Auditioned both speakers, 2.3A and 3.3. Could not afford the 3.3. I did buy 2.3A's. They are totally different speakers. If you can afford the 3.3's and can fit them into your room, buy them. The 2.3A wasn't that bad a performer. I personally feel that it bested any of the 2.5 series. It just needs a lot of good current. My speakers said 8 ohms on the back, but the manual stated 2.7 to 4 ohms nominal. They had extremely good bass down to around 35hz. I prefered the silk dome tweeter to the aluminum that replaced it. Just my opinion, the guy that I sold them to said that they were equal to his 2.9's in every respect, except for the bass extension.
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
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