It doesn’t matter...it is a 2.5way crossed into a ribbon.
For every lower bass octave you force a driver into, you force 4 times the driver motion, not the greatest thing when it also has to multitask with the upper octaves, You also create a lot of unnecessary cabinet chaos when you do such things..i.e why bass management and subwoofers are as important or more important than a tweeter itself.
If my X6 can have a huge benefit with the right subwoofer pairing+integration, I would wager that the X3 would benefit even more.
Everything should sound fine as is (good enough for govt work), but, above mentioned explorations are for dudes who like to watch the jaw dropping of other hifi enthusiasts.
I get what you’re saying. My point was merely that the X3s can dig deeper than many would assume based on the spec sheet and driver complement. Even despite being a 2.5-way, it’s my experience that the X3s suffer less compression at high output than do speakers like the Revel F208s. The X series drivers can handle a lot of power. What many fail to understand is that a small driver that can remain linear over a long excursion length is sometimes better than a large woofer with limited excursion and poor motor control. Audiophiles forget that it was once common for a 10” driver to have a maximum power handling of 20 watts and a very short X-max.
As for subs, I am currently running an REL Carbon Special crossed over at about 35Hz. The two Rythmiks I had previously couldn’t keep pace with the X3’s woofers at all.
I can get the X3s to produce a 30Hz tone in my room.
It doesn’t matter...it is a 2.5way crossed into a ribbon.
For every lower bass octave you force a driver into, you force 4 times the driver motion, not the greatest thing when it also has to multitask with the upper octaves, You also create a lot of unnecessary cabinet chaos when you do such things..i.e why bass management and subwoofers are as important or more important than a tweeter itself.
If my X6 can have a huge benefit with the right subwoofer pairing+integration, I would wager that the X3 would benefit even more.
Everything should sound fine as is (good enough for govt work), but, above mentioned explorations are for dudes who like to watch the jaw dropping of other hifi enthusiasts.
@helomechI wasn't referring to you when I made the comment. I think our conversation was civilized and on point. I understand and respect what you like about the X3. You made your points without getting personal or nasty. There were other folks involved in that discussion who apparently have a lot of growing up to do :)
Regarding which speaker is better, we can continue to go around in circles with no good outcome. We all have our preferences and have a different priority scale when judging speakers. However, I'm still amazed by how so many people (not you) get so worked up over something as trivial as this. I mean, for god's sake, we're not talking about our children. Folks should lighten up a little :)
I have no interest or specific loyalty to Borresen or Harbeth, or any other speaker company for that matter. I have owned many great speakers and I prefer Harbeth over many others. I have zero expectation that others have to agree with me, nor do I get all emotional and confrontational when someone disses the speakers that I own. Who gives a damn!
However, I would like to point out the apparent hypocrisy in some of the posts made in this thread. We're told that unless you have owned and heard a particular speaker for over 500 hours, you have no right to comment. But the same folks have no qualms trashing another speaker, e.g. Harbeth, that they have never owned. Talk about talking from both sides of your mouth!
If Harbeth or other BBC speakers were inferior they would have died a long time ago. The audio industry is a harsh mistress. You don't survive this long if your product doesn't offer the extra value to at least a segment of the audiophile population. So I heard the X3 and still preferred Harbeth 40.2 over it. What's the big deal? These are my opinions and I have a right to share as long as I'm not misrepresenting anything. Lastly, if we are making this a requirement that you can only opine about a speaker that you have owned, 99% of the reviews and opinions will be null and void. Just sayin :)
Ultimately, I still preferred the Harbeth 40.2 because of better midrange, refinement and transparency. That seemed to offend a lot of folks though. Somehow, folks equate cool technology/drivers, buzzwords, etc. with better sound. That’s not always the case as most of us already know.
I wasn’t offended, only perplexed. Based on my auditions of 40.2s, it’s difficult for me to fathom how someone would come to the conclusion that they are the more refined and transparent speaker. That actually goes for any speaker I’ve heard that employs Textreme-based midwoofers—to my ears, all have performed at a higher level than any Harbeth I’ve encountered.
