^^^ Congrats. :D

Edit - I just looked at your pics, do you have them at least 10" to a foot away from the front wall behind them with a little toe in?

Imagine a Four tower, but with the XdW woofer section.......

While it was fun to speculate about what future designs could have been, like the next Evo series having defeatable crossovers so one could use them with XdAs and/or maybe a software update for the Controller that would have accomplished the same thing by making use of it's main L/R and zone 2 outputs with the Power5, and while I will remain hopeful for the best, I'm also realistic too, and unfortunately, it now looks like we'll never know what the future might have held for NHT. :(

Still though, I do believe that we will see most, if not all, of this technology again some day somewhere. ;)

While it was fun to speculate about what future designs could have been, like the next Evo series having defeatable crossovers so one could use them with XdAs and/or maybe a software update for the Controller that would have accomplished the same thing by making use of it's main L/R and zone 2 outputs with the Power5, and while I will remain hopeful for the best, I'm also realistic too, and unfortunately, it now looks like we'll never know what the future might have held. :(

Still though, I do believe that we will see most, if not all, of this technology again some day somewhere. ;)

Like I said before, these designs/possibilities are in Hidley and his team's heads. Other companies as well, although it might not look profitable to them.

Somebody put a GPS collar on Jack so we can track where he lands.

Like I said before, these designs/possibilities are in Hidley and his team's heads. Other companies as well, although it might not look profitable to them.

Somebody put a GPS collar on Jack so we can track where he lands.

Maybe some other company will have the resources to properly market and sale them to where it does become profitable. One A/B comparison between the the Xds and the Revel Perfoma F52s which are at roughly the same price points is a very convincing demonstration of the value of them, and that's not even taking into consideration that you get power amps, stands, and speaker wire/sub cables included in the price. ;) Although I do believe a tower version of Xd with a matching CC speaker of some sort might have sold better.

As for Jack, I'm sure he shouldn't have too much trouble landing on his feet somewhere. Some company ought to be putting together a package to offer him right now. His record speaks for itself. :cool:

Edit - John did have a good point though about how they should have have had another brand name for the electronics (Controller/Power 5/2) such as Fosgate for potential sales to owners of other speaker brands than NHT.

While it was fun to speculate about what future designs could have been, like the next Evo series having defeatable crossovers so one could use them with XdAs and/or maybe a software update for the Controller that would have accomplished the same thing by making use of it's main L/R and zone 2 outputs with the Power5, and while I will remain hopeful for the best, I'm also realistic too, and unfortunately, it now looks like we'll never know what the future might have held for NHT. :(

Still though, I do believe that we will see most, if not all, of this technology again some day somewhere. ;)

I've owned my Xds for nearly two years now and I still feel like I am living in the future. I'm going to hold onto them until the rest of the audio world decides to catch up with NHT.

I've also been working as an installer for a NHT dealer for about a month now and I was looking forward to spreading the good word all over my community. Looks as though that might not happen. :(

With the w1 and w2s, can I use an amp more powerful than A1 to maybe improve their output? Also, is x1 absolutely necessary for w1,2 to function?

With the w1 and w2s, can I use an amp more powerful than A1 to maybe improve their output? Also, is x1 absolutely necessary for w1,2 to function?

A more powerful amp will not improve the output. The X1 is not necessary for the W1 or W2 to "function". However, they will roll off real early and not perform as designed.

No matter what happens, it certainly seems like the end of an era for NHT, and that's a shame. Though I am also looking forward to hearing Jack Hidley's next designs!

Old era ends, New era begins...

Not always a bad thing.

No matter what happens, it certainly seems like the end of an era for NHT, and that's a shame. Though I am also looking forward to hearing Jack Hidley's next designs!For Jack to leave the speaker engineering world would be a big loss...for us. But not necessarily for him. Personally, I'd like to see him resurface in audio, although after the fire sales, I now have my home "done." Some day, I'd like to hear Xd's.

But if you're bright and creative (remember the facts, understand the concepts, and enjoy making things better)--don't you think you could be successful at just about anything? Jack - keep in touch and let us know where you land.

Peter

I still think we should have him fitted with a GPS collar. :)

Yeah, I've done that but he keeps managing to slip it off. Then it takes 2 or 3 months to find him.

I noticed that in the past month NHT has expanded their authorized internet retailers list from 4 to 6. Any significance to that? Just to move stock?

I know next to nothing about the speaker business, but I find the ID concept interesting. It seems like a lot of those companies are basically marriages of engineering and marketing, with the manufacturing done in China or S. America, correct? Oh yeah, and the minor detail of capital.

Could a major online retailer ever produce and sell a "house" line of speakers, or would that jeopardize their relationship with other speaker makers whose product they sell? Because it seems to me an online retailer already has in place a lot of the pieces required for an ID company - not sure about the capital part. Add in engineering and a deal with an offshore manufacturer and you've got a speaker company, right?

Just throwing out the idea more as a question than anything.

I think that once the smoke clears, if NHT is still hanging around, they're going to find that all these fire sales decreased their product range dramatically, decreased interested or current dealers, that they've "pre-filled" a lot of the demand for stuff like Verve and Classic, made prospective customers nervous and have devalued what stock they have left. So, a huge drop in sales volume is coming, except for *maybe* inwall product. :(

Well, Dang.
I certainly missed some excitement.
My wife told me unequivocally that I could not buy any more speakers since I
just bought the 50% off $300 mirage Omni 350s.
perhaps if I had waited, I could have gotten away with the SD C4s and she would have been none the wiser.
I still haven't hooked up the Cambridge 540R V2 receiver that I got on the killer closeout at AA, thanks to mark russ.
And what is up with all of these closeouts? It's great for me as the consumer, but if my favorite audio companies are unhealthy, nobody wins.
These huge incentives remind me of the car business. Pull ahead a lot of customer now, but kills your business later.
Is the economy that bad? Or are these companies not givingthe consumer what they want?
I still think NHT went to a price point they shouldn't have.

There is more than one possible explanation (which I have put in a request for at NHT).

They could be serious about reinventing the company, and what better way to do that then clear out all the old stock. Notice they did not discount everything, just old & slow selling stuff. Make a clean break then work on developing new product. Very sad to see Jack go, but this kind of staff turnover is typical when a larger company overtakes a smaller one and is going to shake things up. They could really do some good here, or it could be the end what used to be called NHT. You don't change something unless it's for improvement, and no one here can say they were happy with marketing & the pace of product development. :confused::):confused:

Yeah, but NHT's parent company, Vinci Labs apparently either no longer exists or is in bankruptcy.
Any way you spell it, it has to be bad.
Unless NHT is the lone bright spot of their holdings and after reorganization they can use NHT as the cornerstone of the company.

From a design and engineering standpoint, the absolute worse thing that could possibly happen to NHT has happened with Jack and his crew now gone. Not that there aren't other very talented speaker designers out there that they could possibly get in the future, but from a developmental standpoint, I'm not really expecting any exciting new product out of them any time soon if they continue to exist.

But with that said, from the standpoint of everything else, sales, marketing, management, etc. of the existing product that is left, let's give these new guys a chance here. I mean, let's face it, the position the company is in right now couldn't possibly get much worse than it is unless it just shuts down entirely, so any change would likely have to be for the better. Maybe these new guys can succeed over time.

But IMO a major shake up has to happen one way or the other. The current dealer network has clearly been a colossal failure. Nobody can deny that, so they they need to either get a lot more dealers on the network, or, take it ID, or something, anything but the status quo. Take the state of Georgia for example. It is one of the 12 or 13 most populous states in the entire country, and a pretty big state geographically, and there is a whopping total of one dealer in the whole state, and it isn't even in Atlanta. And there are several other states with only one dealer, and many with absolutely none whatsoever at all.

Yeah, but NHT's parent company, Vinci Labs apparently either no longer exists or is in bankruptcy.
Any way you spell it, it has to be bad.
Unless NHT is the lone bright spot of their holdings and after reorganization they can use NHT as the cornerstone of the company.

John could prolly remember the details, but their owners have went belly up before, Jensen, recoton, fosgate, etc.

I still haven't hooked up the Cambridge 540R V2 receiver that I got on the killer closeout at AA, thanks to mark russ.
And what is up with all of these closeouts? It's great for me as the consumer, but if my favorite audio companies are unhealthy, nobody wins.


Well in the case of the CA AVR, it was being replaced by a newer model that is basically identical except for the addition of HDMI. As I understand it, CA is actually thriving right now. :)

I think that once the smoke clears, if NHT is still hanging around, they're going to find that all these fire sales decreased their product range dramatically, ...

You got that right. think about it, now the only non-Xdw conventional consumer subs they offer is the Ten & Twelve. :p

Could a major online retailer ever produce and sell a "house" line of speakers, or would that jeopardize their relationship with other speaker makers whose product they sell? Because it seems to me an online retailer already has in place a lot of the pieces required for an ID company - not sure about the capital part. Add in engineering and a deal with an offshore manufacturer and you've got a speaker company, right?

Just throwing out the idea more as a question than anything.

FWIW, Polk has just started up an official "ebay store".

For Jack to leave the speaker engineering world would be a big loss...for us. But not necessarily for him. Personally, I'd like to see him resurface in audio, although after the fire sales, I now have my home "done." Some day, I'd like to hear Xd's.

But if you're bright and creative (remember the facts, understand the concepts, and enjoy making things better)--don't you think you could be successful at just about anything? Jack - keep in touch and let us know where you land.

Peter

I heard he was going to drive an F1 car now and wear Bose headsets in it with Bose as his primary sponsor. :p;):D

I've owned my Xds for nearly two years now and I still feel like I am living in the future. I'm going to hold onto them until the rest of the audio world decides to catch up with NHT.

And just think - the current Xds were just the first attempt at it too. it would have only gotten better and cheaper over time. :(

I've also been working as an installer for a NHT dealer for about a month now and I was looking forward to spreading the good word all over my community. Looks as though that might not happen. :(

What have you installed mostly so far?

You know what? I have the Classic 3s, 3C, and absolute zeros and yea they are decent speakers. But guess what, there are better speakers available - I know I've bought them. I feel sorry for the NHT shills here that have spend a lot of their time promoting a decent product and providing helpful information only to see a product get screwed by poor management. Time to move on. NHT is dead - at least for me.

You know what? I have the Classic 3s, 3C, and absolute zeros and yea they are decent speakers. But guess what, there are better speakers available - I know I've bought them. I feel sorry for the NHT shills here that have spend a lot of their time promoting a decent product and providing helpful information only to see a product get screwed by poor management. Time to move on. NHT is dead - at least for me.Really? There are better speakers available than an $800 pair of bookshelfs? I never would have known. Thanks for the illuminating post.

Really? There are better speakers available than an $800 pair of bookshelfs? I never would have known. Thanks for the illuminating post. What? Now you tell us...lmao. Macintosh is having a audition demo at the dealer here soon...maybe I should shell out 200 Gs because our good little hivalue company hit the rocks. And to think...:rolleyes:

I heard he was going to drive an F1 car now and wear Bose headsets in it with Bose as his primary sponsor. :p;):D That's not what I heard (from a reputable source). But perhaps not as far from the truth as you think... ;).

If Jack gets east, I'll let him take my car around the track (not the Prius). Haven't heard any of you offering.

Peter

McLaren just hired Kovalainen so we know he's not going there. LOL.

You know what? I have the Classic 3s, 3C, and absolute zeros and yea they are decent speakers. But guess what, there are better speakers available - I know I've bought them. I feel sorry for the NHT shills here that have spend a lot of their time promoting a decent product and providing helpful information only to see a product get screwed by poor management. Time to move on. NHT is dead - at least for me.

Uh, yeah, don't let the door hit you in the ass.

I'd like to reiterate some things -

1 - I don't know NHT's future at all, good or bad, anything can happen.
2 - Anyone who buys NHT now at a big discount is one smart human being.
3 - I don't care how lousy NHT's management is, the product is brilliant.
4 - I parted ways with NHT only because arguing with a brick wall is stupid and a waste of time.
5 - Jack, Bill and Ken are all card-carrying geniuses. Not sure about anyone else there.

I'd like to reiterate some things -


4 - I parted ways with NHT only because arguing with a brick wall is stupid and a waste of time.





How about the fact that NHT discontinued the Evolution line. That line looked like a perfect fit for custom installers like yourself!

Yeah, but NHT's parent company, Vinci Labs apparently either no longer exists or is in bankruptcy.
Any way you spell it, it has to be bad.
Unless NHT is the lone bright spot of their holdings and after reorganization they can use NHT as the cornerstone of the company.



Do we know that to be a solid fact (Vinci Labs) at this point in time?

If that is true, then the banks can force NHT into doing things that they do not want to do. Also banks right now are having their own problems, so perhaps the recent fire sale pricing was done to satisfy creditors.

Hmm ... despite their claims of being the "first", does any of this sound familiar?:

INTRODUCING THE OUTLAW LCR LOUDSPEAKER

Following in the footsteps of our Bookshelf Loudspeaker, The Outlaw LCR (Left/Center/Right Channel) loudspeaker is truly something special. We believe it is the most sophisticated and flexible home theater speaker ever offered. Perhaps, most importantly, the Outlaw LCR is the first home theater loudspeaker that, with the flip of a switch, is capable of optimal performance in either a vertical or horizontal orientation.

Until now, getting a perfect match across the front channels of a home theater system has always involved a compromise. Three equal speakers, all placed vertically will sound great, but aesthetically, when paired with a flat panel TV looks downright silly. Alternatively, you could place the “center channel” speaker in a horizontal position to match the lines of the TV, but ultimately, this orientation alters the character of the midrange, thus ruining the perfect timbre match created by your “identical” speakers (especially if you are seated to the left or right of the center channel).

So what does this all mean? Imagine listening to a “pan” of someone speaking as he walks across the screen moving initially from your left speaker, across the center channel and ultimately arriving at the right speaker. By rotating your center channel to the horizontal position, this “pan” will reveal a choppy, mismatched sound field. So, there are your choices: “matched sound” or “appropriate aesthetics.” Pick one.

How did we solve this dilemma? Outlaw collaborated with a talented team of experienced loudspeaker and transducer engineers with over 60-man years of experience to address the issue. Their solution was to outfit the LCR with a set of two different crossovers: one for vertical use, the other for horizontal “center channel” applications.

Placed horizontally as a center channel, The Outlaw LCR delivers crystal clear dialogue with virtually no coloration of voice timbre, even if you are seated a bit “off center.” Placed vertically, as a left/right channel, the LCR delivers pinpoint localization of action or effects. The timbre of all three, especially that of voice, remains intact across the front channels while preserving the clean lines of your flat panel display.

In addition to its unique on-board double crossover system, the Outlaw LCR offers the same dual-boundary compensation controls and high frequency switches that are in the Outlaw Bookshelf Loudspeaker. The boundary compensation control will negate the effects of negative midrange build-up when the speakers are close to a wall or a corner. The high frequency control is designed for use in overly “live” or “dead” rooms. (For more on these controls please download the LCR manual.)

from:

http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/lcr.html

How about the fact that NHT discontinued the Evolution line. That line looked like a perfect fit for custom installers like yourself!

