From a NHT newsletter.

*************

Scheduled to ship in October, NHT CLASSIC will consist of the following eight models.

Absolute Zero - An ultra-compact two-way bookshelf speaker featuring the output and performance that made the original SuperZero a CLASSIC. MSRP: $200 each.

TWO - A traditional NHT two-way design, employing a 6.5" woofer. Great bass response makes using a subwoofer an option rather than a necessity. MSRP: $250 each

THREE - A completely new design, the Three incorporates a new ¾" aluminum dome tweeter and 2" aluminum dome midrange array combined with a 6.5" woofer in a compact bookshelf model, providing full range performance, wide dispersion and high dynamic range. MSRP: $400 each.

FOUR - The Four tower speaker, though extremely compact in size, features a high-output, four-way system that employs the same dome tweeter/midrange array as the Three bookshelf model with the addition of a side-loaded 10" aluminum cone woofer. The system is bi-ampable, and can be used with NHT's X2 crossover and A1 amplifiers. MSRP: $1800 pair (mirror image).

2C - The three-way 2C center channel speaker employs the same dome tweeter/midrange array as models Three and Four, combined with dual 5.25" woofers. Three-way center channel systems provide better dispersion, less lobing and cancellation than typical M-T-M (mid-tweeter-mid) designs, creating a more realistic soundstage regardless of listening position. MSRP: $450 each

3C - The 3C, like the 2C, is designed as a companion to the Model Three and Four. The 3C features a three- way design, employing a dome tweeter/midrange array combined with dual 6.5" woofers for added dynamics and higher output. MSRP: $600 each

TEN - The CLASSIC Ten is a compact, 10" powered subwoofer with a built in 150 Watt amplifier and aluminum cone driver that is attached to an aluminum former, thereby creating a heatsink for minimal distortion and maximum output. MSRP: $600 each

TWELVE - Similar to the TEN subwoofer, but with a 12" driver and 250 Watt amplifier. MSRP: $850 each

Poor Alimentall. His favorite speaker company adopting the aluminium drivers he despises.

Poor Alimentall. His favorite speaker company adopting the aluminium drivers he despises....when implemented poorly.

I got the email from NHT. What strikes me is that this line is about the same price as the Evos, particularly the center channel. Could they be on the way out?

Hahaha. No, actually, as usual, it depends on how it's used. Aluminum is a great material, just not when used as a 6" midrange, for instance, with a high, shallow crossover. The resonance peak should be high enough to be crossed over effectively (I hope). I love aluminum tweeters and bass drivers. The thing is, you have to know where to cross it over. That's the only thing with metal. I explained that in a thread where Energy Veritas popped up. They also use an aluminum dome upper midrange and also use it properly.

And, strangely, I always like the NEAR speakers which always were smooth and polite sounding and they had aluminum midranges. Not quite sure how they pulled that one off, but they did.

...when implemented poorly.

Exactly, thanks!

I got the email from NHT. What strikes me is that this line is about the same price as the Evos, particularly the center channel. Could they be on the way out?

I asked this question. Yes, the 2C and 3C seem to be an updated virutal clone of the M5/M6 for the same price. They say "Classic is for retail, Evolution is for custom". I'm curious to find out if the 2C and 3C sound better than the M5/M6 because I suspect they will at the exact same price. Or, at least different. Wider dispersion anyway and very likely some additional midrange resolution. I'll try to ferret more about this. The 2C or 3C will not work with a B5 or B6, so they tell me and would look a bit weird if it did.

http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_three.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_four.jpg

Very nice! My first set of "real" speakers were NHTs.

My first set of what I would call real HT speakers were also NHT about 5 years ago. I have since upgraded but they served me well. I did not replace them when I was ready to do an upgrade, even though I had about the biggest stuff they had when I bought them along with their dual subs but that was when all the rumors were going around about sombody buying them out and I just didn't like what I heard at the time so I made a switch. They are good speakers though. Saying that I do think you can do better for the same amout of money but again this new line mentioned above is pretty inexpensive already. Will just have to wait until some folks report back on them...

Here's the interesting thing about NHT's products and their "sonic history", since MRL kinda brought it up.

Late 80s, early 90s - A little forward, lacking in bass, precise imaging, not terribly refined.

Mid to late 90s - Still a little forward, deep bass, precise imaging, a little more detailed, a little more refined.

Early 2000s - Borderline warm, certainly by NHT standards, deep bass, imaging less precise, but bigger soundstaging. Notably more refined.

2005 and forward? - What I'm hearing, based on my conversations, design and what I've heard out of Xd, they're going for "not as as forward as the 90s, not as warm as the early 2000s", the image focus of the old, but even better soundstaging than the 2000s stuff. More refined, more detailed at the same time.

IOW, I think NHT gets the fact that a lot of people rebelled against the "too smooth" stuff of recent, despite the fact that this stuff silenced a lot of earlier critics and won over some new fans. So they're trying to triangulate between the earlier and later sounds, hopefully pulling of a "best of both". I haven't heard it, can't say how they've done. But that appears to be the goal. So, hopefully, they'll win back some of the "party faithful", while still appealing to the new audience they've managed to gain. So, for those who felt the last round of stuff didn't sound like "NHT", it might be worth checking out again as I think the whole "classic" name is specifically a signal that they want to, if not go back to their roots, recapture the spirit of their roots. I hope they pull it off. It would be nice if they could get it "just right" with this batch. If they do, I think it will catch some well-deserved attention.

Is there anymore info on these out there? Possibly some pics of them? I saw the two above - just looking for more (larger).

I'm still running NHT stuff & these may hit at the right time for my next upgrade. I'm running VT-1.4 towers up front, VS-1.4s in the rear, an original SW10 sub, and a SC1 center (the VS-1.4 center that I was using wouldn't fit in my new entertainment center). I love NHT stuff - my kind of sound.

-robert

Robert, I should have some more info tomorrow and, if it comes through, I can post some links.

I've always loved the simple elegant looks of NHT.
this new line looks great too !!

http://www.adnm.com/images/THREE.jpg


That speaker gives me wood. I've always like TMWs with dome midranges. I hope it sounds as good as it looks.

I was going to get 7 SB2s but after hearing about the model Three and now seeing it, I'm definitly waiting.

I've always like TMWs with dome midranges.

I've never heard this midrange, but I do know that Jack Hidley at NHT appears to be madly in love with it and has been for, oh, about 2 years. The same tweeter/midrange drivers will be used on their new $7500+/pr M80Xd flagship studio monitor and $1000/pr inwalls so it must be pretty good. It had better be! I've heard lots of dome midranges on Infinities, ARs, Genesis, etc and I've not quite heard one done really well. I haven't heard the Veritias, however. But with Jack's affinity for it, I suspect it eventually will start showing up in on-walls, outdoors, and probably anything else NHT makes that costs more than $800/pr.

The .75" tweeter will push the "oil can" resonance way up in response, probably closer to 30kHz and the dispersion characteristics should hold the whole way up to near 20kHz whereas normal 1" tweeters begin to lose dispersion by around 10kHz or so. I guess this should mean that they will have "air" or whatever that gets called.

This is the M80Xd pro speaker:

http://bobserve.no-ip.com/pics/newpro/images/m80_3.4.jpg

Very nice! My first set of "real" speakers were NHTs.
Same here, a pair of SuperZeroes back in '94. I think they were the last real "revelation" I had in speakers. :)

What strikes me is that this line is about the same price as the Evos, particularly the center channel. Could they be on the way out?

Got more info. Looks like the 2C and 3C are *just* centers. They are a mere 6.5" and 7" high (the new BMC driver frame allows this) and are curved at each end in such a way that I don't think you could stand them on end. There is a "danger" that the $800/pr THREE will outperform the M5/M6 in the areas where they aren't quite SOTA - dispersion, soundstaging, resolution. The M5/M6 will player louder, but most people don't need that kind of output anyway. That being said, I think the M5/M6 will be around for at least a year, probably 1.5-2 years and will still probably perform better overall in some situations, mainly bright rooms or narrow rooms or possibly up against a wall. It is, however, an NHT tradition to develop an affordable speaker that outperforms its own (and others brands') flagships in some ways.

Interestingly, the Absolute Zero is really within a hair of being the same size as the SuperZero, despite the bigger midrange. The SuperZero was 9"x5.5", the Absolute Zero is 9.75"x5.625".

Retail price of the TWO was incorrect in the press release - it's $300 each, not $250 each. Here's some more shots:

http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_azlife.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_twolife.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_threelife.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_fourlife.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_tenlife.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_mirror.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_domearray.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_midbass.jpg

Alimentall,

Do you no what the dimensions of the Three are?

13.75H x 7.5"W x 10.375"D

hmm..the SuperZero replacement at $200 *each* seems a tad high of a price, inflation notwithstanding.

Very interested in hearing the three and four.

Does anyone know which manufacturer makes that 6.5" woofer? It doesn't look like the traditional Peerless w/inverted dustcap. Did they stick with poly or go with treated paper? Vifa maybe?

Not that it matters much, just curious. :)

hmm..the SuperZero replacement at $200 *each* seems a tad high of a price, inflation notwithstanding.

Substantially better tweeter, substantially better (and bigger) midrange, notably better crossover, notably better cabinet (at least in terms of diffraction, nicer finish. Kinda like equating a 2005 Honda Accord with a 1985 one, really.

Does anyone know which manufacturer makes that 6.5" woofer? It doesn't look like the traditional Peerless w/inverted dustcap.)

It's an outie. Not sure who's making that one, but it appears to be an entirely custom midrange for NHT, or at least, the frame is.

Interestingly, one person mentioned to me on my forum that the THREE and FOUR have an aluminum cone 6.5" midrange, so it's official, it's all aluminum, all the time ;) So, basically, a similar design to the more expensive Energy Veritas speaker. The cone probably rings around 4-5kHz, the dome probably around 12-15kHz, so they'd need to get that ringing at least 40dB down. Fortunately, the midbass crossover is at 800Hz, so that should get us down by 45-50dB. On the dome, they're crossover over at 3.5kHz so that would put us down to 36-48dB by 14kHz. I suspect the crossover points are specifically designed to push resonances down below audibility. The tweeter could be crossed over higher, but the dome probably can't. Likewise, the midbass could go higher but not if they want to remove all the ringing, so I'm pretty sure that they specifically chose the points/slopes to deal with it, just as Energy does with Veritas. I guess I'll just have to hear it. I hope they have some in a useful place to hear them.

Actually, the similarities between the Veritas design and the THREE/FOUR design is rather striking. The biggest difference is that the THREE/FOUR are both a little less than half the price. The FOUR also has a single 10" rather than dual 6.5" "Hyperdrive" bass drivers ("Prepare for Ludicrous Bass!!!") and the THREE has an acoustic suspension midbass instead of ported. Both have a narrower, lower diffraction baffle. It would make a nice comparison since the designs are so similar otherwise.

So, Tex-Amp has a point, but I have faith that NHT has dealt with the aluminum thing well, especially since they have previously expressed a high degree of senstivity to ringing. They couldn't do it nearly as well with a 2-way mid/tweeter combo, so the 3-way dome design is critical to avoiding this issue, which is why, I believe, the AZ and TWO use polypropylene. Well, I guess the proof is in the listening. Just kinda ironic though, huh :)

Alimentall... great posts here about NHT and very informative. Thanks for your continued hard work. NHT's will always be in my heart as they were the first I guess you would say real Home Theater speakers that were bit floor standers and they did an ok job. I have not spent the time over the last few years to listen to any of their new stuff but my dealer I buy a lot of stuff from has them and I will give them a listen when I go in to replace my HDRPTV here soon for a DLP or LCOS... Thanks!

Got more info. Looks like the 2C and 3C are *just* centers. They are a mere 6.5" and 7" high (the new BMC driver frame allows this) and are curved at each end in such a way that I don't think you could stand them on end. There is a "danger" that the $800/pr THREE will outperform the M5/M6 in the areas where they aren't quite SOTA - dispersion, soundstaging, resolution. The M5/M6 will player louder, but most people don't need that kind of output anyway. That being said, I think the M5/M6 will be around for at least a year, probably 1.5-2 years and will still probably perform better overall in some situations, mainly bright rooms or narrow rooms or possibly up against a wall. It is, however, an NHT tradition to develop an affordable speaker that outperforms its own (and others brands') flagships in some ways.

