Borresen X3 vs Harbeth 40.2 -- my impressions

To those of you questioning why I compared speakers in two very different price categories, let me explain ...

It has been repeated ad nauseam, on these forums and several youtube commentaries, that the X3s easily compete with speakers twice (or even thrice) as expensive. It was also suggested that the BBC speakers, specifically Harbeth 40.x series, are old tech and really not deserving of their asking price. Basically, the implication was that there’s nothing special about the vocals, midrange, etc. that the Harbeths are known for. It was implied that the Borresen X series will simply outperform Harbeth. Instead of relying on anecdotal evidence, I thought why not seek out an audition and find out myself.

But to set the record straight, I still maintain that for the asking price the X3s are an amazing proposition. I honestly don’t think there’s any ’mainstream’ speaker that provides as much value at this price point. The sound staging was as good as I’ve heard at any price point. Where it lacks is in refinement, micro details, tonality, etc. ... but that too is ONLY in the context of comparing it to something like the Harbeth 40.x. I would take the X3 over a Focal Sopra 2, KEF Reference 3, etc. in a heartbeat. Like I said, once the X3s start showing up in the used market, I will pick them up in a jiffy. They are very very very good for their asking price.

I understand the concerns about the dealer setup but it is what it is. In the ideal world, I could bring the X3s into my listening room and compare them side by side. Unfortunately, that was not possible -- and believe me, I asked :)

Again, as I said they are a steal at their asking price. Are they as good as speakers twice the price? Based on my limited (4 hours) exposure, this is true in some cases (soundstage, imaging) but not so much in other cases (refinement, tonality, timbre, vocals, etc.). Just sharing my findings based on my preferences. Feel free to disagree :)

@yogiboy Glad you enjoyed it and found some value.

@dpac996 I also struggle to understand the vitriol directed at Harbeth ... a good example is one of the posts on this very thread :)

Usually, it devolves into exactly what you can witness on this particular reply from our esteemed friend ...

1. If you like Harbeth, you really don't understand tone, timber, etc. You have no idea how instruments sound like in real life. ONLY I know this because I'm a wannabe musician.

2. You must only listen to Diana Krall or Norah Jones if you like Harbeth.

3. How dare Harbeth set the price of those boxes so high? Anyone who buys Harbeth does not know how real music sounds like ... yada, yada, yada.

The simple fact is that if Harbeth speakers are grossly overpriced then no one would buy their products and they would go out of business. Hasn't happened since the late 70s while many other manufacturers have come and gone. 

If you don't like the Harbeth sound it's your prerogative to not buy it. But to throw around your credentials and make assumptions about someone's understanding of how instruments do or don't sound, or their music preferences shows some people need a lot of growing up to do. 

I’ve been clear from the beginning that these are my subjective opionion based on listening to the speakers in different environments. For those of you who are bringing up this (valid) point, let me ask you ... did you compare the Borresen X3 with Harbeth 40.x on the same day? Have you owned Harbeths before sharing your opinion? In 99% of the cases, the answer is going to be no. So your opinion is no more or no less subjective than mine. At least I made the effort to audition the X3s before sharing my impressions. Unlike deep 333 who not too long ago was trashing Borresen speakers without having listened to them first. Talk about being fickle-minded.

Second, most Harbeth owners know the strength and weaknesses of the speakers, and if you read my impressions I readily admit what they are -- soundstage not as deep, wide, tall as X3s, less dynamics, do not disappear as well.

Third, I have repeatedly mentioned that X3s are an amazing value at their asking price. I have yet to hear a speaker at $11K that comes close to what these guys can. And, no, they're not twice as good. If they were, Borresen would price them accordingly. For my preferences, they did not sound as tonally accurate or transparent as Harbeth 40.x. It is quite possible that someone else might reach just the opposite conclusion in a different setup.

Lastly, this is not dogma. If I can bring the X3s in my room and they turn out to be better, I will have no shame in admitting I was wrong. I will buy them right away ... and I still might because they impressed me more than any other speaker I’ve heard in this price range.

If we make it an absolute rule that you must hear the speakers in the same room, same time, same equipment before you can share your impressions ... let me tell you this, 99% of the opinions shared on these forums will be null and void. If someone wants to bring the X3 to my home for a side by side comparison, I’m all for it. Bring it on.

@missioncoonery 

Anyway I owned the 40.1 for a short time Ive owned the Raidho C3 (a Boressen design and much better than the X series we are discussing) ,I pretty much agree with your assessment

I auditioned the 40.1 maybe 7-8 years ago and was disappointed. I pretty much wrote off the big Harbeths from consideration. I found them to be not resolving enough, bass heavy, and a bit boomy. However, IMO, the 40.2 is a much different animal. It is vastly superior (again, based on for my listening preferences) to the 40.1. 

@helomech

Truthfully, presuming the OP still possesses good hearing acuity (which many/most audiophiles do not, because one cannot elude age-induced loss), I think he would come to a much different conclusion if he were to live with the X3s in his own system for some time.

This is a valid point. Often times, it takes some getting used to the sound signature of a new speaker to appreciate the full spectrum of capabilities, subtleties, and nuances. As I mentioned, I plan to purchase the X3s when they show up in the used market. I will be the first one to admit if they turn out to be better, or even the same.

Having said that, it will good if you can take your own advice. Maybe buy a Harbeth 40.2/3 and live with it for some time? Who knows you might reach a different conclusion too :)

One thing I would like to add is that when a manufacturer creates a product which performs so well at it's respective price point, us as audiophiles, must acknowledge and appreciate it. Whether you like Borresen or not, AGD has delivered a solid product which definitely punches above its weight. Yes, there is some hype, but it's not totally unjustified either. I suspect the next generation of X3 will be tuned even better to overcome some shortcomings (e.g. exaggerated midbass bump). It seems more of a tuning decision than a deficiency in design or quality of parts.

However, I am confident enough in my auditory memory of the 40.2s that I am certain it would be a waste of my time, because I’ve yet to encounter any variant of Harbeth that approaches the resolution of speakers like the X3s, whether we’re talking upper bass, midrange, or treble.

Based on my auditory memory, which is very recent, I found Harbeth to be superior in resolution, including midrange and treble. X3s had a much wider and taller soundstage though. There are too many variables here -- you are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. Anyways, audio is highly subjective and it makes no sense to engage in these types of arguments. I am going to keep an open mind and seek to purchase an X3 so I can listen in my own system. Will truthfully share my impressions after that. I might change my mind after all. Or maybe not.

+1 @helomech 

At the end of the day, this is just audio gear. I don't know why folks get so worked up. Prior to owning Harbeth 40.2, I owned several speakers with very different design philosophies -- Joseph Audio Perspective2, Sonus Faber Olympica 2 and 3, B&W 804, Focal Sopra 2, KEF Reference 1, several Harbeth models, Klipsch Cornwall IV, and a few more that I don't remember. So it's not like I had no idea how other speakers sound.

I enjoyed every speaker for what it offered. They all had strengths and weaknesses. I recently bought Magnepan 1.7i, which will be delivered today. Of all the speakers, my 40.2 are not as dynamic and has weaknesses that I knew very well when buying them. Despite all that, they allow me to get emotionally engaged with the music better than any other speaker I've owned. Whether they use cheap parts or cabinets, or pick your favorite Harbeth insult, I could care less. They do something that other speakers have not done for me ... thus far.

When I listened to the Borresen X3, I did not find them to be as transparent as the 40.2. Could it be the dealer's room, supporting equipment, or something else? Maybe. Now, I will say that the X3s did impress me enough that I'm thinking of buying a pair in the near future. I'll keep whichever sounds better in my room.

Harbeth fans have a long history of bashing any detractors, or anyone who confers even the remotest criticism. You can find that behavior on nearly any lengthy Harbeth thread. IME, Harbeth fans tend to be as dogmatic and vitriolic as those of Audio Note, perhaps more so if we exclude AN’s principal unpaid advertiser.

That's true for any brand. Why pick on Harbeth only. Besides, please read this thread and tell me who is doing most of the bashing here :)

As for colorations, if we are using that yardstick then many of our beloved speaker brands will fail the test. Obviously, Alan Shaw is going for a specific sound signature that appeals to a subset of audiophiles. It's not designed to appeal to everyone. He's not going after the flattest frequency response. Anyone buying Harbeth speakers is very well aware of it. Why is this a problem for so many people? 

Let's grow up and stop questioning people's listening/analytical abilities, calling them outdated/old, and all sorts of juvenile behavior that has been on display on this thread and others. You don't like Harbeth, who cares. I like it enough to own it and enjoy it. You like another brand better, all the power to you. Enjoy the music and your preferred choice of audio equipment. 

Agreed. I can’t imagine X3s sounding bright or fatiguing. 

@mtbiker29 

@arafiq If this wasn't a 1994 era website I'd find a way to "follow" you since your posts are always very thoughtful and well reasoned.  

Separately, holy s*&^ if you punted Joseph Audio to the side for Harbeth, I can't see a scenario where X3 is on your radar, but that's just me.  You're going to need to step up 1-2 notches to really nail it from here.  

First off, thank you for the wonderful compliment. It's heartening to know that people still value balanced perspectives instead of just mindlessly rooting for their favorite brands.

I know it comes as a surprise to many that I preferred the 40.2 over JA Perspectives. The Perspectives (in fact most JA models) are really good and are generally well received in the market. They were certainly a step up from Harbeth SHL5+ which they replaced. But, the 40.x is a completely different animal IMO. Yes, they have some family resemblance but they're just in a class of their own compared to other Harbeth models. The one speaker that I heard recently is the Daedalus Apollo model. Now, this is something I feel can give Harbeth a run for its money. But it's so hard nowadays to find something you can listen to that it makes it impossible to reach an informed conclusion.

@helomech I just want to clarify that my 'brash' comment was not directed towards you. In my book, it's quite ok to passionately defend your choices in audio. After all, you reached to this point after a lot of research and listening. My comments were really meant for some other posters who don't quite understand the notion of civility when making their opinions known. It's one thing to defend your choice (which you were doing) and quite another to insult people for their choices on something as inconsequential as 'liking' a specific brand. In fact, your posts really convince me to seek out an X3 audition in my home and possibly even buy one in the near future.

@fishagedone As someone who previously owned both SF Olympica 2 and 3, I am forever in your debt for showing me the error of my ways. How dare I prefer the crappy box, otherwise known as Harbeth 40.2, over the magnificent Sonus Faber. I think you should collect a few thousand signatures and propose that Alan Shaw be paraded naked on donkey back on the streets of London followed by life imprisoment. What a charlatan he is for collectively fooling so many gullible audiophiles who don’t know what’s good for them. I mean who makes a speaker that looks like box?!! Surely, it must sound horrible by the looks of it. And how dare he uses true-and-tried approaches for making good sound. He should be experimenting with space age materials and exotic drivers -- who cares whether they sound better or not. After all, it's not about SQ but about design language and marketing hype for the sake of marketing hype.

Thank you for being the unsolicited messiah, sir!

lol at 'factual statements' -- please share your source please.

@macg19 

@arafiq You have a really nice and obviously very well thought out rig. What are you thinking for your next cart? 

Actually, thanks for reminding me that I have made a few changes to my system in the last few months, and forgot to update the virtual system.

First, I replaced the Meitner MA3 DAC with a Merging Technologies +NADAC and separate power supply. I chose this DAC after home auditioning Mola Mola Tambaqui and DCS Bartok in my system. To my ears, Merging Technologies was the most analog and natural sounding. Shout out to @lalitk for first recommending the Merging DAC and then giving me the opportunity to hear it in his system, which by the way is one of the best systems I've heard so far.

Second, I replaced the Denon DL-103 cart with Hana ML. Another leap in performance. I might go up the Hana food chain in the future, but for now I'm very happy with ML. I have updated my virtual system with new info and pics. Please check it out if you haven't already.

Lastly, I recently purchased Magnepan 1.7i as a second pair of speakers. This speaker really defies the price-to-performance ratio like nothing else I've owned in the past. It's different than Harbeth 40.2 in many ways, which I enjoy since I wasn't necessarily looking for 'better', just a different 'flavor' to spice things up. And boy does that Maggie deliver the flavor in spades. I might add the Magnepan pics to my virtual system later.

@macg19 

Looking at your TT, I think you are just scratching the surface of your vinyl potential (pun intended). 

I am fairly new to the analog world. To be honest, my focus up until this point has been improving the digital front-end as much as possible. However, I find vinyl to be a worthy contender, in fact, even better than digital in many aspects. Next year, I plan to dedicate most of my audio budget to improving the analog side of things. I'm currently using the built-in phono in the Octave preamp. I compared it to several standalone phonos in the $3-4K range and still found Oct'ave's built-in phono to be a better value.

Wally tools has been suggested to me by another friend of mine. My thinking is that I first need to get a better cartridge (open to suggestions) and tone arm before I do anything else. Hopefully, 2025 will be all about analog for me :)

@thermo Thank you for chiming in. I really appreciate your post. Just like you, I put an equal emphasis on opinions/reviews shared by average joe's like us and not seasoned/paid reviewers. In fact, some of my best buys were influenced by average joes and not reviewers. Go figure! :)

@prof  I wanted to collect my thoughts before responding to your question :)

if I have to rank the three speakers, it would be like this:

Harbeth 40.x > JA Perspective2 > Harbeth SHL5+

When I replaced the SHL5+ with JA Perspective2's it was definitely a jump in sound quality in most areas, especially bass and treble. JA has a very modern, crisp sound that I enjoyed. However, I still missed that little bit of midrange magic that Harbeth had. But in almost all other areas, JA was superior.

Now, on to Harbeth 40.2 ...

First of all, it is a completely different beast than the rest of the Harbeth lineup. You would be mistaken to assume that just because you are familiar with other models in the lineup you can extrapolate it to the 40.x. Yes it retains most of the midrange characteristics, but it adds tremendous scale to everything. Everything sounds much more palpable, more real, more organic, more transparent, and at a much bigger scale. It added a fullness to the sound that was missing from SHL5+ and Perspectives. Here's an analogy I would use to describe the difference between JA Perspective2 and 40.2: The Perspectives are like drinking an ice cold coca cola on a hot day. It gives you that refreshing kick while tickling all your senses.

The 40.2, on the other hand, is more like drinking a warm glass of thick, rich hot chocolate milk on a snowy day. You just feel the warmth going down your throat and engulfing your entire body. There's no wrong or right here. Just depends on what your preference is. For me, I love what the Harbeth 40.2 brings to the table. That does not make Perspective2, or Borresen X3 for that matter, a lesser speaker.

However, the 40.2 do require a beefy amp to really wake them up. More so than the Perspective2s.

@newton Good to know I was not the only one who was perturbed by the mid bass bump. I suspect the issues I heard with X3 has more to do with how they've been voiced as opposed to an inherent weakness in the overall design. Nonetheless, it still provides SQ that punches above the asking price. I hope Michael Borressen will tweak the design in v2 of this model to get rid of the midbass bump.

@jayctoy I understand your point about listening to the X3s in an unfamiliar room. But that is still significantly more valuable than just reading about it or listening at audio shows -- which I suspect a vast majority of buyers do. Whether we like it or not, unless the dealer is willing to let you try the speakers in your own room, the best we can do is to listen at a dealer. Perfect? Of course not. But that is the only data point I had available to make a decision. Could the outcome have been any different in my room? Possibly. But I wasn't going to roll the dice based on my initial impressions.

I ended up buying the Magnepan 1.7i's. TBH, they are a phenomenal speaker given the price. Like any speaker, they have strengths and weaknesses. But you would be hard pressed to find another speaker at $3k retail that can compete with Maggies when it comes to soundstage, acoustic instruments, and vocals. I'm thinking of upgrading to 3.7i/s ... that should tell you how much I liked the 1.7s :)

Did anyone see the new review posted by Erin on youtube. As I mentioned earlier, while there was a lot to love about the X3's, there was something about the midrange that I didn't quite like. I still preferred the Harbeth 40.2's over the X3, especially when it pertained to midrange. I didn't evaluate the differences technically, but I think Erin's findings shed some light on my impressions. There's definitely something about it that didn't appeal to me.