AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › New NHT Classic line to replace Super Audio
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New NHT Classic line to replace Super Audio - Page 336

post #10051 of 10247
5/25/12 at 6:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaiii View Post

But far off axis it does still suffer from lobing issues, although they occur below 1kHz...

http://www.hometheater.com/content/n...m-measurements

The review doesn't show 30-degrees off-axis, so perhaps the lobing issues are very minor (or absent) there...

Also keep in mind HT Mag typically does their measurements with grills on, and the Stereophile review of the Three shows the grill is fairly detrimental to treble performance... Which is the frequency range where the HT Mag measurements look most different than the Soundstage and Stereophile measurements of the Three.

One advantage of the 2C/3C would be that they're a little more sensitive... and being easier to drive is always a plus.

Still, if I could have a vertically placed Three, I would...

Actually, the measurements you linked are originally from Stereophile and done by Thomas Norton. The original review & measurements were by their former sister publication called Ultimate AV or some such that was geared more for surround systems instead of 2 channel. A lot of their old reviews are now showing up on HTM's site for some reason.

Also, in the very link you provided, it clearly specifies in the first sentence that the grilles were off.

The true, original HTM measurements I was referring to where the 3C bested the Threes are here.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #10052 of 10247
5/25/12 at 6:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaiii View Post

Interestingly, those are 2 words I've often heard as descriptors of Monitor Audio's speakers.

That's what I was thinking too. I like MA very, very much, but I don't see how any one could say the Threes are brighter than the MAs I've heard before.
Reply
Reply
post #10053 of 10247
5/25/12 at 6:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveR1952 View Post

I like stereo with a lot of my music so the tower would be nice for that role but in HT it is essentially a waste with a sub (which I want with HT). Still reading and learning.

The Towers don't even extend as low as the Threes on paper even though I couldn't subjectively tell much difference between them. The towers seem to extend as low as the Threes, but with 'faster' bass. The Towers would need a sub or subs as much or more than Threes do for HT. Are you thinking of the Fours maybe?

Between the Towers and Threes, it all comes down to individual taste and preference. Alphaiii and myself both ordered a pair of each. Even though our impressions of them when compared to each other were very close to being the same, he liked the Threes better, and I liked the Towers better.
Reply
Reply
post #10054 of 10247
5/25/12 at 7:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by 65 Electra Glide View Post

Actually, the measurements you linked are originally from Stereophile and done by Thomas Norton. The original review & measurements were by their former sister publication called Ultimate AV or some such that was geared more for surround systems instead of 2 channel. A lot of their old reviews are now showing up on HTM's site for some reason.

Also, in the very link you provided, it clearly specifies in the first sentence that the grilles were off.

The true, original HTM measurements I was referring to where the 3C bested the Threes are here.

Sorry if my previous post was confusing... due to me linking one review on HT Mag's site - the Ultimate AV Mag review - then discussing a different review actually done by HT Mag. So in my mind, I was saying exactly what your reply just pointed out - but my post didn't convey that correctly.

As mentioned, the measurements I previously linked are from Ultimate AV Mag (even though that review is hosted by HT Mag's site now), and as you state, are with the grills off. The Three wasn't measured in this review.

The measurements of the Three done by John Atkinson for the Stereophile review (http://www.stereophile.com/content/n...r-measurements) are sans grill, with some measures done specifically to show the detrimental effect the grill has on FR in the treble range.

My comment regarding the HT Mag measurements was referring to the same review you linked. MJP doesn't specify "grills on" but many of the HT Mag reviews do state this. So my assumption was that those measurements were done with grills on as well - hence the somewhat depressed treble output of the Three (red curve) compared to the measurements from the Sterephile and Soundstage review...

http://www.hometheater.com/content/n...-measures-nht-
Reply
Reply
post #10055 of 10247
5/25/12 at 7:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by 65 Electra Glide View Post

Alphaiii and myself both ordered a pair of each. Even though our impressions of them when compared to each other were very close to being the same, he liked the Threes better, and I liked the Towers better.

Off topic - but did you end up keeping both the Absolute Towers and the Boston VS 260?

I still have the Boston VS260/VS325C and Three/2C - can't seem to decide which to actually part with yet.
Reply
Reply
post #10056 of 10247
5/25/12 at 8:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaiii View Post

I still have the Boston VS260/VS325C and Three/2C - can't seem to decide which to actually part with yet.

