New NHT Classic line to replace Super Audio - Page 2

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:

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

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

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.