Hi Ford,
Class A amps do tend to run hot. Mine in particular runs hot but not so much that I couldnt put my hand on it and leave it there. Im not sure about class A power ratings as they might compare to say class AB or Class D. I do know that ive pushed my bi-amp setup to high volume levels (to my ears at least) w/o the C4 breaking a sweat. Ive even tried a pair of ASL 2x8w mono-tubes amps on the tops of my C4s and they sounded very nice though I couldnt push the sound level too high...

Regards,
Ricky

As far as comparing wattages by sound(?) I couldnt say...ie if I listened to a 50w system versus 100w I wouldnt be able to tell u which was 50w and which was 100w...

I just joined the NHT club. I got the Classic Three's and Three C. I've always been curious about the NHT Classic speakers since their introduction but I've always preferred soft domes and avoided anything metal.

I was delighted to hear the Three's are very detailed yet unfatiguing. I'm particularly sensitive to excessive sibilance and the Three's present them very crisply without getting too edgy. Their overall presentation is neutral with perhaps a touch of warmth. I'm really impressed with the Three C's vocal clarity and it's dynamic presentation outclasses it's bookshelf brethren. Don't get me wrong the Three's are no slouches but NHT should consider making a Three T.

My first real set of speakers were NHT. I think they were the VT-1's with the match center and surround speakers. I bought them way back when I was in college. Since then I've owned many other brands but I'm happy to be back with NHT. I just wish I had done it sooner.

Anyone have any experience with Klipsch subwoofers? Saw one was on sale today:

http://www.techbargains.com/news_displayItem.cfm/241919

Wondering how it would stack up vs the NHT 12''?

Sorry to come into this thread so late (and, no, I'm NOT gonna go back and read 317 pages of posts), but I have a question:

My mains are SuperOnes. I love them, and have no desire to replace them. However, I need a few more speakers for my setup, and SuperOnes are getting increasingly difficult (and expensive!) to find. Of the Classic line, which would be a good timbre match for the speakers I have now?

Well, the Twos are the closest comparison now, but I haven't heard them together. I can tell you that the SB2s were a pretty close match, though they did have differences. The Ones imaged better, but the SB2s beat them in most every other way- smoother, fuller, bigger sounding, could play louder, less fatiguing. My understanding is that the Twos have gotten the imaging mojo back. I would think that the Ones would be sent to the rear pretty quickly.

Thanks for the info!

So I just got my pair of new AT's and 2C center which I love =). I have a question, I know people recommend listening to the towers without the grill for better SQ - but is the same true with the center channel and surround speakers?

So I just got my pair of new AT's and 2C center which I love =). I have a question, I know people recommend listening to the towers without the grill for better SQ - but is the same true with the center channel and surround speakers?

I believe NHT geneally voices their speakers with the grilles on.

That said, if you take the grilles off the ATs, take them off the rest of the speakers too.

I believe NHT geneally voices their speakers with the grilles on.

That said, if you take the grilles off the ATs, take them off the rest of the speakers too.

FWIW, the Stereophile measurements of the Classics (C3 and AT) with grills on and off have shown some very strange behavior. This was true of the C3, and as of late the AT. The 3's in particular had significant differences with vs. w/o the grills.

Brian

FWIW, the Stereophile measurements of the Classics (C3 and AT) with grills on and off have shown some very strange behavior. This was true of the C3, and as of late the AT. The 3's in particular had significant differences with vs. w/o the grills.

Brian

In a good or bad way?

In a good or bad way?

Very choppy upper frequencies with the grills on, but I do not recall what exact frequency range the problems start. The At was not as bad as the 3, IIRC.

In the AT review, the reviewer preferred the sound with the grills on, and JA commented in the measurements that he was surprised at that.

Here ate the AT's:

http://forum.stereophile.com/content/nht-classic-absolute-tower-loudspeaker-measurements

Here is the Three:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/nht-classic-three-loudspeaker-measurements

Brian

Very choppy upper frequencies with the grills on, but I do not recall what exact frequency range the problems start. The At was not as bad as the 3, IIRC.

In the AT review, the reviewer preferred the sound with the grills on, and JA commented in the measurements that he was surprised at that.

Here ate the AT's:

http://forum.stereophile.com/content/nht-classic-absolute-tower-loudspeaker-measurements

Here is the Three:

http://www.stereophile.com/content/nht-classic-three-loudspeaker-measurements

Brian

Yea, from my experience so far the speakers seems to sound better with the grills off. What do you think I should do about the center?

Yea, from my experience so far the speakers seems to sound better with the grills off. What do you think I should do about the center?

I would personally go with all or nothing.

If you are going to use Audyssey or one of the other room correction solutions, the differences may be further minimized.

Brian

Anyone move from the Controller to the Marantz AV7005? Im considering this move and thought maybe I could get some feedback on the sound comparison between these preamps.

Regards,
Ricky

I think NHT started recommending "grilles on" with the SB series. I prefer my SB2s naked, though, pointed right at my ears. With the SOs and SZs, I had to have 'em firing straight ahead with grilles on or fatigue set it quickly. Haven't monkeyed around my SB1s in that way, though I do point 'em at the ears when not just listening casually.

From Reina's SB3 review:

Footnote 2: I noted this natural high-frequency reproduction by following NHT's instruction to leave the grilles on. Designer Jack Hidley explained to me that removing the grilles gives the sound a 8kHz boost. I also listened with the grilles off, but didn't like the exaggerated reproduction of the upper partials of orchestral strings, electric guitars, and brass.—BJR

I currently have Athena AS-B1 for fronts (want to replace),Athena, As-C1 for center channel(want to replace) Athena S.5 surrounds which I will continue to use. I have a Onkyo TX-SR706 Receiver and a BIC Acoustech H100 sub. When I replace the fronts, I would probably use the AS-B1’s to make a 7.1 system.

I am looking for more understandable, crisp dialogue from the center over what I currently have and an upgrade in sound over the fronts. My room is 15x18 with 8 foot ceilings. 95% of the usage of the system is for TV, movies. My budget is $750 max.

I need bookcase speakers which will actually be used in a bookcase and understand that rear porting can be a problem. The depth of the bookcase shelf is about 11inches, height and width not an issue.

What would you suggest in the NHT line of speakers that would be an upgrade over what I have and that will provide the sound needed for a room my size and can be driven with the Onkyo receiver I have?

Since I am having the most difficulty presently with the dialogue what would you recommend as a center channel. The length is not an issue, without interferring with the TV screen the height should not exceed 9 1/2 inches and the depth should not exceed 11inches. If the Absolute Zero speakers would work for my room do you recommend using one of those or a center channel?

Thank you for your help.

I currently have Athena AS-B1 for fronts (want to replace),Athena, As-C1 for center channel(want to replace) Athena S.5 surrounds which I will continue to use. I have a Onkyo TX-SR706 Receiver and a BIC Acoustech H100 sub. When I replace the fronts, I would probably use the AS-B1’s to make a 7.1 system.

I am looking for more understandable, crisp dialogue from the center over what I currently have and an upgrade in sound over the fronts. My room is 15x18 with 8 foot ceilings. 95% of the usage of the system is for TV, movies. My budget is $750 max.

I need bookcase speakers which will actually be used in a bookcase and understand that rear porting can be a problem. The depth of the bookcase shelf is about 11inches, height and width not an issue.

What would you suggest in the NHT line of speakers that would be an upgrade over what I have and that will provide the sound needed for a room my size and can be driven with the Onkyo receiver I have?

Since I am having the most difficulty presently with the dialogue what would you recommend as a center channel. The length is not an issue, without interferring with the TV screen the height should not exceed 9 1/2 inches and the depth should not exceed 11inches. If the Absolute Zero speakers would work for my room do you recommend using one of those or a center channel?

Thank you for your help.

I have been extremely happy with my NHT 2C center that I recently got. It is far better performing than my SuperOne that was doing center duty. Highly recommended.

I burned up a tweeter in one of my 4 Veritas Dipole surround speakers, is it an easy DIY fix with a new driver?
I dont know if there are many different versions of this speaker, it has woofer and tweeter in center and flanked with semi side fire mid drivers and features a couple dials for orientation placement and level and has a curved grill cloth, are these tweeters expensive or easy to replace? Thanks.
I have some BW 600 series Dipoles (4 aswell) that I can replace Energy models with if need. I can scrap the Veritas or put them for OBO on Craigslist if its too pricey or a pain to bother with.
Any info would be great, thanks again.

Buster, since the big guns haven't checked in, my 2 cents would be that the Twos and TwoC would mate better with your sub- and should hit your budget with a 20% discount factored in.

Buster,

BrianWilson's recommendations are right on to stay within your budget. The TwoC will give you excellent dialog. For the Front L/R you can go with the Twos or AZ's (the Twos will give you a bit more energy, but the difference may not be noticed once XO's to the sub). The main thing is the center, the TwoC or ThreeC (a bit more expensive) will fit you needs just right.

I burned up a tweeter in one of my 4 Veritas Dipole surround speakers, is it an easy DIY fix with a new driver?
I dont know if there are many different versions of this speaker, it has woofer and tweeter in center and flanked with semi side fire mid drivers and features a couple dials for orientation placement and level and has a curved grill cloth, are these tweeters expensive or easy to replace? Thanks.
I have some BW 600 series Dipoles (4 aswell) that I can replace Energy models with if need. I can scrap the Veritas or put them for OBO on Craigslist if its too pricey or a pain to bother with.
Any info would be great, thanks again.

chadnliz,

I think you posted in the wrong thread - look for the Energy thread. Even though the fix is actually easy (if you can get the exact tweeter), It may not be available. Call the manufacture to check (depends a lot if that speaker is still in production and if they have extra parts for it).

Buster, I think that the Twos will be worth the extra $ in terms of being able to set the crossover lower with your 12" sub.

Agreed - the AZ's would be pretty small for blending with a 12" (they actually work best XO'd at 90Hz, the Twos will be comfortable at 80Hz where the 12" can easily reach...

Good note Brian, I did not catch at point.

I was just offered a brand new (watched them open the box) B-12D for $550! SOOO wish I had the scratch for it. :(

Hs anyone ever wall mounted their Classic Threes using the Omnimounts that NHT recommends?

Offers?

NHT Evolution U1 Stereo Sub System - 2 Cabinets + 2 Amps + 20hz Stereo Crossover.

(2) W1 Subs - Black

(2) A1 Amps for W1

(1) X1 Crossover with Factory 20hz Mod.


PM if any questions. :)

I asked this question in a general sense in it's own thread, but wanted to get the input of some NHT owners.

I currently use Classic 3s as my LR and can fit a third as my center - but I know the C3 Center is no slouch. Has anyone directly compared the C3 Center to the C3 Bookshelf for use as a center channel?

General consensus seems to be go with the identical center, but I may be changing my setup in a couple of years and would like to avoid (possibly) buying a new center. Any feedback from those that have directly compared the two would be appreciated.

Hello everyone,
I've owned a set consisting of Classic 2's. Classic 2 C and Classic 0 in back going on now for three years.
Lately I've come to realize that I'm missing the shimmer of cymbals in the sound I'm hearing out of my system.
My old system was B&W 804 all around but since moving to smaller quarters I had to down size.
I'm running the system with a Yamaha 2400 AVR.
Any ideas?
Helier

Hello everyone,
I've owned a set consisting of Classic 2's. Classic 2 C and Classic 0 in back going on now for three years.
Lately I've come to realize that I'm missing the shimmer of cymbals in the sound I'm hearing out of my system.
My old system was B&W 804 all around but since moving to smaller quarters I had to down size.
I'm running the system with a Yamaha 2400 AVR.
Any ideas?
Helier

I really haven't spent much time with the C2, but the C3 is a bit brighter and might have more of the shimmer you're looking for.

Yes, the 3's might be a better unit for my needs, however, after retirement it is not something I can rush into.
The yammy has an equalizer that I've been playing with some success, however , it does not provide the decay of the cymbal notes, it is more of a splash. I know, it is hard to explain .

Are Marantz A/V Receiver a good match for either an Absolute Zero 5.1 package or the Absolute Tower 5.1 package? Looking at the SR6005.

Sorry to post this here guys, i know there is a classified section etc. BUT....Im currently running st4's for my mains, sc1 center, sb1's for surrounds. Been trying to find for a while now SB2's that I could use for my surrrounds and move my sb1's up front for height speakers to use with my Onkyo 3008. If ANYONE here is thinking of getting rid of their SB2's or SC2 please feel free to let me know/pm me etc. thanks. again, sorry for posting this in this thread, but figured it there is a better chance here than in other sections.

thanks folks,

Are Marantz A/V Receiver a good match for either an Absolute Zero 5.1 package or the Absolute Tower 5.1 package? Looking at the SR6005.

Based on how the Marantz "house sound" is usually described (ie., smooth and clean and musical), it might be my first choice if. Best looks, too, IMHO. Onkyo and Pioneer seem to be killing it at present, though, and there is always NAD and Cambridge.

If you want more of a "lively and punchy" thing, maybe Marantz isn't the thing, though.

Based on how the Marantz "house sound" is usually described (ie., smooth and clean and musical), it might be my first choice if. Best looks, too, IMHO. Onkyo and Pioneer seem to be killing it at present, though, and there is always NAD and Cambridge.

If you want more of a "lively and punchy" thing, maybe Marantz isn't the thing, though.

Thanks Brian. I'm now looking at an Onkyo TR-NR808 receiver. Looks good on paper.

Anyone try the new NHT subs B-10d or B-12d. Thinking of replacing my U2 system to free up some rack space and was wondering whether it would be a backwards, lateral, or step up in quality. Thanks

Does anyone recognize the subwoofer (in the foreground of pic - vertical speaker)? I was told the back of the sub says "SW1V" but can't find that on the NHT's vintage speaker page (http://www.nhthifi.com/Vintage-Products)

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/1/nhtsub.jpg

TYIA

CRAW,

Could be wrong, but looks like a SubTwo to me (a close friend of mine had a couple of them). It required it's own outboard controller.

the SW1V may be the required controller.

Yeah, but that picture doesn't look like it has two 12" woofers in it when there are SuperOnes and SuperZeros in the background. Right? Or am I seeing it wrong?

Regardless, two SuperOnes, two SuperZeros, and this subwoofer for $150... is that a decent deal? They are supposedly in great condition.


EDIT: I see it would house two 10" woofers, not 12's. My mistake...

The model is indeed a SW1V which has two 6.5" woofers... He doesn't have any more links, but was able to find this chart:

http://www.slfhemmabio.nu/htm/nht-history.htm

Strange. :confused:

Still though, I wouldn't mind messing around with it, and the Ones and Zeros for $150.

Craw that is a great deal. The SZ's are what made me jump to NHT in the first place. I have since went to a mix and match HT with Revel F12 fronts, 2 NHT C3's for rears and a SB3 for center and have been really happy on a very low budget.

Craw,

I agree,that is a great deal! I am not familiar with those, interesting. I started out with the Super Zeros, loved them at the time.

NHT4LIFE,

How do you like the blend of Revels and NHT's? I've heard them separately, but not mixed. I can see them working with movies, but how about multichannel music? An the center, does it pan pretty smoothly between the Revels and the NHT?

NHT4LIFE,

How do you like the blend of Revels and NHT's? I've heard them separately, but not mixed. I can see them working with movies, but how about multichannel music? An the center, does it pan pretty smoothly between the Revels and the NHT?[/QUOTE]

You would be very surprised how well they blend. i too was suspect as to how it would sound but i am very happy. I can tell you this... I am going to upgrade my 4 year old yamaha receiver before I worry about the speakers. ;)

The AT got Class C, limited extension, in the new Recommended Components. Had some limited hopes for B, based on the review, but C seemed logical.

The AT got Class C, limited extension, in the new Recommended Components. Had some limited hopes for B, based on the review, but C seemed logical.

Aww. It did seem like a long shot but I was hoping for B.

Hi, I just needed some advice regarding getting the most out of my classic 4's. Just a little background about my setup:
LR: Classic 4's,
Center: C3 center
Rear: ORB audio speakers
SW: ORB subwoofer that came with speaker.
Receiver: Pioneer SC-27

Currently, the C4's are hooked up to Pio, I tried bi-amping since the receiver is a 7.1 system however I did not really notice a big difference with the sound. I feel like that I'm not really getting the most out of the subs on the C4. So the options I came up with are:

1) Buy a new sub maybe HSU VTF-15
2) Buy an additional amp: I know when the C4's first came out they were matched with the A1 amp and X2 crossover. It seems these products have been discontinued. What alternatives are there to power and get the best sound out of the C4's?

Basically I want to fully utilize the C4's sub and would like the most cost-effective way to do so. Appreciate any advice on the setup or possible alternative options.

Thanks in advance for all your help!

Has anyone come across a site listing the frequency response for the classic 2's. I've searched and can not find it.
Thanks
Helier

Has anyone come across a site listing the frequency response for the classic 2's. I've searched and can not find it.
Thanks
Helier

Helier,

From the NHT site:

Woofer – 6.5” polypropylene cone
Tweeter - 1” aluminum dome
Frequency Response - 51Hz- 20kHz
Crossover Frequency – 3 kHz
Crossover Slopes – 3kHz 18dB HP, 18dB LP
Sensitivity - 86dB
Impedance - 6 ohms
Power Handling - 125W
Inputs – 2 each nickel plated 5-way binding posts
Speaker Dimensions - 12.125"Hx 7"Wx 8.875"D
Speaker Weight - 12.7 lbs./5.8 kg each

Hi, I just needed some advice regarding getting the most out of my classic 4's. Just a little background about my setup:
LR: Classic 4's,
Center: C3 center
Rear: ORB audio speakers
SW: ORB subwoofer that came with speaker.
Receiver: Pioneer SC-27

Currently, the C4's are hooked up to Pio, I tried bi-amping since the receiver is a 7.1 system however I did not really notice a big difference with the sound. I feel like that I'm not really getting the most out of the subs on the C4. So the options I came up with are:

1) Buy a new sub maybe HSU VTF-15
2) Buy an additional amp: I know when the C4's first came out they were matched with the A1 amp and X2 crossover. It seems these products have been discontinued. What alternatives are there to power and get the best sound out of the C4's?

Basically I want to fully utilize the C4's sub and would like the most cost-effective way to do so. Appreciate any advice on the setup or possible alternative options.

Thanks in advance for all your help!

Clymer,

You would need an electronic crossover like the X2 from NHT (now a vintage product, so look for used) and a 2 channel amp to power the subs for the Fours separately from their upper portion. You can also use another crossover like the Behringer:
http://backstage.musiciansfriend.com/Pro-Audio/Signal-Processors/Crossovers/SUPER-X-PRO-CX2310-Crossover.site1prod182466.product

The thing you need to keep in mind is that the Fours' sub is internally XO'd at 125Hz, so you'll need to set the XO near that point or you'll be missing some Freq in that range (i.e. if you XO at 90Hz, you loose the 90-125 portion of the freq range).

The main advantage of using such a setup would be to increase the power to the sub portion of the Fours, but IMO the best best would be to spend money on a more powerful sub (or subs), you'll get more bang for the buck and much better sound (ideal placement of the subs are not usually the same spots as your mains). I actually crossover my Fours at 60Hz (at the usual 12db/octave in most AVR's, there is still energy at the 30Hz point, an the dynamics for the driver increase since it does not have the heavy bass load, which subs are designed for).