Well there's still the M-80Xd/S80 line. ;)

Funny.

I wonder who the "talented team of experienced loudspeaker and transducer engineers with over 60-man years of experience" might have been?

Dunno, but I vaguely seem to recall reading somewhere that Peter Triebman used to work with a speaker company at one time even before he was with NAD, but I can't remember which one though. :o

Uh, yeah, don't let the door hit you in the ass.

Apparently Tyler Acoustics is his new found speaker of choice based on this post in the "What was your progression of speakers?" thread, but doesn't say which model: ;)

1979 DLK 1.5s
1992 Cerwin Vega ??
2000 Bose accoustimass
2003 Polk RTI
2005 NHT classic's
2007 Tyler Acoustics

I'd like to reiterate some things -

1 - I don't know NHT's future at all, good or bad, anything can happen.

Like Yogi Berra said - "It ain't over till it's over". :p

What? Now you tell us...lmao. Macintosh is having a audition demo at the dealer here soon...maybe I should shell out 200 Gs because our good little hivalue company hit the rocks. And to think...:rolleyes:

Actually, I've heard McIntosh speakers before, and they are quite good, but I don't know if they're $200K good though. :p

Hmm ... despite their claims of being the "first", does any of this sound familiar?:



from:

http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/lcr.html

Actually, what is unique (to my knowledge) is the double crossover switch. The Evos used the virtual focused image geometry to achieve the same thing. What the Outlaw does is allow you to switch the speaker from a 2 way WTW to a 2 and 1/2 way WTM.

This switch is in addition to a boundary compensation switch (present on the Evo line) and a tweeter switch (not present on the Evo line). So all this really doesn't sound familiar to me.

So all this really doesn't sound familiar to me.

If you will notice, I asked if any of it sounded familiar, not all. ;)

Emotiva has also recently announced a new LCR monitor line very similar with the optional vertical or horizontal placement and boundary compensation too, but, like the Outlaws, they are not 3 way designs.

If you will notice, I asked if any of it sounded familiar, not all. ;)

Sorry about that. The boundary compensation switch is familiar. Didn't mean to read too much into your post although I did want to take the time to post regarding the "unique" feature of the Outlaw. I'm actually waiting for one to try out.

No need to apologize - no problem at all. I was just trying to point out how more speakers similar to the Evos in many ways are starting to show up on the market now that the Evos have been discontinued. I'm sure there will be even more too.

I remember reading you had the Outlaw bookshelf, are you just gonna get one LCR, or three of them for the front stage?

No need to apologize - no problem at all. I was just trying to point out how more speakers similar to the Evos in many ways are starting to show up on the market now that the Evos have been discontinued. I'm sure there will be even more too.

I remember reading you had the Outlaw bookshelf, are you just gonna get one LCR, or three of them for the front stage?

I'm not sure. To start, I think I'll try a single. They're not quite ready to ship yet from what I understand but it should be any day now. They got a very nice review in the Jan '08 Sound and Vision magazine.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/speakers/2637/outlaw-audio-lcr-speaker-system.html

How about the fact that NHT discontinued the Evolution line. That line looked like a perfect fit for custom installers like yourself!

There are many dealers that pretty much only sell Evolution, little to no Classic, let alone Xd. Most of those will likely fall off the NHT wagon at that point, unless they hold on for the inwalls. Kinda hard to find inwalls that are that good for the money, even with the price increase. The M80Xd doesn't appeal very well because the form factor is great for a pro studio, but all wrong for home install. Our M5/M6 sales dropped off, but we always sold the Evo subs, well more than the ported ones, despite being twice as much. I've sold about 75 or so U1/U2 75 Evo subs, but maybe only 30 or so of the Classic/SuperAudio subs.

I'm not sure. To start, I think I'll try a single. They're not quite ready to ship yet from what I understand but it should be any day now. They got a very nice review in the Jan '08 Sound and Vision magazine.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/speakers/2637/outlaw-audio-lcr-speaker-system.html

Wow, those ID speakers make the M6 seem like a bargain at retail price! I am often surprised just how many companies use a limited design, then pitch how they "fixed" the limitations (usually with your money), rather than going with something as elegant as a 3-way which bypasses the problem altogether.

Wow, those ID speakers make the M6 seem like a bargain at retail price! I am often surprised just how many companies use a limited design, then pitch how they "fixed" the limitations (usually with your money), rather than going with something as elegant as a 3-way which bypasses the problem altogether.

Well ah, yes and no. The Outlaws are made in the USA, have a real wood veneer finish, and are calibrated to within a half a db of a reference across the frequency band. All of which, my friend, costs money.

There's a reason NHT moved production overseas and it certainly wasn't because of superior build quality and QC. What's interesting to me is that with the move abroad they still can't seem to make it a go. Maybe the ID model is one they should explore.

I am thinking of getting 2 M6 as L&R, already have M6 as a center. I don't like the design of the P6 stand and would not consider those. Are other stands compatible with M6, while offering enough rigidity and stability? Tks.

Any well built stand is compatible. As you know they are rather heavy, so you'll need to get a sturdy stand at the correct height.

Well ah, yes and no. The Outlaws are made in the USA, have a real wood veneer finish, and are calibrated to within a half a db of each other across the frequency band. All of which, my friend, costs money.

Maybe, but it's not what I would call a great design for a speaker (don't like MTMs or 2.5-ways much at all) and the wood finish is $50 each more, so that's $700 each. I wonder why almost all ID speakers use soft domes? I really dislike soft dome tweeters (without exception so far).

There's a reason NHT moved production overseas and it certainly wasn't because of superior build quality and QC.

Actually, I think build quality has gone up over the years. They've told me that they can't get that level of build quality here at any reasonable price. Obviously value/price was the primary reason, but imagine how much a Classic Three would cost if made here. That's why most of this stuff is still just a V-cut and Fold square box still.

What's interesting to me is that with the move abroad they still can't seem to make it a go. Maybe the ID model is one they should explore.

They could if they understood marketing. I tried to explain it to them, even offered (seriously) to pay for marketing courses for the sales staff, but nothing. It certainly isn't the product holding them back. And Vinci's failure is the real cause of these problems, not NHT. They seemed to have bitten off more than they can chew at precisely the wrong time for them.

I am thinking of getting 2 M6 as L&R, already have M6 as a center. I don't like the design of the P6 stand and would not consider those. Are other stands compatible with M6, while offering enough rigidity and stability? Tks.

I'd try to get a multi-post sand fillable model though.

Well ah, yes and no. The Outlaws are made in the USA, have a real wood veneer finish, and are calibrated to within a half a db of each other across the frequency band. All of which, my friend, costs money.

There's a reason NHT moved production overseas and it certainly wasn't because of superior build quality and QC. What's interesting to me is that with the move abroad they still can't seem to make it a go. Maybe the ID model is one they should explore.


The "real wood veneer" only applies to the cherry finish (for an extra $50 per speaker), and not to the black finish.

The speakers may claim to have a plus or minus 1/2 dB tolerance from the reference standard, but as quoted from the test report:

"The LCR's main features include a 6-dB depression between 7 and 11 kHz and a 3-dB peak at 13.2 kHz. When vertically arrayed, the unit has well controlled directivity, and the Left/Right and Surround channel traces are basically identical. Used horizontally, response is similar out to ±45°, but subject to a huge lobing dip (—27 dB centered at 1.3 kHz) beyond this angle."


The FR changes of the proprietary boundry compensation switch and high frequency switch can easily be duplicated with the EQ that is available in many receivers. I EQ my speakers for boundry compensation via my receiver's EQ circuit. Heck, a lot of speakers had those on speaker adjustments in the old days.

The speakers may claim to have a plus or minus 1/2 dB tolerance from the reference standard, but as quoted from the test report:

"The LCR's main features include a 6-dB depression between 7 and 11 kHz and a 3-dB peak at 13.2 kHz. When vertically arrayed, the unit has well controlled directivity, and the Left/Right and Surround channel traces are basically identical. Used horizontally, response is similar out to ±45°, but subject to a huge lobing dip (—27 dB centered at 1.3 kHz) beyond this angle."


Dude:

You're confusing frequency response to pair to pair matching. There is a reference standard speaker, and the speaker to speaker matching is within a 1/2 db across the frequency band compared to the reference.

There is a point, however, to the idea that as receivers become more advanced in DSP, that a lot of room matching features could be abandoned - keep the speakers high performance and simple, let the receiver do all the fancy stuff. Imagine if the U1 or U2 didn't need the X1 at all. That would have made them an enormous bargain, even at retail price.

They could if they understood marketing. I tried to explain it to them, even offered (seriously) to pay for marketing courses for the sales staff, but nothing. It certainly isn't the product holding them back. And Vinci's failure is the real cause of these problems, not NHT. They seemed to have bitten off more than they can chew at precisely the wrong time for them.


I thought that dealers were responsible for sales? When I bought my first set of NHT speakers in the early 90's, a regional department store chain promoted NHT speakers (and other brands) on their own.

You can also look at Vinci in a few ways. If Vinci did not buy NHT, what would have happened to NHT a few years ago? For that matter, why did M&K go down the tubes? Speaker brands have come and gone over the years, and will continue to do so in the future.

Here is the pertinent section from Outlaw manual describing the pair to pair matching:

In the manufacturing
process every Outlaw speaker is measured and calibrated to
match our reference design plus or minus ½ dB. This means your
pair of speakers will be virtually identical; a standard that is only found in the
world’s finest loudspeakers.

Dude:

You're confusing frequency response to pair to pair matching. There is a reference standard speaker, and the speaker to speaker matching is within a 1/2 db across the frequency band compared to the reference.



Yes and that is a claim that may or may not be true. Who is going to validate that claim? What happens when they do not hand make these speakers (AKA make in higher volumes). Does it even matter?

Yes and that is a claim that may or may not be true. Who is going to validate that claim? What happens when they do not hand make these speakers (AKA make in higher volumes). Does it even matter?

I think it does matter. Stereo imaging will be more precise with tightly matched stereo pairs. And given who's behind Outlaw, I absolutely believe it to be true. Perhaps Stereophile or UltimateAV can verify the claim if either of them tests them.

Here is the pertinent section from Outlaw manual describing the pair to pair matching:

Quote:
In the manufacturing
process every Outlaw speaker is measured and calibrated to
match our reference design plus or minus ½ dB. This means your
pair of speakers will be virtually identical; a standard that is only found in the
world’s finest loudspeakers.




There is plenty of leeway in those marketing claims. Plus or minus 1/2 dB of what? Anyhow, it is more important in how the speaker sounds. Tolerances do not tell you much about that.


Here is the claim that was made for the NHT M-3.3 speaker. The tolerances only applied to each handmade pair of speakers

"The 3.3's four drivers have all been custom-designed and manufactured to the highest quality standards, and the components for each handmade pair of loudspeakers are matched individually and as a system to within .3dB, ensuring unparalleled sonic consistency with our laboratory standard. The tonality designed in the lab is the same tonality you get in your home."

I thought that dealers were responsible for sales? When I bought my first set of NHT speakers in the early 90's, a regional department store chain promoted NHT speakers (and other brands) on their own.

Sure but you also have to market "globally", not just allow it up to dealers alone if you want to really be successful. You think B&W or Bose just does nothing and lets the dealers do everything? It takes the company itself to create the image of the brand. If NHT had worked as hard on marketing as I did on their behalf, they'd be a $100M/year company. Having a picture of a guy with a megaphone up to his ear or saying "dude, these digital speakers ROCK!" doesn't really count. Designing Xd solely for non-audiophiles was an enormous marketing mistake too, so designing to the actual customer base is important. Good marketing has people willing to give you a shot. Great marketing has people wanting the product before they've seen or heard it. Dealer and company marketing compliment each other, but with only one or the other, success is far from guaranteed.

You can also look at Vinci in a few ways. If Vinci did not buy NHT, what would have happened to NHT a few years ago? For that matter, why did M&K go down the tubes? Speaker brands have come and gone over the years, and will continue to do so in the future.[/QUOTE]

There were half a dozen other suitors, they just made a bad choice, apparently. Not sure who the others were, so I don't know if they'd have been better but it couldn't have been too much worse. M&K went down the tubes because they did virtually no innovation for 10 years. So, even if NHT were run by real professionals, without an engineering team, that would also be their eventual fate.

I think it does matter. Stereo imaging will be more precise with tightly matched stereo pairs. And given who's behind Outlaw, I absolutely believe it to be true. Perhaps Stereophile or UltimateAV can verify the claim if either of them tests them.



I don't think that those LCR's are being sold as stereo pairs. The average room will destroy that 1/2 dB tolerance anyhow.

But what would be the standard tolerance between most decent quality speakers? I don't recall ever reading a review which claims to have ever measured for that in any review. I don't think that it is even mentioned in at all.

I think it does matter. Stereo imaging will be more precise with tightly matched stereo pairs. And given who's behind Outlaw, I absolutely believe it to be true. Perhaps Stereophile or UltimateAV can verify the claim if either of them tests them.

It would be interesting to find out just how big of a deal that is in reality. Just because a speaker isn't hand matched, doesn't mean it's further out of spec, just that the chances are higher. Of course, if Stereophile measured a pair of speakers and they were a dB or two off in different areas, that would make people think twice about spending fabulous amounts of money.

There is plenty of leeway in those marketing claims. Plus or minus 1/2 dB of what? Anyhow, it is more important in how the speaker sounds. Tolerances do not tell you much about that.


Here is the claim that was made for the NHT M-3.3 speaker. The tolerances only applied to each handmade pair of speakers

"The 3.3's four drivers have all been custom-designed and manufactured to the highest quality standards, and the components for each handmade pair of loudspeakers are matched individually and as a system to within .3dB, ensuring unparalleled sonic consistency with our laboratory standard. The tonality designed in the lab is the same tonality you get in your home."

I wonder why they stopped making that claim.

I wonder why they stopped making that claim.

Well, to be fair, it's one thing to make speakers that match subjectively well, it's another to put it in writing. You could build speakers that are typically less that .5dB all day long with random sampling, but if you put it in writing, then you have to spend the money to verify it. I once asked Bill about the Focal tweeters and he said that they were nice, but varied too much in specs. In fact, Jack once told me that the reason they use the SEAS tweeter over the Evo/SA/Classic tweeter was that the were more consistent in their measurements, but not sure by how much.

It would be interesting to find out just how big of a deal that is in reality. Just because a speaker isn't hand matched, doesn't mean it's further out of spec, just that the chances are higher. Of course, if Stereophile measured a pair of speakers and they were a dB or two off in different areas, that would make people think twice about spending fabulous amounts of money.



Try measuring the same identical speaker in two different locations in your room. That will tell you that it does not matter much unless you need to have another marketing claim.

However, QC standards are important if you build the same model speaker over an extended time period. Different batches of drivers and crossovers are not identical, so you have to have a baseline to go by.