Life can be challenging.
Reply
Reply
post #10057 of 10247
5/25/12 at 10:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreightTrainJane View Post

On the fence about the NHT Classic Threes...at their sale price and the stellar reviews from TAS and Stereophile, they seem to be a no brainer upgrade purchase for me. But I also have the Monitor Audio BX2s on top of my list for $100 less.

I love the sound of my Monitor Audio BR1 and I'm afraid that the NHT will be too bright, forward or unforgiving for my ears...Decisions, decisions.

The last set of Monitor Audio speakers I heard—they were bookshelves of a recent vintage, but, sorry, don't know the model, maybe Silver RX1 or RX2—struck me as more forward than the Three. Totally informal, non-adjacent comparison, but that's what I've got to offer.

I never thought the Threes were forward, harsh, or bright. I loved my Threes and only relinquished them when I had the opportunity to get Xds for my LR.
Reply
Reply
post #10058 of 10247
5/25/12 at 10:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by cavchameleon View Post

That's Awesome!!! Do you have some that you can recommend off the top of your head (no pun intended...)? I currently use headphones from AKG for the most part, but also have some from Audio Technica , Sony, JVC, and a couple others. Is there a link to your reviews or are they only from the print version of Macworld? I almost never use the headphones that come with ipods/pads. Curious to read your impressions.

Thanks! All my articles are archived here:

http://www.macworld.com/browse.html?....+Matthew+Ward

They're mostly just online; anything in print is just excerpted from the full review online. Which is nice because I get to stretch my legs a bit as far as article length.

Recommendations always depend on budget, use case, preferences, but we have a nice buyer's guide that covers different price points:

http://www.macworld.com/article/1144...uide_2010.html

Tyll Hertsens, formerly of HeadRoom, also has a great guide at his new site:

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content...itys-wall-fame

If you want to PM me I'd be glad to go into more depth.
Reply
Reply
post #10059 of 10247
5/25/12 at 10:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle_Big_Green View Post

Thanks Matt and Cav. I was thinking that if I went with (3) Threes, that I would put them all at the same level, slightly above the top level of my TV and pitch them appropriately. I was thinking of accomplishing this with wall brackets. If I were to go with a center (2C), then I'd either put it on a wall bracket just above the TV or place it on the cabinet, just below the TV.

I have another question for either/both of you. Right now, I have a good sub (Rumba 12) and my 20-yr. old Polk RTA11TLs (I may have mentioned this). They're doing fine, but I want to go 5.1 and will have to do it incrementally (have Yamaha RX-A710). Another option is to get a pair of Absolute Zeros or Walls for the surrounds. Would this be a better idea for right now since if I only got a center, it wouldn't quite match my Polk's tweeters?

Of course, I could just keep rolling my pennies and buy everything at once, but that's not as fun. I can probably only squeak about a $500 expenditure right now. I was just getting excited because of the sale prices.

Thanks again.

I'd upgrade the surrounds before the sub. As much as I have liked NHT's sealed subs, subs aren't as hard to blend as other speakers. My old system was Threes, a 3C, and AZ surrounds, and for home theater and some light 5.1 music, I was happy with how it all blended.

As far as your Three/3C question... that's a tough call since the Threes were designed to be somewhat free-standing. Honestly, if you're looking at wall-mounting fronts, I think the Absolute Wall is worth a look, but it's hard to weigh the benefits of a speaker that's designed to be wall-mounted versus a better speaker that's not designed for wall mounting.
Reply
Reply
post #10060 of 10247
5/26/12 at 6:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattwardfh View Post

I'd upgrade the surrounds before the sub. As much as I have liked NHT's sealed subs, subs aren't as hard to blend as other speakers. My old system was Threes, a 3C, and AZ surrounds, and for home theater and some light 5.1 music, I was happy with how it all blended.

As far as your Three/3C question... that's a tough call since the Threes were designed to be somewhat free-standing. Honestly, if you're looking at wall-mounting fronts, I think the Absolute Wall is worth a look, but it's hard to weigh the benefits of a speaker that's designed to be wall-mounted versus a better speaker that's not designed for wall mounting.

Matt, I think that I may not have been clear. I like my sub and would only upgrade by adding another (way down the road). I was asking if I should get a pair of surrounds or a single center channel speaker as that is all my budget will allow. However, I know that right now, the new center wouldn't quite match my current L&R fronts. Where wall mounting fronts is concerned, I was thinking of buying the adjustable wall mounting brackets for the Threes (this also applies if I use a Three as center) so that I could "aim" them. I would only consider the Absolute Walls for surrounds - not fronts.

