:( Oh, they just don't make them mellow any more.

I had Three in our storage room running for 5 days. A friend "gave" me his boxed M5 which he ran it about 200 hrs (he will trade cheaply if I decided not to keep Three). I borrowed Two from another friend. And, I have Super Zero (wow, 13 - 14 yrs now?) I listened to them today. You guys are right: Three is bright and forward; M5 is dynamic and punchy; Two is warmer and somewhat lacking. The reason Super Zero is still with me, (you know why, most of us own/owned them), I can listen to them all day when I am not in the picky mood.

Over years, I tried a few speakers, none of them made me feel, "I got to have them". This year, I decided it's time for new ones - finally I settled with Paradigm; because I am 2-channel-guy (lesser speakers to buy), I went with higher end / more refined model - NHT and Paradigm do share some similarity. Then, I decided to get one extra pair of NHT for my small room, oh, ...

I don't know what to say, I am actually quite sad - it's like, ..., did I lost my old friends? I know I probably have no right to be sentimental, after all, I am not the best customer; but I did get my friends to consider NHT. By the way, we don't have a dealer in this state, NHT really should try a little harder.

Question...

How well does the classic 3 center match with SB3's sonically?

Larry

Prolly about as well as the 2C does the AZ and Two. In fact, with SB-3s, I'd rather have a 3C as the CC for them than a SC-2 simply because of the three way design with vertical tweeter/mid alignment.

Because they are. They are meant to be placed against a wall though, and they are rather thin so they are less visually intrusive than they might be.

Indeed. In some ways, I feel they were ahead of their time, and almost a harbinger of the sub/sat world which we live in today because their subs were in effect always in a "corner" placement formed by the floor, the front wall behind them, and the 3.3's cabinet itself, but yet at the same time, they had a relatively narrow front baffle that extended well out into the room away from the wall for imaging almost like a mini monitor on stands.

New speakers setup questions.

I made little (no) fanfare about purchasing my new rig, but now I need to post it here in order to illicit help from the gurus.

The new hotness includes T5s, biamped with 2 A1s, center and surround M5s, and an Onkyo 705 powering it all. I know the receiver isn't what these speakers deserve, but it has plenty of power in the very small room I'm currently in.

Now, the X1 is quite daunting. I've currently got both the high pass and low pass set to 80 hz. I set the phase by listening, arriving at what sounded best in my room.

I'm running LFE only at the moment, but I could use the pre-outs on the Onkyo. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this would only be for music, correct? Also, with regard to this, if I use the Onkyo's pre-outs do I need to connect the main-in from the X1? I don't really know what this is and what it does.

Lastly, I've run Audyssey and it arrived at Full Band for all speakers, but I changed that to an 80 hz crossover. I was surprised I could do this, as I thought Audyssey locks everything in. But apparently I can use the EQ and still set the speaker settings and crossovers myself.

Should I cross them over, or should I run full band and let the X1 do the work? Using the LFE in makes me think I should use a crossover.

Jack, if you're out there, you da' man, and your input would be of enormous value. I'm sure Mark can help too.

thanks in advance everyone

:( Oh, they just don't make them mellow any more.

I had Three in our storage room running for 5 days. A friend "gave" me his boxed M5 which he ran it about 200 hrs (he will trade cheaply if I decided not to keep Three). I borrowed Two from another friend. And, I have Super Zero (wow, 13 - 14 yrs now?) I listened to them today. You guys are right: Three is bright and forward; M5 is dynamic and punchy; Two is warmer and somewhat lacking. The reason Super Zero is still with me, (you know why, most of us own/owned them), I can listen to them all day when I am not in the picky mood.

From measurements (NRC via Soundstage) the Classic 3 apears to be more on the NEUTRAL side, rather than forward, with an extraordinarily good listening window.

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/nht_classic_three/

Perhaps the 'forwardness' some hear is just a reflection of room vs speaker -- in a 'bright' room a neutral speaker will tend to sound forward, while a more rolled off speaker will tend to sound 'right'.

New speakers setup questions.

I made little (no) fanfare about purchasing my new rig, but now I need to post it here in order to illicit help from the gurus.

The new hotness includes T5s, biamped with 2 A1s, center and surround M5s, and an Onkyo 705 powering it all. I know the receiver isn't what these speakers deserve, but it has plenty of power in the very small room I'm currently in.

Now, the X1 is quite daunting. I've currently got both the high pass and low pass set to 80 hz. I set the phase by listening, arriving at what sounded best in my room.

I'm running LFE only at the moment, but I could use the pre-outs on the Onkyo. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this would only be for music, correct? Also, with regard to this, if I use the Onkyo's pre-outs do I need to connect the main-in from the X1? I don't really know what this is and what it does.

Lastly, I've run Audyssey and it arrived at Full Band for all speakers, but I changed that to an 80 hz crossover. I was surprised I could do this, as I thought Audyssey locks everything in. But apparently I can use the EQ and still set the speaker settings and crossovers myself.

Should I cross them over, or should I run full band and let the X1 do the work? Using the LFE in makes me think I should use a crossover.

Jack, if you're out there, you da' man, and your input would be of enormous value. I'm sure Mark can help too.

thanks in advance everyone

So, just to make sure we're on the same page, you have 2 crossovers. One in your AVR and one in the X1.

If you use the one in the X1, you have to run pre outs to the X1 and then run the high passed output of the X1 back to the main ins of the AVR. You can experiment with where to set the high and low pass; the Evolution manual should have good starting points for that.

In this case you want to run your T5s as large. You can then set the AVR to send the output of all small speakers and the LFE channel to the large T5s (subwoofer off), or in a more tweakable and more complicated setup, turn subwoofer on, run LFE to your X1, and have independent control over that input volume in addition to the volume of the bass from the left and right channels.

If for some reason you would prefer to use your AVR's crossover (there are a few people who don't like the high-passed output of the X1), you just run the LFE into the X2, set the T5s (really just the M5s) as small, subwoofer on, and set your crossover frequency. In this case you want to set the crossover of the X1 to the most permissible setting, that is, turn the low pass to the highest frequency possible. The high pass won't matter since you're not using those outputs.

Hopefully that helps. Maybe not my most clear explanation. The Evolution manual is quite helpful; follow its directions and you should be fine, even if you don't understand what's happening. It's better if you understand, though :)

In this case you want to set the crossover of the X1 to the most permissible setting, that is, turn the low pass to the highest frequency possible. The high pass won't matter since you're not using those outputs.



If you run the .1 output from the AVR to the LFE in of the X1, does the LP crossover setting on the X1 matter? I thought the LFE input of the X1 bypassed the LP.

Brian

Thanks.

All of that makes sense. So at the moment I'm basically bypassing the X1, which is what I figured.

I guess, at the end of the day, the big question is whether there is an advantage to running the high pass, low pass through the X1 over the way I have it now.

With my current setup, I will set the low pass to the highest point, since I'm using LFE.

milky way
the threes are bright and forward?
not in my room
detailed? yes
bright? nope
I am not sure what forward means.

If you run the .1 output from the AVR to the LFE in of the X1, does the LP crossover setting on the X1 matter? I thought the LFE input of the X1 bypassed the LP.

Brian

You're probably right. I couldn't remember for sure, and it won't hurt to set it that way.

I am not sure what forward means.
It means "bright" :)

Thanks.

All of that makes sense. So at the moment I'm basically bypassing the X1, which is what I figured.

I guess, at the end of the day, the big question is whether there is an advantage to running the high pass, low pass through the X1 over the way I have it now.

With my current setup, I will set the low pass to the highest point, since I'm using LFE.

Then you do not have true stereo bass, and just as well use only one A1 with them instead of two.

I don't know about your specific Onkyo AVR, but I'm willing to bet that it doesn't have both pre-outs and main-ins, in which case you have to run the sub/LFE out from the AVR to the LFE in in the X1 for mono bass only and simply let the AVR handle all crossover duties, both high and low pass.

Thanks.

All of that makes sense. So at the moment I'm basically bypassing the X1, which is what I figured.

I guess, at the end of the day, the big question is whether there is an advantage to running the high pass, low pass through the X1 over the way I have it now.

With my current setup, I will set the low pass to the highest point, since I'm using LFE.

As BGL pointed out, that may not be necessary (the low pass). And as I pointed out, won't hurt.

You're not bypassing the X1 completely, of course. You're using it for volume control, phase adjustments, and the EQ it applies to the B1 to keep its output flat to 26 Hz (or thereabouts). But your M5s are bypassing it, yes.

If you want to use its crossover, this will gain you configurability, allowing you to choose separate low and high pass filters, the won't likely be very different, but it allows for some extra fine tuning. And there's the possibility that the crossover might be better than what's in your AVR. Or different, at least. Mark probably remembers the exact numbers but I figured I'd save him a few words :o

Well Mark, I did get the second A1 free :).

And, with regard to pre outs and main ins, can you confirm my suspicions that this is only of use with music, and that with LFE from movies it's irrelevent.

If you run the .1 output from the AVR to the LFE in of the X1, does the LP crossover setting on the X1 matter? I thought the LFE input of the X1 bypassed the LP.

Brian


You are right, neither the high or low pass crossovers on the X1 are engaged via the LFE input, only via the main L/R inputs/outputs.

If you use both the main L/R and LFE in on the X1, you would set the AVR's or pre-pro's bass management to main L/R large/full range, and then set it's crossover point for the CC and all surrounds for whatever point is best, which the subsequent filtered signal will then be fed to the X1 via it's LFE in.

Well Mark, I did get the second A1 free :).

And, with regard to pre outs and main ins, can you confirm my suspicions that this is only of use with music, and that with LFE from movies it's irrelevent.

Pretty much. If you only watch movies, I wouldn't even worry about it. However, it would still help integrate the subs (B5s) to the sats (M5s) much better than simply feeding them from the AVR's generic crossover, for either movies or music. ;)

As for the second A1, keep in mind an individual B5's or W2's load is rated for 12 Ohms, and the A1 is only rated for like 135 watts into a 12 Ohm load, but two B5s or W2s together constitutes a 6 Ohm load, which the A1 is rated for 250 watts. IOW, dual A1s don't really give you much, if any, more power over a single A1. The only reason to use dual A1s with T5s or a U2 would be for stereo bass, and that's it.

milky way
the threes are bright and forward?
not in my room
detailed? yes
bright? nope
I am not sure what forward means.

Well keep in mind, "bright" is all relative and subjective of course. For instance, even in a wide, well damped room, I still thought the Threes/Fours were noticeably brighter than M5s or Twos (too much so for my tastes anyway), but certainly not brighter than Klipschs. :p

As always of course, YMMV. ;)

Speaking of stereo bass hook ups with Evo subs on the X1, I can't believe it, but I've just bought a used Yamaha, a DSP-A1 pre-pro/integrated multi channel amp:

http://www.yamaha.com/yec/products/productdetail.html?CNTID=200321&CTID=5002600

Interestingly enough, it has dual, separate L/R sub outputs for true stereo bass while at the same time avoiding the X1's high pass outputs. Unfortunately though, it's crossover point is fixed at 90 Hz, which might still be OK on T5s though.

Mark probably remembers the exact numbers but I figured I'd save him a few words :o

High pass on the X1 is fixed at either 50, 80, or 110 Hz, but the low pass is variable though. :o

Just upgraded to nht's so I will probably be posting from time to time concerning them. I have following...

Classic Four mains
Classic ThreeC
Classic Three surround back ( I use for sacd/dvda mainly or 7.1 video)
ic4's surround
Classic Twelve sub
a1 (two) because I'm sick like that.
x2 keeping it "tidy"


BA pre/pro and pwr amp combo sending the flow. 70/30 audio/video.
Toshi a2 for a/v purposes. Damn good sounding cd player I might ad that holds it own pretty good for a hd player. ( I own a Rega as well)

I have monitored my 'burn-in' time and stand at approx 18 hrs. Was not very impressed initially as I thought the highs were a bit laid back. My room has thick/padded furniture-drapes-carpet-throw pillows. It is not too dead but certainly not bright doctors exam room like either. They are starting to get deeper, tighter on the low and a bit more crisp on the high. Starting to open up/get airy. So far so good. Low-moderate listening level..perhaps a watt+ actual output which is louder than one thinks specially if you had an amp w/ watt meters back in the day. Good break-in volume before throwing the throttle to them. Any feedback on break-in time experience? Anyways...

...does anyone know if whether or not the little foam strips at top inside of grills is supposed to be utilized or not? I am not referring to the x shaped foam piece to be placed between mid-twtr...did that, but rather the little thin strips attached to backside of 3 and 4 grills aroung top curved edge. I think for packaging purposes? Any input? Thanks.

I'm considering about buying Three for the fronts and 2c for the centre. Think this would be a good match for DVD concerts?

Thanks a lot!

Main In...

Ok, so this is the one thing that I still haven't heard clarified. What is the Main In exactly? I cannot find any current receiver that features anything by this nomenclature.

I have pre-outs on my 705, should I just use that, without the main in? Or would that just screw things up?

Is there another name for Main In, which would explain why I'm not seeing it?

Main In...

Ok, so this is the one thing that I still haven't heard clarified. What is the Main In exactly? I cannot find any current receiver that features anything by this nomenclature.

I have pre-outs on my 705, should I just use that, without the main in? Or would that just screw things up?

Is there another name for Main In, which would explain why I'm not seeing it?

Rolen_it_Up,

Your receiver does not have main in's. It does have pre-outs, You will need 3 interconnect cables to do this correctly. Connect your left and right preout from the receiver to the X1 left and right inputs. Connect the LFE/Sub preout from the receiver to the X1 sub/lfe input.(already did this?)

Set the X1 crossover to 80hz and adjust phase as needed. Adjust X1 LFE as needed after checking levels or re-running Audessey. Set the front speakers as full band and the rest to 80hz.

This will send a full band signal to the M5 part of the T5, but it will be fine as they are sealed speakers and will just naturally roll offf what they cannot produce. The B5 bottoms of your T5's now are getting a 80hz low passed stereo signal as well as the LFE and Sub info from the receiver. Best of both worlds.

James

Does this mean the Evolution and in wall line of speakers will continue as well since the X1 is required for use with the Evolution subs?

Classic Series in black (white in AZ and 2) including 3-centers and 2-subs, all the architectural including the IWS (A1, X1, X2 stays), M-00 and S-20, and Verve with new pricepoints across the board.
If it's not listed above, it's gone.

Indeed. In some ways, I feel they were ahead of their time, and almost a harbinger of the sub/sat world which we live in today because their subs were in effect always in a "corner" placement formed by the floor, the front wall behind them, and the 3.3's cabinet itself, but yet at the same time, they had a relatively narrow front baffle that extended well out into the room away from the wall for imaging almost like a mini monitor on stands.




On a practicality basis, the 3.3's were just too big and too heavy for use by most people. I have the 2.9's, and even they are a bit on the large size. The 2.9's are just small enough to be practical.

As for the second A1, keep in mind an individual B5's or W2's load is rated for 12 Ohms, and the A1 is only rated for like 135 watts into a 12 Ohm load, but two B5s or W2s together constitutes a 6 Ohm load, which the A1 is rated for 250 watts. IOW, dual A1s don't really give you much, if any, more power over a single A1. The only reason to use dual A1s with T5s or a U2 would be for stereo bass, and that's it.