There is no claim on how flat the Outlaw speaker measures, just how tight the tolerance is to the reference. Marketing at it's best!

There is no claim on how flat the Outlaw speaker measures, just how tight the tolerance is to the reference. Marketing at it's best!

Factually incorrect. From the website:

Frequency Response: 75 to 22kHz. +/- 3 dB

Factually incorrect. From the website:


A measurement of -6dB @ 7 to 11khz and a +3 dB peak @ 13kHz is plus or minus what?



Test Bench
The LCR's main features include a 6-dB depression between 7 and 11 kHz and a 3-dB peak at 13.2 kHz. When vertically arrayed, the unit has well controlled directivity, and the Left/Right and Surround channel traces are basically identical. Used horizontally, response is similar out to ±45°, but subject to a huge lobing dip (—27 dB centered at 1.3 kHz) beyond this angle. The LFM-1 EX sub, in its Maximum Output mode, delivered a healthy 107 dB average SPL from 25 to 62 Hz, max SPL of 110 dB at 32 Hz, and 93 dB at its bass limit of 20 Hz (<10% distortion). — Tom Nousaine

Designing Xd solely for non-audiophiles was an enormous marketing mistake too, so designing to the actual customer base is important. Good marketing has people willing to give you a shot. Great marketing has people wanting the product before they've seen or heard it. Dealer and company marketing compliment each other, but with only one or the other, success is far from guaranteed.





Audiophile types don't want to be told that they can't buy their own amplifiers and processors so that group was out from the start.

The non-audiophiles don't want to pay that type of money for a system.

So who is left to market to? I did not even get into color choices and the look of the speakers!

Sure but you also have to market "globally", not just allow it up to dealers alone if you want to really be successful. You think B&W or Bose just does nothing and lets the dealers do everything? It takes the company itself to create the image of the brand.






Here is something that Bose does that most speaker manufacturers do not do. Company owned store, and this is one of the reasons Bose products are expensive. Take the walk into the virtual store, and then go to the Bose / Imax lobby. This is pretty much what the real store looks like.

http://www.jordans.com/tours/store_tour.asp?tourid=natick

A measurement of -6dB @ 7 to 11khz and a +3 dB peak @ 13kHz is plus or minus what?



Test Bench
The LCR's main features include a 6-dB depression between 7 and 11 kHz and a 3-dB peak at 13.2 kHz. When vertically arrayed, the unit has well controlled directivity, and the Left/Right and Surround channel traces are basically identical. Used horizontally, response is similar out to ±45°, but subject to a huge lobing dip (—27 dB centered at 1.3 kHz) beyond this angle. The LFM-1 EX sub, in its Maximum Output mode, delivered a healthy 107 dB average SPL from 25 to 62 Hz, max SPL of 110 dB at 32 Hz, and 93 dB at its bass limit of 20 Hz (<10% distortion). — Tom Nousaine
Nousaine's measurements are useless. Just ask John. They are not anechoic and vary all over the lot. I trust Soundstage, UltimateAV and Stereophile for measurements as they all are attempting to provide measurements that can be compared to those done earlier on a consistent basis. Nousaine's measurements have some weird room correction that he overlays onto them.

Here's a link to John's thoughts on Nousaine's measurements, from this same thread no less:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=8261003&postcount=1559

To quote John:

Oh, I e-mailed him a lot. I finally just gave up on him. He is who he is, he does what he does. He measures the "speaker/room" which is fine because it can give you some data, but I don't have is room, nor does anyone else. Moreover, it makes the FR as far as the speaker goes *completely* useless. In reality, measuring the "speaker/room" is really just an interesting thing, since we don't hear the room the way a mic measures it at all. So, he's misleading people by implying that he's measured the speaker. He hasn't.

Mark did you get my PM.
Allen

Outlaws price for ID does look high unless the LCR's do sound like a $1200.00 speakers. Of course you are paying for 2 crossovers in each speaker. Maybe they should have made a L/R and a LCR.
Tony please let us know what you think when you get yours.
Allen

Outlaws price for ID does look high unless the LCR's do sound like a $1200.00 speakers. Of course you are paying for 2 crossovers in each speaker. Maybe they should have made a L/R and a LCR.
Tony please let us know what you think when you get yours.
Allen

Will do, although it seems like certain minds here are already made up and it makes no difference what I think: they're overpriced, measure poorly, are a been there done that design, and probably don't meet their marketing claims. Did I sum that up correctly, boys?

Hey, I'm just saying that the M5/M6 design makes more sense than having multiple crossovers and, when in different modes, inherently different sonic qualities. And that, given the claims of "ID is cheaper", it seems rather pricey for a 2-way MTM *or* a 2.5-way, as in B&W priced. B&W's 2.5 way center speaker is about the same price. As for Noussaine's measurements, I have seen some measurements he's done lately that have been more accurate and were quasi-anechoic, but not sure about this one. Also consider that we're talking 5" drivers in a compact enclosure, so that's similar to PSB Image C40 for $350 retail, but with more features. Anyhoo, maybe it sounds great, I have no real opinion other than the design itself has no appeal for me and it seems more appropriate on a B&M speaker half that price.

John, Jack, Mark...another question in regards to the Fours and bi-amping them with the X-2 and the A-1s. I read over the owner's manual for the X-2, am I understanding that I run the L/R pre-out and the LFE from the receiver into the X-2 so I have "sub" for the HT and "sub" for 2 channel stereo? I can install a car stereo but this home theater thing is confusing...to me anyway.

Our M5/M6 sales dropped off, ...

What did you expect when you started pushing the Classics over them at every opportunity? :p

Or are you talking about before the Classics even came out?

Regardless, it's a shame that line will no longer be available, cause the fact is, the Evos are still to this day a better option and choice for most people's situations (by that, I mean primarily for HT or for certain kinds of music, like rock for example) in a wider variety of rooms than the Classics are. :(

John, Jack, Mark...another question in regards to the Fours and bi-amping them with the X-2 and the A-1s. I read over the owner's manual for the X-2, am I understanding that I run the L/R pre-out and the LFE from the receiver into the X-2 so I have "sub" for the HT and "sub" for 2 channel stereo? I can install a car stereo but this home theater thing is confusing...to me anyway.

That is correct. You have two gain (volume) settings, master for L/R 2 channel music, and one for LFE for the LFE/sub input for movies. This way, you can dial in flat response for 2 channel, while at the same time having an independent setting for a little extra "boom" on movie soundtracks. ;)

Wow, those ID speakers make the M6 seem like a bargain at retail price!

Much less the M5 too. ;)

Actually, I think build quality has gone up over the years. They've told me that they can't get that level of build quality here at any reasonable price. Obviously value/price was the primary reason, but imagine how much a Classic Three would cost if made here. That's why most of this stuff is still just a V-cut and Fold square box still.

I don't feel like to trying to find it to quote right now as a reference, but I do remember a post by Jack stating that random QC checks were consistently shown to be excellent.

Good point too about the price of the Chinese manufactured models of they were still made here. Take for example, the ST-4, when it first came out and was still made here instead, what do you think the MSRP would have been on it? I'm guessing prolly $2000 or close to it instead of $1000. It basically replaced the Super Two, but was IMO even better than the 2.5i, maybe even the VT-2.4. :eek:

Imagine if the U1 or U2 didn't need the X1 at all. That would have made them an enormous bargain, even at retail price.

Yeah, but their performance would have been a joke without the X1's Eq, unless you are maybe talking about having it built into the box itself?

I wonder why they stopped making that claim.

Because they discontinued the model? :p

Going old school AVS here, and in doing so perhaps accidentally stumbled across the post I previously may have mistakenly attributed to Jack about random QC checks:

Response (Don Childers) - 04/19/2005 06:54 AM

The 3.3 was primarily a reference quality stereo music listening speaker whereas the VT-3 was toward both music and home theater. I've built both models and they required more craftsmanship and attention to detail than the line built models. The 3.3's crossover, upper midrange and tweeter have response curves that are matched to within 0.3 db. left and right so it has an edge on the VT-3 for music listening. The VT-3 doesn't have matched components, but they were QC'd for a tolerance of + or - 1.0 db. left and right. The VT-3 will play louder than the 3.3 and will sound better at high volumes. Having powered subs means you won't need a mondo amp to drive them. The VT-3 requires a receiver with a high-pass loop or a separate pre-amp/processor and power amp. For the system to work it must be used with it's controller and 8-pin mini-DIN cables. The SB3's don't have the output capability of the VT-3. The Evolution system is an improvement over the VT-3. The M5 and M6 use Peerless drivers from Denmark and the any of the bass units have tight, well defined bass. They can be mixed and matched into different configurations. Random QC testing has shown these to be very consistent.
Don

from:

http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=531729

Audiophile types don't want to be told that they can't buy their own amplifiers and processors so that group was out from the start.

Not to even mention what John once pointed out about how some dealers might necessarily want to sell a speaker that will cut them out of a potential power amp sell too.

Thanks Mark. I'm thinking about a Yamaha RX-V2700 vice the HK for the set up and want to be sure that the components play nice before purchasing.

FWIW, I wouldn't put a Yammy with Fours! Talk about bright on bright! :eek: It makes my ears hurt to even think about it. :o

What would you recommend? My budget for a receiver is $1,100.00 Must do HDMI with at least 3 HDMI inputs, must work the wife's iPod...5.1 surround is all I'll ever need.

How about one of those HK AVR745s off of their ebay store? You should be able to swing one of those for about $700 to $800 or so, and I believe they will meet all your criteria. It will be "refurbed", but will have full warranty, and will look so new that you will wonder if they simply sell new ones as "refurbs".

It will have a fantastic pre-pro section for movies with it's top of the line TI processor and room Eq, as well as a halfway descent power amp section with plenty of current. Plus, HK has a distinct warmer sound (especially when compared to Yamaha) that will IMO mate very well with the Fours/3C. Double check it's number of HDMI inputs though.

Thanks again Mark...more research...

Mark, only two inputs on the 745...any other recommendations? Denon, Onkyo, Marantz...? I wasn't aware the Yamaha was that bright...

NHT had a primary speaker cabinet manufacturer next door to it for years. They were only in business to build cabinets for us. At some point, they began to falter and we started looking for other sources. We tried a lot of different companies (Hitachi, AAI, Axiom, etc), but no one could do it with the quality we needed. This led us to consider companies overseas. We ended up settling on one company who had better quality and price than any factory in North America. They built the last couples years of the Super Series speakers (Super Zero, Super One, Super Two) and some of the video stuff. They were then transitioned into building the Super Audio speakers (SB1, SB2, SB3, ST4). WE never built ST4s in the US. They were only ever built in China.

Even if your room causes lots of reflections, having the L and R speakers closely matched makes the imaging better. A good test for how close two speakers match is to play mono noise over them. Place the speakers a couple feet apart and listen on the line beween them, about 4-5' away. There should be a very strong, narrow center image coming from the location centered between the speakers. The wider the image is, the less closely matching the speakers are.

In any normal room, the sound from the speakers gets to your ears at least 2-3msec before any reflections do. This first 2-3msec contains mostly high frequencies. You can clearly tell if two speakers have the same response, even under these conditions.

You aren't going to build production speakers that match within +/-0.5dB without premeasuring the drivers and probably the crossovers. With the M3.3, we measured the frequency response of every Woofer, LM, UM, Tweeter and each section of the crossover. Ever driver and crossover was given a serial number. A PC took all of the frequency response data and matched all of the drivers and crossovers together. You ended up with a list of serialized drivers and crossovers for each pair of speakers. After assembly, the frequency response of each speaker was measured against a stored reference curve and against its other half. It was rare that they didn't match within +/-0.15dB. We never dropped this claim. We just only ever did this process on the M3.3. It was just too much work. If a customer blew a crossover or a driver, we had to look up the response data for the part that he had, then do a sort in the computer to find the best matching part that was in stock. It was hard enough to just get an accurate speaker serial number from some customers!

The easy way to fudge this is to not specify the smoothing used for the frequency response measurement. If 1 octave smoothing is appled before the L and R comparison is made, then to get a tolerance of +/-0.5dB, the drivers only need to have the same overall sensitivity to pass the test.

I agree, Nousaine's measurements should be taken with a mountain of salt. He has his own ideas about the laws of psychoacoustics that differ from the rest of the world. He doesn't measure the speaker. He doesn't measure the room. He doesn't quantify how the speaker will sound (tonaly) in the room. He does something else that makes no sense to me.

Outlaws price for ID does look high unless the LCR's do sound like a $1200.00 speakers. Of course you are paying for 2 crossovers in each speaker. Maybe they should have made a L/R and a LCR.
Tony please let us know what you think when you get yours.
Allen



Outlaw markets those proprietary speakers. They don't claim to manufacture them in their own factory. ID does not guarantee low prices.

You have to pay for a quality cabinet, quality drivers, and quality crossovers. Maybe those speakers are a good value, and maybe not. Kind of hard to tell from a picture.

NHT had a primary speaker cabinet manufacturer next door to it for years. They were only in business to build cabinets for us. At some point, they began to falter and we started looking for other sources. We tried a lot of different companies (Hitachi, AAI, Axiom, etc), but no one could do it with the quality we needed. This led us to consider companies overseas. We ended up settling on one company who had better quality and price than any factory in North America. They built the last couples years of the Super Series speakers (Super Zero, Super One, Super Two) and some of the video stuff. They were then transitioned into building the Super Audio speakers (SB1, SB2, SB3, ST4). WE never built ST4s in the US. They were only ever built in China.




Nice quality cabinets cost a lot more than most people realize. It is sort of like buying furniture. Do you want vinyl wood grain paper over the cabinet, wood veneer, piano black gloss plastic laminate, or a quality painted finish. NHT's always have had a quality cabinet and finish.






The easy way to fudge this is to not specify the smoothing used for the frequency response measurement. If 1 octave smoothing is appled before the L and R comparison is made, then to get a tolerance of +/-0.5dB, the drivers only need to have the same overall sensitivity to pass the test.

I agree, Nousaine's measurements should be taken with a mountain of salt. He has his own ideas about the laws of psychoacoustics that differ from the rest of the world. He doesn't measure the speaker. He doesn't measure the room. He doesn't quantify how the speaker will sound (tonaly) in the room. He does something else that makes no sense to me.



Two different models of speakers that measure the same can sound completely different from each other. Like you said, Noisaine doesn't quantify how the speaker will sound (tonaly) in the room. Playback volume capabilities also matter, and most FR measurements that are available to consumers do not tell you much about that.

mark russ,

You said "bright on bright" and nobody refuted it.

And some people have been telling me for the last 2 years that they aren't. LOLZ.

Hey, I'm just saying that the M5/M6 design makes more sense than having multiple crossovers and, when in different modes, inherently different sonic qualities.Not sure where I said it didn't. As you know, I've owned and loved the M5s, M6s and L5s, so no debate there.

