Are Harbeth S HL5's As Good As Reviewers Claim?

I've owned a pr of the HL-5s now for about four months. They have replaced Thiel CS7.2s. At first the difference was hard to get used to. But i dont think i could go back to the Thiels, or most other speakers. I dont find them to warm either. very neutral, sound very musical, big soundstage, I use a REL R505 subwoofer with them and theyhave me considering moving to the 40.1s. I listen to alot of techno, trance, rock, jazz, and dont find them boring at all. They dont have the leading edge or imaging the Thiels had, but as a hole offer a nicer presntation. They have me digging out alot of LPs i had given up on and enjoying them again.

I'm a big fan of the Tannoys. have heard three different tannoy systems recently, and could live with them. But i would not sell my SHL5s to make the move to them. (as i am sure the Tannoy owners would rather keep what they have)
The SHL5 are very much tube friendly.
Mine are now just over a year old. I have compared them to many speakers and it came down to the SHL5/REL system, and the vandersteen Quatro Wood when i bought these. i prefer the SHL5.
If I can ever afford (and feel the need) i would make the move to the 40.1s.
The only speakers I have heard in recent years that I thought were better were the Wilson Sashas and Vandersteen 5As. And even these were not better throughout the freq. range.
Depending on room size, IMO the only speaker i have heard in the SHL5 price range that I think is equal would be the maggie 3.6. However they will need much more $$$$ to get them to there best.
Anyway, that my take on the SHL5 and Harbeths in general.