i have owned in the past the nht super zeros, super ones, 1.5's, nht subs, and the 2.9's. i would opt for the 1.5's with a warm sounding amp, like mcintosh, or classe. most nht's tilt to the 'cool' side.
NHT SuperOne vs. 1.3 vs. 1.5?
Picked up some NHT SuperOnes and although not 100%, I'm finding them delightful.
The SuperOne uses a soft dome tweeter and paper woofer.
The 1.3 uses a composite (polycone perhaps?) woofer, but retains the soft dome tweeter.
The 1.5 uses the composite woofer as well, but swaps to a metal dome tweeter as supplied in the upper-range models, re: 2.5, 3.3, etc.
As I already own a pair of NHT subwoofers, and am contemplating a downsizing in the near future, I will not be pursuing anything bigger than a pair of 1.5s.
My question is whether anyone has an opinion on the paper vs. composite cone of the NHT SuperOne vs. 1.3?
And much more important to me, the soft dome vs. metal dome.
Although I enjoy the metal domes in my Thiels and rare-ish Baltek 30s, and my friend's Mission 750LEs, I admit I can easily me fatigued by them- the reason for my switch to B&K amplification.
Your opinions are much appreciated.
The SuperOne uses a soft dome tweeter and paper woofer.
The 1.3 uses a composite (polycone perhaps?) woofer, but retains the soft dome tweeter.
The 1.5 uses the composite woofer as well, but swaps to a metal dome tweeter as supplied in the upper-range models, re: 2.5, 3.3, etc.
As I already own a pair of NHT subwoofers, and am contemplating a downsizing in the near future, I will not be pursuing anything bigger than a pair of 1.5s.
My question is whether anyone has an opinion on the paper vs. composite cone of the NHT SuperOne vs. 1.3?
And much more important to me, the soft dome vs. metal dome.
Although I enjoy the metal domes in my Thiels and rare-ish Baltek 30s, and my friend's Mission 750LEs, I admit I can easily me fatigued by them- the reason for my switch to B&K amplification.
Your opinions are much appreciated.