Is anyone still doing the 20hz mod for the x1? I would do it myself but my hands aren't steady enough.

Thanks for your help Chameleon.
What I was after was the frequency response curve, guess I was not clear on that.
What I'm trying to do is equalize my c2s since I have them inside a cabinet,
(no way around that I'm afraid) and I feel they are lacking in clarity.
I figured I'd look at that response curve and have a starting point.
Again thanks
Helier

Thanks for your help Chameleon.
What I was after was the frequency response curve, guess I was not clear on that.
What I'm trying to do is equalize my c2s since I have them inside a cabinet,
(no way around that I'm afraid) and I feel they are lacking in clarity.
I figured I'd look at that response curve and have a starting point.
Again thanks
Helier

Ah, I see. The freq specs are within the + 3db range, but that will change if placed in a cabinet (must 'stand alone' speakers are not meant to be placed in a cabinet). Since you have no option, are you using an AVR with Audyssey or something like it? The software should correct the freq response. Also, make sure the front baffle of the C2 is as close to the edge as possible (would be much better if actually sticking out a bit). If you have 'grills' on the cabinet facing, then remove the grills of the C2. Do you have a pic of the setup by chance? Would be good to see what you're actually working with.

Thanks,
Ray

Is anyone still doing the 20hz mod for the x1? I would do it myself but my hands aren't steady enough.

Hi. Jack Hidley is still visiting the AVS forums, search for his name and send a PM to see if he's still doing the mods. I think he's the only one that can do it without voiding any warranty. It's actually not that hard (I did both of my X1's - still have spare caps/resisters since I had to buy a 'bulk' pack of each value). If you feel like tackling it yourself, I can mail you the parts and the schematics. If you want the schematics now, just PM me your email and I can send them to you.

One thing to keep in mind, if you do the mod, you loose some output at loud levels. If you have a very large room, you'll need 2 subs to make up for it. If only one sub in a large room, I wouldn't recommend doing the MOD, IMO.

Ray

The AT got Class C, limited extension, in the new Recommended Components. Had some limited hopes for B, based on the review, but C seemed logical.

I'm with Matt and you, wished for a Class B, but Class C is really not that bad for it's price range...

What exactly do different speaker classes mean?

Stereophile has their 'description' of each class at the beginning of the ratings section, can't think of them right off hand. But, 'in their opinion', briefly: Class A are reference speakers, Class B can be Class A with some limitations (LF, dynamics, etc.), and Class C even has more limitations than Class B (of course, all compared to the reference Class A speakers, and if you see that list, well: Revel Ultimas, Wilson, etc - all very expensive speakers.

Thanks again Ray,
The speakers are as far forward as I can place them and there are no other grills aside from the ones that come with the speakers themselves.
I have just ordered the microphone in order to do the automatic equalization that the Yamaha provides, so that will probably help. I'm a little leery about the automatic eq but I still retain the ability to alter the results if they prove to be too drastic so we'll see.
Helier

Thanks again Ray,
The speakers are as far forward as I can place them and there are no other grills aside from the ones that come with the speakers themselves.
I have just ordered the microphone in order to do the automatic equalization that the Yamaha provides, so that will probably help. I'm a little leery about the automatic eq but I still retain the ability to alter the results if they prove to be too drastic so we'll see.
Helier

You're welcome! Yamaha uses their YPAO which is basically a 1/3 octave band parametric EQ (7 or 10 bands). It should help to flatten the freq response. Double check the crossover it sets though and raise it to 80hz if set too low (a lot of auto EQ programs set them too low) so that the subs do the heavy lifting for bass freq, giving your mains more dynamic range. Let us know how it sounds after your optimization. Also, since the speakers do not have anything in front of them, like I mentioned before, place them as far front as possible - helps minimize the 'in the cabinet' issues and diffraction issues.

Ray

Hey Ray,
Just wanted to let you know that I got the microphone and did the set up and wow!, what a difference!
The system now sounds much clearer.
Thanks again for your advice.
Helier

I seem to have a problem with the 3" midrange driver in my L5. I noticed it sounded off, so I played a 1khz test tone and there is nothing audible coming from this speaker, but my other surrounds are fine. I pulled out the driver and it passes the "battery" test. The connections seemed fine.

Should I assume that there is a problem with the crossover?

I'm finally upgrading my 10+ year old system and I've decided on Absolute Towers and the TwoC as my front sound stage. I currently have 4 SuperOne's as surround speakers and plan on keeping those for the time being. I wish I could hear these baby's in action before I purchased them, but there's no showroom near where I live. I'm going off of my previous experience with NHT and a lot of the reviews on here.

I have a couple of questions before I pull the trigger, however. I'm currently using a VS 1.2a as my center channel, will the TwoC be a significant improvement over the VS 1.2a?? I figure the TwoC will match with the AT's better.

I will be employing heights or wides in my new system and I'm torn between the AZ's and the Classic 2's. I'm leaning towards the AZ because they are smaller and will be easier to place in my narrow room (24L x 11W x 7H). Will I lose much using the AZ's over the C2's as Wides/Heights??

Haven't decided on a Sub yet, might go with the NHT Absolute 5.1T System (upgrading to the TwoC) & b-10d. My room is T shaped which adds to the cubic footage. The extra space puts the room about 2300 cu ft. I just wonder if the b-10d will be enough or I'll need to upgrade to the b-12d.

classic fours

This migh be a bit off topic...but, i just noticed on ebay a pair of fours and a 3c center

Positronic,

Connect an ohmeter to the - terminal on the back of the cabinet and to the + terminal that connects to the midrange driver. The resistance should be under 1 ohm or so. If it is open circuit, then the Molex connector between the midrange chamber and the crossover PCB has probably come undone.

If not, remove all of the perimeter screws that hold the wood baffle to the aluminum extrusion in front. Remove the baffle. All of the drivers will come out with it. The crossover is mounted on the back of the midrange enclosure. Place a jumper wire across capacitor C2 (75uf). If that makes the midrange driver work, then C2 is blown. Other than that, there is probably a broken connection or lifted solder pad somewhere.

Great to see you here again Jack!

Hey Ray,
Just wanted to let you know that I got the microphone and did the set up and wow!, what a difference!
The system now sounds much clearer.
Thanks again for your advice.
Helier

Glad to be of help, always welcome. Enjoy your system Helier!

I'm finally upgrading my 10+ year old system and I've decided on Absolute Towers and the TwoC as my front sound stage. I currently have 4 SuperOne's as surround speakers and plan on keeping those for the time being. I wish I could hear these baby's in action before I purchased them, but there's no showroom near where I live. I'm going off of my previous experience with NHT and a lot of the reviews on here.

I have a couple of questions before I pull the trigger, however. I'm currently using a VS 1.2a as my center channel, will the TwoC be a significant improvement over the VS 1.2a?? I figure the TwoC will match with the AT's better.

I will be employing heights or wides in my new system and I'm torn between the AZ's and the Classic 2's. I'm leaning towards the AZ because they are smaller and will be easier to place in my narrow room (24L x 11W x 7H). Will I lose much using the AZ's over the C2's as Wides/Heights??

Haven't decided on a Sub yet, might go with the NHT Absolute 5.1T System (upgrading to the TwoC) & b-10d. My room is T shaped which adds to the cubic footage. The extra space puts the room about 2300 cu ft. I just wonder if the b-10d will be enough or I'll need to upgrade to the b-12d.

Hi! That would be a great upgrade. As for the Two C, yes, I thing you'll find it a better center - much better dispersion. But, if you can go with the Three C, it would give you better output and would match the AT's just fine. As for the heights/wides the AZ's would be just fine, the main difference is the crossover - you would just need to raise it a little compared to the C2. I actually feel that the AZ's would be better for the heights as they are a bit better off axis than the C2's due to the smaller baffle. I'm actually using the AZ's for my wides (not using heights since it's not really beneficial for the size of my room) with my mains being the Fours/ThreeC with great success.

AS for your sub, I'd recommend going with the B-12d. That is a fairly large room to compress for the B-10d. You could easily use 2 subs, but one may suffice depending on your listening habits (if listening at reference levels, the one sub may be pushing pretty hard in your room).

Have fun with your upgrade! I think you'll love it!

Ray

Thanks for the advice Jack. I tried to take off the front panel after removing 8 screws but it didn't want to cone off easily. Do I need to remove the top and bottom "end caps"?

I managed to find a replacement L5 on craigslist, so I'm keeping the blown one for spare parts.

I want to replace my 16 year old speakers with the Two C and Absolute Towers. I have a 73" DLP TV sitting on a Sanus cabinet which has a 26" wide opening for a center channel speaker. I believe the Two C is just under 20" wide so there is plenty of room. And finally, there are no back panels on the cabinet.

Does anyone have the Two C inside a cabinet? If so, how does it sound. I'm just wondering how much the cabinet changes the sonic characteristics of the speaker.

Thank you
Jim

I am looking to buy a new receiver and am curious, would the Denon 3311 have enough "oomph" to power 2 AT's, a 2C and four SuperOne surrounds? I want to make sure I give these speakers all the power they need ( though FYI, I don't listen to them above reference very often at all). Thanks.

The Denon 3311 should have no problem giving you the power you need, unless you have a very large room listening at reference levels (what is the size of your room?).

The Denon 3311 should have no problem giving you the power you need, unless you have a very large room listening at reference levels (what is the size of your room?).

About 2300 square feet

About 2300 square feet

If you are serious, then you need some serious amps, not a receiver

If you are serious, then you need some serious amps, not a receiver

Cubic feet, sorry :)

Cubic feet, sorry :)

So that being the case, what should I be looking for as far as minimum power needed to fully drive these guys?

But, if you can go with the Three C, it would give you better output and would match the AT's just fine.

+1... the Center Channel upgrade is money well spent!

Just a general question to all NHT owners, looking to transition from a Klipsch reference setup to a NHT or Revel bookshelf setup.

Does material in drivers give a difference in tonal characteristics?

Absolute Zeros use a polypropylene woofer and aluminum tweeter and the 2C center uses aluminum woofers and anodized tweeter and midrange. NHT website says the match all speakers in Classic series, but has anyone noticed a difference?

Absolute Zeros use a polypropylene woofer and aluminum tweeter and the 2C center uses aluminum woofers and anodized tweeter and midrange. NHT website says the match all speakers in Classic series, but has anyone noticed a difference?

I've wondered about this too...

The whole idea that one speaker with different crossovers, drivers and cabinets is actually truly timbre matched is partly wishful thinking. Yes they do sound similar but I would easily be able to tell the different between a NHT Absolute Zero with the Classic 3, but they are close enough that it becomes a non-issue.

This is not critizing NHT but other makers are also guilty of this. Your best bet is to buy identical speakers, (easy for NHT since you can buy them individually)

Thanks Warpdrive! I feel the same way.

My Klipsch reference IV set-up has matching drivers, but crossovers are not identical as well as cabinet size, which I believe has an effect on tonal balance between them. They are in fact similar, but I can still tell a difference between them. Rf-52 fronts, rc-52 center, and rb-51 surrounds.
Not picking on NHT either, its just one of the brands I was looking into getting. 5 identical speakers was my original plan, but reading some posts on the NHT thread suggested that the 3-way centers were actually better at dialogue. True?
Just curious if the Absolute zero set-up would be an "upgrade" to the klipsch reference set-up? Looking for more quality than quantity.
Anyone gone down this path that could share some experiences? Regrets?

The whole idea that one speaker with different crossovers, drivers and cabinets is actually truly timbre matched is partly wishful thinking. Yes they do sound similar but I would easily be able to tell the different between a NHT Absolute Zero with the Classic 3, but they are close enough that it becomes a non-issue.

This is not critizing NHT but other makers are also guilty of this. Your best bet is to buy identical speakers, (easy for NHT since you can buy them individually)

Thanks warpdrive.

And you're right, this isn't a knock on NHT... Hell, my Energy RC-10 and RC-LCR have a slightly different timbre as well, despite using the same tweeter and woofers.

The 2" inverted dome midranges of the LCR impart their own characteristics on the sound that differ from the RC-10. Still, I find that they do blend well enough as a front stage.

So I would never expect the AZ and 2C to have an identical timbre... More so asking if they manage to blend well... despite their driver differences.

I want to add... based on the Ultimate AV Mag showing the off axis performance of the 3C, and I'd expect the 2C to show similar results here as well... The 3C showed a pretty severe suckout around 700-800Hz at 45 degrees and greater. So beyond 30 degrees off axis, despite being a 3-way design, the performance begins to suffer from typical lobing effects.

I'd speculate that a singe AZ (vertically oriented of course) would actually perform better off axis (>30 degrees) than the 2C. Sound and Vision mag commented on the stellar off axis performance of the AT and AZ, showing only the "expected" treble roll-off.

So if far off axis performance is a concern... then AZ might be the better option... provided you can place it upright.

Of course, that's just one factor... and the 2C might be clearer for dialogue, and is probably a bit better in terms of dynamic ability...

Looks like Stehen Mejias will be writing about the SZ 2.0. (Was NHT smart enough to send the sub with it?)


RIOidwcBljs

Looks like Stehen Mejias will be writing about the SZ 2.0. (Was NHT smart enough to send the sub with it?)

I hope they did. I think it's a really hard speaker to listen to without a sub (at least the first SZ was). But I've gotten the impression in the past that SM doesn't really like subs.

I hope RJR does a follow-up, at least.

I hope they did. I think it's a really hard speaker to listen to without a sub (at least the first SZ was). But I've gotten the impression in the past that SM doesn't really like subs.

I hope RJR does a follow-up, at least.

And two of NHT's worst press moments occurred when Stereo Review did group reviews of 5-6 speakers that included the SZ and then the SB1, both getting panned badly compared to the others that actually had bass.

Newest review:

http://stereotimes.com/speak051711.shtml

I'm new to NHT speakers, but I'm trading for some used Classic Fours and a Classic Three Center. I've found a used Classic 10 subwoofer (NHT N-10B) for about $100. I couldn't find much information on this model, and NHT told me that it was discontinued a year or so ago. They strongly recommended the current models (which look like cubes, rather than having the curved top and oblong shape of the Classic 10). The current 10" sells for the same price as the older Classic 10 on Amazon (about $500). It looks like the Classic 10 is ported, and quite a bit larger. I think the new ones are acoustic suspension. I'm very tempted to get the used Classic 10 because of the low price, but I don't want to waste money on something that won't be a good match with my Classic Fours, or that has other problems.

I've spent hours going through this very long thread looking for information on the Classic 10, but didn't find much (except some indication that is isn't great), but I might have missed the discussion (it would take me a week to read though everything). I'm sure the new ones are better, but are they worth several times the cost?

Any advice?

Thanks

Doug

As I mentioned in my previous question about the subwoofer, I'm trading soon for some NHT Classic Four front speakers, and a Classic 3C (center). I've found someone else who is selling a pair of Classic 2's, and I'm thinking of getting them as my rear/surround speakers. I'd like to get Classic 3's for this purpose, but new ones are way over my current budget, and I can probably get a good deal on the used 2s. I know the drivers are different from the 3s and 4s, but I understand that they still match up pretty well with them in this application. NHT even recommended the smaller Zero series for this purpose. What do you think? I'm not going to be able to audition any of these in advance, but based on the reviews I've read and their retail cost, I think I'll be making a significant upgrade to my current 20-year-old speaker system for a pretty minimal investment.

I'm new to NHT speakers, but I'm trading for some used Classic Fours and a Classic Three Center. I've found a used Classic 10 subwoofer (NHT N-10B) for about $100. I couldn't find much information on this model, and NHT told me that it was discontinued a year or so ago. They strongly recommended the current models (which look like cubes, rather than having the curved top and oblong shape of the Classic 10). The current 10" sells for the same price as the older Classic 10 on Amazon (about $500). It looks like the Classic 10 is ported, and quite a bit larger. I think the new ones are acoustic suspension. I'm very tempted to get the used Classic 10 because of the low price, but I don't want to waste money on something that won't be a good match with my Classic Fours, or that has other problems.

Given that the Fours already have two 10" subs, the Classic Ten isn't going to add much. You could argue that maybe it's worthwhile if you're running the Fours as large speakers and just using the Ten to enhance your center and rear channels, but I think the Fours could do a decent job of that same task. Even a 12" sub might not add much.

My advice would be to get the Fours and see how you think they do on their own, then shop for the subwoofer if you still think you need it. I wouldn't go less than 12" on the sub, though.

I used to have the SW12, which was a fairly similar design to the Classic Twelve. I was never particularly thrilled with it, and I was using it to augment bookshelf, not tower speakers.

As I mentioned in my previous question about the subwoofer, I'm trading soon for some NHT Classic Four front speakers, and a Classic 3C (center). I've found someone else who is selling a pair of Classic 2's, and I'm thinking of getting them as my rear/surround speakers. I'd like to get Classic 3's for this purpose, but new ones are way over my current budget, and I can probably get a good deal on the used 2s. I know the drivers are different from the 3s and 4s, but I understand that they still match up pretty well with them in this application. NHT even recommended the smaller Zero series for this purpose. What do you think? I'm not going to be able to audition any of these in advance, but based on the reviews I've read and their retail cost, I think I'll be making a significant upgrade to my current 20-year-old speaker system for a pretty minimal investment.

Twos should be fine. I used AZs as surrounds with Threes for quite some time. The match isn't perfect but for home theater I think it's fine. If you're going to do a lot of multichannel music you might find the match is problematic. But I never wished I had ponied up for Twos or Threes.

I think if you have a system with Fours/3C/Twos, you'll be quite happy.

Mattwardfh,

Thank you for the helpful replies. It sounds like the Classic Twos will be good surrounds for me. I subsequently found out that the same person has some smaller Classic Absolute Zeros available as well, so I'm thinking about them as front high speakers. Front highs have never been a priority for me, even though my relatively new Onkyo TX-NR3008 receiver is set up to drive them, but if I can add them at relatively little cost, I might go ahead and do it. I'm assuming that I should use the larger Classic Twos as my surrounds (not the other way around) - correct? I haven't found a lot of information about front highs, but I gather that they only produce some ambient sounds extracted from the main channels, and therefore don't need to be full-range speakers that are closely matched to the main front speakers - is that correct?

I'm still debating about the Classic Ten subwoofer. I appreciate your comments, and agree that it probably won't add a lot more bass to what the Classic Fours will already provide. I'm just tempted because I can probably get the used one for under $100, so it wouldn't cost me much to add it. I'm inclined to get it if it will just add a bit more low-end volume to what the Fours will provide (i.e. reinforce them). It seems like an additional 10" cone is going to move that much more air - but maybe I'm over-simplifying this. I wouldn't even be thinking about spending $500-$600 for a subwoofer right now, but for a sub-$100 investment, it won't need to add much to be worth it. However, if it will degrade the sound (compared with just using the Fours), or will significantly complicate setup and adjustment of my system, then I'll skip it. I'm hoping the Audyssey XT32 in my receiver will be able to balance everything for me.

Thanks again.

Doug

I agree with mattwordfh, on both accounts. As far at the Two's for surround duty, it'll work out fine. I do listen to a lot of multichannel music, so did finally get the Threes at the time as they are a better blend for that purpose, but did not really notice a difference with movies (I'm now using the Twos for Wides and Zeros for Heights).