Interestingly, the Absolute Zero is really within a hair of being the same size as the SuperZero, despite the bigger midrange. The SuperZero was 9"x5.5", the Absolute Zero is 9.75"x5.625".

Retail price of the TWO was incorrect in the press release - it's $300 each, not $250 each. Here's some more shots:

http://www.adnm.com/images/fourshot1.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_classicdriver.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_classicdome.jpg

Gorgeous, just plain gorgeous. If they sound as good as they look.... :eek:

Here are the promised higher rez pics. Ping me off list if you want high-rez shots ( john@adnm.com ):

http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_az.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_two.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_2c.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_3c.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_ten.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_twelve.jpg

Maybe I missed it, but does anybody know when we can look for these babies to hit the market???????
I love the SB3's!
But I think the Classic 3 will be my next speaker, thinking of using at least 5, probably 6-7, in our pool room system :)

dc

The AZs, TWOs and subs should be late October, the others, hopefully, November.

All of the woofers in the Classic series that are used in 3-ways have aluminum cones. Both of the woofers used in 2-ways have PP cones. All of the drivers in the line are manufactured in China. We did a ton of development work using FEA for the magnetics and mechanical issues. We ended up using virtually zero off the shelf components in all of the drivers. All of the drivers have shorting rings to reduce flux modulation, even the Absolute Zero. All of the woofers (except the 10" in the Four) have frames made of BMC, the same material used in the XdS baffle. The frames are about 4 times as stiff as the frames in the previous line (Super Audio). The baffles for all of the speakers are about twice as thick as the SA cabinets had. This allows us to use much larger radii on them to smooth out the off axis response and reduces the level of baffle acoustic radiation due to the increase in stiffness. There is a lot of cool stuff in this product.

Jack...

Are the new speakers compatible with the 2.9/3.3 in a 5.1 system or are all the drivers wired in uniform polarity?

Are the dome midrange and tweeter in the FOUR the same as in the M80Xd and could the M80Xd be used as a killer Center with the FOURS or XD's as the Mains?

Actually, the similarities between the Veritas design and the THREE/FOUR design is rather striking. The biggest difference is that the THREE/FOUR are both a little less than half the price.

One major plus for NHT is a matching CC. I concidered the V2.2i but the lack of a matching CC and surround put me off. The V2.2i are a bit big for surround use but the Three looks like it may be workable.

B2R,

I don't know about compatibility between the 2C/3C and the AC-2. I have to run some acoustic phase measurements to determine this.

The 2" domes in the M-80Xd are the same driver with a different voice coil impedance as used in the Classic series. I wouldn't use an M-80Xd for a center channel with anything else but itself for Lefts and Rights. The M-80Xd gets processed by an XdA which has about 8ms of latency in it. You're going to have a very hard time getting your other channels time delay to match. The dispersion of the M-80Xd will be considerably narrower than any of our consumer speakers. This will make it very hard to match the tonality of it to anything else. The 3C has about the same output as an AC-2. I don't see why anyone would need any more than this unless their room is just huge. Of course if you really want a headbanger/hi-fi HT system, you can buy 5 M-80Xds and a couple of S-80 subs to go with them. Be prepared to bring a pretty fat wallet though:) Ten 8" magnesium cone woofers, ten 2" dome midranges, four 12" long throw woofers, 4kW total amplifier power, etc, etc.

Jack,

Huge NHT fan here.....past owner of 2.9's, 1.5's etc.. Any chance we'll see any of the new lines in anything other than black or white? Would love a rosewood or cherry. The basic black/white/Grey of recent NHT's has been a hurdle for me.

Thanks,
Steve

How about this:

http://www.adnm.com/images/ces_colorside.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/ces_colorangle.jpg

Daddy Like!!

That picture doesn't quite capture the color, they did not, in person, appear to be baby
$h!t brown.... :)

What midrange material was that again?

sorry, just funnin"

Steve,

There is a possibility that Classic will be offered in a color other than black or white. No decision has been made yet. In no case, will we be producing speakers with real wood veners as finishes. I'll post more about that tomorrow. The finish on the Xd system in the photo is paint and lacquer, but in person it looks a lot like very dark wood.

I believe that the midrange cone material is Superbrightanium:)

I believe that the midrange cone material is Superbrightanium:)

Actually, Bob Hopkins backlit them for dramatic effect. :)

[QUOTE=Jake Sm]That picture doesn't quite capture the color, they did not, in person, appear to be baby
$h!t brown.... :)QUOTE]

I have 7 month old and that is almost too true, the color does look like baby poop. Sorry, Jack, but couldn't resist chiming in on this.

BTW, speaking of NHT speakers and while Mr. Hidley is actively involved in this thread, what does the Classic line mean for the Evolution series? Are any updates/upgrades due to the Evo line in the works?

At this time, there are no changes to the Evolution line that we're announcing. From a sales standpoint, the Evolution and Classic lines don't overlap much. The design of the Evolution line is optimized for custom install applications, while the Classic line is optimized for direct purchases by consumers.

I saw the new Classic line at CEDIA over the weekend. They were perhaps the best *looking* speakers I saw. Absolutely gorgeous. The black gloss of the Classics seems even glossyer (if that's a word) than the Super Audio line. Also, the beveled edges (to reduce refraction) aided in a very sleek, attractive look. Now I wonder what they sound like?

When will these speakers be available for sale? The NHT web site still makes no mention of them.

Here are some pics.
http://home.comcast.net/~tlhuffman/nht_4.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~tlhuffman/nht_center.jpg


BTW, in case you can't tell from the pictures, the center channels are smaller than the M5/M6.

This is a great thread.

I was very interested in replacing my Mirage M3s(circa 1992) with the SB3s because I felt like they didn't have the treble hardness that the SuperOnes had.
Although I recommended the SuperOnes to many friends.
They just weren't for me.
Does this mean the SB line will be discontinued?

Is the Classic center channel less than 19" wide? I need to be able to fit it into my
TV stand in the center rack.

NHTs are a fantastic value in my opinion.
I hope the new line will offer the same.

The Classic line replaces the Super Audio line. Five of the new models should be available at the end of October.

The 2C center is 19.875" wide and the 3C center is 21.875" wide. Sorry:( We tried to minimize height and depth in the design. This means that they get longer.

Thanks.
Didn't realize the SBs were part of the Super Audio line.

Seems like they are at a better price point than the SBs were.

Looks like I will be buying a new TV stand or doing with a center.
I have been without anyway because there is no place
for it on my new Sony 42A10 RPTV.

Jack,

I am a new fan and recently discovered the SB3's but with the introduction of the Three's, I am eargerly awaiting to hear them. have any been sent to anyone, such as Stereophile, for a review to be done? I can't wait to get more spec's on them, such as rated watts RMS, and a frequency chart to see how flat the response is compared to the SB3's and M5's/M6's. I have a 11x13 HT room so I was looking at duing a 6.1 system due mostly to the small room size. Would the Three work as a front center and a rear center? or would you suggest a 7.1 system even with my small room size? A pair of Four's in the front would be overkill for my room I think, as well as being out of my budget. And if I needed an actual center in the front and maybe rear, I would probably go with the 3C due to the same woofer size for timbre matching. What would you suggest? Also, how high can the play? I understand SACD & DVD-Audio can play over 20khz. I only wish you guys made a sub that played sub 20hz. Thanks for the info!

link to Alimental's forum?

thanks

Bottom line it for us Jack, if the new Fours plus a X1 and either an A1 or A2 were close in price to a set of T5s, which would YOU buy with your own money?

I too am large fan of NHT I use to own 2.5's and the center and surrounds how much is the new XD line.

Ran, it's http://forum.adnm.com We kinda have a lot of NHT faithful there while NHT is thinking about a new forum (I guess?).

None of the Classic product is in any reviewers hands yet. We are working on production right now, so there won't be product available for reviewers for at least a month. Remember that the typical review lead time will then need to be added, so it's unlikely any reviews will be in print for at least 4-5 months.

Almost all of the improvements in the Classic line are things that you won't see in standard specifications. These include lower distortion drivers, stiffer cabinets with less panel acoustic output, improved dispersion, etc. Some of these things would be covered in a Stereophile review, some wouldn't. The best way to tell will be by listening to the products. Yes, I know it sounds cliche. Soon I'll post a link with all of the product specification and price information.

Why would you use the Three for the center channels? Why not use the 2C or 3C? The Three will work, but it will look funny on your TV. The 2C or 3C will actually have more output capability. Any of them will play plenty loud in an 11x13 room.

In such a small room, I would use the Twos or Threes for all channels, except the centers. In the centers, I would match a 2C with the Twos or the 3C with the Threes. For the low end, a Twelve subwoofer would be plenty.

None of the Classic product is rated beyond 20kHz. Of course it can produce frequencies higher than this, but you can't hear them. Most people can barely hear 18kHz even at high levels.

The Evolution subwoofers have a -3dB point of 26Hz. If you really must have the last 6Hz, it is fairly simple to modify the X1 crossover to drop the -3dB point to 20Hz. However, once you do this, the subwoofer won't be able to play as loud. To keep SPL constant as frequency drops one octave (40Hz to 20Hz), the driver excursion increases 4 times! Keep in mind that as frequency decreases, the ears sensitivity decreases also. This means that you have to generate a 20Hz signal at a higher SPL than a 40Hz signal, just for it to have the same loudness. This means that you end up wasting a large amount of amplifier power and woofer excursion just to get the last 6Hz. The vast majority of people are happier with a subwoofer that produces 26Hz, louder and with lower distortion.

Mark,

I wouldn't buy either, I'd break out the table saw, AP and build my own;)

The T5 will play louder than the Four will. Plus it deals with rooms with problem acoustics easier and it's more tunable. I'd probably buy the Four since it's smaller, simpler, etc. My critera for purchase decisions are different than most consumers. I move speakers around all day for a living. Simple is good. As soon as I can get my hands on an Xd system, my biamped M3.3 HT system is going away.

The Evolution subwoofers have a -3dB point of 26Hz. If you really must have the last 6Hz, it is fairly simple to modify the X1 crossover to drop the -3dB point to 20Hz. However, once you do this, the subwoofer won't be able to play as loud. To keep SPL constant as frequency drops one octave (40Hz to 20Hz), the driver excursion increases 4 times! Keep in mind that as frequency decreases, the ears sensitivity decreases also. This means that you have to generate a 20Hz signal at a higher SPL than a 40Hz signal, just for it to have the same loudness. This means that you end up wasting a large amount of amplifier power and woofer excursion just to get the last 6Hz. The vast majority of people are happier with a subwoofer that produces 26Hz, louder and with lower distortion.



What do you think of the "audiophile" basshead claims of flat bass through 10hz for a subwoofer frequency response?

Is it really worth it to try to get bass frequency response flat down to below 20hz?

As soon as I can get my hands on an Xd system, my biamped M3.3 HT system is going away.

I claim dibs on the 3.3s Jack!!!!!

You can definitely hear down to 20Hz and feel down to 2Hz. If the recording contains information at or below 20Hz, you will definitely be able to hear/feel the difference, but NOT because the subwoofer can go down to 10Hz. It is because any subwoofer that has enough driver volume displacement (bore x stroke) and enough amplifier power, to produce 10Hz loud enough to be useful, is going to sound so much better producing 40Hz than a regular subwoofer.

It is very easy to build a 6.5" two-way to have flat response down to 20Hz. Does it sound good? No. It sounds awful. As soon as you try to get anything more than 65dB out of the speaker, the midrange is so modulated that it is unlistenable.

When designing any speaker you must balance the low frequency cutoff against the speakers volume capability. To make a speaker system that has useful output at 10Hz requires lots of drivers (or excursion), lots of enclosure volume and lots of amplifier power.

There is a second issue that people tend to ignore. Assume that you have a speaker system that can produce frequencies down to 2Hz with unlimited SPL at low distortion. What monitor system was used to make the recording? It is extremely unlikely that the monitor system has a large signal -3dB point lower than 30Hz. The engineers making the recording are likely to have boosted things between 10 and 40Hz to compensate for this. When you play this recording back on your system, suddenly there is 10-15dB more SPL at 15Hz than the engineers intended. Does this mean that your playback system is more or less accurate than a system that cuts off at 30Hz for the purposes of reproducing the soundtrack? The system may be perfectly accurate at reproducing the tonal balance that is on the recording, but is that what you want hear? Does it sound best? In the case of music, I think it's usually close. In the case of movie soundtracks it usually sounds awful.