Still, it’s difficult to make definitive conclusions without hearing each speaker back-to-back in the same room, with the same ancillaries. Our auditory memories are not very reliable.
congratulations on your X3's!! I get to hear the Raidho D1.1 at axpona and always come away floored by how impressive they are. I just don't have the courage to spend $27k on a pair of bookshelves.
Some of the Spatial open baffle speakers, lots of lovers, lots of haters.
And it’s worth noting we do see a lot of these pop up on the used market, along with many Revels, KEFs and Harbeths. Apparently there are some for whom a flat line is not the end-all, be-all.
Step a) Get 2 kef kc62 subs. Face reality, the X3 small drivers are meant to do something else very good, not get you down to 20 hz and qualify as a full range speaker. It is also meant to be a sleek looking speaker, not some fat eye sore.
I can get the X3s to produce a 30Hz tone in my room.
The biggest problem with measurements like those conducted by Erin, is they don’t take into account room modes and reflections, and don’t reveal what a listener will actually hear at their seat. The upper bass boost is probably intended to offset the bass null that occurs around that frequency in a typical listening room when the speakers are otherwise placed for optimal imaging (away from walls). It just so happens that those nulls tend to be around 10dB in magnitude IME.
If anything, for me, Erin’s results are evidence that speaker measurements are much less useful for determining sound quality than I had long thought. That’s because the X3s at their “street price” are without question the best sounding <$10K speakers I’ve experienced.
Recently, I had a very brief audition of their new C1 standmounts. Despite the brevity of that experience, I could immediately tell the C1s are likely the best sounding standmount 2-way I’d ever heard. And that’s despite having owned/heard many textbook-measuring speakers in my time.
When you think about it, it’s kind of bizarre that the audiophile community puts so much gravity into the conclusions of two psychoacoustic researchers who were once colleagues. In contrast, there is a far greater body of research conducted on cholesterol, and yet the experts can’t seem to come to a consensus on which is bad/good etc. The same applies to a multitude of other subjects.
#3 the lack of dynamic range. I have read people state they can play very loud but the data strongly suggests otherwise. This would explain why the X6 is made. I thought there might be something special with the tweeter but it shows heavy compression too.
I was surprised to see those results, because the X3s can play louder without audible distortion than any speaker I’ve owned. They seem to have incredible dynamic range in my room.
Or, check it out, here’s an idea, buy another speaker that does not need subwoofers, and bass management, and equalizations, and certain streamers to sound good….there must still be some of these around, right?
Step a) Get 2 kef kc62 subs. Face reality, the X3 small drivers are meant to do something else very good, not get you down to 20 hz and qualify as a full range speaker. It is also meant to be a sleek looking speaker, not some fat eye sore.
Step b) Get a amp with "true bass management", such as a Yamaha R-N2000A. (Not sure what else is out there..maybe rotel michi, etc). Send everything 100 hz and under to the subs and 100 hz & above to the borresen bass drivers...watch the X3 drivers spring to life and do what they do best.
Step c) Get something like a Wiim ultra streamer with peq and adjust to taste (actually, this unit has bass management too). RME dacs have peq, etc...or you could go full prepro non-purist like deep_333 (a very very non-puritan guy).
Reason is.....Everyone’s psychoacoustically adjusted hearing is different. You won’t hear what Erin did and rest assured that hamster hears all kinds of things (that he claims is subjective listening) after he sees the measurements.
Step d) Watch your X3 slay and filet the Harbethany priced twice as much, the Fleetwoods priced twice as much, other BBC junkboxes and all kinds of other junk in the 10k, 20k, price bracket.
People that judge equipment ...never having that equipment in their Rig....sometimes only hearing it in a show set up or Never hearing it At All...and bashing it for unknown reasons ( maybe because that equipment gets EXCELLENT REVIEWS from people that are a lot smarter than YOU (MC)......Those feeble minded , non informed product bashers that spend all day on AGON forums and have nothing better to do with their time.than make un- informed comments on equipment they no nothing about, just to upset people, should just shutup and talk about something that they actually know something about and are Qualified to give an opinion ( good or bad) about such product.
Bottom Line : The people on this forum that own the X-3’s love them....The people that don’t own them are the ones that are trashing them. Buy a pair you cheapskates...listen to them....put 500 hrs. on them...Then if you bash them , you Might Have some Credibility! Until that happens, YOU DON’T. Roger, Over and Out .