As for the sub, what he said also... the 10 will not really help with the Fours. You may be able to add a few db's, but it won't go any lower. Save up and buy a bigger, more powerful sub that can get that last 1-2 octaves correctly, that will make a difference. When you do, experiment in your room what XO to use. In mine, the best blend so far is to XO the Fours at 60HZ to the sub.

Mattwardfh,

Thank you for the helpful replies. It sounds like the Classic Twos will be good surrounds for me. I subsequently found out that the same person has some smaller Classic Absolute Zeros available as well, so I'm thinking about them as front high speakers. Front highs have never been a priority for me, even though my relatively new Onkyo TX-NR3008 receiver is set up to drive them, but if I can add them at relatively little cost, I might go ahead and do it. I'm assuming that I should use the larger Classic Twos as my surrounds (not the other way around) - correct? I haven't found a lot of information about front highs, but I gather that they only produce some ambient sounds extracted from the main channels, and therefore don't need to be full-range speakers that are closely matched to the main front speakers - is that correct?

I'm still debating about the Classic Ten subwoofer. I appreciate your comments, and agree that it probably won't add a lot more bass to what the Classic Fours will already provide. I'm just tempted because I can probably get the used one for under $100, so it wouldn't cost me much to add it. I'm inclined to get it if it will just add a bit more low-end volume to what the Fours will provide (i.e. reinforce them). It seems like an additional 10" cone is going to move that much more air - but maybe I'm over-simplifying this. I wouldn't even be thinking about spending $500-$600 for a subwoofer right now, but for a sub-$100 investment, it won't need to add much to be worth it. However, if it will degrade the sound (compared with just using the Fours), or will significantly complicate setup and adjustment of my system, then I'll skip it. I'm hoping the Audyssey XD32 in my receiver will be able to balance everything for me.

Thanks again.

Doug

Doug,

It's actually more advantageous to go with the Wides first, then the Heights. Try it out though. Yes, Audyssey XT32 will balance everything out just fine.

Mattwardfh,

Thank you for the helpful replies. It sounds like the Classic Twos will be good surrounds for me. I subsequently found out that the same person has some smaller Classic Absolute Zeros available as well, so I'm thinking about them as front high speakers. Front highs have never been a priority for me, even though my relatively new Onkyo TX-NR3008 receiver is set up to drive them, but if I can add them at relatively little cost, I might go ahead and do it. I'm assuming that I should use the larger Classic Twos as my surrounds (not the other way around) - correct? I haven't found a lot of information about front highs, but I gather that they only produce some ambient sounds extracted from the main channels, and therefore don't need to be full-range speakers that are closely matched to the main front speakers - is that correct?

I'm still debating about the Classic Ten subwoofer. I appreciate your comments, and agree that it probably won't add a lot more bass to what the Classic Fours will already provide. I'm just tempted because I can probably get the used one for under $100, so it wouldn't cost me much to add it. I'm inclined to get it if it will just add a bit more low-end volume to what the Fours will provide (i.e. reinforce them). It seems like an additional 10" cone is going to move that much more air - but maybe I'm over-simplifying this. I wouldn't even be thinking about spending $500-$600 for a subwoofer right now, but for a sub-$100 investment, it won't need to add much to be worth it. However, if it will degrade the sound (compared with just using the Fours), or will significantly complicate setup and adjustment of my system, then I'll skip it. I'm hoping the Audyssey XT32 in my receiver will be able to balance everything for me.

Thanks again.

Doug

It sounds like you have reasonable expectations for the sub. It may be useful to take over bass for the non L/R channels. Since you know what you're getting into, $100 is probably worth a shot.

That sure is a cheap price for the sub, though. The Ten and a nice bookshelf speaker (I'm assuming you'd seek another great price deal) that goes down to 50-60 HZ sure could make for a nice 2nd system.

Get the sub and the Zeros for a bedroom / office / kitchen system.

Get the sub and the Zeros for a bedroom / office / kitchen system.

Great idea! Especially at those prices!

The new zero's and matching sub are featured in a review in the newest Home Theater Magazine. The measurements show virtually perfect integration with the sub. The zero's themselves measure about +3/-3, so they are not as flat as the Classics.

Brian

Thanks for all the input and good suggestions. I was ready to buy the Classic 10 subwoofer, but it had already sold. I still may have a chance a the Zeros and/or the Twos.

Thanks

Doug

Seems like Mark Fleischmann liked the SZ system better than the AZ system. I gather he found the SZs more forgiving and ingratiating. The SZ measurements sure looked inferior to the AZ's , though- there's a good-sized boost at 1KZ and some peaks and valleys. The sub had a nice looking curve- very flat and uniform from 40-110 HZ, flatter than that of the Classic 10.

He mentioned the Classic 10 sub being localized with the 100HZ crossover and the AZs, something he didn't mention with the SZ-Super 8 or even a cube system like the Cambridge Minx or a little one from Polk. It has seemed like he has had better things to say about all of the small budget systems he's reviewed after the AZ system. (One thing that has bugged me was that the HT and S&V reviews of the AZ and AT systems included the Tens- surely NHT knew that the new ones were coming soon and could have urged both mags to wait a couple of months.)

Cambridge Minx:

http://www.hometheater.com/images/611camb.meas.jpg

AZ-Ten:

http://www.hometheater.com/images/archivesart/1110nht.meas.jpg

Boston Acoustics A25 system ($1200, which MF really seemed to love):

http://www.hometheater.com/images/611boston.meas.jpg

I have a pair of AT mains along with a 2C center and super one surrounds. I am in the market for a new receiver and am curious, how many watts per channel should I be looking for to drive this setup? Don't need anything too overpowering for the time being, but don't want to sell the speakers short either. Thanks!

I have a pair of AT mains along with a 2C center and super one surrounds. I am in the market for a new receiver and am curious, how many watts per channel should I be looking for to drive this setup? Don't need anything too overpowering for the time being, but don't want to sell the speakers short either. Thanks!

I should clarify I am running a 7.1 setup. I am guessing the answer is around 90 watts/channel, but would appreciate some assistance!

I should clarify I am running a 7.1 setup. I am guessing the answer is around 90 watts/channel, but would appreciate some assistance!

How big is your room?

My old system was roughly similar and sounded great with an NAD T753 at 65 watts per channel. I'd focus on being sure you're getting a good receiver over worrying about the wattages, since wattage ratings are so unreliable.

How big is your room?

My old system was roughly similar and sounded great with an NAD T753 at 65 watts per channel. I'd focus on being sure you're getting a good receiver over worrying about the wattages, since wattage ratings are so unreliable.

The room is about 2300 cubic feet so not insanely large. The main reason I ask is I have been looking at the new offerings from Denon and given the fact that the 2112 and 3312 have basically the same audio performance outside of wattage, I would like to know if I even need the extra headroom. Please let me know and thanks for the response!

The room is about 2300 cubic feet so not insanely large. The main reason I ask is I have been looking at the new offerings from Denon and given the fact that the 2112 and 3312 have basically the same audio performance outside of wattage, I would like to know if I even need the extra headroom. Please let me know and thanks for the response!

I'm not familiar with those models, but assuming they're rated accurately, the 2112 is probably fine. How loud do you usually listen?

I'm not familiar with those models, but assuming they're rated accurately, the 2112 is probably fine. How loud do you usually listen?

At a little below reference level. So would the 2112 be enough for what I have or should I go for more power? Would SQ also be comparable to like a 4311 (outside of the XT32 benefit)

At a little below reference level. So would the 2112 be enough for what I have or should I go for more power? Would SQ also be comparable to like a 4311 (outside of the XT32 benefit)

It's hard to tell. I suspect you'll be happy with the 2112, but I'd hate to advise you to make a wrong choice. Is there a place you could buy from with a good return policy?

On the other hand, sometimes it's good to overbuy and know you're getting the most out of your speakers.

It's hard to tell. I suspect you'll be happy with the 2112, but I'd hate to advise you to make a wrong choice. Is there a place you could buy from with a good return policy?

On the other hand, sometimes it's good to overbuy and know you're getting the most out of your speakers.

Yea, there is just SUCH a large price difference between like. 2112 and 4311 :P

Yea, there is just SUCH a large price difference between like. 2112 and 4311 :P

Hi. Just giving my 2 cents here. I think the 2112 will suit you just fine, it will power your NHTs with no problem. The 2112 and the 4311 are different animals though, quite a big difference but may not be necessary in your room (XT32 is much better than XT and it also has SUB EQ for dual subs, but not an issue if you are only using one sub). I've used Denon's for years, and the quality does go up on each series. Point of diminishing returns occurs after the 3XXX series. You have to really get what fits your needs and budget. I have the A100 (same as the 4311), a 4310, and a 2310. All good, but very different from each other. I also have a NAD T-785, beast of an AVR with XT and for me XT32 was worth the upgrade even though the NAD has a much better amp section (Audyssey made a bigger difference in the sound).

The most important piece IMO is the speakers, and you have a nice set. Second most important thing is your setup (speaker placement and sub placement). If you get that right, you'll be very happy with the end results. The 2112 will most likely have more than enough power as for most listening levels use only several watts (only to tap more for peaks). If it has the options/features that you want, it'll be just fine.

Have fun!
Ray

Hi. Just giving my 2 cents here. I think the 2112 will suit you just fine, it will power your NHTs with no problem. The 2112 and the 4311 are different animals though, quite a big difference but may not be necessary in your room (XT32 is much better than XT and it also has SUB EQ for dual subs, but not an issue if you are only using one sub). I've used Denon's for years, and the quality does go up on each series. Point of diminishing returns occurs after the 3XXX series. You have to really get what fits your needs and budget. I have the A100 (same as the 4311), a 4310, and a 2310. All good, but very different from each other. I also have a NAD T-785, beast of an AVR with XT and for me XT32 was worth the upgrade even though the NAD has a much better amp section (Audyssey made a bigger difference in the sound).

The most important piece IMO is the speakers, and you have a nice set. Second most important thing is your setup (speaker placement and sub placement). If you get that right, you'll be very happy with the end results. The 2112 will most likely have more than enough power as for most listening levels use only several watts (only to tap more for peaks). If it has the options/features that you want, it'll be just fine.

Have fun!
Ray

Just as i start thinking about the 4311 again...:P Main concern is SQ for me, and from what I can tell the 2112 is basically identical to the 3312 in that regard. I kind of figured you reach the point of diminishing returns from there.

I do only have one sub at the moment, but even if that's the case I still hear that XT32 can give you a big boost in sound quality, and I do have a goofy room geometry. Don't know if the internal component upgrade would also make any significant difference or not. Thoughts?

Just as i start thinking about the 4311 again...:P Main concern is SQ for me, and from what I can tell the 2112 is basically identical to the 3312 in that regard. I kind of figured you reach the point of diminishing returns from there.

I do only have one sub at the moment, but even if that's the case I still hear that XT32 can give you a big boost in sound quality, and I do have a goofy room geometry. Don't know if the internal component upgrade would also make any significant difference or not. Thoughts?

Ok, if you are really concerned with having the best SQ, then yes, go with the 4311. Also, the more problematic the room the more XT32 will make BIG difference. My room is almost square, so it's well treated with broadband traps. XT32 was still an 'upgrade' for me from XT. I think you'll find that in your case with an odd room. My XT AVR's were very good and I can easily tell the difference (just feel that most would be very happy with the lesser). But, if you're on the fence, you'll always be wondering and I think you should pull the trigger on the 4311, as long as your finances allow. Also, you can add another sub down the road (needs to be the same quality as what you have, not a good idea to have one real good one and one lesser).

Let us know your decision and keep us posted on you progress once you have it set up. I'm very familiar with Denon and NAD equipment, so ask away if you have any questions (there are dedicated threads on them also, the 4311 has a very extensive one as you already know).

Have Fun!

Ok, if you are really concerned with having the best SQ, then yes, go with the 4311. Also, the more problematic the room the more XT32 will make BIG difference. My room is almost square, so it's well treated with broadband traps. XT32 was still an 'upgrade' for me from XT. I think you'll find that in your case with an odd room. My XT AVR's were very good and I can easily tell the difference (just feel that most would be very happy with the lesser). But, if you're on the fence, you'll always be wondering and I think you should pull the trigger on the 4311, as long as your finances allow. Also, you can add another sub down the road (needs to be the same quality as what you have, not a good idea to have one real good one and one lesser).

Let us know your decision and keep us posted on you progress once you have it set up. I'm very familiar with Denon and NAD equipment, so ask away if you have any questions (there are dedicated threads on them also, the 4311 has a very extensive one as you already know).

Have Fun!

Thanks much for your help. I ended up pulling the trigger on a 4311. Can't wait :). Will keep you posted on how setup goes.

Thanks much for your help. I ended up pulling the trigger on a 4311. Can't wait :). Will keep you posted on how setup goes.

Congrats! I think you'll be happy. Enjoy.

^^^ Yep, congrats! You're going to love it.

How closely matched are SB1/SB2/SB3s to M5s and M6s? Do the SBs use the same tweeter? Same woofers?

I am thinking about using SBs as rears with three M6s (or three M5s) across the front.

From NHT's Facebook page...

"If you're on the fence, you may want to make your move this month to get those new NHT's in your house, studio or office. The inevitable price increases we have put off for almost 1 year will take effect July 1, 2011. Most Classic models are effected."

I know I'm not imagining things... and there was a price increase not long ago..

In fact, the following post by mark russ in Oct 2010 mentions the Two C being only $50 more than the Absolute Center... http://ww.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=19379057&postcount=9069 ....so at that time, they were still $300 and $200 respectively.

I find it a little insulting for NHT to claim they've put off a price increase for almost a year, when they just increased prices 6-7 months ago.

Why not just shoot straight?...ie. recognize prices went up recently, but state they need to go up again. Don't spin it like the company did the consumers a favor for "almost a year".

How closely matched are SB1/SB2/SB3s to M5s and M6s? Do the SBs use the same tweeter? Same woofers?

I am thinking about using SBs as rears with three M6s (or three M5s) across the front.

They are not perfectly matched, the M6s are a different line all together. But, having said that, the SB's will be fine for the rears. If you are using a correction system like Audyssey, then the differences are even further diminished.

Have fun with them!

Ray

NHT announced the new pricing of the Classic series on facebook today.

"Quick reminder to our valued FB Fans - Classic price increases go into effect July 1: AbsoluteZero to $199, Two to $299, Three to $399, Four to $999, AbsoluteCenter to $299, TwoC to $399, ThreeC to $499. The SuperZero 2.0, all the subs, Absolute Tower's stay at their current prices - no change. If you got the itch, you might want to take advantage of current pricing soon. Thanks!"

Prices in Nov of 2010 were (correct me if I'm wrong):
Absolute Zero - $149
Absolute Center - $199
Two - $199
TwoC - $299
Three - $299
Three C - $399

Which were raised to:
Absolute Zero - $175
Absolute Center - $250
Two - $225
TwoC - $350
Three - $325
Three C - $450

So in 7 months time, the bookshelves have gone up $50 each, and the centers up $100 each. If they keep this up, in another year or so they'll be back to the old B&M retail pricing... they days when the Absolute Zero's were $249 each IIRC.

Such a shame... I've recently been able to demo and own some of NHT's speakers, and I like their sound. Their products are very well built too.

But these climbing prices are killing the value IMO... and I guess in the future I'll be looking elsewhere again.

$600 for the Classic Twos is an 'alternate universe' price. I've owned NHTs since '94, but, if one doesn't have an absolute requirement for acoustic suspension speakers, they are not remotely competitive- in a 'value' sense- with a veritable horde of $300-500 contenders.

$400 for a 5+ year old design that is of no interest to anyone without an accompanying sub is a stretch.

It sure does make the SZs comparatively appealing, though.

There's a nht pvc pc being sold with 1/4 output and XLR 1/4 input, which is different from the one in NHT website. Does anyone know if the one in ebay is an older model or something?

$600 for the Classic Twos is an 'alternate universe' price. I've owned NHTs since '94, but, if one doesn't have an absolute requirement for acoustic suspension speakers, they are not remotely competitive- in a 'value' sense- with a veritable horde of $300-500 contenders.

$400 for a 5+ year old design that is of no interest to anyone without an accompanying sub is a stretch.

This is exactly the point I was getting at too... and I completely agree.

NHT re-emerges in '09 as "Factory Direct" with pricing matching the "closeout" pricing before the shutdown... but 2 years later, pricing is $50 higher per bookshelf and $100 higher per center... and this price increase happened in a span of just 7 months. All the while, NHT is "Factory Direct" without the overheard of dealing exclusively through B&M brands... and, they're still using a design that was released on '06.

They have everything in place to have these speakers made in China, using a design that's been used for the past 5+ years.

NHT blames increasing production costs resulting from increasing costs of materials/fuel.... but I the price increases seem steep to me.

The competition is tough, and NHT is pricing itself right into territory of speakers that easily best their offerings at that price point.

I have a pair of Absolute Zero's... and I like them alot... but as you said... $400 for them is too high... I wouldn't pay that for them.... I wouldn't have paid $350 for them either.

Such a shame... I've recently been able to demo and own some of NHT's speakers, and I like their sound. Their products are very well built too.

But these climbing prices are killing the value IMO... and I guess in the future I'll be looking elsewhere again.

With the competition out there - I can not strongly rerccomend NHT,
with their price changes.

NHT seems to have ditched Sherwood electronics and replaced them with Marantz. (Now that's more like it.)

I wonder how many of those $100 receivers up and died?

With the competition out there - I can not strongly rerccomend NHT,
with their price changes.

I don't know... PSB for example offers the image b-5 for $400. It has a 5.25" mid and a 1" tweeter. The imagine mini goes for anywhere from $759-$829 and has a smaller woofer and a 1" tweeter. Same basic dimension as the absolute zero yet I have not heard similar complaints. The NHT classic 3 goes for $800 which is what it went for at it's inception 5 years ago... The PSB imagine B goes for $1000, the Focal 800 series bookshelfs go for $900 and $1100, the ERA d-5 goes for $900, while Monitor audios silver RX-2's go from $850-$1000, polks lsi-m bookshelf is priced at $1500.
I do not see how NHT has priced itself out of the affordable speaker market.

As far as the design being 5 years old, why would that matter ? Would it be better if they repackaged the speakers every 2 years and said: here is the newest iteration which is basically the last iteration ? Good engineering is good engineering, so while there are more than likely plans in the works to replace the classic series I don't see a pressing need to do so. Their new line of subs are good performers... better than my HSU which went way out of it's way to make itself heard.

I don't know... PSB for example offers the image b-5 for $400. It has a 5.25" mid and a 1" tweeter. The imagine mini goes for anywhere from $759-$829 and has a smaller woofer and a 1" tweeter. Same basic dimension as the absolute zero yet I have not heard similar complaints. The NHT classic 3 goes for $800 which is what it went for at it's inception 5 years ago... The PSB imagine B goes for $1000, the Focal 800 series bookshelfs go for $900 and $1100, the ERA d-5 goes for $900, while Monitor audios silver RX-2's go from $850-$1000, polks lsi-m bookshelf is priced at $1500.
I do not see how NHT has priced itself out of the affordable speaker market.I don't think that was the point most were making. More the one you made without meaning to: it's one of many very good speakers people should consider at the price point (you listed some), rather than a confident and quick recommendation to just go get the NHTs, you don't have to think about it too much.

