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

Showing 1 response by kjohntsg

I haven't heard the NHTs, but I own a pair of the CDM9NTs and I have been very happy with them. I listen mainly to classic jazz, rock, and classical in that order, with some country and R&B thrown in for good measure.

In my opinion, the CDM9s do a good job of presenting the music accurately without getting too bright or forward. They do equally well with recordings that feature plenty of horns (such as Coltrane's Blue Train) or those that feature piano and bass (Keith Jarrett's Live at the Blue Note). They also do well with large orchestral pieces (I just got Kleiber's recording of Beethoven's Fifth, and it sounds fantastic). They stay very composed as the volume increases and don't break up until you reach truly loud listening levels.

As for the bass issue, I went with the CDM9s rather than the CDM7s because they do a significantly better job with the bass. I run mine off a Denon AVR-4802 (would like to add a separate amp in the future, but this works fine right now). They are two months old and they keep getting better as they break in. No buyer's remorse here.