Your bottom line is about the most foolish post ive read on this forum in quite some time..Maybe you should take your toys and go home.Jesus lets try acting like an adult because right now YOUR NOT..Roger ,over and out,lmao
Bottom Line : The people on this forum that own the X-3’s love them....The people that don’t own them are the ones that are trashing them. Buy a pair you cheapskates...listen to them....put 500 hrs. on them...Then if you bash them , you Might Have some Credibility! Until that happens, YOU DON’T. Roger, Over and Out .
didn’t look like somebody’s DIY speaker project from the 70’s
I didn’t intend this to be a pissing match based on looks which can be very subjective. The Harbeths do have the traditional BBC box form "by design", but anyone who has owned their products will tell you there’s nothing DIY about them. The cabinets are very well put together and look refined in person. Granted the boxy look is not very attractive to many but the fit and finish on the speakers is top notch. Having said that, I will be the first to admit that at $20K+ retail for 40.x, Harbeth could do much better in this department.
I’ve seen and heard the X3’s in person. Not sure what’s "science fiction" worthy about them. They are a good looking speaker with decent fit and finish but nothing extraordinary. Maybe I missed some science fiction aspect of the design?
No one is pissing on you,but when you throw opinions around as fact..we'll some user's have to call BS.To be expected I'd think.The X3 was flavor of the month and now some are moving on to better deals for the investment ,some find that speaker has issues and not interested and some like yourself claim them as gospel according to Borresen.
To summarize, I thought the X3's were a great value at $11k retail. It's clear to see Michael Borresen's aim was/is to appeal to the widest range of audiophiles and focus on the basics -- wide and deep soundstage, musicality, and decent bass. Ultimately, I still preferred the Harbeth 40.2 because of better midrange, refinement and transparency. That seemed to offend a lot of folks though. Somehow, folks equate cool technology/drivers, buzzwords, etc. with better sound. That's not always the case as most of us already know.
Regardless, I still maintain that you will be hard pressed to find a better speaker than X3 at that price point. If Borresen can fix the midrange (in my case that was the slight bass boost in upper midrange) this speaker will be as good as it get within it's respective price range. Having said that, does it compete favorably with speakers twice the price as is often alluded to in several videos and comments? IMO, the answer is no! They lack the ultimate refinement and transparency which you get when you go higher. X6's might be a better deal but I have not heard them.
is that in the measurements taken? I seen the step response to see driver alignment but that does show what is needed? Again maybe I don’t fully understand it.
I assume the driver rise and fall time (and a function of surface area/efficiency) would show dynamics, but I am just guessing.
No, he wouldn't have given you that.
You need specific accelerometers+conditoner+daq to get stuff like that with acceptable accuracy for such a mechanical driver.
(Test engineering never happened over the internet after someone read a klippel manual man. Guys went to school and worked in field for years before they got into all the nitty gritty. What you got from the likes of asr is some feel good snapshot and that's it.)
is that in the measurements taken? I seen the step response to see driver alignment but that does show what is needed? Again maybe I don’t fully understand it.
I assume the driver rise and fall time (and a function of surface area/efficiency) would show dynamics, but I am just guessing.
Kennymc you are probably right, since my x1 monitor is well isolated from their stand, that sound a bit different than their floor stander.Isoacoustic are worth trying.
I would have gone active with it, slapped bash amps inside the cabinet...and said get some subs or go home on the website...Every guy and his uncle should be happy thereafter.
It is strong evidence against your claim that he is one of the most talented speaker
in the world!
He engineered very good drivers from scratch (not buy them from someone and throw it in a box or slap it on a board, call it a night like most duds out there)
There is some sht he did, it seems, to make it not "perceived" as too "bass weak" for the dudes who refuse to use subs....with these tiny drivers.
It needs to sell into closet sized European/Asian lifestyle rooms perhaps, not to mention the V curve lovers, etc,
I am fairly certain he could give you a flat line in 30 mins and lose his target market.