As far as the design being 5 years old, why would that matter ? Would it be better if they repackaged the speakers every 2 years and said: here is the newest iteration which is basically the last iteration ? Good engineering is good engineering, so while there are more than likely plans in the works to replace the classic series I don't see a pressing need to do so. What you say is true, but unfortunately speakers are something of a fashion industry. Preferences change, and to meet changing styles and to get press coverage, speaker companies have to keep updating to give the market what it wants and to create news. In the real world, they need to face that. Plus, other companies aren't standing still in terms of cost, features, engineering and style.

I don't think that was the point most were making. More the one you made without meaning to: it's one of many very good speakers people should consider at the price point (you listed some), rather than a confident and quick recommendation to just go get the NHTs, you don't have to think about it too much.

What you say is true, but unfortunately speakers are something of a fashion industry. Preferences change, and to meet changing styles and to get press coverage, speaker companies have to keep updating to give the market what it wants and to create news. In the real world, they need to face that. Plus, other companies aren't standing still in terms of cost, features, engineering and style.

Actually Buzz I stated my point in plain words, which was that NHT has not priced itself out of the affordable speaker market. I was responding to the point(s) made about not being able to recommend the brand... I gave examples as to why they should be a consideration.

Companies are not standing still in terms of cost I agree. Which companies are dropping the prices on their speakers ? I see the introduction of new lines which are high priced but ? NHT has released a lower priced absolute tower (which by the way has stayed at the same price), and reintroduced the very affordable superzero 2 (which also has stayed at the same price).
I agree that releasing new products creates a buzz, but not every company may have the wherewithal (or see the reason)to do so. Some (like NHT) may offer good performing products at a reasonable (based upon the competition) price.

I suppose then for the most part we agree.

Anyone know what happened to Mark Russ? Looks like he hasn't posted since February. Did I miss a train wreck here? Hope he's doing okay. Tried to send him a PM, but it looks like he has disabled the function on his end.

I don't know... PSB for example offers the image b-5 for $400. It has a 5.25" mid and a 1" tweeter. The imagine mini goes for anywhere from $759-$829 and has a smaller woofer and a 1" tweeter. Same basic dimension as the absolute zero yet I have not heard similar complaints. The NHT classic 3 goes for $800 which is what it went for at it's inception 5 years ago... The PSB imagine B goes for $1000, the Focal 800 series bookshelfs go for $900 and $1100, the ERA d-5 goes for $900, while Monitor audios silver RX-2's go from $850-$1000, polks lsi-m bookshelf is priced at $1500.
I do not see how NHT has priced itself out of the affordable speaker market.

As far as the design being 5 years old, why would that matter ? Would it be better if they repackaged the speakers every 2 years and said: here is the newest iteration which is basically the last iteration ? Good engineering is good engineering, so while there are more than likely plans in the works to replace the classic series I don't see a pressing need to do so. Their new line of subs are good performers... better than my HSU which went way out of it's way to make itself heard.

You will always be able to find speakers that are more expensive than NHT's... and some will offer less performance at that higher price...

But there are alot of good products that cost the same or less than NHT's products... and by raising their prices yet again, NHT keeps pushing their products into competition with higher priced products. It's not really that NHT is pricing itself completely out of the affordable market... Just that it's pricing itself into higher priced competition.

Look at your PSB Image B5 vs. NHT Absolute Zero comparison. In Nov of 2011, the AZ was in direct competion with the Image B4 at $300. Eight months later, that same pair of Absolute Zero's is now in direct competition with the Image B5 at $400.

The B5 is alot more capable of a speaker at that price. The AZ is a good speaker, and very well built... but it's small and inefficient as hell. I own a pair of PSB Image B4's, and they easily play louder than the AZ. I have no doubt the B5 is much more dynamic, plays louder without strain, and plays deeper than the AZ...

So again, my point is that the result of NHT's rising prices is that their speakers are now in direct competition with higher priced products than they were before (assuming the competitor hasn't raised prices), and in some of those cases (not all of course), with that higher price comes more performance from said competition.

so again, my point is that the result of nht's rising prices is that their speakers are now in direct competition with higher priced products than they were before (assuming the competitor hasn't raised prices), and in some of those cases (not all of course), with that higher price comes more performance from said competition.

x2

You will always be able to find speakers that are more expensive than NHT's... and some will offer less performance at that higher price...

But there are alot of good products that cost the same or less than NHT's products... and by raising their prices yet again, NHT keeps pushing their products into competition with higher priced products. It's not really that NHT is pricing itself completely out of the affordable market... Just that it's pricing itself into higher priced competition.

Look at your PSB Image B5 vs. NHT Absolute Zero comparison. In Nov of 2011, the AZ was in direct competion with the Image B4 at $300. Eight months later, that same pair of Absolute Zero's is now in direct competition with the Image B5 at $400.

The B5 is alot more capable of a speaker at that price. The AZ is a good speaker, and very well built... but it's small and inefficient as hell. I own a pair of PSB Image B4's, and they easily play louder than the AZ. I have no doubt the B5 is much more dynamic, plays louder without strain, and plays deeper than the AZ...

So again, my point is that the result of NHT's rising prices is that their speakers are now in direct competition with higher priced products than they were before (assuming the competitor hasn't raised prices), and in some of those cases (not all of course), with that higher price comes more performance from said competition.

So the B5 is more capable because it is more efficient ? Why is it more efficient, because it is ported ? Does a sealed design have advantages over a ported design ? If you have a amp with a properly designed power supply, then the NHT's will not be an issue. Look at the measurements in stereophile for the classic 3.

I gave multiple examples of speakers that the NHT's are in direct competition with. I don't know how you feel they priced themselves out of the market. Some may do some things better than the NHT's and vice versa, as we all know it is a matter of tradeoffs. Speaker companies with multiple lines have their top models priced much higher than the NHT classic series. Don't forget NHT lowered prices before they raised them back to 2006 levels.

I understand you do not like price increases. nobody does. Vote with your dollars; I have and am satisfied.

Again the model that sticks out like the proverbial sore thumb is the Two. The Three seems fine at $800, it being a more unique speaker.

But... unless I knew someone who absolutely had to have a 6", acoustic suspension 2-way at no more than a foot tall, I'd have to point them toward (in no order):

PSB Image B6- $500
PSB Image B5- $400
Paradigm MiniMonitor- $480(?)
Axiom M3, V3- $348
Axiom M22, V3- $488
Monitor Audio Bronze BX2- ($489)
Wharfedale Diamond 10.1- ($350)
Boston Acoustics A26- (400)
Infinity Primus 162- ($170 shipped)
NHT SuperZero 2.0/Super 8 ($500 shipped)

I'm too lazy to go further. (But you'll note the last candidate.:)) My son has a pair of Polk RTi4s, which can still be gotten for $150 shipped, that is overall at least equal to my SB2s. It has an (sometimes pleasing, sometimes not) upper bass boost that is a deviation from neutrality, but it's smoother and sweeter with most music and plays louder without strain/pain. The SB2s certainly image more precisely and are more accurate, but they also can be more tiring. (A good bit of that may be the NAD C340 integrated not being the smoothest thing around.)

Same deal, to a lesser extent, with the AZ. It's limited to being a satellite, and one which apparently shouldn't be crossed over at 80 HZ.

The subs all seem well-priced, assuming they sound as good as I think they must.

Again the model that sticks out like the proverbial sore thumb is the Two. The Three seems fine at $800, it being a more unique speaker.

But... unless I knew someone who absolutely had to have a 6", acoustic suspension 2-way at no more than a foot tall, I'd have to point them toward (in no order):

PSB Image B6- $500
PSB Image B5- $400
Paradigm MiniMonitor- $480(?)
Axiom M3, V3- $348
Axiom M22, V3- $488
Monitor Audio Bronze BX2- ($489)
Wharfedale Diamond 10.1- ($350)
Boston Acoustics A26- (400)
Infinity Primus 162- ($170 shipped)
NHT SuperZero 2.0/Super 8 ($500 shipped)

I'm too lazy to go further. (But you'll note the last candidate.:)) My son has a pair of Polk RTi4s, which can still be gotten for $150 shipped, that is overall at least equal to my SB2s. It has an (sometimes pleasing, sometimes not) upper bass boost that is a deviation from neutrality, but it's smoother and sweeter with most music and plays louder without strain/pain. The SB2s certainly image more precisely and are more accurate, but they also can be more tiring. (A good bit of that may be the NAD C340 integrated not being the smoothest thing around.)

Same deal, to a lesser extent, with the AZ. It's limited to being a satellite, and one which apparently shouldn't be crossed over at 80 HZ.

The subs all seem well-priced, assuming they sound as good as I think they must.

You know what the two has always stood out. I would go as far as to say it is basically unnecessary. I own the classic 3's and the zero's with a b-10 d sub. For me I was able to get the $100 from NHT for buying the sub within the first month of release. I put this down on the zero's before the most recent price increase, so I got a very good deal. To be honest if a person was willing to drop $500, I would simply tell them to wait and go up to the 3's budget of $800, as the extra outlay would be worth it. I was able to get the 3's on a closeout deal years ago for $550 which was wonderful; but even at full price I don't see the 3's as a bad deal at all. More than one review of one of it's competitors (which I was considering) the imagine B comment on it's "over ripe" midbass, which is something you will not hear about an NHT with it being a sealed design. It is about tradeoffs and the NHT's based upon their design simply do some things quite well (I am also partial to gloss black).

I think we can all agree that to get the most out of any bookshelf you would need to pair it with a sub. Yes the zero doesn't do bass well, which isn't a surprise based upon it's size. However the zero does mids and highs quite well. It's a tough market out there, and as I said I think NHT is a viable option amongst many very good alternatives.

So the B5 is more capable because it is more efficient ? Why is it more efficient, because it is ported ? Does a sealed design have advantages over a ported design ? If you have a amp with a properly designed power supply, then the NHT's will not be an issue. Look at the measurements in stereophile for the classic 3.

I gave multiple examples of speakers that the NHT's are in direct competition with. I don't know how you feel they priced themselves out of the market. Some may do some things better than the NHT's and vice versa, as we all know it is a matter of tradeoffs. Speaker companies with multiple lines have their top models priced much higher than the NHT classic series. Don't forget NHT lowered prices before they raised them back to 2006 levels.

I understand you do not like price increases. nobody does. Vote with your dollars; I have and am satisfied.

I've seen the measurements of the Classic 3 in Stereophile, Home Theater Mag, and Soundstage... It measures extremely well. I've seen the measurements of the AZ at both Home Theater Mag and Sound & Vision... The AZ also measures extremely well... No doubt NHT makes great products... I'm not arguing against that.

And again... I'm arguing they're pricing themselves against higher prices competition.... not necessarily pricing themselves out of the market altogether.

And yes, NHT lowered prices when they came back... AS FACTORY DIRECT... without the overhead of selling through B&M dealers... The price should have lowered as that is the big argument for the ID model.... lower costs to the company means better value to the customer (in theory anyhow). And, there are many who would argue NHT's old B&M retail pricing was too high... but that's subjective opinion...

The B5 was an example because it was one you originally mentioned as having the same size driver as the AZ. Yes it's ported in a larger cabinet, so of course it's more efficient... and has a more capable low end. Does that mean it's better... NO... Are there advantages to sealed designs... YES. Does the AZ measure very well and perform very well within its limits... YES.

But none of this is the point of my post.

What I'm trying to get across is that, for example, the AZ was a direct competitor in terms of price to the PSB Image B4 less than a year ago... and now, it's a direct competitor to the Image B5... So pricewise, the AZ now competes with a more expensive speaker (and higher performing speaker) than it did 8 months ago.

Again, NHT's products perform well, and are build incredibly well (maybe overbuilt)... but they aren't the only good speaker out there... and as their prices go up... other options begin to look more attractive...

And you're right - no one likes to see prices go up... But it happens... My biggest issue is the amount of the price hike and the short time frame in which it occurred.

It's up the consumer to decide if NHT speakers still offer the kind of value their after... But to me... the value just isn't there for some of their products now that prices went up again... Just my opinion.

I think we can all agree that to get the most out of any bookshelf you would need to pair it with a sub. Yes the zero doesn't do bass well, which isn't a surprise based upon it's size. However the zero does mids and highs quite well. It's a tough market out there, and as I said I think NHT is a viable option amongst many very good alternatives.

I do agree... the mids and highs with the AZ are very nice... I got mine for just shy of $300 new, and like them alot. But I just find $400 too steep for what they are.

NHT is still an option for sure, and I don't doubt many will still go the NHT route despite the price increases... They make great products, and there are very few good sealed designs out there in the price range.

But for me, some of their products are hard to justify at the current price (and I agree about the Two's standing out).

"What I'm trying to get across is that, for example, the AZ was a direct competitor in terms of price to the PSB Image B4 less than a year ago... and now, it's a direct competitor to the Image B5... So pricewise, the AZ now competes with a more expensive speaker (and higher performing speaker) than it did 8 months ago."

I understand your point about the B4 and B5. I would counter that there isn't much of a need for a B4 and a B5 (much like our feelings towards the classic 2)... I think this argument doesn't work because the zero is still a more capable speaker in the same ways whether compared to the B4 or it's basic twin the B5. For me who has his classic 3's/Zero's almost up against a wall, a speaker with a big back port like the PSB would give me potential problems. The NHT's being a sealed design offer me more flexibility in terms of placement. In addition the 3 is a really "unique" speaker. A sealed three way bookshelf that is (as the measurements show) more than competitive in it's price range and well above. "This superb measured performance is especially commendable given the Classic Three's price of $800/pair.—John Atkinson".

As far as the prices going up, I see it doesn't agree with you and I accept that. For those who feel the way you do there are other options to be considered. I will just state again that the price levels are (except for the 2 and the 4) where they were five years ago, and that prices on the absolute tower, superzero 2, and the subs have not been raised. I have the NHT's paired with a NAD c375bee and they go together like PB&J.

"What I'm trying to get across is that, for example, the AZ was a direct competitor in terms of price to the PSB Image B4 less than a year ago... and now, it's a direct competitor to the Image B5... So pricewise, the AZ now competes with a more expensive speaker (and higher performing speaker) than it did 8 months ago."


I understand your point about the B4 and B5. I would counter that there isn't much of a need for a B4 and a B5... I think this argument doesn't work because the zero is still a more capable speaker in the same ways whether compared to the B4 or it's basic twin the B5.

I'm sure PSB felt there is a need for the B4 for those that want smaller speakers...whether for rears or fronts. There is certainly a market for them.

And I'd argue that is the same compact/mini-monitor speaker market NHT targets with the AZ (and Super Zero 2.0, for a cheaper option)... Granted, the AZ really does fall in between the B4 and B5 size-wise. Still, I own both the B4 and AZ, and the B4 plays louder more easily than the AZ, despite being a bit smaller. Not saying it's better than the AZ (and I'll go as far as to say I do feel the AZ is a better speaker)... just that, for $100 less per pair, it's a compelling option to those looking for a smaller speaker, and comparing the B4 and AZ.

While the AZ may be more capable in some ways than the B4 or B5... it costs the same as the B5... and in some ways the AZ is much less capable than the B5... Some of these are subjective (ie. which sounds more tonally correct, or which has smoother highs, ect.), so there is no point debating them... Others, like measured response, or dynamic ability, or bass extension, are more objective.... And we could argue them...

But either way, it comes down to what attributes are more important to the individual considering a $400 pair of speakers...


As far as the prices going up I see it doesn't agree with you and I accept that. I will just state again that the price levels are (except for the 2 and the 4) where they were six years ago.

... while NHT was still selling through B&M dealers, and had the associated higher costs of that business model.

NHT still has a network of dealers. My point was that their prices for the most part have remained the same (from inception to today), you see that as a negative and I do not. For the price of the B5's you can get superzero 2's and a sub.

We know why the B5 plays "louder" but I can make up for the efficiency by simply turning the volume knob. Since both need a sub to go low I would feel that going with the zero saves you $100, and gives you certain advantages. If you argue the need for the B4 do you still see the need for a B5 ? Why make the B5 at all when there is a B6 ? I like the idea of one product line not the good, better, best model but that is me.

NHT still has a network of dealers. My point was that their prices for the most part have remained the same (from inception to today), you see that as a negative and I do not.

Yes they still sell through authorized retailers in their new business model... but they don't have reps and dealers in the traditional sense.

From the NHT website:
"NHT Sells Factory Direct - No distributors, no sales reps, no middlemen. Consumers and Authorized Dealers alike buy factory direct using our simple, secure online store. That means factory direct pricing plus expert service and support for everyone. "

NHT even stated (on facebook, in reply to my complaining) they don't have the higher overhead with their current business model.


For the price of the B5's you can get superzero 2's and a sub.

B5's = $400/pr. SZ 2.0 + Sub = $500.

And with the SuperZero 2.0, you get to set your xover to 110Hz at a minimum (higher if you want to push high volume to them)... and bass localization can become an issue (depending on placement as well)...
http://www.hometheater.com/content/nht-superzero-20-speaker-system-ht-labs-measures

I don't like a xover that high... But that's a tradeoff of such a small sealed speaker... NO BASS...


We know why the B5 plays "louder" but I can make up for the efficiency by simply turning the volume knob. Since both need a sub to go low I would feel that going with the zero saves you $100, and gives you certain advantages.

You can make up for efficiency by turning up volume.... TO A POINT... But, it isn't only about the volume knob. Aside from the potential to drive the amp to clip... There are issues of how the drivers handle higher volume - woofer compression at high volumes, distortion, ect... There's more to it than just turning up the volume. Not to mention, upping the knob doesn't make a speaker more dynamic...


If you argue the need for the B4 do you still see the need for a B5 ? Why make the B5 at all when there is a B6 ? I like the idea of one product line not the good, better, best model but that is me.

Why eliminate the B5 just because there is a B4? You get a more capable speaker with less cash and space required compared to the B6. No different that NHT having the Two to fit the market of those that want more bass extension than the AZ, but don't have the cash for the Three. Many other brands have done this as well...

I don't see it as good, better, best... as much as I see it as different... with each product in the line targeted toward a particular consumer - price, size, performance all being different factors to consider...

I think ultimately we can agree we just have different views on this topic...

You'll continue to look at NHT despite higher prices, and recommend others do so... I'll likely look elsewhere and suggest other options for folks to consider.

In the end, there are alot of good speakers out there...

I think ultimately we can agree we just have different views on this topic...

You'll continue to look at NHT despite higher prices, and recommend others do so... I'll likely look elsewhere and suggest other options for folks to consider.

In the end, there are alot of good speakers out there...

I agree with you alphaiii, I paid $440 for the Classic Two less than
2 years ago. I believe the Focal Chorus 705 for $500, out performs
it. The Classic Two is now listed at $600. I like the Classic Two, how
ever it does not sound like a $600 speaker. I am still happy for the
NHT owners - and will not tell anyone not to buy them. I still, will not
reccomend them on a regular basis.

The Focal woofer is smaller than the Classic Two woofer.

Yes they still sell through authorized retailers in their new business model... but they don't have reps and dealers in the traditional sense.

