Good perspective. Thanks for sharing.
Borresen X3 vs Harbeth 40.2 -- my impressions
After reading so many glowing reviews of the Borresen X3 speaker, I decided to go and audition them at a local dealer who was gracious enough to let me stay there for over 4 hours. I went there with the intention of buying the X3 if they appealed to me. I thought I’d share my impressions here for those who are interested, especially in comparison to my Harbeth 40.2 speakers that I adore.
The dealer at first hooked them up to the Axxess Forte 1 integrated amp. To be brutally honest, I was about ready to bolt in the first 10 minutes. I just don’t understand why Axxess is getting so much praise. It was the most flat, dry, and boring sound I’ve heard. Luckily, the dealer had some very high end Burmester amp, preamp, and music server (close to $100K retail for the three pieces), which he agreed to use instead. Huuuuuge difference! The Burmester really made those Borresens come alive and sing. IMO, AGD is really doing a disservice to the X line by pairing them with the Axxess in audio shows. They are capable of scaling with much better gear. Shame!
If a massive, immersive, and holographic soundstage is your primary criteria and your budget is $11k max, you should stop reading at this point. Run and get these speakers before AGD decides to raise the price. I have yet to hear a speaker in this price range with this kind of soundstage. But if you value other aspects of music reproduction, keep on reading ...
Soundstage Width, Depth, and Height:
No contest. Borresen is noticeably better. The soundstage is as tall as it is deep. I heard sounds coming from besides me and behind me. Depth, while not outstanding, is there for sure. Just not as impressive as the height and width relatively speaking. I still can’t get that immersive feeling out of my head.
Ability to disappear:
This is one area where Harbeth always struggles. Owing to the thin walls of its cabinets, one is always aware of the big box the sound emanates from. The X3s totally disappeared. Again, very impressive for a speaker in this price range.
Vocals:
Sorry, but the X3 is simply not in the same league as the 40.2 when it comes to vocals. There’s this little extra, lifelike quality to vocals in most Harbeth speakers that is hard to beat. I listened to some very familiar songs on the X3, and it became clear why I fell in love with the Harbeth sound many years ago. Female voices are more ethereal and nuanced, male voices have more chestiness. You hear the emotions and every little inflection in the singers’ voice. It simply gives more of the ‘singer in the room’ feeling.
Instrument Separation:
This is a tough one. Both are excellent in this regard. But I will give a very slight edge to 40.2s here. Or maybe not. I don’t know. Let’s call it evens.
Transparency and Realism:
This is where Harbeth pulled ahead of the X3s in a major way. I’m not saying that the X3s are deficient by any means, but the 40.2s just give you a lot more of it. You really have to live with them for a while to truly understand and appreciate what this speaker brings to the table. It’s truly addictive. The only other speakers I’ve heard that are better in this regard are the Quads or other electrostatics.
Midrange and Lushness:
My impression of Borresen speakers prior to this was that they were very fast, neutral, and quiet. But, much to my surprise, the X3s (or perhaps the X line itself) has been voiced to be more on the warm side of things. Sound was warm and had body. Unfortunately, this is being achieved by adding a bit of a mid bass bump. While it gives the speaker an overall warm predisposition, I felt it came at the expense of hiding details in the mid bass region. Harbeth is also known for a lush midrange but it doesn’t get here by sacrificing detail or exaggerating the sound. Another side effect of this characteristic was that acoustic instruments felt bigger than life. Guitars felt like they were 10 foot long. Piano strokes lacked the bite and immediacy that I get with 40.2s – and by the way this is not a particularly strong point of Harbeth either.
Tone and Timbre:
Harbeth to the front of the line, please. The timbre and tonal accuracy of the 40.2s is on another level. X3s are also very good in this regard but are somewhat outclassed by Harbeth.
Overall Refinement:
I apologize in advance if this is going ruffle some feathers, but the 40.2s are overall much more refined sounding than the Borresen X series. Again, this is only in comparison. On its own, I would never label the X3s as unrefined. The Harbeth just has this extra layer of refinement that you come to appreciate the more time you spend with it.
