Very detail sounds: Strong bass, good mid. Excellent in build and attractive appearance.

Soundstaging & imaging. Bass extension.

None

I had been looking for a full range speaker that was not going to break my bank. I auditioned several before deciding on the Paradigm 9se. I got home and hooked 'em up to my Acurus 150/B&K Pro-10MC/Nakamichi MB2s system, and found the 9ses incredibly flat & dead sounding. I returned them and bought a pair of NHT 2.5s. The difference was astounding. Soundstaging was no longer compressed. The treble sang. The bass thumped. I've used them for 7 years and have no intention of replacing them anytime soon.

Similar Products Used:

Paradigm, JBL, Polk, Boston Acoustics, Tannoy

Excellent resolution of midrange detail. Superb bass. A value.

None at this price.

I have these speakers "tri-amped" via addition of one NHT SA-2 subwoofer amplifier per speaker. The result is extraordinary. Substantial bass, but the midrange opened up too to reveal remarkable detail in middle voices (2nd violin & viola in the classical orchestra). Wow! The improved detail may have resulted from the subs removing much of the burden from the main amp (an old Harman/Kardon separate). However: my source is the Denon LA-3500 LD/CD player which is quite sweet (price was $2300 few years back). I suspect that these speakers would emphasize the sonic limitations of low-end components and cables.

Similar Products Used:

NHT SA-2 Subwoofers

I used to work at an audio store that carried NHT, Carver, and Dahlquist, among others. I auditioned the NHT 2.5 extensively and finally bought a pair. At the store, driven by Sunfire and Carver amps, I felt that they had sharp, pinpoint imaging, but compared to the $2700 Dahlquist DQ32 I felt the NHT was a little drier and a bit forward and threadbare. Compared to the Carver AL3 ribbons, the NHT had MUCH better bass- more extended and more defined. However, I still felt them to be a bit flat and forward compared to the $2000 Carvers. What made me decide to get them was their good value for the money.At home I power them with a Rotel amp amd am generally satisfied. They go louder than I care to push them, despite their modest sensitivity. The imaging is precice but the soundstage is a bit flat. They can be a bit forward in the upper midrange, but where these speakers shine is in treble extention, bass quality and extention, and dynamics, which are all better than average at this price.
This review is of the older 2.5, not the 2.5i which I have not heard yet.

Very detailed sound, good sound stage.

Not an efficient speaker. Make sure you have enough power to drive these speakers.

I replaced the Klipsch's with the NHT's. Initially with the NHT's, I noticed much more detail, but less dynamacism and sound staging than with the Klipshchs'. My first thought was that this means that the NHT's are better for music as you hear more detail and specific sounds but that home theatre use may be less enjoyable as the NHT's just don't appear to produce the same level of sound stage, dynamics and general openess as the Klipschs. It turns out that this effect is due to the greater efficiency of the Klipsch's which would consequently allow them to produce much more volume, greater sound staging, etc. with the same amount of power. However, since I have recently replaced my 70 watt receiver (Sony 333ES) with one possessing greater power (Harmon Kardon 7000 @ 105 watts) the issues of dynamics and sound staging between the two sets of speakers are greatly reduced. Now I am enjoying the greater detail of the NHT's with the dynamacism and sound staging that I hoped that I would have originally attained with these speakers.

The good news is that the NHT's are amoung the most accurate speakers I have ever heard. And with adequate power they produce good dynamics and sound staging. In fact, the only sets of speakers I would rate more accurately than the NHT's would be some of the electrostatic speakers such as Martin-Logan, etc. But the Martin-Logan's and some of the other electrostatic speakers are in a much higher price range, so the comparison may not be fair.

All in all, I rate these speakers highly for accuracy. However, do note carefully that they are not efficient speakers and will require large amounts of power to produce good dynamics and an impressive sound stage. Moreover, while they produce some bass, I would recommend the use of a subwoofer, particularly for HT. (Probably do not need a subwoofer for music, only.)

Similar Products Used:

Klipsch KG 4.2; Baby Advents

good detail, large sound stage, good placement of instruments in soundspace, articulate bass

poor transparency, imaging for vocals not so good

I purchased a used pair of 2.5 in hopes of getting a bargain and better sound than what the Supertwos offered. After listening for a few days, I've found trade-offs. Lucky I paid the same price!

The good:

The 2.5 has better placement of instruments and creates a bigger soundstage. Highs are more prestine. Mid-bass and low notes have better articulation and rhythm, all weak points with the Supertwo.