I think that Jack Hidley said that the maximum power that each single driver can take is 125 watts. Just as you said, dual A1's are used for stereo. Also, they are used for a larger number of drivers in a system (2 - w2's per amplifier).

By the way, I still have to try out the 20 Hz mod for the A-1 and the W2s. At the low end, my pair of SW-2P's (with 20 Hz mod of SA-2 amplifier) beat out the W2s with the stock A1 HP filter.

Hi - I am being lured by the close-out prices on NHT speakers and was hoping I might get some advice from NHT owners. My room (rec-room) is medium to large in size and functions 70% HT / 30% music. My current dog's-breakfeast-of-a-system includes NAD 753 receiver, Monitor Audio silver centre and rear surrounds, 3a M2 fronts, and a Paradigm PW2100 sub. My sources are a PS3 and XA1 > Epson TW700 projector.

The two NHT packages I'm considering are:

1. T5 (fronts) and M5 (centre)
2. Classic 4 (fronts) and 3C (centre)

My question is what is the better system and if #1 is the answer, would it benefit by going to a M6 as the centre?

Thanks for any and all advice.

Just upgraded to nht's so I will probably be posting from time to time concerning them. I have following...

Classic Four mains
Classic ThreeC
Classic Three surround back ( I use for sacd/dvda mainly or 7.1 video)
ic4's surround
Classic Twelve sub
a1 (two) because I'm sick like that.
x2 keeping it "tidy"


BA pre/pro and pwr amp combo sending the flow. 70/30 audio/video.
Toshi a2 for a/v purposes. Damn good sounding cd player I might ad that holds it own pretty good for a hd player. ( I own a Rega as well)

I have monitored my 'burn-in' time and stand at approx 18 hrs. Was not very impressed initially as I thought the highs were a bit laid back. My room has thick/padded furniture-drapes-carpet-throw pillows. It is not too dead but certainly not bright doctors exam room like either. They are starting to get deeper, tighter on the low and a bit more crisp on the high. Starting to open up/get airy. So far so good. Low-moderate listening level..perhaps a watt+ actual output which is louder than one thinks specially if you had an amp w/ watt meters back in the day. Good break-in volume before throwing the throttle to them. Any feedback on break-in time experience? Anyways...

...does anyone know if whether or not the little foam strips at top inside of grills is supposed to be utilized or not? I am not referring to the x shaped foam piece to be placed between mid-twtr...did that, but rather the little thin strips attached to backside of 3 and 4 grills aroung top curved edge. I think for packaging purposes? Any input? Thanks.

Nice separates combo, basically the Sherwood P965/A965 rebadged with the BA logo. I once read at Sensible Sound I think it was that particular amp was the most power you could safely get from a single AC outlet for 7 channels, or something to that effect.

I bought one myself when Audio Advisor was blowing them out for like $700 shipped or so.

If I may make a suggestion, forget about the Twelve sub, especially since you already have the X2 and A1s to bi-amp the Fours with. The Twelve really doesn't have much, if any, deeper extension than the Fours' subs do.

I'm considering about buying Three for the fronts and 2c for the centre. Think this would be a good match for DVD concerts?

Thanks a lot!

Why not get a 3C instead? Or even better yet, a third three as the CC provided you can mount it out in the room on a stand. That would be optimal.

Of course, for me though, I personally still like DVD conceerts in plain old 2 channel. ;)

Hi - I am being lured by the close-out prices on NHT speakers and was hoping I might get some advice from NHT owners. My room (rec-room) is medium to large in size and functions 70% HT / 30% music. My current dog's-breakfeast-of-a-system includes NAD 753 receiver, Monitor Audio silver centre and rear surrounds, 3a M2 fronts, and a Paradigm PW2100 sub. My sources are a PS3 and XA1 > Epson TW700 projector.

The two NHT packages I'm considering are:

1. T5 (fronts) and M5 (centre)
2. Classic 4 (fronts) and 3C (centre)

My question is what is the better system and if #1 is the answer, would it benefit by going to a M6 as the centre?

Thanks for any and all advice.

For mostly movies, the T5/M5 combo all the way. They just flat out have better dynamics than the Classics do.

And since you said a medium to large sized room, there is really no benefit to a M6 as the CC. The T753 is a fine AVR to use with the T5s since it has pre-outs/main-ins. ;)

High pass on the X1 is fixed at either 50, 80, or 110 Hz, but the low pass is variable though. :o

Actually what I was trying to recall was the slope of the crossovers. I seem to remember the high pass being a lower order than the low pass, but wasn't sure.

On a practicality basis, the 3.3's were just too big and too heavy for use by most people. I have the 2.9's, and even they are a bit on the large size. The 2.9's are just small enough to be practical.

That's true, when compared to 3.3s, the 2.9s are almost tiny.

For whatever reason though, the VT-2.4s are almost as big as VT-3s. :eek:

Actually what I was trying to recall was the slope of the crossovers. I seem to remember the high pass being a lower order than the low pass, but wasn't sure.

As I recall and without actually checking the specs before I type this, it's 12 db/octave for both high and low pass if I'm not mistaken.

I have now converted one of the biggest Def Tech fans you've ever heard of to NHT. He had some DT bi-polar powered towers in their system (I couldn't tell you the model # to save my life), and after hearing the VT-2.4s bi-amped with the X2/A1s, which basically also makes them a bi-polar powered tower too, he liked them better than his own DTs. :D

While the VT-2.4 could still produce the spacious, ambient type sound he was used to with the Def Techs on movies, what did the trick was when we listened to 2 channel music both with the optional bi-polar mode engaged and off at the flick of the switch. He couldn't believe the difference it made. Apparently, it's not defeatable on the Def Techs he has like it was on the VT-2.4s.

Now he wants a pair of VT-2.4s of his own real bad. I hated to burst his bubble that they were now discontinued and he would have to try to find a pair used somewhere. :o

Edit - if anyone knows of any for sale, please let me know. :cool:

Thank you James. So I guess you can use the pre out without the main in. I wonder what the drawback is to this...

He already told you - not having the M5s high passed, but at least you will have true stereo bass with the dual A1s by going this route. :cool:

For mostly movies, the T5/M5 combo all the way. They just flat out have better dynamics than the Classics do.

And since you said a medium to large sized room, there is really no benefit to a M6 as the CC. The T753 is a fine AVR to use with the T5s since it has pre-outs/main-ins. ;)

Thank you... and very much appreciated.

Can I use one A1 amp to run a pair of classic four 10inch woofers? Or is one A1 required to biamp each woofer?

Cool. Thanks Mark.

Nice separates combo, basically the Sherwood P965/A965 rebadged with the BA logo. I once read at Sensible Sound I think it was that particular amp was the most power you could safely get from a single AC outlet for 7 channels, or something to that effect.

I bought one myself when Audio Advisor was blowing them out for like $700 shipped or so.

If I may make a suggestion, forget about the Twelve sub, especially since you already have the X2 and A1s to bi-amp the Fours with. The Twelve really doesn't have much, if any, deeper extension than the Fours' subs do.

Thanks Mark...I like it even w/o hdmi, etc. Purchased amp from our friend James here. I could invest in a converter (component-hdmi) if need be but I am mostly audio anyways. The twelve really is not noticed at all or needed really in my 20 x 14 x 8 rm.

I have now converted one of the biggest Def Tech fans you've ever heard of to NHT.
Would that be Pulliamm?

Friend is considering NHT Classic 3s vs Ascend Acoustic CBM170s, in a two-channel + sub setup in a small basement room.

Both measure extremely well (see the Soundstage! reviews with NRC bench tests). Both will tend to be 'neutral' in the range above ~ 80 hz or so, according to such measurements, and both have excellent on and off axis response. The Ascends are easier to drive (sensitivity = 91 dB)

Are there any 'sonic' arguments clearly in favor of the NHT 3s, given that they cost ~ three times as much at retail?

It means "bright" :)

It could also mean 'midrangey'. Because 'presence' is really a midrange thing, and to me, 'forward' means 'present'.

Friend is considering NHT Classic 3s vs Ascend Acoustic CBM170s, in a two-channel + sub setup in a small basement room.

Both measure extremely well (see the Soundstage! reviews with NRC bench tests). Both will tend to be 'neutral' in the range above ~ 80 hz or so, according to such measurements, and both have excellent on and off axis response. The Ascends are easier to drive (sensitivity = 91 dB)

Are there any 'sonic' arguments clearly in favor of the NHT 3s, given that they cost ~ three times as much at retail?

The NHT's have superior microdynamics (detail) and they have a furniture grade finish. Whether that makes them worth 3 times the price is something only you can decide.

Ahhhh Hi Fi

Well I have yet to take the Classic 4s with Yam 1800 out of "pure direct" mode. :) It sounds too dang good! Someday I am going to have to fire up the center and surrounds.

OK, so now I am understanding the "fatigue" you guys mention. I had it before with my 10+yr old Aiwa HTiB. Not here...even at above normal listening levels.

I am "hearing things" in the music that just didn't get processed before, too. It is so great to hear my Bassie, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Satchmo, Floyd, etc. come alive and hear the individual plucks and strikes from the musicians.

I can't tell you bright or forward from laid back and warm (except I don't like Klipsch :eek: ), but my roommate, who teaches voice and piano, was shocked at the definition these speakers threw out. Oh yeah, the speakers were downstairs when he commented. ;)

And the hook up to the receiver was a snap. I look forward to tinkering with it all!

Thanks for the inputs in this forum guys! I think. :D

Why not get a 3C instead? Or even better yet, a third three as the CC provided you can mount it out in the room on a stand. That would be optimal.

Of course, for me though, I personally still like DVD conceerts in plain old 2 channel. ;)

3c apparently is too huge to fit in...

Never thought about putting a 3rd Three for the center though. I might consider this actually.

Thanks very much for your reply!! :)

The NHT's have superior microdynamics (detail) and they have a furniture grade finish. Whether that makes them worth 3 times the price is something only you can decide.

Well, for MY part, if someone tried to sell me a speaker by touting its 'microdynamics', I'd keep my wallet firmly in pocket. But I'll pass the info along.

Ahhhh Hi Fi

Well I have yet to take the Classic 4s with Yam 1800 out of "pure direct" mode. :) It sounds too dang good! Someday I am going to have to fire up the center and surrounds.

OK, so now I am understanding the "fatigue" you guys mention. I had it before with my 10+yr old Aiwa HTiB. Not here...even at above normal listening levels.

I am "hearing things" in the music that just didn't get processed before, too. It is so great to hear my Bassie, Mozart, Beethoven, Brahms, Satchmo, Floyd, etc. come alive and hear the individual plucks and strikes from the musicians.

I can't tell you bright or forward from laid back and warm (except I don't like Klipsch :eek: ), but my roommate, who teaches voice and piano, was shocked at the definition these speakers threw out. Oh yeah, the speakers were downstairs when he commented. ;)

And the hook up to the receiver was a snap. I look forward to tinkering with it all!

Thanks for the inputs in this forum guys! I think. :D

Told you so:p
Glad you're enjoying the set up!

Well, for MY part, if someone tried to sell me a speaker by touting its 'microdynamics', I'd keep my wallet firmly in pocket. But I'll pass the info along.

When I listen to a CD or a movie, I want to hear everything, not just almost everything.
Ideally, an A/B comparison is the best way to determine which speaker would be right for your friend.

3c apparently is too huge to fit in...

Never thought about putting a 3rd Three for the center though. I might consider this actually.

Thanks very much for your reply!! :)
The Classic 2s sound pretty different from the Classic 3s...


BTW, my T5s have arrived - mostly. I'm missing one K5 box (used to mount the M5 on the B5) so although they're mostly set up, I haven't heard them yet. I have taken the time to clean up the tangle of wires behind my electronics...

Peter

Well, for MY part, if someone tried to sell me a speaker by touting its 'microdynamics', I'd keep my wallet firmly in pocket. But I'll pass the info along.Jargon and ******** are two different things. "Microdynamics" may be jargon, but it's not ********. Slagging someone who answers your question, now that's ********.

Since there is new pricing on, as I understood it, at least most of the products in the line where would I find that?

Larry

Are there any 'sonic' arguments clearly in favor of the NHT 3s, given that they cost ~ three times as much at retail?

Wider dispersion, deeper bass, higher output, more resolution, lower distortion, no port noise. On a technical level, it's not even close, but then you have guys who think the 170 is better than anything else from anyone else - only another Ascend is better :rolleyes:

Since there is new pricing on, as I understood it, at least most of the products in the line where would I find that?

From memory, the Three is $900/pr, the Four is $2000/pr, the ThreeC is $690 (which still makes them bargains compared to most anything else), the subs went back to $600 and $850. All the inwalls have gone up $50-$100/pr. AZs and Twos went up, making them less viable. Verve went back to $2K for the 5.1 system.

Can I use one A1 amp to run a pair of classic four 10inch woofers? Or is one A1 required to biamp each woofer?

Yeah, you could, but everything below 125 Hz will be in mono. I'd highly recommend two A1s, or at least some other 2 channel power amp instead.

Cool. Thanks Mark.

You're welcome, but honestly, me personally, I'd rather have the M5s high passed and give up the stereo bass if I had to choose between those two compromises.

Purchased amp from our friend James here.

I've bought many things from him myself too. :cool:

Would that be Pulliamm?

Why, is he into DT's now? Last I kept up with it, he had just dumped the B&Ws for Boston's.

Let's face it, it's only a matter of time till he stumbles onto NHT, and then that will be the latest, greatest thing since sliced bread for a little while before he moves onto Polk or something like that next. :rolleyes:

The Classic 2s sound pretty different from the Classic 3s...


BTW, my T5s have arrived - mostly. I'm missing one K5 box (used to mount the M5 on the B5) so although they're mostly set up, I haven't heard them yet. I have taken the time to clean up the tangle of wires behind my electronics...

Peter

I'm looking forward to hearing your impressions of them. Will you by chance have dual A1s on them?

Ideally, an A/B comparison is the best way to determine which speaker would be right for your friend.

Bingo! Both brands will have their "fanboys" (or others with direct vested financial interests) who pledge blind allegiance to either, so what is quoted above is the only way for him to find out for sure which is better for him.

poll time...

Any Owners of the 4's want to comment on 'burn-in' time? Mine are at about 25 hrs and sounding better. I do have to throw more throttle to them due to lower sensitivity but I have it on tap.

...btw...any comments on little thin foam strips on back of grills? for packaging purposes? I took them off and placed the x shaped large piece b/w mid/twtr.

Thanks.

You're welcome, but honestly, me personally, I'd rather have the M5s high passed and give up the stereo bass if I had to choose between those two compromises.

This comment is interesting because I really don't have a choice between the two compromises. I have 2 A1s, and no way to high pass.

So I guess you are just kinda taunting me, huh mark :)

poll time...

Any Owners of the 4's want to comment on 'burn-in' time? Mine are at about 25 hrs and sounding better. I do have to throw more throttle to them due to lower sensitivity but I have it on tap.

...btw...any comments on little thin foam strips on back of grills? for packaging purposes? I took them off and placed the x shaped large piece b/w mid/twtr.