>>The vast majority of people are happier with a subwoofer that produces 26hz, louder and with lower distortion.<<

Only applies to normal folks unafflicted by audiophilia nervosa.

Why would you use the Three for the center channels? Why not use the 2C or 3C? The Three will work, but it will look funny on your TV. The 2C or 3C will actually have more output capability. Any of them will play plenty loud in an 11x13 room.

Ooh, ooh! I can think of two reasons -

1. $400 instead of $500 or $600
2. Wider dispersion

Though, admittedly, the 2C and 3C should match the THREE and FOUR about as well as a horizontal center possibly could. Personally, if the aesthetics aren't an issue, I'd also do a THREE as a center. Of course, Jack probably tuned the 2C or 3C for TV/cabinet placement. Jack, how much of a ruckus do I have to make to get a ZeroC and 1C? ;)

John,

Totally agree.

Ran

What do you think of the "audiophile" basshead claims of flat bass through 10hz for a subwoofer frequency response?

Is it really worth it to try to get bass frequency response flat down to below 20hz?

It was my understanding that audiophiles listened to music produced by musical instruments, not explosions and shockwaves.

Also curious to know if the Classic line are all shielded? Looked like a cup on the back of the 2's and 3's, no? The Super Audios(pun) were shielded, weren't they?

All of the drivers in the Classic series are shielded except the 10" and 12" in the subwoofers. All the drivers in Super Audio were shielded also except the 8" in the ST4.

When you place the Three on your TV, it is going to have significantly different low midrange frequency response than when placed on a stand. It won't sound the sameas the L and R. The center channel produces the highest average level of all the channels in a surround system, thus the need for two woofers. The crossover between the woofers in the center and the midrange is low enough in frequency that the lateral dispersion will still be excellent.

Even if you did use three of exactly the same speaker for the front channels, without a TV, they won't sound the same. The output from the L and R channels is being shadowed by your head differently than a speaker that is pointing straight ahead.

Soon I'll post a link with all of the product specification and price information.
Jack, I--and I suspect a lot of other people--are looking forward to this. It's a peculiar feeling to have this long, involved public discussion of speakers I've seen at a public show when the company's web site (including the press releases) makes absolutely no mention of them.

Tom, it's absolutely normal for a company to not put product literature on its website until it is actually shipping. Actually, it's rather sane and sober. But it is also good to be able to have this kind of dialogue for those who are looking beyond the current models for whatever reason.

Even if you did use three of exactly the same speaker for the front channels, without a TV, they won't sound the same. The output from the L and R channels is being shadowed by your head differently than a speaker that is pointing straight ahead.

Que?

>>Even if you did use three of exactly the same speaker for the front channels, without a TV, they won't sound the same. The output from the L and R channels is being shadowed by your head differently than a speaker that is pointing straight ahead.
__________________
Jack Hidley
Director of Engineering NHT <<


An interesting notion I haven't heard before....

Yes, I suppose that an identical speaker can't really sound "exactly" the same as either R or L when positioned straight ahead (due to hrtf's), but I would certainly think it would sound smoother than a horizontal MTM. Admittedly, the MTM center channel will be capable of greater output than either the R or L mains, but smoother pans across the front? Fascinating.

Ran

phhht....John beat me to it. :(

Jack,

Now I am confused. I am looking at going with all Three's potentially in my 11x13 HT room. The using a Three for the center would obviously save me a little money, especially if I go with a 6.1 setup. I could go with the 3C, but that would give me an extra Three left over, unless I went with a 7.1 setup. I have heard that my room could be too small for a 7.1 system (not enough channel separation). But I will be using a ceiling mounted front projector and will have no TV cabinet in the front to put the speaker on. So is the 3C designed to go in a cabinet? If that is the case, would a Three center sound better since a stand is what I will be using for the center? I am concerned about sound, not looks. Thanks!

Ran,

I wasn't arguing in favor of an MTM center channel. The 2C and 3C are both 3-ways with the midrange and tweeter vertical. An MTM center channel will have worse performance than a 2-way L and R in every way except maximum output.

The 2C and 3C are both designed to be either on top of or just below a large TV screen. The effect of the large TV screen is to increase the speakers lower midrange output. If you use the 2C or 3C on a stand without this extra baffle area (TV screen) they will sound thin. In your case I would go ahead and use the Three for the center since you don't have a TV.

The 2C and 3C are both designed to be either on top of or just below a large TV screen. The effect of the large TV screen is to increase the speakers lower midrange output. If you use the 2C or 3C on a stand without this extra baffle area (TV screen) they will sound thin. In your case I would go ahead and use the Three for the center since you don't have a TV.
Jack, do I understand you correctly that the 2C and 3C center channel speakers were specifically designed NOT to work well with a front projection application?

Here are the specs.

**********

ABSOLUTE ZERO. Our newest, and best mini-monitor to date, the Absolute Zero combines NHT's new 5.25" woofer and 1" aluminum dome tweeter to make beautiful music together. Easily wall mounted using the threaded insert on the rear panel, or place it on a shelf or stand with the user installed cabinet rails. Frequency Response. 71 Hz 20kHz, Sensitivity: 86dB (2.83v@1m), Impedance: 6 ohms nominal, Dimensions: 9.75" x 5.625" x 7.25 (H x W x D), Weight: 8 lbs. each. Available in High Gloss Black or White.

TWO. The Two is the Absolute Zero with deeper bass extension and higher power handling. Using a 6.5" woofer in a larger enclosure than the Absolute Zero, the Two produces a big room-filling sound with no loss of detail. Easily wall mountable. using a pair of rear panel threaded inserts. Frequency Response: 51 Hz 20kHz, Sensitivity: 86dB (2.83v@1m), Impedance: 6 ohms nominal, Dimensions: 12.125" x 7" x 8.875" (H x W x D), Weight: 12.7 lbs. each. Available in High Gloss Black or White.

THREE. The best bookshelf speaker we've ever made, period. The Three is a 3-way, acoustic suspension design that features a newly developed 6.5" aluminum cone bass driver, and NHT's exclusive midrange/tweeter assembly. Offering a wider listening area, better deep bass extension and higher power handling than the Two, the new Three is the ultimate bookshelf speaker for music and film. Frequency Response: 45Hz-20kHz, Sensitivity 86dB (2.83v@1m) Impedance: 8 ohms Nominal, Dimensions. 13.75" x 7.5" x 10.375" (H x W x D), Weight: 17 lbs. each. Wall Mountable. Available in High Gloss Black.

FOUR. This attractive floor standing loudspeaker is the Three with the addition of a 10" side-firing subwoofer. For installations where an additional outboard subwoofer is impractical, the Four is an ideal choice. For even better performance, the Four can be bi amplified with NHT's optional A1 amplifier and X2 crossover. Frequency Response: 27Hz-20kHz, Sensitivity 86dB (2.83v@1m) Impedance: 6 ohms Nominal, Dimensions: 41” x 7.5" x 16" (H x W x D), Weight: 64 lbs. each. Available in High Gloss Black.

TWELVE. The Twelve's gracefully curved cabinet houses a massive 12" aluminum cone driver and an efficient, powerful 250 watt Class G amplifier - a duo capable of filling even the largest rooms with powerful, clean deep bass. Boundary EQ., adjustable phase, and LFE outputs make this subwoofer easy to integrate into any high performance audio/video system. Frequency Response: 27Hz-180Hz (+/-3dB), Dimensions. 20.125" x 13" x 15.75" (H x W x D), Weight: 49 lbs. Available in High Gloss Black.

TEN. A scaled down version of the Twelve designed for use in small to medium sized rooms, the Ten couples a highly efficient 150 watt amplifier to a 10" aluminum cone woofer to make tight, tuneful bass. Frequency Response: 31 Hz-180Hz (+/- 3dB), Dimensions: 18.125" x 11.25" x 15" (H x W x D), Weight: 41 lbs. Available in High Gloss Black.

TWO C. The ideal center channel match for the Absolute Zero and Two, the Two C combines NHT's new midrange/ tweeter assembly with dual 5.25" aluminum cone woofers to create a center speaker that sounds great outside the narrow "sweet spot" produced by ANY 2-way design. Frequency Response: 78Hz-20kHz, Sensitivity 87dB (2.83v@1m), Impedance: 8 ohms Nominal, Dimensions: 6.5" x 19.875" x 7.375" (H x W x D), Weight: 20 lbs. each. Available in High Gloss Black.

THREE C. Optimized for use with the Three and Four, the Three C uses two 6.5" aluminum cone woofers and NHT's new midrange/tweeter assembly to create a huge listening area. Designed to play well in even the largest rooms, the Three C is the ideal center speaker for high performance multi-channel music and movies. Frequency Response: 73Hz-20kHz, Sensitivity 87dB (2.83v@1m), Impedance: 8 ohms Nominal, Dimensions: 7" x 21.825" x 8.25" (H x W x D), Weight: 23 lbs each. Available in High Gloss Black.

Is there any word on when we can get our paws on the Classic 3?
And will the Classic 3 keep the integrated wall/ceiling mounting abilities of the SB3?

dc

It was my understanding that audiophiles listened to music produced by musical instruments, not explosions and shockwaves.



I said "audiophile", not audiophile!!!

Tom, if you have a front projector, it will probably make sense to do three THREEs or a pair of FOURS with a three. Unless you need very high output

The Evolution subwoofers have a -3dB point of 26Hz. If you really must have the last 6Hz, it is fairly simple to modify the X1 crossover to drop the -3dB point to 20Hz. However, once you do this, the subwoofer won't be able to play as loud. To keep SPL constant as frequency drops one octave (40Hz to 20Hz), the driver excursion increases 4 times! Keep in mind that as frequency decreases, the ears sensitivity decreases also. This means that you have to generate a 20Hz signal at a higher SPL than a 40Hz signal, just for it to have the same loudness. This means that you end up wasting a large amount of amplifier power and woofer excursion just to get the last 6Hz. The vast majority of people are happier with a subwoofer that produces 26Hz, louder and with lower distortion.



I find that makes a lot of sense from my experience, with some reservations. How much is the high pass filter frequency down in output level at the stated frequency? Would it always be down 3dB at the specified frequency?

I have an older NHT 2.1 based system, and I fill in the low end of the 2.1's (3 way 40hz f3) with a single NHT SW-2P subwoofer low pass filtered at 50hz.

I did try dual SW-2P's stacked on top of each other with that same setup. I noticed that after recalibration of levels for the dual subs, that the bass was smoother at higher volume levels (less distortion) and would ultimately play louder if I pushed the system that much (DD/DTS booms). Those trials were with the original MA-1A amplifier.

For music, I found that a single subwoofer was fine.

For DD and DTS movies, at normal volume "boom" levels the single subwoofer was fine also. However, the stacked subwoofers just sounded a bit "cleaner" during the stressful low bass parts of an action movie if I played the system louder than usual!

However, the original MA-1A subwoofer amplifer is not high pass filtered, so it is only down 3dB at 10hz. The newer SA-2 subwoofer amplifier is high pass filtered, but is down 6dB at 20hz and about 30dB at 10hz. I modified the SA-2 to be down 1dB at 20hz, and to my ears the subwoofer sounds a bit better with the high pass filter lowered in frequency. As far as I recall the f3 point is around 18hz.

The SA-3 subwoofer amplifer is specifed as down 3dB at 10hz!

The question is, what is the best frequency to use for the high pass filter, and what measurement (down 3dB?) is used to determine this frequency???

Tom,

The 2C and 3C are designed to sound their best when on top of a large screen TV. Given this fact, when removed from the TV, and put on a stand for use with a projector, they aren't going to sound as good. This is true of any center channel speaker. The designers can optimize it for on TV placement, stand placement or something in between. Unless the speaker has multiple crossovers (a la the M5/M6) it can not be optimiezed for different acoustic environments. The thing that is probably freaking you out here is that almost all other manufacturers will tell you that their center channel will work fine in both applications. They can claim this, but unless it has two crossovers in it that are switchable, they are wrong.

