Now it's time to explain why this review even came to be. I've never heard a monitor this dear. No other I auditioned came close in this regard so its extreme pedigree and what to expect from it had me in the dark. Upon listening to it for the first time in the 130m² Aalborg room, I saw a challenge I'd not be equal to. During my second encounter at the local distributor's far smaller living room, the M1 fronted by Aavik's I-880 integrated felt less intimidating. From there it moved to my acoustically more damped place with electronics groomed for other traits. Most importantly, the M1 behaved differently to properly reflect disparate ancillaries. These three environments helped me understand the M1 enough to now write about. It's a polarizing product but price has little to do with it I wager. In my second factory tour I wrote that the M1 "didn't behave like the similarly sized already remarkable Silver Supreme 01. It was something else entirely and unlike any other monitor I ever experienced. It didn't sound like a compact stand-mount to begin with; as if it had means to go where its breed doesn't and pull stunts it honestly shouldn't have… in a 130m² space. Then again, expecting the unusual from a small speaker at €94'000/pr seems justified. I'm sure that this very ambitious high-performance high-tech project will break quite a few rules". That's key. In the largest Aalborg room with lots of space, the M1 staged enormously large and provided big-bore sound at party SPL without struggle as though it were specifically tailored for big rooms. Since its two closely spaced drivers make it a virtual point source, it projected highly articulated pinpoint-accurate sound that was as deep as it was wide. In the same room Børresen's 05 towers scored significantly higher on overall ease, heft, tactility, power and bass extension. But that was expected and not important in the grand scheme. The sensation back then still was that the M1 hadn't read the memo that gracefully flexing micro muscle in large spaces wasn't allowed. Also, by then the Group had demo'd the M1 at several shows in really large rooms to stress the point.

At Jacek's acoustically optimized regularly sized living room, we compared the M1 to his Martin Logan Summit X. The difference was very clear. The electrostat made the usual radiant nuanced airy informative quick sound to present the first row close up. In comparison to the M1 that behaviour was very much in my face. Some listeners including my host fancy it to remain in direct contact with the music at all time. That's courtesy of closely served images which are larger than they normally are. The Børresen flagship monitor read the same repertoire by normalizing image sizes and presenting them within space of far more specific depth and complexity. Having images close up and personal is effective of course. In the same room the M1 had them noticeably juicier, more three-dimensional, tangible, natural and away from the seat. With the Summit X the view was closer yet significantly flatter and mainly in front of the speaker plane. Although I could easily live with that, Jacek admitted that on the spatial score the M1 was more organized and on a wholly different level.

I agreed. As far as imaging accuracy went, the gap was substantial. The M1 portrayed images behind the cabinets yet not diluted or overly distant. From there its advantage stretched to overall finesse. The Børresen was plenty illuminated and clear to the point where upon listening to it after the Summit X, none of us present felt that we were missing any resolution, shine, insight or other trademark of the electrostatic kind. Shortly I'll explain how the M1 presented the treble and how investigative it was in general. For now it suffices that it had the clear upper hand on these counts too. Most importantly, the Summit X struck me as primarily flaunting spatial stunts typical for electrostats while the M1's tuning felt more complete, sophisticated, elegant, less forced and easier on the ears. Here it's worth noting that the MartinLogan's active bass dug clearly deeper but considering the mainly acoustic vocals and instrumentals we listened to, the M1 had enough reach to produce sufficiently gutsy results which kept us happy. It didn't sound overly thin or ethereal for a second. If anything, it was rich and moist atop all high-performance virtues and its top clarity. That gave me a good idea on what kind of product the M1 is. After about three hours of fun we packed up and drove to my place.

Past unboxing Jacek stayed on to have a listen in a room very different from his. That was the perfect opportunity to watch the man work. Usually setting up speakers is on my shoulders. Now I asked my guest to do what he thought would be optimal so I could stand with my arms crossed and observe. Jacek positioned his speakers wide, toed in to cross at the chair and about a meter from the front wall. Each rear port was fairly close to the sidewalls. Since I'm used to a nearfield headphone-like setup which many compact speaker support, I would have started with the M1 far closer to my chair. That wasn't necessary. Jacek's layout worked from the start and there was no need to change it. The M1 positioned thus delivered images nicely locked into familiar spaces while admirably clean nicely controlled bass was completely free of boom. This was a splendid start. In my room the M1 sounded noticeably darker than at Jacek's. It was the very first thing the two of us commented on.

All  AGD products including Aavik's I-880 integrated at his house were set up for high contrast, energy, reflexes, impact, openness, luminosity, effortlessness, high RPM and slam. These traits form the company's signature backbone upon which build other traits. Here one might predict that too much overlap between speakers and electronics is counter-productive. In most cases I'd be first to agree. The best Danish stuff however escapes such reasoning by elevating overall competence so high that like+like worries are no longer any issue. In Jacek's room the Aavik boosted the M1's highly energized spatially grand sonics to exactly the profile their makers fancy and always pursue in public. Meanwhile my setup comprised of tubed hardware is as quick as it's big of tone while multiple noise-trimming accessories and cables inject a somewhat darkish tint that steals some sun. In this context the Group's own electronics packed with their proprietary noise killers create the same kind of fetching blackness yet lean more towards quickness than saturation to always remain on the cloudless highly articulated clear side. The most interesting part was how expertly the M1 revealed these differences between our two systems. The delta of these shifts had me very impressed.

Although the M1's willingness to highlight our two sounds this clearly was a major asset, it had its own personality like any other audio product, just one that's unusually complex. Let's unpack. Speaker topologies, drivers, filter networks and cabinet types dictate how a finished design sounds as much as it dictates what it's not meant to do. Filter-free widebanders rear-loaded into long quarter-wave lines behave more agile than big vented boxes with heavier larger transducers yet nowhere near as fluffy or round. The M1's most distinct traits should make it a hard-hitting spatially liberated radiant type a bit rough on the edges so particularly useful in dissecting music into small bits individually magnified. It indeed acts the part and gracefully at that but also packs no less generous tone, heft, substance and color if a system can provide those assets. Ancillary hardware determines whether the M1 will behave like a spatially exploded enjoyably fierce speed fiend; or a charming sensual intimate atmospheric type meant to soothe. The Børresen's innate transparency can switch between these opposing profiles and their derivatives without fail. Just change up your electronics.