Thanks.

I subscribe to the theory that there simply is no "break in" period, that what happens is that your ears are only getting more acclimated to them. ;)

Although I realize that this (sort of like wires and cables) is prolly almost akin to arguing politics and/or religion to some people. :o

This comment is interesting because I really don't have a choice between the two compromises. I have 2 A1s, and no way to high pass.

So I guess you are just kinda taunting me, huh mark :)

But you DO have a choice. There is a high pass crossover in your AVR itself that you can use, and, as I previously pointed out already, you don't HAVE to use both A1s for mono bass anyway.

Again, I believe you'd be much better off to high pass the M5s at no lower than 80 Hz than to run them full range, especially with the LFE content on some movies that they would be subjected to if ran large/full range, even it means you have to give up the stereo bass.

But at any rate, no, I'm wasn't taunting" you. I was only trying to help, but after this post, I won't anymore. :(:o

I was joking.

Jargon and ******** are two different things. "Microdynamics" may be jargon, but it's not ********. Slagging someone who answers your question, now that's ********.

Is there a scientific/engineering definition of 'microdynamics'? In other words, does it have a standard meaning?

Bingo! Both brands will have their "fanboys" (or others with direct vested financial interests) who pledge blind allegiance to either, so what is quoted above is the only way for him to find out for sure which is better for him.

Actually, it looks like he and I may be able to set up a blind A/B listening comparison for him between his current SuperOnes (which he bought after hearing mine, years ago)
and the Ascends. I'll report back with the results if so.

Is there a scientific/engineering definition of 'microdynamics'? In other words, does it have a standard meaning?

It's just an adjective that I have seen with different people seemingly having different interpretations of it, that's all.

Wider dispersion, deeper bass, higher output, more resolution, lower distortion, no port noise. On a technical level, it's not even close, but then you have guys who think the 170 is better than anything else from anyone else - only another Ascend is better :rolleyes:

Admittedly the NHTs 3 are three way, which already makes them constitutionatlly different from the Ascends. And I have a personal bias towards NHTs , given that I've enjoyed my Superones for years now.

BUT I wouldn't say its' 'hardly even close'. From the NRC measurements on Soundstage.com:

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/ascend_cbm170/
http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/nht_classic_three/


both of them have extraordinarily good on- and off-axis response, though the NHT3s do appear to go a bit 'wider' while remaining accurate. Within a 15 degree up/down/l/r listening window, though, the Ascends have an edge over the NHTs, and in my friends's narrow basement man cave, he'll usually be sitting in or near the sweet spot anyway.

Mfr spec for bass response of the NHT is -3dB @ 45 Hz, but the NRC measurements seem to say quite otherwise (looks to be more like 60 Hz). Either those specs are generous, or the NRC measurements -- the whole set of axial response measurements -- were faulty. The Ascend spec (-3dB at 69Hz ) jibes well with the NRC graph. In either case, the speakers will be used with a subwoofer, likely crossed over at 80 Hz.

TH distortion, no contest, the NHT wins the measurement race. But both measure so comparatively low, that Soundstage had to add their 'high stress'
graph for both, using a 95dB level.

Port noise could be an issue, but balanced against that as regards structural noise, the Ascends are reportedly well-braced internally, whereas I find no information about the NHTs. So one wonders how they compare in terms of cabinet resonance. I've written Ascend to see if they can supply resonance data, I'd love to see it for the NHTs too.

Finally, the Ascends are clealry more lenient in their power requirements, than the NHT 3s. Though again, at the volumes they'll be used in my friend's setup, it's likely a wash.

In the near term we'll likely be comparing SuperOnes to CBM170's, perhaps a closer match as they're both two-way (or perhaps not); it should be interesting.

OK, I'm looking to wall mount speakers in my 13 by 16 by 8ft high HT. Which would make the most sense: Classic 3s for L and R, a 3C center, and Superzeros for surrounds, or five M5 speakers for LRC and surrounds? The M5s are on clearance, so they would be less. Also, do the M5s have mounting inserts, or do I have to drill into them? Thanks!

For bookshelf models, like the Three, we usually specified the low end cutoff factoring in a reasonable amount of room gain, since these speakers will always be placed within 4' or so from a wall.

The Three cabinet is made of 18mm (3/4") MDF for all surfaces except the front baffle, which is 30mm (1.25") MDF. There are two 18mm MDF shelf braces in the cabinet. To say the cabinet panels are stiff, is an understatement.

Look at the extreme off axis curves for the Three and 170. That is where you see a large difference. Remember, even if you are sitting on axis with the speaker, from a tonal balance standpoint, you hear the average response of the speaker, not just the on axis response.

Regarding speaker distortion. All of the drivers in the Three are designed to have very low modulation distortion. Modulation distortion is much more audible than harmonic distortion. The NRC measurements only show the harmonic distortion results, in which the Three has a 10dB (1/3) advantage from about 150-900Hz.

Don't get M5s, get L5s. They are an onwall speaker and thus, designed to be wall mounted. All brackets included.

Is there a scientific/engineering definition of 'microdynamics'? In other words, does it have a standard meaning?

The best way I can describe microdynamics is this:
The small subtle sounds that might go unnoticed on lesser speakers - such as the sliding of fingers over guitar strings. In a movie, it would best be represented by subtle background sounds that add a depth and texture to the scene, such as people talking in the background, cars driving by and general street noise. A speaker that exhibits superior microdynamics, catches all these little nuances - that in turn ads a realism to music or movies.

I'd like to thank Mr. Hidley for a most informative post.

I blew my M5 tweeters. Dealer got me replacement? Does anyone know how to do it? Is the tweeter guled on? Is a solider gun required? Where can I find the instruction? Thank you.

The best way I can describe microdynamics is this:
The small subtle sounds that might go unnoticed on lesser speakers - such as the sliding of fingers over guitar strings. In a movie, it would best be represented by subtle background sounds that add a depth and texture to the scene, such as people talking in the background, cars driving by and general street noise. A speaker that exhibits superior microdynamics, catches all these little nuances - that in turn ads a realism to music or movies.



The downside to that is you can hear any bit of "crap" that exists on a not so good recording!

Yeah, you could, but everything below 125 Hz will be in mono. I'd highly recommend two A1s, or at least some other 2 channel power amp instead.

Thanks for the response.

In another thread, you mentioned that equipments such as outlaw rr2150 has its own bass management/crossovers built in to avoid the X1's high pass outputs. Does that mean the X1 is not necessary in an evo sub system if I have the outlaw receiver?

Btw, I just want to say that I got a X2 and will soon get a X1 thanks to John(Alimentall).

Don't get M5s, get L5s. They are an onwall speaker and thus, designed to be wall mounted. All brackets included.

Thanks for the reply. Are the L5s comparable in SQ and dynamics to the M5s? The M5s have a "boundary switch", wouldn't that be for wall mounting versus free standing? I wouldn't want to give up any performance just to gain a built-in bracket, as I could always find a way to mount the M5 if necessary. Also, I take it that the Classic 3s aren't suitable for wall mounting?

The downside to that is you can hear any bit of "crap" that exists on a not so good recording!

True, but I want a speaker that doesn't censor or editorialize. I want a speaker that gets as close as possible to the original source. That's "high fidelity" (faithful to the original). That's the whole point in spending a good deal of money on this hobby.

Thanks for the response.

In another thread, you mentioned that equipments such as outlaw rr2150 has its own bass management/crossovers built in to avoid the X1's high pass outputs. Does that mean the X1 is not necessary in an evo sub system if I have the outlaw receiver?

Btw, I just want to say that I got a X2 and will soon get a X1 thanks to John(Alimentall).

The X1 also has built in EQ specific for the NHT Evo subs, so while you could use an external crossover, you still need to run through the signal through the X1 for these subs to work right.

Brian

Admittedly the NHTs 3 are three way, which already makes them constitutionatlly different from the Ascends. And I have a personal bias towards NHTs , given that I've enjoyed my Superones for years now.

Keep in mind that measurements will show off obvious differences in performance or major flaws, as Jack pointed out, a lot of differences aren't even measured because no one tests for it. PSB's Platinum T8 is one of the lowest THD speakers on the market regardless of cost *but* the Four sounds more transparent. I have both in my house. A lot of the differences go away in smoothed graphs too. If a 3-way is done as well as the 2-way, it will outperform it on an objective level, though subjectively, who can say, it's all personal taste. The resolution on the Threes is outstanding and it makes every 2-way I've put up against it sound colored by comparison (though some pleasantly so). And it disappears into its soundstage better than most any 2-way I've heard recently.

And no soft dome tweeter coloration. Again, a lot of people like that kind of thing, but I sure don't. John at NHT raised to me the possibility of bringing back the SuperZero and SuperOne but I told them that they really needed to drop in the new metal tweeter if possible as soft domes have reached their zenith, IMO, and metal is *less* fatiguing and cleaner than any soft dome I've heard.

It's not that the Ascend would be a bad speaker, just like the AZ is a great little speaker *but* it's just not in the same league as the Three. Not a lot is, quite frankly. It just comes down to whether you like the sound (or lack thereof).

I blew my M5 tweeters. Dealer got me replacement? Does anyone know how to do it? Is the tweeter guled on? Is a solider gun required? Where can I find the instruction? Thank you.

That hex screw on the back of the speaker? You loosen that and the tweeter and an aluminum rod comes out.

The best way I can describe microdynamics is this:
The small subtle sounds that might go unnoticed on lesser speakers - such as the sliding of fingers over guitar strings. In a movie, it would best be represented by subtle background sounds that add a depth and texture to the scene, such as people talking in the background, cars driving by and general street noise. A speaker that exhibits superior microdynamics, catches all these little nuances - that in turn ads a realism to music or movies.

It's kind of like a low noise floor. That happens when you use low distortion drivers and good crossovers. Meridian made me understand the term "micro dynamic" because their digital crossovers were so *clean* that you just heard little stuff that was normally buried under what I would call "noise". BUT, some of them weren't "macrodynamic", they just couldn't play loud without strain, well, you know the "affordable" ones.

The best way I can describe microdynamics is this:
The small subtle sounds that might go unnoticed on lesser speakers - such as the sliding of fingers over guitar strings. In a movie, it would best be represented by subtle background sounds that add a depth and texture to the scene, such as people talking in the background, cars driving by and general street noise. A speaker that exhibits superior microdynamics, catches all these little nuances - that in turn ads a realism to music or movies.

What you call micro dynamics I simply call detail, and what I would assume you refer to as macro dynamics I simply call dynamics. :p

Thanks for the response.

In another thread, you mentioned that equipments such as outlaw rr2150 has its own bass management/crossovers built in to avoid the X1's high pass outputs. Does that mean the X1 is not necessary in an evo sub system if I have the outlaw receiver?

The X1 also has built in EQ specific for the NHT Evo subs, so while you could use an external crossover, you still need to run through the signal through the X1 for these subs to work right.

Brian

Bingo!

Thanks for the reply. Are the L5s comparable in SQ and dynamics to the M5s? The M5s have a "boundary switch", wouldn't that be for wall mounting versus free standing? I wouldn't want to give up any performance just to gain a built-in bracket, as I could always find a way to mount the M5 if necessary. Also, I take it that the Classic 3s aren't suitable for wall mounting?


Anyone?

Thanks for the reply. Are the L5s comparable in SQ and dynamics to the M5s? The M5s have a "boundary switch", wouldn't that be for wall mounting versus free standing? I wouldn't want to give up any performance just to gain a built-in bracket, as I could always find a way to mount the M5 if necessary. Also, I take it that the Classic 3s aren't suitable for wall mounting?

The L5 is basically identical to the M5, except it is already "tuned" for on wall mounting since that is the only way it should be used. The M5 has the boundary compensation option because it is designed to be mounted as either free standing in space, or on/in bookshelves/cases/cabinets/TVs and/or close to the wall behind it.

Anyone?

Was that fast enough? ;)

Yes, thanks! But is the M5 as suitable as a wall mount, except of course for the built in bracket on the L5? Also, should I forget about the Classic 3s for this application? Thanks!

One more time - the M5 is NOT suitable as a wall mount, thge L5 is. The M5 can be placed close to a wall.

As for the M5 vs the Three, that is all subjective. You might like one better than the other.

The L5 is basically identical to the M5, except it is already "tuned" for on wall mounting since that is the only way it should be used. The M5 has the boundary compensation option because it is designed to be mounted as either free standing in space, or on/in bookshelves/cases/cabinets/TVs and/or close to the wall behind it.I've always wondered whether in practice the low end is really as close as the specs say (-3db at 66 hz for the M5 vs 70 hz for the L5). Though it wouldn't matter much if you're using a sub.

And not that it matters but the L5 isn't shielded.

The M5 COULD be wall mounted and the audio performance would be fine. The M5 does not have inserts in the back for a mounting bracket and it is going to end up 4-5" from the wall when you do install a bracket by drilling into the cabinet. When mounted on the wall, the FRONT of the L5 is only about 7" off of the wall.

If you need to replace a tweeter in an M5, M6, Super Audio, Xd, etc speaker, call NHT. Ask for customer service and have them e-mail you the installation instructions on the process. Read them all before taking the speaker apart. If you try this without the instructions, you will mess up something and you probably won't even know it.

If you need to replace a tweeter in an M5, M6, Super Audio, Xd, etc speaker, call NHT. Ask for customer service and have them e-mail you the installation instructions on the process. Read them all before taking the speaker apart. If you try this without the instructions, you will mess up something and you probably won't even know it.

Jack, I noticed recently when listening with the grilles off that the mid on one of my Classic Threes has some some minor dings along the perimeter of the dome. If I decided to replace these, do I have to replace the entire mid/tweeter array?

TVguy,

Yes, the domes can't be removed from the assembly. If the dents are very small, it isn't going to affect anything from an audio standpoint.

Should I set the 4s and 3s to LARGE on the receiver, or just the 4s and leave the 3s small?

I am ready to move beyond pure direct.

What you call micro dynamics I simply call detail, and what I would assume you refer to as macro dynamics I simply call dynamics. :p

I would call 'microdynamics' low distortion(low noise) + neutrality. I would call it 'dynamic range' , really. 'Resolution' is directly related to S/N is directly related to the low end of dynamic range. The higher the S/N , the more of low level content you will hear, limited by the noise floor of the recording itself. A neutral frequency response will render the sound in accurate balance. (I can imagine that some speakers touted as having great 'microdynamics' merely have a tipped-up midrange or treble, which would bring out things on the recording like finger squeaks, whispers from the 7th row, and someone breaking wind in the string section)

I'm looking forward to hearing your impressions of them. Will you by chance have dual A1s on them?

I subscribe to the theory that there simply is no "break in" period, that what happens is that your ears are only getting more acclimated to them. ;)

These two relate to one another. When I broke in my C3s, I left them on for 48 hours, and I wasn't in the room most of the time. They, to my (unacclimated?) ears, sounded significantly better after running for a while - lost the annoying edge I thought they had at first, and also sounded less muddled in the upper mid-range (to my ears - and, of course, note my login name...).