The only real way to know for sure if you like the sound of the 2C or 3C used on a stand is to listen to it. FYI, the closer the 2C or 3C are located to the ground, the better the frequency response will be. The ground will behave somewhat like the baffle that a large TV creates. If you put the 2C or 3C on a 24"-30" tall stand, they will definitely sound different than when placed on a large TV.

Jack:

I appreciate the problems designers face when trying to optimize a speaker for different environments. However, given the direction in which the video market is clearly moving --plasma, LCD, DLP flat panels, and digital front projection. Plasma alone is now more popular than CRT rear projection--I have to wonder about the wisdom of specifically targeting a center channel for use with CRT direct views and rear projectors, whose market share is clearly declining overall and especially declining in the high end, the market that includes those consumers most willing to pay $600 for a center channel.

Perhaps a boundary switch, ala M5/M6, would have been a good idea, but alas that's water under the bridge. Despite this somewhat disappointing news, I'm still enthusiastic about the new line.

Jack,

I am going to buy a new TV stand since the 2C and 3C will not fit in my current one.

This is the stand I am interested in and it will solve my center placement issue.

How well do you think it will work sonically?
I have never put a center under a TV.

Here is my post in the display area with a link to the stand.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I currently have a 40" wide and 21" deep CWD stand/cabinet that my 42A10 fits perfectly on.

Like most of us I have absolutley no place to put a center channel.
Unless I were to build another shelf on top to put the TV, and the center under.

I have looked at every TV stand currently available and feel that I would have to go with a fairly expensive and probably 60"+ wide 3 bay stand.
So that the center would fit in the center bay and my equipment on either side.

Just go back from World Market and found this new media center.
40" wide and 24" deep.
With a shelf directly under the TV! Perfect for the center.
AND there is enough width inside to stack my equipment side by side.
There is also a removable shelf inside and I can unscrew the doors too.

Scroll down to the bottom of the page and you will see:

"SAVE $50"
CORTESE MEDIA STAND
NOW $299.

http://www.worldmarket.com/costplus/site/rop/index.jsp

Tom,

Thanks for the printout of the specs. Looks like NHT has a pretty fleshed-out line here..something for everybody. Heck, if the 3 doesn't work as a center, try the 3C..or vice versa! I look forward to hearing them all. :)

Ran

FYI, the closer the 2C or 3C are located to the ground, the better the frequency response will be. The ground will behave somewhat like the baffle that a large TV creates.

Jack, does this also equally apply to the M5/M6 as well?

I must say I am amazed. Never have I heard of the Director of Engineering for a stereo manufacturer do what Jack is doing! You rock Jack!!! :D I must look you up at CES this January. Hope you will be there. Feel free to shoot me an email.

The only real way to know for sure if you like the sound of the 2C or 3C used on a stand is to listen to it. FYI, the closer the 2C or 3C are located to the ground, the better the frequency response will be. The ground will behave somewhat like the baffle that a large TV creates. If you put the 2C or 3C on a 24"-30" tall stand, they will definitely sound different than when placed on a large TV.

Basically, what Jack is saying is that the 2C and 3C are designed to have an accurate sound with some boundary reinforcement. If you have it on a stand, it will change the tonal balance, but that does not mean it will sound *worse*, it will simply mean that it won't sound as balanced. Any speaker benefits from being away from boundaries. But it is likely that a THREE which is balanced to be away from boundaries (I assume) will do a little better on a stand, away from walls, than the 2C or 3C.

I have to wonder about the wisdom of specifically targeting a center channel for use with CRT direct views and rear projectors, whose market share is clearly declining overall and especially declining in the high end, the market that includes those consumers most willing to pay $600 for a center channel..

Tom,

NHT has speakers that can be used away from TVs (Zero, TWO, THREE, etc), on TVs (2C, 3C, M5, M6, etc) and against the wall (M5, M6, L5, etc), so the "wisdom" here is to make a few different choices for every situation.

Went back to World Market and found out that the
Media cabinet that I was buying for the 3C has a shelf that is only 5" tall.
So neither the 3C or the smaller 2C will fit.
Back to square one.

Called my dealer here in Charleston and told them that when orders open up to
order an extra pair of Threes so if I like them I won't have to wait.

Any update on the release date?

Is it still going to be around November.

No news is good news!

I think they're still on target, but I think it will be more realistic to say "late November" for shipping and a probably drifting into December til they actually show up at the dealers. And, I'd be surprised if shipping didn't drift back. I've never seen that not happen.

Thanks to Bob at NHT, I have posted higher quality images in place the original poorer ones I posted on page 1 of this thread. I think it better shows just how glossy these puppies are!

I have the Hsu STF-2 w/ the NHT Super1...

Now I'm looking at the NHT SW10 II sub online(for another system), wonder anyone have listen to both the STF-2 and SW10?

Thanks,

They're actually pretty comparable. The SW10 doesn't go quite as deep, but has nicer contruction (at least compared to the VTF2) and a cleaner, nicer amp. I thought the Hsu was more powerful, but the SW10 slightly better sounding. But I am referencing the previous SW10 vs the VTF2, but I suspect the comparison still is pretty close to accurate.

thx, sound like the sw10 II is even better for music, i will give it a try...

I have designed in some T6/M6/L5 to my new 7.1 dedicated HT and I spoke to a dealer recently who told me the L5s are being discontinued. I can't see any indication of that anywhere else so maybe he just go his facts wrong - any comments anyone? Also am I just going to be wishing I had waited another 6 months to upgrade my current system because the evolutions get replaced or do you think they will be around for a while yet......

Speculation, speculation.......

Nope. No L5s being discontinued to my knowledge. Very popular speaker and one of the best on-walls on the market. At worst, they'll get updated. It's one of our most popular speakers, but then all of the NHTs are.

Evolutions will be on the market for a solid 1-2 years more. Any possible replacement couldn't possibly show up until at least CEDIA 2006/CES2007 and then there's the normal 3-6 month arrival time after being shown.

http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_azlife.jpg


I don't suppose there is any chance of the Three being available in white?

No, but at some point, I expect that there will be a specific white onwall speaker that is tonally matched. The Three is pretty deep to be wall mounted and so the white is less important, but an L5 style onwall might be a possibility when the L5 is up for an update, but I'd peg that at at least a year away.

any chance of there being a matching dipole/bipole?...something a little less obtrusive/protrusive than the old HDP's?

Nope! NHT's semi-official philosophy there is that dipole speakers are best left in the past with Pro-logic and THX. Set up properly, there's just no solid reason for dipoles any more. However, they do believe in wide dispersion, which can sound even better than a "bipole", which isn't actually a bipole, nor has it bipole radiation in an on-wall design.

Bummer. :(

Without getting into the positives/negatives of dipole speakers, I'll just say that I differ with NHT's philosophy on this....especially in a home theater where the side speakers are relatively close to the listeners.

Ran,

wait til you hear the THREE (or Xd). It will change your mind on this, trust me. All you have to do if the sidewalls are close is to move the speaker up on the wall or to move them back a bit. Especially with the new ones.

hmmmm...will be curious to hear indeed, but from a room aesthetics point of view, I suspect that some folks prefer something that blends in a little better. That's why I ended up going with Phase Tech V-Surrounds. Nope, they don't match my fronts, but they don't call attention to themselves up on the walls.

Yep, I'll be curious to hear the 3's when they come to the local dealer. :)

Ran

This thread has got me thinking. My HT is not going to be ready for speakers until Christmas so I could listen to the Classic line. If I like them (and I hope I would - loved the evolutions T6) what are the pros for the Classic over the evolutions? Jack mentioned that that the classic is more consumer while evolution is more custom. I'm a consumer doing a custom HT!!! My room is just over 3000 cubic ft with front projection. My center will sit against the wall below the screen. I preferred the T6 over the T5 if that makes any difference.

It sounds as though the M5/6 - L5 might solve placement issues but the classic may benefit from newer technology.

There are no plans to discontinue sale of the L5.

The Three won't be offered in white due to the very low number of people who would be willing to wall mount the speaker.

I'm a consumer doing a custom HT!!!

Thank you for saying that, it's a message I was trying to send to them the other day. There need be no distinction. It shouldn't matter whether it's "spec'd in" or chosen by a customer in a store. But I digress!

My room is just over 3000 cubic ft with front projection. My center will sit against the wall below the screen. I preferred the T6 over the T5 if that makes any difference.

If the room is narrow and the speakers are near the wall, the controlled dispersion of the M5/M6 might outweigh the advantages of the new drivers. I haven't heard the difference and NHT tends to not make subjective evaluations of their own gear or try to tell people which sounds "best". They don't even seem to ever say how they improved over the previous version.

However, I do believe that the Three/Four have more resolution and a more "open" and spacious sound, which is good if you have a reasonably wide wall, say, 15' wide or so. The fact that you like the M6s more than the M5 leads me to believe that you'd like the Three even more. The low diffraction baffle, new tweeter and dome midrange should be an upgrade. The only thing is that the Evolution woofers are definitely still number one. What we need here is a high-end subwoofer in piano black that is truly worthy to be used with the Three. Or maybe a U2 in Piano Black. I wouldn't use less than a U2 with the Three, which makes the color difference a bit unfortunate.

Thanks John. My room is an annoyingly square 17' by 20'. As I have time I should listen and see if I can hear enough of a difference to warrant the potential issue with the surrounds in that at the moment I am planning on wall L5s. The sub point is interesting. I suppose with the sub you have more latitude to look at other brands. I heard the T6/L5 with a paradigm signature series sub added and that sounded great although I can imagine the setup would be tough. One of the things with the T6 approach is having your subs stuck in the corners.......

We definitely recommend to not add a subwoofer to a T6 system. It will be impossible to ge the two systems sum correctly. If you need more bass output than a T6 system has, just add a U1 or U2 subwoofer to it. This is guaranteed to add correctly.

I don't understand your comment about the "T6 approach is having your subs stuck in the corners...".

Thanks John. My room is an annoyingly square 17' by 20'.

Annoyingly square isn't an issue for midrange and treble. And you could easily use a wide dispersion speaker like the Three or Four in there. If it's an unusually echo'y or bright sounding room then the M5 or M6 will help with this.

The sub point is interesting. I suppose with the sub you have more latitude to look at other brands.

Don't get me wrong, I'm just saying that the Three would automatically deserve, almost *need* either two good subs or one great one to match the performance, as do the M5/M6 speakers. The Four has two *good* subs and the Evo subs are *great* subs, especially if you value precision and musicality over throbbing rumble. They go deep, but they stop on a dime.

One of the things with the T6 approach is having your subs stuck in the corners.......

Did you read a Sound & Vision article or what? ;)

However, I do believe that the Three/Four have more resolution and a more "open" and spacious sound, which is good if you have a reasonably wide wall, say, 15' wide or so. The fact that you like the M6s more than the M5 leads me to believe that you'd like the Three even more.

Without trying to sound overly combative...

I find it extremely interesting how you can make definitive statements about how a speaker performs without ever having heard it...

I think words like "may", "might" or "I would assume", etc... might be more appropriate.

I find it extremely interesting how you can make definitive statements about how a speaker performs without ever having heard it...

If you understand the underlying acoustics, it's not that hard, trust me.

I think words like "may", "might" or "I would assume", etc... might be more appropriate.

"I do believe" doesn't count? Admission of belief is anything but definitive.

FWIW, rumor has it that the Four has the kind of sound with which a 3.3/2.9 owner would fall in love. At least, that's what I was told.

Being a longtime NHT fan I would hope and assume that the new series will perform admirably, but to actually know if they possess qualities such as detailed resolution and a "open" and spacious sound is not guaranteed until we have the opportunity to audition them. The ingredients look great... let's just hope Jack and the boys did a great job designing these tasty looking speakers!

Sold my 1.5's in preparation for some THREE's
A-20's are staying in the studio...
ST-4's in the bedroom are in danger of being replaced by the FOUR
3.3's are not going anywhere soon... still the best overall speaker I have ever heard!

Being a longtime NHT fan I would hope and assume that the new series will perform admirably, but to actually know if they possess qualities such as detailed resolution and a "open" and spacious sound is not guaranteed until we have the opportunity to audition them.

Here's my case.

