NHT Tower Speakers
NHT VT-2
These were NHT's flagship towers in the mid/late 90s, until replaced by VT-2.4 which look to use the same cabinet and the same drivers but add a rear array of tweeter + midrange for the video setting instead of changing the crossover points and slopes like VT-2 do.
These are large speakers, larger than Definitive BP7002. Unlike Definitive towers the NHT VT-2 is a passive design, meaning they doesn't have amplifiers that can go bad. VT-2 can be bi-amped, with the lower binding posts driving the subwoofers, and subwoofer volume should be effectively controllable on the amplifier.
Initial listening impressions in the seller's garage: very nice, sound similar to the BP supertowers. Excellent low frequency extension, excellent clarity in midrange and treble.
Listening impressions when I first installed the speakers in the living room: harsh treble and midrange that doesn't draw me into the music. Very sibilant treble. Bass is OK, I think the 10" driver should've been a 12" or even larger - Definitive fits a 15" driver into a cabinet that is 18" deep, same as the VT-2, and Definitive's 12" driver towers (BP2002/BP7002) are only 16" deep. The bass is there but doesn't extend as far down as Definitive 12" subwoofer bass. Somewhat similar bass sound to the BP7004 which has a 10" subwoofer, and which I find slightly too hot in the upper bass but also lacking low frequency extension compared to BP7002.
I had the speakers initially positioned the width of a 50" TV apart, with the subwoofer drivers facing outward. This in theory should have produced the best bass dispersion. I did have them back against a wall in this position.
Listening impressions after bi-amping and moving the speakers further apart, which also gave them more space behind: Treble sibilance is reduced, the speakers are now much less offensive. Midrange engagement I think increased somewhat but is still not as good as Wharfedale Emerald or Definitive BP7002. The VT-2 have a very concentrated presentation dead in the center, unlike Definitives which are spread out significantly more. BP7002 have a deeper and wider sound, VT-2 sound appears to very prominently come out exactly from the TV in between the speakers. This is happening even with VT-2 placed almost against BP7002 on the inside, i.e. at a similar separation. The treble of VT-2 is still harsher than that of BP7002, and the midrange of VT-2 is not as full as that of BP7002. BP7002 has a lower bass extension as well.
I haven't found VT-2 to be generally boomy given a flat EQ (i.e., when they are bi-amped, without bumping the subwoofer level compared to the mid/high frequency drivers). When I placed VT-2s adjacent to BP7002, with VT-2 subwoofers firing into the Definitive cabinets, the subwoofer sound became somewhat boomy but I consider this a placement issue and not a speaker defect. With that said, because BP700x speakers have subwoofer drivers on both sides, I do consider them easier to place to get good sound out of them compared to VT-2 which have subwoofer drivers on one side of the cabinet only.
Based on my listening tests, I believe BP7002 is superior to VT-2 in all regards: treble airiness, treble pleasantness, treble legibility, midrange depth, midrange clarity, bass fullness, LF extension. The two speakers could be considered comparable in bass slam but BP7002's bass slams lower. Additionally, BP7002 is a smaller speaker (same width as VT-2, smaller depth and smaller height). The smaller depth of BP7002 permits it to be better placed: either further away from listening position or further away from the wall with the same distance from listening position. Shallower depth of BP7002 is also helpful for toeing the speaker in, though I found this to be unnecessary. The points in favor of VT-2 are 1) a flat top, making it possible to place other objects on top of the speakers, and 2) a completely passive design, leading to impossibility of amplifier failure which is unfortunately common with Definitive powered towers.
While testing the VT-2s I was once again impressed with how insensitive the BP7002 are to being cramped - they still produced superior sound after being surrounded on 3 sides by walls or other speakers.