I finally got the T5s set up and turned on last night (oops, didn't realize my wife had already gone to bed). They are replacing B&W Matrix 805s and ASW2000 Subwoofer. Also, I haven't really adjusted the T5s yet, just setting the sub volume to what sounded right, turning on a bit of boundry equalization since the subs back to the wall (but did not turn on the boundary switch on the M5s since they're on the subs, about 6" from the wall--probably should turn it on, huh?).

Just before I switched wires, I listened to bits of Beethoven's 9th, Bonnie Raitt, Rippingtons, and Dave Koz. I listened to the same music right after making the switch. I found the NHTs "dull" but accurate. For the passages where I had a little wince with the B&Ws, it didn't with the NHTs, [i]but[/] cymbals, drums, guitar picking didn't sound particularly clean or realistic, either. The classical music sounded the best, with the individual instruments heard better than on the B&Ws, but overall, at this point, the B&Ws sound more accurate. Notwithstanding what Mark says, I left them on today and will listen again tonight and over the weekend. I hope Mark's wrong (and I'll also set them up better), or I might have a "just broken in" set of T5s to sell (on the other hand, I can probably get more for my B&Ws, which are about 12 years old, than I paid for the NHTs).

Peter

B&W has yet to make a speaker as accurate as T5s. However, they are a bit on the lossy side whereas the B&Ws add to the sound with the Kevlar. This makes the T5s seem more dull than they are. The best thing to do is just listen for a week and let your ears (and expectations) break in to them a bit and then see. The B&Ws have a lively, exciting sound, but it's far from accurate.

B&W has yet to make a speaker as accurate as T5s. However, they are a bit on the lossy side whereas the B&Ws add to the sound with the Kevlar. This makes the T5s seem more dull than they are. The best thing to do is just listen for a week and let your ears (and expectations) break in to them a bit and then see. The B&Ws have a lively, exciting sound, but it's far from accurate.
John,

To put you on the spot (but also to give you a chance to disagree with Mark :D), do you agree or disagree with him that speakers do not "break in?"

Peter

The M5 COULD be wall mounted and the audio performance would be fine. The M5 does not have inserts in the back for a mounting bracket and it is going to end up 4-5" from the wall when you do install a bracket by drilling into the cabinet. When mounted on the wall, the FRONT of the L5 is only about 7" off of the wall.


Thank you! That was, of course, what I was asking. The L5s might be a better choice for surrounds, where the depth for me is more of an issue, but for my front LCR the small difference in depth won't matter. One more time, thanks!

One more time - the M5 is NOT suitable as a wall mount, thge L5 is. The M5 can be placed close to a wall.

As for the M5 vs the Three, that is all subjective. You might like one better than the other.

One more time, how "close" is that? I guess that's subjective also. Thanks for the reply though, but I think I'll go with Jacks advice!

One more time, how "close" is that? I guess that's subjective also. Thanks for the reply though, but I think I'll go with Jacks advice!

Well if you consider drilling holes in the back of a sealed speaker cabinet just to add brackets as "suitable" for wall mounting, then you go right ahead and knock yourself out. ;) :rolleyes: :p

Before I'd do that, I'd obviously get the L5s instead, but short of that, I'd install a single little shelf on the wall to sit the M5 on in the location I wanted it, or maybe just put a relatively cheap, but halfway descent looking bookcase up instead if possible.

John,

To put you on the spot (but also to give you a chance to disagree with Mark :D), do you agree or disagree with him that speakers do not "break in?"

Peter

Oh, I have no doubts whatsoever that he is only going to disagree. ;) :D

These two relate to one another. When I broke in my C3s, I left them on for 48 hours, and I wasn't in the room most of the time. They, to my (unacclimated?) ears, sounded significantly better after running for a while - lost the annoying edge I thought they had at first, and also sounded less muddled in the upper mid-range (to my ears - and, of course, note my login name...).

I finally got the T5s set up and turned on last night (oops, didn't realize my wife had already gone to bed). They are replacing B&W Matrix 805s and ASW2000 Subwoofer. Also, I haven't really adjusted the T5s yet, just setting the sub volume to what sounded right, turning on a bit of boundry equalization since the subs back to the wall (but did not turn on the boundary switch on the M5s since they're on the subs, about 6" from the wall--probably should turn it on, huh?).

Just before I switched wires, I listened to bits of Beethoven's 9th, Bonnie Raitt, Rippingtons, and Dave Koz. I listened to the same music right after making the switch. I found the NHTs "dull" but accurate. For the passages where I had a little wince with the B&Ws, it didn't with the NHTs, [i]but[/] cymbals, drums, guitar picking didn't sound particularly clean or realistic, either. The classical music sounded the best, with the individual instruments heard better than on the B&Ws, but overall, at this point, the B&Ws sound more accurate. Notwithstanding what Mark says, I left them on today and will listen again tonight and over the weekend. I hope Mark's wrong (and I'll also set them up better), or I might have a "just broken in" set of T5s to sell (on the other hand, I can probably get more for my B&Ws, which are about 12 years old, than I paid for the NHTs).

Peter

If you are used to brighter speakers, then the M5 is indeed a whole other world when compared to them, especially at first.

I had always intended to use a mounting bracket that the M5 would sit on, as I don't like the idea of drilling into a speaker either! I wanted to know (originally) if the M5 would be sonically superior when mounted (several inches away) on the wall, versus the L5. Reviews I have read have seemed to favor the M5 over the L5, which is why I asked. As for the Classic 3, I know sound is subjective, but that wasn't the point. I was looking for someone who has heard the Classic 3s mounted on brackets (or small shelves). Do they sound OK this way, or do they require a larger distance to the wall? That was the question, if the 3s were suitable for this application.

Should I set the 4s and 3s to LARGE on the receiver, or just the 4s and leave the 3s small?

I am ready to move beyond pure direct.

I'd say put the Threes as "small" at 80 Hz.

I had always intended to use a mounting bracket that the M5 would sit on, as I don't like the idea of drilling into a speaker either! I wanted to know (originally) if the M5 would be sonically superior when mounted (several inches away) on the wall, versus the L5. Reviews I have read have seemed to favor the M5 over the L5, which is why I asked. As for the Classic 3, I know sound is subjective, but that wasn't the point. I was looking for someone who has heard the Classic 3s mounted on brackets (or small shelves). Do they sound OK this way, or do they require a larger distance to the wall? That was the question, if the 3s were suitable for this application.

The Threes have no built in boundary compensation as the M5s do, and were intended to be placed standing out in free space for best results. If you have to wall mount anything in the Classic series, the AZ is the best bet since it being so small aids it in a couple of ways as a wall mounted surround.

OK, no 3s then. Thanks!

Well so far I have received my 3C, absolutely beautiful, the wife even likes the looks. She went so far as to say that she doesn't believe it should be hidden in the EC, but placed on top. I also had my X2 show up the same week (thanks John!), so I'm waiting on my Fours now and still trying to decide between the Marantz SR8001 or 7001...
Wes

OK, no 3s then. Thanks!

Well I wouldn't automatically rule them out without at least hearing them first if I were you. Who knows? - you might actually like them better. Or have you already auditioned them both?

If you liked them better, you could always put AZs up on the walls as surrounds.

OTOH, M5s are truly a no-brainer at their current prices.

Well I wouldn't automatically rule them out without at least hearing them first if I were you. Who knows? - you might actually like them better. Or have you already auditioned them both?

If you liked them better, you could always put AZs up on the walls as surrounds.

OTOH, M5s are truly a no-brainer at their current prices.

Yes, my thoughts exactly!

I wouldn't want to spend more for the 3s, just to cripple their performance by mounting them too close to the wall. How would the AZs pair as surrounds with the M5s? I like their small size, easy to blend in for surrounds.

Pardon me but what are az's?...?

While I have nothing better to do at the moment...back to 'break-in' or 'burn-in' time. What would one say to to the fact that recognized reviewers from highly regarded zines have stated that the classic series do need anywhere from 30-50 hrs 'break-in' time?

Pardon me but what are az's?...?

While I have nothing better to do at the moment...back to 'break-in' or 'burn-in' time. What would one say to to the fact that recognized reviewers from highly regarded zines have stated that the classic series do need anywhere from 30-50 hrs 'break-in' time?

AZ's are Absolute Zero's....the baby of the Classic family. Great little speakers. I use them in my 2CH rig with a NHT U2 sub set-up.

I have no comment on the break in question. Some say its real, some say its non-sense. Maybe Jack can chime on on that one?

Brian

I'm looking forward to hearing your impressions of them. Will you by chance have dual A1s on them?

This comment is interesting because I really don't have a choice between the two compromises. I have 2 A1s, and no way to high pass.

Gee - this could work out well...I just need one more A1.

Peter

I wouldn't want to spend more for the 3s, just to cripple their performance by mounting them too close to the wall. How would the AZs pair as surrounds with the M5s? I like their small size, easy to blend in for surrounds.I use AZs as surrounds for my C3/C3c/dual U2s HT, and they work well. BUT, they really have a different sound from the M5s and I don't think they'd go together well.

L5s are what you should use. As they've just apparently just been discontinued, there may be deals on them soon. And if you put any value on your time, the cost and time for the shelves for the M5s would reduce the value of your savings.

Peter

I use AZs as surrounds for my C3/C3c/dual U2s HT, and they work well. BUT, they really have a different sound from the M5s and I don't think they'd go together well.

L5s are what you should use. As they've just apparently just been discontinued, there may be deals on them soon. And if you put any value on your time, the cost and time for the shelves for the M5s would reduce the value of your savings.

Peter

OK, so the AZs don't match up well with the M5s, good to know, thanks! I was thinking of using something like the Peerless CS-13 from www.partsexpress.com for mounts. They were made for small TVs, but should work fine for speakers, and at under $13 each the price ain't bad either!

OK, so the AZs don't match up well with the M5s, good to know, thanks! I was thinking of using something like the Peerless CS-13 from www.partsexpress.com for mounts. They were made for small TVs, but should work fine for speakers, and at under $13 each the price ain't bad either! Remember that if the speaker cabinet moves or vibrates a little, that's going to affect your sound significantly - hope those $13 shelves are solid...

Peter

Mark,

OMFG!!! Just default settings so far.

Peter

Can't tell until I see one, but they look it. Of course, there are other options, but being that the M5 is $90 less than the L5 it might be worth looking into.

I use AZs as surrounds for my C3/C3c/dual U2s HT, and they work well. BUT, they really have a different sound from the M5s and I don't think they'd go together well.

Peter


Which way did you wire the AZ's when used for surrounds with the M-5's? Standard or reverse polarity?

I am going to try the SuperZero XT's for surrounds with the M-5's up front. As I recall, SZ XT's should be wired in reverse polarity when used with the M-5's.

I had always intended to use a mounting bracket that the M5 would sit on, as I don't like the idea of drilling into a speaker either! I wanted to know (originally) if the M5 would be sonically superior when mounted (several inches away) on the wall, versus the L5. Reviews I have read have seemed to favor the M5 over the L5, which is why I asked. As for the Classic 3, I know sound is subjective, but that wasn't the point. I was looking for someone who has heard the Classic 3s mounted on brackets (or small shelves). Do they sound OK this way, or do they require a larger distance to the wall? That was the question, if the 3s were suitable for this application.


Use the M5's for the front three speakers (LCR) and L5's for the surrounds. B-tech makes brackets called BT-77 for the left and right and a BT-15 for the center. The M5's will work better than L5's this way and will have better SQ. I have tried both :)

James

Use the M5's for the front three speakers (LCR) and L5's for the surrounds. B-tech makes brackets called BT-77 for the left and right and a BT-15 for the center. The M5's will work better than L5's this way and will have better SQ. I have tried both :)

James

FloridaPoolBoy,

But note JPC also recommends L5s for the surrounds. Use the right tool for the right job. In 2 years from now, $180 (minus $26 for the brackets, minus your time, plus the better sound from a proper mounting) for 2 L5 surrounds instead of M5s will seem like nothing, will look better, and will be less of a hassle.


JPC:
I used the AZs as surrounds for my 3s, not for my T5s. The current surrounds for the T5s are tiny ceiling-mounted Solids, with a rear-placed 8" Boston Acoustics sub for them. Not a match for the T5s, but the HT is downstairs (NHT Classics and 4 A2s), and I intend any serious listening upstairs will be 2-channel music. If you're in the DC area, come by and we can carry the T5s downstairs and see how they sound with the AZs...

Peter

Use the M5's for the front three speakers (LCR) and L5's for the surrounds. B-tech makes brackets called BT-77 for the left and right and a BT-15 for the center. The M5's will work better than L5's this way and will have better SQ. I have tried both :)

James

Thanks! I saw those brackets at Crutchfield, they do look like a better choice.

FloridaPoolBoy,

But note JPC also recommends L5s for the surrounds. Use the right tool for the right job. In 2 years from now, $180 (minus $26 for the brackets, minus your time, plus the better sound from a proper mounting) for 2 L5 surrounds instead of M5s will seem like nothing, will look better, and will be less of a hassle.

Peter

Thanks, my only problem with the L5 is I can't find an authorized site that has them in stock!

Use the M5's for the front three speakers (LCR) and L5's for the surrounds. B-tech makes brackets called BT-77 for the left and right and a BT-15 for the center. The M5's will work better than L5's this way and will have better SQ. I have tried both :)

James

I've tried both as well. In fact, I currently have both set up in the same room. I find that for stereo listening the M5 is the superior choice due to the comparatively anemic 2 channel imaging from the L5s. For surround duty (be it derived or discrete), however, the L5s more than hold their own. I attribute this to the extra channels filling in the image.

YMMV and all disclaimers about my ears, my room, compromises in setup, mid-fi electronics, lack of $10,000 interconnects, no priest consulted to bless them, etc. apply.

I'd say put the Threes as "small" at 80 Hz.

Thanks Mark.

The Threes can be wall mounted using a standard mount, ie omnimount. I think they sound good but have not compared them to other NHTs.

I've tried both as well. In fact, I currently have both set up in the same room. I find that for stereo listening the M5 is the superior choice due to the comparatively anemic 2 channel imaging from the L5s. For surround duty (be it derived or discrete), however, the L5s more than hold their own. I attribute this to the extra channels filling in the image.

Plus one. I wouldn't want L5s as mains and/or CC if I didn't have to have them, but as surrounds they are more than adequate. ;)

Mark,

OMFG!!! Just default settings so far.

Peter

??? :confused::confused:

I have no comment on the break in question. Some say its real, some say its non-sense. Maybe Jack can chime on on that one?

Brian

Actually, he already has: ;)

As long as the speaker drivers are at room temperature, there will be no change in performance during "break in", except your brain will be acclimating itself to the speakers.