Metal drivers are more rigid and this means fine details are not absorbed. Smaller drivers are more rigid, which means resolution is further enhanced. IOW, that dome midrange, by its very nature, will have very high levels of resolution (aka low distortion/low inband spectral decay).

Smaller radiators will automatically have wider dispersion in their upper ranges. The 2" will have much wider/higher dispersion than a 4" in the upper midrange/low treble. The .75" dome will have more dispersion in the upper treble. Furthermore, while the M5/M6 actually have a cancellation area in the upper midrange (which avoids too much reflection from a close wall), the Three/Four design is specifically engineered to have the widest possible dispersion in all directions. This means more ambient reflection in the upper midrange and this means a "more open, more spacious sound".

The low diffraction baffle is specifically designed to increase dispersion in the upper mids and treble by ameliorating the "kinks" that occur when the soundwave suddenly shifts direction at the speaker corner. One of the complaints of the 3.3 is that it wasn't spacious. It had reduced reflection from the ceiling/sidewalls compared to some speakers. This is because of its design, not because of some unknown, unpredictable interaction.

IOW, *everything* about the new Three/Four is designed around lowering distortion and increasing dispersion which is essentially identical to increasing resolution and spaciousness. Besides, I'm about 95% sure that the exact goal was to emulate the Xd as best possible, but with an analog speaker. With a 110dB/octave crossover, you can make a precise, wide dispersion, low distortion handoff. However, you can't do that with a 6" and a 1" in the analog domain. The handoff between the drivers will be "off" in both dispersion and distortion ("sound"), not to mention out of bandwidth distortions and FR errors because the drivers are pushed more than is ideal.

The 2" dome acts as a bridge. The typical 1" dome can be replaced by a .75" which automatically yields wider upper treble dispersion ("air") and the 6" driver can be cut off *very* early (~800Hz instead of ~3000Hz), meaning that rigidity is not a problem and the driver can be tweaked for more upper bass/low mid performance. And rather than having the upper mids being handled by a driver that would have squelched dispersion, the 2" dome is free to radiate a coherent soundfield, unfettered by being too big for the job. It's a solution that has been done on some flagship speakers such as B&W's [actual] Nautilus, Energy's Veritas and several others, but never, to my knowledge, on something this affordable before.

So, yeah, I'm making a presumption here, but only the presumption that NHT didn't do anything to impede the obvious advantages of this design. The *only* thing really in question is *how detailed* and *how spacious*, not if it is better in these areas because that is a given. Well, tonal balance is the other issue. What is the flavor of the speaker? We don't know that. My prediction is that it is voiced marginally towards the forgiving side of things so that they don't come across as bright in a normal room. The Xds are shockingly smooth, so if they can mimic that balance, all is right with the world ;)

Sold my 1.5's in preparation for some THREE's


:eek: Hey, I thought *I* was being presumptious- pot, kettle, black!!! :)

I didn't read a "Sound and Vision" article but maybe the dealer I spoke to had! Before I continue I should say that I make the newest amateur seem like an old hand pro! I am also at the room design phase of my HT and have been reading endless acoustic posts on this site and elsewhere. Once room treatments for low frequency have been put in place it seem as though the next step can be moving the sub to improve the sound throughout the room. If you can't do this then it limits your options - right? My dealer mentioned that he had used an additional sub for this purpose. I'm going to head back there this weekend and quiz him about it. I would love to learn the pros/cons surrounding this. The bottom line is I LOVED the sound I heard from the T6s and maybe the phrase "stuck in the corner" wasn't quite the right one........

Would I be giving up a lot if I went without a center channel?
I cannnot find a media stand/cabinet that lets me put a center channel
below my Sony LCD RPTV.
At least not any of the NHT Classic Centers.

I will be going with the Threes front and back and the 12" sub.
My Mirage M3s put the dialogue right at the center of the TV when
the center channel is off.
Can I expect the kind of soundstaging and imaging with the Threes that will make
the 3C unnecessary?

The center channel is quite important for dialog & center fill for music & ambience. If you have your set placed up against a rear wall, you might be able to use one of those wall mounts used for small TVs in the bedroom to hold your center above your set. I have one w/ my JVC 52" D-ILA RPT & it works great.

Would I be giving up a lot if I went without a center channel?
I cannnot find a media stand/cabinet that lets me put a center channel
below my Sony LCD RPTV.
At least not any of the NHT Classic Centers.

Have you looked at some of the Stuio Tech stuff? www.studiotech.com

I will be going with the Threes front and back and the 12" sub.
My Mirage M3s put the dialogue right at the center of the TV when
the center channel is off.
Can I expect the kind of soundstaging and imaging with the Threes that will make
the 3C unnecessary?

Theoretically, but it all comes down to room acoustics and setup. The center makes it a lot easier, but if the Mirages can do it in your room, the NHTs should be able to as well.

The Classic series is now shown on NHT's website.

Are any dealers offering them, yet?

Sorry if i missed this portion of the thread but would the Classic series be a semi-decent timbre match to the Super Audio series speakers? I just recently bought a pair of NHT SB 2's at a discounted price of $300 a pair and could not afford two more to use as surrounds. I was wondering what my options were down the road in terms of adding more speakers to my system.

mjc - they're still a few weeks away for the AZ, Two, Ten, Twelve and 2C with the rest to follow.

Exocer - probably the $600/pr Two is the probably best match, but you could probably also find SB2s used. I know we'll probably have some as I do the big "Upgrade to Classic" push here in a month or so.

Alimental,

I think you guys are right. I will be giving up too much without the center.

I found this media stand at World Market yesterday. 40" wide(same as my CWD)
but with no center divider/support.
Center can go in the upper shelf and everything below.
Or center can go in upper shelf sitting on my DVD players, etc. Plenty of height and width. I think I mmeasured about 9" tall for the space in the top shelf.
$249. I may wait for it to go on sale for $199.
3c will fit fine.

http://www.worldmarket.com/costplus/action/public/product/view?page=1&parentid=48&id=3339

I know this is a little bit off topic but I just wanted to report back after my second visit to my local NHT dealer. The system I had heard where I ASSUMED they were adding a Paradigm Signature sub to a T6 system was actually a sub added to an M6 system. They told me that they were not using the T6 in that room just because of the room set-up where they needed bookshelves. I also asked them about the "subs in the corner" with the T6 and they guy (a T6 owner....) told me that it wasn't a problem and went on to talk about how configurable it it. The M6/paradigm sub combo did sound fantastic and I would have really liked to listen to the T6 in a proper room to compare. The T5 setup they had was good but seemed to lack a little bit of low end punch for my taste.

I'm sure these guys will have the Classic line once available and so I will be back. Did also listen to B&W, Paradigm, Def Tech and Martin Logans. NHT still wins it for me!

It seems like the THREE C's 75hz low limit is awfully high for dual 6.5" drivers?

The THREE is rated at 45hz and has a single 6.5?

The AC-2 and VC-3 were rated around 45hz as well... any explanation?

Cabinet size. Also, I'm willing to bet Jack says that it was tuned to use the TV/cabinet/bookshelf as bass reinforcment. IOW, it's assuming placement and compensating accordingly in order to keep the midbass from getting chesty. Like the boundary switch on the M5/M6, but always set to "1". If the speaker is in free space, on a stand, then use the THREE.

If I ever actually start finishing Jack's sentences, slap me. :)

B2R,

Some of this has to do with cabinet size. The VC-3 was 10" x 8.5" 22". This is 50% larger than the 3C is. This allows us to build a speaker with a lower bass cutoff.

Very few people actually used the low bass output from the VC3, VR3, etc. When we designed the 2C and 3C we decided to optimize their design to reduce distortion and maximize SPL capability in their passband (above 70Hz). There are tradeoffs in driver design between lowering distortion and increasing bass extension.

Hmmm, maybe I can claim "partial credit" on that.

Not to change the subject, but.....
today is October 12th.
Does NHT have a firm ship date on the Classic line?
My Mirage M3s are for sale for $750 and I am waiting patiently.

You're still a good 6 weeks away for a Three or Four.

This from NHT FAQ:

My SW10ii / SW12 subwoofer has a loud hum when I turn it on.
What can I do to get rid of the hum?

The DSS system and all cable TV systems have a ground wire connected to the shield of the signal on the outside of the house and driven into the earth with a metal rod or water pipe. The SW10II/12 is grounded to the power outlet through the third prong of the power cord. The AC wiring in the building has the ground conductor connected to a metal rod or water pipe outside the building. Once a patch cord is connected between the DSS system and the subwoofer, a complete circuit is formed called a ground loop. Current flowing in the ground loop can cause very large amounts of noise in the system.

To legally install cable TV or a DSS system, there must be a ground conductor from the dish or cable tied to the earth outside of the building. This guarantees that if struck by lightening, the current will flow to ground (earth) outside of the building, never endangering someone’s life inside or damaging any equipment. Removing the ground from the DSS or cable system is not a legal or safe option. We use a grounded power cord on our powered subwoofers and amplifiers to ensure that the customer is always safe. If there is ever any internal short in the subwoofer amplifier between the power supply and the chassis, the current will be shunted to ground (earth) through the power cord and the fuse will blow. The customer will never be in any danger of electric shock.

The proper way to break the ground loop in the system is to do it at the signal level. This should be done at the output of the device that is causing the ground loop. In this case it is the DSS or cable system. The best way to do this is with a ground loop isolator. A good one is available from Jensen Transformers.
==============
my question is why only NHT sub have that prob?
(all my other sub don't hum)

It is not only NHT. All subwoofers with which I am familiar can do this. It is a common problem and is system related, not product related. The grounded design is a safety feature. There are ways around this. You can eliminate the ground on the sub, it's just that NHT won't be the one to recommend it. We do this all the time. The ground loop isolator is technically the better way to go, though.

It is not only NHT. All subwoofers with which I am familiar can do this. It is a common problem and is system related, not product related. The grounded design is a safety feature. There are ways around this. You can eliminate the ground on the sub, it's just that NHT won't be the one to recommend it. We do this all the time. The ground loop isolator is technically the better way to go, though.

i have 2 sys, and i have another sub(hsu stf2) that don't have hum on both....
maybe the hsu sub is not ground?

edit: btw, how to eliminate the ground on the sw10? tia

Just get a three-prong to 2-prong adaptor at the local home store for 39¢. It should do it.

cool, thx....want to hear the sub and that hum is killing me, almost cut off that ground pin
LOL

edit: weird, even i turn off sub, w/ pw cord plug in, sw10 cause rest of sys to hum
removing ground work, thx

Will the sale of NHT to Vinci labs change the timetable for the new Classic line?

Nope, it shouldn't. The first of Classic should be on a ship right now, maybe even at a port. Not sure exactly. I know the cabinets went into production a few weeks back.

The sale of NHT isn't having any affect on the production status for Classic. We've already shipped at least four models to dealers (Absolute Zero, Two, Ten and Twelve).

Silly engineers :)

Word I'm getting is that there were only a few rep samples sent out so far, that the first major containers start arriving at NHT tomorrow with more coming each week, so shipping to dealers would start next week and at least some dealers should have them by end of next week.

And here I was standing by the door waiting for UPS to show up!

What is the time status of the THREE and FOUR?

I'd say 5 weeks.

Has anyone seen a picture of the 2 or 3 with the grill on?

Jerry, I haven't, but I just saw them in person as they have arrived! The grill looks great. Very pretty in person. I'm also happy to report after some quick A/Bing that they do *exactly* what they need to do and a bit more. The Absolute Zero has tonal balance that is brighter and more detailed than the SB1, with a bigger soundstage, but with a marginally warmer balance than the M5. It is very nearly the performance of the M5, but less than half the size and price. It pays a wonderful tribute to the original SuperZero. The Two offers deeper bass and output. Compared to the SB3 at the same price, it is clearly more detailed, a little lighter but tauter in the bass and, again, a bit warmer than the M5. I'd argue that the Two matches the performance of the M5 in most ways and may have a better overall tonal balance. It has more of that "fun" sound, somewhat missing on the SB2, that made the SuperOne a classic. What is most obvious is how they clearly enunciate vocals and pick up every syllable. And they haven't broken in yet, they're being tortured as I type. The look is just beautiful. The cabinets are also notably more rigid. Rapping on the front baffle is almost like rapping on a granite kitchen counter top. The cones are the other major upgrade while the excellent tweeter from the Super Audio is appropriately carried over. I can't wait to hear the rest of the line as these are a bigger upgrade than I'd expected.