From the NHT website:
"NHT Sells Factory Direct - No distributors, no sales reps, no middlemen. Consumers and Authorized Dealers alike buy factory direct using our simple, secure online store. That means factory direct pricing plus expert service and support for everyone. "

NHT even stated (on facebook, in reply to my complaining) they don't have the higher overhead with their current business model.



B5's = $400/pr. SZ 2.0 + Sub = $500.

And with the SuperZero 2.0, you get to set your xover to 110Hz at a minimum (higher if you want to push high volume to them)... and bass localization can become an issue (depending on placement as well)...
http://www.hometheater.com/content/nht-superzero-20-speaker-system-ht-labs-measures

I don't like a xover that high... But that's a tradeoff of such a small sealed speaker... NO BASS...



You can make up for efficiency by turning up volume.... TO A POINT... But, it isn't only about the volume knob. Aside from the potential to drive the amp to clip... There are issues of how the drivers handle higher volume - woofer compression at high volumes, distortion, ect... There's more to it than just turning up the volume. Not to mention, upping the knob doesn't make a speaker more dynamic...



Why eliminate the B5 just because there is a B4? You get a more capable speaker with less cash and space required compared to the B6. No different that NHT having the Two to fit the market of those that want more bass extension than the AZ, but don't have the cash for the Three. Many other brands have done this as well...

I don't see it as good, better, best... as much as I see it as different... with each product in the line targeted toward a particular consumer - price, size, performance all being different factors to consider...

Again the prices have remained where they were 5 years ago... Yes the superzero 2 goes down to about 100 hz but it is honest. For the extra $100 over the B5 you get bass that goes low enough to enjoy music and that to me is worth $100.

The inefficiency difference isn't really much of an issue and you don't have to drive an amp into clipping to make up the difference. Any amp with a properly designed power supply can power the NHT's. The c375bee I own grabs the 3's by the throat and won't let go (as would the 326/356). A sealed design is less efficient... simple as that, but not so much so that it requires anything radical. You can keep your "dynamic" speakers, what I want is accuracy and bass that isn't exaggerated by a large port.

Why eliminate the B5, I brought up that in response to those who think the two is unnecessary. I would go for the B6 or the B4 and skip the 5, much like going for the 3 or the zero over the 2. I mean the price difference isn't that great and the 2 gives you things the B5 cannot based upon it's design.

The idea of good, better, and best gives more market presence. I don't disagree with it, but prefer the idea of one line over it (fewer models, all of which had a specific purpose).

I think ultimately we can agree we just have different views on this topic...

You'll continue to look at NHT despite higher prices, and recommend others do so... I'll likely look elsewhere and suggest other options for folks to consider.

In the end, there are alot of good speakers out there...



I will look at NHT's because of their performance and engineering. I also like the fact that their prices (except for the 2 and 4) are where they were 5 years ago. I will also recommend other speakers as well as there are obviously other excellent options available.

Again the prices have remained where they were 5 years ago...

You fail to acknowledge the difference in the business model between then and now, and the fact that NHT does not have the same costs they did associated with the previous rep/dealer based model.

NHT didn't lower prices out of the kindness of their hearts... They had room to lower prices because they eliminated costs by going factory direct.

Now prices have gone up... and NHT puts the blame on rising costs of materials and production. Is there truth to that? Sure. The price of neodymium, which they use for their tweeters, has gone up like crazy. But the prices of their speakers went up ALOT... back to where they were in 2006 as you point out... When - just to reiterate since it seems somehow overlooked - NHT had the overhead of being a B&M brand... which they now don't...


Yes the superzero 2 goes down to about 100 hz but it is honest.

To a certain point.. Beyond that, woofer compression and distortion are going to come into play and they won't be playing close to that low anymore.


For the extra $100 over the B5 you get bass that goes low enough to enjoy music and that to me is worth $100.

I can understand that... In my case, it isn't worth it... The SZ2.0 doesn't measure that great and even within its limitations it necessitates a higher xover than I'm willing to use. Others mileage may vary of course...


The inefficiency difference isn't really much of an issue and you don't have to drive an amp into clipping to make up the difference. Any amp with a properly designed power supply can power the NHT's.

For many cases you're probably right. But this depends on alot of factors... No, you don't need magic or something radical solution in order to drive sealed speakers... But you also cannot expect miracles from smaller woofers in small sealed cabinets... Hell, you can't expect miracles from small woofers in general.

Whether or not the efficiency is an issue really depends on what the intended use is for the speakers. Even smaller ported designs like the B4 or B5 may not give someone the kind of output they want...

More importantly... when they speakers do get pushed to loud levels... how linear is that output? How much distortion, or woofer compression, is occuring?


You can keep your "dynamic" speakers, what I want is accuracy and bass that isn't exaggerated by a large port.

You assume ported speakers cannot be "accurate", or that they automatically have exaggerated bass due to being ported. The AZ and Two have a small upper bass bump... Some would call that "inaccurate" since it deviates from flat response.

And, you assume a speaker with good dynamic ability cannot be accurate either.

We both know there are advantages and disadvantages inherent to sealed vs ported designs... And in the price range we're talking about... you aren't going to get it all...

Obviously, opinions will vary on which choice is better in a given sitation.

I mean the price difference isn't that great and the 2 gives you things the B5 cannot based upon it's design.

...and vice versa.

I will look at NHT's because of their performance and engineering. I also like the fact that their prices (except for the 2 and 4) are where they were 5 years ago. I will also recommend other speakers as well as there are obviously other excellent options available.

BTW, my comment "You'll continue to look at NHT despite higher prices..." wasn't meant as a dig.

I meant to imply you'd keep looking because you still find value in their products, for reasons such as those you mentioned (performance, engineering)... even though prices have gone up recently.

You fail to acknowledge the difference in the business model between then and now, and the fact that NHT does not have the same costs they did associated with the previous rep/dealer based model.

NHT didn't lower prices out of the kindness of their hearts... They had room to lower prices because they eliminated costs by going factory direct.

Now prices have gone up... and NHT puts the blame on rising costs of materials and production. Is there truth to that? Sure. The price of neodymium, which they use for their tweeters, has gone up like crazy. But the prices of their speakers went up ALOT... back to where they were in 2006 as you point out... When - just to reiterate since it seems somehow overlooked - NHT had the overhead of being a B&M brand... which they now don't...



To a certain point.. Beyond that, woofer compression and distortion are going to come into play and they won't be playing close to that low anymore.



I can understand that... In my case, it isn't worth it... The SZ2.0 doesn't measure that great and even within its limitations it necessitates a higher xover than I'm willing to use. Others mileage may vary of course...



For many cases you're probably right. But this depends on alot of factors... No, you don't need magic or something radical solution in order to drive sealed speakers... But you also cannot expect miracles from smaller woofers in small sealed cabinets... Hell, you can't expect miracles from small woofers in general.

Whether or not the efficiency is an issue really depends on what the intended use is for the speakers. Even smaller ported designs like the B4 or B5 may not give someone the kind of output they want...

More importantly... when they speakers do get pushed to loud levels... how linear is that output? How much distortion, or woofer compression, is occuring?



You assume ported speakers cannot be "accurate", or that they automatically have exaggerated bass due to being ported. The AZ and Two have a small upper bass bump... Some would call that "inaccurate" since it deviates from flat response.

And, you assume a speaker with good dynamic ability cannot be accurate either.

We both know there are advantages and disadvantages inherent to sealed vs ported designs... And in the price range we're talking about... you aren't going to get it all...

Obviously, opinions will vary on which choice is better in a given sitation.



...and vice versa.

As far as prices increasing have you gone shopping recently, because I have see prices rise on any number of goods. Also consider the size of the company and the amount of product they move. NHT has never been a giant so the concept of economies of scale comes into play. What Byrne said in his blog is true about labor costs in China. Again, prices are where they were five years ago, I see that as a positive and you do not.

Hey as far as the superzero goes I would take it and a sub over the B5, you would not but that is your prerogative. The zero is a better speaker than the superzero, but all three (superzero, zero, B5) would need a sub to enjoy music. With that being true I would take the zero over the B5 (and pocket $100).

I assume a port has noise because it does, and that a sealed design doesn't have port noise. Nothing out of the ordinary there just one of the advantages of a sealed design, but not as efficient/dynamic. I didn't say that a speaker that is dynamic cannot be accurate (and you know that). No NHT is ruler flat (big surprise there) but look at the measurements for the 3 vs the Imagine B (which is a great speaker and betters the 3 in some ways). While the some NHTs may have a bit of a hump have you seen ones midbass described as "overripe". I said my emphasis is on accuracy over dynamics, you seem to focus on dynamics and I focus on accuracy nothing wrong with that.
Any speaker that is pushed too hard starts to distort (nothing new there), so the idea is not to push your speakers to that point.

I believe if you read back I said tradeoffs more than once. If you take two similarly prices speakers, one isn't going to be superior to the other in every way (no big surprise there either). For my application the advantages of the sealed NHT's make them a better choice (appearance and finish also put them ahead). Since this is the case I have gone out of my way to purchase them (and will continue to do so). For you the cost increase is the main focus, so based upon that you should look elsewhere. Yet with all the choices available, and many which you seem to trumpet, you continue to come back to this thread to reiterate points you made weeks ago ?

As far as prices increasing have you gone shopping recently, because I have see prices rise on any number of goods. Also consider the size of the company and the amount of product they move. NHT has never been a giant so the concept of economies of scale comes into play. What Byrne said in his blog is true about labor costs in China. Again, prices are where they were five years ago, I see that as a positive and you do not.

No doubt prices are up all over the place. And being a smaller company, a doubling in the cost of each tweeter, for instance, is going to affect price per unit more than would be the case for a company that can move much larger volumes... I don't doubt production costs went up, and maybe NHT really had to raise the price as much as they did to maintain their margins...maybe... Or maybe they think they can squeeze out a bit more profit... maybe. Only NHT knows the answer...

Either way, like you said, I see the rising costs as a negative and feel it somewhat kills value... and you don't. We each have our opinion on the matter - no point in dwelling on that any longer.

Hey as far as the superzero goes I would take it and a sub over the B5, you would not but that is your prerogative. The zero is a better speaker than the superzero, but all three (superzero, zero, B5) would need a sub to enjoy music. With that being true I would take the zero over the B5 (and pocket $100).

I have the AZ, and demo'd the SZ 2.0 for a month... and I absolutely agree the AZ is a better speaker in every regard (better drivers, better cabinets, better performance)... as it should be at twice the cost...

Whether one chooses the AZ or B5, or the SZ 2.0 + Sub in that price range is entirely up to the individual. I won't condemn you, or anyone else, for that choice. I see drawbacks to the SZ 2.0 + Sub system, despite the fact that I'd need a sub with the B5 & AZ, which adds to the cost (an entirely different drawback).

I assume a port has noise because it does, and that a sealed design doesn't have port noise. Nothing out of the ordinary there just one of the advantages of a sealed design, but not as efficient/dynamic. I didn't say that a speaker that is dynamic cannot be accurate (and you know that). No NHT is ruler flat (big surprise there) but look at the measurements for the 3 vs the Imagine B (which is a great speaker and betters the 3 in some ways). While the some NHTs may have a bit of a hump have you seen ones midbass described as "overripe". I said my emphasis is on accuracy over dynamics, you seem to focus on dynamics and I focus on accuracy nothing wrong with that.

My comment on the upper bass bump wasn't to say the sound is exaggerated or "overripe" in that regard... More to point out that it's all about design... and you can tailor the size of a sealed cabinet for a given driver to give an upper bass bump, which, if done wrong, doesn't just add some "warmth" but can result in exaggerated bass. The same goes for ported designs (albeit trickier since it's not just about cabinet size, but also port diameter, length, placement). However, when done correctly a ported speaker can have very articulate bass without port noise being an issue.... Guess I was just playing devil's advocate a bit...

And just to clarify, I don't focus on dynamics when I audition speakers... I don't have a dedicated theater room, and I live in a connected townhome, so I don't need dynamic speakers... I actually value low level resolution and clarity alot more than dynamics.

I wouldn't expect you to know any of this because my posts did talk alot about efficiency and dynamics... But that was more about me presenting the other side of the argument (oversimplified) to point out some advantages to ported designs.... than it was about getting into a bunch of subjective differences that lead me to pick one speaker over another.

Any speaker that is pushed too hard starts to distort (nothing new there), so the idea is not to push your speakers to that point.

Absolutely... I'm not arguing that, just pointing out that you don't have to drive more a efficient speaker as hard to get to a given volume (obviously)... Not to say that makes it a better speaker... just an advantage of the design.

I believe if you read back I said tradeoffs more than once. If you take two similarly prices speakers, one isn't going to be superior to the other in every way (no big surprise there either). For my application the advantages of the sealed NHT's make them a better choice (appearance and finish also put them ahead). Since this is the case I have gone out of my way to purchase them (and will continue to do so).

Yeah you have, and we're basically saying the same thing in that regard... just going in circles a bit doing so.

Everyone will have their own opinion on which attributes of a given speaker at a given price point are more important, and will choose the one that works better for their needs.

Still, because the price went up for NHT's speakers, a given NHT speaker now sits at the same price point as a competitor's product that was previously priced higher... Fact... We've beaten the PSB example to death already. Whether a competitor's product at that higher price point is a better choice than the given NHT speaker is up to the buyer...since there is a long list of specific needs and personal preferences that come into play.

Of course, this whole point may become moot if much of the competition raises their prices as well. If that happens, then I guess good sound just becomes less affordable.

For you the cost increase is the main focus, so based upon that you should look elsewhere.

The cost increase just means that previously higher priced competition is now the same price... So it means I'll consider that competition.

Yet with all the choices available, and many which you seem to trumpet, you continue to come back to this thread to reiterate points you made weeks ago ?

I actually hadn't visited this thread for a bit, but dropped in and noticed your post mentioning several higher priced speakers to argue NHT hasn't price itself out of the affordable speaker market.

It seemed you had misunderstood the intent of my (or maybe someone else') posts on the topic, so I attempted to point out the following, which I've already posted:
"so again, my point is that the result of nht's rising prices is that their speakers are now in direct competition with higher priced products than they were before (assuming the competitor hasn't raised prices), and in some of those cases (not all of course), with that higher price comes more performance from said competition."

...not to say NHT has entirely priced itself out of the affordable market.

Obviously, that attempt failed... and instead I've gotten into a pissing match where we keep arguing the same points...

On a side note... I still own a pair of AZ's, and it's not like I'm anti-NHT now and going to dump them just because prices went up... They're good speakers... and I like them...

As an NHT owner, and a fan of some of their products... there's no reason I can't express my opinion on the price increases, and how I feel the value of their products is affected as a result.

No doubt prices are up all over the place. And being a smaller company, a doubling in the cost of each tweeter, for instance, is going to affect price per unit more than would be the case for a company that can move much larger volumes... I don't doubt production costs went up, and maybe NHT really had to raise the price as much as they did to maintain their margins...maybe... Or maybe they think they can squeeze out a bit more profit... maybe. Only NHT knows the answer...

Either way, like you said, I see the rising costs as a negative and feel it somewhat kills value... and you don't. We each have our opinion on the matter - no point in dwelling on that any longer.



I have the AZ, and demo'd the SZ 2.0 for a month... and I absolutely agree the AZ is a better speaker in every regard (better drivers, better cabinets, better performance)... as it should be at twice the cost...

Whether one chooses the AZ or B5, or the SZ 2.0 + Sub in that price range is entirely up to the individual. I won't condemn you, or anyone else, for that choice. I see drawbacks to the SZ 2.0 + Sub system, despite the fact that I'd need a sub with the B5 & AZ, which adds to the cost (an entirely different drawback).



My comment on the upper bass bump wasn't to say the sound is exaggerated or "overripe" in that regard... More to point out that it's all about design... and you can tailor the size of a sealed cabinet for a given driver to give an upper bass bump, which, if done wrong, doesn't just add some "warmth" but can result in exaggerated bass. The same goes for ported designs (albeit trickier since it's not just about cabinet size, but also port diameter, length, placement). However, when done correctly a ported speaker can have very articulate bass without port noise being an issue.... Guess I was just playing devil's advocate a bit...

And just to clarify, I don't focus on dynamics when I audition speakers... I don't have a dedicated theater room, and I live in a connected townhome, so I don't need dynamic speakers... I actually value low level resolution and clarity alot more than dynamics.

I wouldn't expect you to know any of this because my posts did talk alot about efficiency and dynamics... But that was more about me presenting the other side of the argument (oversimplified) to point out some advantages to ported designs.... than it was about getting into a bunch of subjective differences that lead me to pick one speaker over another.



Absolutely... I'm not arguing that, just pointing out that you don't have to drive more a efficient speaker as hard to get to a given volume (obviously)... Not to say that makes it a better speaker... just an advantage of the design.



Yeah you have, and we're basically saying the same thing in that regard... just going in circles a bit doing so.

Everyone will have their own opinion on which attributes of a given speaker at a given price point are more important, and will choose the one that works better for their needs.

Still, because the price went up for NHT's speakers, a given NHT speaker now sits at the same price point as a competitor's product that was previously priced higher... Fact... We've beaten the PSB example to death already. Whether a competitor's product at that higher price point is a better choice than the given NHT speaker is up to the buyer...since there is a long list of specific needs and personal preferences that come into play.

Of course, this whole point may become moot if much of the competition raises their prices as well. If that happens, then I guess good sound just becomes less affordable.



The cost increase just means that previously higher priced competition is now the same price... So it means I'll consider that competition.



I actually hadn't visited this thread for a bit, but dropped in and noticed your post mentioning several higher priced speakers to argue NHT hasn't price itself out of the affordable speaker market.

It seemed you had misunderstood the intent of my (or maybe someone else') posts on the topic, so I attempted to point out the following, which I've already posted:
"so again, my point is that the result of nht's rising prices is that their speakers are now in direct competition with higher priced products than they were before (assuming the competitor hasn't raised prices), and in some of those cases (not all of course), with that higher price comes more performance from said competition."

...not to say NHT has entirely priced itself out of the affordable market.

Obviously, that attempt failed... and instead I've gotten into a pissing match where we keep arguing the same points...

On a side note... I still own a pair of AZ's, and it's not like I'm anti-NHT now and going to dump them just because prices went up... They're good speakers... and I like them...

As an NHT owner, and a fan of some of their products... there's no reason I can't express my opinion on the price increases, and how I feel the value of their products is affected as a result.

Well since we both acknowledge that costs have gone up then it seems one possible result would be to pass them on to the consumer. By doing so I will once again state that prices are where they were five years ago. Perhaps with Sadowski on board NHT will function as a profitable company for a change. Byrne and the others needed the help based upon the companies history. By the way is your name Frank Vendetti, I ask this because on NHT's facebook page said person made the same argument using the same words you do ?

Actually if you look back I said nobody (this even includes me) likes rising prices. Why I have to say this again (stating the obvious) I don't know. Your intent was to point out how NHT has raised prices and how this will or may cause you (and perhaps others) to look elsewhere (not difficult to understand). That is as I said your prerogative, but others may take a different point of view based upon other factors (which I have pointed out ad nauseam). My point was that despite them raising their prices, their prices are still competitive (and in many instances a deal) amongst their peers (also not difficult to understand as I provided examples). You made your point about how the increases have affected you, and yet and still you continue to argue the point. So while I understood your "point", what I also realize is that you want the first and last words on the subject.

