New NHT Classic line to replace Super Audio [Text View] - Page 6

mark russ

06-20-06, 12:32 AM

Wow! I've really got a lot of catching up to do on this thread! :eek: :o

If you think so.

A small sealed (or vented for that matter) box CANNOT reproduce bass below resonance with power. They roll off at between 12db (in the case of sealed) or 24 db (in the case of vented) per octave. EQ is necessary and is inversely proportional to that roll off. If the design is down 3db at 50, the electronics apply a boost of 3db at 50 to compensate for it. The downside to all of this is: need for crazy amp power (the greater the boost) and output limitations as you reach the excursion limit of the driver. It's simple physics.

Even the relatively large U1 needs the X1 to apply that boost or it craps out around 35hz.

Taken from http://www.iar-80.com/page111.html then scroll about halfway down to the "Evolution Subwoofer vs. Vented Enclosure Subwoofer" paragraph.

"At 27 Hz the equalizing boost from the X1 stops, in order to prevent excessive excursion demands upon the subwoofer drivers from yet lower frequencies that would be electrically boosted even more. And below 27 Hz the X1 actually begins electrically rolling off the signal fed to your subwoofer power amplifier (instead of merely becoming flat below 27 Hz). The ultimate rolloff slope of the X1, far below 27 Hz, becomes 12 dB per octave. This 12 dB per octave rolloff slope adds to the intrinsic 12 dB per octave acoustic rolloff slope of the subwoofer's sealed bass system that intrinsically began below 50 Hz, thereby making the ultimate bass rolloff slope 24 dB per octave.

This 24 dB per octave ultimate slope is significant because it means that the Evolution subwoofers are ultimately fourth order bass systems, just like the very common vented enclosure bass systems. Why is this fact so important? A pure sealed bass system (without equalization) is a second order bass system, and this inherently has superior bass transient response to fourth order bass systems (which include all vented or ported bass systems). The superior bass transient response of a pure second order sealed bass system means that there is less overhang and ringing after each musical bass transient, which yields tighter bass, better bass definition, better bass tunefulness, less of the one-note boom phenomenon, and less of that woolly, heavy fullness that characterizes most vented bass loudspeaker systems (except those with ports specifically "mistuned" for flat top response, which can achieve much better bass transient response, almost as good as a second order sealed bass system).

But the Evolution subwoofers, even though they use sealed enclosures, are not pure second order systems, since they also employ boosting electrical equalization that then itself rolls off below 27 Hz and thereby adds two more orders (12 dB per octave extra slope) to the intrinsic acoustic rolloff of the Evolution's sealed bass, acoustic suspension enclosure. The bottom line is that the bass transient response of the Evolution subwoofers, including the W1, is not as good as a pure sealed bass second order subwoofer, and instead is much like the bass transient response of a very good vented bass subwoofer system. That's what keeps the W1's bass transient response from earning an excellent rating. The slight overhang and heaviness we hear from the W1, which demotes its bass quality rating from excellent to very good, is explained by and is directly attributable to this important fact, that its transient response actually behaves like a fourth order vented bass subwoofer system instead of a second order sealed enclosure subwoofer system. Incidentally, it's worth noting that even pure second order sealed enclosure bass systems do not have ideal bass transient response. In order to achieve ideal bass transient response, you'd need a single order bass system with a rolloff slope of just 6 dB per octave (dipole woofers can achieve this, but only for a limited range of frequencies).

Although the W1 is a fourth order system, it does have the potential for better quality bass, at the low end of its bass passband, than common vented bass fourth order systems. One reason is that the four orders of common vented bass systems are entirely achieved by very imperfect acoustical and electromechanical means, whereas two of the W1's orders are achieved by virtually perfect electrical means, and the remaining two are achieved by well controlled acoustical and electromechanical means.

Why does this contrast make a sonic difference? In this modern engineering age, fourth order vented bass loudspeaker systems are designed in accordance with the equations involving the major Thiele-Small parameters. The problem is that these equations make many simplifying assumptions about other minor parameters, wrongly ignoring them or assuming that they are static or well behaved, when in fact these other minor parameters do dynamically affect the sound, in particular the bass quality. To make matters worse, many of the vented bass alignment choices are very critical of even the major parameters having exact values, and these exact values, though plottable and calculable in the abstract on paper, cannot be achieved in concrete practical reality, due to tolerance variations in various parts and systems. The result is that the actual bass performance of most fourth order vented bass loudspeaker systems does not fulfill the promise that the simplified equation assumptions suggest on paper.

In contrast, two orders of the W1's rolloff below 27 Hz are achieved by a purely electrical filter, wherein all parameters are known and no simplifying assumptions need be made, and furthermore whose behavior is virtually perfect within very tight tolerances.

What then about the other two orders of the W1's bass rolloff, the two orders governed by acoustical and electromechanical means? They too can be far better predicted and controlled than in a common vented bass system, for several reasons. First, an acoustic suspension design such as the W1 depends on the linear springiness of a fixed and well controlled amount of air, without many complicating minor factors that must be assumed, oversimplified, or ignored, as was the case with fourth order vented systems.

Second, the behavior of a second order system like the W1 does not depend for its success on exact alignment of many factors requiring exact alignment and exact tolerances, as do most fourth order vented bass alignments. If the parts tolerances are slightly off in an acoustic suspension system, the quality of its bass performance will be only slightly affected, instead of going to hell in a hand basket as do most vented bass systems.

Third, the functioning of the W1's second order acoustical and electromechanical filter occurs up at 50 Hz, which is almost an octave removed from the critical 27 Hz frequency where the equalized W1 actually begins its rolloff. Thus, by the point we get down to this critical frequency of 27 Hz, the two orders of W1's acoustical and electromechanical filter have already assumed a stable 12 dB per octave downward slope, even if there were to have been some slight deviation due to parts tolerances when it turned its corner up at 50 Hz. In other words, the W1's behavior at its critical corner frequency of 27 Hz is the sum of a virtually perfect electrical filter for two orders, plus (for the other two orders) the well behaved straight line of the acoustical cum electromechanical filter that had already turned its corner an octave away. In the W1, no critical alignment factors are even present at this 27 Hz corner frequency, in sharp contrast to vented bass systems. Therefore, the quality of the W1's bass performance is not compromised by all the many factors that compromise the bass quality of most vented bass systems. The quality of the W1's bass performance can be as good in practical reality as it ideally promised to be on paper.

Indeed, if NHT wanted to, they could easily make the quality of the W1's bass even better than it is. You see, because the W1's intrinsic second order acoustic suspension filter has already become a substantially straight line down at 27 Hz, NHT could shape the 27 Hz corner of the equalized W1's response to any shape they wanted, using purely electrical means (in the equalizing signal coming from the X1 crossover)."

mark russ

06-20-06, 12:38 AM

Yep, the 24" speaker stand is too short. ..

Wouldn't the 28" be better since it would put the Three at about the exact same height as the Four?

mark russ

06-20-06, 12:43 AM

In order of performance, lowest to highest, IMO:

Three with one Ten (why?!?)
Three with one Twelve
Fours or Threes with two Tens
Threes with two Twelves or Evolution U1/U2 (depending on room)
Threes with dual U1 setup.

I can't easily comment on other subs, but, by far, most subwoofers can't touch the bass quality of the Fours. The few that can would be getting a hell of a run for the money.

What about when Fours biamped with a NAD C270 (or some comparable amp) for the bass/woofers, T5s, or M5s with U1s or U2s is thrown into the mix?

Alimentall

06-20-06, 08:54 AM

Hey John, wouldn't the 28" be better since it would put the Three at about the exact same height as the Four?

Well, I think it will put them about 2" higher. I'll measure.

Alimentall

06-20-06, 08:57 AM

Hey John, what about when Fours biamped with a NAD C270 (or some comparable amp) for the bass/woofers, T5s, or M5s with U1s or U2s is thrown into the mix?

Well, biamping wouldn't really change the overall performance significantly, just allow you to change the bass levels. I would put the T5 as slightly below the Fours in mid/treble, but slightly above in bass, plus or minus a bit.

mark russ

06-20-06, 04:19 PM

Well, I think it will put them about 2" higher. I'll measure.

I was just going by the specs on NHT's website showing the Four as 41" high and the Three as 13.75", which would be a difference of 27.25". I assume that the Threes height given includes the bar supports?

BTW, when you said Threes with dual 12s or with a U2/U1, depending on room, before as your second choice, what type of room would the dual 12s actually be better in than U2s?

mark russ

06-20-06, 05:43 PM

Well I just got back from my local NHT dealer to see if he had any Fours yet so I could listen to them, but they still haven't arrived yet. :rolleyes:

JRSUB

06-22-06, 07:31 AM

Got an in stock notice from J&R on the fours on Tuesday. I though it was funny that the notice just said that the left speaker was available.

Alimental, are further insight you can share on how the 4's stack up after having them for a few days now?

el stumbo

06-22-06, 09:50 AM

Finally got possession of my Threes - finally - a long time coming!

Funny thing is they were manufactured in Feb. and it took this long to get to retail. Wow. NHT really ought to get their lines rolling better. Or, are we back to horse in buggy the Classic way?

BTW - they sound beautiful - look beautiful and just won't turn off for some reason...

Alimentall

06-22-06, 10:30 AM

I was just going by the specs on NHT's website showing the Four as 41" high and the Three as 13.75", which would be a difference of 27.25". I assume that the Threes height given includes the bar supports?

Well, they're about 3" higher than Threes on the HS60s.

BTW, when you said Threes with dual 12s or with a U2/U1, depending on room, before as your second choice, what type of room would the dual 12s actually be better in than U2s?

Large room, home theater. One Twelve (ported) probably plays a solid 3dB+ louder than a single U2.

Alimentall

06-22-06, 10:32 AM

Alimental, are further insight you can share on how the 4's stack up after having them for a few days now?

Not a lot. They sound great, a bit warm and the bass is a bit hot. This is good for me because we have a lot of rooms that are big, bright, reverberant. Compared to many speakers, the warmth may make people think they're not as detailed when they're very likely *more* detailed. I'm hoping to take these out and compare them in homes soon.

Alimentall

06-22-06, 10:33 AM

BTW - they sound beautiful - look beautiful and just won't turn off for some reason...

Funny how the off switch doesn't work on these. ;)

DreamCatcher

06-22-06, 06:41 PM

I wonder, heard rumors, if NHT will come out with an on-wall to match their Classic line, like the L5s for their evolution line?
I'm sure the L5 would work well enough but on on-wall with matching Classic drivers would be awesome :)

dc

oldears

06-23-06, 07:13 PM

b4z

06-25-06, 10:18 AM

Wow.

This thread is almost a year old and I think it is this is the first time it has been relegated to the 3rd page of the Speaker Forum.

So who else other than John has the Fours and what are your impressions?
Especially the bass.

Anyone?

Alimentall

06-25-06, 10:24 AM

John,
I'm not happy with my local NHT dealers (who will not allow an in-home listen and are basically rather arrogant). When you first got your Twos, you sent them around for people to test. I'm very interested in Threes or Fours, and wonder if you're willing to do something similar.

Perhaps, though I've *really* got a lot of catching up to do in the near term. I'm about 20 pair behind right now :eek: So, it will take a good month before I can send any out for a tour if you can wait that long. Can't do it with the Fours because they're just too big and heavy. NHT says that 400 pair or something like that is coming in late next week. God, I hope so.

Where are you?

oldears

06-25-06, 10:38 PM

Alimentall

06-26-06, 04:50 PM

That's what my brother kept trying to convince me to do, but he moved back to PA. It seems like it would be a gold mine, with pretty much ever person having a basement that could be turned into a killer HT with the works!

el stumbo

06-27-06, 06:40 AM

John,

What is this:

Defaced by Ednux - D.O.M

zaracsan

06-27-06, 11:05 AM

John,

What is this:

Defaced by Ednux - D.O.M

The "Lightning Rod" got zapped once again. :eek: Just a guess, but it does look like someone has hacked John's New Mexico Audio-Video Forum. Fortunately, it appears his Audio Design site was not similarly attacked.

Alimentall

06-27-06, 12:24 PM

Yeah, I've been hacked. The stupid hosting place isn't very helpful or fast at fixing it either. It's such a stupid little hack, but I need access to their data base to fix it.

JFISHER

06-28-06, 12:16 AM

I am finally able to setup my HT again but unfortunately it is no longer in a dedicated room but now in the family room. I have the VT-2 for the L-R and the VS-2 for the center. I have no plans for a subwooofer. I am looking at the Absolute Zero and the Classic Two for the surround speakers in a 5.1 setup. My couch is back against the wall. Mounting the surrounds on the sidewalls is not an option because there is only a half wall on the one side which is really just more of a seperator between the family room and the kitchen so I plan on placing the surrounds in each back corner on 24" stands pointing up towards the ceiling at a 22.5 degree angle. I do not want them playing right into the ears of the people sitting on the ends of the couch. Any suggestions for a better setup based on my room limitations? I like the sound of the Twos but $600 is a bit high for surrounds so I will be listening to the Zeros in the next couple of days. Thanks for any thoughts.

JFISHER

06-28-06, 12:27 AM

I'm located in the Maryland suburbs of DC. I just want to listen to the speakers in my own listening room, and even offered to local dealers to buy their demos at closing time, listen overnight, and return them the next morning at opening time, but nothing doing... I've enjoyed reading your comments, and if you want to move to the DC area and set up a shop, I bet you'd be successfull.

We definintely could use some better HT dealers in the DC area. When I lived in Colorado Springs, there were 3 good HT dealers in a city about 1/10 the size of Metro DC. I was over in Kensington yesterday checking out the Two.

mattwardfh

06-28-06, 01:54 AM

OmniMount makes ceiling mounts in addition to the wall mounts that fit the Zeroes, and maybe the Twos.

They're sort of L-shaped, so it's kind of like having them wall-mounted.

I am finally able to setup my HT again but unfortunately it is no longer in a dedicated room but now in the family room. I have the VT-2 for the L-R and the VS-2 for the center. I have no plans for a subwooofer. I am looking at the Absolute Zero and the Classic Two for the surround speakers in a 5.1 setup. My couch is back against the wall. Mounting the surrounds on the sidewalls is not an option because there is only a half wall on the one side which is really just more of a seperator between the family room and the kitchen so I plan on placing the surrounds in each back corner on 24" stands pointing up towards the ceiling at a 22.5 degree angle. I do not want them playing right into the ears of the people sitting on the ends of the couch. Any suggestions for a better setup based on my room limitations? I like the sound of the Twos but $600 is a bit high for surrounds so I will be listening to the Zeros in the next couple of days. Thanks for any thoughts.

el stumbo

06-28-06, 08:00 AM

....I like the sound of the Twos but $600 is a bit high for surrounds so I will be listening to the Zeros in the next couple of days. Thanks for any thoughts.

I went with the Zeros for surround and like it very much. Yes, the Twos give off a broader / deeper (?) sound than the zeros, but for the surrounds it simply may not be needed. The size is a bit smaller with the Zeros, which should help in placing them in space constrained locations - ie small rooms. I have the Threes up front.

Personally I think the Zeros are the best looking amongst all the NHT Classic speakers. The size and symmetry of them just do me nicely.

BTW, mine are placed just off from the sofa at ear level - they do not blast much onto me when sitting near to one of them. In fact, I kinda want to have them a bit louder - well have to play around with the levels to get it right eventually.

JFISHER

06-28-06, 01:22 PM

How do you bi-amp the VT-2? I have the pre-outs going to an Acurcus 200x3 Amp so how would I get the pre-outs to two amps and do I have do provide crossovers so that the same signal does not go to both the midrange and bass portions of the speaker? Thanks for any information on how to do this.

Alimentall

06-28-06, 02:00 PM

You have to split the signal if you don't have dual pre-outs. After that, take off the binding post jumpers and plug one amp into the highs, the other into the bass. The crossovers inside the speaker will filter out the excess information.

BTW, my forum is back up and running after being sabotaged - http://forum.adnm.com

I think I fixed the hole in the system, but I guess we'll see.

