nht vs cerwin vega

gmarcotte:
As Bigjow suggests, work with what you have. E-mail the people at Cerwin and ASK them about x-over modification to tame the sizzle.
As you suspect, the sound "imbalance" is x-over related and designed to be so.
Alternatively, check out a recent thread at AA -- "remember when CW were audiophile" or s/thing along those lines. Cheers

inscrutable, i suspected i may be loosing something in the mid bass region, i will go back to bi-amping with fullrange signal. at that point i could swap the sp wire at the speakers to give a full 100 watts to the mid-highs. ive been a little weary af just turning it up with no cliping indicater on the hk. i think i will also run the sp with just one amp like gregm suggested, both with the hk and then the carver only. thanks everybody for the comments!

Bigjoe-While I would like to make fun of a lot of equipment on Audiogon, I never do. Especially when it involves huge megabuck systems some of which in my experience sound like crap.
It was not clear from the original post that he owned this equipment. I thought he was contemplating a purchasing decision. It appears from his follow up post that he agrees that nht is a vastly superior speaker to cerwin vega for a hi-fi two channel system.
Furthermore saying that a speaker is designed for boom and sizzle is not necessarily an insult. An examination of how cerwin vega is marketed and where it is sold indictes it is directed toward the pop music market. It is no secret that recording engineers producing pop music bump up the bass and the high end. Thus for those who like this sound Cerwin Vega might be the preferred choice. Before dvd it was my experience that vhs hi-fi also followed this practice. Again making cerwin vega a good if not ideal choice. I had a boom and sizzle system when I was in college.

if it was just a question of ht, cw imho is a good choice due to low power amps in av recievers. no need to buy lots of amps and the subs are built in. if cw in not up to your standerds, klipsch should have something in their ref line that will need no more than 50 good watts. its what that first watt does that is important. for big sound in big rooms. ive been told the older cw with the 15 mated with 5 1000 wt mac monoblocks mades a pretty impreseve system. my wife did jump once when we were watching hero the other night, but when i had my re30 hooked to the front durring private ryan she was actually taking cover. just couldnt help but to think what it would be like with 5 of them. im shure 5 2.5i would sound good too just might need those mac mono blocks to do it

subs now getting full-range signal as inscrutable suggested. sounds better and im glad. ive been looking to upgrade to hk avr230 which has mono sub-out. but has all the pre amp out-puts i want for future power upgrade. ive been told the avr230 has a better sound than their more expenseve models. and i know from exp hk does not exagerate their power output.
after doing some more listening i noticed fm stereo got loud. i had been doing most of my listening with cd player. sat signal got loud. though i ussaly dont crank up the raido or sat signal up too loud cuz u never know what u are going to get. so i took a look behind my system and low and behold the cheepest patch cords u can get. i remember thinking to my self "where did all my good ones go". new ones will be in place tomorrow.