Even if your room causes lots of reflections, having the L and R speakers closely matched makes the imaging better. A good test for how close two speakers match is to play mono noise over them. Place the speakers a couple feet apart and listen on the line beween them, about 4-5' away. There should be a very strong, narrow center image coming from the location centered between the speakers. The wider the image is, the less closely matching the speakers are.
What I like to do is place the speakers side by side and run left and right pink noise through them. Speakers with a good match will sound indistinguishable.

Not sure where I said it didn't. As you know, I've owned and loved the M5s, M6s and L5s, so no debate there.

Oh, I know, not trying to convince you of anything you don't already know. I'm saying this more as a general observation. I was conceptualizing some speakers for PSB, the idea of moving towards an "Alpha HT" speaker which was a 2.5-way LCR, but only as an entry level, $200-$300 each product, then go to a full 3-way. Paul has always avoided 3-ways for the most part and you can count them on one hand, but every time he builds one, it sounds dramatically better than his 2.5-ways. And, unfortunately, his 2-way bookshelf speakers sound better than his 2-way MTM towers with the same drivers and bigger enclosure and I don't think they would if MTM design weren't so problematic. I always preferred the NHT 3-way single midrange speakers to the NHT 3-way MTM speakers such as the VT1.4 and 2.4 in most ways. They were lower in driver distortion, but higher in acoustic distortion.

I'm starting to feel guilty for neglecting the M5/M6 for the last two years. But then, I always had thought there'd be a new version in 2008.

mark russ,

You said "bright on bright" and nobody refuted it.

And some people have been telling me for the last 2 years that they aren't. LOLZ.

Well I assume you are talking about the Fours here and not the Yammys? It's all subjective and relative of course. Are the Threes/Fours bright compared to Klipschs? - no. Are they bright compared to some Mirages? - yes.

When I say that I think the M5 is warmer sounding than the Threes, that is only when compared to Threes. I don't think the M5 is what I would necessarily call a "warm" sounding speaker. In fact, I would call it very neutral. If you are used to your Mirages, you might still think they are on the bright side.

More so than just about any other speaker I have ever heard, the M5 to me just perfectly walks and straddles that delicate line of striking an almost magical balance between being detailed, dynamic, and just flat out fun to listen to while yet at the same time not being fatiguing in any way whatsoever as you can literally listen to them all day long. :cool:

Mark, only two inputs on the 745...any other recommendations? Denon, Onkyo, Marantz...? I wasn't aware the Yamaha was that bright...

Between those three, assuming all things being equal as far as the features you want and need (including main L/R pre-outs and main-ins if possible), I'd put them in this order:

Marantz
Denon
Onkyo

As always, YMMV. ;)

mark russ,

You said "bright on bright" and nobody refuted it.

And some people have been telling me for the last 2 years that they aren't. LOLZ.

I refute it, but Mark likes a warmer sound, as do you, so I largely just ignore it. Many people think the Threes and Fours are way too warm and lacking. It's all just POV. They measure flat to marginally warm and are warmer than Xds and Xd is warmer than most high-end speakers that are boom and sizzle. BUT, the Xds are lower in distortion than the Three/Four, so they are easier on the ear.

Here is something that Bose does that most speaker manufacturers do not do. Company owned store, and this is one of the reasons Bose products are expensive. Take the walk into the virtual store, and then go to the Bose / Imax lobby. This is pretty much what the real store looks like.

http://www.jordans.com/tours/store_tour.asp?tourid=natick

Look in the "marketplace" section of today's Yahoo front page and tell me what you see:

www.yahoo.com

Bose does know how to spend $$$ on marketing and advertising, I'll give them that, and it also helps explain why they have absolutely no money left to put into actual research too. :p

Between those three, assuming all things being equal as far as the features you want and need (including main L/R pre-outs and main-ins if possible), I'd put them in this order:

Marantz
Denon
Onkyo

As always, YMMV. ;)

x2

I was conceptualizing some speakers for PSB...

Did you talk them into going sealed yet? :p

Did you talk them into going sealed yet? :p

Not yet, but working on it!!!! Their new Synchrony speakers sound great *except* for the overly ported sound. They have port plugs that come with, but I'd rather just see them do a proper sealed speaker.

Outlaw markets those proprietary speakers. They don't claim to manufacture them in their own factory. ID does not guarantee low prices.

You have to pay for a quality cabinet, quality drivers, and quality crossovers. Maybe those speakers are a good value, and maybe not. Kind of hard to tell from a picture.

Kind of hard to see what you are trying to say unless you think I am talking about how a speaker sounds by the looks of a picture which I didn't say. But I know Tony has listened to a lot of ID speakers and has had NHT M6's in his house so that is why I asked him to tell us his what he thought about the speaker. As far as ID you are right most ID companies boast about no middle man so you get more for your money maybe with these speakers you get what you pay for. My point was if only one of the 3 speakers needs the crossover why put it in all of the speakers.
Allen

Nousaine's measurements are useless. Just ask John. They are not anechoic and vary all over the lot. I trust Soundstage, UltimateAV and Stereophile for measurements as they all are attempting to provide measurements that can be compared to those done earlier on a consistent basis. Nousaine's measurements have some weird room correction that he overlays onto them.

Of those, only Soundstage's measurements are 'anaechoic' ..the other two are quasi-anaechoic, as I would presume are Nousaine's. Anaechoic chambers are not exactly easy to come by.

Here's a link to John's thoughts on Nousaine's measurements, from this same thread no less:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=8261003&postcount=1559

To quote John:

Wow, that's convincing. Not.

Of those, only Soundstage's measurements are 'anaechoic' ..they others are quasi-anaechoic, as I would presume are Nousaine's. Anaechoic chambers are not exactly easy to come by.Nousaine's aren't.

Kind of hard to see what you are trying to say unless you think I am talking about how a speaker sounds by the looks of a picture which I didn't say. But I know Tony has listened to a lot of ID speakers and has had NHT M6's in his house so that is why I asked him to tell us his what he thought about the speaker. As far as ID you are right most ID companies boast about no middle man so you get more for your money maybe with these speakers you get what you pay for. My point was if only one of the 3 speakers needs the crossover why put it in all of the speakers.
Allen


I am sure that the Outlaw speakers are decent. By the time you add shipping and sales tax onto those speakers, they seem to be priced on the high side for an ID speaker. Then again, I don't know how expensive those drivers are and how good the build quality is.

The added crossover could be as simple as a single capacitor to HP one 5" speaker and a switch. It is not a large cost item, and adding it in as standard will keep inventory down (and keep the volume of single speaker sales up). It can be MTM, or 2 1/2 way, center, or L and R. One single speaker to inventory at minimal extra cost.

Nousaine's aren't.


How the speaker sounds to the end user in the users room is what counts. As we all know, measurements only tell you part of the story.

What speakers do you plan to reference the Outlaw speakers to as far as sound quality goes?

Look in the "marketplace" section of today's Yahoo front page and tell me what you see:

www.yahoo.com

Bose does know how to spend $$$ on marketing and advertising, I'll give them that, and it also helps explain why they have absolutely no money left to put into actual research too. :p


Bose has more money than they know what to do with. Bose is more than just speakers for use in the home. They also have 151 stores at last count.

If Bose is anything like Harman, then about 60% of their sales are to the auto industry.

Harman actually designs and builds OEM products for the auto industry. Bose doesn't have any OEM manufacturing. They just charge a license fee to the automaker for ploping their name all over the car.

Harman actually designs and builds OEM products for the auto industry. Bose doesn't have any OEM manufacturing. They just charge a license fee to the automaker for ploping their name all over the car.

Learn something new every day...

I'm not impressed with my Harmon system in my Mercedes. The best sounding car stereo stock system was in my Volvo S60R which was Harmon speakers and Mitsubishi electronics.

Harman actually designs and builds OEM products for the auto industry. Bose doesn't have any OEM manufacturing. They just charge a license fee to the automaker for ploping their name all over the car.

Blose

Blose

Thanks for the contribution to the thread. Very illuminating.

Wow, that's convincing. Not.

If you understood anything, it would be self-evident.

How the speaker sounds to the end user in the users room is what counts. As we all know, measurements only tell you part of the story.

What speakers do you plan to reference the Outlaw speakers to as far as sound quality goes?

Well, let's see. Currently on tap are AV123 Ref 1s and 3s (with SOCS) and Dunlavy SM-1s. Previously I compared the Outlaw BLS to Totem Mani-2s and Forests which I owned for a few months. I've also recently had in the house Classic 4s (which weren't to my liking in my room, their tonal quality seemed rather odd, a little laid back and diffuse, particularly compared to my memory of the M5s and M6s).

The "bright on bright" post was made in good fun, and luckily none of you guys took offense. Thanks.

I did find the 3Cs to be quite lively and engaging, so it is hard for me to understand that somebody could find them "lacking".

Like you said, it is all point of view. And I think some people must focus on a certain frequency range or ranges. If those areas are presented "correctly" then all other sins are forgiven.

I wonder what it would take to engineer out the ringing that mark russ mentioned he noticed in a post several months ago and the upper midrange hardness I hear?
A crossover mod, or a design change to the mid/tweeter array?

And John also said that the Classic series do so many things better than other speakers that he can overlook those it doesn't.

Couldn't a different cap be put in to take .5-1db off the treble?
Those ********** guys are always doing mods.

^^^ You know, you really should try M5s or Classic Twos (or maybe even a used pair of SB-3s) to see how you like them. I believe you would find any of them more to your tastes. ;)

If you understood anything, it would be self-evident.

Wow! That's deeper than Jerry Springer's final thought of the day! :eek: :p;):cool::D

Harman actually designs and builds OEM products for the auto industry. Bose doesn't have any OEM manufacturing. They just charge a license fee to the automaker for ploping their name all over the car.

If you start driving an F1 car with Bose as your primary sponsor, then they are the ones who will be paying you to plaster their name all over your car. :D;):p

As for Nousaine, just take a look at the drastic difference between his measurements of the M5s/T5s on the last page here:

http://nhthifi.com/2006/press/reviews/evolution_sound.pdf

and HTM's of the same speakers on the third page here:

http://nhthifi.com/2006/press/reviews/evolution_ht.pdf

Well, let's see. Currently on tap are AV123 Ref 1s and 3s (with SOCS) and Dunlavy SM-1s. Previously I compared the Outlaw BLS to Totem Mani-2s and Forests which I owned for a few months. I've also recently had in the house Classic 4s (which weren't to my liking in my room, their tonal quality seemed rather odd, a little laid back and diffuse, particularly compared to my memory of the M5s and M6s).

Just curious, but why did you ever get rid of your Evo monitors? Did you feel there was something lacking, or was it more a case of just wanting to try out some more new stuff?

Just curious, but why did you ever get rid of your Evo monitors? Did you feel there was something lacking, or was it more a case of just wanting to try out some more new stuff?

It was time to move on and try new stuff.

I know the feeling, but I always keep coming back to the M5s/T5s. ;)

I wonder what it would take to engineer out the ringing that mark russ mentioned he noticed in a post several months ago and the upper midrange hardness I hear?
A crossover mod, or a design change to the mid/tweeter array?2 words: room treatment. I had the same ringing and it went completely away with sound diffusing panels. Okay, actually, I haven't put in the sound diffusing panels yet and I still have a little ring, but my expert (who's been mentioned before) took one listen and said they'd fix it, so I'll let you all know.

As for Nousaine, just take a look at the drastic difference between his measurements of the M5s/T5s on the last page here:

http://nhthifi.com/2006/press/reviews/evolution_sound.pdf

and HTM's of the same speakers on the third page here:

http://nhthifi.com/2006/press/reviews/evolution_sound.pdf
Mark,
Did you mean to post the same link twice? :D

Peter

^^^ As a matter of fact, I did. I just wanted to see if anyone was paying attention. :p

It's now been corrected. :o

As for Nousaine, just take a look at the drastic difference between his measurements of the M5s/T5s on the last page here:

http://nhthifi.com/2006/press/reviews/evolution_sound.pdf

and HTM's of the same speakers on the third page here:

http://nhthifi.com/2006/press/reviews/evolution_ht.pdf


S & V

"All of the response curves in the graph are
weighted to reflect how sound arrives at a
listener’s ears with normal speaker placement."

Nousaine's measurements are just a little outside of the +/- 3 dB spec. Those are realistic curves that you could get if you measured the speakers in your own room.



HTM

"In an ongoing effort to provide the most meaningful data possible, we’ve
changed our loudspeaker-measurement procedure. In the past, our graphs
have shown each speaker’s axial response. We are now displaying the
listening-window response, which is an average of the axial +/–15-degree
horizontal and +/–15-degree vertical measurements. This averaged response
more closely represents what a listener in a "normal" listening position is
likely to hear, instead of assuming that the listener is directly on-axis with
the speaker. For most well-designed speakers, the difference between
these two measurements will be slight."


One must realize that all sorts of averaging and smoothing goes on in most FR graphs to make them look good. HTM's measurments are some type of average. No seats will sound average, so that FR curve means what?

Hello everyone,

I thought I would chime in just once on this thread to make a few comments:

As everyone knows there are a lot of very good speakers out there and no company has a lock on "just the right sound". NHT has been mentioned a lot and in our opinion many of their models are truly great.
As for Revel, if you look back on the "about" page of the Outlaw BLS and you will see that it is called out on our short list as one of the brands we admire the most.

Since it is so crowded out there with very good speakers, we know that anything with the Outlaw name has to hold its own in very good company. Otherwise, why do produce loudspeakers at all with so many decent choices? For the record, each of these two models took us about nine months to reach our standards.The reviews, (with more to come) seem to verify that we have achieved our goals.

All of this brings me to my point: There are some of you making declarations and judgements about these and other speakers with no data except your own opinions or biases. Others of you are making certain statements about design approaches or how something is accomplished In several cases you are posting facts that are either unsubstantiated or just plain wrong.

In our view, the only valid "opinions" should be those that have auditioned certain loudspeakers ,including our own) in a trial period. At that point, whether they love them or hate them, at least they have a basis of real life experience. With a certain amount of authority ( validated by their own personal experiences )they can render a judgement that is relevant to their own listening situations and taste.

For those of you that can read music, imagine "judging" a symphony just by reading the score and not attending a performance of the work. Reading some of these posts I get a similar feeling.

I have been in this industry a long time and I have a fair knowledge of loudspeaker design. However, I am constantly humbled by what I don't know. Loudspeaker design is both a science and an art and in the past few years much has changed in materials and technologies. That is what makes it so interesting. While we thought we "knew" what the Outlaw speakers would sound like, it was only until we got to the evaluation stage where we could hear what choices we had made. We knew at that point what needed to be changed.


On our side of this industry, we never assume anything and constantly look for ways of doing things better. In return, all we ask is that for those who want to render judgements, to gain a little experience with the products that they declare are good or not.

In any event, thank you for reading my own take on this thread. I am bowing out and am now returning all to their regularly scheduled debate.

