I have both and the M105 my friend is absolutely NO BMR MONITOR, no matter what EQ is applied. lol
I tried EQ with M105 and it was a waste of time. The only EQ that worked well with M105 is a shelf that stops it from playing below 70Hz.
The BMR sounds fantastic at 85dB and bass is full and strong. The M105 switched in for an identical listening comparison test sounds puny and the bass distortion is horrible. They are nothing alike.
In fact, the BMR Monitor at medium listening levels (85dB area) and appropriate EQ can sound much closer to the Revel F228BE, leaving the M105 in the dust.
The Philharmonic Monitor and Towers both rule their price range and well above. Marvelous
weaknesses:
1. if you love K-Horn dynamics not for you
2. if you must have bass to 25 Hz get the Towers
3. they must have diffusion or absorption at the side wall 1st reflection point
4. they throw a huge soundstage horizontally, I have them on a 14' back wall and thats not enough - 18' is the other dim and that is almost enough, but not if I want to have a happy wife.
5. they excel for classical, jazz, well recorded pop/rock
strengths:
1. low distortion and amazingly flat 35-20k
2. the Raal outside of other speakers with ribbons (true ribbon Maggies, Apogee) are the best at anywhere near sane prices
3. bass is superb: fast and deep
4. two way stand mounts sound like toys next to them including ProAc Tablettes, KEF LS50, etc.
5. the xover/drivers are wonderfully blended - in the Monitor the lowest range of the tweeter can get strident over 95 db at 10 feet, Towers more like 102 db with better dynamics
6. staging/timbre which are two things I insist on are just right