@rubicon15 I’ve not compared them, but had owned B&W early in my hifi journey. Spent time listening to the 805 D3’s & 804’s. Certainly had some qualities that I liked, but the two speaker brands are on the opposite spectrum. You either like how B&W sounds or don’t, I believe the same goes with Harbeth. I recall the B&W’s being a little too bright and didn’t have enough of the midrange tone I prefer. I also found them to be fatiguing, all of the B&W gear was driven by McIntosh. Coincidentally, it’s what led me to divest myself of the B&W + McIntosh combo. Having said all of that, the combo is very “lively,” almost wet sounding…which is great for having an energized listening session and some really do prefer that. I do not.
Current or Previous Harbeth Owners…
For those of us that have had or currently have, are there other speakers you’ve listened to that you found sounded “better”? I’m eyeing stepping into a set of 40.2 or 40.3’s, but am also willing to step in a different direction. I realize “better” is subjective, but a speaker that does what Harbeth does, but better.
I have a set of Pass Labs XA100.5’s, FWIW.
59 responses Add your response
@akg_ca I’m not familiar with that particular sub, but I would trust anything ATC makes. I pair my 30.1s with a JLAudio e110 10" sealed sub (receives signal from a very fine electronic crossover), and it’s perfect. @dpac996, I had a modest but amazing sounding pair of ATCs here on the desktop for several years, the SCM12 Pros (passive 2-way). The tweeter is exceptional, just as everyone says, and the 6" mid-woofer is pretty amazing, too. I ended up "trading up" to two pairs of sealed 2-ways that are larger, borderline too large for my desktop (vintage KEF 103.2s & Harbeth 30.1s), both of which have a 8" woofer. As I suspected, the bigger woofer moves more air and gut-punches me better than the ATC could. But really, that’s more a testament to my bass/mid-bass addiction than anything else. True, the Harbeth isn’t as good in the bass/mid-bass as it is in the midrange on up (where it is world class). No problem, though. I’m about due to swap out the 30.1s for the KEFs, which are far more dynamic in the lower register but still sound great on top. What can I say? Life is good.... |
@avanti1960 i felt the very same way about all my Harbeths until I auditioned ATC. They have the potential ( setup dependent) to portray that incredible transparent midrange realism of properly setup Harbeths, but the ATC’s extend top and bottom aspects of the performance. First speaker I’ve had since Harbeth, that imho, does Harbeth natural midrange better than Harbeth. |
i added an ATC C1Sub MK2 premium build subwoofer to flesh out the bottom octave to my 30.2XD’s using the high-level connectors.. . Integration was EZPZ and flawless. I’ve now matched the audio performance of the larger 40.2XD’s.IMO …Because the 30.2’s have the same drivers as the 40.2 but without the latter’s added bass driver, https://atc.audio/hi-fi/loudspeakers/subwoofers/c1-sub-mk2/
|
It's a matter of picking which poison you can live with. What Harbeth does well- a fatigue free sound with very good detail, vocal timbre and tonal realism and a superb midrange- I have not heard another speaker that sound better in those areas. What they do not do exceptionally well is bass articulation, speed and dynamics. If Harbeth made a higher sensitivity floor standing speaker I would be all over it. My last Harbeth (SHL5+) required subwoofer support for world class bass but with an open port and lossy cabinet perfect integration was not achievable. My current Spendor D series floorstander gives you the dynamics, bass and articulation without losing too much in the midrange.