BGLeduc

06-28-06, 04:01 PM

[QUOTE=el stumbo]Personally I think the Zeros are the best looking amongst all the NHT Classic speakers. The size and symmetry of them just do me nicely.
QUOTE]

Yup...the AZ's are quite nice to look at. I replaced a pair of SB3's in my 2CH rig with the AZ's, and during my evaluation, I briefly swapped the SB3's back in, and they really didn't look so nice replacing the AZ's. Big black boxes...shiny boxes to be sure, but they can't hold a candle to the AZ's in the style dept.

I can also recommend the Target stands that John had custom made with the smaller top plate. The AZ's look perfect sitting on them.

Brian

mark russ

06-29-06, 12:29 PM

OK John, time to bottom line it.

Lets say a customer walks in your store with about $4000 to spend on a 5.1 (or 5.2 as the case may be) NHT speaker surround system, and they already have an appropriate receiver, lets say a NAD T773 or T763 for example, and they want to use their system for an approximate 50/50 split of music and movies.

What would you suggest and why, T5s (or M5s and U2s) for mains, M5 for center, and L5s for surrounds; or, Fours for mains, 3 Center, Threes for surrounds, and a SW12 sub; or some other possible combination such as Threes for mains with U2s or U1, etc., just so long as it's all in the $4000 or so range total cost?

BTW, any luck on finding the sub crossover point yet on the Fours?

b4z

06-29-06, 02:13 PM

Alimentall

06-29-06, 02:20 PM

What would you suggest and why, T5s (or M5s and U2s) for mains, M5 for center, and L5s for surrounds; or, Fours for mains, 3 Center, Threes for surrounds, and a SW12 sub; or some other possible combination such as Threes for mains with U2s or U1, etc., just so long as it's all in the $4000 or so range total cost?

Bottom line? Well, I hate being an "out with the old, in with the new" guy when the T5 is such an awesome speaker, but I'd probably do a pair of U1s with 4 Threes and a 3C. I think that offers the best of both the old and new. The U1 is still top dog in the sub line up, but I think the Threes are, overall, an upgrade from the M5/M6 which is a heckuva a compliment.

What I'm *really* pushing for is a "3T" or "3.5" tower that has the dynamic output of the M6 in a nice, slim, tower and with a dome array on the back for monopole/dipole/bipole operation. Don't count on it, but that's what I'm pushing.

I haven't found out the crossover on the Four yet, sorry.

BGLeduc

06-29-06, 02:34 PM

Bottom line? Well, I hate being an "out with the old, in with the new" guy when the T5 is such an awesome speaker, but I'd probably do a pair of U1s with 4 Threes and a 3C. I think that offers the best of both the old and new. The U1 is still top dog in the sub line up, but I think the Threes are, overall, an upgrade from the M5/M6 which is a heckuva a compliment.

What I'm *really* pushing for is a "3T" or "3.5" tower that has the dynamic output of the M6 in a nice, slim, tower and with a dome array on the back for monopole/dipole/bipole operation. Don't count on it, but that's what I'm pushing.

I haven't found out the crossover on the Four yet, sorry.

Dipoles??????

I thought those were the Devil's Spawn????? :)

Brian

Alimentall

06-29-06, 02:44 PM

Hey, just for added ambience in the fronts or rears, not that whole THX type dipole crap!!!

mark russ

06-29-06, 03:20 PM

Hey, just for added ambience in the fronts or rears, not that whole THX type dipole crap!!!

I actually like that feature in the VT-1.4s and VT-3s. VT-2.4s had it as well. It is curious to me though how Bill Busch believed in having bipolar mains, but yet seemed to be so dead set against them for surrounds.

I am also curious why NHT didn't come out with an on wall friendly surround to match the Threes/Fours like the L5.

mark russ

06-29-06, 03:23 PM

I don't know what John would advise but,
4 Fours and a Center and no subs would work great for me.

You figure the 4 Fours would be $3600 and a minimum 10% discount
would get you to $3240, which would leave $760 to buy the NHT center channel.

You would need some serious amp power for that set up, :eek: and still wouldn't be strong at 20 Hz.

Actually, I personally think the SVS PB10 is still the best lower priced "movie" sub on the market in terms of output and extension. You can actually feel the cannon shots bouncing by you on Master and Commander when the ship first fires on them from out of the fog, etc.

Alimentall

06-29-06, 03:41 PM

I actually like that feature in the VT-1.4s and VT-3s. VT-2.4s had it as well. It is curious to me though how Bill Busch believed in having bipolar mains, but yet seemed to be so dead set against them for surrounds.

Bill's rationale was this: Most people didn't have a TV that matched the size and scope of the image thrown by the VT series and that meant that things would be coming very precisely from the wrong place at times. Therefore, the bipolar blurred it enough that the mismatch wasn't obvious. Kinda like dipoles, I suppose, but you still got some accuracy from the bipole approach.

I am also curious why NHT didn't come out with an on wall friendly surround to match the Threes/Fours like the L5.

I think it's only a matter of time.

Alimentall

06-29-06, 03:54 PM

You would need some serious amp power for that set up, :eek: and still wouldn't be strong at 20 Hz.

Oh, I don't know about that! At 20Hz, the Fours would maybe be down ~12dB, most subwoofers are down more than that (when they're honest about it)

mark russ

06-29-06, 03:59 PM

Oh, I don't know about that! At 20Hz, the Fours would maybe be down ~12dB, ...

Maybe so, but the PB10 is -1 db at 19 Hz at 2 meters in an outdoor ground plane measurement! :eek:

And has it's own amp power already built in to boot. ;)

I'll bet a NAD S300 or the newer Master series equivalent integrated would drive the Fours OK though. :D

What crossover point on the Three/Dual U1 set up would you use John?

:cool:

mark russ

06-29-06, 04:07 PM

Bill's rationale was this: Most people didn't have a TV that matched the size and scope of the image thrown by the VT series and that meant that things would be coming very precisely from the wrong place at times. Therefore, the bipolar blurred it enough that the mismatch wasn't obvious. Kinda like dipoles, I suppose, but you still got some accuracy from the bipole approach.

I find it helps allow further spacing or spreading out of the mains away from the screen while not calling as much attention to it.

JimmyJoe

07-09-06, 11:59 AM

Hello everyone. I am not an audiophile, but I love HT and movies. I enjoy music too, but as long as it sounds good I am ok. We have a 5.1 setup in our living room, but we are adding another in our game room. I took my wife to go listen to speakers yesterday, and based on this thread I wanted to listen to the NHT Classic Three. Paradigm was also on my short list.

We went to a couple of places and listed to paradigm monitor series (mini, 5, 7, & 9) and the studio series (20 & 40). The pardadigm monitor sounded good, the studios sounded great. My wife liked the monitors until she heard the studios and then did not want to even go back and listen to the monitors, she started to hear thing with her music that she had never heard before. I did too for that matter. One of the stores we went to had a dedicated theater room setup with six studio 40's and a CC570 powered by adcom pre with rotel amps. We spent about an hour in the room listening to different material. Loved the sound.

Next we went to an NHT dealer. We listened to Zeros, Twos and Threes. They all sounded great, but the Threes were exceptional. I could not believe how great they sounded and this was not in the best of rooms. My wife looked at me and smiled, she also liked the Threes much better that any of the Paradigms, including the Studio 40's. In 5.1, we listened to Threes up front, a Three C center, and some in-ceiling B&W surrounds driven by a Denon 3806. The room was open on the back and 1/2 of one of the sides to the rest of the shop. WOW. I was literally blown away and made my decision right then. My wife then looks up at me and says, how much more do these cost than the Paradigm studio 40's? When I told her the NHT's were less, she just smiled.

Again I am not an audiophile, but the NHT Threes sounds amazing to me. I am excited to watch all of my movies again with the new setup. Just listening to a few music sources has increased my interest in listening to music too, and I am looking forward to spending some time just listening, instead of just playing music in the background, which is something that I have never done.

Thanks for the great thread and all the useful information!!! :)

Alimentall

07-10-06, 11:04 PM

Congrats on your speakers, I'm glad they lived up to their reputation :)

JFISHER

07-11-06, 05:09 PM

I bought 2 Absolute Zeros for the surrounds to go with my VT-2 fronts and I am happy with the sound. I would like to add some back surrounds but my couch is up against the back wall so no room for them.

Trancethereal

07-11-06, 08:01 PM

mziegler

07-11-06, 08:45 PM

The Classic Threes are available at The Sound Factor in Santa Monica.

cschang

07-11-06, 08:50 PM

The Classic Threes are available at The Sound Factor in Santa Monica.
Yup....I heard them there. Good shop.

Trance, there is also a new place on Aviation called Home Theater Doctor, www.hometheaterdoctor.com. They carry some nice stuff and a great atmosphere.

Alimentall

07-12-06, 09:16 PM

I would *love* to audition the NHT Classic line (2x3's, 3c, 2xAZ) ... but no one I can find has them on hand for an audition.

How hard is it for NHT to get their dealers the speakers - and more importantly, what is NHT doing to repair the apparent damage they have caused to their dealers. Most have not been complimentary ...

I am trying to replace my current music setup and go to a 5.1 music/HT setup. NHT's are top on my short list.

You would think LA would be an easy market to find these speakers - and a dealer willing to audition them unbiased.

- Alimental, any advice?

Did you try the dealer locator - www.nhthifi.com

Yeah, sorry about the dealer thing, they really need to get it together *aside* from building good stuff. Anymore, with the quality of gear available, being extremely good isn't good enough. I'm hoping we'll see them get back to doing all the right things once they get enough product shipping. They used to have exemplary dealer and customer service. I'm going to do a full court press on this here pretty soon. They're kind of hard to talk to with the product shortages right now.

Trancethereal

07-12-06, 09:19 PM

cschang

07-12-06, 09:53 PM

You can't get any more convenient than Aviation Blvd.... what is the cross street? Is this place by appt. only, or are walk-ins welcomed?

Are you also saying they carry NHT - or that they offer some good alternatives to consider?

Thanks for your insight and heads-up.
It is pretty close to Grant.....across the street from Giuliano's.

They do not carry NHT, but many alternatives.

At the moment, it is by appointment only, but I am going to be there a little after 2:30pm on Saturday to do some listening and pick up a Sonos system.

Sorry for the OT....back to your NHT info...

I heard the Classic Three last week at Sound Factor in Santa Monica. While I did not think much of the Classic Twos, the Threes are definitely a step up.

mziegler

07-12-06, 09:56 PM

Hometheaterdoctor does not carry NHT. In the beach cities, Definition Audio is supposed to carry the Classic Threes, but they haven't been able to get their hands on them. Sound Factor, in Santa Monica, is the only place that has them in stock. They are good to deal with. If you give them your credit card number, they might even let you try out their demos at home, which I would highly recommend.

The place on Aviation is at the corner of Carneige, just north of Grant, across the street from Guilianos. The place is by appointment only. He carries Usher, Totem, and other (check web site). I suggest you get in contact and wait until the Usher V-601s hit town. I'm dying to hear those.

dmk11

07-24-06, 07:48 PM

mattwardfh

07-24-06, 07:54 PM

Hi guys,

I needed some advice and was wondering if someone can help me.

About a year ago, I bought SB3s for front and SW10 with HK AVR-235. I just love the sound coming out of those speakers. Now, I wanted to added my surround and center. At first I was thinking either SB2 or SB3 for surround and SC2. BUT, I this is before I realized they came out with the Classic line (I pretty much stop researching after I got my speakers last year).

Reading the reviews, I'm excited about the Classic Three. I'm now thinking that I would get those to replace my fronts and use the SB3s for my surround. and either Three C or Two C for the center.

I'm going to go listen to the Classic this weekend, but what do you guys would recommend me buying?

I think that's a fine plan. The Classics are a pretty substantial upgrade from what I've heard listening to my Threes (replaced SB3s) over the last few months. And the 3C is a great center...

JRSUB

07-24-06, 07:58 PM

Move the SB3s to surround duty, buy the Classic 3s for the front's, and the Classic 3C for the center. You might also want to investigate a bigger sub depending on your room size and listening preferences. I really like the Classic 3 and 3C combo with a decent sub. That's what I use with an SVS sub and it sounds great.

mark russ

07-25-06, 02:00 PM

Hi guys,

I needed some advice and was wondering if someone can help me.

About a year ago, I bought SB3s for front and SW10 with HK AVR-235. I just love the sound coming out of those speakers. Now, I wanted to added my surround and center. At first I was thinking either SB2 or SB3 for surround and SC2. BUT, I this is before I realized they came out with the Classic line (I pretty much stop researching after I got my speakers last year).

Reading the reviews, I'm excited about the Classic Three. I'm now thinking that I would get those to replace my fronts and use the SB3s for my surround. and either Three C or Two C for the center.

I'm going to go listen to the Classic this weekend, but what do you guys would recommend me buying?

If you can, try to listen to the Threes against the SB-3s and compare them to each other. Who knows, there is always a chance that you might actually like the SB-3s better.

In any case though, the 3 Center will be FAR superior to the SC-2, and you HK 235 should go well with either series as long as you cross them over at 80 Hz or so.

dmk11

07-27-06, 10:39 AM

Hmm. I've been reading this thread and having second thought on what exact speakers I should get when I do my surround.

My problem is I live in a condo and don't have a dedicated media room. I know I won't have an idea acoustic with my setup.

Here's a picture of what I have to work with:
http://static.flickr.com/68/199570368_667a617dce.jpg?v=0

Currently I have my TV & fronts on the notch near the balcony door and my sofa on the opposite wall. Pretty much the only way since all the wiring is on that side of the wall.
I still haven't decided what I should do with the surround speakers. I could either mount them on the wall or pull the sofa forward a tad and put speaker stands right behind it.
Maybe I should go with smaller speakers because of the size of the room??

TomHuffman

07-27-06, 01:10 PM

Has anyone purchased a pair of Fours? I've heard very little feedback about these, except from a dealer.

JRSUB

07-28-06, 05:04 PM

I was just wondering the same thing. Is Alimental the only person in theworld that has heard the 4s?

Pupton

07-29-06, 01:09 PM

Hi - New to the forum. I'm a long-time NHT owner and I'd like to get feedback on the Fours compared to 2.9s or 3.3s for 2-ch?

Thanks in advance!

Mike

Pupton

07-29-06, 01:17 PM

Another scenario for HT: Fours / Threes / 3C setup compared to 3.3s / 2.9s / 1.5 (center).... I'd love to have some preliminary thoughts on this before I make a roadtrip to hear the new line (Central Ohio has NO dealers with any NHT in stock).... thanks again... Mike

Alimentall

07-30-06, 11:57 AM

Hi - New to the forum. I'm a long-time NHT owner and I'd like to get feedback on the Fours compared to 2.9s or 3.3s for 2-ch?

Well, the Fours are more powerful than either in terms of sound. The bass isn't deeper, but it is more present. I think the 2.9/3.3 are probably a bit more cohesive in the bass/mid transition, but i think the mid/treble is a notable and substantial improvement, though I'm sure some of the old guard will disagree. There's just more resolution and soundstage there. The Fours might be a tad warmer too up top, which maybe softens some of the intensity that is attractive on the 2.9/3.3 to any people. I think many people who are used to the 2.9/3.3 sound may not want to switch, and may even prefer the older models, but I think, by far, most people hearing both for the first time will prefer the Fours. If the bass seems a bit heavy (they seem to be tuned for a large room), the Threes combined with a U1 or U2 sub is the best of both worlds, IMO, easily bettering older models.

mark russ

07-30-06, 12:43 PM

While I still haven't even heard the Fours yet, so I won't comment on them, I CAN tell you without reservation that the T5 is a better speaker than the 2.9 in every way (except maybe looks). It may even be better than the 3.3, and if not, I'm pretty sure the T6 is.

As for the Four vs the T5, I am pretty sure that the T5 will have better bass, as John alluded to above, and I also agree 100% with him in that you would be much better off adding Evolution subs to the Classic series instead of the Ten and Twelve Classic series subs.

A dual U1/Three combination really wouldn't cost all that much more than a Four plus a Twelve (or some other sub, which would be kind of redundant anyway) and/or a separate outboard amp to adequately drive the Fours own built in passive subs in a bi-amp configuration to reference theater levels.

