Considering Harbeth C 7ES-3

22 views and no comments. Am I missing something here?

I really enjoy whenever I hear the Harbeth 7s and personally, given they have rich bass for their size, I find they do both the "organic Harbeth" sound but are also "fun" for any type of music. Great speaker. Frankly I don’t know lots of speakers in the $4,000 range (as I did a major speaker search recently at higher prices), but if you like the Harbeth sound, no other speaker really sounds like them (except maybe Spendor).   And if you really like Harbeth, you may find they sound more "right" than speakers costing much more money.

Why are you looking at the Harbeth's?  You have to tell us why you are considering them and what you are looking for in a speaker.  There are plenty of other options I would look at before them unless you have actually heard them and are enamored by what they bring to the table. 

I have not heard them yet and look forward to the opportunity. I like what I hear about an open, natural sound, especially for acoustic instruments,  and the resonance of the cabinet design. They also seem to come up in forums as recommendations quite often. Any one know where I can hear them near San Francisco?

Harbeth makes a great speaker and they obviously have a devoted following. Spendor is also highly regarded and make a similarly voiced speaker. However, the key to choosing any speaker is to listen, and preferably in your own room.

it looks you have powerfull amp,it can be too much for harbeths.Dynaudio speakers like powerfull amps.For $4000 you can get dynaudio platinum c1 with stands.If you won't like sound,dynaudio has good resale value.

I owned the C7ES3 for the better part of three years.  Position them right, use good quality stands and you will have one of the best sounding speakers on the market regardless of price.  

Here ya go!
http://www.toneofmusic.com/products

Try to audition the Spendor SP2/3R2 or Stirling Broadcast SB-88. I like both quite a lot more than the C7ES3s. The 88s can be had for a good discount since Stirling has mostly been shoved out of the U.S. market thanks to the competition's distributor and marketing. And never mind the SB-88 vs C7 claims of ToneAudio, it's hogwash. 

+1
http://www.toneofmusic.com/products

Thank you yogi boy! Looks like a great shop.

I had the 7's and loved them. Now have the 40th SL's. The Analog Room in Campbell is a Harbeth dealer.

Listen to some ProAc and Spendor speakers. I had Harbeth and they were not to my taste. You might like them.

Also seek out an audition of the Spendor A4. $3500/pair. They have greater bass extension, less cabinet noise and superior resolution. If connected to high-quality ancillaries, they can sound as good as some $10K speakers. I could imagine them being the end-game for many listeners.  

Another speaker I'd take over the C7s at $3K/pair are the Rega RX-5s. What Hi-Fi gave them a luke-warm review, and despite usually agreeing with their assessments, I didn't hear any of the issues they noted. 

If someone likes the Harbeths, I doubt they'd really like the Spendor floor standers.  They don't have that lush organic sound of the Harbeths.

If someone likes the Harbeths, I doubt they'd really like the Spendor floor standers. They don't have that lush organic sound of the Harbeths

In my experience the new Spendor A series sounds far more organic than any Harbeth I've heard. I do know that some of the older A-series models, the A6R in particular, are not very well received but the new ones are incredibly good values. There is nothing the C7 does better than the A4s, the latter are in a whole other league. 

Helomech... in every forum, when someone opens a thread asking about Harbeth do you have to come in and recommend Spendor or Stirling?

"nothing the C7 do that the A4 dont do better" . I mean, really dude?

Yes, that is my opinion based on my auditions. The A4s have greater resolution, they "disappear" more, plumb deeper in the bass and have a lower fatigue factor despite their greater resolution. Keep in mind I’m specifically referring to the A4s vs the C7s, not every Harbeth.

And I don't know why you put that second sentence in quotes, those are not my exact words. Please, if you're going to quote me, please copy my words verbatim. I said the A4s are in a "whole other league." It's true IME and I'm confident 90% of other listeners would agree because the difference is huge. It's not a matter of comparing the minor quirks of each, like maybe one has a sweeter treble and the other a sweeter midrange.

The OP asked for recommendations for other speakers he should consider. Do you think it unwise for him to audition any of the competition? Really, shouldn’t he listen to as many options as possible and decide for himself instead of drinking the Harbeth Kool Aid and buying "blind"/deaf?

