Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo M5HP vs. M60's

I've had several speakers over the years, and some, I've really enjoyed. (All Canadian!) But during these last 6 to 8 years, I've been using Axiom M60's and more recently, the M5's; the 60's (v4) really are excellent speakers, in my opinion. Of course, rooms matter. The only real difficulty I've had with the 60's has been the bass range, from roughly 200hz. on down because the room really is part of the equation at that point. While the 60's certainly have a full, rich, crystal-clear, wide-open sound, very large-scale and rewarding to listen to and very impressive if pushed, there can be issues with bass-loading in an average size room. (Mine is 13' x 17' x 8'.) Furnishings and 'treatments' can made a difference but overall, the basic sound of any speaker will pretty much be what it is. The M5's, on the other hand, I've found to be every bit as 'rewarding' to listen to, clean, clear and very, very "comfortable." I've gone days without even having paid any direct attention to the speakers themselves. Like a clean windshield on your car, it shouldn't distract or draw attention to itself; it's just something to look through to see (hear) what's out there. The M5 bass register extends about as low as the 60's but is much less 'difficult' to deal with in the room. (approx. 30hz. in my room) Fewer obnoxious peaks and annoying 'bassness' generally, but yet are full sounding and natural; in some ways, even more so that the 60's. Also, you can adjust the height by adjusting the stand height, unlike any tower speaker. As far as loudness, I've found that the 5's remain clean as far as I've ever pushed them. At times, they can benefit from a good sub, but only to extend what is already good bass extension. The 60's benefit in some respects, from the Audyssey (32) treatment, at least in the bass control, but they almost need that, plus the sub, to smooth out the overall presentation in the room, whereas the 5's really don't need / benefit from any such room "correction." I don't know why there's so very little exposure to the Axiom products on line, generally, and especially to the speakers. Surveys, discussions and commentary rarely, if ever, include any talk of normal, room speakers like the 60's or M5's. People don't know what they're missing. Without hyper-analyzing and nit-picking, just listening with an open mind (and ears) would probably amaze some people. I've been a professional musician all my life, (primarily classical, and almost always acoustic, "real" instruments, so I do know what "real" sounds like.) No speaker is perfect but some are certainly a lot more convincing than others. There's some talk on this Axiom Forum here, about the 5's and 60's and a number of other models, but for my money, I feel you really can't go wrong with either of these, given a normal room and application. Interested to see what others have to say.

So would you recommend Audyssey 32 for anyone with bass issues? And does it need multiple subs to work best?

I've only had boomy bass in a couple of different rooms, both in basements with concrete flooring and concrete or masonry walls. My current and last residences were wood platform frame construction, and that same tower loudspeaker sounded good in those spaces.

I'm content with my M5's, I found the neutral sound I was looking for and blends nicely with the decor.

I found that with the Axiom 60's and especially the M5's, that Audyssey (xt32) has very little effect on frequencies above 300hz or so, but with the 60's, does have a pretty profound effect on lower, bass frequencies. Since that's usually where most of the problems are, it can be pretty effective in smoothing out the overall system's response. This is assuming the use of a sub because the bass output of the 60's e.g., is considerable and depending on the room and where you're sitting, the bass can be perfectly fine or somewhat overpowering. Rolling off, in effect, of the 60's' bass range somewhat, helps to reduce the problem and lets the sub deal with that range, "corrected." (There is a newer version of Audyssey that allows you to 'correct' only those frequencies below a certain point, like say, 300hz. I don't have that program so I can't comment on it.) Also, if repositioning the speakers is possible, that can have some effect on bass output.


I've never been able to incorporate two subs in my system, in this room, though some claim it's the only way to go. For me, any bass issues only seemed to get worse, but your room / system could well be different. The bass output of the 5's is more balanced overall, again, for me in this room, and I agree with you that they have a neutral, balanced sound. And certainly, they look good!

“ People don't know what they're missing. Without hyper-analyzing and nit-picking, just listening with an open mind (and ears) would probably amaze some people.”

This comment is gold. So very true. Folks just need to give them a try. The product literally speaks for itself. I’ve said it elsewhere before on the forum, I’m biased and a bit of an Axiom fanboy now, but the music and audio experiences I’ve had with my various axiom speakers are super fun and blow me away. Even when I’m just playing music and not critically listening, doing dishes whatever, something will catch my ear and draw me in and all of sudden I’m not doing dishes anymore but sitting and listening!!