|
@toddcowles : I have owned the Harbeth M30.2 and the Spendor SP2/3R2 at the same time for about an year before selling the Harbeths. That was a couple of years ago or so. The Spendor Classic 100 was a very recent affair and I ended up returning them (which kinda broke my heart, so to speak). The 100’s were offering better separation, much stronger / more impactful upper to mid bass and a slightly clearer and extended treble compared to my SP2/3R2s; however, the midrange was a bit darker and there was a sort of cloudiness / weirdness in the upper bass / lower midrange region making some piano chords sound almost as if the piano was a bit out of tune(!), there was definitely less of the one driver seamlessness of the 2/3s in the bass to midrange area. The bass extension was also less than expected. Overall, I was hearing more sounds but less music. Sad. |
I've never owned Harbeth's but have heard them dozen of times at shows, at a local dealer and a good buddy ownes the 40.1. Just not my cup of coffee, seems too colored and honestly WAY overpriced. (But what high end equipment isn't). Have you listened to Joseph Audio Perspectives? More accurate & musical IMO
|
@donquichotte had you listened to the M series previously to getting the Classic 100’s? I wish I had a shop near my home, closest is about 2 hours, w/o traffic, and unless I’m interested in DAgostino + Wilson, I’m SOL. |
I read a LOT of reviews and user comments about Harbeth & Spendor before picking up a gently used pair of 30.1s. Everything good anyone said about the 30.1s is true. I can pick nits (the mid- and low-bass aren't as thunderous as some other 8" woofer designs), but that matters less than the overall "voice" of this speaker--they sing music to me. I couldn’t possibly fit a 40.1 or 40.2 here, but I heard the latter once and was really wowed. Easy to hear, even in a poorly damped show room, how good that one sounds. |
+1 @gryphongryph I would also add that very few speakers do vocals like the BBC speakers. I would love to own the bigger Grahams some day. When I first heard them, I preferred them over Harbeth 40.2. However, I think 40.3 has closed the gap considerably. |
People have to remember that the BBC designed speakers are a engineering tour de forces of a concept where no budget was ever an constraint. I think most people bad mouthing the BBC design, have never heard un amplified instruments being played. I have the LS5/9 and I get goosebumps hearing a violin or cello playing, just so natural and sweet sounding, Jazz is sublime to listen to also. If one need more omph, get a Rel sub or a pair if you can swing it. |
I’ve had C7ES-3XD, 30.2XD, and 40.3XD. All were very good enjoyable speakers that I had for several years but as this hobby is I moved on.
|
Let me add my voice to the chorus of high praise for the C7ES3. I originally chose that model because more than one Harbeth employee mentioned off the the record that upper management considered the C7 line the "best-sounding" of what Harbeth had to offer (whatever "best-sounding" means -- I can’t get into that here, but regardless, that was a convincing endorsement). I’ve had my pair for, I dunno, 10 years?, and in that time, upgraded from a sub-$1K amp to a $19K T+A. In every case, yes, in terms of voicing and cohesiveness, these little boxes rivaled the Quad ESL (57s) that I’d restored & enjoyed for over 20 years. I’m sure that many people have other favorites in this price range, but overall, these non-flashy little speakers are stunningly lifelike in many ways -- at least in my 14x17 room, paired with a sub. Having said all that, they’re not perfect. They throw a decent soundstage, but don’t disappear as well as some of the competition. Despite their generally excellent imaging, I can always point to the speakers with my eyes closed. However, given all the other strengths of the Harbeth house sound, that’s never been a showstopper for me. they still regularly provide a thrilling listening experience with content like SACD or 45RPM vinyl. These comments only speak to the C7 stand-mount models, which are the only ones I have extensive personal experience with. But my understanding is that the main ways in which the larger and smaller models differ is in bass extension and dynamic range (and, to a minor extent, to treble extension). All Harbeths are reputed to have similar house sound. As for the thin-wall-construction controversy, all I can say is that it seems to work. Aside from the fact that it’s nice to have 15-pound speakers that produce this level of SQ, I did personally confirm that part of the BBC’s design philosophy was to not even try to eliminate all cabinet resonances -- but to instead minimize them and then incorporate any residual resonances into the speaker’s sonic signature. That is, the overall system design expects the cabinet resonances to exist and is tuned to complement them. I verified this by damping the cabinets externally, just out of curiousity. And when I did so, the sound degraded considerably, lifeless, dull, colored. I guess that’s one reason why Harbeth recommends minimizing coupling with even the Harbeth-recommended Sound Anchor stands. Bottom line for me is that the Harbeth line -- especially the C7ES3 -- are undoubtedly worth considering in their respective price ranges. Not for everybody, not for every system, but still an extraordinary box speaker in its price range. Add a top-notch sub like a Perlisten, and you’ll have a heckuva good $5-10K system for a small or mid-sized room.