But why do you care anyway? You claim you have no regrets going from the Super HL5+ to the much less expensive Seas A26. So should you really be surprised that I don’t consider Harbeth the best value in this price range? I mean, you went from a $6K/pair speaker to a ~$1800/pair speaker and claim "no regrets."

I truly do find the Spendors and Stirlings to offer far better performance and value. Between the Spendor SP2/3R2, Stirling SB-88 and Harbeth C7ES3s, I actually find the Stirlings are the best overall. I know where one can buy them for less than $3200, which makes them an incredible value since they happen to sound best of the three.

Both of the sales managers of my local Harbeth dealer (one of the largest in the U.S.) share my opinion. They also sell Spendor and Stirling. Guess what? They don’t have Harbeths in their home systems. Nuff said.

Thank you all for your thoughts. Much appreciated. 

Hi, @helomech! You seem to be one of the few people around with direct experience with the Spendor SP2/3R2. Could you please elaborate a bit more on:
1. the difference between the SP2/3R2 and the Stirling's?
2. the difference between the SP2/3R2 and SP100R2, if you've heard them (I want to know if the voicing is the same, of course the raw performance should be quite different)?
3. the difference between the SP2/3R2 and the current Spendor Classic range, if you've heard them (2/3, 1/2, 100)?

Thanks a lot! Oh, and apologies to the OP for hijacking the thread, an answer in a new thread or by PM would be fine with me.

You will get more opinions if you start your own thread!!

My experience of smaller Harbeths is that they lack treble. A lot. If you mostly listen to voices and acoustic wood instruments they might be fine for you. They will not give you any listening fatigue.

Hi, @helomech! You seem to be one of the few people around with direct experience with the Spendor SP2/3R2. Could you please elaborate a bit more on:
1. the difference between the SP2/3R2 and the Stirling’s?
2. the difference between the SP2/3R2 and SP100R2, if you’ve heard them (I want to know if the voicing is the same, of course the raw performance should be quite different)?
3. the difference between the SP2/3R2 and the current Spendor Classic range, if you’ve heard them (2/3, 1/2, 100)?

Thanks a lot! Oh, and apologies to the OP for hijacking the thread, an answer in a new thread or by PM would be fine with me.

The SB-88s have a sweeter treble greater bass output, and better dynamics than both the 2/3R2 and C7ES3 - why I find the ToneAudio review so confounding and assume it's really a paid advert. The 88s are equally as resolving as the 2/3R2 which makes them more resolving than the C7s. The 2/3R2s have the warmest tonal balance and biggest sound of the three so I could understand why some may prefer them to the Stirlings. The only potential advantage I heard with the C7s was overall speed, which many often assume is a strength but in IME, it actually hinders the speaker’s detail, as though its speed is damping instrument decay.

I haven’t heard the SP100R2 but I think it relevant to note that I consider the old SP100s to be superior to the 2/3R2s and any other Spendor, Stirling or Harbeth I’ve encountered. If I ever find a pair in good condition I will snatch them up even though I don’t currently have the space. I haven’t heard the most recent Classic series either, but based on my auditions of the A4, I’d bet they’re stellar with greater dynamics than any previous iteration.

My experience of smaller Harbeths is that they lack treble. A lot.

I don't have the C7s, so wasn't going to post in this thread, but I found this comment surprising.  I like treble, and started out with (and still have) a lot of different Klipsch speakers.

I have the 40th anniversary Super HL5 Plus and P3ESR SE and neither are lacking in the treble department, at least in my system.  The P3ESR in particular are revealing information in songs that I'm very familiar with that I never noticed was there before, often in the upper registers.  I listen primarily to classic rock, but also Jazz, Classical, EDM, and more.  The P3s don't have the body, weight, or dynamics of the Super HL5 Plus, but they sound more alike than different.