Bass:
As they say, there’s no replacement for displacement. The 4.5” drivers on X3 produce a prodigious amount of bass which is hard to believe considering the size of the drivers. Yet, the 12” woofer on 40.2s gives you more of that deep and tuneful bass. It just sounds more satisfying and fuller.
Look and Feel:
This is very subjective, of course, so please feel free to take it with a grain of salt. But I was not impressed by how the X3s looked in person, they lacked elegance. It kind of reminded me of Tekton – okay, maybe that’s too harsh, I take it back. But I was a little disappointed as they looked really nice in pictures. Wish they would lose the carbon fiber touch and the checkered driver patterns. The Harbeths, on the other hand, don’t look as impressive and nice in pictures. I mean what do you expect from an oversized shoebox on stands. But, the quality and craftsmanship of hand-built cabinets has a more timeless and elegant feel to it that has to be seen and felt to be appreciated. I just feel this style, boring as it is, just ages more gracefully.
Long story short, I have decided to stay with my 40.2s. They have many quirks, as pointed out by several members on this forum. But what they do, they do it exceedingly well. I found the Harbeth 40.x to be overall more transparent, lifelike, refined, and balanced. They don’t do dynamics as good as other speakers or disappear as much as other speakers in this price range, but they more than make up for it in other ways. I’ve heard people claim that the X3 are twice (or even thrice!) as good as their asking price. If soundstage is your primary criteria for judging speakers, then I wholeheartedly agree. But if you value transparency, vocals, timbre, tonal accuracy, and overall refinement ... the Harbeth 40.x series justifies its higher price, despite the shortcomings.
Having said that, I was still very impressed by Borresen X3 and won’t mind having it as a second pair once they hit the used market. But I feel the hype doesn’t quite align with what I actually heard during the audition. In this price range, I find Audio Vector to be a better value.
Please note that these are my opinions based on a ‘mere’ 4-hour demo, and only in comparison to my favorite speakers. It’s totally fine if someone draws a completely opposite conclusion, or tells me that I’m biased. My taste, my preferences, IMO, IHMO, etc. etc. etc.
163 responses Add your response
Did you hear the Harbeths at the same store and exact same set up ? if not the cables alone can make a big difference. in TAS magazine Borrensen was mentioned and on you tube .many accolades. I have heard them with AGD amps and they sounded great that ribbon tweeter and wave guide Harbeth can’t match the Big sound stage . I find the Axxess cables they use too neutral. For my taste and Borresen like tubes, as well as Pass labs amps ,and Accuphase . Having owned a Audio store , system synergy is most important , the forte amps no way , T+A was great with them I do agree that the 12 inch Bass produces more impact , Borresen New series coming out in Sept use 8 inch woofers and much more refined if you have $25k to spend . the Harbeths the 40.2 are very good especially midrange , what’s the price difference today ?