I'm looking at pulling the trigger on something because of the sale. To summarize, I want the Threes as left and rights, I'm considering either the Two C or an upright Three (not Three C) as the center, and I'll go either Absolute Zeros or Absolute Walls for the rear speakers.

Thanks.
Reply
Reply
post #10061 of 10247
5/26/12 at 4:02pm
I've been involved in this insane hobby for almost 35 years now. I've had all different kinds of speakers from moderately priced to expensive. I can say confidently that my 6 NHT Classic 3 speakers, combined with a Classic 3c center are without a doubt the best I've ever owned. Combined with an SVS PB12+2 sub, I have absolutely no desire to ever "upgrade" again.
Reply
Reply
post #10062 of 10247
5/26/12 at 5:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaiii View Post

Off topic - but did you end up keeping both the Absolute Towers and the Boston VS 260?

No, I really, really liked the BAs a lot, even better than the the Threes in some ways. The VS260s look and sound beautiful, and were a steal at the price of $250 each delivered, but I ultimately felt that the Towers were a better speaker overall than either of the stand-mount pairs.

I went into it fully expecting to pick the Threes over the BA VS260s and the NHT Towers, but in reality that didn't happen. Two other very popular speakers here at AVS that you have also owned at one time or another, the Ascend Sierras, and the previous version of the Energy RC-10s (the RC-3s), weren't exactly my favorites either. I thought they were both even more laid back than the Threes, especially the Energys.

I recently ordered a complete 5.2 system of the JBL Performance Series that will go in the main room's system. The sealed monitor/satellite of the system, the JBL PT800, is basically an earlier version the current Revel Ultima 2 Gem 2, but with much, much higher sensitivity. The cabinets are very, very similar and even some of the drivers. I've always thought that for a dual purpose 50/50 split of movies and music that they would be very hard to beat. They have been my dream system ever since I first saw them circa '05 or so in a store that eventually became a Tweeter before they shut down for business. Back then, the entire JBL 5.2 system was like $15,000 and included JBL branded separates (a pre/pro and a multi channel power amp) along with an outboard bass eq component IIRC. I got what I believe to be quite possibly the very last new full system of the speaker set for a price that I simply could not refuse that would probably shock you if you knew.

There is currently a death match going on between the Towers and my pair of Revel F12s to see which will be the final keeper for the bedroom system. When both ran large/full range, there is obviously no contest, but when crossed over to a sub or subs, the competition between them gets very interesting.

To further complicate things, since last weekend, I've been listening to a pair of Revel Performa M22s that I've borrowed. Their sensitivity is low, but they really have detail and imaging like you wouldn't believe, as good or even better than the Towers as far as those two things go. They totally 'disappear' about as well as the Towers do. I think they are quite simply the best stand-mount speaker I've ever heard. Other than much higher sensitivity of the Revel F12s, the M22s seem to be a cross between the F12s and the Towers that have the best of both worlds of the two different models.
Reply
Reply
post #10063 of 10247
5/28/12 at 11:47am
Pulled the trigger on a pair of Classic Threes. With the insane sale price plus free Straightwire cable, it was impossible to say no. Can't wait to hear if the Threes live up to the hype...
Reply
Reply
post #10064 of 10247
5/28/12 at 1:38pm
I recently purchased a TEAC CR-H500NT AM/FM Stereo CD Receiver.

This stereo only unit has a power rating of 40 watts per channel at 6 ohms.

I am interested in matching this receiver with a set of NHT bookshelf speakers, including possibly the NHT Classic Absolute Zero, Classic Two, or Classic Three.

I spoke to a Crutchfield customer service representative, and he recommended the Absolute Zero because the high efficiency of this speaker.

I would appreciate your thoughts regarding my ability to properly power the Classic Two and/or Classic Three on the TEAC receivier.

I believe that the minimum power rating for the Absolute Zero is 10 watts. I could not find published minimum power ratings for the Classic Two or Classic Three.

I have already returned a PSB Image B4 speaker (20 watt minimum power rating) because the stereo could not sufficiently power this speaker.

Your comments are appreciated.
Reply
Reply
post #10065 of 10247
5/28/12 at 3:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbguy View Post

I recently purchased a TEAC CR-H500NT AM/FM Stereo CD Receiver.

This stereo only unit has a power rating of 40 watts per channel at 6 ohms.