Just food for thought.

Superior Gimp

07-30-06, 08:10 PM

Pupton

07-30-06, 09:12 PM

John & Mark,

Thank you very much for your feedback. I've now had a chance to hear the Classic line and all I can say is WOW! I've liked / used the 3.3/2.9/2.5s for a long time, but I heard more "fullness" in the mid/treble on the Four/Three/3C - you were spot on in your analysis of these John! :)

Mark, the Evolution line is really good & agree if I had a larger room for HT I would consider them. I hadn't ventured out to listen to these since I've always been fairly committed to the older line of NHT's. Now I had always thought the older NHT's did 95% of what I wanted, but a bit more fullness/warmness always eluding me and I think the new line will solve that for me... Classics are on order for my HT setup & may replace my 2-CH setup as well.

Thanks again,

Mike

mark russ

07-30-06, 10:26 PM

You guys seem to have a awesome amount of interest in these speakers, heck I am almost totally and utterly convinced to go NHT

I listen to a lot of different music, from classic rock, to classical, to etc.

I cant audition speakers pain in the ass with my situation...So I am going to take a chance on NHT

I have a old Pioneer elite vsx79 reciever for free, which Ill be driving the speaks, cant be too horrible i wouldnt think and hell for free!

So these are my thoughts for 2channel sound

2xClassic3 no sub
2xAZ with av123 x-sub
2xClassic2 with av123 x-sub

Which of the three do you think I should do, I dont really want to upgrade to a better sub if i get one. Would the performance benefit of the 3 without a sub outweight getting the lesser speaks with the sub reinforcement. Theoretically speaking of course ;)

Well, there are 2 ways to look at it:

1- you could get the Threes now since they go down to something like 45 Hz (at -3 db) anyway, and always add a sub later on down the line,

or

2- get the Twos or Zeros and the sub you really, really want now, then you could always eventually add a pair of Threes later on AND a 3-C center, then move the Twos or Zeros you already have to surround duty in a home theater since you would already have the AVR for it anyway with the Pioneer Elite.

Don't be afraid to take a chance on NHT, There's always the chance you might not like them, but I would be surprised if you didn't. Especially if you like rock music. Everyone always says Klipsch for rock, but to me NHT is the ultimate rock speaker (I have a pair of Klipsch KLF-30s, touted by them to be THE ultimate rock speaker, sitting unused in a spare closet for quite a while now). They (NHT) generally have three notable characteristics which are deep, powerful, clean and tight bass (especially common to most floorstanding NHTs, and even a few bookshelves, the SB-3 for instance will embarrass many towers on bass) and a distinctly forward and exciting midrange along with seemingly limitless dynamics which are all characteristics generally well suited to rock, but yet all at the same time while being smooth, clean, and nonfatiguing to listen to. You can literally listen to them for hours on end whereas the KLF-30 Klipsches start to grate on my nerves after about 30 minutes or so.

I own or have owned at one time or the other over the years everything from the typical mass market brands like Polk, Klipsch, JBL, Infinity, Boston, DCM, and I'm ashamed to say Bose, to more respected brands like Revel, Energy, M&K, Epos, and Spica, and NHT is hands down my personal favorite speaker brand.

I think NHT beats even Revel at certain price points. Like at 6K, I would take the XD ANY day of the week over the Performa F52 (not to even mention the fact that you also already get the amps, cables, and wires with the XD). At 4K I would take the T6 any day over the Performa F32, and at the approximate $2500 price point I would DEFINITELY take the T5 over the Performa M22 and it's matching stands.

mark russ

07-30-06, 10:34 PM

Pupton

07-30-06, 11:43 PM

What do you have on the way for HT, and what are you thinking about for 2 channel?

Also, what did you presently already have? I'm guessing 2.9s and 2.5s for HT and 3.3s for 2 ch?

Good guess on current setup ;)

I've ordered Fours (Mains) / Threes (Surround) and brought the 3C home already. I should note I have an IB setup in my HT (4-15s) so LFE/bass is covered.

Here's why I went with the Fours... I really thought the Fours sounded a little more "sweet" in the middle region than Threes for mains... not sure that's the best way to describe them - I like them a bit better. The bigger reason: I'm pretty sure a set of Fours will end up as my 2-CH eventually, so.... I'll probably test both Threes & Fours as mains once all is set in my HT, then I can spend time tweaking my setup until I can make a decision....I'll either order another set of Fours or find the Threes do the job as mains. If the latter is true, I'll get another set of Threes and move the Fours to 2-CH... hope this is not too confusing... I'd love to hear your, and others, input on my logic...any help is always welcome.

Thanks! Mike

mark russ

07-31-06, 12:39 AM

Here's why I went with the Fours... I really thought the Fours sounded a little more "sweet" in the middle region than Threes for mains... not sure that's the best way to describe them - I like them a bit better.

Mike, you aren't the first one who has said this. I think John pretty much said about the very same exact thing before in this thread. If only we could ever find out exactly what the crossover point is on the Fours from the lower mid-bass to the built in subs, then all one would have to do is simply set the x-over point from the Threes to whatever sub or subs are being used with them the same to get them to sound just like the Fours from the mids on up. I'm guessing prolly 100 or 125 Hz maybe.

As for the Four in 2 channel, I personally generally like a full range, point source speaker for 2 ch. music, but with that said and even though I haven't even heard them yet, I'm kind of wary of the Fours vented bass design, which I think would matter more on 2 ch. music than HT movies.

A pair of Threes on stands and a U2 sub set up would be somewhat more expensive in cost than the Fours though, $400 at full retail price plus the cost of whatever stands, but you would also get the amplification for the subs (to in effect have a pair of bi-amped mains) along with much more flexible placement options. The X1 active crossover that goes along with them can be a pain in the @$$ to set up in a system, but once it is, it makes it a snap to properly calibrate the subs to seamlessly integrate them with the sats. Dual U1s and Threes for mains would be one hell of a KILLER set up for both HT AND 2 Ch. music! Just my $0.02.

I had a 6.1 system set up with 3.3 mains, AC-2 center, 2.9s for side surrounds, and another AC-2 for rear. I'll prolly eventually try to get another AC-2 and use the three of them as center and surrounds along with my present set of 2.9s as mains in a 5.1 system (or another pair of 2.9s for mains in a 6.1 system), and move my 3.3s to a dedicated 2 channel rig. I still just can't bring myself to part with them yet even though I now mostly use the T5, M5, L5, U2 system more than any other.

mark russ

07-31-06, 10:23 AM

Pupton

07-31-06, 07:24 PM

Mark, Thanks again for your feedback. I'll keep all posted once I've had time to play with initial setup.

Helier Felipe

08-01-06, 08:48 AM

I'm about to purchase the classic 2c, 2cs and AZs for home theater and music system and would like to know if there are any issues with the difference in woofer composition differences(aluminum in center vs. paper in sides and surrounds)
Thanks
Helier

Pupton

08-01-06, 01:24 PM

Helier, I'm sure many on here are much more knowledgeable than I, but based on my recent listening, I would not consider the Two or 2C..
Two's didn't match 2C or 3C in sound. And for a little more $ you get twice the performance in the 3C over the 2C... I would do Threes/3C/AZ - save up if needed- worth the wait... just my opinion... Mike

Talisman39

08-01-06, 04:28 PM

Hi all-

I've had a short opportunity to hear the Fours at a local dealer, where they were poorly set up in a surround-sound setting. They still sounded very good though, despite being in what was effectively very large space that offered little in the way of walls. This made me wonder about their suitability for bass with HT in a fairly large room.

I'm considering a combination of Fours in fronts along with some Three's in the rears and a 3C for a system that will be used for 80% music and 20% HT. I'm wondering if the Fours will provide enough bass or if I'll need a sub also? The room is 20x24x10 ft, a combined living room/kitchen space. This will be quite a live room - no heavy carpeting or overstuffed furniture. I'm not a super low bass freak - currently I have some Totem Model 1's unassisted in a much smaller room, which do a good job but are not pant-flappers by any measure. But I'd like some good (but accurate) wallop for HT.

Thoughts appreciated,

Adam

Alimentall

08-01-06, 04:57 PM

Alimentall

08-01-06, 05:01 PM

. I'm wondering if the Fours will provide enough bass or if I'll need a sub also? The room is 20x24x10 ft

I don't see an issue here. These move quite a bit of air and, IMO, are just a bit too bass heavy for a small room and is a close call in a mid-sized room. I'm pushing hard for a smaller version for smaller rooms.

On the other hand, you can always add a sub, or, if you don't mind stand mounting, you can do a pair of Threes with dual Twelves *or* a U1/U2 sub system. While the Fours outperform a single $850 Twelve subwoofer in the bass, dual Twelves would outperform the Fours in the movie thing and a U1/U2 sub would outperform them for music.

Threes with dual Twelves would be better and less expensive than Fours with a single Twelve, for instance.

mark russ

08-01-06, 05:09 PM

mark russ

08-01-06, 05:12 PM

Ditto that.

The upgrade is only $100 per speaker and well worth it!

Ditto on the ditto. Hell, the 2c will prolly actually match the Threes or Fours better than it will the Two.

mark russ

08-01-06, 05:15 PM

I'm pushing hard for a smaller version for smaller rooms.

I wish they would come put with a hybrid of the VT-3 and the Four. Dual 10" sealed self powered (X1 or X2 with dual A1s like the T6) subs per side and the dome array with an optional bipolar configuration. Now THAT would be interesting.

Talisman39

08-01-06, 05:29 PM

Thanks for the feedback so far on the Fours/bass/HT in a largish room. Re: 3's on stands + sub, I'm looking to move away from satellites on stands and go to floorstanders for aesthetic reasons. Hence the Fours. Otherwise I'd probably stick with the Totems and add subs and surrounds.

Sounds like I can probably go with the Fours, and then add the sub later if I really feel the need for it. That was my hunch, good to have it confirmed.

Cheers,

Adam

mattwardfh

08-01-06, 07:10 PM

BTW, did I mention maybe looking into Threes on stands with Evolution subs instead of the Fours yet? ;) :p

To anyone on the fence out there about this option, I strongly second it (though to be fair I haven't heard the Fours).

Going from a ported (SW12) to a sealed (U1) sub is one of the biggest upgrades I've given my system (followed by the move from an Onkyo to an NAD receiver, from 160 kbps AAC to Apple Lossless for music, and from SB3s to Threes, and then the move from 30" to 26" stands, in that order... well, maybe the receiver upgrade ties the sub upgrade).

Alimentall

08-01-06, 10:09 PM

I wish they would come put with a hybrid of the VT-3 and the Four. Dual 10" sealed self powered (X1 or X2 with dual A1s like the T6) subs per side and the dome array with an optional bipolar configuration. Now THAT would be interesting.

You're not the only one, I've been pushing for it!!!

mark russ

08-01-06, 10:50 PM

You're not the only one, I've been pushing for it!!!

I'd buy a pair (or two)!

And judging by all these others who say they are picking the Fours over Threes and a sub or subs, the market for full range tower speakers is most definitely still there.

Alimentall

08-01-06, 10:53 PM

Everyone wants to own Fours based on their stealthy good looks. Which makes me think that a $1100-$1200/pr "3.5" mini tower and $2500-$3000/pr "5" super tower would sell rather well.

mark russ

08-01-06, 10:58 PM

Do you think they could build a VT-3/Classic Four hybrid with dual 10' sealed subs per side along with an X1 or X2 plus dual A1 bass amps at the 3K price point?

The Four as is along with an optional X2 and A1 for bi-amping the subs in them would be roughly the same $2500 retail price as a T5 set, no?

BTW John, any luck on the crossover point from lower mid bass to the subs on the Fours yet?

mattwardfh

08-02-06, 02:10 AM

Everyone wants to own Fours based on their stealthy good looks. Which makes me think that a $1100-$1200/pr "3.5" mini tower and $2500-$3000/pr "5" super tower would sell rather well.

Seems like those two products would serve the market much better than the existing Fours. Maybe it's just my personal bias, but those two price points you mention are better price points and make towers a better alternative to a pair of threes and a sealed sub/subs on the low end or a ported sub/subs on the high end.

And at the low end, a $400 increase over the threes to step up to a full range system is much more palatable than a $1000 increase.

At the high end, something in the $2500-3000 would make a good T5/T6 replacement and fill in the ground between the current Classics and the Xd much better.

Alimentall

08-02-06, 10:16 AM

Do you think they could build a VT-3/Classic Four hybrid with dual 10' sealed subs per side along with an X1 or X2 plus dual A1 bass amps at the 3K price point?

I'm pretty sure they could. Obviously the X1/A1 package at $1150 puts the price almost up to $3000 alone, but I also think that they could shave money off that package by integrating them into the cabinet or putting them in a single box. I'm almost thinking that a second midbass driver would be appropriate.

The Four as is along with an optional X2 and A1 for bi-amping the subs in them would be roughly the same $2500 retail price as a T5 set, no?

Yeah, $2550. But they didn't do the crossover bypass switch I'd wanted for that.

BTW John, any luck on the crossover point from lower mid bass to the subs on the Fours yet?

Not yet. I'll try again here soon, I just am waiting until they are caught up on product to press because they're all so stressed out.

mark russ

08-02-06, 01:47 PM

With all this recent talk about the 3.3s and VT-3s, bottom line it John, between those two models, which did you feel was the better one, IOW, which would you have bought with your own money and why?

Then lets also throw the T6 into that mix too against the winner of the 3.3 vs VT-3?

Others thoughts as well who are familiar with at least two of the three models?

And yes, a cross between the VT-3 and Four would almost be too good to be true. :cool:

Alimentall

08-02-06, 02:05 PM

mark russ

08-02-06, 02:16 PM

How similar were the 10" drivers in the VT-3s to the 2.9's? They look REAL close to me, if not identical.

What about 2.9 vs VT-2.4 vs T5 vs Four in your opinion?

And finally, the 3.3 vs the T5 and Four? Actually, they are really prolly a little more comparable to the 3.3 than the VT-3 is, at least in some ways.

Alimentall

08-02-06, 02:33 PM

I believe those were identical drivers.

Geez, let me see here, holy cow.

In FR accuracy/integration it goes T5, 2.9, Four, VT-2.4
In treble and midrange resolution, it goes Four, T5, VT-2.4, 2.9
In bass quality, it goes T5, 2.9, Four, VT-2.4
In bass output/dynamics, it goes T5, Four, VT-2.4, 2.9
In soundstage, it goes Four, T5, VT-2.4, 2.9
In imaging precision, it goes Four, 2.9, T5, VT-2.4
In sweetspot, it goes T5, Four, 2.9, VT-2.4

The Four *could* beat out the T5, IMO, in virtually every way, but there's no denying the T5's bass quality. It's awesome by any standard. Now, put a set of Threes with an Evolution sub, and I think it wins or ties pretty much every contest, no problem.

I see the Four as being a fantastic all around performer. It's only liability, I think, is that the bass isn't as precise as the T5/T6. But that puts it pretty well on par with most every other tower speaker under $10K. I can't think of a tower speaker off hand under $10K that has the bass quality and depth of the 3.3, VT-3, T5, T6 models, though I'm sure there might be a couple. But if you transplant the dual 10" woofers from the Xd system into a "Five", you've got a deadly speaker, not just a "giant matcher", but a real giant killer with embarrassingly awesome bass and dynamic range. That would be the real deal. That being said, nitpicking the bass on the Fours is kind of like complaining that the VW R32 only has a 250HP engine and so it can't quite match a Viper in drag race. The Four's main "weakness" is equal or superior to all its similarly priced competition.

mark russ

08-02-06, 03:00 PM

But if you transplant the dual 10" woofers from the Xd system into a "Five", you've got a deadly speaker, not just a "giant matcher", but a real giant killer with embarrassingly awesome bass and dynamic range. That would be the real deal.

Yep, my thoughts exactly. In a side by side configuration like the XDW or U1 (W1) even if it makes the bottom of the cabinet a little wider (but less deep in diameter) instead of having both woofers on the same side like in the T6/VT-3.

As for the T5's bass against the Four's, an optional X2/A1 combo should help close the gap at least somewhat if not entirely.