I’ve since tried some Energy speakers and some older Paradigms too but the Axioms are the clear winner.

Great comment there Dlow.

Hi Kodiak,

Yes, I had various Energy Connoisseur speakers over the years, too, C-2 and C-6, initially, and then when the C-2's died (tweeter dried up) I began using the "odd numbers," the C-3 and C-5's. I liked them but with some material, they seemed to have something of a 'commercial' type sound. But later, in direct comparisons with the Axioms, they really fell short. The Axioms just opened up and relaxed the sound. I've since revisited the C-3's just for fun and still, overall, there's really no comparison. I think the best compliment we can give any speaker is to say that it just "goes away," it disappears; draws no attention to itself. No experience with older Paradigms but I don't like the newer ones. I don't know if they've changed their approach or what but they sounded very almost harsh to me. Might have been the store / showroom / related equipment, but non-starters for me.

Yeah. My Energy bookshelves are now a garage setup, perfect for that type of listening while working on stuff etc.

The old Paradigms are doing theatre duty in my budget theatre setup in my unfinished basement. Does the job for movies where im totally less critical. It’s really all about the 2 channel stereo for me for more critical listening.

I suspect my m60ti will eventually make it down there for their duty when I upgrade the living main system. But I’m in no rush really.

I really do think the axiom speakers are hard to beat even for the current prices. Folks were complaining elsewhere that the axioms “ used to be “ a good value. As if Axiom was immune to inflation and increased costs of doing business.

I am interested to try other brands of speakers for sure but I find it hard to pay more for something that’s maybe not as good. I guess it comes down to return policy. I know I will want to audition others for my eventual living room upgrade.

There was a forum member posting last year on an upgrade with axiom and paradigm. In the end I think he went with paradigm. I’ll see if I can find the thread sometime.

It sounds like you have some good options, having systems in different rooms. I just have one main system used for everything, so the speakers are the speakers!

I understand you want to look around at the current options when the time comes to upgrade, but I have a problem with so many of the so-called American, (or German or English or 'whatever') companies who claim to be American, German, etc., when the fine print says "Designed and Engineered in Whatever country," but then, clearly on the back of the product, "MADE IN CHINA." Well, then, it's not an American company, is it?! And if they're claiming to save so much money by having this stuff made overseas, in China, then why the heck is so much of it so very expensive!? Look at Monitor Audio or countless other products; they cost way more than Axioms comparing comparable models, so where is all that money going? And listen to some of it!...some pretty nasty stuff out there. Some insist that the products are 'well made,' 'top quality,' etc., but even if they are, I personally can't financially support let's say ... "what going on over there." (Follow what's happening in the western Pacific, with Taiwan, the Philippines, collaboration with Russia, etc., etc.) I'd soon go without than buy into their economy. Also, years ago, I worked in a business where we dealt with products, musical instruments, from all over, and initially, it seemed some of those "imported" products were Ok, not great but Ok. Then, after a while, we began to see the gradual disintegration of the products, failures due directly to poor quality materials, if not workmanship. So, what can we expect from today's stereo equipment down the road? I don't know but I don't care...I don't want to support them, or their so-called 'parent companies.'

So that leaves me, at least, few options, but fortunately, companies like Axiom still exist, making what I feel are great, sensibly priced products. (Focal is actually a real French company, so that'd be a possibility, but some of what I've seen and read doesn't speak well for some of their construction methods. Sound, of course, is a personal matter.) Paradigm is still Canadian, as far as I know, but it seems they've changed their sound.

Didn't mean to go on a rant here, but it is part of the equation, as far as I'm concerned. I certainly respect anyone's right to buy what they like, wherever it's made, but I'm very happy with the whole Axiom thing, and I hope they stay put and keep their prices in line. If not, they'll drive even loyal customers away.

Kodiak, I still have back issues of Sound & Vision (Canada), and the Energy Connoisseur C-2 was one of their best measuring loudspeakers. The listening window was a tight +/- 1.5 dB across most of the audio spectrum. Only the much more expensive Ethera Vitae was in the same ballpark (but with a worse directivity curve); most speakers of that era didn't even fit within +/- 3 dB.

