Dynaudio Audience 52 plus HSU 2 sub or NHT 2.9 or

I used to own NHT 2.9’s, and while they can put out very tight bass if you have an amp that can handle them, I eventually sold mine after tiring of the overly aggressive top end. I had a solid state amp at the time that may have been a significant contributor to the problem though. Most comments that I’ve read on Vandie’s appear to indicate that they tend to err on the warmer side (perhaps someone else can verify this).

wdi, i was always curious about NHT after reading Corey Greenberg's rave up of the 3.3s in Stereohple, but somehow I thought that might be their limitations, that perhaps it could not transcend its design and execution limitations.

I wonder, it seems that people cite sonic pros and cons to both a sat/sub versus two unit approach. Besides the convenience and room placement advantages , is there strong reason to think that unless you spend relatively more on a 2 unit floorstander (e.g., more than a pair of used Vandersteen 2ces), the sub/sat can provide more overall image stability, tightness, and mid-bass and bass presence, than a good budget combo like the one mentioned above?

Perhaps then another version of my question is whether for $800-$1200 price range cited (as well the admittedly broad sonic conditions discussed so far), on the used market is a monitor/sat a better strategy than a larger stereo pair (and if the latter, what would people recommend [i'm pretty sure if i go the first way, i'll go with an original HSU VTF 2, though my current preference as to monitor, Dynaudio Audience 52s, is more unformed.

I have to admit that my intuition tends toward sat/sub, but I can't say I have any technical reason to think so (not that I am technical anyway).

Anyway, this is really helping so thanks again!

thank you Bob, again your excellent advice reinforces my intuition...i am much more comfortable with my decision now.
It would seem that relatively much money must be spent on a floorstander to avoid these limitations and transcend the advantages of the monitor/sub approach?

very interesting, thanks again