Me personally, I'd much rather have the option of "tuning" the bass output to my room and taste preferences that the X1 provides than not.

sc10000

08-02-06, 04:33 PM

sc10000

08-02-06, 04:46 PM

Everyone wants to own Fours based on their stealthy good looks. Which makes me think that a $1100-$1200/pr "3.5" mini tower and $2500-$3000/pr "5" super tower would sell rather well.
Seems like a no brainer that they would make those, but everyone I spoke with at NHT said no, no, no...not going to happen. But it could be a sign of something better coming. Happy with the 3's as is but 2 woofers would be awesome.

Alimentall

08-02-06, 04:48 PM

They always say they're not going to make something right up until they do. I'm going to be *hammering* on them about it at CEDIA. More like demanding that they build it. The "3.5" actually does have some likelihood of existing, a bit more than the "5", but even that has some possibility. They just can't think beyond catching up at the moment.

There is a lot of rationale for the 3.5 dual 6.5" floor stander:

1. Fits a lower price point
2. Forward firing woofers mean ease of placement
3. Perfect for stand alone stereo in small to medium sized rooms
4. Perfect as high output satellites with a huge, deep bass subwoofer
5. An option for a dipole/bipole rear firing array with mono/bi/di switch
6. Perfect for use as rear channel speakers in various modes.

Besides, it would give women the elegant tower look and allow for use with a really high grade subwoofer for which I am also pushing. A "SuperTen" subwoofer based on Xd in a small, elegant, piano black box. They just have to listen and pay attention!

sc10000

08-02-06, 04:51 PM

BachToRock

08-02-06, 05:35 PM

I thought the VT3s were better over all. I don't think they imaged quite as precisely, but had a far bigger, more room filling soundstage, more resolution, more output with lower distortion and room adjustable bass. The 3.3s had a better woofer, but the dual woofers in the VT3, along with the power pretty well made up for that. That being said, the VT was almost $2000 more, so the 3.3 still was probably the best deal.

But when you look at the T6, I think it had pretty much the best of both speakers and at a lower price point than either. The cost savings from building the cabinets in China allowed them to upgrade the tweeter, upgrade the woofers to beyond the 3.3's famous woofer (and have two of them), upgrade the amp, upgrade the crossover and top the price that much, well, it's a no-brainer.

I know a lot of 3.3 customers are very much attached to them and feel that they are better, but IMO, the T6 and VT-3 were better in most ways. Every way? Nah, that's hard to do, but overall, they're better, at least objectively so. How that's interpreted is up to the person.

I have owned all 3 of these speakers and still feel that the 3.3 is the finest overall design... it has to be driven by a capable amplifier to really shine... I use a BRYSTON 4BSST.
Remember:

Newer isn't always necessarily better...

2 bass drivers aren't more accurate than a higher quality single driver...

The X1 is not built to high-end standards and if you have high-end source components the signal suffers from degradation when passing through it...

The M6 has design comprimises in it's crossover which affect the dispersion pattern to be a universal monitor... uniform dispersion is key to producing the most consistant imaging in a room... that's one of the key traits of the XD System... I found the suckout in the mids to be clearly audible off axis to the outside and the inverse is a slight mid bump that produced what I would call a squawky sound on the inside axis(listening position)

If the M6's tweeter is an upgrade then why do they still use the 3.3's tweeter in their A-20, M-20 and XD M-60 Pro Studio Monitors which are designed for the most accurate sound possible? Think about that for a moment...

Jack stated a short while back that he would probably be replacing his 3.3's with an XD System in the near future... why is a head guy at the company still using the 3.3's when he could have the newer stuff with the snap of a finger?

The T6 is a great speaker at a great price point, but the 3.3 still takes the cake when the purest reproduction and highest level of accurracy is what you are looking for...

mark russ

08-02-06, 05:45 PM

Ok, I have upgrade-itis already. Look at what I have & what is proposed & throw in your .02

(2) 3
(1) 3c
(1) W1/A1/X1
(2) AZ

Upgrade to this?

(2) 3
(1) 3c
(2) W1/A1/X1 (with X1 20hz mod)
(4) Fours (for rear/surround)

Is there a better matchup for the rear/surrounds than fours? I can't really see going with 3's & W1s for the back four speakers, just takes up too much space. Also, can I add 2 X1 for these four backs, or do I have to also add A1s?

Going to use an NAD T973 amp, not sure which pre-amp to go with yet....gee this is fun. :confused:

IMO, Fours as rear surrounds is wayyyy overkill, redundant, unnecessary, and basically a waste, and especially even just that much more so with four Fours as side and back surrounds in a 7.1 system. That's $3600 at retail for surround speakers that will NEVER be used up to their full capabilities in that situation. :eek:

Instead, I would get four (2 pairs of) threes for rear surrounds for $1600 at full retail (Street price will always be at least a little less than that of course), but the single biggest most dramatic thing you could do for your money to impact your system is to also add an additional W1 at the front of the room (along with another A1 to power it of course) to your existing U1 set up since you don't need another X1. This would give you the same bass output as a pair of T6s.

Another complete U1, U2, or most especially dual U1 set at the back of the room for the rear channels only would be just as much a waste as a pair of Fours as rear surrounds. Get one W1/A1 and put it at the front/LFE channels with your existing U1 set. If you still want more bass, add a third W1/A1 to the LFE on the X1.

Plus, each pair of Threes and another W1 and A1 would prolly cost about the same as each pair of Fours, maybe even a little less.

I recently added (in effect) a U2 set to my T5 based system and got input from Jack H. himself as how to best integrate it into the room and system. PM me if interested in what he said.

mark russ

08-02-06, 06:01 PM

I have owned all 3 of these speakers and still feel that the 3.3 is the finest overall design... it has to be driven by a capable amplifier to really shine... I use a BRYSTON 4BSST.
Remember:

Newer isn't always necessarily better...

2 bass drivers aren't more accurate than a higher quality single driver... True, but 2 even better quality bass drivers (as the aluminum Evolutions are) are certainly better than one of lesser quality.

The X1 is not built to high-end standards and if you have high-end source components the signal suffers from degradation when passing through it... Which is very easily gotten around by simply not engaging it's high pass filters, but it still is prolly better than the generic crossovers in most typical AVRS and pre-pros though.

The M6 has design comprimises in it's crossover which affect the dispersion pattern to be a universal monitor... uniform dispersion is key to producing the most consistant imaging in a room... that's one of the key traits of the XD System... I found the suckout in the mids to be clearly audible off axis to the outside You don't want to even start to go there talking about and comparing the 3.3s almost non-existant off axis outside performance . and the inverse is a slight mid bump that produced what I would call a squawky sound on the inside axis(listening position) John has on more than one occasion now stated that nothing else has quite the sonic, holographic imaging of the 3.3/2.9. I agree, as I'm sure most others would as well who have actually heard them. This is prolly the 3.3/2.9s strongest suit/greatest strength.

If the M6's tweeter is an upgrade then why do they still use the 3.3's tweeter in their A-20, M-20 and XD M-60 Pro Studio Monitors which are designed for the most accurate sound possible? Think about that for a moment... Let me ask you, Q - what are pro monitors designed for first and foremost? A - for very close range, nearfield listening, which kind of goes along hand and hand with the 3.3 having better imaging focus, but less dispersion than the others.

Jack stated a short while back that he would probably be replacing his 3.3's with an XD System in the near future... why is a head guy at the company still using the 3.3's when he could have the newer stuff with the snap of a finger? Yeah, and he also basically said that after fooling around with speakers all day long that the very last thing he wanted to do when he got home was more of it on his own time.

The T6 is a great speaker at a great price point, but the 3.3 still takes the cake when the purest reproduction and highest level of accurracy is what you are looking for...

The 3.3 was, is, and will continue to be a great speaker. Nobody is denying that, but time and technology do march ever onward.

Hell, Bill Busch himself said that the VT-3 was his best efforts to correct what few problems and shortcomings he perceived with the 3.3.

BTW, I currently have a pair each of 3.3s, T6s, and VT-3s. I run a NAD S200 Silverline power amp and S100 pre-amp on the 3.3s. I've also gotten good results from bi-amping them with dual NHT SA-3 bass amps for the subs and Jolida tubed integrateds for the top end, both hybrid and full tube.

mark russ

08-02-06, 06:10 PM

Seems like a no brainer that they would make those, but everyone I spoke with at NHT said no, no, no...not going to happen. But it could be a sign of something better coming. Happy with the 3's as is but 2 woofers would be awesome.

They always say they're not going to make something right up until they do. I'm going to be *hammering* on them about it at CEDIA. More like demanding that they build it. The "3.5" actually does have some likelihood of existing, a bit more than the "5", but even that has some possibility. They just can't think beyond catching up at the moment.

There is a lot of rationale for the 3.5 dual 6.5" floor stander:

1. Fits a lower price point
2. Forward firing woofers mean ease of placement
3. Perfect for stand alone stereo in small to medium sized rooms
4. Perfect as high output satellites with a huge, deep bass subwoofer
5. An option for a dipole/bipole rear firing array with mono/bi/di switch
6. Perfect for use as rear channel speakers in various modes.

Besides, it would give women the elegant tower look and allow for use with a really high grade subwoofer for which I am also pushing. A "SuperTen" subwoofer based on Xd in a small, elegant, piano black box. They just have to listen and pay attention!

Could be the case; probably still smarting from the spanking they got for the year early announcement for the classics.

That could be what they might have in mind for the next generation Evolutions (what will they call them ... Revolution?).

If they haven't started on them already, I expect the replacement series for the Evolutions is no longer on the back burner at this point, and that they are prolly in at least the preliminary stages.

I can't wait to hear them either. :) :cool: :eek:

rynberg

08-02-06, 07:58 PM

Review of the 4s, 3s, and 3C at www.hometheatersound.com

mark russ

08-02-06, 08:28 PM

Review of the 4s, 3s, and 3C at www.hometheatersound.com

Thanks for the link!

Based on what I heard for myself in the Threes, what Jack H. himself said very early on in this thread, and now what this reviewer also stated all helps pretty much confirm what I have suspected all along, that for rock music, and prolly even for dynamic movie soundtracks as well, that the T5 is still prolly the better overall speaker for in the case of those two scenarios than the Four.

TomHuffman

08-02-06, 09:10 PM

BTW, here's the direct link.

http://www.hometheatersound.com/equipment/nht_classic_four_threec_three.htm

Alimentall

08-02-06, 10:44 PM

Interesting review. My reviewer decoder ring locked up several times leaving me somewhat confused. But pretty positive. I can't figure out how the midrange was the "weak spot" and then saying that the "guitar ripped!" It just seemed contradictory at times. But it does seem like he likes speakers that are warmer than the Fours which, IMO, are just a tad warm already!

mattwardfh

08-03-06, 01:06 AM

Alimentall

08-03-06, 10:41 AM

It was more like the perceptions that someone might get if they listened to the speaker for 15 minutes with one or two CDs and then went home and wrote an article. I could talk for pages and pages about all the little details of the sound and what's good and what's not so good. I almost want to buy a set of these Von Schweikerts for comparison. When I had Von Schweikert, just a few models to get my toes wet, everyone kept asking "ummm, why does the less expensive NHT sound better?!?" Yes, they were warm, but it was like listening to a wet blanket. I can't imagine the Threes doing anything *but* kicking the heck out of the VS speakers. The Threes and Fours have more in common design-wise with the VR7 and up, not that I expect they are *that* good. If I have a little extra money, I'll find a pair of VR1s on the net used and buy them just to compare them. Ported speaker, 6.5" midbass, soft dome tweeter. I'm sure they *sound* nice, but they're going to give up resolution, soundstage, imaging, bass precision etc to the Threes.

Alimentall

08-03-06, 10:53 AM

I also found this comment to be strange:
While both speakers have aluminum-dome midrange drivers, the Veritas’s tweeter and midrange are housed in separate compartments to prevent their interaction.
Well, see, the drivers are domes. They aren't going to interfere with each other anyway, so why spend the money to build separate compartments and why space them out when you can put them together for more of a point source.

Well, anyway, it's a nice review, but a little amateurish, as almost all are. Heck, I consider most of the "professionals" in the industry to be shockingly amateurish in their reviewing and logical writing skills. It's why I often say "hey, look at this great review. Well, you know, for what *that* is worth........" I remember when a good review used to mean something. Now, it's like having your cousin say "yeah man, I heard these Cerwin Vegas and they *rock*" "Great review, thanks, I'll rush out to buy". :)

sc10000

08-03-06, 11:35 AM

John, any comments on posts #1364 & 1369?

Mark, check your pm.

Thanks

budluvcash

08-04-06, 12:13 AM

Hello all i am a newbie, this forum has provided me with alot of valuable information. I am even more confused now.

I am a mostly movies watcher a little music but mostly movies with good effects (base). I am on a budget and have these options listed which do you think would be the best for me with my movie needs in mind. Also which would be the best bang for the buck for what I need.

this will set up in a room about 20x20 with a nice sized kitchen connected on one side. here are the possibilitys.

classic 4s/classic 3C/classic 2s for rears new for 1900.00

T5 system NEW for 1575.00 and M5 center/2- M5s on P5 pedestals/ super one xu for other rears all used for a few months mint for 800.00 for a total for everything of 2375.00

or Demo set like new of T5 system/M5 center/ 4- L5 wall mount speakers for a total of 1750.00

Which would fit me best for movies and the best bang for the buck??? all help is appreciated. Thanks in advance

mark russ

08-04-06, 12:39 AM

First of all, what electronics do you have?

But if you do get the Classic series, I vote for going for Threes and Evolution subs instead of the Fours.

budluvcash

08-04-06, 12:45 AM

budluvcash

08-04-06, 12:49 AM

mark russ

08-04-06, 12:57 AM

In FR accuracy/integration it goes T5, 2.9, Four, VT-2.4
In treble and midrange resolution, it goes Four, T5, VT-2.4, 2.9
In bass quality, it goes T5, 2.9, Four, VT-2.4
In bass output/dynamics, it goes T5, Four, VT-2.4, 2.9
In soundstage, it goes Four, T5, VT-2.4, 2.9
In imaging precision, it goes Four, 2.9, T5, VT-2.4
In sweetspot, it goes T5, Four, 2.9, VT-2.4

The Four *could* beat out the T5, IMO, in virtually every way, but there's no denying the T5's bass quality. It's awesome by any standard. Now, put a set of Threes with an Evolution sub, and I think it wins or ties pretty much every contest, no problem.

I see the Four as being a fantastic all around performer. It's only liability, I think, is that the bass isn't as precise as the T5/T6. But that puts it pretty well on par with most every other tower speaker under $10K. I can't think of a tower speaker off hand under $10K that has the bass quality and depth of the 3.3, VT-3, T5, T6 models, though I'm sure there might be a couple. But if you transplant the dual 10" woofers from the Xd system into a "Five", you've got a deadly speaker, not just a "giant matcher", but a real giant killer with embarrassingly awesome bass and dynamic range. That would be the real deal. That being said, nitpicking the bass on the Fours is kind of like complaining that the VW R32 only has a 250HP engine and so it can't quite match a Viper in drag race. The Four's main "weakness" is equal or superior to all its similarly priced competition.

Based on a rating system of finished ranking in each category assigned a point system as follows:
1 = 4 points,
2 = 3,
3 = 2, and
4 = 1, the final tally was as follows:

T5 = 24 points,
Four = 22,
2.9 = 14, and
VT-2.4 = 10 points.

The T5 barely nicked the Four using this criteria based mostly on better sub performance, which would be nullified by using Evo subs with the Classics. :cool:

mark russ

08-04-06, 12:59 AM

I will be purchasing a new receiver to run this system.