Peter Tribeman
President,
Outlaw Audio

Uh-oh. Now you guys have gone and done it, you've pissed off an outlaw. :p :D

Nousaine's measurements are just a little outside of the +/- 3 dB spec. Those are realistic curves that you could get if you measured the speakers in your own room.

Those are measurements that don't reflect in any way how our brain processes sound. Therefore, it's not only useless, it paints the wrong portrait of what's actually happening.

One must realize that all sorts of averaging and smoothing goes on in most FR graphs to make them look good. HTM's measurments are some type of average. No seats will sound average, so that FR curve means what?

Averaging has been proven to be, at least most of the time, more along the line of what we're likely to perceive and that's why it is used regularly. It rarely varies much from a single snapshot, if the speaker is designed well, but it's a nice thing to have.

All of this brings me to my point: There are some of you making declarations and judgements about these and other speakers with no data except your own opinions or biases. Others of you are making certain statements about design approaches or how something is accomplished In several cases you are posting facts that are either unsubstantiated or just plain wrong.

Some people call it experience, but whatever makes you feel better.

Just curious, but why did you ever get rid of your Evo monitors? Did you feel there was something lacking, or was it more a case of just wanting to try out some more new stuff?

It was time to move on and try new stuff.

He knew of a good home for them.

Thanks again Tony.
Allen

He knew of a good home for them.

Thanks again Tony.
Allen

You're welcome, Allen! I'm sure they're giving you as much pleasure as they gave to me.

Tony

Since I don't have an engineering degree and an unlimited budget my opinion and bias are the only thing I've got.
Of course I learn alot on here and don't get upset when someone posts a "wrong" fact.
It's not the end of the world, it's a message board.

Some people call it experience, but whatever makes you feel better.

Well, your "experience" is clearly not the only path. If it were, NHT would be the most successful speaker company out there, beating down all competition.

Fact is, I've owned lots of speakers in my day ranging from AR to Vandersteen (with NHT and Outlaw along the way) and I would be the last person to tell you that NHT was the only one that gave me consistent pleasure and brought me closer to the core of what I listen to. In fact, I much preferred the Outlaw BLS to the NHT Classic 4, at least in my house, listening to my music. YMMV.

You can't seem to get beyond the theory...without, as Peter says, even hearing a speaker. I've tried one of Outlaw's offerings, and they stand up well to other similarly priced and more expensive speakers.

But you are so smart, knowledgeable, and perspicacious that you don't need to hear a speaker to judge its sound. You just know, based on your understanding of its design principles. You are a better man than I am, Gunga Din.

Well, your "experience" is clearly not the only path. If it were, NHT would be the most successful speaker company out there, beating down all competition.

Well, that would also take marketing, so that statement is false. Obviously, Bose is number one, so that means that quality or good design has essentially zero to do with sales. In fact, it seems like good design has a nearly inverse relationship with sales, probably because it's not as easily marketed. "We did it well, not features, gimmicks, cool buzzwords™"

Fact is, I've owned lots of speakers in my day ranging from AR to Vandersteen (with NHT and Outlaw along the way) and I would be the last person to tell you that NHT was the only one that gave me consistent pleasure and brought me closer to the core of what I listen to. In fact, I much preferred the Outlaw BLS to the NHT Classic 4, at least in my house, listening to my music. YMMV.

I didn't say you wouldn't enjoy it, I was just critical of the design vs price.

But you are so smart, knowledgeable, and perspicacious that you don't need to hear a speaker to judge its sound. You just know, based on your understanding of its design principles. You are a better man than I am, Gunga Din.

As I said, I wasn't judging the sound, just the design and price. I don't think the design is *bad*, just much more appropriate to a speaker costing 1/3 to 1/2 what they cost. IMO, dual crossovers isn't the best way of dealing with the issue. I think they're using unneeded "features" to sell the product, not that this is unusual in audio. And at least I'm being consistent. I'm on record as not liking MTM design, nor 2.5-way design. You can make those designs sound *good*, but it's very difficult, if not impossible, to make them sound *great*.

Some people call it experience, but whatever makes you feel better.

Goes back to something I was arguing about with Mark a few weeks ago with the SVS subs.

You can't hear everything, so you have to make some decisions on the basis of design, engineering, and measurements.

Now Mark was right that I shouldn't count out the entire class of ported subs, and should probably hear a good one to see if my opinion of them is correct. And to a certain extent you have to yield to the experience of people who have heard something, but then that has to be filtered through how their tastes match yours, so obviously it gets complicated quickly.

But in the absence of actually having the chance to listen to something, sometimes you have to judge a speaker by eye. It's the nature of the hobby...

Well, that would also take marketing, so that statement is false.So it's just marketing that keeps NHT from being the most successful speaker company out there, and what, stupidity that keeps all the speaker designers with a different way to the truth from following your design precepts?

Well, that would also take marketing, so that statement is false. Obviously, Bose is number one, so that means that quality or good design has essentially zero to do with sales. In fact, it seems like good design has a nearly inverse relationship with sales, probably because it's not as easily marketed. "We did it well, not features, gimmicks, cool buzzwords™" It's come up so many times that I have to mention it - it seems like by "marketing" people are referring to the whole marketing/sales/distribution side of things. Or use other labels if you want, but being so broad obscures what's actually happening at the various steps in the chain.

For example, Bose has a big marketing budget and obviously wide distribution (in the big box stores, etc.), and I have to think a pretty big sales force that supports that and links the two.

NHT is very thin on the ground. They obviously used to have a stellar dealer in New Mexico ;) , but most people elsewhere wouldn't be able to find a place to see, much less demo or buy, an NHT speaker.

Design will have an inverse relation to sales when the design is done in a vacuum, without understanding what customers want. That's a hazard that companies face, especially engineering-driven companies. Not saying that's the case here, though it may be to some degree in spots, just pointing out the real issue.

Other than that, it should succeed when the design is supported by a marketing/sales/distribution side that's effective.

So here it gets speculative - I don't really know, but saying it seems like it's been weak seems to be a safe statement. Rather than lose the engineering department, they should really have sold the company to a company that has an effective marketing/sales/distribution arm they can plug into.

Those are measurements that don't reflect in any way how our brain processes sound. Therefore, it's not only useless, it paints the wrong portrait of what's actually happening.

Er...your animus is showing...I didn't write the post you quoted..J Palmer-Cass did. So you had to have actually *added my name* there.

I'm gonna bet two things

1) that Tom Nousaine knows more about psychoacoustics than you do

and

2) that you're one of the people Peter Tribeman is referring to, as promulgating bad information here

Re: Outlaw
What Mr. Tribeman was saying is that many were posting about their new speaker without any first-hand experience whatsovever. If you're going to post about build quality, what the crossover switch does, or sound quality, at least have a look (or listen) to the speaker, it's construction, or a first-hand informed source, first. People were posting that the speaker is "overpriced" without knowing anything about the build or crossovers or sound. He's right. When I think of Outlaw, I certainly think of "good bang-for-the-buck." On the other hand, it's a bulletin board, so we can say whatever we want. But it that's the case, at least make it funny! :D


Re: Bose
It's a business. Bose is very good at it. I knew Amar Bose when I was in college, when he was a respected audio engineer at MIT. Actually, if you look at and listen to what he's done (totally ignoring price), he's done a pretty good job of making tiny, inexpensive drivers sound pretty good. Not great, but for the cost to build, very impressive. Unfortunately for the public, all that marketing and desire for profit drives up the price quite a bit. If they sold the Acoustimass (sp?) for $150, it would be great!

Those are measurements that don't reflect in any way how our brain processes sound. Therefore, it's not only useless, it paints the wrong portrait of what's actually happening.

Averaging has been proven to be, at least most of the time, more along the line of what we're likely to perceive and that's why it is used regularly. It rarely varies much from a single snapshot, if the speaker is designed well, but it's a nice thing to have.




I have made plenty of measurements on my system with various speakers. You can have two different speakers that measure almost identical for FR over most of the range, but the speakers sound nothing alike. None of those measurements tell you much about how a speaker sounds, or how loud they will play. I use 1/24 octave curves, and do not use smoothing. Smoothing down to 1/6 octave (like a lot of reviews use) hides way too much information.


The primary use of FR measurements that I have found to be of critical importance is for integrating a subwoofer(s) with the main speakers. FR measurements are very informative for that type of integration work. Basic in-room nulls and peaks are also easily seen with FR curves. Still, you have to know what to do with that FR information for it to be of any use!


I guess that means you have to listen to a speaker in your own room in order to hear if the sound is good in your room. How easily a certain speaker integrates with a subwoofer and with the room is another related question. If you don't (or can't) get the integration right, I don't care how the speaker measures. It just won't sound good.

Er...your animus is showing...I didn't write the post you quoted..J Palmer-Cass did. So you had to have actually *added my name* there.

I'm gonna bet two things

1) that Tom Nousaine knows more about psychoacoustics than you do

and

2) that you're one of the people Peter Tribeman is referring to, as promulgating bad information here



Yup, it was my posting. Not sure how your name showed up there.

Sorry, just saying is all.

1) that Tom Nousaine knows more about psychoacoustics than you do

You'd probably lose that bet! Nousaine is kind of an idiot in many respects. Jack knows what I mean.

2) that you're one of the people Peter Tribeman is referring to, as promulgating bad information here

You mean promulgating good information that isn't helpful to his income.

So it's just marketing that keeps NHT from being the most successful speaker company out there, and what, stupidity that keeps all the speaker designers with a different way to the truth from following your design precepts?

Oh, c'mon now Tony. I just said that marketing wouldn't make NHT the most successful speaker company. In fact the best marketing in the world *might* get it to #25 in about 5 or so years.

And it's not stupidity, it's the desire to make money. There are three goals in business -

1. Sell as many units as possible
2. Make them for as little as possible
3. Sell them for as much as possible.

Using poor design and then "overcoming" the problems with it helps with all of that. Using good engineering and design often raises the price to build and gives the marketing guys less about which they can blather. Mainly because it's easier to sell BS like golf ball dimples. It's easier to say "two crossovers for different uses!" rather than get into a long conversation about how a 3-way design simply avoids the need. I've been in this biz long enough to know that people are more willing to believe a good marketing lie than actual science based truth.

Besides, Tony, I've heard *hundreds* of different speakers of virtually ever possible design and I've been able to correlate what works with what doesn't and why. I get to hear what effects crossover slopes and points have, cabinet construction/design, driver layout, driver materials, ported/sealed etc, etc, etc and so my beliefs are all founded on long and varied experiences and they're consistent with what guys like Kevin Voecks and Bill Bush and Jack Hidley and other really great speaker engineers understand. Does that make me biased? Sure, but not without cause. It's politically incorrect to be biased or draw generalizations from experience because there are always exceptions, but they're called exceptions for a reason. They're few and far between.

Hello everyone,

I thought I would chime in just once on this thread to make a few comments:

As everyone knows there are a lot of very good speakers out there and no company has a lock on "just the right sound". NHT has been mentioned a lot and in our opinion many of their models are truly great.
As for Revel, if you look back on the "about" page of the Outlaw BLS and you will see that it is called out on our short list as one of the brands we admire the most.

Since it is so crowded out there with very good speakers, we know that anything with the Outlaw name has to hold its own in very good company. Otherwise, why do produce loudspeakers at all with so many decent choices? For the record, each of these two models took us about nine months to reach our standards.The reviews, (with more to come) seem to verify that we have achieved our goals.

All of this brings me to my point: There are some of you making declarations and judgements about these and other speakers with no data except your own opinions or biases. Others of you are making certain statements about design approaches or how something is accomplished In several cases you are posting facts that are either unsubstantiated or just plain wrong.

In our view, the only valid "opinions" should be those that have auditioned certain loudspeakers ,including our own) in a trial period. At that point, whether they love them or hate them, at least they have a basis of real life experience. With a certain amount of authority ( validated by their own personal experiences )they can render a judgement that is relevant to their own listening situations and taste.

For those of you that can read music, imagine "judging" a symphony just by reading the score and not attending a performance of the work. Reading some of these posts I get a similar feeling.

I have been in this industry a long time and I have a fair knowledge of loudspeaker design. However, I am constantly humbled by what I don't know. Loudspeaker design is both a science and an art and in the past few years much has changed in materials and technologies. That is what makes it so interesting. While we thought we "knew" what the Outlaw speakers would sound like, it was only until we got to the evaluation stage where we could hear what choices we had made. We knew at that point what needed to be changed.


On our side of this industry, we never assume anything and constantly look for ways of doing things better. In return, all we ask is that for those who want to render judgements, to gain a little experience with the products that they declare are good or not.

In any event, thank you for reading my own take on this thread. I am bowing out and am now returning all to their regularly scheduled debate.

Peter Tribeman
President,
Outlaw Audio



I seemed to have missed your discussion of the Outlaw claim of a 1/2 dB tolerance from speaker to speaker. Do you actually measure each crossover and driver and match them that close? Or is that more of a marketing misrepresentation of a tolerance that really is not what it appears to be?

I have made plenty of measurements on my system with various speakers. You can have two different speakers that measure almost identical for FR over most of the range, but the speakers sound nothing alike. None of those measurements tell you much about how a speaker sounds, or how loud they will play. I use 1/24 octave curves, and do not use smoothing. Smoothing down to 1/6 octave (like a lot of reviews use) hides way too much information.

This is true, but it does tell us a couple of things about the speaker's tonal balance and whether or not the person doing the measuring has any clue what he's doing. FR is really not terribly useful by itself. But HT is a whole lot better at measuring than Nousaine is. It's easy to get a bad measurement, but it's very hard to get a measurement as clean and accurate as the HT one. I've also found that driver materials alone make almost as much impact on the sound as FR does, not to mention dispersion characteristics.

I seemed to have missed your discussion of the Outlaw claim of a 1/2 dB tolerance from speaker to speaker. Do you actually measure each crossover and driver and match them that close? Or is that more of a marketing misrepresentation of a tolerance that really is not what it appears to be?

I'd say that belongs in the soon to be coming, I'd bet, Outlaw speaker thread!

There are three goals in business -

1. Sell as many units as possible
2. Make them for as little as possible
3. Sell them for as much as possible.
Actually the first goal in business, and one that is often overlooked, is to stay in business.

Well, if you do the other three, the staying in business part usually handles itself :)

Even if you make a mountain of cash, the goal of staying in business has to be #1 in order to set the rest of your objectives & priorities. How many companies can you think of that hit it big only to be gone. This is where management & marketing have to come together or you end up like NHT.

I think there are successful companies out there that don't prescribe to the sell them for as much as possible model.
Bose is obviously not one of them, but they have found their niche and if you repeat something enough times it becomes the truth. Enough people buy the stuff and they think it's the best available.
The other companies that want to build a good product and charge a fair price often shoot themselves in the foot because they don't have enough money for research or to handle warranty claims.
Parasound is a great company that doesnt charge an arm and a leg, as is cambridge Audio and NHT, although their current price points are high in relation to what they once were.
And I'm amazed that av123 can sell their little bookshelf for what the DIY parts cost.