By the way, did I imply that you were out of line by pointing out the price increases, or state you were anti NHT ? What you are is a person who like everybody else wants the most product for the least cash outlay. Do I disagree with the fact that raising prices affects value; I could, but I couldn't do it with a straight face. You also seem to prefer a dynamic speaker or so I took your posts to imply. Of course we know about the sealed vs ported debate and advantages/disadvantages, so it was nice "running laps" with you on that.

Did you end up buying the Energy speakers you were auditioning ? They were more to your liking at one point (from what I read) yet you purchased the zeros. What other bookshelfs have you owned, and are you in the market for anything new ? ----> (an attempt to steer the conversation in a more "productive" direction).

Well since we both acknowledge that costs have gone up then it seems one possible result would be to pass them on to the consumer. By doing so I will once again state that prices are where they were five years ago.

And I kept the possibility open that the price raises may be just passing on the extra costs, or to also squeeze out more profit...

I'll admit that it's possible that the money saved by NHT going factory direct now has to be funneled into the increased costs of production, with the net result being prices today that match those of 5 years ago.... whether you choose to acknowledge the difference in the business models of past/present, and the costs/savings associated with each.

Your intent was to point out how NHT has raised prices and how this will or may cause you (and perhaps others) to look elsewhere (not difficult to understand).

Well, yes and no. That's part of it. The main point I've been trying to make in my last several posts is:
"...the result of nht's rising prices is that their speakers are now in direct competition with higher priced products than they were before (assuming the competitor hasn't raised prices), and in some of those cases (not all of course), with that higher price comes more performance from said competition."

Will that affect my future purchases decisions - sure it will. But regardless of how the price increase affects me... the above statement still holds...

My point was that despite them raising their prices, their prices are still competitive (and in many instances a deal) amongst their peers (also not difficult to understand as I provided examples).

Fair enough. But this is your opinion, and while I have no trouble understanding it... it doesn't mean I have to necessarily agree with it in all cases... and it's clear a few others here also don't agree.

You made your point about how the increases have affected you, and yet and still you continue to argue the point. So while I understood your "point", what I also realize is that you want the first and last words on the subject.

Well, twice in this post you stated your interpretation of my point... and you're still focusing on only part of what I'm saying - how price hikes affect my future decisions - while ignoring the part that I have in quotations above (which I've now posted a few times), which is independent of how prices affect me. That's why I keep beating the dead horse...

By the way, did I imply that you were out of line by pointing out the price increases, or state you were anti NHT ?

No, you didn't... You questioned why I keep returning to this thread... and I stated a few reasons why...that's all.

What you are is a person who like everybody else wants the most product for the least cash outlay.

Of course I want to get the most for my dollar... within reason. Given the experience I've had with selling on ebay/audiogon/forums, and some of the ridiculous lowball offers people give... I don't feel I fit into the category with "everybody else."

You also seem to prefer a dynamic speaker or so I took your posts to imply.

I can definitely see where you got that idea... but in my last post I did clarify this a bit.

Did you end up buying the Energy speakers you were auditioning ? They were more to your liking at one point (from what I read) yet you purchased the zeros.

I actually had the Energy RC speakers prior to buying the NHT... and still have them...

I originally bought three AZ's for my bedroom... but spent some time comparing the Energy RC-10/RC-LCR vs. NHT AZ x 3 vs. NHT AZ + 2C in my living room...

As of now, I just have the pair of AZ's. In some areas, I like the AZ a bit better than the RC-10... mainly a little more articulate in the lower mids/upper bass, and slightly more forward vocals (technically, more neutral)...certainly nice in the midrange... On the other hand, IMO, the AZ's had a smaller soundstage and got a bit, for lack of a better term, clinical when pushed a little.

I just feel the RC-10's offer more overall (for my preferences) and hold together alot better when the volume goes up... The highs are detailed and extended, but still smooth... the mids are nice even if not as resolving... I hate to bring up this word again :rolleyes:, but they are more dynamic, and dig deeper (no surprise, given the size and design differences). Although I should note much of the comparison was done with the RC-10's port plugged. In any case, like I mentioned in my other thread, they were more alike than different in that moderate volume range when using them with a sub and appropriate xover. The differences were more notable at higher volumes...

I've always liked the RC-10's alot though... It was the RC-LCR I've never been completely happy with, even though it is a nice center. I do like the 2C a little better than the RC-LCR, since I feel the 2C has a little better clarity, especially at lower volume. But, like the RC-10, I think the RC-LCR had better soundstage than the 2C, and it was a little easier to pinpoint voices emanating from the 2C.

Overall though, I just found more enjoyment in the Energy RC setup. The AZ/2C setup was nice too, but I had to pick one... and I think the bigger, more open soundstage helped sway me (at the expense of having to bump the center volume just a bit to help with dialogue clarity).

What other bookshelfs have you owned, and are you in the market for anything new ? ----> (an attempt to steer the conversation in a more "productive" direction).

As for bookshelves, here are some others that I owned/demo'd in my living room:

Ascend Sierra-1 (really like these, but needed the cash so sold them)
ACI Emerald XL (my favorite midrange of anything I've heard)
Wharfedale Evo2-8
Cambridge S30
Mirage OMD-5
Tweak City Audio WAF-1
AV123 ELT525M (and 525T)
AV123 X-LS
Aperion 4T (yeah not a bookshelf, but essentially bookshelf type performance)
Pioneer BS41 (yeah, budget speaker... but I wanted to see what Andrew Jones could do with those constraints)
Energy RC-10
NHT Absolute Zero
PSB Image B4

And some that only saw desktop &/or bedroom duty:
NHT SB1
Onix Ref 0.5
Pioneer S-31B
Energy RC-Mini
Ascend HTM-200SE
NHT SZ 2.0

...and several other cheaper one's not worth mentioning...

I'm not in the market for anything specific at the moment... but at some point I'll likely continue the search for a center I'm completely satisfied with, and build around that.

"...the result of nht's rising prices is that their speakers are now in direct competition with higher priced products than they were before (assuming the competitor hasn't raised prices), and in some of those cases (not all of course), with that higher price comes more performance from said competition."

This is your opinion and yes I have understood it, but do you understand that I understand it ? Feel free to go back and read how I feel that NHTs are competitive in their price range. Also if you spool forward in the thought process, by being less competitive price wise would this not prompt people to look elsewhere ! What I found here is that some agree that the NHT's are competitive (which was and remains my point). I have taken the time to give examples of other products to make my point. Particular focus has been put on the 2's and while I don't completely agree with it, the 2's are excellent speakers. I don't see in other instances where this holds true, yet you hold to this position. We have gone around and around and I will state my point again, in their price range the NHT's are competitive with their competition, and I have given examples as to why I feel the way I do.

I have also said their prices remain where they were and you focus on their business model. Yet you acknowledge recent events which would lead to an increase in prices. You also must consider that with Sadowski on board and his past successes that perhaps NHT will finally be managed in a way that makes they not only profitable but grow. It has never been a matter of product performance with NHT.
But you do not see anything positive about prices basically being where they were 5 years ago. You also do not mention that prices on subs, superzero 2 and absolute tower have not gone up, why is that ? Again I believe it is more your desire to have the last word on the subject, which speaks more to your ego than anything else. You fail to acknowledge this, and continue to push forward, and I can tell you that sometimes persistence doesn't pay off. But I am curious if you are the same person on NHT's facebook page who made almost the same complaint, you didn't answer my question ?

Everybody wants the most for their cash outlay, that is human nature. There isn't any point to include the obvious extreme of those who are unreasonable or unrealistic as that is also a given.

Yes you clarified in your last post about your mentioning dynamics. You repeated it because you felt it supports your opinions... As I said time and again (and I assume you agree), no one speaker in a price range betters another at all things, and we have gone over why this is.

I actually had the Energy RC speakers prior to buying the NHT... and still have them...

I originally bought three AZ's for my bedroom... but spent some time comparing the Energy RC-10/RC-LCR vs. NHT AZ x 3 vs. NHT AZ + 2C in my living room...

As of now, I just have the pair of AZ's. In some areas, I like the AZ a bit better than the RC-10... mainly a little more articulate in the lower mids/upper bass, and slightly more forward vocals (technically, more neutral)...certainly nice in the midrange... On the other hand, IMO, the AZ's had a smaller soundstage and got a bit, for lack of a better term, clinical when pushed a little.

I just feel the RC-10's offer more overall (for my preferences) and hold together alot better when the volume goes up... The highs are detailed and extended, but still smooth... the mids are nice even if not as resolving... I hate to bring up this word again :rolleyes:, but they are more dynamic, and dig deeper (no surprise, given the size and design differences). Although I should note much of the comparison was done with the RC-10's port plugged. In any case, like I mentioned in my other thread, they were more alike than different in that moderate volume range when using them with a sub and appropriate xover. The differences were more notable at higher volumes...

I've always liked the RC-10's alot though... It was the RC-LCR I've never been completely happy with, even though it is a nice center. I do like the 2C a little better than the RC-LCR, since I feel the 2C has a little better clarity, especially at lower volume. But, like the RC-10, I think the RC-LCR had better soundstage than the 2C, and it was a little easier to pinpoint voices emanating from the 2C.

Overall though, I just found more enjoyment in the Energy RC setup. The AZ/2C setup was nice too, but I had to pick one... and I think the bigger, more open soundstage helped sway me (at the expense of having to bump the center volume just a bit to help with dialogue clarity).


The energys are nice looking speakers. I have heard some disparage the use of kevlar in drivers, but have not heard the speakers in question. I believe Klipsch now owns Energy ? I don't know if that is a good thing overall for energy. I know they used to have the veritas models (older model). The bookshelf vertias looked almost identical to the classic 3 (vice versa really as the energy came first).

As for bookshelves, here are some others that I owned/demo'd in my living room:

Ascend Sierra-1 (really like these, but needed the cash so sold them)
ACI Emerald XL (my favorite midrange of anything I've heard)
Wharfedale Evo2-8
Cambridge S30
Mirage OMD-5
Tweak City Audio WAF-1
AV123 ELT525M (and 525T)
AV123 X-LS
Aperion 4T (yeah not a bookshelf, but essentially bookshelf type performance)
Pioneer BS41 (yeah, budget speaker... but I wanted to see what Andrew Jones could do with those constraints)

And some that only saw desktop &/or bedroom duty:
NHT SB1
Onix Ref 0.5
Pioneer S-31B
Energy RC-Mini
Ascend HTM-200SE

...and several other cheaper one's not worth mentioning...

I'm not in the market for anything specific at the moment... but at some point I'll likely continue the search for a center I'm completely satisfied with, and build around that.



Nice varied list there, I would have sworn you owned PSB's, but I guess not. I for one really like PSB's (even though it might appear to some that I feel otherwise) and have not heard the Imagine B's, but really want to . I was close to selling my 3's and getting the B's as I could get them for a really nice price. I have heard a lot of good things about the imagines, and also know that they and NAD are a good combination.

I wonder why they came out with the Imagine mini though. Very close in price to the imagine B and for the extra 200 it seems like going with the B only makes sense. That being said with the way I have my speakers set up I think the large backside port on the imagines would lead to potential issues which the sealed NHT's for the most part do not have.

I used to own the Polk lsi-9's before the NHT's and while they were different in just about every way (poly drivers, soft dome tweeter, diappolito, multiple ports) I thought they were quite nice. I really have not done the "merry go round" in terms of ownership. I have listened to several at dealer showrooms and some in other peoples homes.

Feel free to go back and read how I feel that NHTs are competitive in their price range. Also if you spool forward in the thought process, by being less competitive price wise this would prompt people to look elsewhere ! What I found here is that some agree that the NHT's are competitive (which was and remains my point).

Your point isn't lost on me, and I don't take issue with you, or anyone else, finding NHT is still competitive at current pricing. They make good speakers...

I have taken the time to give examples of other products to make my point. Particular focus has been put on the 2's and rightly so, though the 2's are excellent speakers. I don't see in other instances where this holds true, yet you hold to this position.

If you want an example of something other than the Two's... here's one... Is the Classic Three still a competitive speaker at $800?... I'm not saying it isn't. What I am saying is - what was $700, and $184 away, is now $800 and only $84 away from a brand new pair of Ascend Sierra-1's (in natural finish)... Does that mean it automatically isn't a better option than the Sierra... absolutely not... But, it now much closer in price to another well performing, well reviewed product...

Again, I'm not saying the Sierra is better than the Three... just that the Three is now much closer in price to the Sierra, and as a result, in more direct competition based on price, than it was last year when it was $100 cheaper per pair.

You also do not mention that prices on subs, superzero 2 and absolute tower have not gone up, why is that ?

Because it doesn't change anything regarding the other products...

But I am curious if you are the same person on NHT's facebook page who made almost the same complaint, you didn't answer my question ?

I've left it to you to draw your own conclusions...

As I said time and again (and I assume you agree), no one speaker in a price range betters another at all things, and we have gone over why this is.

I do agree...

The energys are nice looking speakers. I have heard some disparage the use of kevlar in drivers, but have not heard the speakers in question. I believe Klipsch now owns Energy ? I don't know if that is a good thing overall for energy. I know they used to have the veritas models (older model). The bookshelf vertias looked almost identical to the classic 3 (vice versa really as the energy came first).

Klipsch bought out API (Energy, Mirage, Athena) a few years ago. They killed off Athena entirely, neutered Mirage (the OMD line exclusive to Vann's is the last worthwhile, non-lifestyle product Mirage has).... and have cashed in on the Energy name and Veritas legacy... taking the RC lineup, making some tweaks and prettying up the cabinets with high gloss, and slapping the Veritas name on it.

I can't say I think Klipsch ownership has been a good thing... and now Audiovox owns Klipsch... so I guess we'll see where that leads...

Nice varied list there, I would have sworn you owned PSB's, but I guess not. I for one really like PSB's (even though it might appear to some that I feel otherwise) and have not heard the Imagine B's, but really want to . I was close to selling my 3's and getting the B's as I could get them for a really nice price. I have heard a lot of good things about the imagines, and also know that they and NAD are a good combination.

I do own a pair of PSB Image B4's... just left them (along with Energy RC-10, NHT AZ & SZ 2.0) off the list since I mentioned them in prior posts... I'll add them for completion's sake.

I'd like the hear the Imagine B as well... but they are out of my price range.

I wonder why they came out with the Imagine mini though. Very close in price to the imagine B and for the extra 200 it seems like going with the B only makes sense. That being said with the way I have my speakers set up I think the large backside port on the imagines would lead to potential issues which the sealed NHT's for the most part do not have.

I agree... the rear port puts restrictions on placement if you want optimal performance, and they certainly are not inexpensive... They've gotten a good deal of praise so far though... Still, they wouldn't be my choice unless they came down in price some...

I used to own the Polk lsi-9's before the NHT's and while they were different in just about every way (poly drivers, soft dome tweeter, diappolito, multiple ports) I thought they were quite nice.

I've heard good things about the Lsi's, but never heard them... I wonder how Polk has improved on them with the new lineup...

I really have not done the "merry go round" in terms of ownership. I have listened to several at dealer showrooms and some in other peoples homes.

Well, you did it the smarter way - found speakers you like without the hassles of repeatedly buying, returning, reselling, ect. Plus, I think my significant other would like your method much more... without the steady stream of boxes arriving and leaving...

Alphaiii, you don't have to keep telling us over and over. We get it, you are no longer as happy with NHT as you may have been before the recent price increases and won't be recommending them as much anymore. You have made the same point at least a dozen times or more now, and it is more than redundant at this point to keep doing so by repeating yourself any further. Duly noted, even though I highly doubt that the lack of your future recommendations are going to affect NHT's sales very much one way or the other though.

I could throw many different things back at you if I had an equal amount of time to devote to this that you seem to, but a few points I do want to make -

for the same approximate price of the PSB's and the matching PSB sub you could buy the Super Zero's and 2 of the Super Subs, run the dual subs in stereo and place them close enough to the SZ's to avoid localization no matter how high you cross them over. I know this is a minor point, but one I wanted to make just the same to try to keep it real and to put things into perspective here

NHT could switch to only offering soft dome tweeters on the Classic series like every other, and I do mean every other ID speaker company does and that could save some money on the relatively scarce and expensive "rare earth' materials that go into their tweeters, but then we would lose the crisp detail that is yet at the same time buttery smooth and as unfatiguing as a soft dome tweeter

you mentioned the Ascend Sierra's as now being a direct competitor. I had a pair of them too and I feel the NHT 3s rather easily bested them in detail and imaging. I do feel the Sierra's had better bass, but if crossing over to a sub, then it no longer has it's only advantage over the 3

This will be my 1st and last post to you because I don't want to be perceived as feeding a troll any more than I already may be, so I will return to lurk mode. You can now come back and get the last word in if it will make you feel all better about yourself, but I won't see it because you are now the very 1st and hopefully last person to ever make my ignore list. Then after that please feel free to go make positive, constructive posts in the threads of the other brands which you feel now offer more bang for the buck instead of regurgitating the same old same old in this one. Or if you want to continue to make a jack@$$ out of yourself, you could go into the threads of other speaker brands that you obviously must also feel are overpriced if you think NHT is such as Paradigm and B&W to make posts such as these and see what kind of responses you get there. Either way, thank you very much in advance.

__________________
Can't we all just get along?

Fair enough, I won't continue discussing the price issue... I certainly didn't come here to start a drawn out argument or anger people, but obviously I have. So my apologies to the folks here that I've offended.

Good point made on running dual subs with the SZ 2.0 to avoid bass localization... If an individual can make it work with placement of the subs and dialing the subs in correctly... it's a great option.

No doubt the neodymium for the aluminum tweeters is a costly component for NHT. They've achieved great performance with those tweeters, so it certainly makes sense not to overhaul their lineup to put in a cheaper options which compromise performance... But there are very good silk dome tweeters as well...

Regarding the Sierra vs Classic Three... I've only heard (owned) the Sierra's, so I don't know which I would think is better. There are plenty of folks who feel the Sierra's are a better speaker, and vice versa. They're clearly both well designed, and have both gotten alot of praise.

EDIT: I realize Rodney King won't see this post, but my apology to the NHT owners stands.

Hey, I think this exchange has been excellent!

Wouldn't what looks like the linearity of the Super 8 help with localization? I must say that, even with the old SZs and SW1P with a fixed high-pass at 105 and maybe low-passed at 90 (IIRC), I never heard any localization. And I would think the Super 8 should be tighter and more uniform in its response.

BTW, after dragging out some bass-heavy tunes and listening some more to my son's Polk RTi4s (staying with us temporarily), that bass ripeness definitely reinforces my appreciation for a nice acoustic suspension design.

BTW, after dragging out some bass-heavy tunes and listening some more to my son's Polk RTi4s (staying with us temporarily), that bass ripeness definitely reinforces my appreciation for a nice acoustic suspension design.

The bass of the RTi4 was a little to loose and boomy for me. I did stuff
the front resonance port - and it helped a little. I also added a little more
damping material inside - not much damping inside the speaker, and no
cross bracing inside. I wish they had done a little more work with the RTi4.

Hey, I think this exchange has been excellent!