Along with "break in", I also don't buy into wires and cables making dramatic differences either. For example, while I do believe type of wire can make a discernible difference in the sound, IE. - 12 gauge speaker wire is certainly better than 20 gauge, I don't buy into different brands of the same gauge of wire, or even different price points within the same brand, having impact. IOW, I don't believe that a company's $1 per foot 12 gauge speaker wire might not have quit the "inner detail" of that same company's $100 per foot wire. :p However, I also have no doubts that individuals who bought and paid for the $100 per foot wire will vigorously defend that choice either. ;)

As always though, YMMV. :D

Actually, he already has: ;)

Along with "break in", I also don't buy into wires and cables making dramatic differences either. For example, while I do believe type of wire can make a discernible difference in the sound, IE. - 12 gauge speaker wire is certainly better than 20 gauge, I don't buy into different brands of the same gauge of wire, or even different price points within the same brand, having impact. IOW, I don't believe that a company's $1 per foot 12 gauge speaker wire might not have quit the "inner detail" of that same company's $100 per foot wire. :p However, I also have no doubts that individuals who bought and paid for the $100 per foot wire will vigorously defend that choice either. ;)

As always though, YMMV. :D

I am not a believer in voodoo wire either, but I did find this interesting, and present it to all w/o any editorial comment on my part:D

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120044692027492991.html?mod=hps_us_at_glance_columnists


Brian

ok...AZ's...duh? absolute zero's...forgot about those...it's been a while. Nearly purchased a set many years ago.

I am not a believer in voodoo wire either, but I did find this interesting, and present it to all w/o any editorial comment on my part:D

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120044692027492991.html?mod=hps_us_at_glance_columnists

BrianNot only could Atkinson pick the cables, he could say they sounded 5% better. Right. If cables could make a system 5% better, they wouldn't have trouble selling them, or proving a difference.

I wouldn't put any weight on it, for so many reasons. Not a carefully run test, and not a significant result.

I don't get why we're even still talking about cables - which might at best make a tiny improvement on a reference system, in a perfect room, played louder than you usually listen, when you're focusing your attention on listening - when it's clear that you can get a definite improvement by spending the money pretty much any other way.

... when it's clear that you can get a definite improvement by spending the money pretty much any other way.

Bingo! Lets say you have $1500 to spend on a system, what do you think will be the better sounding system, one with $300 each in the CD player, integrated amp, speakers, speaker wires, and interconnect; or, one with $500 each in the CDP, integrated, and speakers with much cheaper cables and wires? IOW - how many here believe that the $300 each interconnect and pair of speaker wire will make the $300 components sound as good or better than the $500 components?

For an example - this would be about the equivalent to having a NAD C320BEE integrated, C525BEE CDP, and a pair of NHT SB1s with expensive wire and cable vs a NAD C352 integrated, C542 CDP, and a pair of NHT SB3s with cheaper wire and cables.

I'd think you could do the same analysis with a $15,000 budget, or a $150,000 budget, too. And factor the room into the approach. There's always somewhere that the money is better spent.

Klipsch just dropped Athena, I wonder if Mirage is next? I hope not.
maybe the economy is worse than I expected or maybe a lot of audio companies have moved up to price points consumers won't pay when there are so many products chasing their dollars?

Bingo! Lets say you have $1500 to spend on a system, what do you think will be the better sounding system, one with $300 each in the CD player, integrated amp, speakers, speaker wires, and interconnect; or, one with $500 each in the CDP, integrated, and speakers with much cheaper cables and wires? IOW - how many here believe that the $300 each interconnect and pair of speaker wire will make the $300 components sound as good or better than the $500 components?

For an example - this would be about the equivalent to having a NAD C320BEE integrated, C525BEE CDP, and a pair of NHT SB1s with expensive wire and cable vs a NAD C352 integrated, C542 CDP, and a pair of NHT SB3s with cheaper wire and cables.

I'll take "better" components and less expensive/"cheaper" ic's anyday.

Bingo! Lets say you have $1500 to spend on a system, what do you think will be the better sounding system, one with $300 each in the CD player, integrated amp, speakers, speaker wires, and interconnect; or, one with $500 each in the CDP, integrated, and speakers with much cheaper cables and wires? IOW - how many here believe that the $300 each interconnect and pair of speaker wire will make the $300 components sound as good or better than the $500 components?

For an example - this would be about the equivalent to having a NAD C320BEE integrated, C525BEE CDP, and a pair of NHT SB1s with expensive wire and cable vs a NAD C352 integrated, C542 CDP, and a pair of NHT SB3s with cheaper wire and cables.

I'll take "better" components and less expensive/"cheaper" ic's anyday. Give me a Krell amp/pre-amp setup w/ some Wilson's and a tol rega player...I'll use the dental floss wires that come with cheap off the shelf components!

For those who want the L5 wall mount speakers, wait no longer! Listenup.com is selling L5 in silver or anthracite for 180 dollars shipped!!!

For those who want the L5 wall mount speakers, wait no longer! Listenup.com is selling L5 in silver or anthracite for 180 dollars shipped!!!


Way cool, I just ordered 5! Thank you Miky, this is just a stupid good deal!!

Thanks, my only problem with the L5 is I can't find an authorized site that has them in stock!

Listenup.com, $179 each shipping included! Thanks again Miky!!

That is just crazy cheap. Hell you can't buy them used for that! Well, not mine anyway.

Listenup.com, $179 each shipping included! Thanks again Miky!!

Yep. Too bad they don't have white L5s though. I want them to disappear in my rooms. Silver or Anthracite, decisions decisions...

Don't wait too long, these will fly off the shelf!

JPC:
I used the AZs as surrounds for my 3s, not for my T5s. The current surrounds for the T5s are tiny ceiling-mounted Solids, with a rear-placed 8" Boston Acoustics sub for them. Not a match for the T5s, but the HT is downstairs (NHT Classics and 4 A2s), and I intend any serious listening upstairs will be 2-channel music.

Peter

For those who want the L5 wall mount speakers, wait no longer! Listenup.com is selling L5 in silver or anthracite for 180 dollars shipped!!!

Alright Peter, no more excuses to replace those Bostons with L5s for surrounds (and do away with that rear sub). You just might now find that the all Evolution system upstairs will become the main HT. ;)

Wow, just think, one can now put together a five speaker surround system package with three M5s across the front stage and two L5s on the wall for surrounds for less than $1000 shipped, from a fully authorized dealer to boot! :eek:

Add in virtually any halfway descent sub, and you're golden. There is, quite simply, nothing else by anybody anywhere on the new market right now for a five HT satellite speaker package for less than $1000 that can possibly top this for the same or less $$$. :cool:

Also, in addition to M5s/M6s, any owners with VT-3s, VR-3s, 2.9s, or 3.3s as mains, L5s will work as a good surround match.

Yep. Too bad they don't have white L5s though. I want them to disappear in my rooms. Silver or Anthracite, decisions decisions...

For that kind of money, learn to love the contrasting look of black. :)





Wow, just think, one can now put together a five speaker surround system package with three M5s across the front stage and two L5s on the wall for surrounds for less than $1000 shipped, from a fully authorized dealer to boot! :eek:

Add in virtually any halfway descent sub, and you're golden. There is, quite simply, nothing else by anybody anywhere on the new market right now for a five HT satellite speaker package for less than $1000 that can possibly top this for the same or less $$$. :cool:

+70 kabillion. That's a high grade surround system at entry level prices. I'd even go so far as to say go in debt (which I never advise for "toys") if necessary. Unless one just hates the Evolution line's sound, this is a killer opportunity. :cool:

Seriously, I wouldn't go through the trouble to box my gear up for double that price. :)

Is it still possible to get the 20hz mod for the X1 from NHT? I have a pair of T5s, but only 1 A1 amp. I will be getting another eventually. Can I run 20hz with a single A1 powering the T5s? Or, should I wait until I get the dual A1s going?

T5s do not provide enough woofage for the 20 hz mod: you need four 12" drivers for the mod to be worthwhile.

Listenup.com, $179 each shipping included! Thanks again Miky!!


Thanks a lot guys. The costs keep going up, and my room will not be ready for another 4 - 6 months.

So, I just bought 3 of the L-5's for surround use (2 side, 1 rear). At the current pricing, how could I not justify spending the money for matching Evolution surround speakers that can be easily wall mounted. I had 4 SuperZero XU's stored away, so perhaps I should sell those now.

Last week I ordered three M-5's for use up front.

Last month I bought two sets of the W-2's (4 drivers).

Total so far is about $2,300 delivered. Funny thing is, I did not even need a new system. I was just going to buy the subwoofers and call it a day. But at these "clearance" prices, I would be crazy not to make the full Evolution system purchase.

Wow, just think, one can now put together a five speaker surround system package with three M5s across the front stage and two L5s on the wall for surrounds for less than $1000 shipped, from a fully authorized dealer to boot! :eek:

Add in virtually any halfway descent sub, and you're golden. There is, quite simply, nothing else by anybody anywhere on the new market right now for a five HT satellite speaker package for less than $1000 that can possibly top this for the same or less $$$. :cool:




The funny thing is, the prior market for used Evolution products was competitive with the present brand new unit "clearance" pricing once you added in shipping costs!

Could someone differentiate the 3 NHT sounds? The early 90s, the Super Audio, and the Classics?

Early 90s - lean, clean, but a bit harsh in the upper mids/treble, great imaging

SA - Warm, lush, but a bit lacking in detail/presence/imaging

Classic - more detailed, great imaging, more refined, better balanced.

How about use L5s in the fronts compared to M5s? Wife likes the look of L5 better...

Thanks,

How about use L5s in the fronts compared to M5s? Wife likes the look of L5 better...

Thanks,



They should be fine if you want to have a wall mounted speaker.


http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/speakers/662/nht-evolution-l5-home-theater-speaker-system.html

Early 90s - lean, clean, but a bit harsh in the upper mids/treble, great imaging





Early 90's had a hard dome tweeter (AKA Zero's, model 1's, model 2's,etc).

Mid 90's had an improved soft dome tweeter (AKA SuperZero's, model 1.1, model 2.1, etc).

I don't think that the soft dome NHT speakers are that harsh.

Hi All,
Well maybe this is a speaker faux pas but I couldnt resist the L5 sale. I p/u a Classic Three C (dark) to match my Classic Fours but the Classic rears in the dark were hard to find a discounted price on so I p/u two L5 for rears...Im sure this will be fine for movies but im wondering how bad things will be for surround sacd and dvd-a.

Regards,
Ricky

??? :confused::confused:Mark,
My OMFG statement to which you replied above came from the following. I set up the T5s finishing LATE at night and guessed at the setting. My posts before the OMFG post related to that. Then I had time to look at the manual, and set the X1 to the "starting" settings from the manual. Just moving the phase to 180 degrees made the whole system blossom, and when set to those full initial settings, the speakers were truly wonderful. Now this is probably because they had a day to break in ;). These are great speakers, and I believe HiDefLifestyles has lots of them. Hey Aaron, how about just putting a price on these for people on this board, bypassing eBay? With the L5s at the above price (does ANYBODY have WHITE??), that's a stellar system with a reasonable WAF.

Peter

Thanks a lot guys. The costs keep going up, and my room will not be ready for another 4 - 6 months.

So, I just bought 3 of the L-5's for surround use (2 side, 1 rear). At the current pricing, how could I not justify spending the money for matching Evolution surround speakers that can be easily wall mounted. I had 4 SuperZero XU's stored away, so perhaps I should sell those now.

Last week I ordered three M-5's for use up front.

Last month I bought two sets of the W-2's (4 drivers).

Total so far is about $2,300 delivered. Funny thing is, I did not even need a new system. I was just going to buy the subwoofers and call it a day. But at these "clearance" prices, I would be crazy not to make the full Evolution system purchase.

Oh go ahead and pick up one more L5 so you can have a full on 7.2 surround system. :p

Even if you did, you would still have a little less $$$ in the system than a pair of T5s alone retailed for. :eek:

Now, if only some P5 stands would pop up somewhere at a crazy price like this.

Mark,
My OMFG statement to which you replied above came from the following. I set up the T5s finishing LATE at night and guessed at the setting. My posts before the OMFG post related to that. Then I had time to look at the manual, and set the X1 to the "starting" settings from the manual. Just moving the phase to 180 degrees made the whole system blossom, and when set to those full initial settings, the speakers were truly wonderful. Now this is probably because they had a day to break in ;). These are great speakers, and I believe HiDefLifestyles has lots of them. Hey Aaron, how about just putting a price on these for people on this board, bypassing eBay? With the L5s at the above price (does ANYBODY have WHITE??), that's a stellar system with a reasonable WAF.

Peter

You have them literally placed right up against the front wall behind them, correct? If so, play with the boundary eq setting on the X1 for the subs, and try the M5 in the "1" boundary switch position if you haven't already. ;)

I'd like to use L5 as front. It is easier to mount and looks good with flat TV. L5 is made for rear, it must lack of something comparing to M5. Is it a big "gap"?

I'd like to use L5 as front. It is easier to mount and looks good with flat TV. L5 is made for rear, it must lack of something comparing to M5. Is it a big "gap"?


The L5 was made for wall mounting around a wall mounted television. They also match the M-5's and M-6's as far as sound quality is concerned, so they can be used as surrounds with those speakers up front.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/speakers/662/nht-evolution-l5-home-theater-speaker-system.html

Oh go ahead and pick up one more L5 so you can have a full on 7.2 surround system. :p

Even if you did, you would still have a little less $$$ in the system than a pair of T5s alone retailed for. :eek:




I only intend on setting up a 5.1 system, but I ordered an extra L5 for 6.1 EX soundtracks just in case that is the way I want to go. I don't have room for a 7.1 setup, so the rear surround speaker will be a horizontal mount if used. I could also go two SuperZero XU's in the rear of the room for 7.1. They will look fine, and will sound good enough.

After I get all these speakers in house, I can setup my various speakers in many different ways. M-2.9's plus a M-5 center up front, L-5's for surrounds, M-5's up front all the way, SuperZero XU's for surrounds, 4 W-2's stacked for LFE, W-2's setup for stereo with M-5's, whatever else I have time to try.

Heck, anything that I do not use can be kept for spares, or sold at a later date when these items are no longer widely available. First things first, I need to get the speakers in house so I can play around with things.

As far as the current "sale" pricing is concerned, I sometimes wonder if Crazy Eddie was hired by NHT!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li6bDuyf3C0

I only intend on setting up a 5.1 system, but I ordered an extra L5 for 6.1 EX soundtracks just in case that is the way I want to go. I don't have room for a 7.1 setup, so the rear surround speaker will be a horizontal mount if used.

That is a good point - to all who are planning on doing up a 6.1 surround system with an L5 (or even a M5 or M6) as the rear center speaker, for best results, it should be positioned horizontally with the tweeter either up or down (relative to height above or below ear level in the listening position) as opposed to vertically with the tweeter facing either left or right.

I could also go two SuperZero XU's in the rear of the room for 7.1. They will look fine, and will sound good enough.

After I get all these speakers in house, I can setup my various speakers in many different ways. M-2.9's plus a M-5 center up front, L-5's for surrounds, M-5's up front all the way, SuperZero XU's for surrounds, 4 W-2's stacked for LFE, W-2's setup for stereo with M-5's, whatever else I have time to try.

Heck, anything that I do not use can be kept for spares, or sold at a later date when these items are no longer widely available. First things first, I need to get the speakers in house so I can play around with things.