|
I’m a member of a large audio club and we have a Zoom social weekly. There are a lot of very experienced, even obsessive, audiophiles in attendance. I attended the usual weekly Zoom meeting just two weeks ago and came away with what I think is valuable advice on a speaker that you might consider listening to. Here’s the story I heard: a fellow audiophile member had some Danish speakers in for review which he liked very much. When he had finished his review and returned the speakers he was instantly aware that his Harbeth* speakers sounded dull and unmusical in comparison. The difference was so obvious that he immediately decided he had to sell his Harbeths and buy the Danish speakers, which he did. He is very happy with the change and kept emphasizing how much more musical the Danish speakers were. And, interestingly, the Danish speakers cost about half what the Harbeth’s cost. Perhaps that’s because the Danish speakers are sold direct unlike Harbeth speakers which are sold through distributors and audio shops which raises their cost to the consumer. It also turns out that Harbeth speakers are built to a price point and contain el cheapo parts in their crossovers; the Danish speakers have an opposite philosophy in that their speakers are designed with the best parts that will perfect the way they sound. Also the Danish speakers are shipped free all over the world and have a 60 day trial period. The speakers are Buchardt S400 MKII. They are perfectly suited to his smallish room. I don’t know more.
* I’m not absolutely certain of the model no of his Harbeth speakers I think they were 30.2s. They might have been 40.2s. |
Just like dpac996 I have chosen ATC after several smaller models of Harbeth. ATC does have a better, more colourful midrange and the dynamics are much better. I’m a classical listener and Harbeth is an often advised brand to people like me, for some years now I have felt no need to change my speakers, other equipment yes.
|
Spendor or Graham. I like both better than the Harbeths. The Graham 5/8 is probably the best of the three to my ears. IMHO, there are brands that employ more advanced materials/tech that sound better than any of the thin-wall, BBC derivatives. Some of those are Rockport, Acora, Borresen and Joseph Audio.
|
I own a pair of M30.2 40th anniversary. I have listened to some other speakers since I got them 4 years ago. Afraid to lose that outstanding midrange and soundstage that is so superb with vocals. This speaker is so easy to listen to with its neutral and accurate timber. i recently did an AB comparison with the M30.2 XD and a pair of Fleetwood Deville. Nice but it not float my boat. However the Devore 0/96 I listened to right after were fantastic. Wow! This was something else. Would not have the bass of the 40.3 but in terms of soundstage, texture and organic sound , the DeVore would be something to consider IMHO. A lot more expensive than my M30.2 obviously, but in the price range of the 40.3 |
Interesting post... I had Harbeth M30.1 bought in 2015. Loved them until I happened upon a little know speaker from Canada (by way of Belgium) called the Equation 7. Not a stand mount but a narrow, shallow smaller 2/way tower. Incredibly well built with a beautiful Spanish maple finish. They were great at the shop in NY I found them at paired with a Mastersound integrated so I bought them on the spot. Took them home and immediately inserted them into my setup consisting of Chord, Hovland, Luxman/Hana - was shocked at how much better at everything the Equations were over the Harbeths. A more pleasing sound signature on almost every level. I have since moved on to a more vintage Shindo/Altec setup but I'll never forget how I was floored by a speaker that was so totally unexpected. |
An instrument creates sound. A speaker reproduces sound. Pretty simple really. The Stereophile excerpt is copy. Do you think Fremer or Atkinson would give a Harbeth the same review as Dudley? What about the glowing reviews of a "dead" speakers like a Magico? Anyway, as dpac points out, we all have opinions and these opinions should be respected and welcomed. At least among adults. |