Ribbon tweeters and cone drivers generally prove difficult to match seamlessly. By way of example, I always preferred the soft dome tweeter ProAc's to their ribbon tweeter equivalents. Borresen make a big thing of their crossovers not having phase shift through the midrange. If that is the case here, it looks like it has been achieved by sacrificing frequency response accuracy. BTW Subjectively, Borresen speakers are not bright, but the full range speakers can be difficult to control in the bass. The measurements appear to bear that out.
I have owned/own 4 pairs of speakers that all have full measurements (“spins”) on the Kipple system. It just worked out that way and I did not buy due to seeing measurements
My thoughts are as a whole I think what you see is what you get from the measurements, but two things really stand out. #1 is the estimated in room response. The measurements track pretty closely to how my room measures with those speakers and how I hear it. #2 is the directivity, it really does give insight to how the soundstage will play out in room.
where I feel the measurements lack is in transients, or at least I don’t know what I am looking for to see it. Some speakers have far more kick/snap than others even though the in room estimates are pretty similar. There is more to be learned and understood for sure.
I have also not cared for near perfect measuring speakers (Kef blade 2). They lacked the life and detail I get out of my JBL 4367 that happens to also measure very well. I am not sure where to look in the measurements to see that difference or if it is even there. In my mind a speaker would need to be able to produce a square wave to truly represent the impulse but I don’t than any can.
I never stated that measurements don’t matter, because they most certainly do, to some audiophiles. However, I say again, I doubt if the average audiophile pays much attention to measurements when it comes down to choosing a particular pair of speakers who’s sound qualities have captured their emotion as well as their imagination. I believe that most people ultimately follow their ears and their hearts over how strictly a pair of speakers measure. Personally, I’ve listened extensively to both the Borresen X3 and X6 (and other borresen speakers as well) on a couple occasions, and despite their shortcomings, I thought they both sounded incredible. Could I live with the X3 or X6 long tern? Absolutely!!! As they say, there’s no perfect speaker. Happy listening.
Erin's results on the X3 is odd or at least unusual. Not flat responses are not that unusual by designers' choice, budget and performance/cost tradeoffs, or QC fails to name a few possible causes. What I am puzzled about is the ~12 dB suck out then peak between 200-350 Hz. Something (perhaps woofers' mechanics or enclosure?) is in a sharp undamped resonance condition.
This also shows up in the Cumulative Spectral Decay plot.
Just nerding out on what is the source of that resonance still ringing along 20 mS after test impulse is done.
Im sure the Borresens are fine speakers too. It’s too subjective to take anyone’s word for it. It’s different from other audio equipment. I think measuring things is important, but speakers are so personal I think it’s less indicative of how a person will feel about the sound. People aren’t necessarily wanting perfect accuracy/neutrality from a speaker.
Borrensen’s marketing(trickle-down theory) has convinced(brainwashed) many that the X3 shares many sonic virtues and quality of the upper level Borrensen loudspeakers which is not true. It’s unclear where the X3 is assembled, where the cabinets and even the drivers are manufactured. This type of ambiguity should not exist at this price point if a company desires transparency and respect.
I've heard the X3 finally and my initial thought was dam nice but the more I listened the less I liked it..There is an obvious issue with midrange.I think the review hits the nail squarely.This all maybe for nothing as its been replaced or soon will be as we are aware how things at Borresen change rather quickly.For me id wait for the better /upgraded/replaced version or buy the X at firesale prices which I'm sure won't be long.
@kennymac..............I totally agree with your posts...You Make Sense. The X-3 have to get off the ground. Iso Acoustics or The new Axxses Isolation pads w/ titanium rollers change the sound noticeably for the better......Some tweaks work really good....others are snake oil. These x-3's are a tremendous Value for 11K.
Borensen speakers are not bright , they sound amazing, I listen to their c1 monitor 16k so impressed though I have 13 pair of speakers ? I end up buying the x1!monitor.The x1 cabinet are superb and very quiet. This speakers made me realize how a good cabinet sounds. And it made me to go back to listen with my diapason adamantes, technic, and Norh marble speakers. Now I appreciate them more because of x1 quiet presentation.it teach me to finally realize how a good built cabinet does. Iam not really into measurement . If your ears prefer other sound don’t buy them. Choose the one that will make your ears happy.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