|
Borresen sounds very impressive first. After a short while it sounds very digital and mechanic. No musicality. It feels like you are listening each individual note instead of a song. Not my cup of tea. I rather prefer a lush sound of musical speaker, I would stick to Harbeth, or consider Audio Note which will be similar sound signature but better. |
@arafiq nice comparison. I heard the X3 at Axpona and initially thought they sounded very good. Went back 3 or 4 times but after careful listening they just weren't "refined" sounding exactly like you stated. Also after awhile I didn't feel I could listen long time. Yes initially they grab you but not for long. |
The top-of-the-line Harbeth is in a completely different price range (double), so it would not be a fair buyer's comparison. To compare apples, one might consider the Daedalus Muse Studio. Its tonal quality is striking, along with a good soundstage and detail. I've had both the Harbeth and the Daedalus and the latter won out. It is in the same price range as the Borreson X3. |
Arafiq I did not feel the Axxes cable are flat sounding at Axpona 2024 ,When I listen to the C1 Borensen speakers.Maybe different set up , different results.This set put me to a place to buy Borensen x1 speakers.They are arriving tommorow.Harbeth are amazing speakers but they are not for me. We all have different taste though. Good thread OP. |
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. |
OP, thank you for this very interesting and informative thread. I am a fan of both the Harbeth sound and of the Borresen sound. I have also listened extensively to both the speakers in your thread. I basically agree with everything you state about both speakers. The X3’s are a good value, although as you go up the Borresen line, you do get more accuracy and better refinement, micro detail, accuracy etc., The problem is that once you get to the ability to reproduce these things in the manner you describe, you have spent some very serious money. The Harbeth’s are also, at least IMO, pretty much exactly as you describe, with their strengths and weaknesses well pointed out. One thing that you did not mention about the comparison is the room size required. I believe that the X3’s will most likely sing in a much smaller sized room than the 40’s. One thing that does amuse me in this hobby is the so called rule that a newer design and tech has to be better than a proven older design. I’m not a believer in this, certainly not in all circumstances. One has to really listen for oneself to know if the newer design really is superior, or if the newer design is simply enjoying a lot of marketing hype.
|
Thanks for taking the time to write this up and providing me with confirmation bias about how great my 40.3's are (just kidding, well maybe not) . I disagree that the 40's cannot disappear. It is largely dependent on the recording but when dialed in you can hear the placement of the instruments/vocalists not the speakers. There is a visual bias as you are probably aware, so eyes closed works best. Not saying other speakers might not do this better/easier. |
| Post removed |
@kennymacc - Makes one curious as to how much or how little advertising Borresen does with Stereophile. |
Stereophile.....The more you spend on advertising...the better the reviews.. .....The X-3's have a very Modern look.....It's not as Warm looking as a double the price wooden box. The X-3 is not only a beautiful speaker to look at, but a beautiful speaker to Listen to....it's warm and tight....a unique sound . Mine needed 300 hrs. to really Bloom ! |
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 :) |
Since you somehow appear to have the price of a Harbeth 40 justified, allow me to shed some light. Have you spent any time around real musicians? I am a hobbyist violin/piano player who makes some guest appearances in some shows from time to time. Not sure what you understand about tonality, timbre, etc (something’s way off there too) but, lets keep it simpler...do you understand how a real instrument in real life hits ya? A trumpet will hit a 110db. A trombone will hit a 110 db. A cello will hit a 110db. A flute will hit a 100db...etc....percussion, don’t even go there... These types of things will just exterminate your Harbeth 40. That cheap cabinet, drivers, lack of innovation, etc are also the cheapest ways to make a rinse/repeat speaker and they have the audacity to charge 20k+? based on what? I wouldn’t even consider paying 2k for that speaker. It could work though for trying to doze off to some Diana Krall/Eva Cassidy vocals at 60db (that kind of apparent "female vocals refinement" is certainly not my thing). Anyways, i suppose we shall agree to disagree & move on...