The bad:

All of a sudden a veil has been cast over the music. My fiance calls this muffled sound. I call it lack of transparency. The Supertwos are brand new year 2001 speakers with new technology and drivers. The 2.5 are 6 years old and I can see that NHT has moved on with R&D to create a superb speaker in the Supertwo. The SP2s are dynamic and transparent while the 2.5 are laid back and articulate and rhythmic. Vocal imaging also is a bit less congrete as the SP2s.

Each has strengths and I'm sure the newer 2.5s have got to be better than the current SP2.

I guess I'll live with the 2.5s for now, unless someone wants to buy them from me? dancetracks@yahoo.com

Associated Equipment:
Audio Alchemy transport/filter stuff feeds Theta Cobalt to passive attenuators to Muse 100 amp. All interconnects Kimber KCAG and 8TC to the speakers. I may try 4TC soon to see if that'll help with imaging on the 2.5.

Similar Products Used:

NHT Superzero and Supertwo

I spend a lot of time jumping around to all the local Audio/Video stores listening to speakers and checking out what's new. I've listened to many types. ie.B&W,Definitive Technology,Jamo,Boson, Klipsch, and many more. I have owned a pair of NHT 2.5's for about 2 years now and have yet to find a pair of speakers at any price that can match them. They're clean ,crisp,and have decent bass. If your looking for a great pair of speakers, I would check these out. Most stores want at least $1200.00. If you can get them for under a $1000.00 your doing pretty good. I got mine for $850.00 from a guy in Lake Oswego, Oregon, but I dought you'll ever find a deal that good. Good Luck with your Audio adventures. Mike

I bought my pair used about 2 years ago for $650. They were a steal at that price, since there wasn't anything else readily available used for that price that would have come close in sound quality. The imaging is so precise, and the soundstage can be quite deep with good electronics. The bass extension is superb for 8 inch woofers! My previous speaks had 10 inchers and these NHTs still blow them away. Bass output is very dependent on how closely you put them to the wall, of course. I have them 6 inches away, which is closer than the factory's recommendation. In some rooms that would cause overwhelming bass I think, but since they flank a fireplace here this placement is necessary. If you are not a bass freak who plays movies at THX reference level (which is deafeningly loud and damaging to your ears) then you will not need a sub to enjoy home theater. My main complaint about these speakers is the lack of warmth for vocals. Both male and female singers sound disembodied and tinny. I've been told that this has been improved with the 2.5i. (But the degree to which this is a problem is also probably dependent on the room they're in.) I am driving them with an Adcom GFA-6000 5-channel amp (100watt RMS). Not the greatest combo. Adcom is too forward for NHT. It's enough wattage, but I wouldn't drive these speakers with any less power than that. I have heard a number of NHT models, and they are very neutral - BUT... they can tend towards forwardness with most electronics. I would strongly recommend a warm-sounding amplifier/receiver with their speakers (Parasound amps for example). I currently have Super Zeroes for center and surround duties. It's a good overall match. Super Zeroes have the warm vocal sound that the 2.5 is missing, so they make a good center channel speaker. If you are a theater freak then I would suggest you instead look at Super Ones all around with a matching sub. Music fans should stick with NHT tower speakers (2.5i, 2.9, 3.3).

Clarity

Have used the NHT 2.5 speakers with various integrated amps and have never been disappointed with the speakers. I enjoy the clarity of sound that the 2.5's produce. For the price, $700 at a clearance sale, it would be hard to find better speakers.

Great buy, amazing sound

Bass not low enough for HT, slight upper-midrange peak

I purchased these over a year ago for around $500 on ebay and am very happy with them. One of those speakers that makes you think "I can't wait to here XXX recording, everything sounds amazing." Great bass for an 8" woofer, very fast and uncolored, however they do roll-off at the extreme bottom end. The midrange is very nice except for an upper-midrange peak that either makes recordings sound very detailed (at best) or slightly nasal (at worst). Smooth highs, overall a well-balanced tonal response that just dishes out what is input into them. I feel that due to their very flat response curve, the presentation is a bit laid back, especially, with older analog recordings. This isn't a necessarily a complaint, just a contrast to other more "in you face" speakers that I have auditioned. The only other issue is thelack of efficiency. I upgraded to an Adcom GFA 555 (200/channel) and would say that type of low current power is required if you like concert hall sound levels.

Similar Products Used:

B&W, Infinity, Polk, Energy