I am interested in matching this receiver with a set of NHT bookshelf speakers, including possibly the NHT Classic Absolute Zero, Classic Two, or Classic Three.

I spoke to a Crutchfield customer service representative, and he recommended the Absolute Zero because the high efficiency of this speaker.

I would appreciate your thoughts regarding my ability to properly power the Classic Two and/or Classic Three on the TEAC receivier.

I believe that the minimum power rating for the Absolute Zero is 10 watts. I could not find published minimum power ratings for the Classic Two or Classic Three.

I have already returned a PSB Image B4 speaker (20 watt minimum power rating) because the stereo could not sufficiently power this speaker.

Your comments are appreciated.

I don't think the Crutchfield guy knows what he is talking about.

I have Classic 3's, 2's, AZ's, a Classic 3C and a Absolute Center. Wonderful speakers all, but none are high efficiency. The sealed AZ is spec'd at 86db per the cut sheet. That is not really a pig, but it is not in the same ball park as say a typical Klipsch bookshelf, which will typically be in the low 90's. If the Crutchfield guy thinks the AZ's are high efficiency, I wonder what he would call Klipsch which they also sell.

What is your intention for your system? I assume (and hope) you are not looking to shake the walls. I am also somewhat surprised that you found that your receiver was unable to adequately drive the PSB's, but per their specs, they have about the same sensitivity as the AZ's.

I would think that 40 real watts should be sufficient to play music at reasonable levels through the PSB's or AZ's. I was driving my AZ's in a 2ch rig (NAD 320BEE) which is, I think perhaps 50 watts and I never felt like I needed more power.

Brian
Reply
Reply
post #10066 of 10247
5/28/12 at 3:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbguy View Post

I recently purchased a TEAC CR-H500NT AM/FM Stereo CD Receiver.

This stereo only unit has a power rating of 40 watts per channel at 6 ohms.

I am interested in matching this receiver with a set of NHT bookshelf speakers, including possibly the NHT Classic Absolute Zero, Classic Two, or Classic Three.

I spoke to a Crutchfield customer service representative, and he recommended the Absolute Zero because the high efficiency of this speaker.

I would appreciate your thoughts regarding my ability to properly power the Classic Two and/or Classic Three on the TEAC receivier.

I believe that the minimum power rating for the Absolute Zero is 10 watts. I could not find published minimum power ratings for the Classic Two or Classic Three.

I have already returned a PSB Image B4 speaker (20 watt minimum power rating) because the stereo could not sufficiently power this speaker.

Your comments are appreciated.

I think you can safely ignore the power ratings. It's more a question of how loud you intend to play them. If the speakers play as loud as you need them to without the amp clipping, you're fine.

I've hear the AZs sound good at moderate volumes in a small room powered by desktop amps like the NuForce Icon-2, which does 14 watts into 8 ohms. I wouldn't expect much difference from the Three, or the Image B4 for that matter. For a bigger room or louder volumes, you'd probably want more power, but you might be able to get by. I don't know what your intended use is or what the true capabilities of that Teac are, but I don't think it's an unreasonable combination. But the AZ and Three probably want do any better with that amp than the PSB, though.
Reply
Reply
post #10067 of 10247
5/28/12 at 5:03pm
Speaking from my own experience... The PSB Image B4 is easier to drive than the Absolute Zero.

As far as the Three, it's very similar to the Absolute Zero in terms of sensitivity... The bigger difference being the impedance profiles, with the Three likely to demand a bit more current.

Classic Three:
"The minimum value was 4 ohms between 120Hz and 170Hz, but there is also a combination of 5.5 ohms and -46° electrical phase angle at 94Hz that will demand a goodly amount of current from the partnering amplifier." - John Aktinson, Stereophile
http://www.stereophile.com/content/n...r-measurements

Absolute Zero (along with Tower and Center):
"Sensitivity of all models is a hair on the low side, ranging from 84 to 86 dB. Fortunately, the impedance curves of all three models are pretty reasonable, and the phase curves of the impedance show only mild phase shift, so I'm confident that even a really cheap receiver could drive them to fairly high levels." - Brent Butterworth, Sound & Vision Magazine
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/art...ystem?page=0,3
Reply
Reply
post #10068 of 10247
5/28/12 at 5:33pm
Based on the advice to date, what would consider to be an optimal set up for my TEAC CR-H500NT Receiver (40 watts per channel, 6 ohms) and some NHT bookshelf speakers:

Set Up Number #1: Bedroom (15x15)

TEAC Receiver and No Possibility of the Placement of a Subwoofer (issue with wife)

Would you recommend the Absolute Zero, Classic Two, or Classic Three for this room?