|
Nice post! I’m in agreement with you on Harbeth. Amazing speakers when setup with some care. They display truth and color in music and are capable of being highly emotionally engaging. I never quite understood the vitriol directed at Harbeth by some folks. It’s like they are put off that other listeners love them… But pretty much pick any two speaker brands and a roomful of picky audiophiles and you might see similar discordant opinions. |
@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. |
| Post removed |
Nobody can evaluate a speaker against another in 2 different systems, in 2 different rooms. System synergy and room acoustics come into play here. Hatbeths don’t play progressive rock music very well but any Borresen I have listened too play it well. I have been impressed with all the Borresen speakers for their size of drivers, but you pay the price. |
You said the Borresen speakers sound "digital" on another thread, which I asked for an explanation of that descriptor applying to a completely passive transducer. I didn't understand how it applies. My cousin owns a pair of Borresen Z3, and they sound nothing like you describe. They are neutral, dynamic, cohesive, accurate. Sure, they are not what I would refer to as a warm speaker, but they are not harsh either. Last time I was at my cousin's house, we listened for hours with no hint of fatigue. |
What I mean for digital and mechanical means, separation is too much to a point that I feel like song looses its composure. I feel like listening the each note from each instrument getting detached from the vocals that I can’t concentrate to song anymore. Music is presented as if you are reading something from a screen but each letter is displayed one by one, so you can’t focus on what is being said anymore. I hope this is helpful. |
Being an owner of the X3s and having had several lengthy auditions with the Harbeth 40.2s in what is a better sorted room than my own (giving the Harbeths a field advantage) I have to vehemently disagree with your assessment, especially with regard to midrange performance, transparency and refinement. It’s all good if you subjectively prefer the Harbeth sound, however, to claim they are the more transparent and refined speaker is akin to claiming a Volkswagen Golf GTI is faster than a Porsche 911 Turbo. The gulf between these two speakers really is that large. Despite the size difference in woofers, the X3s can also play louder than any Harbeth before crying uncle, and can do so with less power demand. Bear in mind that the Borresens are really equipped with what any other manufacturer would claim are 6 inch woofers, not 4.5 inch. Borresen is just one of the very few manufacturers who are honest about their cone surface area, which is probably to their disadvantage.
|
As an ex pro studio musician, I really have a hard time with folk who profess to know exactly what a musical instrument sounds like, and therefore, others don’t. |
@macg19 +100 |
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. |
Arafiq...."Talk about being fickle minded"......No kidding ,I call it laughable at best but adding his take on the Harbeth speakers..Well ,you think he would just be silent for awhile...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..Lets get past this X series hype chatter please,its starting to get like the Tekton shill debates |
While I can't comment directly on the comparison, I do have a few thoughts. First, @arafiq deserves high marks for his original post. If only all reviews and comparisons were so well constructed, and sensitively produced! That doesn't mean, of course, that one has to agree with his opinions of conclusions, but no one should be confused about how he arrived at them. Secondly, whole I am not familiar with Børresen speakers, and have never owned the 40.2, I do have experience moving from Harbeth speakers to a faster, more neutral and accurate speaker. I owned Harbeth M30.1 for some time, and liked them quite a bit for the reasons that most are attracted to the Harbeth sound: gorgeous mid-range, impressive vocals, etc. But as much as I love good vocals, jazz, and some classical music, I grew up in the '70s listening to soul and funk, and also now listen to a lot of African music, and felt that I was missing dynamics with the Harbeths. Long story short, I ended up purchasing a pair lightly used Fink Team KIM stand-mounted speakers, and never looked back. The custom AMT tweeters provide both speed and dynamism that were lacking in the Harbeth, while at the same time producing beautiful details. The bass response is night and day better. Of course the 40.2 are far bigger and, at least in some respects, better than the small M30 series. But I expect that the broad strengths and weaknesses of Harbeth designs are likely to be found, at least to some degree, throughout their range. To be clear, I am aware that the FinkTeam speakers are more neutral, and on some recordings the warmth of the Harbeths was be a welcome coloration. But coupled with my Aqua La Scala DAC and Circle Labs A200 integrated amp, both of which are hybrid designs, employing tubes, the KIM, while revealing, are never harsh. What I suggesting, in essence, is that for all types of music I find the speed and dynamism of the KIM to be a very valuable improvement, and, with the exception of relatively poor recordings that benefit from some warmth, I really don't miss the Harbeth sound at all.
|
| Post removed |
I don’t agreed I am going to use car analogies, Harbeth it’s an BMW series 3 maybe 5 and Borresen it’s a Porsche Cayman. Either are very good cars and depends a lot of who is driving and what is the use. Borresen it’s a taste of a sports car. Fast, dynamic, soundstage and Harbeth it’s a taste of a luxury car. Easy driving, comfortable. Both are doors for bigger things |
@helomech +1 👍 |
| Post removed |