But currently I only have a yamaha htr 595 receiver running a 5.1 klipsch system SF2 system with SW12 sub i know i will need some other stuff, but wanted to get the speakers first why I can get a deal. Trying to upgrade. any help is appreciated

Yamaha with Klipsch?!?!?! :eek:

Man, talk about bright on bright! :o

If you can, try to make sure that whatever you get has pre-ins and outs just in case you use Evolution subs so you will have the option of running them that way with the X1 if you so choose, although just a sub/LFE out can and will work with spectacular results as well.

mark russ

08-04-06, 01:03 AM

actually I have been leaning towards the second option on my list. I think for the money that might fit me better. Since the T5 system comes with the amp and cross over on the subs included. If i had the classics I dont think it would be enough base without a dedicated amp for the subs.

its really hard because out of the optiond im looking for the best fit as i know the rest of my money would be on a nice receiver to push this I actually was looking at the Harman kardon 2005 DPR at 120 watts per channel 7.1

I would stay away from a digital path receiver with this line. I have tried the Panny XR-55 in "dual amp" mode on my SB-3s with OK results, but either the Classics or Evolutions are noticeably brighter than the SB-3s.

Plus, for Fours or ANY of the Evolutions, keep in mind that they are 6 Ohm loads, which won't help matters any on the DPRs.

I would suggest HK analog amps, NAD, Marantz, Rotel, Cambridge Audio, Jolida tubes, etc. "Warmer" sounding amps.

The subs on the T5 are more than adequate for most people. They don't have quite the output and extension of say dual SVS PB 10 I/NSDs for example, but are more musical while still being more than adequate on movies.

budluvcash

08-04-06, 01:37 AM

if i get the t5 system i will just use the x1 and a1.

What reciever would you rec? what brand? to run either of the options?

mark russ

08-04-06, 01:58 AM

if i get the t5 system i will just use the x1 and a1.

What reciever would you rec? what brand? to run either of the options?

Well, since the T5's and U2's bass when used with only one A1 each is in mono anyway, I have gotten absolutely spectacular results with a Cambridge Audio Azur 540R by simply running the sub/LFE out from the AVR to the sub/LFE in on the X1 and setting the 540R's own built in internal crossover to 70 Hz for music. On movies, I bump up the crossover point to at least 80 Hz, or even as high as 100 Hz.

With M5s, just so long as you have a receiver by one of those brands I mentioned before who are honest and do not fudge on their power ratings rated for at least 100 watts per channel at 8 Ohms, you will be OK. The M5 does best with about 150 watts (at 6 Ohms), so that would be close enough to play them plenty loud even in a bigger room.

The CA 540R might not have 52 different DSP soundfields like Church, stadium, disco, Joe's Pool Hall, John's Demo Room, etc. or other features like many typical Japanese receivers, but it does have 192 khz/24 bit dacs and a toroidal transformer for about $750 at retail. You simply will not beat that.

GKH

08-04-06, 06:26 AM

Helier Felipe

08-04-06, 08:47 AM

Please post your comments on your audition GKH
I'd love to hear what you think
Helier

swestbom

08-04-06, 09:10 AM

The reason for the relatively large distance between the midrange and tweeter domes on the "Convergent Source Module (CSM)" can easily be seen if you take one out. There are massive aluminum chambers around the drivers to "isolate" them and to draw heat away from them (the latter makes some marginal sense, the former is really just marketing).

The reason for the CSM is also obvious from a manufacturing standpoint. The CSM is a subassembly that can be assembled and tested independently of the speaker it goes in , they are modular, just like good software (Microsoft obviously excluded), computers and Japanese cars. The assembly can then be plopped into the appropriate speaker as a single unit without worrying about tolerances or fussy assembly operations (read easily automated and low skill required).

Lastly, about reviews, they have mostly been subjective BS from the beginning involving a cozy relationship between the magazines marketing department, the manufacturers and the magazines (you pat my back, I'll pat yours). Look at some 20 or 30 year old Stereophile reviews.

It costs money to really test equipment and requires engineers, not dime a dozen English teachers (if you are lucky), who are home theater or stereo hobbyists or aspiring journalists.

GKH

08-04-06, 09:22 AM

Please post your comments on your audition GKH
I'd love to hear what you think
Helier

Absolutely! Happy to! :) Can you tell me if the NHT's can use the Omnimount bolt wall mounts? In other words, do they have the threaded bolt hole on the back?

Alimentall

08-04-06, 10:55 AM

(2) 3
(1) 3c
(1) W1/A1/X1
(2) AZ

Upgrade to this?

(2) 3
(1) 3c
(2) W1/A1/X1 (with X1 20hz mod)
(4) Fours (for rear/surround)

Hmmm, I like the Threes up front, but I would either go *all* Fours or *all* Threes. No subs with the Fours (a bit of a step down for stereo) and with subs for the Threes. I would do the dual subs. One of my favorite ideas is to do 3 U1s up front and 2 U2s in the back, with a sub near each speaker and dual X1s. Make the *whole* system 7.1 basically!

Alimentall

08-04-06, 10:59 AM

Hello all i am a newbie, this forum has provided me with alot of valuable information. I am even more confused now.

I am a mostly movies watcher a little music but mostly movies with good effects (base). I am on a budget and have these options listed which do you think would be the best for me with my movie needs in mind. Also which would be the best bang for the buck for what I need.

Well, I would match the rears regardless of what you do. Get Threes for rears or get the M5/L5.

I would say it comes down to this if aesthetics/price is mostly out of the equation. Do you like tighter cleaner bass? Or a little more powerful and thicker bass with movies?

If it's the former, get the T5, if it's the latter, get the Fours. I do think at retail, the Fours are the best option. And, even better, as many people are doing, is the mix of Threes with an Evolution sub.

Alimentall

08-04-06, 11:04 AM

I'm giving this NHT set-up a listen today at my local shop....

NHT Two (fronts)
NHT Absolute Zero (rears)
NHT Two C (center) ((or maybe another Two for the center))
NHT Ten (Subwoofer)

And; I have the 120watt x 7 Sony ES Receiver (STR-DA3100ES)

Doesn't the NHT line use the threaded hole on back for wall hanging?

Ugh, that's the worst mismatch ever. Okay, maybe not ever. But there are three sub sat systems that make sense:

5 AZs with a Ten
5 Twos with a Twelve (skip the 2C and get another Two to match)
4 Threes, 3C and a Twelve.

You'll probably get the hankering to upgrade the receiver at some point, but it might do fine.

GKH

08-04-06, 11:10 AM

Ugh, that's the worst mismatch ever. Okay, maybe not ever. But there are three sub sat systems that make sense:

5 AZs with a Ten
5 Twos with a Twelve (skip the 2C and get another Two to match)
4 Threes, 3C and a Twelve.

You'll probably get the hankering to upgrade the receiver at some point, but it might do fine.

Hey! It was just a thought. I'm no pro, okay? :)

Upgrade the Receiver?? Why would I want to do that (it's 120watts x 7)? I think not! I just bought it! I'm 52. It will be with me till the day, I die! Just ask my Wife! :D

I'll mention your listed options to my guy at the store. Originally; I was thinking 5 AZs. But; I thought that Twos on the fronts might be better for music.

Alimentall

08-04-06, 11:13 AM

The reason for the CSM is also obvious from a manufacturing standpoint. The CSM is a subassembly that can be assembled and tested independently of the speaker it goes in , they are modular, just like good software (Microsoft obviously excluded), computers and Japanese cars. The assembly can then be plopped into the appropriate speaker as a single unit without worrying about tolerances or fussy assembly operations (read easily automated and low skill required).

NHT obviously had this in mind. Of course, doing this well can offer more performance, lower pricing and more ability to create new models more quickly. Get this mid/treble module perfected and it's an easy drop into other speakers! The NHT model actually has the midbass high pass, the midbass/mid crossover and the mid/tweeter crossover on the board attached to the back of the module!

It costs money to really test equipment and requires engineers, not dime a dozen English teachers (if you are lucky), who are home theater or stereo hobbyists or aspiring journalists.

Most of them have fairly poor grammar and writing skills so i doubt many are English teachers! They're just hobbyists who found an "in" or lucked into it. I can't think of a less fun job, however, than being a reviewer with all the politics involved. I'm too much of a "speak my mind" kinda guy.

Alimentall

08-04-06, 11:17 AM

Hey! It was just a thought. I'm no pro, okay? :)

You will be. You will be. :)

Upgrade the Receiver?? Why would I want to do that (it's 120watts x 7)? I think not! I just bought it! I'm 52. It will be with me till the day, I die! Just ask my Wife! :D

Well, just so you know "120W x 7" means each channel from a Japanese company means that two channels can do 120W simultaneously and there are 7 of those channels, so you can do the math. Generally, the true power output is 1/3-2/3rds of that.

I'll mention your listed options to my guy at the store. Originally; I was thinking 5 AZs. But; I thought that Twos on the fronts might be better for music.

True, the Twos are a little warmer and more forgiving, but then you're mismatching the whole system for movies. I guess it depends on the total budget.

mattwardfh

08-04-06, 11:21 AM

Hey! It was just a thought. I'm no pro, okay? :)

Upgrade the Receiver?? Why would I want to do that (it's 120watts x 7)? I think not! I just bought it! I'm 52. It will be with me till the day, I die! Just ask my Wife! :D

I'll mention your listed options to my guy at the store. Originally; I was thinking 5 AZs. But; I thought that Twos on the fronts might be better for music.

Well, it's not awful. I think there are a few issues John had with that setup that I can highlight for you.

First, the Ten is too small to do much for the Two. With the Two and the Three, you need a Twelve (or Evolution series sub!). Wih the AZ, you need a Ten. You don't want a sub that's too big or too small to match your satellite woofer.

Second, the conclusion about the Two has been that it's not really the sweet spot of the line. If you want a small sub/sat system, go AZ all the way. If you want something a little beefier up front for stereo music, don't buy the Twos, save up a little more and get the Threes. They're that much better.

Finally, as far as the receiver goes, it'll do, but it won't make the NHTs sing as well as they could. They like (but don't require) high quality power. So something like NAD, Rotel, Cambridge, Arcam, maybe Outlaw. There are plenty of others, but that's off the top of my head.

GKH

08-04-06, 11:26 AM

You will be. You will be. :)

Well, just so you know "120W x 7" means each channel from a Japanese company means that two channels can do 120W simultaneously and there are 7 of those channels, so you can do the math. Generally, the true power output is 1/3-2/3rds of that.

True, the Twos are a little warmer and more forgiving, but then you're mismatching the whole system for movies. I guess it depends on the total budget.

John: Back in the 70s, I was sooooooo deep in audio, it was crazy. My Wife's Father owned a stereo shop. I always was upgrading, and changing systems. It was fun then. These days, it's not a hobby for me. Not really. Once I get this settled, I'll just enjoy it all. For the past 20 years, I have been using essentially the same Sony System. The only components changed were the CD player, and the addition of a Sony DVD unit. I bought the ES series Sony this time because, I know about the quality Sony offers, and it's their best. I thought about Denon, and some of the others. But; I'll be fine with the trusty Sony, I'm sure.

I'm not competing anymore. :D My hobbies these days are RC, watch collecting, and target shooting. Oh! Slot cars and motorsports collectibles, too.

But; I am anxious to get over and give the NHT's another listen. :)

GKH

08-04-06, 12:28 PM

^^^^^ Please see my above post, as well.

What about 5 Absolute Zero's and 2 10" NHT subs?

Helier Felipe

08-04-06, 01:34 PM

GKH

08-04-06, 01:39 PM

Hey GKH,
what kind of target shhoting do you do?, pistol or rifle?
I'm an old pistol target shooter myself!
Good to see that not all of us have gone deaf from all that time at the range!
Regards
Helier :)

Helier:
I have a Ruger MKIII 6 7/8" slabside Target Pistol, and a Ruger 10/22T Blue rifle. I'm just an informal shooter. The rifle is scoped with a 3-9x32 Bushnell. I'm still using the iron sights on the pistol. Fun guns! Both .22 caliber. :)

Currently, we have no public ranges. So; I shoot indoors. Hopefully, we will get another outdoor facility in the near future.

- Greg

Alimentall

08-04-06, 01:40 PM

Eh? :D

Alimentall

08-04-06, 01:44 PM

^^^^^ Please see my above post, as well.

What about 5 Absolute Zero's and 2 10" NHT subs?

That's a good idea if you would prefer a tighter, cleaner bass over the depth. However, for $100-$200, you could get the higher quality U1 or U2 system. Then you might as well get Threes and, as you say, keep it until you die :)

As Matt implied, the AZ system is really a "lifestyle" system for a small room, except that it has the *performance* of a high-end system. But, if size isn't a big issue and a not quite doubling of the budget, the Three/U1 or U2 system is *the* ultimate bang/buck system of the whole lineup. A true "keeper". About the only thing that will make these "obsolete" is affordable digital speakers.

Helier Felipe

08-04-06, 01:45 PM

Well,
Not too much harm comes from shooting .22s, and that is a good thing.
I'm a pistol only shooter at this point, Colt .45 auto, but used to shoot
an AR-15 years ago with a scope, damm that was fun!
The reason I asked about your audition is that I'm contemplating the same set up,
so please let us know.
Regards
Helier

GKH

08-04-06, 01:51 PM

That's a good idea if you would prefer a tighter, cleaner bass over the depth. However, for $100-$200, you could get the higher quality U1 or U2 system. Then you might as well get Threes and, as you say, keep it until you die :)

As Matt implied, the AZ system is really a "lifestyle" system for a small room, except that it has the *performance* of a high-end system. But, if size isn't a big issue and a not quite doubling of the budget, the Three/U1 or U2 system is *the* ultimate bang/buck system of the whole lineup. A true "keeper". About the only thing that will make these "obsolete" is affordable digital speakers.

John:
I'm really wanting to stay under $1600 for all of it (I'm at $1450 now). And; like I was saying, I'm not totally ruling out keeping my OmniSats and Omni S10 sub. :)

........the nice thing is, I have all weekend with the OmniSats before I make the final decision. How cool is that? :D

So; if the 5 Absolute's and NHT's Sub really get my attention, I may change my mind. Plus; I really should re-visit the PSB store.

But....... but: since I will be listening to the NHT's, I'll look at the bigger stuff. At this point, it's all been cash $$$. I really don't want to put anything on a card. :p

GKH

08-04-06, 01:58 PM

Helier Felipe

08-04-06, 02:03 PM

Maybe I should switch, when I was young and foolish I was a rock drummer and that did some damage to my ears, and perhaps I should preserve what there's left of it a bit better. Also saving money is looking awful good the closer I get to retirement!
Helier

mattwardfh

08-04-06, 02:52 PM

That's a good idea if you would prefer a tighter, cleaner bass over the depth. However, for $100-$200, you could get the higher quality U1 or U2 system. Then you might as well get Threes and, as you say, keep it until you die :)

As Matt implied, the AZ system is really a "lifestyle" system for a small room, except that it has the *performance* of a high-end system. But, if size isn't a big issue and a not quite doubling of the budget, the Three/U1 or U2 system is *the* ultimate bang/buck system of the whole lineup. A true "keeper". About the only thing that will make these "obsolete" is affordable digital speakers.

Wow, what a smart thing for me to imply :-)

I'll just interject once again that I have the 3/3C/U1 system up front, and it kicks some serious ass. I can't foresee the need for another upgrade until I can afford an Xd setup when I get out of grad school and get a real job.

That is, if I can supress the itch to upgrade. But that's what the bedroom system is for, playing around with. The main system is for serious stuff only :rolleyes:

I use AZs in the rear due to aesthetic (and, to a lesser extent, budgetary) constraints, which John probably isn't crazy about, but they work well enough at half the price of using Threes.

mark russ

08-04-06, 03:02 PM

I use AZs in the rear due to aesthetic (and, to a lesser extent, budgetary) constraints, which John probably isn't crazy about, but they work well enough at half the price of using Threes.

I agree. For surround effects on movies, the AZ is is more than adequate. If anything, Threes are prolly a little overkill as surrounds.

But, with that said, if you have the $$$ and space, why not? :D

mark russ

08-04-06, 03:05 PM

Well,
Not too much harm comes from shooting .22s,

I don't care if someone as big as Shaq is coming after you, if you pump at least 6 .22s in them, they won't keep coming for too much longer.

mark russ

08-04-06, 03:06 PM

John: Back in the 70s, I was sooooooo deep in audio, it was crazy. My Wife's Father owned a stereo shop. I always was upgrading, and changing systems. It was fun then. These days, it's not a hobby for me. Not really. Once I get this settled, I'll just enjoy it all. For the past 20 years, I have been using essentially the same Sony System. The only components changed were the CD player, and the addition of a Sony DVD unit. I bought the ES series Sony this time because, I know about the quality Sony offers, and it's their best. I thought about Denon, and some of the others. But; I'll be fine with the trusty Sony, I'm sure.