And I'm amazed that av123 can sell their little bookshelf for what the DIY parts cost.

Well, actually, that's not that abnormal at the lower end as the cost of shipping and retailing and all of that gets way up there. Just like you can buy a built car for 1/3rd the price of the parts. Imagine how many parts and boxes and shipping charges you're avoiding for one thing.

I seemed to have missed your discussion of the Outlaw claim of a 1/2 dB tolerance from speaker to speaker. Do you actually measure each crossover and driver and match them that close? Or is that more of a marketing misrepresentation of a tolerance that really is not what it appears to be?

The 1/2 db tolerance is not from speaker to speaker but 1/2 db tolerance to the reference standard. So, if one speaker is 1/2db below the reference and the other speaker is 1/2db above the reference, the tolerance between speaker to speaker would be 1 db, still pretty damn good it seems to me.

The 1/2 db tolerance is not from speaker to speaker but 1/2 db tolerance to the reference standard. So, if one speaker is 1/2db below the reference and the other speaker is 1/2db above the reference, the tolerance between speaker to speaker would be 1 db, still pretty damn good it seems to me.



The 1/2 dB tolerance is speaker to speaker just as is the 3 dB tolerance for flat FR. Do I have to write plus or minus every time I write? Obviously a +/- 1/2 dB tolerance has a potential 1 dB spread, and +/- 3 dB has a potential 6 dB spread. The two tolerances are additive, so the flatness tolerance gives you a potential 7 dB spread.


However, saying that a speaker is flat to within +/- 3 dB is one thing. It does not tell you where in the frequency band the speaker is near + 3 dB, and where it is near -3 dB. In other words, it does not tell you how the speaker sounds.


The +/- 1/2 dB tolerance as referenced to a standard is missing one important piece of information - over what freqency range. 1/12 octave? 1/3 octave? 1 octave? 5 octaves? It is kind of a meaningless number.


All the above is an academic exercise anyhow. The room will destroy those numbers. I still wonder what the normal tolerance is between most decent quality speakers.

Well, that would also take marketing, so that statement is false. Obviously, Bose is number one, so that means that quality or good design has essentially zero to do with sales. In fact, it seems like good design has a nearly inverse relationship with sales, probably because it's not as easily marketed. "We did it well, not features, gimmicks, cool buzzwords™"

I didn't say you wouldn't enjoy it, I was just critical of the design vs price.

As I said, I wasn't judging the sound, just the design and price. I don't think the design is *bad*, just much more appropriate to a speaker costing 1/3 to 1/2 what they cost. IMO, dual crossovers isn't the best way of dealing with the issue. I think they're using unneeded "features" to sell the product, not that this is unusual in audio. And at least I'm being consistent. I'm on record as not liking MTM design, nor 2.5-way design. You can make those designs sound *good*, but it's very difficult, if not impossible, to make them sound *great*.

Here is what I believe:

NHT makes damn good speakers. They sound like someone is playing instruments in your room. They would sell more if they made them more efficient. They would not sound as good if they were more efficient.

Jack H is one smart (musically speaking) dude.

Peter T knows of where he speaks. I still have that little three piece Atlantic Tech speaker set. I use the sub module to crush Bose speakers!

John believes what he says. Some of what he says is correct.

I should not be allowed to write on a forum.


We all have to much time on our hands.

That is all.

Neil

All the above is an academic exercise anyhow.

That's for sure. I can tell you that I enjoy a set of Outlaw BLS everyday and chose them over the Mani-2s ($4500 a pair), Forests ($3150 a pair) and Classic 4s ($999.99 a pair). Again, YMMV.

All this talk about the speaker business makes me wonder what percentage of the overall $$ spent on speakers goes to HTIB, Bose, speakers sold at Best Buy, Circuit City, etc.?

After that, how much of the market now goes (or will soon go) to the companies making the line-array speakers (right term? - I'm thinking of those "lifestyle-friendly" speakers that have lots of smaller drivers lined up in a long, narrow and shallow box) that lend themselves well to driver-matching among various-sizes speakers?

Or to put it another way, how big a slice of the overall pie are the many reasonably-priced "audiophile" speaker manufacturers competing for? I'm guessing this is a very competitive business segment. Therefore, I'd think it's crucially important for a company to decide who their customers will be, and then develop a product line and marketing plan to reach those people. And to keep costs down and stay focused it seems like the way to go is to limit product somewhat. In other words, it's great to make a lot of excellent trees, but you can't lose sight of the forest in the process.

Also, the business seems to be going the systems route, and short of being more of a boutique company is it possible to produce a line of speakers that don't efficiently lend themselves to HT?

Hey, I like that Neilster guy!

(but speaker efficiency not as important anymore when you can buy 7 x 140 W so reasonably)

Peter

That's for sure. I can tell you that I enjoy a set of Outlaw BLS everyday and chose them over the Mani-2s ($4500 a pair), Forests ($3150 a pair) and Classic 4s ($999.99 a pair). Again, YMMV.

Where can I buy a pair of Classic 4's for $999.99 without them being special dark??

Where can I buy a pair of Classic 4's for $999.99 without them being special dark??

Picky, picky.

Not trying to be picky, I was hoping that I could pick up a pair of Classic 4's for that amount lol.

Not trying to be picky, I was hoping that I could pick up a pair of Classic 4's for that amount lol.

You can, as long as they're special dark.:)

That's for sure. I can tell you that I enjoy a set of Outlaw BLS everyday and chose them over the Mani-2s ($4500 a pair), Forests ($3150 a pair) and Classic 4s ($999.99 a pair). Again, YMMV.

I enjoy my Mazda5 every day and chose it over a Porsche 911, an Audi S4 and a Corvette C6 ;) [true statement]

Not trying to be picky, I was hoping that I could pick up a pair of Classic 4's for that amount lol.

Nothing wrong with SD! Besides, I have a matching center for you :)

I enjoy my Mazda5 every day and chose it over a Porsche 911, an Audi S4 and a Corvette C6 ;) [true statement]

I actually owned the speakers I mentioned. Can you say the same about the cars mentioned? Because as you know, the only way to know if a speaker is going to float your boat is to audition it over a period of time. Isn't it the same with cars? Strike that. Yours is an inane analogy, smiley or no.

Some of the more popular speakers are the ones that offer the most profit for the retailer.
If speaker A has 100% markup and speaker B has 110% markup then you will see more of those, and probably more advertising.
Out of that profit the dealer has to pay for shipping.
So when I see 50% off deals the dealer is either taking the hit, the manufacturer is providing rebates/incentives or the margins are higher.

I actually owned the speakers I mentioned. Can you say the same about the cars mentioned? Because as you know, the only way to know if a speaker is going to float your boat is to audition it over a period of time. Isn't it the same with cars? Strike that. Yours is an inane analogy, smiley or no.

I almost made a similar analogy! Note that he didn't say a Mazda5 is BETTER than those cars, simply that he chose the Mazda over them and he enjoys it every day. If your priority is a vehicle that gets good gas mileage, has good cargo/passenger capacity, AND handles well, then the Mazda5 is a better choice than all those cars. I had a rough budget (which for once I ended up spending less than) wanted a car that gets 25+ mpg (real world), handles extremely well, has 4 doors and enough room for 2 car seats when necessary, with about a 7 seconds or better 0-60 time, and a manual transmission. I test drove the few cars that met that list and easily chose the Honda Civic SI sedan (which is perhaps my favorite car ever now that I've owned it awhile).

The point I was going to make with the analogy is that speaker buyers will narrow their choices based on their specific needs, and on what they read, before they start listening (if they listen at all!). That's why I believe a company should have a coherent plan/philosophy and products that fill niches.

BTW, Honda dealers can't keep Civic SIs on the lot for more than a day, if they're not sold before they hit the lot.

I almost made a similar analogy! Note that he didn't say a Mazda5 is BETTER than those cars, simply that he chose the Mazda over them and he enjoys it every day. If your priority is a vehicle that gets good gas mileage, has good cargo/passenger capacity, AND handles well, then the Mazda5 is a better choice than all those cars. I had a rough budget (which for once I ended up spending less than) wanted a car that gets 25+ mpg (real world), handles extremely well, has 4 doors and enough room for 2 car seats when necessary, with about a 7 seconds or better 0-60 time, and a manual transmission. I test drove the few cars that met that list and easily chose the Honda Civic SI sedan (which is perhaps my favorite car ever now that I've owned it awhile).

The point I was going to make with the analogy is that speaker buyers will narrow their choices based on their specific needs, and on what they read, before they start listening (if they listen at all!). That's why I believe a company should have a coherent plan/philosophy and products that fill niches.

BTW, Honda dealers can't keep Civic SIs on the lot for more than a day, if they're not sold before they hit the lot.

The only reason I even mentioned the speakers I compared them against was that J Palmer Cass asked the question. My priority is getting me closer to the core of my music. I understand that it's important to have a context when making statements about the relative goodness of speakers. J Palmer asked, and I answered. That gave John the ammunition to come out with one if his inane analogies, aimed at, in essence, calling into question the validity of my choice.

Like saying, I could have gone to a gourmet restaurant, but instead chose to eat at Burger King. John didn't give any qualification. He just made an idiotic statement aimed at minimizing the validity of my choice. The sophistry is not lost on me.

I actually owned the speakers I mentioned. Can you say the same about the cars mentioned? Because as you know, the only way to know if a speaker is going to float your boat is to audition it over a period of time. Isn't it the same with cars? Strike that. Yours is an inane analogy, smiley or no.

Well, I've driven them! But I needed a different experience - more space, less money. I'm just saying - preference ≠ better. It's just what you like or need. Nothing wrong with that.

Like saying, I could have gone to a gourmet restaurant, but instead chose to eat at Burger King. John didn't give any qualification. He just made an idiotic statement aimed at minimizing the validity of my choice. The sophistry is not lost on me.

Oh good grief, don't take it personally. Many people think soft domes and ported midranges get them "closer to the music". I'm not calling into question your choice because your choice is *your* choice. I'm just saying it would be silly to construe that this would be everyone's choice. Heck, I wouldn't say the Mazda is "better", but it's one of the coolest cars out there and I'd never give it up. On a technical level, it's not the same as a sports car though. I can admit that, much as I love the car. So, I was poking a bit of fun, but it was hardly "idiotic". And, yes, there are many times when I'd rather have a burger and fries than a fancy meal or a beer instead of a martini. Why so defensive?

Oh good grief, don't take it personally. Many people think soft domes and ported midranges get them "closer to the music". I'm not calling into question your choice because your choice is *your* choice. I'm just saying it would be silly to construe that this would be everyone's choice.

Well who the hell said it would be everyone's choice? Not I. Do you know what YMMV meant at the end of my post? Since you used the car analogy, I thought you would, but I guess I need to spell it out:

"I can tell you that I enjoy a set of Outlaw BLS everyday and chose them over the Mani-2s ($4500 a pair), Forests ($3150 a pair) and Classic 4s ($999.99 a pair). Again, YOUR MILEAGE MAY VARY.

Get it?

The little condescending digs (Many people think soft domes and ported midranges get them "closer to the music".) don't cut it with me. What you're saying, in your subtle, little obnoxious way is although many people "think" it, you know better. Please. I've been there, done that (many times). It ain't the technology, but the implementation.

Geez, someone sure got out on the wrong side of Massachusetts today.

Mr sharp of tongue can dish out the cutting wit, but can't take it?

I know the feeling, but I always keep coming back to the M5s/T5s. ;)

Me too :D This is my third stint....

James

Here is what I believe:

NHT makes damn good speakers. They sound like someone is playing instruments in your room. They would sell more if they made them more efficient. They would not sound as good if they were more efficient.

Jack H is one smart (musically speaking) dude.

Peter T knows of where he speaks. I still have that little three piece Atlantic Tech speaker set. I use the sub module to crush Bose speakers!

John believes what he says. Some of what he says is correct.

I should not be allowed to write on a forum.


We all have to much time on our hands.

That is all.

Neil

Touche... :D

Hey, I like that Neilster guy!

(but speaker efficiency not as important anymore when you can buy 7 x 140 W so reasonably)

Peter

I agree, sensitivity/efficiency is so overrated. How much louder than the point to where one would eventually go deaf does anyone need them to play anyway? :eek:

Take the SB-3 as a random example. Fact is, they are 8ohm speakers, 86db 1w/1m, and to be a at 101db at the same distance (constant, not peaks), you will need a whopping Thirty Two watts of power. Interpolate from there as to approximately how much power you need based on how far your listening position is away from the speakers. 100 good, measurable watts should plenty for most situations.

Nice quality cabinets cost a lot more than most people realize. It is sort of like buying furniture. Do you want vinyl wood grain paper over the cabinet, wood veneer, piano black gloss plastic laminate, or a quality painted finish. NHT's always have had a quality cabinet and finish.

Just imagine how much the 3.3's cabinet alone must have cost.

When you also factor in the fact that each pair was actually hand made here in the US, and all the extra work that went into them that Jack mentioned here:

You aren't going to build production speakers that match within +/-0.5dB without premeasuring the drivers and probably the crossovers. With the M3.3, we measured the frequency response of every Woofer, LM, UM, Tweeter and each section of the crossover. Ever driver and crossover was given a serial number. A PC took all of the frequency response data and matched all of the drivers and crossovers together. You ended up with a list of serialized drivers and crossovers for each pair of speakers. After assembly, the frequency response of each speaker was measured against a stored reference curve and against its other half. It was rare that they didn't match within +/-0.15dB. We never dropped this claim. We just only ever did this process on the M3.3. It was just too much work. If a customer blew a crossover or a driver, we had to look up the response data for the part that he had, then do a sort in the computer to find the best matching part that was in stock. It was hard enough to just get an accurate speaker serial number from some customers!

... how did they ever offer a pair of them for only $4000, retail at that? :eek:

I think it was Ken that said once that they thought they could sell the 3.3 for $7K, probably even *should* sell them for $7K based on the cost to build, but that they wanted to sell a lot of them, not a precious few. Of course, that's why NHT never made a ton of money, they're managing to sell B&M product at ID (and sometimes less) pricing.

One of the tricks used by companies to get very high margins on product is to raise the price of their models with every upgrade. The cost to build may go up 1-5%, but the retail may go up 15-25%. Or, what I call "line stuffing". You put the 3.3 at $10,000/pr, then you put in a 3.2 at $6000/pr, a 3.1 at $4500/pr, a 3.0 at $3000/pr, etc, etc, and make sure that each one is an audible step down. "Top down selling". You make people *want* the top of the line that they can't afford, but give them the lesser product they can which is what they can afford and is arguably the closest thing to the image and flavor (not necessarily quality) of the flagship they wish they could afford. And, of course, you pull in the guys that have big bucks to spend whatever to overspend on the flagship.

^^^ The 2.9 at $2500 pretty much did that to at least some extent, no?