BTW, just to be clear, it's the Absolute Zero, Two and Ten that have arrived. Nothing on the others so far.

Wow. I just saw the new lineup in person at EHX. Those are some stunning looking speakers in person. Especially the Three and Four. The iW4 looks to be an impressive inwall. Too bad I couldn't listen to them. Can't wait to audition them.

Any update on the Three's availability?

Also, how can the Two have deeper base than the SB3?
Wasn't the SB3 rated down to 39Hz?
Granted it was ported and fell off quickly......

Same as ever, last I checked. Still 2-3 weeks away.

The Two doesn't have deeper bass than the SB3, it's about the same as the SB2. Even the Three doesn't have as deep a bass as the SB3. The bass, however is more detailed in the mid/upper bass than on the SB3, so this should address any issues that came up with the SB3s for most people.

No, it wasn't ported. NHT doesn't port midranges. It's why their bookshelf speakers can sound as good as very expensive towers and others can't.

In an earlier post(s) on this thread Jack said the NHT center speakers were designed to be put on top of a television and not on a stand.

My question is: when you say: "on a stand" are you talking about an individual speaker stand OR a television stand that has a top shelf which could be used for a center speaker?

Those of us with LCD or plasma monitors really cannot set a speaker on top. I am quite interested in the NHT speakers, but if I cannot put the speaker on the top shelf of a Bell'O TV stand below the monitor without sacrificing sound quality I will look at other brands.

Thanks,

Larry

These speakers are exceptionally ugly. I'm a 20 something straight as an arrow hetrosexual male but these things look fairly horrible by eye. Definitely not WAF material. Also, funny how this thread comes about a few days after slining so much feces and mud in the Axiom speaker thread (aliminium speakers at nearly the same pricepoint)

Larry, you can place in anywhere, what Jack was saying was that the bass is optimized for placement above, below, near a TV, or up against a wall rather than in free space. Every speaker is optimized (in theory) for one placement or another, so it's not like NHT was trying to limit the flexibility, it's no less flexible than any other center speaker. Your placement is perfectly fine for the speaker.

I buy speakers for their sound, not their looks. In my man-cave, what I say goes. Maybe you should get the keys to ranch back if you're that worried about looks of a speaker.

Very interested in 3's

Jack,

Does NHT have a showroom or listening room that's open to the public? I'm about 10 mins from you guys in Benicia and would LOVE to check out the new 3's. I'm a long time Definitive Tech fan (Been using DR-7's and a C-1) and was considering the Aperion 532's before I started reading about the Classic 3's.

btw~The new 3's are visually stunning. Can't wait to hear them.

Speaking of which, I got the white Absolute Zeros and the Twelve subwoofer today. Looking forward to the rest of the line showing up!

Still no info on price? Scanned the thread and didn't see any...

$800 for the Threes(pair).
I believe all of the pricing is in this thread or there are links in this thread that will take you to a price list.

I thought I'd posted this earlier somewhere, but here goes:

Absolute Zero monitor - $200 each
Two monitor - $300 each
Three monitor - $400 each
Four tower - $1800/pr
2C center- $500
3C center - $600
Ten sub - $600
Twelve sub - $850

Best location for my HT mains in front will be on bookshelves that are only 10 3/8" high, so only the Absolute Zero would fit (I think they would fit!), standing up. I like the SB2 & SB3 because their basic rectangular shape allowed side positioning with no "obvious" signs. But on the new Two and Three, with the tapered top end, it seems they would look, well, awkward lying on their side. May be a stupid quesiton, but would it compromise the sound to position either of those on its side? Seems hard to believe the Ab Zero would almost equal the M5; so maybe I wouldn't be sacrificing too much to go with all Zero's instead of Twos or Threes? Thoughts?

You could do the speakers sideways if need be. It's not ideal and the dispersion won't be as good, but you can do it. How big is the room? I find the Two to be a bit better balanced than the AZ and handles high power a little better and more smoothly. Another option would be to get dual Ten subs with the AZs and then cross over a bit higher to give the AZs a bit more freedom to rock out.

You could do the speakers sideways if need be. It's not ideal and the dispersion won't be as good, but you can do it. How big is the room? I find the Two to be a bit better balanced than the AZ and handles high power a little better and more smoothly. Another option would be to get dual Ten subs with the AZs and then cross over a bit higher to give the AZs a bit more freedom to rock out.

Thanks, Alimentall. The room measures 13' x 14', with doorways on two walls, a fireplace diagonally in one corner, and 9'5" ceilings. Would you really need two Ten subs to drive 4 AZs and a center channel? FWIW, the system in reality will be used more for TV than DVD watching, and for music infrequently. My local NHT dealer sells Marantz receivers & separates, and am seriously considering this combo, though I still need to add a DVD/CD player. Recommendations? I would like to stay under $3K total budget for receiver, all speakers, and player. Thanks!

No, you wouldn't need dual subs. It's a small enough room, one is fine, though two subs really are a great thing. Can you use an AZ as a center as well? Or do you need a horizontal speaker? An AZ will match much better and sound great for less money if you can place it.

My theory is that, if you spend the money on the Classic 3-way centers, you should go for the Threes to match, but that might blow the budget.

No, you wouldn't need dual subs. It's a small enough room, one is fine, though two subs really are a great thing. Can you use an AZ as a center as well? Or do you need a horizontal speaker? An AZ will match much better and sound great for less money if you can place it.

My theory is that, if you spend the money on the Classic 3-way centers, you should go for the Threes to match, but that might blow the budget.

Thanks again. Yes, I could use an AZ as a center, since it would be on the same bookshelf as the mains. The thing is, the bookshelf is floor to ceiling, from the left wall of the room to the doorway in the center of the room, and my 30" LCD HDTV is mounted in the shelves (a couple are removed). But the right side of the TV is flush with the right edge of the bookshelf. In other words, it's "right-justified", if you will, and that's because there is a doorway adjacent to the bookshelf on the right; thus the location of the TV for optimal viewing from the other side of the room. But it means that the right main cannot be positioned to the right of the TV, but rather will be directly above the TV, flush with its right-side edge. (I'm kind of having to work within the limitations posed by the shelves.) Consequently, the center channel speaker will have to sit within about 24 inches of the right (and left) mains in front. Is that enough separation? Would 3 AZs (L-C-R) work okay in front? Or should I just rip out the bookshelves & start over?!! Thanks for any advice.

No way you can put the right speaker to the right of the doorway?

No way you can put the right speaker to the right of the doorway?

Yeah, I know, I wish. But not unless I remove the door or close it anytime the speaker is in use, and since the door faces a high traffic hallway, it typically stays open. It opens into the room, toward the listener, on right-hand-side hinges, and thus would obscure any speakers to the right of the door when open (they woudl be behind the door). Moreover, the wall space to the right of the door is only about 12" wide before the diagonal fireplace starts, so the door actually obscures part of that, too. Hmm, wonder how the AZ would look on the mantle? Just kidding, heat issues there. Oh, the joys of working around the quirks of a 1920 home. :o

Not sure what to say. You could use 2 speakers or 3 speakers up front. The center will help on 5.1 material, but might hurt on other 2.0 type stuff. At least they're thin, low profile and image well. Wish I could be of more help there.

The new classic line comes prethreaded for speaker mounts. You say you have 9.5' ceilings? I would mount them up high in the corners, that way you can have them where you want them, not worry about the door, and have good channel separation. With speaker mounts, you should be able to angle them downward towards the listening position.

John, any Three's show up yet? I am dying to hear how they sound compared to the Two's, and compared to the SB3's.

Not for about 4 weeks yet. I'd love to know too. The Twos are a better speaker overall than the SB3 with better imaging, soundstaging, resolution so all the Three needs to do is have even a little more resolution, a little more bass and a little better dispersion than the Two and it's an audiophile home run. Based on its design parameters, thats *exactly* what it should do. My only fear is that the Three/Four will be so good that it will eat into Xd sales.

I am just chimming in so to receive updates to this thread and the availability once they arrive. Thanks again John…

NHT has speakers that can be used away from TVs (Zero, TWO, THREE, etc), on TVs (2C, 3C, M5, M6, etc) and against the wall (M5, M6, L5, etc), so the "wisdom" here is to make a few different choices for every situation.

John, for someone who wants the Classic why can't the 2c or 3c be used against the wall under a front projector screen? I thought it was also built and designed for it, since I find it somehow awkward looking to have a speaker away and up front of the screen. thanks.

No reason why not, that's essentially how it's designed. We're just getting "tweaky" at this point. It's better for the upper midrange and the imaging to be away from room boundaries in general, but the bass balance of the 2C/3C was tuned based on the idea that it was a) on something big (big screen), b) in something big (cabinet) or c) against something big (wall). It's an imperfect approximate anyway. But at least they care enough to consider the likely placement rather than ignore it as many companies do. The Three would perform better away from the wall as it has much more extended bass.

First time post... My concern is whether NHT will be here to support us in the future. Their emails to sales or staff come back undeliverable and their website needs to be updated. Under their history link the last entry was in 2002. I would think for such a major player in the audio/speaker world someone would keep their site current.

Are you going to this site? - www.nhthifi.com

First time post... My concern is whether NHT will be here to support us in the future. Their emails to sales or staff come back undeliverable and their website needs to be updated. Under their history link the last entry was in 2002. I would think for such a major player in the audio/speaker world someone would keep their site current.

Not sure what you're talking about here. The site was just completely updated with the Classic models a few weeks back and all of my e-mails went through except for sales@nhthifi.com which is a bad link. I've e-mailed them on that one with the corrected HTML.

No reason why not, that's essentially how it's designed. We're just getting "tweaky" at this point. It's better for the upper midrange and the imaging to be away from room boundaries in general, but the bass balance of the 2C/3C was tuned based on the idea that it was a) on something big (big screen), b) in something big (cabinet) or c) against something big (wall). It's an imperfect approximate anyway. But at least they care enough to consider the likely placement rather than ignore it as many companies do. The Three would perform better away from the wall as it has much more extended bass.

Last week, I visited a store (Digital Ear) to check out the anthony gallo speakers to replace my superzeros b/c my wife wanted a more minimalist look to our small HT room once we move in next week. While talking to the sales rep I noticed a shiny black and nicely crafted satellite speaker which I pointed out to him. He said that thing of beauty, called the Tannoy Arenas, are way much better in sound quality than those Gallos. Never had the chance to listen although he allowed me to bring home a pair of Gallos diva to compare my superzeros with.

As expected, it was a no contest win for the SuperZeros. The Gallos sounded a little harsh and overly bright. I just thought to myself how difficult it is to depart from NHT after being spoiled with for 11 years (I still remember Corey Greenberg's articles from Home Theater mags).

Anyhow, I'm seriously considering the Tannoy arenas or the amazing Niro speaker which I had recently demoed. The Niro delivers high quality sound but is a totally different animal - all 5 drivers enclosed in one small box; you'll be totally surprised by the sound of this puppy. But this thread is making me want to go back with NHT and check out the new Classics... :confused: :)

How can you get more minimalist that SuperZeros?!? :confused: :D

How can you get more minimalist that SuperZeros?!? :confused: :D

:)

Somehow, she wants them to disappear b/c the room is really a dining room when we move in :eek: So I'm trying to find the best solution for both. Somewhat hard to describe...see, one wall has a huge wide niche to fit in a 120" front projection screen which I can cover with panels during the day. So dining room by day, HT room by night :D

Well i know this is off topic but i was planning on down the road adding a pair of Twos to my current setup of NHT SB-2's. These were recommended to be the closest timbre match. I didnt realize the Two was a 6ohm speaker. My current receiver willl not have a problem powering these, but my question is will these speakers be louder than the SB2's at the same volume settings because of their lower ohm rating? I am assuming the twos will player louder only because they will draw more power from the amp.

Why not just get some more SB2's. They can be had for a great price right now.

I should while they're still available...But i am really strapped for cash, for id say about a month or so. By then they'll probably all be gone.

Just tell yourself you will be saving money in the long run since SB2s are half the price of the Twos ;)

The impedance difference shouldn't really be noticeable.

