to me for background listening and very bad recordings. M3 and M50 are like 480p, all other passives are like 1080p and active LFRs are like 4K. At least this is my analogy. If you like low spatial resolution sound, the M3 or M50 is the way to go. Otherwise, the M2 is the clear winner.
Keep in mind though, the woofer in the M5 reaches lower and is much more linear than the M3. The M5 can go to 103dBC peaks without distorting and no sub which is 8dBC better than the M3. You can use it without a sub in a 4,200 cu. ft. room like mine and still be very satisfied with the bass for music. But not the M3. You can push the M5 to 107dBC with a sub as measured at a 12 foot MLP without any distortion. No way you can do that with an M3 or M2.
----- Recommendations -----
I’ll finally leave you with some specific recommendations about M2s vs. M5s for music listening. For rooms less than 1900 cu. ft., go M2s and no sub. For a listening distance of less than 10 feet, go M5 or M60 if you don’t want a sub; otherwise go M2s with a sub for rooms larger than 1900 cu. ft. For a listening distance greater than 10 feet and less than 12 feet, go M5 or M60HP if you don’t want a sub; otherwise go M2s with a sub for rooms larger than 1900 cu. ft. For distances greater than 12 feet, then you need other Axiom floor-standers. One last thing I’ll leave you with. Experiment with how high you place them using boxes, cans or whatever before you commit to stands. I’ve found M2 and M5 tweeters placed below the ears allow these speakers to acoustically disappear better and cast uncanny 3D images.
-Mojo-