Exactly the direction I think they should go in. You have the loss leader; the ultra 'Enzo Ferrari' model and it's tech gradually trickles down to more affordable lines. Even if they take a loss on the 'Enzo', it doesn't really matter because it drives sales on all the other models. That & you don't even want to sell more than a few of those; people who can afford them want exclusivity & that leaves everyone else with a burning, never fulfilled desire for anything that xyz company puts out. Pretty simple really.

The Xd was a step in the right direction, but wasn't quite all out, high priced, or useful enough. Awesome no doubt, but not the 'it' thing everyone has to have regardless of price.

Not really. Rather than supporting the need to spend more money on the 3.3, it offered 90% of its performance for 60% of the price and that was plenty for most people. Besides, the 3.3 was out for years before the 2.9, so it didn't need a decontented version to make it seem a necessary purchase and if you heard them side by side, while they had some differences, it wasn't dramatic except maybe in the low bass.

The 3.3 has a pretty extreme cabinet and bass driver that cost a lot more money to implement, so removing those was a way of making a virtually identical sounding speaker (above about 100 or 200Hz) for the masses. The big thing is that the 3.3 sounded more like an "SE" version of the 2.9. Yes, better, but much closer in performance than the typical decontented and even sabotaged designs that companies often do on filler models. Same crossover and mid/treble. For us, a lot people just said "hey, this is perfect, now I don't need to spend the money on the 3.3" or "hey, now I can have the sound that I want because my wife won't divorce me over *these*."

The Xd was a step in the right direction, but wasn't quite all out, high priced, or useful enough. Awesome no doubt, but not the 'it' thing everyone has to have regardless of price.

Yes, well, ask Jack how tired he is of hearing asking about a "SuperXd"!

I truly believe that if there had been a $12K+ 4-way tower version of Xd for audiophiles, they (and the magazines) would have convinced their wealthy non-audiophile friends to buy more Xds. So not only would they sell a fair amount of $12K models, the sales of $6K Xd would have quadrupled (or more). As it was, they rejected the Xd concept and so the Xds just didn't take off. Probably the best speaker ever made that is still sitting unwanted in a warehouse because it is a speaker without a market that knows it exists or is as good as it is.

Probably the best speaker ever made that is still sitting unwanted in a warehouse because it is a speaker without a market that knows it exists or is as good as it is. I need to find that warehouse. :p

6400 Goodyear Road Benicia, California 94510 ;)

Geez, someone sure got out on the wrong side of Massachusetts today.

Mr sharp of tongue can dish out the cutting wit, but can't take it?

Actually, I got up on the right side of Massachusetts, near the water. Re taking, fire away.

6400 Goodyear Road Benicia, California 94510 ;)

I have to wonder just how good the security is....

Probably the best speaker ever made that is still sitting unwanted in a warehouse because it is a speaker without a market that knows it exists or is as good as it is.

Do you think it would have been more accepted if it was offered in piano black?

Any recommendations for speakerwire and cables to connect the A1's and X1 to my receiver? I have 2 set-ups, 7 M6's + 2 U1's and 2 Classic Fours, a 3C + 4 Classic 2's for the moment. All the equipment will be in a rack and the furthest speakers will be within a 30-40ft speakerwire distance away.

Do you think it would have been more accepted if it was offered in piano black?

It is! Or do you mean without the two tone special dark finish as well? They did try it with just black, but I was told that it looked "Darth Vader-esque" and I can believe that. Of course, it took *forever* for the black finish to come, so by that time, a lot of people had bought other things.

It is! Or do you mean without the two tone special dark finish as well? They did try it with just black, but I was told that it looked "Darth Vader-esque" and I can believe that. Of course, it took *forever* for the black finish to come, so by that time, a lot of people had bought other things.

I was trying to get my hands on a set and have only seen the two tone version. I was aware of the special dark, but not the piano black. I wish I could hear the holographic imaging for myself beforehand, though.

Well, it's special dark and piano black.

Yeah the xD red was not for me. I'd rather have it two toned or piano black or real wood.

I've always liked the "Darth Vader look." :D

NHT should have done a straight piano black, it would have looked great.

Actually, I like the burgundy and maple. I too thought they looked fugly in pics, but when you actually see them for real, they look quite striking.

Just like I can't for the life of me figure out why Revel discontinued the two tone maple and black M22 Performas. It was the best looking color option they offered IMO.

Any recommendations for speakerwire and cables to connect the A1's and X1 to my receiver? I have 2 set-ups, 7 M6's + 2 U1's and 2 Classic Fours, a 3C + 4 Classic 2's for the moment. All the equipment will be in a rack and the furthest speakers will be within a 30-40ft speakerwire distance away.

12 Gauge speaker wire (any brand, including Lowes) should do it. :p

For RCAs, virtually any quality IC at least the equivalent of the venerable Radio Shack "Gold Line" (or whatever) will be more than adequate for the bass. ;)

I have to wonder just how good the security is....

Ain't but one way to find out. ;)

Ain't but one way to find out. ;)

Road trip.

Hidley, any "inside" tips for the pilferers among us? :p

I'm just waiting for NHT to blow out the Xds!

Exactly the direction I think they should go in. You have the loss leader; the ultra 'Enzo Ferrari' model and it's tech gradually trickles down to more affordable lines. Even if they take a loss on the 'Enzo', it doesn't really matter because it drives sales on all the other models. That & you don't even want to sell more than a few of those; people who can afford them want exclusivity & that leaves everyone else with a burning, never fulfilled desire for anything that xyz company puts out. Pretty simple really.

The Xd was a step in the right direction, but wasn't quite all out, high priced, or useful enough. Awesome no doubt, but not the 'it' thing everyone has to have regardless of price.
I believe that's the first time I've heard the Enzo referred to as a "loss leader." :D

Peter

I believe that's the first time I've heard the Enzo referred to as a "loss leader." :D

Peter

It probably was a loss leader due to only 200 of them made and the R&D that went into them, support, parts etc.

piano black all the way!!!!

If anyone is planning a breakin, get me an Xd system while you're at it. PM me for a map to the "good stuff" j/k:)

Xd was built in two finishes.

1) Classic finish. Two tone, reddish/burgundy for the BMC parts and a very light yellow/tan wood finish for the MDF parts. This is the finish you see in almost all of the photos. Very retro looking. Looks cool in person, not so good in photos.

2) Special dark. Two tone, special dark color (reddish/brown) for the BMC parts and gloss black for the MDF parts. Makes the system much less noticable.

We tried doing some systems in all gloss black. Didn't look so good. We also did one system with gloss black MDF parts and chromed BMC parts. It looked awesome!!!!!

If anyone is planning a breakin, get me an Xd system while you're at it. PM me for a map to the "good stuff" j/k:)

Xd was built in two finishes.

1) Classic finish. Two tone, reddish/burgundy for the BMC parts and a very light yellow/tan wood finish for the MDF parts. This is the finish you see in almost all of the photos. Very retro looking. Looks cool in person, not so good in photos.

2) Special dark. Two tone, special dark color (reddish/brown) for the BMC parts and gloss black for the MDF parts. Makes the system much less noticable.

We tried doing some systems in all gloss black. Didn't look so good. We also did one system with gloss black MDF parts and chromed BMC parts. It looked awesome!!!!!

What happened to the gloss black ones? Did you refinish them to a standard color, or did you scrap them? If I had Xds, I'd get the room designed around them!

We also did one system with gloss black MDF parts and chromed BMC parts. It looked awesome!!!!!

I WANT those!!!! I have toyed with the idea of having flames sprayed on my 4's:D

I think I read it somewhere in this thread but I have to ask again since it's just too long.

x2 is absolutely necessary if I want to biamp the classic4 with a1? Is there another brand of product I can use? Thanks.

If anyone is planning a breakin, get me an Xd system while you're at it. PM me for a map to the "good stuff" j/k:)

Xd was built in two finishes.

1) Classic finish. Two tone, reddish/burgundy for the BMC parts and a very light yellow/tan wood finish for the MDF parts. This is the finish you see in almost all of the photos. Very retro looking. Looks cool in person, not so good in photos.

2) Special dark. Two tone, special dark color (reddish/brown) for the BMC parts and gloss black for the MDF parts. Makes the system much less noticable.

We tried doing some systems in all gloss black. Didn't look so good. We also did one system with gloss black MDF parts and chromed BMC parts. It looked awesome!!!!!



I own three various sets of NHT speakers, and I would never consider the Xd's simply based on these pictures!

http://nhthifi.com/2006/ht-s-ultimate.html


The special dark looks very nice in the pictures. Gloss black and chrome sounds like it could have looked real slick. Then again, I like the look of the plain old gloss piano black. The speakers, the receiver, the television set all are one color - black!

The Xd system brochure has the ugly looking color scheme. Perhaps that was a marketing error!

http://nhthifi.com/2006/brochures/HomeTheater/NHT-XdUltimate-HT.pdf

Hey Guys -

I am finally getting around to upgrading my Receiver to this Pre/Pro & Amp combo, just wanted to know which amp I should be looking at? I have Classic Threes and the ThreeC center (I think that is what it is called) and I have two absolute zero's (I think for surround)

Pre/Pro:
Integra 9.8 (http://www.integrahometheater.com/model.cfm?class=Separates&m=DTC-9.8&p=i)
Emotiva LPA-1 (http://emotiva.com/lpa1.html) 5x125 watts + 2x50 = 7 or 6x125 watts, configurable
Emotiva IPS-1 (http://emotiva.com/ips1.html) 7x150

I am guessing the IPS-1 would match up better since the Three's are 150 Max and the Three C's are 200 Max.

HA! I finally found and ordered my C3 and a pair of Fours!!! Still flipping a quarter to see what AVR to use. John, I'm still interested in ordering the X2 and 2 A1s, I'm waiting on bonus money to hit the bank.

There are lots of active crossovers that can be used to biamp the Fours. However, the X2 has features designed to specifically work well with the Fours. It has a 15Hz HP filter to keep low frequency garbage from over driving the woofer below port tuning. It has three inputs, L, R and LFE. This allows you to set up the system so it has balanced flat bass response with 2 channel music and surround format movies. This is almost impossible to do with a normal receiver/surround processor and impossible with a conventional active crossover.

We also did one system with gloss black MDF parts and chromed BMC parts. It looked awesome!!!!!

:eek:

There are lots of active crossovers that can be used to biamp the Fours. However, the X2 has features designed to specifically work well with the Fours. It has a 15Hz HP filter to keep low frequency garbage from over driving the woofer below port tuning. It has three inputs, L, R and LFE. This allows you to set up the system so it has balanced flat bass response with 2 channel music and surround format movies. This is almost impossible to do with a normal receiver/surround processor and impossible with a conventional active crossover.

I always wondered if it was better to have a mild slope at 20Hz or steep one at 15Hz or lower. Some of my older Jazz recordings have a ton of subsonic material that's annoying, more so since I now have a sub that can reach that low.

Oh no...now i'm thinking about bi-amping my Fours! I've got a Rotel RB-1080 2x200wpc that I could use w/the X2 for the 10s but what about the mids and uppers? Would a tube amp work? Or should I stick w/ss amp?

I'm also wondering that if I don't use A1, how powerful of an amp I could use to biamp the fours. Any suggestion of a nice amp? Is it worth it to spend more and get something made by rotel or nad instead of the A1?

Also, I have 2 pairs of classic4s. Is one x2 enough? Since two mono amps such as a1s are needed to run a pair of classic4 bass drivers, can I use two 2channel amps to run 2 pair of classic4s?

The Xd system brochure has the ugly looking color scheme. Perhaps that was a marketing error!

http://nhthifi.com/2006/brochures/HomeTheater/NHT-XdUltimate-HT.pdf

Just laziness. They should have taken the other color off the website and shown only the SD color. Many people don't even know the SD color exists two years later and persist in believing Xds are inherently ugly.

Hi all! I'm a new convert to the NHT brand, have some questions on a subwoofer recommendation, and someone from another HT forum told me about this thread. I hope I'm not out of line jumping in here, but I could use some advice...

The 5.1 system I am building consists, so far, of a pair of Superones and a Supercenter. I am assuming, for now, that this will be my front stage. I am in search of a suitable rear stage and sub. I am leaning toward another set of Superones for the rear, but am wondering if Superzeros would do the job? In addition, I am looking for a reasonably priced sub (I'm all about the "search" for good deals on quality used equipment:)) that will blend well with this system. My room is about 17' x 15' with a vaulted ceiling that is about 12' high in the center of the room (so the cubic footage of the space is ~ 3000). My listening habits are about 25% music (jazz, prog rock, pop and the occassional bout of classic rock) and 75% movies of all genres.

Any advice on the choice of a rear speaker? The Superzeros and Supercenter are piano black, and I want the rears to match since they will be quite visible. As for the sub, I am looking at a Sub One or Sub Two, but am open for suggestions....

One last thing ... how high of a speaker stand do you recommend for the fronts and rears?

Thanks for all the help:D

Tom

Hi all! I'm a new convert to the NHT brand, have some questions on a subwoofer recommendation, and someone from another HT forum told me about this thread. I hope I'm not out of line jumping in here, but I could use some advice...

The 5.1 system I am building consists, so far, of a pair of Superones and a Supercenter. I am assuming, for now, that this will be my front stage. I am in search of a suitable rear stage and sub. I am leaning toward another set of Superones for the rear, but am wondering if Superzeros would do the job? In addition, I am looking for a reasonably priced sub (I'm all about the "search" for good deals on quality used equipment:)) that will blend well with this system. My room is about 17' x 15' with a vaulted ceiling that is about 12' high in the center of the room (so the cubic footage of the space is ~ 3000). My listening habits are about 25% music (jazz, prog rock, pop and the occassional bout of classic rock) and 75% movies of all genres.

Any advice on the choice of a rear speaker? The Superzeros and Supercenter are piano black, and I want the rears to match since they will be quite visible. As for the sub, I am looking at a Sub One or Sub Two, but am open for suggestions....

One last thing ... how high of a speaker stand do you recommend for the fronts and rears?

Thanks for all the help:D

Tom

SuperZeroes are fine for the rears if you're looking to save some money, but there's something to be said for using SuperOnes--easier to blend both fronts and rears with the sub, overall beefier sound. That said I use AZs as surrounds with my Classic 3 fronts.

Either of the subs you mention should be fine if you want to go used. If you can track down a U1 or U2 at clearance prices they're great deals; others here like the SVS subs. I haven't heard them but love my U1.

Just laziness. They should have taken the other color off the website and shown only the SD color. Many people don't even know the SD color exists two years later and persist in believing Xds are inherently ugly.



They should have had the SD color as the first color shown on the website. It took me a while to notice that you could view an alternate color (SD) on the website. The handout brochures don't even show the SD color.

The Xd's in the original color are in fact inherently ugly to my eyes. Nice look to please a gay interior decorator, but not for most others:eek:!

SuperZeroes are fine for the rears if you're looking to save some money, but there's something to be said for using SuperOnes--easier to blend both fronts and rears with the sub, overall beefier sound. That said I use AZs as surrounds with my Classic 3 fronts.