As far as the current "sale" pricing is concerned, I sometimes wonder if Crazy Eddie was hired by NHT!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li6bDuyf3C0


That is sort of like what I do. I have three rooms, one with four L5s, and two each with two L5s as surrounds, and I can swap out any combination of M5s/T5s, M6s/T6s, VT-3s/VR-3s/VC-3, and 2.9s/AC2 or 3.3s/AC-2 in them. Well, all that is, except for the 3.3s and VT-3s which are just too damned heavy to be moving very much. :o:p

And, for that price, I just ordered two more L5s from ListenUp for even more flexibility to make one more of those current 5.1 rooms 7.1, or, both as 6.1 instead. ;)

So, L5 sounds as good as M5?

Edit: Sorry, I did a search, found Sneezy's and mark's post.

I've tried both as well. In fact, I currently have both set up in the same room. I find that for stereo listening the M5 is the superior choice due to the comparatively anemic 2 channel imaging from the L5s. For surround duty (be it derived or discrete), however, the L5s more than hold their own. I attribute this to the extra channels filling in the image.


Plus one. I wouldn't want L5s as mains and/or CC if I didn't have to have them, but as surrounds they are more than adequate. ;)

So I guess I shouldn't use L5 as center if I have M5 as left/right?

^^^ You can. In fact, if you had a wall mounted LCD or plasma TV, you can have a L5 horizontally wall mounted as the CC either above or below the TV, and have the M5s on stands out away from the wall in the recommended "semi-circle" set up of slightly in front of the CC, but yet still equidistant from the main listening position (like the illustration diagrams in sections 3.3 and 3.4 of the Evo manual). ;)

But all, I'd still rather have another M% as the CC if at all possible and practical.

Hi All,
Well maybe this is a speaker faux pas but I couldnt resist the L5 sale. I p/u a Classic Three C (dark) to match my Classic Fours but the Classic rears in the dark were hard to find a discounted price on so I p/u two L5 for rears...Im sure this will be fine for movies but im wondering how bad things will be for surround sacd and dvd-a.

Regards,
Ricky

Just remember to invert the polarity of the L5s. Then it may be a semi-passable match for HT surround sound, but prolly not too good for multi channel SACD/DVD Audio, which should be listened to in plain old 2 channel mode anyway IMO. :p

Thanks to Mark and Jack!!!

Guys, I feel pretty stupid buying a speaker from a company about to (in my estimation) go out of business.

I feel even more foolish buying a T5 set and 3 additional M5s from that same company.

I have been looking at many much more sensible alternatives for about 18 months. But periodically I have been stopping in at this thread and have become fixated on the obvious love (if that is not too objectionable a word) for this brand and in particular for the M5s from the two of you.

I ordered my NHTs today. I suspect that many who buy NHTs do so because of y'all.

Thanks for the great information and support. I greatly appreciate it.

-glenn

Thanks to Mark and Jack!!!

Guys, I feel pretty stupid buying a speaker from a company about to (in my estimation) go out of business. But periodically I have been stopping in at this thread and have become fixated on the obvious love (if that is not too objectionable a word) for this brand.

I ordered my NHTs today. I suspect that many who buy NHTs do so because of y'all.

Thanks for the great information and support. I greatly appreciate it.

-glenn


X2

Glenn, I bought the 4s with 3C and 3s for surround and I am just overwhelmed at how good they sound. Don't feel stupid, feel lucky to get such great deals!

I believe I have the speakers dialed in to where I want them...finally.

I can't stop listening in stereo. I love the fact that I can turn these up past the usual listening volume and still just set there and listen without my ears pleading for me to stop. The Classics are not the best hardcore rock speakers, but they rock. I sat there for 4 hours last night with a couple of Manhattans and ran through a ton of jazz and chamber music. Oh, and I took the grills off.

As for the bass, I finally understand the musical bass concept. I have had to disassociate myself from the hard bass we have been inundated with, in order to appreciate a more subtle feel. Listening to some jazz trios and quartets and have the bass come alive is...well, great. Same with symphonies. I had to dial the bass down a bit, I was over compensating, to get a more natural sound and feel.

Now, I did put in Floyd's Dark Side and on "Speak To Me" cranked up the heart beat--the place shook. ;)

I have been looking at many much more sensible alternatives for about 18 months.

And obviously came to the conclusion that there simply is no such thing, especially at these current blow out prices. :D

I periodically try other things, like right now I'm still really digging the VT-2.4s, but I always inevitably come back to the M5s/T5s every time. ;)

I can't stop listening in stereo. I love the fact that I can turn these up past the usual listening volume and still just set there and listen without my ears pleading for me to stop. The Classics are not the best hardcore rock speakers, but they rock. I sat there for 4 hours last night with a couple of Manhattans and ran through a ton of jazz and chamber music. Oh, and I took the grills off.

As for the bass, I finally understand the musical bass concept. I have had to disassociate myself from the hard bass we have been inundated with, in order to appreciate a more subtle feel. Listening to some jazz trios and quartets and have the bass come alive is...well, great. Same with symphonies. I had to dial the bass down a bit, I was over compensating, to get a more natural sound and feel.

Now, I did put in Floyd's Dark Side and on "Speak To Me" cranked up the heart beat--the place shook. ;)

Congrats, and if you ever get the chance, you really should check out the T5s too. Based on what you said quoted here, particularly about rock music, no listening fatigue, and musical bass, I believe you might like them even better than the Fours. :cool:

jazz - what did you purshase as an AVR - did you end up with the Yammy 1800?

thanks!

And obviously came to the conclusion that there simply is no such thing, especially at these current blow out prices. :D

I periodically try other things, like right now I'm still really digging the VT-2.4s, but I always inevitably come back to the M5s/T5s every time. ;) Prob should grab a pair. What is better for 2 ch only (from NAD T175 zone 2), M5 or M6...and run a U1 with them or just the speakers? Also have NAD T143 collecting dust, maybe run an amp with that, and which one?

Prob should grab a pair. What is better for 2 ch only (from NAD T175 zone 2), M5 or M6...and run a U1 with them or just the speakers? Also have NAD T143 collecting dust, maybe run an amp with that, and which one?

M5 or M6 mainly depends on the room size and/or the distance of listening position away from them. If you have a room no bigger than, say, 3500 cubic feet at the most and a listening position of no more than say 12' at the most away from the speakers, I'd go with the M5s. But anything more than that, and/or if you just really like to crank them at eardrum splitting levels, the M6s are for you (even though the M5s will still play louder than Threes/Fours).

Either way though, you'd still need a sub or subs with them IMO, as even the M6 doesn't quite go low enough not to have one, much less the M5.

M5 or M6 mainly depends on the room size and/or the distance of listening position away from them. If you have a room no bigger than, say, 3500 cubic feet at the most and a listening position of no more than say 12' at the most away from the speakers, I'd go with the M5s. But anything more than that, and/or if you just really like to crank them at eardrum splitting levels, the M6s are for you (even though the M5s will still play louder than Threes/Fours).

Either way though, you'd still need a sub or subs with them IMO, as even the M6 doesn't quite go low enough not to have one, much less the M5.



This is what Jack Hidley said about the M6's earlier in this thread.

"The M6 has a slight 2kHz resonance in the midrange that we weren't able to get rid of. This bothers me both because I know it is there, and I hear it in the speaker. Or maybe I only hear it, because I know it's there."


He also said that:

"I prefer the M5 over the M6.

The M5 and Three are different speakers, designed for different purposes. The M5 plays louder and works better in reflective rooms. The Three has better imaging, and smoother off axis response. Without knowing what the application is, I don't have a preference.

Anytime a loudspeaker is designed, the designer designs it to have a target frequency response with it positioned at some particular place in the room. If this location is far away from boundaries, then when you move that speaker near a wall, it will get very heavy or thick sounding. If that location is very close to boundaries, then the speaker will sound very thin when pulled away from the walls.

For instance the L5 is designed to have flat response when mounted directly against the wall."

jazz - what did you purshase as an AVR - did you end up with the Yammy 1800?

thanks!

Yes, i went ahead and got the Yammy 1800. It may not be as musical as some of the 1.2 HDMI systems out there (especially now that many are cutting the prices of the older format receivers), but it is doing great, has plenty of power and when I upgrade to a plasma it will all be 1.3.

I skipped the YPAO, and did a manual set up.

I got a great deal from 6ave.

This is what Jack Hidley said about the M6's earlier in this thread.

He also said:

The M5 and M6 have the same basic design as each other. The M6 is larger and is designed to have more output for larger rooms. The M5s would be fine in your room.

The woofer cones for the M5 and M6 are both a polypropylene sandwich. So is the midrange in the M6. The M5 midrange uses a paper cone. Both speakers use the same tweeter.

The M5 has better midrange tonality than the M6. The M6 will play louder and has less distortion and compression at any given playback level.

Congrats, and if you ever get the chance, you really should check out the T5s too. Based on what you said quoted here, particularly about rock music, no listening fatigue, and musical bass, I believe you might like them even better than the Fours. :cool:

T5s? I'm not familiar with those.

T5s? I'm not familiar with those.Try this. I'm only posting it because I already have mine, and don't need another pair! http://www.hideflifestyle.com/nhtt5-evolution-series-speaker-systempair-p-1198.html

PS: this is a SMOKIN' deal!! They're outside of Harrisburg, PA, if you're close enough to pick up - shipping isn't cheap.

Peter

He also said:


The woofer cones for the M5 and M6 are both a polypropylene sandwich. So is the midrange in the M6. The M5 midrange uses a paper cone. Both speakers use the same tweeter.

and


The M5 has better midrange tonality than the M6. The M6 will play louder and has less distortion and compression at any given playback level.







There seems to be an issue with that M6 midrange driver. Detailed writeup here, but it just confirms what Jack Hidley stated.


http://www.iar-80.com/page103.html


I did not even consider the M6's due to this issue.

Either way though, you'd still need a sub or subs with them IMO, as even the M6 doesn't quite go low enough not to have one, much less the M5. Think I'll go with 2xM5, and yet another U1, no 20hz mod. Only using the 2 ch for small/med guest area. The ht room is for all the loud stuff. Any suggestion on 2 ch amp to add to T743 to max out the 150w/ch power rating of M5?

^^^ For the price of a pair of M5s and a U1 sub (based on your comment, I'm assuming you will have to pick up another U1 and don't already have the one you would be using here), why not just buy a pair of T5s instead for about the same $$$? This way, you will already have the stands for the M5s covered too, plus it would give you the option to add another A1 at any time for stereo bass. ;)

As for an amp, why not a NAD C272? It's rated at 150 X 2 into 8/6 ohms if I'm not mistaken, and can be picked up a good prices.

There seems to be an issue with that M6 midrange driver. Detailed writeup here, but it just confirms what Jack Hidley stated.


http://www.iar-80.com/page103.html

I did not even consider the M6's due to this issue.

Oh yeah, there's definitely a little midrange blip on M6s that some have noticed besides myself, such as B2R for example, but luckily, for whatever reason, it's simply not there on the M5s.

Truth be told, the M6s really aren't my favorite overall speaker, but for cranking some good old hard rock like AC/DC, there's not much out there that can top them. ;)

But I take some of what the guy who wrote that article says with a grain of salt. If you will notice, he actually recommends setting them up the exact opposite of how they should be with the tweeters facing out. :rolleyes:

Try this. I'm only posting it because I already have mine, and don't need another pair! http://www.hideflifestyle.com/nhtt5-evolution-series-speaker-systempair-p-1198.html

PS: this is a SMOKIN' deal!! They're outside of Harrisburg, PA, if you're close enough to pick up - shipping isn't cheap.

Peter

Thanks Peter, I had seen those, but didn't put 2&2, as I was thinking of just the M5s and separate bases.

Oh, that is just a crazy great deal, and if I hadn't just bought the Classics I would have jumped on that! I can't believe what all you get for $1100, and then throw in 3 M5s for center and surrounds...maybe a couple of L5s for rears....

My next move will be the X2/A1s...or a pair of AZs in SD.

Speaking of deals ... has anyone seen a good price on an A1 amp?

That NAD C272 looks interesting. I need to pick up a 2 channel amp to drive my M5s.

Thanks Peter, I had seen those, but didn't put 2&2, as I was thinking of just the M5s and separate bases.

Oh, that is just a crazy great deal, and if I hadn't just bought the Classics I would have jumped on that! I can't believe what all you get for $1100, and then throw in 3 M5s for center and surrounds...maybe a couple of L5s for rears....

My next move will be the X2/A1s...or a pair of AZs in SD.

I had just bought 2 C3s, a C3c, 2 AZs, and TWO U2 sets. But I couldn't pass up the T5s from the same dealer at MORE than the current price (you might snatch some up on eBay for $100 less, but why bother). I bought the T5s and would have moved them down to my HT (lower WAF than the C3s) except for the 4 12" subs down there which just wouldn't make it in the den (nor would 2 of them, which I'd need to go with the Classics, at the least, even if I left 2 down in the HT). Find another room and buy the T5s. They really are great, and for jazz (which I assume you love for some reason), I think the T5s beat out the Classics any day.

Peter

What do you guys think about using the Classic Fours in a small room in an apartment? The living room is 17' x 12' , but due to layout there would be only about 7 feet between each speaker. I wonder if the Three would be a better choice. Music performance is a priority for me over HT performance.

Although I know this doesn't quite fit the thread, I'm open to any suggestions in the under $1500/pr range.

Thanks,
Chris

What do you guys think about using the Classic Fours in a small room in an apartment? The living room is 17' x 12' , but due to layout there would be only about 7 feet between each speaker. I wonder if the Three would be a better choice. Music performance is a priority for me over HT performance.

Although I know this doesn't quite fit the thread, I'm open to any suggestions in the under $1500/pr range.

Thanks,
Chris

That's not too far from my setup: Threes with U1 subwoofer in a similarly-sized room in an apartment. I don't think it will be too much for you. Just use a little restraint. Except on Saturday afternoons :D I've got my sub on an Auralex SubDude. No complaints from the neighbors so far...

What do you guys think about using the Classic Fours in a small room in an apartment? The living room is 17' x 12' , but due to layout there would be only about 7 feet between each speaker. I wonder if the Three would be a better choice. Music performance is a priority for me over HT performance.

Although I know this doesn't quite fit the thread, I'm open to any suggestions in the under $1500/pr range.

Thanks,
Chris

The T5s have more boundary control for difficult placement, and sound better for music (IMHO, YMMV). The Classic series need to be at least 10" out from the wall. T5s are currently less expensive, too, since they come with X1/A1. Classic 4s look a lot nicer, though.

Peter

But I couldn't pass up the T5s from the same dealer at MORE than the current price...and would have moved them down to my HT (lower WAF than the C3s). Find another room and buy the T5s. They really are great, and for jazz (which I assume you love for some reason), I think the T5s beat out the Classics any day.

Peter

That is a big statement and I don't think I would be able to handle it! ;) I do like the appearance of the Classics a lot more and am trying to maintain fiscal discipline. :eek:

The T5s have more boundary control for difficult placement, and sound better for music (IMHO, YMMV). The Classic series need to be at least 10" out from the wall. T5s are currently less expensive, too, since they come with X1/A1. Classic 4s look a lot nicer, though.

Peter

I have the Classics in a small place and use constraint, but I can tell they were meant for a lot bigger space.

Oh yeah, there's definitely a little midrange blip on M6s that some have noticed besides myself, such as B2R for example, but luckily, for whatever reason, it's simply not there on the M5s.