The C7ES3 treble is incredible and best in the Harbeth line IMHO.  
Possibly the nicest sounding application of an aluminum dome that I have ever heard- natural but with a shimmering amount of air that adds trailing edge detail without going too far.  
The P3ESR and 30.1 / .2 use the soft domes and they are too rounded off for me.  
The SHL5+ have a super tweeter that while impressive does have some cancellations with the main tweeter that give the C7ES3 the edge.  
The 40.1 /2 sound overly natural with a rounded off top end and dominating bottom end. 
Again with the right system synergy and room setup the C7ES3 are spooky good speakers. 

thanks for the helpful overview. 

The Super HL5plus is DEFINITELY not lacking in treble, either measurably or sonically.  It sounds open and airy.   The C7 didn't sound lacking to me either.
The 30.1 was a tad darker sounding than the two above, but still very nice.

Agreed, no lack of treble with the 7’s or SHL 5’s.

@avanti1960
FYI, the P3ESR and the C7 does not use a soft dome tweeter. It’s aluminum!

Harbeth P3ESR loudspeaker. The fundamental design of the P3ESR remains unchanged from its predecessor: a 0.75" (19mm) ferrofluid-cooled aluminum-dome tweeter, protected by a mesh screen (in this version, black instead of gold), is coupled to a 5" plastic-cone woofer, mounted on the front baffle from behind.

Harbeths only lack treble compared to speakers with a tipped-up, intentionally bright response - speakers designed to impress in quick auditions, Golden Ear Tritons for example.

Harbeth doesnt lack treble at all. I actually ended up selling the Shl5+ cause I found them slightly too present in the treble. but this is really my own personal taste, they were not bright, but definitely not dark either.

The 30.2 treble is more to my taste however and the Harbeth ill likely buy next

If your listening space is at least 200 ft sq,  jump on this incredible deal:  

https://www.audiogon.com/listings/lis9e8b2-stirling-broadcast-ls3-6-monitors

This is a steal of a price for one of the best speakers I've heard anywhere. The midrange is incredible. 

I love my Harbeth C7es3.    They paired fantastic with McIntosh.   Great detail and not fatiguing!   

I also listen to everything accept heavy metal/thrash or rap!   The harbeth speakers shine for live concerts and studio!   

I paid 3200 dollars new tiger ebony.   500 for stands  in Chicago 

I have owned many Spendor loudspeakers including the SP 2/3R2s as well as earlier versions of this model and can wholeheartedly recommend them. Actually, over the years this is the speaker I have come back to having owned and sold four pairs. Obviously I like rotating through gear to try different things. Currently using a pair of Spendor SA1s with a pair of subs and enjoying that combo quite a bit. 

I would suggest speakers that are built to represent the recorded material truthfully before you enter into the more coloured world. ATC 11, 19, 20, PMC Result 6 (active) and Quested H108 are fine and affordable examples (all english). Also easy to complement with subs using a good room eq management system like ARC or Dirac.

I am a C7es3  owner for about 2 years. For what its worth I like them very much but like many in this hobby, always wonder what else or 'better' is out there. As a generalization, I would describe them as a 'warm' sounding speaker and they are very natural, with a laid back presentation. On comparison to many audiophile systems I think they have a roll off at the top end (though perhaps many 'audiophile' speakers are just tipped up and aggressive or hard sounding, to my ears), though what is presented I think is very sweet and enjoyable, and resolving.

Take this for what you will - I recently A/B/C compared them to the 30.1 and for kicks, the Heresy III, in the same system with 'good' electronics (though not exactly what I would pick. I think it was a tube vintage McIntosh pre into one of the recognizable name solid state amp though I cant remember what it was) and the same digital source (also dont remember what it was. Not a 100k blow you away type of DAC and not a piece of junk either..). I was thinking I was going to want the 30.1 and that it would present more high-end energy and have a more 'resolved' or detailed sound, but strongly preferred the c7. They just had a 'right' sound about them, more laid back and natural, whereas the 30.1 was a 'tighter' type of presentation (though no more treble energy), with smaller images. Perhaps more of a 'monitor' sound. I don't meant to suggest the c7 is loose or unresolving. My impression was that the c7 was equally resolving and transparent, but just flowed naturally. It made me love my speakers that much more. Then we put on the Heresy. I appreciate why people love those speakers but, there was no comparison to my ear. Although the Heresy (not surprisingly) had a more exciting dynamic presentation, the c7 was fuller, warmer, and far more resolving in terms of representing the sound of instruments. Perhaps its just the sound I am used to but I came away really loving the c7 that much more.

