2. speakers
  3. 1041043491

NHT 2.3A vs. NHT 3.3 original model

Just curious to hear if anyone has ever compared these two speakers. I know that the 3.3 has to have much greater bass extension and power, but I'm wondering if there are any significant differences in the midrange and treble, and how the imaging and soundstaging compares between the two models.

By "original model," I mean the 3.3 with the soft-dome tweeters, not the newer metal ones.

I've recognized the fact that I need to upgrade my amplification -- just wondering if I will need to upgrade my speakers in the near future, too, and need to take that into account when buying a new amp, or if the 2.3As will be good enough, so I just have to worry about getting an amp that makes THEM sound as good as possible.

Thanks!

Pat
tsrart

Showing 3 responses by bigtee

bigtee
803 posts
 
You can't even start to compare these two speakers. There is NO comparison. The 3.3 is in an entirely different class. The 2.3 was a very average speaker for the time.
A realistic comparison would be the 2.3 vs the 2.5 which it still comes out on the loosing end.
bigtee
803 posts
 
Pat, the 3.3 bettered the 2.3 in every area. The 2.3 is not on the same playing field. The 3.3 is more open, has better highs, has a better midrange and MUCH better bass. The 2.5 is a better speaker than the 2.3. It betters the 2.3 in transparency, midrange definition and bass.
The reason I didn't get more specific is there is actually not a lot there to get specific with. It is a apple vs a grape comparison.
The 3.3 will play much, much louder.
You can go to an old Stereophile (look at their web sight) and read the review on the 3.3. It was a "B" rated speaker. The 2.3 was a poor "D" rated speaker at best. So, think of any audiophile term and the 3.3 betters it!
The 2.3 was one of NHT's initial products. They got a lot better with time.
Yes, I have owned all 3. I still have the 3.3's and the 2.5's in a home theater application.
The only area where the 2.3 betters the 3.3 is it doesn't require as much power to operate.
bigtee
803 posts
 
In the mid to late 90's, NHT really began to build some decent products. The 2.3 upgrade was a relatively modest change. The 3.3 was a statement product. The 2.5 was an excellent product along with the Super 1 and Super Zero. The 2.9 gave about 90% of the performance of the 3.3 at a lot less money(although I personally thought it was somewhat bright and more closed in) Then they upgraded the 2.5 to the 2.5i with the metal dome tweeters debut. It was considered a great buy for the money.
In all, the 2.3A wasn't a bad speaker. It just wasn't up to the level of performance of the newer entries. A more fair comparison would have been between the 2.3A and the 2.5. I would still choose the 2.5 but they are closer. Hope this helps.
I have been and continue to be a fan of NHT. I think they make some excellent products for the money. The Super 1(or even the super zero) and a good sub like the SW3Pi made for a relatively inexpensive system with great performance. This combo bettered the 2.3A by a substantial margin.
Some of NHT's latest stuff like the SB3 has been getting some really good press.
More to discover