Truth be told, the M6s really aren't my favorite overall speaker, but for cranking some good old hard rock like AC/DC, there's not much out there that can top them. ;)

But I take some of what the guy who wrote that article says with a grain of salt. If you will notice, he actually recommends setting them up the exact opposite of how they should be with the tweeters facing out. :rolleyes:

And now for another point of view :)

I actually have come back to the M6 several times, even over the M5. I have a T6 setup with the 20hz mod for X1. This is primarily a music room, although I have L5's around the back for when needed. My room is pretty large and I like to play music fairly loud. Lots of jazz, mostly hi-rez SACD. The M6's play with more ease, and more air around them while still having better midbass.

The midrange blip is a non-issue and truly don't believe anyone could "pick" it out. Remember that your room will be the biggest factor on the response, not some minute response blip measured in a anoechic chamber. The T6/M6 itself was rated Class A by Stereophile (John Atkinson). I also love the fact that the M6 weighs 36lbs by itself!!

I also own M5's for my dedicated theater, so this is not a case of me "wanting" the M6 to sound better. I just think it does :D

James

thanks james!!!!! Go NHT M6's

So, are the Classic Three/Four more of an HT speaker? I'm also looking at the usual suspects like Revel, B&W, etc. I love the way the NHT's look, but I don't want to pull the trigger on a speaker that will not only be too much for the room, but also not as well suited to music as some of the others.

So, are the Classic Three/Four more of an HT speaker? I'm also looking at the usual suspects like Revel, B&W, etc. I love the way the NHT's look, but I don't want to pull the trigger on a speaker that will not only be too much for the room, but also not as well suited to music as some of the others.

There's an argument to be made the the Classics are more of a music speaker and that the Evolution line is more of a home theater speaker. Certainly there are those on here who prefer the Evolutions for music, but I seem to recall reading that the Classics were voiced and marketed for music.

My priorities are toward music. I watch a lot of TV and movies on them, but what I truly enjoy is punching up my favorite 2 channel music on my Classic Threes.

There are definitely some Revel fans on this thread, but I don't think B&W gets much love.

The Classics are music speakers that also do movies. They're better at music than most any speaker i've heard near that range, but not as good as Evolution or stuff like the psb Syncrhonies on movies. They are to music what a mazda miata is to a local race track.

The Classics are music speakers that also do movies. They're better at music than most any speaker i've heard near that range, but not as good as Evolution or stuff like the psb Syncrhonies on movies. They are to music what a mazda miata is to a local race track.

:D Got one of those too....Anybody want to buy it?
I'll sell the Miata but NEVER sell my 4's!!!! Enjoying them in 5 chanel stereo right now!! Music is where they shine! I demo'd them against the evos....Just plain fell in love with the sound of the 4's.
Anyone want to trade a some NHT stuff (or decent amps) for a Miata....The car seat just won't fit in it:(

So, are the Classic Three/Four more of an HT speaker? I'm also looking at the usual suspects like Revel, B&W, etc. I love the way the NHT's look, but I don't want to pull the trigger on a speaker that will not only be too much for the room, but also not as well suited to music as some of the others.

The Classic Three and Four are both accurate transducers that don't editorialize. Therefore, if you want to get as close as possible to the original source, either speaker is an excellent choice.

Try this. I'm only posting it because I already have mine, and don't need another pair! http://www.hideflifestyle.com/nhtt5-evolution-series-speaker-systempair-p-1198.html

PS: this is a SMOKIN' deal!! They're outside of Harrisburg, PA, if you're close enough to pick up - shipping isn't cheap.

Peter

From nht site I clicked on stores/shop online/Azon...sold thru hi-def lfstyls...free shpng! Ordered/paid Mon/21...recv'd today/23rd. Free shpng. Azon is way to go in my opinion because if you order direct(from dealer) you are charged shpng and/or tax. It is all coming from same place so why would one go direct. Saved me bunches of money.

Speaking of deals ... has anyone seen a good price on an A1 amp?

That NAD C272 looks interesting. I need to pick up a 2 channel amp to drive my M5s.

a1's...audio-video logic...advertised 249.99 ea...plus about 20 for shpng ea. Were available a couple weeks back as confirmed by email w/ them (through agon site).

Purchased mine at amazon(thru hi-def...) for 249ea/free shpng. Now they are 499ea!:eek:

a1's...audio-video logic...advertised 249.99 ea...plus about 20 for shpng ea. Were available a couple weeks back as confirmed by email w/ them (through agon site).

Purchased mine at amazon(thru hi-def...) for 249ea/free shpng. Now they are 499ea!:eek:

Thanks, I'll check that out. I also picked up a pair of L5s from the ListenUp deal.

thanks james!!!!! Go NHT M6's

Weren't you the one who felt 2.5s were better than M6s and a Velo sub? :o

There's an argument to be made the the Classics are more of a music speaker and that the Evolution line is more of a home theater speaker. Certainly there are those on here who prefer the Evolutions for music, but I seem to recall reading that the Classics were voiced and marketed for music.

Depends on the type of music. There are some kinds of music the Evos do better than the Classics, including rock music, and apparently jazz as well, while there are other kinds the classics do better, but even then, it depends on the room they are placed in. IOW, even on the type of music that Classics might would normally do better than Evos, there's some rooms where the Evos would even do that kind of music better.

My priorities are toward music. I watch a lot of TV and movies on them, but what I truly enjoy is punching up my favorite 2 channel music on my Classic Threes.

2 channel is still king to me too. :D

There are definitely some Revel fans on this thread, but I don't think B&W gets much love.

X2

And now for another point of view :)

I actually have come back to the M6 several times, even over the M5. I have a T6 setup with the 20hz mod for X1. This is primarily a music room, although I have L5's around the back for when needed. My room is pretty large and I like to play music fairly loud.

I have always recommended M6s/T6s over M5s/T5s for what is quoted in bold, most recently in post 6696.

Lots of jazz, mostly hi-rez SACD. The M6's play with more ease, and more air around them while still having better midbass.

The T6 is a very powerful speaker, no doubt about that. Like I said in my last post yesterday, there's simply not much out there that can top them for cranking rock music. They are also absolutely phenomenal HT speakers too.

As for mids, you really should hear the VT-2.4s, with dual 5.25" drivers covering all the frequency spectrum from 125 Hz all the way up to the crossover to the tweeter as opposed to having one 4" driver handling all the mids from 400 Hz up to 2.3kHz. Very noticeably better mid range dynamics IMO over any of the models with 3-way designs for the upper frequency drivers, like, M5s, M6s, Threes, VR-3s, etc.

The midrange blip is a non-issue and truly don't believe anyone could "pick" it out.

I don't know about that. There's been a few who commented on it even before Jack openly acknowledged it, but I do agree that it is relatively benign overall IMO as to pretty much be a non-issue.

Remember that your room will be the biggest factor on the response,

True, but the Evos do take the room out of the equation more so than just about any other speakers, which is a good thing. :cool:

not some minute response blip measured in a anoechic chamber. The T6/M6 itself was rated Class A by Stereophile (John Atkinson). I also love the fact that the M6 weighs 36lbs by itself!!

I also own M5's for my dedicated theater, so this is not a case of me "wanting" the M6 to sound better. I just think it does :D

James

And I also own T6s/M6s as well, but still personally like the M5s better. ;) The M6s/T6s are definitely more powerful, but the M5s/T5s are noticeably more accurate IMO. Then again, I feel that the M5s are not only more accurate then M6s, but also Threes/Fours, or everything else NHT has ever made except for Xds.

But, as always, YMMV. :D

The T5s have more boundary control for difficult placement, and sound better for music (IMHO, YMMV). The Classic series need to be at least 10" out from the wall. T5s are currently less expensive, too, since they come with X1/A1. Classic 4s look a lot nicer, though.

Peter

You may have already mentioned it, but what electronics are using with the T5s Peter?

That NAD C272 looks interesting. I need to pick up a 2 channel amp to drive my M5s.

I don't have much experience with the C272, but I do it's immediate predecessor, the C270, and I liked the B&K Reference 5 S2 a little more with the M5s:

http://www.bkcomp.com/products/amplifiers/?tx_ttproducts_pi1%5BbackPID%5D=14&tx_ttproducts_pi1%5Bproduct%5D=5&cHash=5abcbb5051

Still, a C272 would be a fine choice though. ;)

From nht site I clicked on stores/shop online/Azon...sold thru hi-def lfstyls...free shpng! Ordered/paid Mon/21...recv'd today/23rd. Free shpng. Azon is way to go in my opinion because if you order direct(from dealer) you are charged shpng and/or tax. It is all coming from same place so why would one go direct. Saved me bunches of money.

Let us know your thoughts on them after you've spent a little time with them.

What do you guys think about using the Classic Fours in a small room in an apartment? The living room is 17' x 12' , but due to layout there would be only about 7 feet between each speaker. I wonder if the Three would be a better choice. Music performance is a priority for me over HT performance.

Although I know this doesn't quite fit the thread, I'm open to any suggestions in the under $1500/pr range.

Thanks,
Chris

Like Old ears stated, you would need them at least 10" to 12" off of the front wall behind them, so when you also factor in the depth of their cabinets, and the fact that you would need at least 1.5 times the distance from them to the main listening position that they are placed apart, and the fact that they would work best when placed along the longer 17' wall, I don't know if you will have enough room. :(:o

Yeah, I don't think they will fit very well. Presumably the Threes would work better due to their reduced depth.

The Totem Arro's look very interesting, but I have a hard time getting past the driver complement compared to a lot of the competition, even if it doesn't actually matter.

i heard the Arros vs the Threes and the Threes had more resolution, a more real, less boxy sound, better imaging. Arros were nice, but the Threes were clearly better. Even the customer with the Arros was really impressed.

Originally Posted by mark russ
And I also own T6s/M6s as well, but still personally like the M5s better. ;) The M6s/T6s are definitely more powerful, but the M5s/T5s are noticeably more accurate IMO. Then again, I feel that the M5s are not only more accurate then M6s, but also Threes/Fours, or everything else NHT has ever made except for Xds.

But, as always, YMMV. :D[/quote]


<<The M5 has better midrange tonality than the M6. The M6 will play louder and has less distortion and compression at any given playback level.<<

This is the statement from Jack Hidley that rings true for me. At any given volume the M6 has less distortion and compression. This statement is contradictory to the M5 being overall more accurate. That is what I hear.

The M5 is defintely smoother in the midrange, but for me also sounds slightly more compressed. For some music that may even sound better, but overall I still think the M6 just sings better for lack of a better term.

BTW, the X1 mod with the B6 bases of the T6 truly helps smooth out the "bloom" I use to get in the 50hz range. Whatever the lower extension of the mod does, must reduce some of the ouput further up the band. It sounds overall better and actually graphs better in my room. Very pleased with the T6's :D

Like Old ears stated, you would need them at least 10" to 12" off of the front wall behind them, so when you also factor in the depth of their cabinets, and the fact that you would need at least 1.5 times the distance from them to the main listening position that they are placed apart, and the fact that they would work best when placed along the longer 17' wall, I don't know if you will have enough room. :(:o

Mark,

My room is about the same size, and it's tight, not ideal, but the sound is incredible. And at these prices...Classics or Evolution.... Plus, I bought these with the future in mind towards a larger place.

Weren't you the one who felt 2.5s were better than M6s and a Velo sub? :o

mark russ,
i do feel the 2.5i's do sound better than the m6's for music with my hgs-12. but i still use my m6's for my center and surround duties. :eek:

Originally Posted by positronic View Post
Speaking of deals ... has anyone seen a good price on an A1 amp?

That NAD C272 looks interesting. I need to pick up a 2 channel amp to drive my M5s.

positronic,
if you looking for a two channel amp, you should check out rotel. the rotel rb-1080 would be a great choice.

I recently picked up some SD classic 4's and a classic 2 center for a combined HT/2channel system. My AVR is an Arcam AVR300. Ive been messing with the various setups for a few months now and I cannot get it to sound as good as my 13 year old Harman Kardon AVR 15 / Klipsch KG 3.5 setup for music. My old setup just sounds so much bigger and richer. Is there anything I can do to improve the sound of my Nht / arcam rig for music? Im really frustrated and feel like Ive wasted a lot of money.

You may have already mentioned it, but what electronics are using with the T5s Peter?At work so don't know the model number. It was the Yamaha AVR flagship from about 12 years ago: (100W x 5) + (80W x 2), much better distortion figures than the other models in their line. Doesn't even have component video (to say nothing of HDMI), but does have main channel input/outputs for proper use with the X1. I'll look up the model number later (if I remember...).

Peter

Should I set the Yammie 1800 for 6 ohms, or leave at 8 ohms for the 4s???

Let us know your thoughts on them after you've spent a little time with them.

Will do...I am a bit of a tweek freak...so I'll do a before/after. Now I am waiting for more ic's for the x-over/amps. Back of rack looks like nyc metro grid. Jeez...I am going to neat-up while I'm back there and promise myself that's it for a while! Only have approx 25hrs on the 4's thus far.

Thanks to this thread and the people here, I have just ordered an Evolution T5 system and an M5 for a centre.... now I just need to find a pair of L5s at a reasonable price, and from someone who will ship to Canada. I can't wait... and thanks to all those who responded to my many pm's.

Should I set the Yammie 1800 for 6 ohms, or leave at 8 ohms for the 4s???


There has been a lot of discussion concerning ohm selection on rx-v yammies...I had a 2500. Nonetheless, after countless threads(aholics)I came to the conclusion that the Yamaha should be set as close as poss to the spkr's nominal which in this case would be 6ohm. Keep in mind that the yammies have improved on their ability to habdle lower loads and yamaha addressed this since the 2400/2500 series a couple yrs back. I would read what manual states (no offense) and most likely set at 6 ohm. Several opinions revolved around the idea that if you drove low ohm spkr's with recv't set at 8...as long as you did not try to break the sound barrier the recv'r would perform fine. I'm the kind of person that thinks to himself, "if it's(ohm selector) there, use it." I love toll free customer service and speaking with a tech. Contact yammy and/or nht. Both have been very pro/friendly with me and my seemingly 'newbie' questions. As far as bench tests are concerned the 4's do reach lower than the nom 6...something like 4.85 ohm at 1khz. Setting the recv'r/pre-pro at 6 would probably be best imo.

has anyone heard any news on whats going to happen to NHT?

Thanks, I had read a little on this, but the results seemed inconclusive. Better safe then sorry.

There has been a lot of discussion concerning ohm selection on rx-v yammies...I had a 2500. Nonetheless, after countless threads(aholics)I came to the conclusion that the Yamaha should be set as close as poss to the spkr's nominal which in this case would be 6ohm. Keep in mind that the yammies have improved on their ability to habdle lower loads and yamaha addressed this since the 2400/2500 series a couple yrs back. I would read what manual states (no offense) and most likely set at 6 ohm. Several opinions revolved around the idea that if you drove low ohm spkr's with recv't set at 8...as long as you did not try to break the sound barrier the recv'r would perform fine. I'm the kind of person that thinks to himself, "if it's(ohm selector) there, use it." I love toll free customer service and speaking with a tech. Contact yammy and/or nht. Both have been very pro/friendly with me and my seemingly 'newbie' questions. As far as bench tests are concerned the 4's do reach lower than the nom 6...something like 4.85 ohm at 1khz. Setting the recv'r/pre-pro at 6 would probably be best imo.