Listening impressions after switching left & right speakers so that subwoofers are facing inward, tweeters are toward the outside, still bi-amped: the soundstage expanded to be beyond the TV in width, I'd say its width approximately doubled. Still a very strong centering of all sound. Treble became even less harsh, probably because I now am slightly off-axis for the tweeters. I did not notice a change in the midrange. With the speakers still toed in, bass output nearly disappeared - it is now projecting to the sides and behind the speakers, very clearly audible when standing next to the speakers, but is canceling at the listening position. What bass is present at listening position was boomy. LF extension was gone completely, speakers sound like small towers with 6.5" woofers like the AR 2262PS I have.
All of the above tests were done with the A/V switch in the A position. In the V position the midrange does sound a bit more spread out I would say.
Amanda strongly preferred very centered sound and forward vocals and had a strong preference for VT-2 over BP7002.
NHT VT-2.4
These are the replacement for VT-2. As luck would have it, literally two days after I bought my pair of VT-2 I saw a pair of VT-2.4 for sale. Since I wasn't completely thrilled with VT-2, I thought I'd try the newer VT-2.4.
I originally mistakenly thought that VT-2.4 was a VT-2 with the rear driver array added. In reality, the only elements that are shared between VT-2 and VT-2.4 are the cabinets (at least from the outside), the A/V mode switch and perhaps the subwoofer drivers. The front tweeter is an aluminum unit on the VT-2.4 and a soft dome on the VT-2, although the spec sheet for the VT-2.4 says it has a soft dome tweeter; the rear tweeter on the VT-2.4 looks to be the same as the tweeters on VT-2 and is in fact a soft dome. Mid-woofers are different drivers.
Mid-woofers on VT-2.4 are slightly larger but still well short of the claimed 5.25" diameter. They use inverted dust caps unlike the VT-2 mid-woofers which use the ordinary dust caps. Mid-woofers are further away from each other, moving the tweeter closer to the center of the cabinet (although it is still offset). The tweeter offset is flipped so that the tweeter is on the same side of the cabinet as the subwoofer driver.
I placed the VT-2.4 in the same position where VT-2 worked, which was approximately in the middle between the TV edge and the outer walls (which technically were the BP7002 towers), thus VT-2.4 were about 1.5 feet away from the outside edges of the TV and 1.5 feet away from BP7002s. The subwoofers were pointing outward as they were for VT-2s.
Listening impressions: the treble is significantly less offensive, I would say it's no longer offensive at all. The sibilance is gone and the clarity is good. I wonder why the rear drive array utilizes the soft dome tweeter used in the previous generation speakers (the VT-2) - cost-saving measure or NHT trying to use up their existing driver stock?
Compared to BP7002, VT-2.4 still lack midrange. I don't think the issue is that BP7002 have excessive midrange, since I have BBE processing on which boosts bass and treble, and generally I don't like the "warm" sound of pre-2000 receivers that did have more midrange. Perhaps VT-2.4 are voiced similarly to Wharfedale Emerald EM99 MKIV, which have a midrange dip, to provide a more "modern" sound from the pre-2000 warm receivers/amplifiers.
Similarly to VT-2, VT-2.4 also have a very center-focused sound. They have a much narrower soundstage compared to BP7002. They may be slightly better than VT-2 in this regard but with VT-2.4 the sound still largely appears to come from the TV, whereas with BP7002 I perceive it to come from much of the front wall of the room. The sound is much deeper with BP7002 compared to VT-2.4.
My biggest problem with the VT-2.4 is that they sound flat (in the sense of lacking depth and width) and unengaging, compared to BP7002. Given that VT-2.4 are physically larger than BP7002, require 4 channels of amplification to drive rather than 2, and aren't as engaging, I think they are markedly inferior to BP7002.
In terms of pricing, VT-2.4 go for similar money on the used market as BP7004 which I find close to BP7002 but not quite as good as far as low frequency extension is concerned. Between BP7004 and VT-2.4 the choice is perhaps less clear but the obvious solution is to get larger Definitive towers (or older ones like BP2002TL).