Let's assume that price is not a major consideration based on the relatively low price difference between the speakers at the present time [$199 (Absolute Zero) - $229 (Classic Two) - $299 (Classic Three)].


Set Up Number #2: Living Room (15x15):

TEAC Receiver and Possibility of Subwoofer Placement (plenty of places to hide the subwoofer in this room from my wife)

Would you recommend the Absolute Zero, Classic Two, or Classic Three for this room?

Would you pair the NHT bookshelf speakers with a subwoofer? Which bookshelf speakers and subwoofer?

Would you avoid the 8 ohm Classic Three with this TEAC Receiver?

In response to previous replies to my initial question on this topic: I am not a listener of music at very high volume levels. I simply was underwhelmed by the PSB Image B4 even at low volumes. The speakers projected very little stereo imaging and bass, regardless of their placement in my bedroom. In part, the culprit may be their very small woofers (3.25 inches). Frankly, the music sounded like it was coming from two very small boxes.
Reply
Reply
post #10069 of 10247
5/28/12 at 5:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbguy View Post

Would you avoid the 8 ohm Classic Three with this TEAC Receiver?

In response to previous replies to my initial question on this topic: I am not a listener of music at very high volume levels. I simply was underwhelmed by the PSB Image B4 even at low volumes. The speakers projected very little stereo imaging and bass, regardless of their placement in my bedroom. In part, the culprit may be their very small woofers (3.25 inches). Frankly, the music sounded like it was coming from two very small boxes.

The Three being 8ohm isn't the issue. The only issue (if there really is one) is the lower impedance accompanied by the phase shift near 100Hz - which will need more current from the amp...

Your room isn't too big, and you already stated you don't need really high volumes... so you may be ok. I don't know much about that TEAC, but did look it up to see it's rated 40W @ 6ohm @ 1kHz... so it's really less that 40W per channel useable power.

Personally, I think the Three is well worth it over the Absolute Zero (and Two).

Regarding the Image B4 - it really doesn't have much bass, and the sound is a little laid back (especially with grills on) compared to the Absolute Zero. The AZ takes more power to get as loud, but it does extend a little lower and sounds a little more forward in the midrange/low treble compared to the B4. At low-moderate volumes, I think the Absolute Zero might be more to your liking and a bit of a step up...

But IMO, the improvement from the AZ to the Three is greater than the improvement from the Image B4 to the AZ....
Reply
Reply
post #10070 of 10247
5/28/12 at 6:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbguy View Post

Based on the advice to date, what would consider to be an optimal set up for my TEAC CR-H500NT Receiver (40 watts per channel, 6 ohms) and some NHT bookshelf speakers:

Set Up Number #1: Bedroom (15x15)

TEAC Receiver and No Possibility of the Placement of a Subwoofer (issue with wife)

Would you recommend the Absolute Zero, Classic Two, or Classic Three for this room?

Let's assume that price is not a major consideration based on the relatively low price difference between the speakers at the present time [$199 (Absolute Zero) - $229 (Classic Two) - $299 (Classic Three)].


Set Up Number #2: Living Room (15x15):

TEAC Receiver and Possibility of Subwoofer Placement (plenty of places to hide the subwoofer in this room from my wife)

Would you recommend the Absolute Zero, Classic Two, or Classic Three for this room?

Would you pair the NHT bookshelf speakers with a subwoofer? Which bookshelf speakers and subwoofer?

Would you avoid the 8 ohm Classic Three with this TEAC Receiver?

In response to previous replies to my initial question on this topic: I am not a listener of music at very high volume levels. I simply was underwhelmed by the PSB Image B4 even at low volumes. The speakers projected very little stereo imaging and bass, regardless of their placement in my bedroom. In part, the culprit may be their very small woofers (3.25 inches). Frankly, the music sounded like it was coming from two very small boxes.

Have you decided on NHT's but are looking to change your receiver, or are you looking for speakers that will work with your receiver?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1412685

I won't speak for the other members that are offering you advice, but from my point of view, I would recommend that you get your ducks all lined up before you start asking for help. Your similar request in two forums comes pretty close to a cross post, which is frowned upon at AVS and most other forums.

