2. speakers
  3. 1014991317

NHT 2.9 or B&W CDM9NT

Yes I know, what a strange pairing. I have listened to both, and they are very, very different. The problem is, I liked both of them very much. So what's a guy to do?

Maybe if any of you that have heard both (owned both?) were to comment on your experience, it might reinforce or clarify my own thoughts.

I like most all music, but mostly classical (both chamber and orchestral), jazz (acoustic and electronic), some pop rock, etc. No head banging for me, but I must admit I ruled out my favorites, the Maggie 1.6QR because of the lack of bass. I would like to stay in the low $2k range, and to add a good sub to the Maggies puts it out of range.

Oh yes - I am waiting to purchase amp/pre-amp until I decide on speakers, but I plan on spending around $1,500 for an amp (I prefer tubes, but with these speakers I may have to opt for ss).

Your thoughts are very welcome and appreciated.
seldenr
viggen
817 posts
 
Hey,

It is easier to go with NHT since they are much easier to match with amps and other components. NHT are more efficent and has less "garbage in garbage out" syndrome. Many people who have NHT floor standing speakers merely use AV receivers with great results. When my non audiophile friends, actually none of my friends are, ask me to recommend speakers, I always tell them to audition NHT.

In a more perfect scenario, using a high quality high current amp and a high resolution source component, I'd go with CDM series. Then again, if I got the dollars to afford this "perfect scenario", I'd go with KEF Reference, Vandersteens, Von Schweikerts, Theils, Dunlavy, or.... I don't know, Tannoy?
jsbail
320 posts
 
I had 2.9's for a year. They will play vary loud and have great bass. 2.9's are an extremely revealing speaker, and I found they make poor recordings hard to listen to. They sound great from the sweet spot with good quality recordings. From the next room they sound like a boom box on top of a subwoofer. They need alot of power. I used Classe electronics (ca200), and Harmonic-Tech cables. I have Proac 3.8's now and can listen to my poorly recorded classic rock again and still enjoy it. At three times the price it is not a fair comparison. I still miss the 2.9's when I pump up the volume.
dave1515
1 posts
 
I too compared the 2.9 to the B&W. Yes both are great, I was leaning toard the 2.9. But then I found Maggies and they are the best for accoustical music! Get the Maggies and when you save up a few hundred, get a fast tight 8 inch sub.
jack_dotson
210 posts
 
Your going to kick your self for not getting he Maggie's. I've heard the others (owned the NHT 2.5's)and there not in the same league as the 1.6's IMO. You can add a good sub later and you could also spend less on the amp and have money for a sub. A good sub need not be expensive. I'm using a SVS 20-39Pi and it blends very well so long as you keep the crossover below 60Hz, and I've seen post from others who have used even cheaper subs with good results.
More to discover