NHT Model II Towers

Griffinconst,
$100 bucks is a no brainer to try them out.
Go for it!!!
Todd

from the web:
Model 2 1988 - 1990 1" + 6.5" + 2 x 6.5" 40Hz - 22kHz 8 ohms 87dB 35W - 200W
haven't heard 'em myself, but nht is a well-regarded maker; as tooddn syas. hard to go wrong for a hundo.

Thanks guys, always appreciate the help.

I've had the II's and the 2.5i.

The II were veiled sounding by comparison to the 2.5i. They use a less accurate, more forgiving midbass driver than the 2.5i. The tweeter is a semi dome on the II and I quite liked its sound. The 2.5i has a metal dome tweeter that is more extended than the II's, but you're talking about the 2.5 speaker, which has the same tweeter as the NHT 1.3, which i've also owned. This tweeter is also more extended than the II's tweeter, but with the II's tweeter being more 'delicate' sounding, in a way (if that makes any sense).

As far as bass is concerned, the 2.5 and 2.5i have a single, inward firing 8" bass driver, in its own, ported enclosure(sealed off within the speaker from the upper drivers, from what i recall). The bass in the 2.5i is boomy, in my opinion, although does go down quite low and is certainly enough to circumvent the necessity of a subwoofer, in most cases, if driven with a suitable amp.

The II's bass drivers consist of two 6.5 inch drivers at the base of the speaker's front baffle, just off the floor. This provides a bass-coupling effect with the floor to assist in bass delivery. The II's are a closed design and are hence tighter in bass than the 2.5's, although they do not go as low in frequency.

Also, the II's cannot handle as much power or volume as the 2.5's can; my friends blew one of my midbass drivers on the II's when they were listening to music just a tad too loudly one evening (nowhere NEAR as loudly as the 2.5's could play with the same amps).

for 100 bucks, I would purchase the II's myself, provided the foam surround on the midrange driver is intact.

Oh, incidentally, I never really mentioned how they sound. The II's are quite tight sounding and have fairly strong pinpoint imaging, although not the most open sounding speaker in the world (although much better than most competitors of the day and still no slouch now).

The 2.5i was quite a bit more open sounding than the II, with its metal tweeter and more accurate midbass driver. The 2.5i's bass went lower, as stated earlier, but was more rounded and less accurate. I remedied this to some degree by making foam plugs that fit into the ports in the back. by adjusting the tightness of the plugs , I could adjust the bass fairly well for my purposes.

Both speakers image quite well and can provide a powerful, striking soundstage (not in the realm of 'spooky realistic', but quite good nonetheless).

With the right gear in the right room properly set up, either pairs of these speakers have potential to do very well.

(btw - the II's are to be used in a smaller room than the 2.5's. I had my 2.5i's in a room that was approx 10x15 or so and they were too much speaker. The II's probably would have been more at home in a room that size)