Just tell yourself you will be saving money in the long run since SB2s are half the price of the Twos ;)

You do have a point...I hope they're still around by the 12th.

Alimentall, thanks for the info.

In other news, since Classic speakers make pretty much every speaker stand on which they sit look kinda ugly, I did a lot of searching and found that Target makes a piano black speaker stand that looks fantastic with the Two and Three (too big for the AZ). The only bad thing? I bought the last ones that had been important. The good news? They said they'd bring over more if the demand is there. So I'm going to try to convince them to import some more. Sand fillable, gloss black, all metal construction.

Hey Jack, is NHT really not going to be at CES this year? I did not see you listed on the exhibitor list. I was looking forward to seeing the entire Classic line, and hopefully even hear a few of the models demo'd.

Look under the Hilton. They'll be there.

In other news, since Classic speakers make pretty much every speaker stand on which they sit look kinda ugly, I did a lot of searching and found that Target makes a piano black speaker stand that looks fantastic with the Two and Three (too big for the AZ). The only bad thing? I bought the last ones that had been important. The good news? They said they'd bring over more if the demand is there. So I'm going to try to convince them to import some more. Sand fillable, gloss black, all metal construction.

I'd like NHT to make some custom stands that bolt onto to Classic bookshelf speakers. Aren't there screw holes there now for the metal footers?

So has anyone heard the Classic 3 or 4 yet? I stopped by my dealer 2 days ago and he said that delivery was imminent. I bought the absolute zeros and like them and now am interested in buying the center and fronts.

Do you think the 4's are mainly for HT or will they be great for two channel music as well. I noticed in the glossy that it says that the 4 is for people who don't have room for an external sub - I have an external SVS sub, so does this mean the 4's won't play well in my environment? I primarily want a great two channel stereo speaker that will also sound good with HT.


One thing I thought was kinda of chessy with the 3 and 4 is that there is a foam piece (that they don't show in the pictures) that attaches between the tweeter and mid-range domes to reduce reflections between the two. No big deal just seems strange.

I'd like NHT to make some custom stands that bolt onto to Classic bookshelf speakers. Aren't there screw holes there now for the metal footers?

Yes, but they're angled and I thing it would be expensive to make a speaker stand that worked with the rounded bottom of the speaker. Possible, but NHT has never been good as selling speaker stands. And the screw holes are all spaced differently. That's another issue. The Targets look great with them though.

I am building a dedicated theater room. It will be 80% movies, but I periodically like to jam to some DVD-Audio Blue Man Group or Mannheim Steamroller. I am looking at eaither the Yammy RX-V2600, Denon 3806, or possibly a Pioneer Elite or Onkyo. I really like the Yammy's upconversion to 720p/1080i. They say receivers sound different, but it also depends on your speakers. I will be going with the Two's or Three's all around in a 6.1 front projection set-up, with an SVS sub. Any idea which would be the best match for the new NHT's? And what type of sound would it have - a bit warm, or a bit bright? If it makes a difference, the front speakers will be on stands, and the rear speakers will be up high in the corners pointed down towards the center of the room. Room is 11wide x 13deep x 9tall fully enclosed. What do you guys think?

So has anyone heard the Classic 3 or 4 yet? I stopped by my dealer 2 days ago and he said that delivery was imminent. I bought the absolute zeros and like them and now am interested in buying the center and fronts.

Imminent being probably second week of January, to be realistic.

Do you think the 4's are mainly for HT or will they be great for two channel music as well. I noticed in the glossy that it says that the 4 is for people who don't have room for an external sub - I have an external SVS sub, so does this mean the 4's won't play well in my environment? I primarily want a great two channel stereo speaker that will also sound good with HT.

They're going to be *excellent* for 2-channel. The dispersion and clarity is a big deal for music. But, if you want to avoid using the SVS for music, then buy the Fours and set the fronts to "large". Otherwise, you could get Threes and use your sub all the time. I do believe that the Fours will give you a more coherent bass than most any separate sub, especially with the dual 10" woofers rather than, say, a single 12".

One thing I thought was kinda of chessy with the 3 and 4 is that there is a foam piece (that they don't show in the pictures) that attaches between the tweeter and mid-range domes to reduce reflections between the two. No big deal just seems strange.

I'm not sure what is "cheesy" (chessy?) about putting foam on the speaker to improve the sound, especially when it will be hidden behind a grill. Most companies wouldn't bother with this. To me, it shows great attention to even the smallest details. Isn't that what true high-end design is all about?

I am building a dedicated theater room. It will be 80% movies, but I periodically like to jam to some DVD-Audio Blue Man Group or Mannheim Steamroller. I am looking at eaither the Yammy RX-V2600, Denon 3806, or possibly a Pioneer Elite or Onkyo. I really like the Yammy's upconversion to 720p/1080i. They say receivers sound different, but it also depends on your speakers. I will be going with the Two's or Three's all around in a 6.1 front projection set-up, with an SVS sub. Any idea which would be the best match for the new NHT's? And what type of sound would it have - a bit warm, or a bit bright? If it makes a difference, the front speakers will be on stands, and the rear speakers will be up high in the corners pointed down towards the center of the room. Room is 11wide x 13deep x 9tall fully enclosed. What do you guys think?

Wow. That's a bit overkill, IMO. Personally, for a room that small, I'd probably do 5 Absolute Zeros and an SW10, then take the savings and put a set of Threes or Fours in the living room for music. SVS subs are more about loud output and ultra deep bass, something your room is just to small to really use. Kind of like buying an SUV to commute to work. Maybe Twos. I wouldn't put the speakers up in the corners. I assume your couch will be against the back wall? If that's the case, the speakers should be about ~5' off the ground on the side walls facing each other. If your couch is, say, 5' in, which would put you 8' from the screen (which is fine, up to an 8' wide screen), you'll get better sound and the rears can be a bit lower and angled forward toward the person furthest away (not that it matters as much with this much dispersion). The Threes might actually have *too much* dispersion for your room without some treatment. That could make them a bit brighter sounding. But done properly, it would be fine.

Alimentall,

Thanks for the input. I hope my local dealer wasn't being overly optimistic on their availability. They sure implied to me that they would be in within a week, but they probably don't know more that any other dealer.

I agree that for two channel the four is the way to go. It can be tough to integrate a sub with bookshelf speakers for two channel listening.

The foam just seemed strange but like you said it shows attention to detail.

Thanks Alimentall,

I know that Three's are not needed for my room size. I was going to get them since they are better sound quality wise. I thought the 3-way design with aluminum drivers would be significantly better. I just will not need to blast them too loud. I did not think about the dispersion though. You may have a point there about too wide of a dispersion in my small room. I am going with SVS sub because the ultra deep is exactly what I want. My room size wont need much, but I want to be able to go ultra deep. And which receiver would you suggest with these speakers (Two's or Three's)?

Well, here's the thing. If you use a 6' wide screen, then the speakers will be about 2' from the side walls. That means too much sidewall reflection too soon. There *is* a possible solution to this. Make a couple of triangles out of some 1' wide MDF or plywood strips about 4' high. Cover with some carpet or anything absorbent (if you can). Then place these triangles along the sidewall between you and the speakers, but a little close to the speakers. This absorbs/reflects the worse side wall reflections so that they don't reach your ear directly. But you'll have to treat the walls. Not because the Three's dispersion is bad, but it makes a bad situation worse. If you have a wider room, then it is a good thing. The Twos don't have as much dispersion, but they're still pretty wide. I'd do some treatment, no matter what. I guess the sub thing is up to you. Not what I'd recommend, but you can always ship it back, if it doesn't work out.

And any suggestions on receivers for the Two's or Three's?

I think they deserve something like NAD, Arcam, Rotel, Cambridge if you can.

Alimentall,

Any word or updated info. on arrival time?

Early January by all accounts. Not too far away.

A week and half ago my dealer said a few days, 5 days ago they said any day now, and yesterday they said they really don't know - just that they expect it soon.

I think your dealer did what I did - went off the previous estimate right up until they started wondering where their order was. Then finding out that there had been a bit of a delay, though certainly not an abnormal one. I don't think I've *ever* had a product show up within a month of its original target date in 15 years in business.

Anyone have pictures of the Two's and Three's with the grills?

Thanks

There are some pictures on at www.nhthifi.com They look great with the grills as the grill really matches the contour of the speaker. Very nicely done.

Will the new 3C work with 2.5i speakers?

Yes, but it will make you want to get the Fours to match :)

BTW, if anyone hasn't noticed, I'm doing a "US Tour" of the Classic series. I've got three sets of Twos out, one pair in CA, on in MI (that may not be going anywhere) and a pair in NC now that are about ready to be passed on. I want to send out three pairs of Absolute Zeros now and I have Threes coming in a few weeks. This is mainly for people who simply have no nearby dealer and probably can't hear them otherwise. Details below:

BTW, if anyone hasn't noticed, I'm doing a "US Tour" of the Classic series. I've got three sets of Twos out, one pair in CA, on in MI (that may not be going anywhere) and a pair in NC now that are about ready to be passed on. I want to send out three pairs of Absolute Zeros now and I have Threes coming in a few weeks. This is mainly for people who simply have no nearby dealer and probably can't hear them otherwise. Details below:

I would like to audition the THREE'S when they arrive.

Would this be a good 5:1 setup?

receiver: Yamaha 1600 or 2600
fronts: Two's
surrounds: Zero's
center: Two C (need to fit in cabinet, can't go with Three C)
sub: SW10
room is about 15' x 19'

I'd probably just do 5 Absoluate Zeros or 5 Twos if you can. Or, if you have to go with the 2C, spend the extra bucks and get the Threes for the front to match. I know NHT is marketing the 2C for the Twos, but I suspect it's still a better match for the Three because the Three has the same basic drivers. Then upgrade the sub and rears to match.

Would this be a good 5:1 setup?

receiver: Yamaha 1600 or 2600
fronts: Two's
surrounds: Zero's
center: Two C (need to fit in cabinet, can't go with Three C)
sub: SW10
room is about 15' x 19'

That's a good sized room. IMO it would be worth it to match your fronts and surrounds.

Where would you set the crossover for these little guys, I noticed a couple only reach down to the 70hz region?

I would put a HK, NAD, Marantz, or Cambridge Audio receiver with them before a Yamaha.

I really like the Yamaha's for the price - and the connections, video switching, etc...

Also, I probably should have mentioned my usage will probably be about 80% HT and 20% music. Wouldn't one of the Yamahas be a decent choice?

No problem going with the Yamaha if it affords you better speakers that your Yamaha can adequately drive, especially if a more expensive receiver in this price range means you will be using lessor speakers.

Where would you set the crossover for these little guys, I noticed a couple only reach down to the 70hz region?

One full octave below the 3db downpoint is the prevaling wisdom, so 140hz .

I've been switching between 80Hz and 100Hz and there's not much difference. I'd say lower if you have one sub. You can go a bit higher with dual subs, but which is best will depend on multiple factors including the room. I'd say 100Hz is a good starting point.

Still, probably, below the point where bass is localizable...depending on who you ask.

Also a decent sub shouldn't have too much trouble keeping pace and rythm at the upper end of it's frequency limitation when also having to run the really low stuff.

One full octave below the 3db downpoint is the prevaling wisdom, so 140hz .The prevailing wisdom is different for acoustic suspension bass. You can generally cross over at the -3db point with no ill effects as the roll off is gradual and predictable and the woofer won't go into self destruct mode (like a ported speaker will) trying to reproduce tones below resonance. In fact, THX speakers use the predictable roll-off of acoustic suspension speakers as part of the crossover, specifying a 3db down point of 80hz which when combined with a THX crossover gives you a Linkwitz-Riley 24db per octave at 80.

I have a Velodyne DD-18 sub that includes a 8 band parameteric EQ. Where would you crossover the classic 3s?

I am looking for a couple options for a potential 7.1 Classic set up utilizing an existing Velodyne DD-18.

Option 1

Fronts: Classic 3s

Center: 3C

Rears: 4 Classic 2s wall mounted

Option 2

Fronts: Classic 3s

Center: 3C

Rears: 4 Classic 3s stand mounted

Room is to be a dedecated media room. Specific room dimensions TBD. Minimum room size 12 * 20 * 8

Music and Movies will be 50 / 50

Question 1: Given the more advanced design of the Classic 3s, should they be used for surround duties as well as fronts?

