Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
November 20, 2006 - 7:25pm
#1
NHT Three review errata.......
Loudspeakers Amplification | Digital Sources Analog Sources Featured | Accessories Music |
Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | Analog Sources Accessories Featured | Music Columns Retired Columns | Show Reports | Features Latest News Community | Resources Subscriptions |
Brainfade on our part. Thanks for the correction.
The other text was fine as is, however.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Heckuva "brainfade"
But seriously? That paragraph makes no sense, not grammatically, not contextually, not logically. He's saying that the Nola is better in some ways, "however" better than NHT's strengths, which are supposedly dynamics, resolution and bass. This isn't supported by measurements either. If this is true, then that means the Nola is a much better speaker in every way for $100 less, so why would he then praise the NHT for being so good at the things in which the Nola is better? Makes *no* sense.
Could RJR weigh in on this, I don't think you're following my logic here.
Also:
It's smaller, and while it is still a sealed-box, acoustic-suspension design, the Three is a three-way speaker with a
John Ashman is right about the paragraph comparing the Nola Mini and the NHT Three: The language is, at best, muddy. RJR should clarify.
I have to agree, BIG TIME! RJR should clarify his comments in his comparison of the sound of the Classic Three's relative to the Nola's. I am now in the market for this class of speaker and currently doing my research. Mr. Atkinson, at the request of two enthusiasts, how come you never asked RJR to clarify his thoughts on the above quote? Now a third Stereophile reader is asking for clarification. One of the most important paragraphs in the entire write-up makes no sense. Hmmm, maybe you don't want it to make sense. Maybe this you your convoluted way of not saying anything negative about a product. Picking an out right winner might not be good for business. Please prove us wrong. Please request that RJR provide us with additional feedback. Thanks in advance!
Scott
I think you guys are letting the use of 'however' confuse your reading of the paragraph. He's talking about the Nola's virtues and not that of the NHT's.
It reads something like this; The NHTs were good, but the Nolas were also good and even better than the NHTs in these respects.
The use of "however" was not intended as a substitution for "but."
Exactly so, Monty. Thank you.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
WOW! I can't believe someone read my post on this old thread
Ok, I was 99% sure I knew what he was trying to say, ie. that the NHT were good but not as good as the Nola's. The issue the three of us had was that he never just came right out and said so. So we asked if he could clarify his statement. Obviously it was the way he used the word "however". Usually the word "however" is used to introduce a statement contrasting with a previous one, such as, "on the other hand"....or to introduce a restricting or counterbalancing consideration. It doesn't seem as though there is any contrast in his statement. It would have been more clear if he just left out the word "however". 'Guess I better find a retailer in my area who sells the Nola's.
Cheers!
St
Shoot! Just went to the Accent Speakers Technology website and it looks as though they no longer offer the Mini. At least the website doesn't show it under the "Products" section.
St
Mr. Atkinson, I know this is a crazy question, but how do you think the NHT Classic 3 compares to the B&W 805? I know there is a HUGE cost difference. Do you think the extra $1,500 is worth it for the 805's. Thanks!
St