I'm not competing anymore. :D My hobbies these days are RC, watch collecting, and target shooting. Oh! Slot cars and motorsports collectibles, too.

But; I am anxious to get over and give the NHT's another listen. :)

Well, 2 channel gear is much easier and cheaper to swap out than complete surround systems.

sc10000

08-04-06, 03:10 PM

I don't care if someone as big as Shaq is coming after you, if you pump at least 6 .22s in them, they won't keep coming for too much longer.
Unless you are Jack Bauer. :rolleyes:

mark russ

08-04-06, 03:12 PM

Unless you are Jack Bauer. :rolleyes:

Or Superman. :p

Actually, the age old theory has always been that a .357 round, for example, would just go right through somebody, whereas the .22 would go in, but not come back out the other side, and would start bouncing around off of ribs. This theory, as we all know also applies to 30 ought 6 rounds as well in the case of the J F K assassination. :rolleyes:

I once read somewhere that .22s had killed more people than any other size gun.

budluvcash

08-04-06, 06:38 PM

mark russ

08-04-06, 06:46 PM

All I'll add is that I do like the 2nd option of having M5s on P5 stands as surrounds better than L5s.

I have L5s as side surrounds, but that was more out of necessity for the room itself than my own choice.

budluvcash

08-04-06, 06:54 PM

what dont you like about th L5 for side and rears?

mark russ

08-04-06, 07:26 PM

DreamCatcher

08-04-06, 07:41 PM

Oh, the L5s are OK for side/ rear surrounds. Hell, virtually ANYTHING will work as surrounds, but I just would rather have had M5s for some multichannel music.

L5s actually cost more than M5s, plus they HAVE to be wall mounted, but they are tuned for it.
The L5 RULES.... for what they are....
Which is, at least imho, the best sounding, best integrated, best looking, on-walls available (for the money), when used as surround speakers!

dc

Alimentall

08-04-06, 07:47 PM

Heck, I have all L5s. I'm hoping the Controller will have some EQ assistance for them. Of course, I'm about 15th on the list to get one!

Pupton

08-04-06, 08:21 PM

Here's my non-english-teaching, non-eloquent update ;)

Fours came today. Did a brief demo vs. my 2.9's and they did pretty much what I expected. In my 2-ch room (17x14x9), my first impression was that I had replaced my SS pre with a tube pre. Mids and Mid-bass were more pronounced than the 2.9s, especially in the 200-400Hz range. The 2.9 bass was tighter (sealed) but the Fours were not lacking, and after some rearranging, they hit the low notes very well. The Fours soundstage was a little more relaxed, but larger. Off-axis and imaging was terrific. I listened to some old vinyl recordings and boy, it sounds sweet. I could listen to them for hours at moderate to high levels and not feel fatigued. I still love my 2.9s, but the Fours show the 2.9s shortcomings.

Next up will be the 4/3/3C setup in the HT.

BTW - I did some quick near-level testing of both the 2.9s and the Fours - both appear to cross-over at about 100Hz (actually I know the 2.9s do, and the Fours rolled off / on at the same points as the 2.9s). Not totally sure if it's 2nd order, but I expect it is...

Mike

Pupton

08-04-06, 11:50 PM

Mids and Mid-bass were more pronounced than the 2.9s, especially in the 200-400Hz range.

What I meant to say here is: 'Lower Mid to Midbass (200-400Hz) were more pronounced in the 2.9s'

mark russ

08-05-06, 03:10 AM

The L5 RULES.... for what they are....
Which is, at least imho, the best sounding, best integrated, best looking, on-walls available (for the money), when used as surround speakers!

dc

Actually, I agree. I can't think of a better on wall speaker, even for mains and center.

mark russ

08-05-06, 03:15 AM

Here's my non-english-teaching, non-eloquent update ;)

You didn't have to prove it (literally)! :p ;) :cool: :D :o :eek: :)

What I meant to say here is: 'Lower Mid to Midbass (200-400Hz) were more pronounced in the 2.9s'

Just kidding. :D

BTW - I did some quick near-level testing of both the 2.9s and the Fours - both appear to cross-over at about 100Hz (actually I know the 2.9s do, and the Fours rolled off / on at the same points as the 2.9s). Not totally sure if it's 2nd order, but I expect it is...

Mike

Interesting. Kind of what I suspected too.

So, with a direct comparison now in hand between the Four and the 2.9, what would you think of Threes with Evolutions sealed subs now for the best of both worlds?

Helier Felipe

08-05-06, 09:00 AM

Fellows all I meant by not too mush harm comes fromm shooting 22s was that not too much harm idone to your hearing, we are talking target shooting for crying out loud , not going on a killing rampage!
Helier

Helier Felipe

08-05-06, 09:06 AM

By the way GKH, I'm curious about your audition, how did it go?
Regards
Helier

Pupton

08-05-06, 09:56 AM

You didn't have to prove it (literally)!

Ha Ha Ha Ha.... uh........ GIT 'R DONE!!?!?!! :D

So, with a direct comparison now in hand between the Four and the 2.9, what would you think of Threes with Evolutions sealed subs now for the best of both worlds?

Yes, I think both you and John are spot on with this suggestion. Of course having a little old-school in me, I would also love to hear the Fours with the 1259 driver used in the 3.3s ;) ... <just kidding>

Alimentall

08-05-06, 03:28 PM

What I meant to say here is: 'Lower Mid to Midbass (200-400Hz) were more pronounced in the 2.9s'

I'm thinking that you might mean a bit lower, maybe 75Hz-150Hz, maybe a bit broader. I think that's where they may be a bit of a dip in the response. Acoustic suspension woofers seem to reach higher more easily and more accurately than ported ones for some reason. It's also right around the crossover which makes sense. I think the 2.9's greatest attribute is its incredible seamlessness, especially in the woofer/midbass/mid transitions. I used to tell people that it was the driver sizes were the speaker equivalent to "36/24/36" :)

I also think there *might* be a bit of a recess between the midbass and dome mid in that 600-1000Hz range. I mean, at times it "feels" like it, but then when I try to *hear* it, it doesn't seem to be there. Maybe just a slight difference in sound between the dome sound and the cone sound? Not sure. I'm dying to see the measurements on these. I supposed one of the websites will publish them soon enough.

Of course, you could be right in that the 2.9, to me, has a "darker" midrange sound (with an offseting tweeter "sparkle") whereas the Fours are more lively in the upper midrange. That could give the impression of more low bass. Interesting, on the Fours, the midbass driver just seems to "purr" along with the sound, almost seeming invisible at times. I mean, it's *there*, but it's like I can't hear the driver. Not sure what that means as I don't get much of a chance to listen like I want! Too busy trying to get everyone theirs :)

Also, FWIW, the Fours have begun shipping in Special Dark. I got the first two pairs in on Friday. Really pretty! I wish they had just a bit of metal flake in them though, like some of the Meridians.

Pupton

08-05-06, 04:31 PM

John, your right - as usual ;) I sent some tones thought them at listening position and the Fours were down approx 1-2 Db around 70Hz (prolly due to setup / my room) then again from about 125-175Hz - the ladder was what I was hearing last night. 200-400hz was on par with the 2.9s, but just laid back and more integrated into the total sound of the speaker. I've got too accustomed to the 2.9s ;) anyway thanks for keeping me honest.

zaracsan

08-05-06, 05:36 PM

Heck, I have all L5s. I'm hoping the Controller will have some EQ assistance for them. Of course, I'm about 15th on the list to get one!

I'm still curious to know how the Controller and Power5 performs, but the only person I know that has had a chance to wring them out (that would be Kal) is mum on the subject. :( I heard a rumor that Vinci was updating the Controller already for v1.3 HDMI (and TrueHD), but I am doubtful about such claims happening anytime soon. Any word on when the Power2 is coming to market?

Different topic: Did your NMAV Forum go bye-bye when your store burglarized and your laptop was nabbed?

Alimentall

08-06-06, 10:45 AM

I'm on my way to Taos (long drive) to setup an Xd/Controller surround system (with an IF projector and all HDMI - the coolest A/V system I've ever done!!!) in a few minutes. I can at least let you know how the setup went and how well it worked. The 1.3 is in the planning stages, but don't expect it for 9-12 months at least. It will be available as a factory upgrade.

The burglary and the forum were two different things that happened, but unfortunately, within 18 hours of one another. The hosting people are transferring to more secure servers so I'm hoping to be up in a week, but I've been down for 3 weeks now and it's beginning to piss me off, especially since it wasn't my fault the security was so lax. I lost a LOT of work in that forum. All the memberships seem to be intact, so hopefully I'll spam everyone when we're back up.

zaracsan

08-06-06, 12:32 PM

I'm on my way to Taos (long drive) to setup an Xd/Controller surround system (with an IF projector and all HDMI - the coolest A/V system I've ever done!!!) in a few minutes. I can at least let you know how the setup went and how well it worked.

Sounds like an exciting project. I'm sure many here (myself included) would be interested in hearing more about this installation.

The 1.3 is in the planning stages, but don't expect it for 9-12 months at least. It will be available as a factory upgrade.

That IS very good news and makes the Controller a front runner on my short list of pre/pros. Any word on the Power2, the two-channel companion for the Power5? I was told months back that it would be out by now, but it appears this will be yet another NHT delayed release.

The burglary and the forum were two different things that happened, but unfortunately, within 18 hours of one another. The hosting people are transferring to more secure servers so I'm hoping to be up in a week, but I've been down for 3 weeks now and it's beginning to piss me off, especially since it wasn't my fault the security was so lax. I lost a LOT of work in that forum. All the memberships seem to be intact, so hopefully I'll spam everyone when we're back up.

Well, that certainly was a crappy run of bad luck for you; and for those of us that looked at your Forum as a repository for NHT specific info, a loss of an important resource. You wrote some excellent 'think pieces' on audio that I hope were not lost. Did you or your provider have a backup of any the Forum data? If not, that is a real loss for all. I'll look for the e-mail when you get the Forum back up.

Talisman39

08-06-06, 01:50 PM

Also, FWIW, the Fours have begun shipping in Special Dark. I got the first two pairs in on Friday. Really pretty! I wish they had just a bit of metal flake in them though, like some of the Meridians.

John, I know you've posted pictures of these before, but it would be great to see some new ones. This is the color I'm considering for mine, but have yet to see them in the flesh (or MDF), and I know it's kind of a tricky color. I don't know if the local dealer will be getting them in for display. NHT should send out color chips :)

Adam

DreamCatcher

08-06-06, 06:18 PM

Another John question.............

John (or anybody who's had experience)
I'm very interested in the new NHT Controller/Amp combo.
But would like to hear from those who have had some hands on.
I'll be checking them out locally asap :D

dc

Alimentall

08-07-06, 10:42 PM

Sounds like an exciting project. I'm sure many here (myself included) would be interested in hearing more about this installation.

Well the installation went well, the system rocks, reports are that Alien vs Predator kicked ass after we left. The Controller *rocks*. I can't really tell you too much about the sound, the design is stellar. Quibbles are essentially non-existent.

That IS very good news and makes the Controller a front runner on my short list of pre/pros. Any word on the Power2, the two-channel companion for the Power5? I was told months back that it would be out by now, but it appears this will be yet another NHT delayed release.

No word yet. I really don't want to know about anything that isn't in production yet, if you know what I mean.

Well, that certainly was a crappy run of bad luck for you; and for those of us that looked at your Forum as a repository for NHT specific info, a loss of an important resource. You wrote some excellent 'think pieces' on audio that I hope were not lost. Did you or your provider have a backup of any the Forum data? If not, that is a real loss for all. I'll look for the e-mail when you get the Forum back up.

Well, I did lose it all, from what I've been told. I don't know how. But like New Orleans, we'll rebuild. It's nothing but a little time. Thanks for the thoughts.

Alimentall

08-07-06, 10:45 PM

John, I know you've posted pictures of these before, but it would be great to see some new ones. This is the color I'm considering for mine, but have yet to see them in the flesh (or MDF), and I know it's kind of a tricky color. I don't know if the local dealer will be getting them in for display. NHT should send out color chips :)

Ehhhh, unfortunately, my nifty Fuji camera was also stolen. However, you can go here:

http://www.adnm.com/ces_nhtclassic.htm

Alimentall

08-07-06, 10:50 PM

John (or anybody who's had experience)
I'm very interested in the new NHT Controller/Amp combo.
But would like to hear from those who have had some hands on.
I'll be checking them out locally asap :D

I think it's probably the best unit on the market (kind of on the market!) under $5K. With the 3 HDMI inputs, the video upconversion, the flexible input assignments, the NHT EQ settings, the automatic setup, etc, all in one unit makes it a pretty amazing unit. It is pretty intuitive and easy to setup and has lots of interesting features. The manual is available on line and is a very interesting read and is surprisingly well written.

http://www.nhthifi.com/manuals/current/Controller-userguide.pdf

I plan on getting one of these sets for myself as soon as I can make everyone else happy! Also, I'm trying to get EQ contours for the onboard EQ so that people can see what it does. I have no idea, to be honest. It's all automated and "behind the scenes"

zaracsan

08-08-06, 09:24 AM

Well the installation went well, the system rocks, reports are that Alien vs Predator kicked ass after we left. The Controller *rocks*. I can't really tell you too much about the sound, the design is stellar. Quibbles are essentially non-existent.

Was this an Xd 4.2 system? 6.2? I really do think NHT should consider making a 5 or 7 channel Xd HT system, as I think there is a ready market for something like that. Still, even a 'modest' 4.2 would be pretty damn nice. For me, I would like to hear more reports on the Controller/Power5 combo, as the only one that has been able to tell me much was a dealer who said he was pretty *wowed* by what he heard at the dealer show in LA a couple of months back.

No word yet. I really don't want to know about anything that isn't in production yet, if you know what I mean.

I do know what you mean about NHT and getting one's hopes up about delivery times. I can only imagine the torment you endured with the Classic rollout. As Tommy Boy would say: "That'll leave a mark!". Still, if I go with the Controller/Power5, then I will be kinda stuck waiting on the Power2 in order to have 7-channel setup. I'm told no Power7 is in the works.

Well, I did lose it all, from what I've been told. I don't know how. But like New Orleans, we'll rebuild. It's nothing but a little time. Thanks for the thoughts.

Well, not everything is completely lost. Google cache is your friend. I did several searches just now and was quickly able to dredge up a fair number of complete threads from the Forum via Google cache. If you weren't aware, if you do a Google search, there is a link at the end of the search result that says "cache" which will bring up complete pages -- even if the data is no longer on your server. Search: +"NHT" +"John Ashman" and you can see the old NHT Forum menu page. From there, you can search: +"exact thread subject line" +"author screen name" and you will see the thread in its entirety. Also try: site:forum.adnm.com . Play around with the "quotes" to lessen or increase the broadness of the search. Just be sure to use the cached result. Time is working against you, so sooner is better, if you want to recover some of the lost posts from our New Orleans.

Better days to be. :)

budluvcash

08-10-06, 04:29 PM

have they released the X2 crossover for the classic 4s? If they have where can I get 1?

mark russ

08-10-06, 05:16 PM

have they released the X2 crossover for the classic 4s? If they have where can I get 1?

It looks to me like an X2/A1 combo should help close the gap between the bass performance on the Fours and T5s at least somewhat.

Alimentall

08-10-06, 05:24 PM

mattwardfh

08-10-06, 05:26 PM

mark russ

08-10-06, 05:52 PM

I hate to say this, but I'd recommend using a stereo power amp with volume controls. I don't think it's a good idea to overlay two crossovers on top of each other. I keep waiting for the day when NHT makes a really stellar crossover/amp/room EQ unit that is stereo, but nothing yet.