API made great products back then, I've learned from a recent interview with Dr. Sean Olive that the Energy 22 was in regular rotation at the NRC because it was hard to beat in double blind listening tests.

Yes, the C-2's were great. I was really disappointed when mine gave up the ghost and I wasn't able to get replacement parts. The C-6's were good too, but with the much greater bass output, they were difficult to work with in a small to medium size room. The 'even numbers' were Canadian made as were the early 'odd numbers.' At some point, I think when Klipsch go involved, they moved production to China.

I've heard so much about the 22's but never heard them, and now, I guess they're too old to find in reasonably good condition. Also, the Veritas line was supposed to be good but I never heard them, either. Glad to be comfortable with the Axioms and don't feel I have to keep looking!

I was quite interested in Energy's Veritas v2.8 flagship, both because of their reputation as a flagship, and the fact that audio writer Daniel Kumin of Sound & Vision (Canada) and Sound & Vision (US) owned a pair as his reference speaker and often used them as his basis of comparison when auditioning review speakers.

I didn't learn to properly decipher speaker measurements until 2021, so I didn't realize that their measurements were atrocious. They look worse than the $24,000 B&W Matrix 801’s measurements that Dr. Floyd Toole likes to make fun of on Powerpoint for being outperformed by $200 rivals. Who knew that separate midrange and tweeter enclosures introduces unwanted resonances? I've since come to the conclusion that we're adaptive to our environment and can learn to like whatever speaker we own.

That thread where Stereoguy99 chose the Premier 800F over the M60HP taught me that a non-neutral lifted treble is a market place expectation. Every loudspeaker I’ve owned since the early 90’s has a lifted treble, the exception being my M5HP’s. You can tell there’s lift because you hear treble air, sparkle, and brilliance when listening to human speech. BTW, human voices don’t have treble air, sparkle, and brilliance.

Still, listening to speakers at home in your own room, using your own music, and comparing back-to-back with a candidate rival is a fair comparison. I reread the Veritas review, and if a poorly spectrally unbalanced loudspeaker can still earn praise in double blind listening tests, I wonder if there’s something else that wins double blind listening tests beyond Olive score or Spinorama metrics?

C-2
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/h0dc...zy14iyos8j2ecci&st=o410drkq&dl=0

Energy Veritas v2.8
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/mruj...2x3r57oxrj5lltl&st=4ieo5sxf&dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/lazp...jaha7y9i47zhcgx&st=lnvac2x1&dl=0

Ethera Vitae
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/1lsv...fbng0vmorzn3l1w&st=v15yy825&dl=0

These reviews were usually penned by Ian G. Masters. Himself and Alan Lofft were usually the main panelists, and they just tore every loudspeaker apart critically, all without knowing what they were listening to. The reviews are succinct, brilliant, and relevant even 30 years later.

Hi Hambrabi,
I lot of truth in what you say here and a lot to digest in the reviews...tomorrow! I have to agree that we do tend to adapt to what we have and unless it's really 'offensive,' we can learn to live with it. But I also believe that a really neutral speaker, whatever that actually is, one reasonably well matched to the room, will be a lot easier to live with over time than one that has issues. The old lifted treble trick has, for sure, tricked many as has thunderous, booming bass! And you're quite right that the human voice has no such air and sparkle about it.

As I'd mentioned, I've never heard the Energy 22's nor anything from the Veritas line, just that they were supposed to be excellent. ?? Yeah, measurements are one thing but the sound delivered to the ear can be something else, especially taking rooms into account. Actually, too, we all hear differently and our expectations are different, often depending on what our preferred material is. (And our age!)

We also need to consider environment, biases and the equipment driving the speakers. I have long held beliefs that the source is the most important component in the audio chain. I have owned cheap to ultra expensive speakers and have been an Axiom customer since the late 1980's, early 1990's and believe their value proposition is the best I have found.

Axiom at one point off shored manufacturing. It has since returned to Dwight. Andrew was also an engineer at Audio Products International, the conglomerate owner of many audio brands - including Energy. Point of note, API was purchased by Klipsch.

