A rare comparison

[RoyFJ]

A good detailed comparison between the old and the new namely the NS1000M vs the NS5000. With the cost factor, ideally it should have been the NS-10000 vs the 5000 but this gives you an idea. Its in Japanese so use google translation and ideally via your sound equipment, not your PC speakers.

 

[gizzyman47]

I thought the ns-5000 sounded smoother and more cohesive as a whole. Just easier to listen to. Guess I'll have to just be happy with my NS-1000m's. For what the 5000's cost I think I did good at $650.

 

[RoyFJ]

I feel the mids are better with more presence in the NS 1000Ms over the 5000 but overall, the 5000 more balanced.

 

[Mark B]

I feel the mids are better with more presence in the NS 1000Ms over the 5000 but overall, the 5000 more balanced.

From your description it sounds like the NS-5000 sounds more like the NS-1000x. IMO the NS-1000x sounds more well rounded than the NS-1000M.

The NS-2000 is in a different league than the NS 1000 series speakers.

 

[RoyFJ]

From your description it sounds like the NS-5000 sounds more like the NS-1000x. IMO the NS-1000x sounds more well rounded than the NS-1000M.

The NS-2000 is in a different league than the NS 1000 series speakers.

Both have carbon fiber woofers over the plain paper woofer of the 1000M and my opinion was on the mids, I preferred the life in the NS1000M over the 5000 but overall, the 5000 with its Zylon woofers with better more rigid cabinet design. The right comparison would have been with the NSX-10000 with the 5000.

 

[808_state]

Own NS-1000x, NS-2000 & NSF-901. Additionally have spent adequate time with NSX-10000's and NS-5000's to characterize them. While they are nice and well built speakers, the NS-5000's fail to impress over the 2000's or 10000's. The first time I heard them I was honestly shocked that they really didn't sound $10,000 better than the NSF-901''s. It honestly made me feel better about owning 901's.

 

[RoyFJ]

Personally I will give the edge to beryllium over Zylon science notwithstanding.

 

[rottalpha]

Both have carbon fiber woofers over the plain paper woofer of the 1000M and my opinion was on the mids, I preferred the life in the NS1000M over the 5000 but overall, the 5000 with its Zylon woofers with better more rigid cabinet design. The right comparison would have been with the NSX-10000 with the 5000.

heck no. The ported box of the 5000s is where they lost me. The NS-2k is a way better speaker. The NSX-10k wins in cool factor over all of them but at the end of day the NS-2k is a better speaker than both.

 

[rottalpha]

From your description it sounds like the NS-5000 sounds more like the NS-1000x. IMO the NS-1000x sounds more well rounded than the NS-1000M.

The NS-2000 is in a different league than the NS 1000 series speakers.

and I will add, also than the 5Ks speakers. For the 5k they should have stayed with a sealed box and beryllium.

 

[RoyFJ]

NSX10000 and GF-1 being the ultimate in the series, 2000 was a good step up with better mid and woofer than the 1000M. The new NS5000 is among the best sounding speakers in the market currently and well rounded offering but my tilt in comparison would be for he NSX-10000. GC beryllium being the difference. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0039914068800116 The ported woofer in the 5000 gives it a low extension not possible with sealed design.

 

[808_state]

NSX10000 and GF-1 being the ultimate in the series, 2000 was a good step up with better mid and woofer than the 1000M. The new NS5000 is among the best sounding speakers in the market currently and well rounded offering but my tilt in comparison would be for he NSX-10000. GC beryllium being the difference. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0039914068800116 The ported woofer in the 5000 gives it a low extension not possible with sealed design.

Having heard both 2000's and 10000's hooked to the same system in the same room for many hours, the difference in sound between the two is incredibly marginal. The 10000's might sound a few millimeters sweeter but that's about it and they don't dig as deep in the low end as the 2000's. Much like NS-690's, at the going price 2000's are an incredible value in Hifi.

 

[rottalpha]

NSX10000 and GF-1 being the ultimate in the series, 2000 was a good step up with better mid and woofer than the 1000M. The new NS5000 is among the best sounding speakers in the market currently and well rounded offering but my tilt in comparison would be for he NSX-10000. GC beryllium being the difference. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0039914068800116 The ported woofer in the 5000 gives it a low extension not possible with sealed design.

Roy, you are reciting marketing specs to people that actually heard most of these speakers with the exception of the GF-1s.