Should be no problems if you jack the X2's low pass up as high as it will go and the high pass as low as it will go. That should effectively eliminate any nasty double filtering.

Then you would still have all the benefits of phase, gain, LFE gain, and boundry control.

Of course, it would help if we could only find out what the x-over point is on the Fours from the low mid bass to the passive sub. :p

mark russ

08-13-06, 12:36 PM

NHT has recently updated their web site, and I could find no mention of an X2.

Looks like this may be just like the A2, an idea that never sees the light of day for whatever reason.

mattwardfh

08-13-06, 04:30 PM

NHT has recently updated their web site, and I could find no mention of an X2.

Looks like this may be just like the A2, an idea that never sees the light of day for whatever reason.

http://nhthifi.com/2006/products/ht/x2.html

b4z

08-13-06, 07:06 PM

Now I'm wondering I can really use the Fours in my room.
Here are the dimensions.
The room is 11'8" wide.
My current TV stand is 41" wide X 21" tall X 21" deep.
On top of it sits a 42" Sony A10 that is 14" deep and is pushed bsck to the wall.
For my speakers I have this available space:
3'4" deep from the wall to the sofa arm X 4'2" wide from the TV to the wall.

For display purposes I have set up a pair of Mirage M260s that are 40" high
to approximate the Four's height. They are about 1" shorter than the
Fours would be not on spikes.

Ignore the M3s up against the wall please.

My fear is that the woofer of the Fours will be firing into either the TV cabinet or the wall.

I may also buy a Shaker style TV stand which is 53" wide and would pinch them in even further.

Can I work with this current setup or will I be getting too much bass?

Pupton

08-13-06, 07:21 PM

BTW - I did some quick near-level testing of both the 2.9s and the Fours - both appear to cross-over at about 100Hz (actually I know the 2.9s do, and the Fours rolled off / on at the same points as the 2.9s). Not totally sure if it's 2nd order, but I expect it is...

Well, I was off on x-over, but right on 2nd order... it's 125Hz w/12db LP filter... Here's the specs: http://nhthifi.com/2006/products/s/four.html

mark russ

08-13-06, 09:18 PM

http://nhthifi.com/2006/products/ht/x2.html

Yeah, I found it after I posted that by clicking on the X1, then changing the 1 to a 2 in my browser. :p

mark russ

08-13-06, 09:22 PM

mark russ

08-13-06, 09:25 PM

Well, I was off on x-over, but right on 2nd order... it's 125Hz w/12db LP filter... Here's the specs: http://nhthifi.com/2006/products/s/four.html

Good eye (if not ear)! ;) :p :cool: :D

b4z

08-13-06, 09:39 PM

Alimentall

08-13-06, 09:49 PM

Can I work with this current setup or will I be getting too much bass?

Well, it depends on what you think is too much. It will probably be a little heavy, however, if it *is* too much, you can do a little pad down circuit on the bass for a couple of $. Threes with a sub gives you a bit more flexibility though.

Alimentall

08-13-06, 09:50 PM

I guess I could put the Fours closer to the TV and that would have them 2'+ away from the walls with the woofers firing at the walls.
Doesn't seem ideal to me.
If they were about 5' apart then they would be around 2'8" from the walls.

It is not the direction the woofers face, but the proximity to the walls. Whatever speaker you do will have this. But some adjustability might help.

mattwardfh

08-13-06, 11:12 PM

NHT has recently updated their web site...

Anybody have any thoughts on the new site? Nice to see something resembling marketing going on, I think.

Alimentall

08-13-06, 11:56 PM

Ditto! I guess I have to congratulate them for doing something that looks nice and has lots of packages that people can put together in their mind and go hear. If NHT gets good at marketing, I'm going to faint!

mattwardfh

08-13-06, 11:59 PM

sc10000

08-14-06, 12:07 PM

The new site has significantly improved WAF potential. :cool:

mattwardfh

08-14-06, 12:11 PM

The new site has significantly improved WAF potential. :cool:

Much more consumer-friendly, which I suppose is what they really need.

linzer

08-14-06, 11:48 PM

Anybody have any thoughts on the new site? Nice to see something resembling marketing going on, I think.

Anyone notice the site and PDF brochures now do not include tolerances (+-3db) for the frequency range on the classics? You have to dig into the owners manual to find that information.

What's with that? Me thinks it smells like a company desperately trying to get into big box stores.

Alimentall

08-15-06, 01:12 AM

What's with that? Me thinks it smells like a company desperately trying to get into big box stores.

If they wanted to be in big box stores, they'd already be there. To be honest, NHT always downplays their measurements. And, since they've always been very accurate and honest in their specs, they probably figure it goes without saying.

b4z

08-15-06, 09:52 AM

This is pretty funny:
Went to my dealer yesterday afternoon to borrow their demo Threes for an overnight audition. I probably should have called first because they had sold their demo pair plus what they had in stock since I had been there about 6 weeks ago.
My dealer said she had ordered another pair and NHT sent them 1 speaker! LOL.
Apparently NHT is still having some issues.

Alimentall

08-15-06, 10:36 AM

Hah, yeah, the girls don't quite get that dealers think in pairs, not singles and most of the speakers are shipped in singles now. I just ordered 10 *pairs* of iW4s and got 10 *singles*. I keep forgetting to order twice as many singles! That's happened to me on almost every order with at least one or two products, so I keep coming up short!

But, seriously, who just orders just one pair of Threes?!? I just got in 9 pair this week in Special Dark.

Speaking of which, the "Classic Three Tour" is now about to begin...........

b4z

08-15-06, 11:13 AM

Alimental,

Do you have a good, well lit pic of "Special Dark"?

Alimentall

08-15-06, 12:02 PM

Well, I don't know how good they are, but if you stare at these long enough, you get the idea....

http://www.adnm.com/ces_nhtclassic.htm

b4z

08-15-06, 02:51 PM

Hmmmm, interesting color.
I'm trying to get all of the black speakers, cabinets, and coffee tables out of the room
and go with mahoganys and coffee colors, so if I go with Speical Dark everything will be brown. LOL.
Excepting the Sony LCD and my equipment.
From one extreme to the other.

I'm just amazed that I actually give a s*** what it looks like when a few years ago I could have cared less.

Seriously though NHT needs to offer some wood veneers or something in that vein.

Alimentall

08-15-06, 02:59 PM

It would be tough (or very expensive!) to do a wood veneer and keep the rounded contours that help the sound. You could do it, but it would then it would cost $3K/pr and they'd have to market like a B&W or Wilson or Thiel to convince people to buy them. Besides, the NHT guys are generally of the homo treehuggerus and/or dudas musicanas species and so I doubt you'll see any wood veneers any time soon. Except on their guitars and drumsets, that is ;)

Also, I have a customer who bought leather furniture of a brownish/red look and it was almost a perfect match for the Fours in SD. I need to get some photos (but my camera was stolen!).

mark russ

08-15-06, 05:39 PM

I got back from my local dealer today who is literally right across the street from my office.

Still no Fours have come in, and he said he even cancelled the order for a pair. :(

I'm still curious to hear them against the $1200 per pair Revel F12s.

Alimentall

08-15-06, 05:44 PM

I've been getting them. I got 4 more pairs of black a week ago and two pairs of SD yesterday (along with 6 pairs of Three SD). I also got 5 or 6 ThreeCs in and a bunch of iW4s.

ericgl

08-15-06, 06:17 PM

mattwardfh

08-15-06, 06:24 PM

So for those of us wanting 3 identical speakers across the front is it possible to purchase 3 of the 3s?

Yes. In fact, John would probably encourage it.

Alimentall

08-15-06, 06:29 PM

It is. All of the NHTs except for the Fours now ship in singles.

ericgl

08-15-06, 06:33 PM

I am beginning to like this company. I hate it when stores advertise the each price but will only sell in pairs.

Alimentall

08-15-06, 06:37 PM

When they first shipped SB1s and SB2s, they were only in pairs. I fought for 2 years to get them to split them, but they did and have kept it that way. We split up all kinds of things for people though. Speaker stands, speaker pairs, inwalls, inceilings, whatever. As long as its a reasonably popular and affordable thing. I probably wouldn't split up a pair of PSB T8s, for instance ;)

ericgl

08-15-06, 06:42 PM

I probably wouldn't split up a pair of PSB T8s, for instance ;)

Fine. I guess if I'm ever in the market I'll need to make a rich friend.

b4z

08-16-06, 03:55 PM

I talked with the NHT guy about this last year when he was participating
but I feel like bringing it up again.
The 3C is 20" wide which makes placement difficult.
Furniture manufacturers are really behind on designing stands that will
accomodate a flat panel TV AND a center channel speaker.
It seems they still think we can put our center channels on top.

If you guys can give me some direction to site that offers
space for a center channel AND a reasonable amount of equipment it would be great.

And I am not interested in having a silver metal and glass stand.
It has to look like furniture.
Here is one I have found, but my equipment really wouldn't fit.

http://www.homedecorators.com/P/Hawthorne_Wide-Screen_TV_Stand_Console/130/

sc10000

08-16-06, 05:44 PM

Salamander Designs Synergy line can accomodate any configuration you can imagine. Very nice quality, and it can either look like furniture or more rack like depending on what your tastes are and the options you choose. I have the 3c sitting on top, but you can add a riser to the top just high enough to fit the center channel in. Totally customizable now or later.

I have the Synergy triple 20, maple with aluminum posts, saturn wheels (with brakes), black metal screens between each post, and matching screen/maple doors. Looks very classy & furniture like enough to please anyone. :)

Salamander Synergy System (http://www.salamanderdesigns.com/syn/index.jsp)

b4z

08-16-06, 06:45 PM

Thanks for the Salamander info.
It still has metal on it, so no go.

Last week my wife and I found
a TV stand at Target(don't laugh).
It is actually a twin with a 13" high X 20"+ space on each side
which would hold a 3C, my receiver, dvd player and cable box.
I went back to look at it today and it is actual wood veneer
with 2 sliding glass doors which I would not install.
After looking at the display i realized that the 3 stands in boxes I saw
last week weren't there. SOLD OUT in a week!
it's only $159, so if i don't like it no big loss.
Wish it was wider than 43.5" so I could buy a bigger TV.

http://www.target.com/gp/detail.html/sr=1-5/qid=1155767597/ref=sr_1_5/601-2348158-7589738?%5Fencoding=UTF8&asin=B000CSYZL0

mark russ

08-16-06, 07:05 PM

Quote:
BTW - I did some quick near-level testing of both the 2.9s and the Fours - both appear to cross-over at about 100Hz (actually I know the 2.9s do, and the Fours rolled off / on at the same points as the 2.9s). Not totally sure if it's 2nd order, but I expect it is...

Well, I was off on x-over, but right on 2nd order... it's 125Hz w/12db LP filter... Here's the specs: http://nhthifi.com/2006/products/s/four.html

So now with more time spent with them, how do you think the Fours compare to the 3.3s as music first, 2 channel speakers?

Pupton

08-16-06, 08:07 PM

With my SS pre/amp I like just about everything in the Four more except ...... The Bass :) I'm not a fan of the ported design...I think the 3.3 & 2.9s bass is much tighter & cohorent across the board. I actually took a set of Threes & 2.9s to my dads to run a biamped compare - I ran the subs separate from the top of the 2.9s 1st - then ran the Threes & the 2.9 subs - amazingly we both loved the last setup :)

So Threes with the 3.3 or 2.9 was my fav.

mark russ

08-16-06, 08:22 PM

Thanks for the review. Did you by chance use a high pass crossover at all for the Threes for bass integration since the x-over point on the 3.3s and 2.9s to the sub is 100 Hz if my memory serves me correctly.

So in retrospect, would you now recommend Threes on stands with Evolution sealed subs instead of Fours for 2 channel music? I wouldn't think it would really matter as much for movies.

I will have the chance to do something similar this coming weekend. I will have access to a pair of Threes from Saturday through Monday, and I intend to A/B compare them against the M5s on my T5s while using the T5's (B5) subs for both, and being able to switch between them with a simple A/B speaker selector switch on the amp.

The T5s are approx 6' apart with the subs facing out, so I will put the Threes on stands just inside of the T5s. Their spacing will be about 5', and I will have them both crossed over to start with at 80 Hz. Might bump the x-over up to as high as maybe 125 Hz a little too, as the Fours are just for experimentation.

ellogan

08-16-06, 10:50 PM

[b4z wrote:
I talked with the NHT guy about this last year when he was participating
but I feel like bringing it up again.
The 3C is 20" wide which makes placement difficult.
Furniture manufacturers are really behind on designing stands that will
accomodate a flat panel TV AND a center channel speaker.
It seems they still think we can put our center channels on top.

If you guys can give me some direction to site that offers
space for a center channel AND a reasonable amount of equipment it would be great.

And I am not interested in having a silver metal and glass stand.
It has to look like furniture.
Here is one I have found, but my equipment really wouldn't fit.]

b4z:
Try the following link: http://www.pier1.com/catalog/productdetail.aspx?oid=112109&returnURL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.pier1.com%2fcatalog%2fcollections .aspx%3ffh_view_size%3d8%26fh_eds%3d%c3%9f%26fh_view%3dliste r%26fh_refpath%3dfacet_59432939%26fh_location%3d%2f%2fpier1d irect%2fen_US%2fcategories%3c%7b110297%7d%2fcategories%3c%7b 110317%7d%26fh_start_index%3d32&fh_view_size=8&fh_eds=ß&fh_view=lister&fh_refpath=facet_59432939&fh_location=//pier1direct/en_US/categories<{110297}/categories<{110317}&fh_start_index=32

That Vega Console Table looks great in real life. If you get the Pier 1 card you get $15 off your first purchase I believe. Good luck.

mmsean

08-17-06, 02:15 AM

I got some Classic Three's in today and my best friend and I auditioned them. We absolutely love em'.

We tested them next to the SuperOne's and SB3's. We found that the SuperOne's were forward, bright and light on bass, the SB3's were more laid back with good highs and better bass and the Classic threes were brighter and more forward than the SB3's but not as in your face as the SuperOne's. We also felt like the Classics had pretty good bass and midbass with a better overall sound.

I was considering using these for surrounds and getting the Fours but now I'm debating :)

b4z

08-17-06, 10:36 AM

Thanks.
The Pier1 table would give lots of equipment and speaker options
but at 28" is is too tall. I am trying not to block a lot of the windows that are behind the TV.

sc10000

08-17-06, 11:42 AM

Alimentall

08-17-06, 11:48 AM

http://www.pier1.com/catalog/productdetail.aspx?oid=112109&returnURL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.pier1.com%2fcatalog%2fcollections .aspx%3ffh_view_size%3d8%26fh_eds%3d%c3%9f%26fh_view%3dliste r%26fh_refpath%3dfacet_59432939%26fh_location%3d%2f%2fpier1d irect%2fen_US%2fcategories%3c%7b110297%7d%2fcategories%3c%7b 110317%7d%26fh_start_index%3d32&fh_view_size=8&fh_eds=ß&fh_view=lister&fh_refpath=facet_59432939&fh_location=//pier1direct/en_US/categories<{110297}/categories<{110317}&fh_start_index=32

Has the Guinness Book of World Records been notified? :)

http://www.makeashorterlink.com/

Pupton

08-17-06, 01:37 PM

mark - yes, xover used at 100Hz for apples to apples compare... I still can't answer your ? re the use of the U1/W1/B5 as I have not listened to them in this arraignment - if the sound is tight, linear, extended bass, then yes - it would be optimum NHT setup (I probably should have & I will if I get the chance to travel to a dealer in light of your / John's recommendation). I still like the Fours as I have them integrated in my HT with my IB sub's - but they will not move to my 2-ch setup.

Also, I'll be interested in your feedback after you've demo'd...
if you get a chance try setting the Three's in a LRLR config & in front of your towers. I did this just to experiment with sound integration & would be interested in your feedback....

On another note - have you (or anyone else reading this) built a DIY sub based on the 1259 Driver... just brainstorming.... :)

mark russ

08-17-06, 03:49 PM

if you get a chance try setting the Three's in a LRLR config & in front of your towers.