Yes, I think we're both saying very similar things, if not quite exactly. By 'environment,' I think we both mean our surroundings, including the room and anything else that has an effect on what we are hearing from our systems. "Biases,' I think we mean our 'tastes' in sound reproduction, what we expect or want to hear, whether or not it's actually what others would call 'neutral.' What I hear as "neutral," the next person might hear as bland, dull, thin, etc., so it really does come down to personal taste. I guess there's really no "right" or "wrong" when it comes to taste, but fidelity to the original or intended could be considered more "right." After all, even a live performance of normal, standard instruments doesn't sound bright, or "airy" or boomy, but is balanced, open and natural sounding. So, I appreciate speakers that do the same.

As for the "source being the most important component," there'd I'd have to differ with you. I feel that the speakers themselves have the most determinative effect on the final sound of a system. I can change any number of things in the 'chain' and hear at most, very subtle differences; but if I change speakers, I'll likely hear enormous differences, depending on the type of speaker, etc. Everything from tonal balance to efficiency, not to mention dispersion and overall interaction with the room itself.

I didn't know that Axiom had been sourcing or manufacturing (?) overseas. That's something of a shock to me but at least they came 'back home.' Yes, I knew Andrew Welker had been working for API (Mirage? or whoever...) but I didn't know he went back as far as early Energy days. And yes, I know that when Klipsch bought them, Energy's speakers went 'overseas,'probably among others.

Hi Hambrabi,
I lot of truth in what you say here and a lot to digest in the reviews...tomorrow! I have to agree that we do tend to adapt to what we have and unless it's really 'offensive,' we can learn to live with it. But I also believe that a really neutral speaker, whatever that actually is, one reasonably well matched to the room, will be a lot easier to live with over time than one that has issues. The old lifted treble trick has, for sure, tricked many as has thunderous, booming bass! And you're quite right that the human voice has no such air and sparkle about it.

As I'd mentioned, I've never heard the Energy 22's nor anything from the Veritas line, just that they were supposed to be excellent. ?? Yeah, measurements are one thing but the sound delivered to the ear can be something else, especially taking rooms into account. Actually, too, we all hear differently and our expectations are different, often depending on what our preferred material is. (And our age!)

Hambrabi, thanks for the links to those speaker reviews. Doug Schneider's are always good, aren't they? I'm surprised to see the Veritas results, though, so now I don't feel I've really missed too much, especially considering the price. Bass from those things would have been intolerable in my room! Whew.

The C-2's really were pretty impressive, and the bass extension in my room was solid down to almost 30hz. And I always found their overall sound to be very natural, 'comfortable' and easy to live with, very similar in ways to the C-6's without the overbearing bass output.

Fair enough, all good. Note that I am not talking about the "similarly good" mass market brands of Sony, Yamaha, etc. If you drive a system with a better quality turntable (Linn) for example, your Sony TT will be exposed as being less than good. Your mileage may vary, depending upon everything we discuss above. I have built basic amp/speaker systems with high end sources, and they are always deemed better by friends/relatives than high end speaker based systems with mediocre sources. I do realize that not everyone has the means or access - and in some cases the knowledge of where manufacturers fit into the scale of decent to exceptional equipment. Bottom line - if you like it, that is all that matters! :-)


Yes, at one point Ian moved manufacturing and assembly to China. Now everything including the Bryston and the tuner business Ian recent bought are all designed and made in Dwight. If you are in the area, they welcome drop ins and will give you a tour!

The one element of a system I didn't mention, because I hadn't been thinking about it, is the TT, especially the arm and cartridge. They can definitely have a dramatic effect on the sound of a system, regardless of speakers or whatever else. But as dramatic as those differences can be, (comparing good vinyl playback components with mediocre ones) keeping whatever source constant and changing only speakers, I feel, will nearly always show huge differences between / among different speakers. Whereas, through any given "rest of the system," changing source hardware seems more subtle than changing speakers. Maybe we're both saying more less the same thing, but from different perspectives, BBIBH? I haven't used any vinyl for years...years...so that isn't usually on my radar and I don't normally think "vinyl" first.

I agree with your Linn vs. Sony comparison being clearly discernable, but do you think as much so as say comparing two similarly different speaker brands or types? A shame we all live so far away from each other! It would be fun to actually do some of this in person, on real, live systems! Nobody I know around here could possibly care any less about this kind of thing!

My audio sources nowadays are the apps on my iPhone and Chromecast with Google TV. For $13 a month, I get millions of songs, my own portable playlists, and no YouTube ads. I've buried analog. Thankfully, there's millions of grave digging Millennial and Gen Z hipsters to resurrect and nourish those formats.