I would also comment that electronics are very important with this speaker. Over time I have auditioned and purchased tube pre and solid state power amps with lots of power. My preference with these speakers is with all solid-state. I think the amp you pair them with should lean toward a lively presentation to give them some life. I found at one point that a pre using Mullard 6sn7 with the harbeths was VERY soggy and dark sounding and just not to my taste. I suppose some may enjoy this. 

I landed on an LFD integrated amp. It is a great match, IMO.

As a takeaway I would say these are as advertised. There are certainly more dynamic or fun (e.g. horns), in your face speakers, perhaps speakers that offer greater detail, but IMO these are great if you like jazz, classical, choral, and pop music. If you want to pump metal or rap, probably not at the top of your list.

you truly don't know what you've got until it's gone with the C7ES3.  they gave me so many moments where I just marveled at the sound and never anything to be irritated about.  but like a bonehead i had to complain about some slightly excessive enclosure warmth on some recordings and at the same time falling for the hype of faster, more efficient speakers so i sold them.  
although the new speakers i bought were clearly an upgrade in sound they simply did not sound natural and did not deliver the same amount of moments to marvel at.  
Harbeth is my brand for life.  

I have the 40.1's and think they produce as accurate a sound as one can achieve in this hobby. I always compare them to the original Quads that I had for 30 years....so natural but without the limitations of the Quads. But they do benefit from powerful amplification. You may be able to find a used pair on the internet that would save you some bucks. As a caveat, I've only heard the 7's several times in short listening sessions but they should sound reasonably similar to the 40's

I owned C7's for about two years after my Quad ESLs quit
They are exceptionally good speakers with a very sweet treble
I was so impressed I decided to step up a notch to Harbeths SHL5+
but I could have lived very happily with the C7's

I have two Graham Slee Golds and they are very uncolored and natural sounding but they are not SUT's....they are to be used after an 
SUT or directly with a MM cartridge. They're at their optimum with the optional power supply

oooops!!!!! sorry about my last post. It was supposed to be in response to a fellow stereophile who is looking for a quality phono preamp

@jim51     I have a pair,  bought them used on the Gon and saved a bit of money.   Something I learned from spending time on Harbeth website is a substantial amount of speakers are using the polypropylene cone material.    Long story short--good for low cost for the builder but not so good for best sound reproduction.   Harbeth does not use poly for cone material--at least not on these.    
I've had mine now for 3 or 5 yrs or so and they remain in my main system.   I sold my ML's and others as well.  What I have left are speakers that are primarily for low wattage amps.   The workmanship is outstanding  as well as the sound.   highs can be etheral depending on material played.   Most life like presentation I have heard in my system to date and no need to spend more.  I think I spent 2200 for mine.  excellent midrange and bass adequate for my needs.  I dont use a sub.     Good luck,  give them a try.
amps currently used.    Emotiva  xpa100 monos.    Pass   XA30.5.       

thanks for the comparative info. I’ll give a listen to ATC. 

Maybe consider the Graham Audio line too, I have had a pair of LS 5/9 from them for nearly 2 years now, very good speakers and totally no listening fatigue, I liked them better than the Harbeth 30.1 

Atc are very amp finicky, just so you know.  That's probably why people go with the active versions.   I personally enjoyed the harbeth sound more with my mc452 in comparison to the atc19 with Mac.  That said, I just couldn't justify pulling the trigger on the 19scms unless I was starting off from scratch.  It was approximately 2000. dollars more in price and it wasn't necessarily better just different.  If I did go atc, I would go actives and save money on not needing an amp.  Plus you won't need to worry about amp pairing and wondering if you're optimizing these speakers.  That's just my opinion.   I also prefer solid state gear with both speakers.  I did try a tube with my Harbeths and they were dull.  The details came alive more than ever, when I added a SS preamp c52.  It was crazy the difference imho.