But then the imaging of the M5s would be compromised unless I go through the trouble of moving the Threes and stands back, which would make it difficult to do quick A/B comparisons. It'll be easier just to slide the chair forward or back to get the proper distance in each case.

The Evo sealed subs would IMO be better at music than the Ten, Twelve, or Four's passive ported subs. I believe John hit the nail on the head as usual before by saying that dual U1s and Threes on stands is the ultimate for the best of all worlds (that is, if in fact the Classic threes are indeed better than the M5/M6).

I agree with you though, the Four is prolly better suited to HT than 2 channel.

The 1259 was considered to be one of, if not THE best sub drivers for DIYs back in the day, and still to this day you here it's name come up sometimes.

b4z

08-17-06, 04:43 PM

mattwardfh

08-17-06, 05:41 PM

If i go with the Threes I am leaning more towards a Martin Logan Dynamo at $600
or the Martin Logan Grotto at $1,000.

My dealer is not at all happy with the Super Audio and Classic subs.

Anyhow it will be first ownership experience with a sub(car excluded).

I am just hoping/praying that the bass will be integrated.

A little more money and you can get the Evolution subs. I wasn't very happy with my Super Audio sub, but this thing is great. In my mind it's the difference between acoustic suspension and ported, but I could be wrong on that.

BachToRock

08-17-06, 09:34 PM

I can't recommend the U1 Evolution subwoofer highly enough... it is extremely compact and produces the finest performance I have heard in my room after trying many different subwoofers.

Apparently, there is a modification consisting of a few resistor changes in the X1 that allow true extention to 20hz instead of the stock 27hz rolloff... of course, the tradeoff is more distortion at high output levels...

Alimentall

08-17-06, 10:09 PM

I am trying SO hard to get NHT to replace the Classic subs with sealed units. I think they are great for ported subs, but once you get used to sealed subs, you just can't go back.

ellogan

08-17-06, 11:18 PM

Thanks.
The Pier1 table would give lots of equipment and speaker options
but at 28" is is too tall. I am trying not to block a lot of the windows that are behind the TV.

b4z:
Check this thread on AudioCircle: Ikea Lyte thread (http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=30417.0)

It may solve your problem or at least give you good ideas. Sorry the Pier 1 table did not work for you.
Take care

ellogan

08-17-06, 11:20 PM

Has the Guinness Book of World Records been notified? :)

http://www.makeashorterlink.com/

I just did. I was sure to let them know you should get the credit. Finder's fee coming up for you!

sc10000

08-17-06, 11:50 PM

I am trying SO hard to get NHT to replace the Classic subs with sealed units. I think they are great for ported subs, but once you get used to sealed subs, you just can't go back. Please, everyone...listen to your xprts, the U1 is the sub to have & a great value at that. Classic subs just do not cut it; good yes, but in no way do they compare. Just DO it. :rolleyes:

VladDracul

08-18-06, 02:49 PM

I got a pair of Classic Threes about a month ago. They replaced SB3s as mains. I currently have a 2.1 setup only; but I'm thinking of getting the 3C and AZs for surrounds. I've also thought about Threes for surrounds; but honestly, I think they'd be wasted for most stuff. I listen primarily to music, stereo SACDs and RB CDs. I'd be looking to listen to some surround SACDs; but usually these only have ambiance sound through the surrounds and I don't think the Threes would be used much in that capacity.

Now, about the Classic Threes, they are a considerable upgrade over the SB3s. My setup constists of a Rotel RSX 1056 AVR + Denon 3910 universal player + Outlaw ICBM bass management module. The SB3s were awesome Jazz speakers. rather warm, excellent bass, very good imaging and soundstage. I also listen to classical music and it was here that the SB3s weren't as good. They weren't bad really, but they did show some serious limitations. They didn't exhibit very good midrange resolution and the treble could be rather harsh when driven hard. I ended up archiving much of my classical software because it sounded too harsh at the upper end, and not detailed enough in the middle. I don't mean to be hard on the SB3, I still love those speakers; and consider them much better than most alternatives at their price point. So, it was with this in my mind that after setting up the Threes, the first thing I did was to take out all those classical discs and re-listen to them. The difference was quite pronounced. It was like listening to those CDs for the very first time. Midrange detail was excellent and the upper range was smooth, not harsh at all. The Netherlands' Philarmonic Orchestra recording of Mahler's Fifth Symphony never sounded so good in my system. The music had a very airy quality; a very detailed, yet smooth, midrange that the SB3 was never able to render. I think this is probably what is most obvious about the Threes, the excellent, smooth resolution. All in all, I am very impressed.

Finally, a rant. Why has it been so difficult for NHT to get these speakers to the dealers? I waited about six months to be able to get these from an on-line authorized dealer (since I don't have any near me), and finally gave up and bought them on eBay. I'm rather upset that I had to go that route because I'm pretty sure the warranty is void. What I don't understand is why the eBay dealer had 10 Classic Three pairs available for sale; and yet authorized dealers are having trouble with supply. What gives?

mark russ

08-18-06, 02:50 PM

I'm an NHT guy through and through, but I'm sorry, I just can't recommend their Classic or Super Audio subs at all unless you happen to get just a super price on them.

For example, two of the Twelves (or SW12s before them) would be, what, some $1600 at full retail? And SVS makes a 10" sub for well under $500 shipped that will literally outgun the two NHTs put together, with deeper extension to boot.

Now the Evolution sealed subs on music is a different story. :D

If you guys had a choice between a single U1 or a U2 set, which would the choice be and why?

And finally, John, does the new NHT pre/pro have the capability where you can set up the built in Eq for say Classic Series speakers, but with Evolution subs? Or does everything have to be matched in series?

mark russ

08-18-06, 02:56 PM

Finally, a rant. Why has it been so difficult for NHT to get these speakers to the dealers? I waited about six months to be able to get these from an on-line authorized dealer (since I don't have any near me), and finally gave up and bought them on eBay. I'm rather upset that I had to go that route because I'm pretty sure the warranty is void. What I don't understand is why the eBay dealer had 10 Classic Three pairs available for sale; and yet authorized dealers are having trouble with supply. What gives?

Yeah, I noticed that. There are Fours on ebay and Audiogon, yet my local dealer still hasn't received the first pair yet? :rolleyes:

What's up with that? :confused:

mattwardfh

08-18-06, 03:06 PM

mattwardfh

08-18-06, 03:09 PM

If you guys had a choice between a single U1 or a U2 set, which would the choice be and why?

I faced that same question. Basically, in my mind it worked out to positioning of U2 to work against room modes, vs. force cancellation in the U1.

I went with U1 due to being in an apartment. With the U1 on top of an Auralex SubDude (which probably isn't even necessary anymore), just about nothing get through to the floor. Pretty nifty. Also, given my room layout, the U2 set would have ended up symetrically arranged, which to my understanding doesn't really help counteract room acoustics.

VladDracul

08-18-06, 03:25 PM

That's the setup I have (plus a U1 sub and NAD receiver). I think the AZs do fine as surround if you're a primarily music person. Certainly worth considering at half the price of the Threes.

Thanks for the heads up.

Do you listen to SACDs? How do the AZs do on those?

Also, about the U1, how large is your room? I'm also thinking of upgrading my sub, and hadn't considered anything by NHT. I was thinking more in the line of a Rel Strata. How does your U1 compare to that?

b4z

08-18-06, 04:14 PM

What height speaker stand do you guys recommend for the Threes?
I currently have some 26" tall stands and was thinking of something
about 3" shorter?

Also I bought the Target TV stand last night and my Mirage center fits perfectly in
one of the bays which are 21" wide. So it will also accomodate the 3C.
This is also the first time I have mounted a center under a TV, and I prefer the sound.
When I put the stand together I left out the glass doors and it is a big improvement in looks over my CWD cabinet.

I feel like I have actual furniture in my room now and not a cabinet soley for audio/video equipment. And it only cost $159!

I will post pics later.

mark russ

08-18-06, 04:31 PM

Keep the 26". That will put them closer to the height of the Fours, which we can indirectly assume is the best height for them by NHT themselves.

mark russ

08-18-06, 04:33 PM

I faced that same question. Basically, in my mind it worked out to positioning of U2 to work against room modes, vs. force cancellation in the U1.

I went with U1 due to being in an apartment. With the U1 on top of an Auralex SubDude (which probably isn't even necessary anymore), just about nothing get through to the floor. Pretty nifty. Also, given my room layout, the U2 set would have ended up symetrically arranged, which to my understanding doesn't really help counteract room acoustics.

Yeah, there are advantages to both, but just get dual U1s and you will truly have the best of both worlds. :D :eek: :cool: ;) :p :) :o

sc10000

08-18-06, 04:40 PM

If you guys had a choice between a single U1 or a U2 set, which would the choice be and why? U1 of course, room placement is much easier. Adding a second U1 is a piece of cake; can't say that about a second pair of U2s.

And finally, John, does the new NHT pre/pro have the capability where you can set up the built in Eq for say Classic Series speakers, but with Evolution subs? Or does everything have to be matched in series? Exactly what I want to know. That and whether NHT will really upgrade the exisiting units to HDMI 1.3 down the road, and for how much $.

mattwardfh

08-18-06, 05:53 PM

Yeah, there are advantages to both, but just get dual U1s and you will truly have the best of both worlds. :D :eek: :cool: ;) :p :) :o

I would like stereo bass. I can localize just a bit in the 60-80 Hz range (using 80 Hz crossover). But one U1 is already overkill, volume-wise (but not quality-wise!). By the time a second U1 becomes necessary (or that I have the disposable income for it), I'll be hopefully going for Xd (or SuperXd, or whatever the latest and greatest is).

mattwardfh

08-18-06, 05:54 PM

Keep the 26". That will put them closer to the height of the Fours, which we can indirectly assume is the best height for them by NHT themselves.

Agreed. Works great for me.

mattwardfh

08-18-06, 06:10 PM

Thanks for the heads up.

Do you listen to SACDs? How do the AZs do on those?

Also, about the U1, how large is your room? I'm also thinking of upgrading my sub, and hadn't considered anything by NHT. I was thinking more in the line of a Rel Strata. How does your U1 compare to that?

I don't really listen to SACDs. Didn't really feel like investing in another format and rebuying a bunch of music. But I've listened to stereo material with Dolby ProLogic II, and I've listened to some 5.1 music DVDs.

With things where the back channels are just for ambiant sort of stuff (like what you would get with PLII, and most concert DVDs), it works really well.

For a mix that's very dependent on surround sound, it's not perfect. Best example is the Flaming Lips' recent 5.1 remasterings of The Soft Bullettin and Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots.

With those, you get stuff bouncing around from speaker to speaker, so positioning, voicing, and frequency response have to be absolutely perfect to make clean transitions, and, well, it's not in my setup. AZs are mounted high on the sidewalls, and I've optimized the U1 to match the Threes rather than the AZs, so you get changes in upper bass levels as sounds move from speaker to speaker, for example.

Seriously, though, those disks are absolutely brutal to a bad setup. I'm surprised I've never heard anyone else use them as a reference.

Room size is 16 x 24, I think, with an opening in one corner (about the size of two doors) leading into the adjacent dining nook and small kitchen (8x8 and 8x4, respectively), and a small opening above the bar going into the kitchen. So a little extra openness added to the main dimensions of the room.

U1 puts out more than enough volume for that space. Plenty to get the cops called and kicked out of my apartment, if I wanted, certainly. I'd imagine it'd do quite well in a much bigger room, and the cost of adding an additional bass module is less since you only need one X1 crossover to run both units.

Looking at the Stratas, with the U1 you gain two larger woofers (2x12"), and outboard electronics. The U1 is almost twice as heavy, for what that's worth. The X1 crossover is also very configurable, allowing continuous adjustment of crossover, phase, boundary control, and volume. A little intimidating but very useful.

BGLeduc

08-18-06, 06:14 PM

mattwardfh

08-18-06, 06:16 PM

I am not Matt, but I use my AZ's in my 2CH rig (paired with a sub). They rawk.

I can, in fact, verify that BGL is not me.

What sub are you running with the AZs?

mark russ

08-18-06, 06:23 PM

I would like stereo bass. I can localize just a bit in the 60-80 Hz range (using 80 Hz crossover). But one U1 is already overkill, volume-wise (but not quality-wise!). By the time a second U1 becomes necessary (or that I have the disposable income for it), I'll be hopefully going for Xd (or SuperXd, or whatever the latest and greatest is).

That's one thing about the new pre/pro that disappoints me, that there isn't separate L/R dual sub outputs.

So if you have T6s, dual U1s, or even if you are using dual A1s or some other stereo amp such as a NAD C270 on T5s or U2s, the ONLY way to keep "stereo" bass is to use the X1 through the front L/R pre-outs. :( :mad:

BGLeduc

08-18-06, 07:03 PM

I can, in fact, verify that BGL is not me.

What sub are you running with the AZs?

A puny(!), old school Klipsch SW8 II. But I do have it EQ'd with a BFD, and use an ICBM for the crossover.

Its actually a very big, irregular shaped room, that opens to the dining room, and a foyer. Ceilings are close to 20 feet in places.

Way too much room for the size of the gear, but for music, sitting in the sweet spot, its works out very, very well. Its all driven with a NAD 320BEE, another giant killer.

Brian

mattwardfh

08-18-06, 07:16 PM

zaracsan

08-18-06, 08:49 PM

That's one thing about the new pre/pro that disappoints me, that there isn't separate L/R dual sub outputs.

So if you have T6s, dual U1s, or even if you are using dual A1s or some other stereo amp such as a NAD C270 on T5s or U2s, the ONLY way to keep "stereo" bass is to use the X1 through the front L/R pre-outs. :( :mad:

I would have preferred to have seen dual sub outs on the Controller for my dual U2s (4 W2 cabinets), but as it remains an unknown whether the BM in the Controller is so much better than when running through the X1, that it may be premature to be bumming about it at this point. With the X1, we also have the additional benefit of knowing we can mod it to go deeper if we choose to, and I'm not sure whether that would even be an option on the Controller. No doubt, there are tradeoffs with either approach.

If I get the Controller, I will be very interested to compare the two different sub connection options. My hope would be that electronics in the Controller are so much cleaner than in an X1, and when combined with the advantages of the DSP, make the tradeoff of giving up the X1s tweakability and stereo bass potential worth forgoing. Stereo bass is a debateable advantage, and with my M6es being able to go down to 61 Hz, this may be less of a problem than other NHT speakers with less bass extension. At this point, we really are speculating here.

DekPM19

08-19-06, 01:16 AM

I wish they would make a spacer to go on top of the U1 to set the M6 or 5's to the correct height. I know you would need different sizes for the speakers. Also I don't see much about the b5 or b6 or any information on the NHT web sight. Are they planing to get rid of them.
Allen

zaracsan

08-19-06, 09:48 AM

I wish they would make a spacer to go on top of the U1 to set the M6 or 5's to the correct height. I know you would need different sizes for the speakers.

You may find the experimentation with placement of an M6 ontop of a U1 that was done by reviewer Peter Moncreiff, which I cited a few pages back, to be of particular interest. Be forewarned, it is a very long read (think novelette), but does contain more detailed info on the NHT Evo subs than is found anywhere else. It starts here: http://www.iar-80.com/page103.html . The subwoofer info starts on page 110 of this online review.

While the U1 was covered in great detail in that review, and it does enjoy the unique benefit of opposing woofers that cancel vibration -- making it particularly well suited to placing things on top of the cabinet; I do think the U2 works out even better in some ways for running with the idea of subs as speaker stands. If you stack a pair of the U2s (each U2 system has 2 W2 cabinets) you end up with a 28" speaker stand (same as the P6 pedestal). Now, if you can swing getting two U2 systems (4 W2s), then you end up creating what are essentially two line sources with (2) 12" woofers per side. This also creates natural stereo bass (like a T6/T5) with a very small footprint; and as Mr. Moncreiff points out, with none of the inherent disadvantages of the B5/B6 bass modules. Not perfect for every room and everyone, but an idea that may be worth considering.

Also I don't see much about the b5 or b6 or any information on the NHT web sight. Are they planing to get rid of them.

It was mentioned earlier in this thread that the B5 and B6 bass modules have been discontinued by NHT.