I ditched vinyl when my JVC, Toshiba, and Akai turntables all croaked. Just like today, I listened to favorite tracks rather than complete albums, so I made my own mix tapes with Dolby B and later Dolby C. Type II chrome tape was good enough, but for my favorites I would use type IV metal tape for best sound quality. Tape also minimized record wear since the Shure cartridge needed a whopping 3 grams of tracking force for recommended playback.

I don't have fond memories of LP's, perhaps because I grew up through the elevated noise floor of the recycled vinyl era of the 1970's and 1980's. Today's virgin vinyl and 180g+ pressings are better, but at $30+ a pop, they're just not as accessible as the $5 and $8 records of the 70's and 80's (inflation unadjusted).

Oh, and I forgot to mention that LP is a home audio format. It's hard to play a record in a moving car or airplane. Digitization makes sense for convenience, space savings, and portability. I'm satisfied with sound quality for now, but think artists and recording engineers could make better decisions with today's releases.

I'm researching the minimum lossy bitrate before it's indistinguishable from lossless 16/44. I'll post the info to the forum when I find the verifiable answer, but it seems the bigger problem are the unfathomable streaming services: pristine uploads from content creators never reach the end user because it went through a black box of compression and data loss.

A TT was an extreme example, granted. The same can be said of CD, DVD, and most other playback devices. I
have switched for most listening to streaming service, and know people who are taking a similar approach to those services and also any media files they utilize. I run Spotify through a decent sound card on an average pc in my HT setup, through an average amp and M80 V2/M5 V4/VP160 V3/EP500 V4 x 2. I honestly cant be bothered upgrading any longer - having gone through the 80's to about 2020 when I said I was good. My days of Reference 3a Supremas and Totem Mani 2's, Linn Sondek, SIMAudio Moon amps are over. I mainly use the system for background music or HT at this point. Also, the closest high end shop (Sound Stage Fine Audio) owner recently retired...and I don't want to travel to audition gear any more. I try to visit Ian and gang yearly, just to see what they have in store and get any teasers of future plans. I dont think I will get there this year, but maybe next!

I've retired the whole vinyl rig long ago and now, mostly stream and occasionally dig out a CD, SACD or two. DVD / Blu-ray videos, but mostly now, stream from the internet. I'm done upgrading too, especially since I seem to have found the right mix of stuff that I'm really happy with. I mentioned earlier here, that it's nice not to feel the need to 'keep looking.' It sounds like you're there, too! By the way, I also have the VP160 center; I don't think there's a better center out there, especially for the price. I wish I lived closer to Axiom; I'd love to go see the place but it's way too far from here.

BBiBH, you had the Mani-2's? How did you like them?

I had a list 6 pairs of dream loudspeakers during the 90's, all of them financially out of reach. I had a thing for the Waveform Mach 17, Ethera Vitae, Mirage M1si, KEF Model 4, Infinity Modulus sub-sat, and the Totem Mani-2.

While I never heard them, the Totems wowed me with their isobaric woofers (though you could accomplish the same thing with a sub-sat configuration).

In perfect hindsight, I wouldn't change a thing and just enjoy my Nuance 330's for the next 20 years.

They were quite possibly the best speakers I have every heard and owned. The dual woofers inside (one you saw, one that mirrored that inside) were amazing at preproducing bass. You may be correct in the sub/sat thinking, but this was done in one footprint about the size of my M5's (if memory servs). The designer Vince had some interesting ideas on speaker design - such as veneering the inside of the speaker cabinet to eliminate cabinet warping - but the design was amazing at reproducing music. I drove these with a YBA amp (cant recall the model), had various sources vinyl and CD (Linn, Oracle, Rega, etc.) and they were great.

The only speaker that approached or even surpassed them was the Reference 3a Suprema. But they were a much larger design, more along a sub/sat design.

I hear you on the longevity of finding a good system. I settled on the Axiom AX3's and had them for 20+ years, then traded them in on M80's at the 2011 Axiom anniversary party. Added M5's, EP500's, VP160's and even a pair of M3 wireless. This will be good for a while. We played with the LFR1100's and EP800's at the last Axiom anniversary in 2015. Not sure I will ever feel the need to go that far!