Brian
Reply
Reply
post #10071 of 10247
5/28/12 at 6:52pm
I already purchased the TEAC Receiver and I need compatible speakers.

I think that my posts have been very clear on this point.

My inquiry about matching NHT speakers is sincere - it was not intended to cause you or any other person to frown.
Reply
Reply
post #10072 of 10247
5/29/12 at 2:27pm
I would go for the 3's.. The zero's are a nice speaker, but when you look into each it will be apparent as to why the 3's are superior.

when/if you decide to move up the ladder in terms of your gear the 3's will not be out of place..

A sealed three way bookshelf with aluminum drivers and the fit and finish of the 3's is a steal at 600... Even at retail value it is priced less than most if not all of the 2-way ported speakers that would be considered in it's class. NHT has a winner with the 3's ..
Reply
Reply
post #10073 of 10247
5/29/12 at 2:38pm
I'll agree with the others here. If your budget and space allows, you might as well go with the Threes. There shouldn't be too much difference in volume, and overall quality should be better, compared to the AZ or Two.

For your living room, go for the B12d sub, I'd say. The B12d is made to go with the Two and Three; the B10d with the AZ. You could look at other brands of subs, too, but I've always liked NHT's sealed subs.
Reply
Reply
post #10074 of 10247
5/29/12 at 2:59pm
Just took advantage of the last day of NHT sale. Triggered a 2C to complete my 2 CLassic 3's for front and 2 SuperZ's for back. NHT all the way. Now I am going to have to go back and listen to my movies again with a center. Love my 3's and looking forward to Return of the King in true 5.1!
I called NHT direct for the deal. Talk to John.
Reply
Reply
post #10075 of 10247
5/30/12 at 2:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaiii View Post

Off topic - but did you end up keeping both the Absolute Towers and the Boston VS 260?

I still have the Boston VS260/VS325C and Three/2C - can't seem to decide which to actually part with yet.

Is it too late for you to return the NHT's as they have free return shipping.. Then perhaps you could try the 4's ?
Reply
Reply
post #10076 of 10247
5/30/12 at 2:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by kauaidoug View Post

Just took advantage of the last day of NHT sale

Me as well. Communicated with John by e-mail the entire day. Got the Classic 3s. I'm back with the NHT family (previously owned 1.1 and SuperOne)
Reply
Reply
post #10077 of 10247
6/1/12 at 10:04pm
Well, it looks like I am going to finally be selling off some of the first speakers I ever owned. I think it's time for the NHT ST4's to find a new home. Does anyone know what I can get for them? I know they were $1000 when new, but I am just not sure what to ask for...

Maybe I wont sell them at all, but I am not sure if I can even find a suitable center channel to match up. I am up for any and all suggestions here.

Thanks in advance.

Here is where I listed them on CL: http://charlottesville.craigslist.or...050223534.html

Side note: Do you think they would be better for HT (if I can find a suitable CC) then some PSB Image T65 and C60 speakers?
Reply
Reply
post #10078 of 10247
6/2/12 at 9:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbridled_id View Post

Is it too late for you to return the NHT's as they have free return shipping.. Then perhaps you could try the 4's ?

Yeah, way too late to return.

I may still keep them though - I really like them alot. Problem is that I like the Boston VS260 alot too... It may come down to which center I prefer.

The Fours are way over budget, and too big (deep) for my space. Given my room layout constraints, I think I'm better off with Three's, and saving up for a better sub than the Emotiva Ultra 12 I have now.
Reply
Reply
post #10079 of 10247
6/2/12 at 10:52am
Speaking of Fours, according to NHT's facebook page, apparently they average selling a pair of Fours per day. I was surprised that the figure is that high. It seems like CavCham is the only one here at AVS who has them.
Reply
Reply
post #10080 of 10247
6/2/12 at 10:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphaiii View Post

Yeah, way too late to return.

I may still keep them though - I really like them alot. Problem is that I like the Boston VS260 alot too... It may come down to which center I prefer.

The Fours are way over budget, and too big (deep) for my space. Given my room layout constraints, I think I'm better off with Three's, and saving up for a better sub than the Emotiva Ultra 12 I have now.

The Boston VS260s and the VS325C are a phenomenal front stage for only $780 shipped.

I also agree about the Fours price. For one thing, it seems like they're never on sale for less than $2000 per pair, and you can get Threes on stands (or Absolute Towers) with dual B-12d subs for the same money or even less.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › New NHT Classic line to replace Super Audio