At work so don't know the model number. It was the Yamaha AVR flagship from about 12 years ago: (100W x 5) + (80W x 2), much better distortion figures than the other models in their line. Doesn't even have component video (to say nothing of HDMI), but does have main channel input/outputs for proper use with the X1. I'll look up the model number later (if I remember...).

Peter
Yamaha RX-V 2092. And searching old threads, I see our own Mark Russ used to own one of these...many years ago. It is thin on inputs, but the only inputs I'm using in this room are Tivo/DVD and a CD changer. This isn't my HT and only a 27" TV, so lack of HDMI isn't a huge problem. And if you think this is old, we have multi-room speakers running off this receiver powered by a Phase Linear 400 that I bought as a store demo in 1973 - still works great! This amp's lower frequency response goes to, like, DC. It was REALLY powerful in 1973. We once used it for a party in a huge room at college (MIT, the Sala de Puerto Rico for those that know it), running active equalized into 6 home-built Bose 901s (54 high-efficiency 4.5" speakers) and it was LOUD.

I've considered using the Phase Linear for my front channels, but the Yamaha, while only 100 Watts, is a high-quality amplifier and works well at this point, although perhaps I should experiment...

has anyone heard any news on whats going to happen to NHT?
I asked my dealer where to get parts after NHT closes its door. He said NHT is not going away. Anyone heard anything at all?

They are being bought out by an original owner, employee and investor. Future seems bright though they will have some rebuilding to do.

I'm again thinking of redoing two systems somewhat.

First will a C 3 center work well with M5's and mains and L5 surrounds in a 5.1 system? I am going to sell my ST4's since the bass just sounds congested or doesn't sound right since they have to be put in a hole inbetween other furniture in the bedroom on either side of the 50" plasma. I have a U2 set on their way to me to deal with the bass now. Or, am I just better off saving up to get C3's for the fronts and use C2's as rears, (purchased but not installed) or the existing B3's? I really do like the C 3 center with the C 3's at this place but have a pair of M5's attached to the ceiling (ugly) in the main living room system, and can replace them with L5's and use the M5's as L/R in the bedroom.

Bedroom system, mostly TV, then music, HT use third.

Yeah it may sound dumb, I theoretically should get another M5 but I have the C3 center already and was going to get a set of classic 3's for the front but found L5's cheap and they *should* solve probems with both systems and give me a pair of M5's to work with as fronts instead of C3's.

Yes, I'm only on pge 70 of the thread.

Larry

For those who uses x2 with classic 4. Are there recommended frequencies for the high and low pass settings?

For those who uses x2 with classic 4. Are there recommended frequencies for the high and low pass settings?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=12605213&postcount=6264

I received my M-5's yesterday. I played with them for a while, and they are very nice speakers.

The M-5's do match very well with NHT 2.9s.

The M-5's do match very well with NHT Super Zero's (wired in reverse polarity) as surround speakers. I ordered some L-5's for surrounds, and it seems that I did not need to do so. However, I bought the L-5's while they are being cleared, so I can mix and match them with any of the above speakers.

One thing that I did notice is that I can play the M-5 speakers at a louder volume level than my other speakers. That MTWM driver setup must reduce indirect sounds in my room by enough to make a difference. As of now I am very impressed with the sound quality of the speakers in my actual room.

They are being bought out by an original owner, employee and investor. Future seems bright though they will have some rebuilding to do.

X2. I have talked with them a couple of times about the Classics and they are excited about their prospects, but the guy admitted to me that they are a bit gutted right now.

Friend is considering NHT Classic 3s vs Ascend Acoustic CBM170s, in a two-channel + sub setup in a small basement room.

Both measure extremely well (see the Soundstage! reviews with NRC bench tests). Both will tend to be 'neutral' in the range above ~ 80 hz or so, according to such measurements, and both have excellent on and off axis response. The Ascends are easier to drive (sensitivity = 91 dB)

Are there any 'sonic' arguments clearly in favor of the NHT 3s, given that they cost ~ three times as much at retail?


Thought I'd give a follow-up on this. I didn't get to visit my friend for his loudspeaker auditions, but I've been in email contact with him throughout. In the end, he was able to home-audition not only the Ascend CBM170 SEs, and the NHT Classic 3s, but also PSB Image B25s -- all in addition to his original NHT SuperOnes. I told him to try to at least match the levels if possible, and he did this, but only 'by ear'. So it was hardly a scientific comparison, and it certainly wasn't blind.

His first comparison was SuperOnes to CAscend BMs, and he wasn't sure which one he liked better, though they sounded significantly different to him (the CBMs being more forward in the mid and upper reaches). A day or two later, he'd decided he liked the Ascends better. Then he swapped in the Classic 3s, and he thought they had a 'more polished ' sound and went lower into the bass , but the Ascends still sounded 'more alive' to him. But when he switched in the PSBs, he liked them even better than the Ascends (due to slightly less harsh cymbals) and a clear winner over the the NHT3s (which in comaprison sounded 'like a sack over my head'). So there you have it. At press time he's going to keep the PSB Image B25s and return the Ascends and NHT 3s.

Well, i don't think he's making a mistake or anything, especially since the B25s are half the price, though he's showing some of his newbishness. But it's a good first step (I also sell PSB). The Threes are certainly a huge step up, if you're accustomed to high-end speakers, from the B25s, as they should be for twice the price. That 'sack over my head' is a combination of lack of driver and cabinet resonance/distortion combined with a 3-4dB efficiency deficit when A/B switching.

They are being bought out by an original owner, employee and investor. Future seems bright though they will have some rebuilding to do.

thanks for the update!!!!

everyone, someone is selling a pair of p6 stands on audiogon

Yamaha RX-V 2092. And searching old threads, I see our own Mark Russ used to own one of these...many years ago. It is thin on inputs, but the only inputs I'm using in this room are Tivo/DVD and a CD changer. This isn't my HT and only a 27" TV, so lack of HDMI isn't a huge problem.

Yep, I did use to have a Yammy AVR, even though I couldn't remember the model #. It was second from the top of the line at the time only to the processor/multi channel integrated amp who's model # I also can't recall that was a predecessor to the DSP-A1, and it was the flagship AVR.

I thought it was great for movies, but I didn't like it as much for 2 channel. It was just too bright for me, although M5s would prolly sound better with it than just about any other NHT speaker.

It was built like a tank, and it would actually dim the lights in the room for a split second when you first powered it up. It is still in service to this day at a friend's house who I'm letting "borrow" it along with the first Sony DVD player they ever made that was so highly rated back in the day (with another model # I can't remember) so technically, I still own them. ;)

As I remember, the Yammy only had DD and plain old vanilla DPL (I don't even think DTS and DPLII, much less DPLIIx were even out then). It had no usable pre-ins other than only the main L/R channels as I recall, and couldn't be upgraded, so it was a relatively expensive mistake in hind site, which, as we all know, is always 20/20.

It had like 100 different DSP soundfields- Church, stadium, Joe's pool hall, etc, and they were mildly amusing at first, but quickly got old. However, I did like a couple of the enhanced movie modes that incorporated a pair of front "effects" speakers mounted high up on the front wall further apart than the main L/R.

I also seem to remember it had hook-ups for two different CC speakers. Refresh my memory Peter, does it also have dual sub outputs?

Mark,

My room is about the same size, and it's tight, not ideal, but the sound is incredible. And at these prices...Classics or Evolution.... Plus, I bought these with the future in mind towards a larger place.

While I have no doubts that you think that they sound great right now since you went to them from an Aiwa HTIB, but if you think they sound good now, just wait till you finally get them set up properly. You ain't heard nothin' yet. ;)

<<The M5 has better midrange tonality than the M6. The M6 will play louder and has less distortion and compression at any given playback level.<<

This is the statement from Jack Hidley that rings true for me. At any given volume the M6 has less distortion and compression. This statement is contradictory to the M5 being overall more accurate. That is what I hear.

The M5 is defintely smoother in the midrange, but for me also sounds slightly more compressed. For some music that may even sound better, but overall I still think the M6 just sings better for lack of a better term.

James, while I can see your point with where you're trying to go with it here, and can even agree with it to a certain extent, apparently though, you and I simply have two totally different interpretations/definitions of accuracy as it relates here. To me, the more "accurate" speaker is the one with the smoother, flattest response at the listening position, which is not necessarily the one that plays the loudest.

Let me use this example as my counterpoint - I have an old pair of big-@$$ed Klipsch KLF-30s http://www.klipsch.com/products/discontinued/details/klf-30.aspx that will prolly play louder with less distortion and/or compression than even the M6s/T6s, but I'm sure not about to say that it somehow makes them more accurate than the M6s since their response graph would prolly look like a Richter scale graph of a small earthquake. :p

BTW, the X1 mod with the B6 bases of the T6 truly helps smooth out the "bloom" I use to get in the 50hz range. Whatever the lower extension of the mod does, must reduce some of the ouput further up the band. It sounds overall better and actually graphs better in my room. Very pleased with the T6's :D

Speaking of which, did you ever get a chance to check out Queensryche's Operation Mindcrime yet? :cool:

I'm again thinking of redoing two systems somewhat.

First will a C 3 center work well with M5's and mains and L5 surrounds in a 5.1 system?

Not very well. Your cheapest, easiest, and simplest solution is to just get another M5 now and put the 3C with the Threes later on when you get them in another system.

Thanks to this thread and the people here, I have just ordered an Evolution T5 system and an M5 for a centre.... now I just need to find a pair of L5s at a reasonable price, and from someone who will ship to Canada. I can't wait... and thanks to all those who responded to my many pm's.


Does ListenUp ship to Canada? If so, they have some great prices on L5s right now. ;)

I recently picked up some SD classic 4's and a classic 2 center for a combined HT/2channel system. My AVR is an Arcam AVR300. Ive been messing with the various setups for a few months now and I cannot get it to sound as good as my 13 year old Harman Kardon AVR 15 / Klipsch KG 3.5 setup for music. My old setup just sounds so much bigger and richer. Is there anything I can do to improve the sound of my Nht / arcam rig for music? Im really frustrated and feel like Ive wasted a lot of money.

Could be that you just flat out like the sound of Klipsch, but virtually any NHT speaker will taker some time to get used to at first if you are used to the "Klipsch sound". :p

Well, i don't think he's making a mistake or anything, especially since the B25s are half the price, though he's showing some of his newbishness. But it's a good first step (I also sell PSB). The Threes are certainly a huge step up, if you're accustomed to high-end speakers, from the B25s, as they should be for twice the price. That 'sack over my head' is a combination of lack of driver and cabinet resonance/distortion combined with a 3-4dB efficiency deficit when A/B switching.

The Ascends have low resonance/distortion too, so I doubt it's that, at least for that comparison (I don't know how well the PSBs are damped). And the efficiency deficit is at least partially offset by level matching.

All three are excellent speakers -- and given the comparative measured and reported performance of the other two, I'd say the NHT3s are overpriced @$800/pr, though a good buy at what my friend got them for ($560/pr).

I received my M-5's yesterday. I played with them for a while, and they are very nice speakers.

The M-5's do match very well with NHT 2.9s.

The M-5's do match very well with NHT Super Zero's (wired in reverse polarity) as surround speakers. I ordered some L-5's for surrounds, and it seems that I did not need to do so. However, I bought the L-5's while they are being cleared, so I can mix and match them with any of the above speakers.

One thing that I did notice is that I can play the M-5 speakers at a louder volume level than my other speakers. That MTWM driver setup must reduce indirect sounds in my room by enough to make a difference. As of now I am very impressed with the sound quality of the speakers in my actual room.

Yep, IMO, the T5s or M5s/U2 are an overall upgrade over the 2.9s.

Are you gonna set up two surround systems with your old and new speakers and have the 2.9s as a separate 2 channel only rig or what?

everyone, someone is selling a pair of p6 stands on audiogon


...I just saw a 6 series sub cab/base on ebay///trick center channel anyone? Would work great with display/screen mounted high above.

For those who uses x2 with classic 4. Are there recommended frequencies for the high and low pass settings?

Have yet to play around with the x2, a1s, with my 4's. Waiting for some cables. In the meantime I am looking over the manuals as far as connections are concerned. The manuals give starting points and has a fine tuning section/troubleshooting. I look forward to a long listen/tweek session and a chance to report my 'findings'.

With less than 30 hrs on the 4's my first impressions were less than expected. After a few hours and different selections of music I started noticing things previously unheard. THe highs as I had read about were a bit laid back but very detailed. Just not too forward which is new but nice for me. The mid is clear as far as vocals are concerned but I am missing the mid-bass punch. That quick, sharp pop I want to hear. I do notice the 4's like to be played hard and sound better as you throw the throttle to them. Reminds me of an old acquitance...anyways. I think I'm getting used to them and they are sounding better as each hour of signal cycles through them.

Material listened to thus far...After 30+ yrs of liking music my tastes are diverse.:confused:

Steely Dan/Fagen
Tribal tech(the best fusion jazz imo)
Grant Lee Buffalo
Days of the New
Miles Davis
M. Buble'
311
Cream
Seal
Blood Sweat and Tears

and some of my wife's stuff...mostly latin music which is done very well production wise and really cooks.

While I have no doubts that you think that they sound great right now since you went to them from an Aiwa HTIB, but if you think they sound good now, just wait till you finally get them set up properly. You ain't heard nothin' yet. ;)

Mark, I know. I actually feel a little bad because they are cramped down there. As I told my girlfriend, "if you take out that wall and that wall, they would fill that entire space comfortably."

Been reading this thread for a few days now. Have a mix of speakers, but picked up a pair of classic 3's last May over a pair of totem arros. Picked up an Onkyo 805 at Christmas and like the 3's more and more.

Two developments. 1) added a Toshiba HD-A35 to the mix (really liking the TrueHD sound); 2) My sub crapped out.

Read good things about the B&W 685 series so I went and listened to them, but prices were higher up north here and in my humble opinion the NHT's are superior.

I can get a really good deal on a pair of 4's and a 3 c. I believe this will be a great combination for music SACD's in particular, and with the 3's for surrounds I think it will be good for movies, but if anyone has a similar set-up perhaps they could advise regarding subs. Is anyone runnning the 4's bi-wired and finding this sufficient for HT listening? My room is about 14 x 24 (family room/kitchen), ugly I know.

Noobie question on M5s/T5s hardware

I just got my speakers in (!!!!) and was assembling them. On the back of the M5 is a plastic socket, on which are the boundary switch and speaker connections. This plastic piece has two extruded flanges oriented on the long axis of the speaker.

The problem is that the flanges interfere with hooking up the rather tight wiring harness that connects the m5 to the base unit.

All the diagrams show this flange rotated 90 degrees so that the extruded edges are oriented on the short dimension. Then there would be enough slack (barely) to connect the wiring harness.

Is this something that I can do? Do I unscrew the four small scres or use allen wrench hole?

Sorry, went through the manual and searched this thread for "rotate", so I'm guessing I'm missing something pretty obvious. How about a nudge in the right direction?

Thanks to all!

-glenn