I recently sold a pair of Harbeth C7ES3XD speakers, the latest model, and they left a strong impression. Having owned more than 20 pairs of speakers, I can confidently say these stand out. They achieve a remarkable balance in the mid/upper frequencies, with zero harshness or fatigue that many other speakers in this range can cause. The imaging is fantastic when paired with sufficient power—I'd recommend at least 50 watts to get the best results, especially in a small to medium-sized room. The resonance argument is silly. It doesn't matter. I've encountered speakers that struggle with resonance, or have zero, but the Harbeths use it to their advantage somehow. I decided to part with these speakers mainly due to my challenging room layout, which required frequent repositioning for optimal performance. They also benefit from ample power, and while they worked beautifully with my Supernait 3 (for sale!), I generally prefer tube amplification. I paired them with a Leben amp as well, and the Supernait-Harbeth combination was particularly stunning. Although this was my first experience with Harbeth, I can see myself revisiting them in the future. While they benefit from a subwoofer for deeper bass, the C7ES3XD has a satisfying, full-bodied sound. Their box size—comparable to the upper torso of an average person—seems to contribute to their weighty, realistic presence. They won’t mimic the depth of a large-scale concert or rock the house with Pink Floyd, but they excel in drawing you into intimate, smaller-scale music venues. |
I would add one more thing..I moved from M30.1 to the 30.2Xd...The 30.1 did indeed have a touch more "warmth"that could come off as slightly veiled or too dark with the wrong amplification..The 30.2Xd does not have that additional warmth,adding a bit more nuetrality through the upper bass,lower mid range..An email to Harbeth returned the info that the inside of the cabinets & crossover received a little tuning to bring this about... |
I can't speak to the 40.2's but I owned 30.2 XDs and now have 40.3 XDs. I drive them with a T+A PA 3100HV integrated and they sound great. I've had the T+A for about 7 months now and it never gets boring or fatiguing. (I had a BAT VK 3500 before the T+A it it was just OK with the 40's.) While I enjoyed several tube amps with the small Harbeth's, the 40's absolutely need big powerful SS amplification. I'm guessing your amps would drive them really nicely. My experience with other brands is limited but if your music preferences matches what Harbeth's are renowned for, I think you will be happy with them.
|
Why are you presuming that I’m knocking HARBETHs. I never said nor implied any such thing , I am assuredly not knocking “thin wall” HARBETHs or any other BBC monitor design .,,, I love my HARBETH M30.2 XD’s on TonTraeger speaker stands as defo keepers long-term, full stop. . All I posted herein was a simple personal experiences opinion that (a);I prefer to keep my current speakers over the many contenders and pretenders at the 30.2 price-point strata , and up to double theirpricepoint strata.Adding ahigh-end ATC subwoofer to flesh out the bottom end for these standmounts provided me me with a peer speaker system to the higher model 40,2’s. (b) and yes ..Ive also auditioned other speaker brands (mostly at audio expos) that could sway me to change, BUT ONLY AT significant multiples ( ….plural ….) in 30.2 speaker pricepoint AND a matched significant multiple in price of upstream electronics to drive them. Intuitively unless I win a mega lottery, nuthin’ is gonna change for me, |
@freediver copy that. Good excerpt. I really do love Harbeths and always wanted to try the babies in a small near field setup; I’ve discovered, however that for the overall genres of music I love, ATC SCM40 v2 have that juicy vibe and incredibly transparent midrange of the Beth’s I’ve tried, but to my ears do the music even more justice. Classical and big band scale super well and vocalists have that lit from within quality my ears 👂 adore. 🥰 cheers mates and enjoy the Holiday!