Question 2: Does anyone know if NHT is planning a dipolar or bipolar rear classic speaker.

The answer to Q1 and Q2 is the same. The ultra wide dispersion of the Three makes it an ideal rear speaker for 5, 6 and 7 channel systems. No dipole/bipole necessary.

As for the sub crossover, fortunately, the Three goes pretty low. You might go as low as 60Hz, but it really depends on how well the sub does the upper bass vs how well the Threes play loud enough for you. I'd crossover low if you can, but if you play at very high volumes, you may go back up to 80Hz or so. By 80Hz you should be okay for pretty high output. Just experimenting is the key.

John,

As you have a lot of experience with NHT, Any idea of how the new Classic 3 and C3 or Classic 2 and C2 compare in sound to the 2.5i and AC1

As the Classic 3s are not threaded. Is there a way to wall mount them?

John,

As you have a lot of experience with NHT, Any idea of how the new Classic 3 and C3 or Classic 2 and C2 compare in sound to the 2.5i and AC1

Much more detailed, richer midrange, smoother sound, cleaner treble, bigger soundfield. Big differences. But still that lively sound that was nice about them and, room acoustics willing, the same kind of imaging focus.

As the Classic 3s are not threaded. Is there a way to wall mount them?

From the manual:

If you decide to wall mount the Three follow these simple instructions. The model Three has threaded inserts on the rear of the cabinet for wall mounting. NHT recommends the use of OmniMount 20 series brackets. You will need to purchase two, 1?4-20 x 5/8" (length) pan head machine screws to attach the bracket to the back of the speaker. For more information, visit www.omnimount.com or call them at 800-668-6848.

My mistake. thanks for the feedback.

Based on my positive previous experience with NHT, I look forward to being a part of the Classic Three U.S. Tour!

John,

I had a chance to briefly hear a pair of Classic Twos. Overall, I was pretty impressed.

Much as you described, I noticed additional midrange detail, an overall smoother sound, great imaging, huge sweetspot and great off axis sound. The twos also had a bigger soundstage than earlier NHTs.

My concern is that the upper midrange and treble seemed brighter and unfocussed than other NHTs I've heard in the past. These speakers I heard were placed on a "Book Shelf" about 2 inches from the wall. They were powered by a Denon 3806. The room did not appear to have any acoustic treatment.

Could this be the issue or has NHT changed their sound? Are the Threes better than the Twos in this respect given the new tweeter?

Will wall mounted Twos or Threes sound noticably brighter in a Home Theater enviroment?

I know my questions may be difficult to speculate about, but I thought I would ask anyway.

Hmmm, I guess I'm hearing it differently. I think that there is more precision and focus than earlier versions. They are warmer than the Music series, but brighter than the SuperAudio series. Are you thinking imaging focus? Or midrange precision and "speed" as they say?

Any word on when the 3's will ship?

Given the two choices, it may be imaging focus? My main thought is that piano and vocals had a great open sound but with some program material seemed to take on a fatter / more forward feel. This seemed slightly beyond what I had heard from NHT's music series.

Don't get me wrong, my overall impression was extremely positive. I am just picking nits. I am also unsure if the room I was in or amplification could have played a role.

I run B&K while the Classic Two set-up ran Denon. It's my experience that Denon is slightly brighter.

Could this have made a difference?

I guess this just reaffirms your thoughts. An in home demo with various program material is essential to making an informed decision.

But back to my previous question...are the Threes brighter than the Twos?

But back to my previous question...are the Threes brighter than the Twos?

Too my knowledge nobody but a few engineers at NHT have even ever heard this speaker so the answer to your question would be pure speculation or an educated guess.

Being a 3way that retails at 400.00, there is no exuse for it to not be an extremly balanced and blended speaker.

I heard it. I just didn't hear it side by side and so I don't want to get try to get into detail. Unlike most reviewers, I don't have the magical power to remember exactly how a speaker sounded on a different system with different music in a different room weeks/months/years apart. I was happy to hear that they didn't sound bright or forward to me, rather, it sounded very balanced and smooth. In fact, I was expecting to hear some sort of revelation of some sort, but what I heard was almost nothing of note. They just performed and I heard music and I didn't really hear the speaker. So getting into detail about subtleties, for me, will have to wait until I can do A/Bs with the rest of the line up. I suspect that they may be a *bit* brighter than the Two in some rooms, but I think the Two is not bright at all. Brighter than the SB3, but not by much. More of additional clarity and transient response in the upper mids because of the better driver/cabinet combo.

BTW, Need, you need to get out and listen to a lot of $2K/pr and up speakers just to find out how *bad* expensive speakers can be. There are just tons of speakers that are anything but "extremely balanced and blended" and many of those are put up as "reference speakers".

If the Three does what I think it does, it will set something of a new standard for the under $1000/pr class, probably even the under $2500/pr class. I've never seen a bookshelf speaker this well engineered for top to bottom resolution, dispersion, transient behavior before. At any price. That won't necessarily make the speaker "pop" and blow everyone away on its own, but like other great speakers I've heard, they make everything that sits beside them sound colored by comparison. That's what Xds do. Yes, they sound great. But when you take another "great sounding" speaker and set it beside them, the Xd makes them sound obviously flawed. At least, that's what they did to my previous $15K and $21K speakers I had on display. I think the Threes will do this, but for a less expensive grouping of product. Still, if you have $800/pr 3-way speakers that are that well engineered - cabinet/drivers/design - it kind of makes a $8000/pr "bookshelf" 2-way speaker with $7500 worth of cabinet seem kind of silly.

I do not need to look at 2000.00 speakers. The law of diminishing return kicks in for me at very low levels. For example the NHT classic 3 at 400 each is what I would call enough money to get what 95% of want people need, myself included. Maybe not from NHT but 400 is enough money. Towers would be about 800.00 each. Anything more then that, I can not here what it is people are paying for. Maybe it is just my ears?

I have heard expensive speakers and I am just as wowed by more affordable speakers.

If I were to spend alot of money it would be because of other things like cabinet looks, total power handling and db output, and overall size. But sound quality can be had for affordable amounts.

I just want the damn NHT classic 3's to ship so I can start my comparisons.

I just wouldn't generalize so much. Yes, maybe now, the Three and Four are really bringing something akin to exotic performance *down* to your price points, but that hasn't really existed before. NHT is a rebel company. They don't care about exotic wood cabinets. If they did, Xd would probably be a $25,000 product, the Threes would be $2500/pr and the Fours would be $7500/pr - they're that advanced.

About every 5 years, yes, the price of near exotic performance gets lower and I thought the NHT 3.3 (and a few other models from others) brought that down to about $4K about 10 years ago, and then the 2.9/T5 brought it down to $2500. The Four brings it down to $1800 while furthering the performance. But this is not only a new price point for this level of performance, it hasn't even happened yet! And Xd has brought true exotic performance (one might say "better than exotic") down to $6K. But I do think that level of performance is easily worth that $6K to a lot of people. More, in fact. As a self-professed newbie, I think you're expectations are so high that you've missed the last 10-20 years of huge advancements that allow you to expect this level of performance for under $2K.

That being said, yeah, I just want "the damn NHT classic 3s" to ship too.

Anyone else want to hear the NHT Two on the Classic Tour before I shut it down? The Moderation felt it was "marketing". I suppose....... :(

Yeah I do expect alot for my dollar and I found with a little shopping around you can usually get it. The internet is suppose to make bargain hunting that much easier but I sometimes wonder.

I will definatly try your 3's out when they become available for the world tour. If you can not provide them, then there is a store called THE BIG PICTURE who will carry the 3's as well. I check in with them regularly but they have not received theres yet.

Has anyone posted reviews of the Classic Twos that listened to them on the U.S. tour? Regardless of motivation, we all benefit greatly from product reviews on this forum. I would not have purchased half of my equipment if it wasn't for endorsements and reviews originally found on AVS. I trust the reviews of the people on this Forum way more than the average home theater magazine.

Just talked with NHT today and they expect the Classic 3's container to arrive early February and they plan to ship them out to dealers fairly quickly after that.

I asked about the fours and they said that container hasn't even shipped yet.

vvv,
I was part of the Classic Two tour...until I decided to keep them. ;) I posted my impressions at John's site:

http://forum.adnm.com/viewtopic.php?t=567

I'm listening to them now as I type......I'd recommend them highly!

I'm looking for a hifi quality minimonitor, and the size and looks of the AZ look appealing. I've always liked the NHT family sound way back to the NHT-1's.

old goalie,

Thanks for the review. Very informative.

Alimentall,

Any word or the arrival of the 3's?

Looks like arrival at dealers in about 3 weeks. Wish it were sooner, the natives are getting restless......

Looks like arrival at dealers in about 3 weeks. Wish it were sooner, the natives are getting restless......

Spoke with NHT today, they are saying closer to end of February. BTW, they said the back side of the Three is threaded for wall mounting, just in case you need to.

Gimme! :)

Well, that's for the main boat shipment, but they are airfreighting in some to meet the immediate need. At least that's what they're telling me. I have forgotten how many I have on order, but it's in the dozens.

BTW, what does everyone think about Classic in "Special Dark" -

http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_foursd1.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_foursd2.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_zerosd1.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nht_zerosd2.jpg

BTW, what does everyone think about Classic in "Special Dark" -

Is it brown, like dark chocolate?

Different and kind of cool. I feel like you would have to see them in person and in different light. Does Special Dark cost more?

Ron, it's kinda a weird red/brown combo. I still don't know how to describe it.


VVV, it's the same price, just an option.

John what type of power do you think will be required to take full advantage of the the Classic 3's in a 5.1 configuration? How about 2 channel?

I understand the 3's have a threaded insert for wall mounting.

Any suggestions on which bracket to use? At 17lbs it should probally go into a stud somehow.

The depth on the speaker is 10.3" so with a mount that will put it out atleast 2" more. How will a speaker that is 13" off the wall blend with a flat panel or even a crt that is out 24". Just trying to start a little discussion on the wall mount feature. I really want wall mount speakers but not necassarily " flat screen speakers" or " onwall speakers".

ANy thoughts on how they will sound wall mounted and how they will compare to a flat screen? How far do flat screens stick out form the wall anyways?

I think NHT recommends Omni Mount 20s. A typical Plasma is 4 deep and the mount should add another 3 or 4 inches.

My wall studs are not in the appropriate location so I am going to install a nicley finishised board across the length of the wall. This will allow me to mount the speakers directly to the board or to the board via the omni 20 mounts.

If the display is approx. 8" off the board and the speakers are approx. 11" off of the board how will this sound? Any guess's?

Well, if you really want the best performance, I'd *highly* recommend that you put the Threes on stands away from the walls. And put 50-100W *real* watts behind them.

Thanks John,

I guess there is only one way to find out if wall placement is acceptable. I will just have to try it.

I'm buying my first house and ordered a pair of Classic 3's to go with it. The speakers will go in the living/dining room which is a 12' by 24' area and will be placed along one of the 12' sides. I read one of John's posts on another thread and he mentioned that narrow rooms could be a problem. Did I screw up?? Is this room to narrow for the 3's....should I have gotten the 2's instead?? John.....anybody.....?

Josh

I'm planning on using the three's in a narrow room (approx. 13 feet) also. Speakers will be about 2 1/2 to 3 feet from side wall. I'm planning to toe them in to help minimize the side-wall reflections. John....good idea or bad idea?

Well, the big thing is to minimize early reflections. There are three strategies - pull the speakers closer to you, put them further from the walls. You want to get the reflected distance to be 5'-6'(or more) longer than the direct distance to you. Then it's not a problem. The other way is to use dampening/dipsersion to kill it. One thing I haven't tried, but should work, would be to *block* the sound from the wall with a barrier, like a deep post or a triangular post that intercepts the early reflection and absorbs it or deflects it away from you.

Hey Jack!
Do the new THREE & FOUR have the Mid & Tweeter wired in reverse polarity in relation to the Woofers like the 2.9 & 3.3?
The FOUR might fill the bill as full range rears!

Any news yet with the threes?

I've listened to the twos and zeros, sounded very nice to me.

Still waiting for some threes though...

I know it seems like a "Groundhog Day" loop, but we're still about 3 weeks away.