Wouldn't what looks like the linearity of the Super 8 help with localization? I must say that, even with the old SZs and SW1P with a fixed high-pass at 105 and maybe low-passed at 90 (IIRC), I never heard any localization. And I would think the Super 8 should be tighter and more uniform in its response.

The Home Theater Mag measurements of the Super 8 do look good - (as you said) very linear down to the rolloff point. It should be a nice little music sub.

http://www.audioadvisor.com/images/NHTAZB_000.JPG

Absolute zero

http://burrowowl.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/king_ghidorah.jpg

Monster zero

New media room doesn't really leave me space to continue to use my M6's as surrounds and I'm am forced to consider in wall. Does anyone know if the IW series NHTs are timbre matched to the 3.3's, as the M and L series is?

TIA for the help!

New media room doesn't really leave me space to continue to use my M6's as surround backs and I'm am forced to consider in wall/in ceiling. Does anyone know if the IW and IC series NHTs are timbre matched to the 3.3's, as the M and L series is?

TIA for the help!

What are you using for your front L-C-R speakers? If you are using M6 speakers, the perfect timbre match would be L5 on-wall speakers. Drivers are M5 complement residing in a well-dampened metal enclosure. Mid range is M5 not M6, but likely the very best surround substitute for an M6.

What I was using:

L/R: 3.3
C: AudioCenter Two
L/R surrounds: M6
L/R surround backs: L5

Unfortunately, placement logistics prevent me from continuing to use the M6 as surrounds (they would stick out too much on the side walls and people would be running into them). I am aware of the timbre matching with the L5s but these would stick out too much as well. Was hoping that the IW-3 or IW-4 can work in place of the M6's.

Got a response back from NHT, in case anyone else finds themselves in a similar situation:

We have never built a completely timbre-matched architectural speaker for the 3.3, but there's a VERY strong family resemblance with the IW4 in-wall speaker.

The IW4 was originally designed to be the sonic twin of the M5 and M6 monitors, and will work beautifully in a system with our current NHT Classic speakers, or one of our Evolution or Audio Series speakers.

Your best bet in an in-ceiling speaker would be either the IC3 or IC4 in-ceiling speakers.

What I was using:

L/R: 3.3
C: AudioCenter Two
L/R surrounds: M6
L/R surround backs: L5

Unfortunately, placement logistics prevent me from continuing to use the M6 as surrounds (they would stick out too much on the side walls and people would be running into them). I am aware of the timbre matching with the L5s but these would stick out too much as well. Was hoping that the IW-3 or IW-4 can work in place of the M6's.

Good to know. Thanks for posting Mr. Foo.

Speaking of price, Paradigm's new Monitor v7 line (pair):

Atom $398
Mini- $558
Monitor 7- $900
Monitor 9- $1200
Monitor 11- $1500

Studio 20 v5- $1400
Studio- 60v5- $2400
Studio 100v5- $3500

http://www.nhthifi.com/Home-Theater-On-Wall-Speaker-AWSB

Makes me wish I had waited a bit before I purchased the Zero's. I could have saved on the cost of the stands...

http://www.nhthifi.com/Home-Theater-On-Wall-Speaker-AWSBThat's an interesting development, an on wall speaker.

http://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/messages/10381/691280.jpg

Driver complement:
Tweeter: 1” anodized aluminum dome, ferro-fluid cooled
Mid-Woofer: 5.25” polyproplene cone, custom BMC basket

Cabinet Material: 18mm MDF front baffle, sides 12mm, back 6mm
Frequency response: 76Hz - 20kHz
Sensitivity: 86dB (2.83v@1m)
Power Handling: 100 watts
Height: 13.78” H
Width: 5.71” W
Depth: 4” D (4.6” deep with w/wall key and grill
Speaker Weight: 7.2 lbs. (3.3kg)

That's an interesting development, an on wall speaker.


very. It nicely splits the difference between those flat lifestyle on-wall speakers and a bookshelf speaker.

I wonder if they will release a on-wall center to match

very. It nicely splits the difference between those flat lifestyle on-wall speakers and a bookshelf speaker.

I wonder if they will release a on-wall center to match

That would be great for flat panels (kinda like the L5 wall mountables they use to make, those were nice). I wish they had these when I was looking for Heights and Rears, would have worked perfectly...

The SuperZero 2.0 and Super 8 got a nice "review" from Stephen Mejias in the October "Phile". The SZ was placed in Class E- a rather rare rating. It shares Class E with the Klipsch Synergy B-20 (something like that).

I can see the rating on one hand, though the original made Class D and the SZ-SW2P combo was put in Class C. It will be interesting to see if JA does a follow-up with measurements.

The Super 8 was placed in Class D.

First off, let me complement the participants in this thread with providing one of the few comprehensive dialogues regarding NHT speakers. About a month ago I decided to revamp my HT when my 16 year old center finally bit the dust. My room had changed since the last revamp 12 years ago and I now need a system that can work well in a wall unit type environment vs. free standing. The room has also increased in size and I have updated my electronics a couple times. That pushed me in the direction of either a sealed / acoustic suspension design or front firing ported design to minimize my installation's issues with rear ports. Having had some remarkable experience with NHT many years ago setting up 2.1 and 5.1 (pro logic back in the day) systems for some musician friends I set about looking for information on NHT. To say that was a frustrating experience would be an understatement. There just isn't the amount of coverage of their new product line to get a feel for whether they have remained true to their original designs that stress imaging and tonal balance along with small, elegant designs. The 300+ pages of this thread helped immensely.

For reference my old system was comprised of:

Denon AVR-2809CI
Paradigm Reference Studio 20 v.2 fronts
Paradigm CC-200 center
Velodyne VA-1210 sub
Speakercraft AIM 8-3 rear surrounds

While a good system the rear ported Paradigms required a ton of equalization to counter the shelf enclosure they were mounted in. The CC-200 center was weak, for lack of a better term and the Velodyne, while top shelf in it's day, was simply not very musical and I had already rebuilt the amp twice due to failed power supply capacitors.

My newly revamped systems is:

Denon AVR-2809CI
NHT Absolute Zero fronts
NHT Absolute Center
NHT B-12d sub
Speakercraft AIM 8-3 rears

After about 100 hours of break in which included 3 separate Audyssey calibrations as they broke in I can say with 100% confidence that I am completely satisfied with my new system.

NOTE: DO NOT base your opinion of these speaker on how they sound out of the box. They REQUIRE at least 100 hours of dynamic break in based on my experience. The sound I have now vs. what I had out of the box is so radically different that even my father-in-law, who has a tin ear at best, thought I had changed speakers from the first listen when new and how they sound now.

I know many will scratch their heads when I say the AZ's out perform the Studio 20's but in my application, to my ears (as well as what Audyssey found based on it's calibrations) it's the truth. I absolutely love the balance and musicality of the AZ's. The sound stage and tonal balance are excellent in my environment. I was on the fence between the AZ's and the 2's but knowing I would have the proper bass supplementation with the B-12d the extended range of the 2's simply didn't seem worth the extra $200 and I can honestly say I'm satisfied with the results.

One other note, I originally purchased the B-10d but after about 1 week of listening I decided to take advantage of Crutchfield's liberal return policy and swapped it out for the B-12d and that was the crowning touch. The B-10d was boomy in my application because it had to be boosted so much to overcome my large room. It made the transition from sat to sub unnatural. With the B-12d the transition is seamless and the overhead available is incredible when listening to either music or movies.

I know a lot has been written here on price but I was able to take advantage of some package savings through Crutchfield as well as purchase the B-12d as an open box so my total cost for the AZ's, AC and B-12d was right around $1200. I don't think there are many comparable 3.1 systems out there at that price than can compare. Even fewer if you, like me, truly love the sound of acoustic suspension over ported designs.

I know a lot has been written here on price but I was able to take advantage of some package savings through Crutchfield as well as purchase the B-12d as an open box so my total cost for the AZ's, AC and B-12d was right around $1200. I don't think there are many comparable 3.1 systems out there at that price than can compare. Even fewer if you, like me, truly love the sound of acoustic suspension over ported designs.

Congrats on the purchase. Even with price increases, I think NHT's products are still worth it, especially if you're looking for sealed designs. Although when I'm recommending systems to people who aren't really into this as a hobby, it can be a tough sell...

The SuperZero-Super 8 are doing the company name proud this year. Goodsound got the price wrong, but that's OK.

http://goodsound.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=285:nht-superzero-20-loudspeakers-and-super-8-subwoofer&catid=56:equipment-reviews&Itemid=37

Their comparison was to a $1900 sub-sat combo from Paradigm. I wondered (as I read) how the AZ-B10 at $800, the Two-10 at $1000 and Three-12 combo at $1400 might fare?

I bought a used (never opened) pair of M5s recently. They really do sound terrific. I'm looking for a sub to go with them. Have any of you NHT fans used a Super 8 or B10d with M5s?

I'm not looking for massive room-shaking explosions of bass, I have a JBL LSR4326p & LSR4312 system in the home studio, and I don't need anything that big for the NHTs.

I guess my real question is: Do I buy a B10d and go phantom center for now, or Super 8 and Absolute Center?

Thanks for your help!

I use an Outlaw LFM-1 Plus with my M5/SuperZero setup and I have no complaints. The fact that it makes a killer end table with the Lexan top (and nobody even notices it in the room) is a nice bonus.

I bought a used (never opened) pair of M5s recently. They really do sound terrific. I'm looking for a sub to go with them. Have any of you NHT fans used a Super 8 or B10d with M5s?

I'm not looking for massive room-shaking explosions of bass, I have a JBL LSR4326p & LSR4312 system in the home studio, and I don't need anything that big for the NHTs.

I guess my real question is: Do I buy a B10d and go phantom center for now, or Super 8 and Absolute Center?

Thanks for your help!

I would go with a phantom center and skip the Absolute Center. That's a matter of personal preference, but I prefer a phantom center to a non-matching one.

Definitely don't go with the Super 8. An 8" sub isn't big enough to do much for the M5s. At least go with the B10d, but I'd say go for the B12d if possible—the original matching sub for the M5 used two 12" woofers.

I would go with a phantom center and skip the Absolute Center. That's a matter of personal preference, but I prefer a phantom center to a non-matching one.

Definitely don't go with the Super 8. An 8" sub isn't big enough to do much for the M5s. At least go with the B10d, but I'd say go for the B12d if possible—the original matching sub for the M5 used two 12" woofers.

Thanks for your advice.

I didn't realize the AZ and M5 were that far apart sound-wise.

I use an Outlaw LFM-1 Plus with my M5/SuperZero setup and I have no complaints. The fact that it makes a killer end table with the Lexan top (and nobody even notices it in the room) is a nice bonus.

Thanks, I haven't looked into the Outlaw stuff before. I'll do some research on them.

1st time poster here just wondering how many of you got any 30% off gift certificates from NHT last week?

Speaking of price, Paradigm's new Monitor v7 line (pair):

Atom $398
Mini- $558
Monitor 7- $900
Monitor 9- $1200
Monitor 11- $1500

Studio 20 v5- $1400
Studio- 60v5- $2400
Studio 100v5- $3500

Yea, as of Oct 1 PSB raised their prices by 10%... Seems like NHT wasn't the only one...

B&M and ID speaker companies have been raising their prices for years now. Salk SongTowers started off at $1500 per pair and Revel F12 Towers were once $1200 a pair IIRC.

I don't see too many other ID speaker companies offering free shipping over $500 and 30% off gift certificates that are even good on additional sales promotions though.

Yea, as of Oct 1 PSB raised their prices by 10%... Seems like NHT wasn't the only one...

I saw that too.

Klipsch, Jamo, and Energy raised MSRP as well... Yet strangely enough, there are now huge discounts on some of Energy's new Veritas series gear (through at least one retailer)...

Aperion, on the other hand, lowered prices of their Intimus speakers, but did so by cutting a few corners - dropping cherry veneer/gloss black for vinyl, dropping cabinet thickness from 18mm to 15mm (with the 4 series), dropping warranty from 10 to 5 years on parts other than drivers... Fortunately, the Verus series pricing stayed the same (except for the Forte tower only that did go up a bit)... Those speakers look very nice for the money. I'm hoping the pricing holds...

Guess the industry as a whole is hurting... Labor and materials cost more, so prices go up, yet consumers are generally spending less... Makes it a tough time to be in the audio business...

As a consumer, it's all the more reason to hold out for closeout deals or specials sales... I was glad to see NHT offer the 30% off gift card deal...it's a nice deal for someone who planned on going NHT anyway... and might have swayed some folks who had them on the radar, but were holding back for cost reasons.

B&M and ID speaker companies have been raising their prices for years now. Salk SongTowers started off at $1500 per pair and Revel F12 Towers were once $1200 a pair IIRC.

I don't see too many other ID speaker companies offering free shipping over $500 and 30% off gift certificates that are even good on additional sales promotions though.

Yea, great offer by NHT... I spent my gift card I received from the sub this summer. I wish I had been a bit more patient.

Yes when labor and material costs go up the increase is passed on to consumers sooner (NHT) or a bit later (PSB).

Anyone know how close you can put the NHT absolute tower speakers to the side of an HDTV?

I imagine your questioning if the speakers will affect the TV set's picture.

If the HDTV is an older CRT set - more than 12".

You can experiment with it closer. If the picture distorts, keep moving the speaker
farther away.

Plasmas and LCDs won't be a problem - place your speakers as close as it's sonically good for your set up.

I imagine your questioning if the speakers will affect the TV set's picture.

If the HDTV is an older CRT set - more than 12".

You can experiment with it closer. If the picture distorts, keep moving the speaker
farther away.

Plasmas and LCDs won't be a problem - place your speakers as close as it's sonically good for your set up.

Cool - exactly what I was wondering - thanks! Just curious, should I keep it any minimum distance away from a sound perspective or no? The front of the speaker would be equal or in front of the front of he screen. Thanks again.

Yea, great offer by NHT... I spent my gift card I received from the sub this summer. I wish I had been a bit more patient.

Yes when labor and material costs go up the increase is passed on to consumers sooner (NHT) or a bit later (PSB).

You have the b-10d right? Do you use it for HT, music, both?

I bought a gift card to use on a sub... and I'm sitting tight to see if they run any sales on the subs so I can double it up to get the b-12d for a nice price... otherwise, I might just get the 10.

Cool - exactly what I was wondering - thanks! Just curious, should I keep it any minimum distance away from a sound perspective or no? The front of the speaker would be equal or in front of the front of he screen. Thanks again.

There are variables - size of room, distance from main listening area to speakers, size of speakers. First, try what is esthecally pleasing concerning distance from HDTV, then use your ears and try different placements.

Wish you well!

You have the b-10d right? Do you use it for HT, music, both?

I bought a gift card to use on a sub... and I'm sitting tight to see if they run any sales on the subs so I can double it up to get the b-12d for a nice price... otherwise, I might just get the 10.

Same here. I'm considering a pair of B-12d for a room of about 3300 cubic feet. The true cost with the certificates will be $978.60 with free shipping if my math is right.

I've already preordered 6 of the new Absolute Onwall speakers, and I'm waiting for NHT to put that free Absolute Center speaker deal with the Absolute Towers again and upgrade the Absolute Center to the 2C or even 3C.

All of this will be used with a Denon AVR-4311CI and a Denon PMA-2000 IVR as a power amp for the Towers.

What would be the best option for wides? Another pair of Absolute Onwalls will not work for that will it?

You have the b-10d right? Do you use it for HT, music, both?

I bought a gift card to use on a sub... and I'm sitting tight to see if they run any sales on the subs so I can double it up to get the b-12d for a nice price... otherwise, I might just get the 10.

I just use it for music. It doesn't make as much of a rumble as my previous HSU, it is a bit better "behaved". When there is a bass heavy track it makes it's presence known. Of course it depends on the size of your room, I have an open room but short ceilings. I think a 12 would be a start and a finish for you especially if you use it for music and ht..

Did you get that 30% offer a couple of weeks back ? I didn't because I didn't join the "insider" list. If I knew now what I had know then..... Instead of zeros I would have gotten a pair of 2's B-stock and used my $100 gift card for that.

So 600-15%= 510 510-30%=357 357-100= 257 257 + about 35 or so for shipping..... Oh how the mind wanders from time to time..

Same here. I'm considering a pair of B-12d for a room of about 3300 cubic feet. The true cost with the certificates will be $978.60 with free shipping if my math is right.

I've already preordered 6 of the new Absolute Onwall speakers, and I'm waiting for NHT to put that free Absolute Center speaker deal with the Absolute Towers again and upgrade the Absolute Center to the 2C or even 3C.

All of this will be used with a Denon AVR-4311CI and a Denon PMA-200 IVR as a power amp for the Towers.

What would be the best option for wides? Another pair of Absolute Onwalls will not work for that will it?


I really dig those onwall NHT's.... Perhaps the zero's would fit your need ?

I just use it for music. It doesn't make as much of a rumble as my previous HSU, it is a bit better "behaved". When there is a bass heavy track it makes it's presence known. Of course it depends on the size of your room, I have an open room but short ceilings. I think a 12 would be a start and a finish for you especially if you use it for music and ht..

Did you get that 30% offer a couple of weeks back ? I didn't because I didn't join the "insider" list. If I knew now what I had know then..... Instead of zeros I would have gotten a pair of 2's B-stock and used my $100 gift card for that.

So 600-15%= 510 510-30%=357 357-100= 257 257 + about 35 or so for shipping..... Oh how the mind wanders from time to time..

Yeah I grabbed a for 30% off... knowing I could get a b-10d now for $350.

For their anniversary sale back in Sept (I think), they temporarily marked everyone 18% off... If they do that again, a b-12d would cost me about $423 total. So I'm holding out to see if that deal comes along.

The 30% off applied to the cost of the gift card.... and you couldn't combine gift cards - only one per order. So I think the cheapest you could've grabbed the b-stock Two's for would've been $358. Still a good deal that way.

"The 30% off applied to the cost of the gift card.... and you couldn't combine gift cards - only one per order. So I think the cheapest you could've grabbed the b-stock Two's for would've been $358. Still a good deal that way."


Not surprising that I couldn't combine them... I still am pleased with the zero's, just "crunching" some numbers that weren't meant to be. So you picked up a 30% off coupon..nice. That would make the NHT's more than competitive with the competition wouldn't it ? Always nice when credit is given as well as criticism levied isn't it ?

I don't recall their anniversary sale from this year... I thought that particular sale was in May, which is when they re-emerged with the new business model..

"The 30% off applied to the cost of the gift card.... and you couldn't combine gift cards - only one per order. So I think the cheapest you could've grabbed the b-stock Two's for would've been $358. Still a good deal that way."


Not surprising that I couldn't combine them... I still am pleased with the zero's, just "crunching" some potential numbers...

I don't recall their anniversary sale from this year... I thought that particular sale was in May, which is when they re-emerged with the new business model..

You're right, their 18% off sale was in May. Not sure where I got Sept. Seems time is flying and my months are blending together.

I just remember seeing everyone at 18% off when I was scouring OneCall's website.

You're right, their 18% off sale was in May. Not sure where I got Sept. Seems time is flying and my months are blending together.

I just remember seeing everyone at 18% off when I was scouring OneCall's website.

Well I was sad to see them go and was pleased when they re-emerged so the time frame sticks. I am also a fan of the new business model and what that offers us as consumers.