What is the correct polarity to use for the AZ's when you use the AZ's with Classic 3's? I have some older NHT speakers, and I have to reverse to polarity to maintain a good phase match with the main speakers.

I think that Mark Russ said that you have to use reverse polarity to match the AZ's with the Evolution product. Not sure about for use with the Classic series.

There are lots of active crossovers that can be used to biamp the Fours. However, the X2 has features designed to specifically work well with the Fours. It has a 15Hz HP filter to keep low frequency garbage from over driving the woofer below port tuning. It has three inputs, L, R and LFE. This allows you to set up the system so it has balanced flat bass response with 2 channel music and surround format movies. This is almost impossible to do with a normal receiver/surround processor and impossible with a conventional active crossover.



What frequency is the port tuned for in the fours?

I am looking to upgrade my Mirage OM based system home theater system mainly because I want change, want to hear what other speakers companies has to offer. I am considering NHT M5 based HT syatem. I haven't done a lot of reading lately as I have been pressed for time the past few months so I am not much informed about these speakers. I won't be able to do much reading now either as I am going to be of the country in early Jan. I am sure the sale will end by the time I get back so I want to order the speakers before I leave. What I am looking to get from this upgrade is better dynamics, resolution, detail and accuracy. I don't like very bright and forward sound. I doubt the NHT will have more and deep soundstage than the Mirage though. I will be mating the NTH with Onkyo 805 receiver, Acurus 200 W x 3 amp for front three and JL F112 sub. I am open to changing the amp if another brand will mate better with the NHT. Please help, I would appreciate all input. Thanks.

What about the M6?

I'm sure others will jump in, but FWIW I'm running M5's & prefer them over Classics...although Classics have the bigger soundstage, I think the M5s are a bit warmer with better dynamics.... your amp should mate well & like you said, you will not lose if you decide to turn them later...

I'm sure others will jump in, but FWIW I'm running M5's & prefer them over Classics...although Classics have the bigger soundstage, I think the M5s are a bit warmer with better dynamics.... your amp should mate well & like you said, you will not lose if you decide to turn them later...

Are the M5 able to extract every detail from soundtrack especially at low volumes? How do you find the performance of the M5 as a center channel?

AZ and Threes should both be wired with normal polarity.

The port tuning on the Fours is 25Hz.

Still newbie with the NHT product, thus I would like to ask again:

I'm also wondering that if I don't use A1, how powerful of an amp I could use to biamp the classic 4s. Any suggestion of a nice amp? Is it worth it to spend more and get something made by rotel or nad instead of the A1?

Also, I have 2 pairs of classic4s. Is one x2 enough? Since two mono amps such as a1s are needed to run a pair of classic4 bass drivers, can I use two 2channel amps to run 2 pair of classic4s?

Many of you are also on new NAD threads; how are you doing Audyssey XT setup with the U1? Fyi I have U1 stereo system.

Im thinking of bi-amping my Fours with the Vincent SSP-31 for mids+highs and then the 10s with a D-class amp(s)...opinions?

Regards,
Ricky

I'm also wondering that if I don't use A1, how powerful of an amp I could use to biamp the classic 4s. Any suggestion of a nice amp? Is it worth it to spend more and get something made by rotel or nad instead of the A1?

Nothing wrong with the A1s at all. But an NAD C262 is a nice option as it has gain controls on the back.

Also, I have 2 pairs of classic4s. Is one x2 enough? Since two mono amps such as a1s are needed to run a pair of classic4 bass drivers, can I use two 2channel amps to run 2 pair of classic4s?

I would keep the bass drivers in stereo.

Just wanted to Wish all of my fellow NHT/Avs'ers a Merry Christmas.
Allen

Just wanted to Wish all of my fellow NHT/Avs'ers a Merry Christmas.
Allen

Ditto. May your holidays be bright, and your speakers if you lean that way :)

I forgot it is still Christmas back in the States...Merry Christmas to all.

I ordered my 3C last week and finally found and ordered my Fours Monday. Let's see how long they take to get to Okinawa, Japan...at least I have time to figure out what AVR to use. Marantz, CA, HK....

Question about speaker placement:

I have Classic Threes and a 3C up front for a HT system that will be in our basement, which is in the process of being finished. The Threes will be on the cabinet part of built-ins, and the 3C will be in a recessed compartment in the wall beneath the TV, with the tweeter at almost exactly the same (ear) level as the Threes, which is good. The Threes will sit on a 22" deep cabinet, so there will be 10"+ behind the speakers (or so I thought, anyway).

The bad part is, and I'll spare you the details of why, I just found out that the drywall on the left side will have to be further out from the basement wall than was planned, with the result being that I will have less than 10" (probably about 5") behind the left Three, which is bad. And the two Threes will be different distances from the drywall, since the right speaker will have 10"+ still.

Any suggestions? Speaker stands or replacing my speakers with M5/M6s are not options. I suppose I could ask my contractor to cut a "window" in the drywall behind my left Three and cover it with speaker grille material - I'm not sure if that would help, or if it's even possible in my situation.

If I can't do anything at all, how bad is it to have <10" behind a Classic 3, and how bad is it to have different distances behind the two front speakers?

As always, thanks.

It's great to see a lot of new participants in this thread.
Any new NHT updates?

Hope everybody had a Merry One.

Our's was great. The drive South on I-95 back to SC today was a nightmare,
tons of rain, tons of traffic and drivers who need to learn to
stay out of the left lane. What is up with people getting in the left
lane to pass a car then staying there till they pass 30 cars?
Or just staying there period.

It's great to see a lot of new participants in this thread.
Any new NHT updates?

Hope everybody had a Merry One.

Our's was great. The drive South on I-95 back to SC today was a nightmare,
tons of rain, tons of traffic and drivers who need to learn to
stay out of the left lane. What is up with people getting in the left
lane to pass a car then staying there till they pass 30 cars?
Or just staying there period.

Well as long as they're doing the speed limit I guess you have nothing to complain about, right. Because I'm sure you're not breaking the law, right?

dc

There is only one solution for LLBs. A LAW (Light Antitank Weapon) from the roof of your car:) I feel your pain. It is the primary reason I only drive long distances after 10PM.

Dreamcatcher,

You assumed that there were doing the speed limit. Many were under.
Speeding is wrong, but all white signs with black borders must be obeyed. That includes "Slower traffic keep right." 2 wrongs don't make a right.
The left lane is the passing lane, not the hangout lane.
Regardless of speed.
I understand your feelings on speeding, but I hope you are not telling us that when you are an interstate you drive exclusively in the left lane and enjoy watching people pass you on the right?
It's mean spirited at best and dangerous at worst.

Rant over.
Back to our regularly scheduled NHT discussion.

There is only one solution for LLBs. A LAW (Light Antitank Weapon) from the roof of your car:) I feel your pain. It is the primary reason I only drive long distances after 10PM.

*laugh*

Same here on the late night driving. If I must drive during the day, I set the cruise on whatever the speed limit is and stay in the rightmost lane. Then I watch the lane jockey's pass me all day while cursing the car in front of them that has a different "comfort" speed. I arrive at my destination an hour later, but stress free.

I like the LAW idea, you can get those at Target, right?

Speeding is wrong,.

Speeding isn't wrong, just a source of needed revenue, and therefore "illegal".

We have a situation here where we got red light cameras "for your protection". City revenues went through the roof (by $millions per month). Accidents remain constant. Rear end collisions actually going up at some intersections. If the traffic accidents doubled, those wouldn't go anywhere because now they're making huge money off of it. I think the cameras paid for themselves within the first month.

Speeding isn't wrong, just a source of needed revenue, and therefore "illegal".

We have a situation here where we got red light cameras "for your protection". City revenues went through the roof (by $millions per month). Accidents remain constant. Rear end collisions actually going up at some intersections. If the traffic accidents doubled, those wouldn't go anywhere because now they're making huge money off of it. I think the cameras paid for themselves within the first month.

This is true everywhere but people do tend to follow to close.
Allen

In California we all drive in the left lane. ;)

I've been getting quite a few PMs here lately from various different members with X2/Four bi-wire hook up questions, so, I'm putting this in an open post.

Keep in mind, the first, most important thing you have to do is to remove the jumper strap between each Fours' set of upper and lower speaker wire binding posts on the back! This is very important and can't be stressed enough!

Since the Four has it's own built in fixed internal high and low pass crossovers at 125 Hz between the lower 6.5" mid bass driver and the 10" sub drivers, you only need both pre-outs and main-ins (or true separates) if you actually want to use the X2's high pass outputs and get into double filtering, which Jack actually recommends as seen here:

Mark,

I think that the text you are referring to in the X2 manual assumes that a subwoofer satellite system is being biamped in that case, not a tower speaker. In the case of a tower speaker, you set the LP filter and the HP filter at the subwoofer to woofer crossover frequency as a starting point.

Take the example of biamping a Four with an X2.

Case #1.

Set the HP filter on the X2 to 50Hz, since this is the lowest setting available. Set the LP filter to about 220Hz, since this is the highest setting available. Leave the phase at 0 degrees.

At the listening position, the frequency response will be about the same as without the system being biamped. This is because the active filter cutoff frequencies are about 1 octave or more away from the passive filter cutoff frequencies in the Four. They really need to be more than 1 octave away to not affect the phase response at the crossover frequency, but it will be fairly close.

There is no change in driver excursions since the filter slopes haven't changed much.

The lower amplifier is amplifying from 20-220Hz. The upper amplifier is amplifying from 50Hz-20kHz.

Case #2.

Set the HP filter on the X2 to 110Hz, since this is about the same frequency as the passive filter in the Four. Set the LP filter to about 130Hz, since this is about the same crossover frequency as the passive filter in the Four. You will need to adjust the phase to get the output from the subwoofer and woofer in phase at the listening position. This is because you have added one HP and one LP filter to the system. Both of these filters have some added phase shift.

The excursion of the 6.5" driver will now be less since there is a 24dB/octave HP slope on it instead of a 12dB/octve slope. There will be less midrange coming from the 12" woofer for the same basic reason. Double the filter slope.

The lower amplifier is now amplifying from 20-130Hz. The upper amplifier is amplifying from 110Hz-20kHz. Both amplifiers are amplifying less bandwidth, so they will both have more power available.

You will need to tweak the LP filter setting and the phase setting to get the two drivers integrated as well as possible.

There nothing wrong with "double filtering". If you have adequate adjustments on the filters (frequency AND phase) and the knowledge and experience to set them, you can easily end up with better system performance. Minimizing the amount of double filtering (as in case 1) is easier because it requires no subjective adjustments. Just turn the filters all the way up and down. i.e., remove them as much as possible. Case 2 will give you better performance if you know what you are doing.

I'll post some settings for the X2 and Fours later.

Unfortunately, he never did post these settings however. :(

For more on this, see page 4 of the X2 manual here:

http://nhthifi.com/2006/manuals/current/X2_Manual.pdf

The X1 part of the Evo manual might actually be a little more helpful and easier to understand than the X2 manual. Click here:

http://nhthifi.com/2006/manuals/current/EvolutionUserGuide.pdf

... and then look for X1 method 1 and method 2 (I would not recommend method 3 for the Fours/X2) hook up options starting in section 6.1 as these will also work for the Fours/X2. Just substitute the Fours' upper set of speaker wire binding posts in place of the M5/M6 Evo monitors, and the Fours' lower set of speaker wire binding posts in place of the Evo sub cabinets (W1,W2, B5s, or B6s).

For hooking up via a set of pre-outs only, thus forgoing double filtering and/or avoiding the X2's high pass outputs, you would run them to the X2's main L/R inputs, run sub out from the AVR to sub in on the X2. Set main L/R to large, all other speakers to small with whatever crossover point you want to use that would best for them (I usually stick with 80 Hz myself, but it will depend on your specific CC and surrounds).

Then you would set your X2's low pass filter as high as it would go (220 Hz) to get it as much "out of the way" so to speak as possible (you wouldn't even be using the X2's high pass outputs like this, so no need to even worry about it). Set X2 to stereo on the back of it, run L/R sub outs to each corresponding speaker's A1 input, again, remove the jumper straps from the Four's speaker wire binding posts if you haven't already done so, hook the A1s up to the appropriate L/R speaker's bottom set of posts, hook the speakers top set of posts up to the AVR's corresponding L/R main speaker outs. and that's it! You are then golden, even without main-ins.

For more on this that might be a little easier to follow than the X2's manual, take a look at the SA-3's manual here:

http://nhthifi.com/2006/manuals/vintage/sa_3Man.pdf

... starting on page 9, particularly biamplification method #2 on page 11.

Now the NHT is on the brink of extinction; how risky would a controller/power5 acquistion be?

I currently have the NHT classic 5 channel setup (fours, 3c, and threes). They are driven by an Emotiva MMC-1 and IPS-1. The fours are bi-amped with an X2 and a Crown XLS402 driving the woofers. This is my entertainment system and I use it for both music and HT.

So, would the controller/power5 provide enough improvement over the Emotiva gear to make the NHT risk worth it?

Thanks,

Mark,

As it turns out, the optimal settings for the X2 biamping the Fours did end up being with the HP at min and the LP at max.

Now the NHT is on the brink of extinction; how risky would a controller/power5 acquistion be?

Hard to say but I'd probably wait and see if a buyer comes through. If NHT were to shut down, that would really make it risky. If they get picked up, there's a lot less of it. I do think that with the price increase, they've pushed the product out of competitiveness compared to something like an NAD T175.

So, would the controller/power5 provide enough improvement over the Emotiva gear to make the NHT risk worth it?

Well, a lot more than many "upgrades" probably would. I'd hang in awhile to see what happens.

Say I have 2 pairs of classic 4s and 2 u2s, a Crown XLS402 amp and two A1s. What would be a good combination of amp/speaker pairing?

Speaking of the E (extinction) word:

Let's says that the company disappears. Is there anything comparable in the audio business to the NHT story? A company offering some brilliant, revolutionary designs at very reasonable prices, getting some of the best press in company history (two offerings in Class A of 'Phile, lots of kudos for Classic and Evolution, as well as Super before that). Riding the crest of a great wave in a great 'ship' and then....Titanic city.

Has that happened before?

Now the NHT is on the brink of extinction; how risky would a controller/power5 acquistion be?

None at all if you can get a good price on them, as I certainly wouldn't pay full retail, especially now.

The Power5 is a BEAST of an amp. Just check out HTM's bench test measurements on it:

All channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 257.1 watts
1% distortion at 299.1 watts

Frequency response:
–0.29 dB at 10 Hz; –0.09 dB at 20 Hz
–0.27 dB at 20 kHz; +0.68 dB at 50 kHz

This graph shows that the Power5's left amplifier channel, with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 291.6 watts and

1 percent distortion at 349.5 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 538.9 watts and 1 percent distortion at 640.2 watts.

from:

http://www.hometheatermag.com/completesystems/407nht/index4.html

As for the Controller, I've said it before and I'll say it again - for pure audio quality with NHT speakers, you simply can't get a better pre-amp period, even just for 2 channel. :cool: