Borresen X3 vs Harbeth 40.2 -- my impressions

@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.

Thanks!  That’s what I figured.

As I mentioned, I’ve heard the Harbeth 40s And my descriptions would be similar.

Unfortunately, my room situation is complicated and wide speakers

Won’t work well in the room.   However, I’ve got my Joseph perspectives sounding remarkably lush.  My Thiel 2.7s Sound even fatter and lusher.

So I’m doing pretty well in that regard.  
 

Good tread despite the negativity. I have not seen a lot of A/B comparisons (not that this really is one). I personally am waiting for detailed measurements or a demo. I have only seen the M1’s measurements and they a comically bad at any price with a 7db peak at 80hz followed by a 5db dip at 300hz. You have to use a translator (built into web browser) to read it but the link is below.

I have seen a few comments now about the X3 having a bass peak. I wonder if they are all tuned like this.

https://audio.com.pl/testy/stereo/kolumny-glosnikowe/3781-borresen-m1/s/3#laboratory

I have seen a few comments now about the X3 having a bass peak. I wonder if they are all tuned like this.

The X3s do have an inherent bass peak, but it certainly doesn’t sound anything like 7dB. My estimate is it might be as high as 2dB. This actually helps them to sound more linear and dynamic when playing at normal levels. My previous floorstanders (BMR Towers) are some of the most linear-measuring speakers on the market at any price, however, in practice, the X3s actually sound more linear and balanced in my room. My suspicion is the X3s are voiced to compensate for the natural dips/peaks of our ears (aka Equal Loudness Contour). This isn’t to say they do that in the same way some other brands do. They sound more balanced than the newer B&W lines for example. 

In terms of on-axis linearity, I doubt the X3s are close to as flat as the BMRs, but it’s quite apparent to my ears that the X3s are considerably lower in distortion. The X3s are over twice the price of the BMR Towers though (and I still prefer the BMRs to all Harbeths I’ve heard), so in terms of absolute value, the BMRs are still incredible. 

I was increasingly gravitating toward great measuring speakers prior to acquiring the Borresens, but the X3s have upended that whole paradigm for me. As I stated earlier, I visited the dealer expecting that I would probably leave with a pair of Perlisten towers, or at minimum, realize the Perlistens weren’t any better than my BMR Towers. Instead, I ended up buying the X3s, which was an easy decision after hearing the Perlisten R towers. That said, I was also able to conclude that the BMR Towers perform better than the Perlistens. In recent weeks I have begun to suspect that driver distortion levels matter far more than on-axis linearity when it comes to subjective sound quality. 

Helomech,

good feed back. I am not a die hard measurements guy either but most of the speakers I really like also measure pretty well. I think it is an important starting point and then quality of the drivers/build matters too. I will be interested to see measurements of the X line and see if insight can be gained with subjective reviews. I have seen the BMR measurements but never heard them. Also having owned Revel speakers I know “perfect” measurements are not the be all end all as everything important is not measured.  
 

I hope to hear the Borresens sooner than later but in the meantime I would love to see full measurements of the X line, whether it is gated, Kipple, or anechoic. 

Arafiq again thank you for spending time writing this thread.I just realized you spend four hours on the dealership that’s a long hours just to demo speakers. This tells me you enjoyed listening to them. Because initially you almost bolted out when the x3 when connected to axxis integrated amp.When I listened to to audition 30 minute is needed to settle my ears .I also believe your Harbeth are tune for your listening preference.your room is very familiar to you.The dealer room is very unfamiliar to you , you are not familiar how the x3 react to the room.I believe your system is also perfectly match to your Harbeth. So I agree with your comparison.I wish you can listen to x3 with perfectly match system and the right room for them.

OP what’s going on with the Magnepan you bought? Any update?

Arafiq - nice review, thank you for taking the time to write it.  I listened to the X3's at a local dealer (who also used Forte integrated amps).  In their room I did notice the clarity, transparency and high frequency extension that you mention.  I also noticed a disturbing bass bump.  In this dealer's room the speakers were place well away from the rear walls behind the speakers.  I don't know why the X3 and other AGD models haven't been measured in labs yet (like Sterephile) as that would help us to better understand the sources of what we hear, the design aspects (and tradeoffs) and give me, at least, greater confidence in making a purchase decision.

@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 :)

@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.

Arafiq ribbon speakers are so unique. You get different taste of sound.Why I bought the model 9 KLH panel, Resd rose, and now x1.Magnepan are good speakers if you can match them. Thank you for the update.

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.

My hypothesis is that the midbass bump is what allows the X3s to sound so dynamic and linear at conversational levels, it compensates for the Munson loudness curve. The bump does necessitate giving them plenty of space—about 3’ minimum from the front baffles to the wall behind them. When I first setup the X3s there was a considerable mode being excited when the aforementioned spacing was closer to 2.5 feet. An additional 6” was all it took to tame the mode completely from a subjective standpoint. Despite having zero doubt the X3s would produce a hump in anechoic measurements, they still manage to produce the most subjectively balanced bass I’ve ever achieved in a system, regardless of playback level. In fact, when I had the WiiM Ultra streamer here to test, I ran its room correction DSP and was surprised that it suggested considerable levels of bass boost between 40 and 120Hz, no reductions at any frequency. The system sounded much better without the DSP, no matter how many times I allowed the WiiM to attempt correction. 

I was a stalwart believer that all good speakers should produce a mostly linear output, but my experience with the X3s has completely upended that concept for me. My hunch is the X3s would produce rather mediocre measurements by the Floyd Toole metrics, which is why I am beginning to doubt whether said metrics really do indicate much of what we can expect subjectively. My departed Revels measured better, no doubt, but the X3s absolutely wipe the floor with them subjectively.