Well I was sad to see them go and was pleased when they re-emerged so the time frame sticks. I am also a fan of the new business model and what that offers us as consumers.

Yeah I certainly prefer the perks of their new model as well.

NHT re-emerged in May of '09 right?

When I googled to find when the last 18% off sale was, I saw they had one in May 2010 as well as in 2011... so 2009 seemed right for when the brand came back from the dead.

Yeah I certainly prefer the perks of their new model as well.

NHT re-emerged in May of '09 right?

When I googled to find when the last 18% off sale was, I saw they had one in May 2010 as well as in 2011... so 2009 seemed right for when the brand came back from the dead.

May of 09 would be correct. I purchased my sub last October and received a $100 gift card for it, but didn't purchase the Zero's when they had their annual sale (did get in before the price increase but also missed the free shipping offer at the end of June).. Timing matters, but either way it's nice to know they offer discount(s) on an annual basis.

I really dig those onwall NHT's.... Perhaps the zero's would fit your need ?

Thanks. Absolute Zeros are what I thought would probably be the best choice for wides too.

I currently have a 7.1 setup consisting of two NHT Absolute towers, a 2C center and four SuperOne surrounds. Since my AVR can handle it (Denon 4311). I am thinking of adding wides into the mix and wondering what would be a good fit? Since the concept is new to me, how close do wides need to be with respect to the quality of the main LR, etc?

The front sound stage should have the same timbre/tonal match. If adding wides, using speakers from the same 'family' should work fine. In your case, Absolute Zeros would fit the bill nicely. I'm using Fours for my main L/R and a 3C. I tried Threes, Two, and Absolute Zeros for the wides and all worked just fine (just make sure the XO's are set correctly for the speaker you use - ie, I used an XO of 90HZ for the Zeros). You may be able to get away using the Super Zeros since the Denon 4311 does a great job with Audyssey XT32, but still not a perfect match (I tried it, was not as good as using speakers with the same tweeters). Once set up, you'll have a HUGE front sound stage when Audyssey DSX is engaged.

Have some fun!!!
Ray

Cool, thanks for the tip :)

Along those same lines, are SuperOnes ok to use for surrounds - and would those fit the bill for wides (I have one extra so would only need to pick up one more)?

Yes, the SuperOnes will work for surrounds. As for the wides, you'll just have to try it. After calibration, it may work great.

Keep us posted - I'm curious if they will sound good for wides (I had SuperOnes bck in the day, great speaker.

Question relating to the Absolute tower speakers efficiency. I know they are not the most efficient, but I would like to know how the current sensitivity of 86db /w/m changes if you are crossing the speakers over at 80hz. Basically, how is the overall total wattage divided amongst the various woofers/tweeters, does it get diverted and re-split up in the event that certain frequencies are not being demanded or is there some fixed number per woofer that can't be increased (so basically, I gain no headroom by crossing over at 80hz besides on the bass woofers. Thanks in advance!

^^^ The crossovers are fixed for both the Tweeters and Midrange drivers, so they are not affected at all. The only thing affected are the woofers, so you do gain a LOT of headroom if crossing over at 80 hz for the midbass/bass region. It is worth it! Keep in mind that the bass region takes up most of the power from your receiver/amp and that is where you will gain tremendous headroom - in your receiver since it will no longer have to amplify the bass region (will be taken care of by your Subs amp). Besides, you sub is much more capable in the lower regions than your mains - let them do the heavy lifting and your mains will be much better off.

^^^ The crossovers are fixed for both the Tweeters and Midrange drivers, so they are not affected at all. The only thing affected are the woofers, so you do gain a LOT of headroom if crossing over at 80 hz for the midbass/bass region. It is worth it! Keep in mind that the bass region takes up most of the power from your receiver/amp and that is where you will gain tremendous headroom - in your receiver since it will no longer have to amplify the bass region (will be taken care of by your Subs amp). Besides, you sub is much more capable in the lower regions than your mains - let them do the heavy lifting and your mains will be much better off.

So does your speaker efficiency increase beyond 86db/w/m then? If so, by how much relatively

So does your speaker efficiency increase beyond 86db/w/m then? If so, by how much relatively

The efficiency does not change.

The efficiency does not change.

So basically then these speakers are not capable of playing peak reference level sound at 10ft then (even if the bass load is lessened) since they are pretty inefficient AND can't be driven with more than 200watts which would be needed to get there?

It really depends on your room, size, furniture. Also remember the multiplier of more than one speaker. I know in my room, it easily reaches 115-120db NHTs all the way around.

peak reference level soundThe ratings are squishy enough at continuous levels, I doubt very much that you can draw a lot of conclusions about peak levels. But my guess is that they can handle peaks above those specs. And I'm fairly certain the real, practical conclusions are not the ones you are drawing - they will get loud enough if the room isn't too large.

It really depends on your room, size, furniture. Also remember the multiplier of more than one speaker. I know in my room, it easily reaches 115-120db NHTs all the way around.

My room is only about 2000 ft^3 and furniture is a couch and some smaller seats. I mean it seems to me I can play at reference level as well, but just when you look at the calculators it appears that you can't get there without distortion at 10ft away?

New self amplified Super Zero 2.0 (http://www.nhthifi.com/http-www-nhthifi-com-Powered-Desktop-Monitor-Speaker-Super-Power) speakers.

Would these qualify as active?

Another interesting product, just stumbled across them on the site. Yes, powerered and active are the same thing.

It seems to be a powered SuperZero 2.0, 1.75" deeper. It's a good product category to be in, and a lot easier for most people than figuring out an amp for the SZ2.

http://www.twice.com/article/476522-NHT_Unveils_Powered_Mini_Monitor.php

The web write up and the article are interesting.

This sounds like them: "The amp in each SuperPower speaker is rated at 90 watts with more than 90 percent efficiency. The amp mates with a custom-designed pre-amp circuit to extend bass to 72Hz and deliver more than 111dB at 1 meter."

Lots of Google results, their PR people have been busy:
http://www.google.com/search?q=SuperPower+NHT


http://www.stereophile.com/content/nht-superpower-computer-desktop-loudspeakers

My room is only about 2000 ft^3 and furniture is a couch and some smaller seats. I mean it seems to me I can play at reference level as well, but just when you look at the calculators it appears that you can't get there without distortion at 10ft away?

The best way to confirm - do actual measurements using a calibrated SPL meter or REW with a calibrated mic. If you can reach reference levels without distortion, then you have no problem. Keep in mind that the reference level points are very short bursts and most of the material is at 85db (when played at reference).

New self amplified Super Zero 2.0 (http://www.nhthifi.com/http-www-nhthifi-com-Powered-Desktop-Monitor-Speaker-Super-Power) speakers.

Would these qualify as active?

Yep, they would!!! Way cool, I hope they start looking at doing this to their larger speakers.

Another interesting product, just stumbled across them on the site. Yes, powerered and active are the same thing.

It seems to be a powered SuperZero 2.0, 1.75" deeper. It's a good product category to be in, and a lot easier for most people than figuring out an amp for the SZ2.

http://www.twice.com/article/476522-NHT_Unveils_Powered_Mini_Monitor.php

The web write up and the article are interesting.

This sounds like them: "The amp in each SuperPower speaker is rated at 90 watts with more than 90 percent efficiency. The amp mates with a custom-designed pre-amp circuit to extend bass to 72Hz and deliver more than 111dB at 1 meter."

Lots of Google results, their PR people have been busy:
http://www.google.com/search?q=SuperPower+NHT


http://www.stereophile.com/content/nht-superpower-computer-desktop-loudspeakers

Seems to me like they tailor customized, tweaked, and fine tuned the amp specifically for the speaker in order to squeeze every last little bit of performance out of it that it is capable of, even to the point of making it a little easier to blend with a sub than the passive model.

If so, that would be well worth springing an extra $100 per channel over the stock Super Zero 2.0

And talk about economy. Add channels for only $199 each for both the speaker and amp.

Hello I am new to the NHT forum, I just ordered Absolute Towers ($200 off special) and both Centers ( I'll return the loser in my testing ) I am replacing my Paradigm Monitor 3s and Center. I am currently powering the mains with an Adcom 555 ( yes it is still hanging in there after 20 plus years! ) The rest of the surrounds and rear surrounds are powered by my Onkyo SR707. My Paradigm sub is self powered. My question is do I have enough current to drive the NHTs properly?

Thanks in advance,
Jeff

Hello I am new to the NHT forum, I just ordered Absolute Towers ($200 off special) and both Centers ( I'll return the loser in my testing ) I am replacing my Paradigm Monitor 3s and Center. I am currently powering the mains with an Adcom 555 ( yes it is still hanging in there after 20 plus years! ) The rest of the surrounds and rear surrounds are powered by my Onkyo SR707. My Paradigm sub is self powered. My question is do I have enough current to drive the NHTs properly?

Thanks in advance,
Jeff

Welcome Jeff! You should have no problem driving your speakers, especially the mains (Absolute Towers). The Adcom 555 is a classic amp and a very good one. Have fun with it and let us know how you like your new setup.

Hello I am new to the NHT forum, I just ordered Absolute Towers ($200 off special) and both Centers ( I'll return the loser in my testing ) I am replacing my Paradigm Monitor 3s and Center. I am currently powering the mains with an Adcom 555 ( yes it is still hanging in there after 20 plus years! ) The rest of the surrounds and rear surrounds are powered by my Onkyo SR707. My Paradigm sub is self powered. My question is do I have enough current to drive the NHTs properly?

Thanks in advance,
Jeff

Same here. Plus, I used one of my 30% off gift certificates that NHT recently offered, so my final cost for a pair of them shipped is $558.60!

They will be the heart of a bedroom system that is going to eventually replace a 15 year old M&K surround system in the bedroom. The M&Ks have served me well for years, and are still to this day as good as they were new, but I want to start listening to more music in that room in addition to the occasional movie.

As dead sexy as the C4 towers look, the cost was just too prohibitive for me, especially since I fully subscribed to the sub/sat theory years ago.

Those new Super Powers and a Super 8 sub sure look inviting though.

Fantastic deal! My Speakers will be here today. It will be raining/snowing here thru Saturday so I'll have plenty of time to play indoors.

How long do the Towers take to break in so I know I have the true sound from them? I want to make sure I give them the proper audition.

They'll sound great out of the box, you won't regret it. If you feel you need to break it in, give it a week of playing. It's not always about breaking in the speakers - sometimes it's our ears getting used to them and listening to the nuances.

Enjoy and have some fun!!!

Count me in as another who took advantage of the gift card deal + Absolute tower sale.

I originally bought one of the $500 gift cards with the intention of buying a sub at some point, but I caved to the deal on the towers to go with a 2C I already had in my bedroom. Total cost was $648 - so not as good a deal as possible, but still good enough that I felt it was worth it.

I'll be comparing the AT/2C to the Energy RC10/LCR I've had in my main system for the last couple years.

I previously compared the AZ/2C, but stuck with the Energy setup for various reasons. I like the 2C though, and perhaps the AT will give me what I felt was lacking with the AZ.

I want to order some SuperZero 2.0's and a Super 8 subwoofer. I missed both the 30% gift card and Thanksgiving sales because I can't buy til December. Does NHT normally do a sale for Christmas or are they done for a while? I'm trying to figure out whether to order soon or wait a while. Thanks.

Are you looking for a surround system or a 2.1 system, because if it's 2.1, I don't think they ever really ran a special on that other than the gift certificates which are good for anything. I believe they are even good for the Marantz electronics too.

They periodically run specials on certain items (like the free Absolute Center with purchase of Absolute Towers deal), but the only other time of year I recall them running a "storewide" sale is their May 18th "anniversary" sale, when they run everything 18% off.

They did this the last 2 years in a row... but no idea if they'll do it again in 2012.

Thanks. Sounds like there's no good reason to wait. I was planning to do a 3.1 setup at this time. They do have a 2.1 bundle with a small discount.

Exactly, they knock $50 off the 2.1 bundle, and $50 is what they knocked off the price of the Super 8 sub by itself over Black Friday weekend anyway. And by it being $500 total you will get free shipping too. So overall that's still quite a good deal.

I was thinking about a Super Zero pair and Super 8 for my home office with the little Marantz 40 watt integrated amp they offer, but now I'm thinking a Super Power pair instead because they should integrate better with the sub since they go lower than the Super Zeros and I have a B&K pre-amp/tuner around here I could use with them.

Got them tonight and started listening to them in Direct mode no sub. I am very impressed with the sound stage. They seem a little harsh on the high end. I'll give them a week like you suggested and give me time to get used to them.

I'll let you know how they work out for me.

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

The harshness on the high end might be due to a 'lively room'. Does you room have a lot of reflective surfaces? If your AVR/Processor has a room calibration system (Audyssey, MMAC, etc.) set it up. It should tame the upper end a lot to match your room.

Have fun!!!

Bob Reina wrote in Stereophile:

When I first listened to the Classic Absolute Tower, I was surprised to find that I didn't like its sound. The upper midrange and lower highs were tense, glary, and forward, and the speaker didn't sound balanced. Listening for longer than 15 minutes was fatiguing, and every time I turned the system on, my wife told me to turn it down—no matter the volume level or the music being played. After five hours of listening, I discovered the problem.

I'm a strong believer in breaking in a new product before critically listening to it, a view not universally held among Stereophile writers. I have found this to be particularly critical with dynamic speakers, and with electronic components with exotic capacitor designs. So I always request that a manufacturer break in a product for 100 hours before shipping it to me. My review samples of the Absolute Towers arrived with what NHT claimed was "36 to 48 hours of break-in." I figured that would be enough, but it wasn't. However, after the NHTs had played music for another five hours, for a total of 10 additional hours, the clouds parted—for the rest of my time with them, the Towers let me enjoy many hours of coherent, natural, nonfatiguing listening.

Brian,

Thanks for posting!!! I do not have the Absolute Towers, but found the same thing with the Fours - they needed a decent break-in period.

Just ordered some SuperZero 2.0's and a Super 8 subwoofer to go along with the Pioneer 1121 I got on BF. Can't wait to hear them.

Sorry for the duplicate post.

The 3s and 4s hurt my ears no matter how many hours they have. Might just be that I prefer a more laid back presentation. They have a hardness in the treble to me.

The 3s and 4s hurt my ears no matter how many hours they have. Might just be that I prefer a more laid back presentation. They have a hardness in the treble to me.

Maybe you prefer speakers that have soft-dome tweeters. They tend to be a bit more laid back. But, when using a system calibrated with Audyssey, some of the differences are tamed.

Maybe you prefer speakers that have soft-dome tweeters. They tend to be a bit more laid back. But, when using a system calibrated with Audyssey, some of the differences are tamed.

I think Audyssey has made a difference. I did notice less harshness after calibration. However, before calibration I did notice a huge difference between the Absolute CC and the C2 CC. The C2 was smoother. I backed up the Absolute CC for return before I calibrated my system.
My verdict on the Towers sound is still out however.

Also, my Onkyo 705 decided it didn't want to cooperate any longer, I am looking at a Yamaha Rx-A1010, a Marantz 5006 or a Pioneer SC-37. I have the absolute towers and I want to use my Adcom 555 for the front mains and I also want networking capabilities, any suggestions?

My absolute Towers are supposed to arrive today. I will set them up tonight and let them play relatively loud all week with the tuner while the house is empty during the day while we are at work to break them in. I can have over 30 hours on them by the weekend before I really do any "critical" listening to them. By the following weekend, they will have well over 75 hours on them like this.

Also, my Onkyo 705 decided it didn't want to cooperate any longer, I am looking at a Yamaha Rx-A1010, a Marantz 5006 or a Pioneer SC-37. I have the absolute towers and I want to use my Adcom 555 for the front mains and I also want networking capabilities, any suggestions?

I vote for the Marantz, but better yet would be if you could get a Denon AVR-3311 on closeout or a 3312. The 4311 is the bomb though. I'm sure the Pioneer SC-37 is nice too, but I just like Audyssey much more so than YPAO or MCAC.

Just ordered some SuperZero 2.0's and a Super 8 subwoofer to go along with the Pioneer 1121 I got on BF. Can't wait to hear them.

Please report back your experience with them. I'm so seriously considering them myself.

Do you guys think the Super 2.0's would be suitable rears for my current system?

AVR: Pioneer Elite VSX-0TXH
Fronts: NHT Classic 3's
Center: NHT Three C

I can't quite swing the dough for the Absolute Zero's. TYIA

Do you guys think the Super 2.0's would be suitable rears for my current system?

AVR: Pioneer Elite VSX-0TXH
Fronts: NHT Classic 3's
Center: NHT Three C

I can't quite swing the dough for the Absolute Zero's. TYIA

CRAW,

They should work just fine for movies (for multichannel music you may notice, but will also be fine for that use). The main thing it to make sure the XO is high enough (90Hz or 100Hz) and you'll be good to go.

How do the new owners of the Absolute towers feel about them ... I would love to hear what you folks think !

I vote for the Marantz, but better yet would be if you could get a Denon AVR-3311 on closeout or a 3312. The 4311 is the bomb though. I'm sure the Pioneer SC-37 is nice too, but I just like Audyssey much more so than YPAO or MCAC.

I went with the Yamaha RX1010, it just had the right features. The calibration was quick and flawless, better than the Audyssey on the Onkyo. As far as the Towers go, They are sounding better all the time, but they still aren't what I was hoping for. They are keepers but not wall hangers.

I just saw on NHT's site that they have a limited number of 3's going for $600 per pair which is a really nice price.
If someone has one of those gift cards you could put towards it, and that would be a fantastic deal.

I just saw on NHT's site that they have a limited number of 3's going for $600 per pair which is a really nice price.
If someone has one of those gift cards you could put towards it, and that would be a fantastic deal.

That is a killer deal!

^^^ Yes it is, a very hard speaker to beat at it's original price and an absolute steal at this price!!!

I ended up returning the Absolute Towers a few weeks back...

I liked them alot, but would've liked a little more politeness on the high end, and just a tiny bit of warmth on the low end (nitpicking here). At the price I paid for them, it was a heck of a deal... but since they weren't THE speaker for me, I couldn't justify keeping them over my Energy RC-10's at twice the cost.

That said, they did make me more aware of some of the RC-10's shortcomings... IMO, the AT has a wider/taller soundstage (this was what struck me most), more taut/defined bass, and a cleaner mid-range. I did, however, prefer the slightly more polite, but no less detailed (IMO) treble of the RC-10.


Fast forward to today - it only made sense that I use my gift card and jump on the current Classic Three deal... and I did just that.

Based on the Stereophile measurements of the Classic Three and Absolute Tower, it looks like the C3 has a bit more low end warmth, and doesn't have the slightly rising high end of the AT... so in other words... I'm hoping this is the perfect mix of what I like about the AT and RC-10...

That is a killer deal!

Especially if someone bought one of the $500 gift cards for 30% off a couple months back... :D

I just saw on NHT's site that they have a limited number of 3's going for $600 per pair which is a really nice price.
If someone has one of those gift cards you could put towards it, and that would be a fantastic deal.

For the non-gift card folks... There is an NHT authorized online retailer that also has an active 15% off coupon code... so one should be able to buy them from that dealer for $510/pair.

Especially if someone bought one of the $500 gift cards for 30% off a couple months back... :D

Maybe this will be the one, to hold you for a while.