The "extended" bass you call out in the NS-5k felt like "boomi" bass to me when I listened to them, when referenced with what I expected to hear based on the NS-2000 experience, which provides a very precise bass that feels like a cannon ball. The ported box of the 5Ks is not a plus as you might think. The temporal coherence of the NS-5Ks is good but not near as tight as that of the NS-2ks and frankly I do not think the cabinets themselves were as sturdy as the NS-2k (read more cabinet resonance than I expected).
I tried to like the 5000 set because I was genuinely interested. I tried multiple times but the conclusion was the same: The NS-2000 is a better speaker. The Centennial amp or the vfet amps are miles better than the 5000 components.

Re: the NSX: The NSX-10000 are difficult to fault. The differentiating factor is the lows for me. The NS-2000s are better on the lows. The only reason I can think of why that is, is because the larger woofer of the NSX had to be tamed so that the temporal coherence with the rest of the drivers was retained. What I cannot explain is why Yamaha chose to increase the size of the woofer in the NSX.
Same as with the NS-5000s, the NSX is something I considered but ultimately decided against pursuing as a idea and it is not because the NS-2000s are a "better value" or "good enough", but because the NS-2000 are simply better for my liking.

Side note here: I am not totally honest about not having a Japanese NSX. I actually have a Japanese NSX for over 20 years and this is my "second set". The only difference is that my NSX is made by Honda and not by Yamaha.

Regarding the GF-1 which are supposed to be the best thing after milk and honey, that no one here actually heard as far as I know:
I would be lying if I said I do not desire owning a set BUT, these are active speakers powered by supposedly very good class A amps, YET, I do not see that as a benefit since I imagine this would limit the ability to power them with my other beloved amps.

 

[808_state]

Roy, you are reciting marketing specs to people that actually heard most of these speakers with the exception of the GF-1s.

The "extended" bass you call out in the NS-5k felt like "boomi" bass to me when I listened to them, when referenced with what I expected to hear based on the NS-2000 experience, which provides a very precise bass that feels like a cannon ball. The ported box of the 5Ks is not a plus as you might think. The temporal coherence of the NS-5Ks is good but not near as tight as that of the NS-2ks and frankly I do not think the cabinets themselves were as sturdy as the NS-2k (read more cabinet resonance than I expected).
I tried to like the 5000 set because I was genuinely interested. I tried multiple times but the conclusion was the same: The NS-2000 is a better speaker. The Centennial amp or the vfet amps are miles better than the 5000 components.

Re: the NSX: The NSX-10000 are difficult to fault. The differentiating factor is the lows for me. The NS-2000s are better on the lows. The only reason I can think of why that is, is because the larger woofer of the NSX had to be tamed so that the temporal coherence with the rest of the drivers was retained. What I cannot explain is why Yamaha chose to increase the size of the woofer in the NSX.
Same as with the NS-5000s, the NSX is something I considered but ultimately decided against pursuing as a idea and it is not because the NS-2000s are a "better value" or "good enough", but because the NS-2000 are simply better for my liking.

Side note here: I am not totally honest about not having a Japanese NSX. I actually have a Japanese NSX for over 20 years and this is my "second set". The only difference is that my NSX is made by Honda and not by Yamaha.

Regarding the GF-1 which are supposed to be the best thing after milk and honey, that no one here actually heard as far as I know:
I would be lying if I said I do not desire owning a set BUT, these are active speakers powered by supposedly very good class A amps, YET, I do not see that as a benefit since I imagine this would limit the ability to power them with my other beloved amps.

Heard GF-1's...but...my friend didn't have the dedicated amps that go with the speakers. He had a very creative setup of multiple MX-10000's to drive them. I don't know that I spent enough time listening to characterize them but just that the sound was very different and not what I expected. Apparently the amps are harder to find than the speakers themselves.

 

[rottalpha]

Heard GF-1's...but...my friend didn't have the dedicated amps that go with the speakers. He had a very creative setup of multiple MX-10000's to drive them. I don't know that I spent enough time listening to characterize them but just that the sound was very different and not what I expected. Apparently the amps are harder to find than the speakers themselves.

Great to hear and interesting.

 

[808_state]

Great to hear and interesting.

Honestly when a set of the amps came up on hifido a year or so ago I was shocked that they weren't offered to him. But I guess maybe there was another GF-1 owner higher up on the totem pole. Hopefully he gets the next set if and when they ever appear. I will say his pair is in really nice condition and doesn't have the corrosion on the badges that I've seen in pictures of other units.