|
@arafiq thanks, I will try a good solid state amp with the 40.3 sooner or later. Maybe a Hegel. At the moment I run a full tube system with a Mcintosh c2600 tube preamp into various tube power amps. The Harbeth matches nicely with the MC275 and the Music Reference RM-200 which is a hybrid solid-state/tube 100 wpc. About the lossy cabinets, I thought that this is backed by scientific data from the BBC research. This type of construction allows the cabinet to dissipate energy in a way that produces a natural and uncolored sound, especially for voice reproduction. |
@dpac996 ,this replier continues to parrot his "opinion" in thread after thread regarding Harbeth speakers,denigrating speakers & a maker who are cherished world wide by end users & reviewers..IF the cabinets contributed so much "coloration" as he states the WHY are they so highly regarded by EVERY SINGLE professional reviewer that has put their time & effort into providing the potential buyer needed Intel? |
@freediver I believe instead of BS, it’s called an opinion, and believe it or not, some members actually have differing experiences that shape these things called opinions. Enjoy the music!🎶 |
The BS regarding the cabinet resonance of Harbeth is laughable..WTH do you people think a Cello,Violin, Les Paul,Strat or even a close mic’d drum kit would sound like without the body resonance? |
Simple fact that the energy dissipates by vibrating the cabinet which creates coloration through resonance. Now if you like this type of sound then more power to you, but I believe that speaker cabinets should be inert with only the sound of the drivers contributing. Dissipating this energy properly is not a simple proposition however. When you check out some of the more prominent speaker manufacturers they spend an enormous amount to time, energy and expense in the construction of the cabinet. Some may disagree but things like wide baffles, thin walled cabinets and parallel surfaces are not things that typically contribute to accurate reproduction. They are also very inexpensive, comparatively, to other types of construction. So when people discuss the nature of Harbeth sound they describe the texture, tone and natural presentation of the speaker. I take this to mean that they dont hear these attributes on other speakers to the same degree. I attribute this to the fact that Harbeths and similar are coloring the sound in ways that other speakers do not. Some really like this presentation, but I think it is far from natural. My preference is for a transducer that comes as close as possible to the original signal and editorializes less.
|
@akg_ca Why would you call the thin wall design a major detriment? Many other speakers use this design including Spendor, Graham, Falcon, Stirling, etc., etc,. It's been around for over 60 years and many enjoy BBC type speakers! |
At last someone mentions the cabinets. In my opinion, the thin walled, "lossy" cabinets used on the Harbeths is a major detriment. I think this applies to all speakers with this type of construction. The designer offers an explanation as to why this is a viable method of construction, but this explanation makes no sense. |
@toddcowles nice post I enjoyed a few models from Harbeth; SHL5+XD, C7ES3 XD, M40.2 and M40.3XD. good luck! |
@chrys71 Indeed! Harbeth 40.x is a phenomenal speaker. It's for a select group of audiophiles who appreciate good tonality and timbre, realism, and vocal purity. In my case, the most potent combination was a solid state class A amplifier paired with a tube preamp -- best of both worlds. You'd be surprised how much more the 40.x can offer when a powerful amp takes control of those 12 inch woofers. |
My history of speaker ownership, in no particular order. Quad 988, Kef Reference 5, Stirling LS3/6, Klipsch Heresy 3, Kef LS50, Magnepan 1.7, Spendor BC1, Harbeth C7 40th anniversary edition. I have also heard numerous speakers in shows, dealers, etc. I now own Harbeth 40.3. Out of the speakers mentioned above I have kept only the Stirling LS3/6 because they are made by Derek Hughes, whom I admire, and resemble the 40.3 sound but in a much smaller scale. The Harbeth 40.3 imo surpass all speakers that I owned previously. They excel in tonality, realism, voices, dynamics and they are tube friendly which is important to me. I have tried them with a MC275, Quicksilver mid monos, Cary CAD-300sei, and they have always sounded their best. YMMV, but for me, the 40.3 is a truly end game speaker. |
I'm a bit in a similar position trying to upgrade from another BBC speaker, the Spendor SP2/3R2. Admittedly I couldn't test a lot of brands, but I couldn't find the "better" sound, at least not for a decent amount of money. I have recently tested a pair of Sonus Faber Serafino at home and they didn't quite cut it (a very forward but otherwise wonderful tweeter, by the way). I would have liked to also try Devore, Fink, Tannoy (and maybe Fyne) and the other BBC type speakers - Graham, Stirling, maybe you can check them out, I couldn't. So I have just bought the bigger Spendors, the Classic 100 (the equivalent of the Harbeth M40.x). Small room so bass is a challenge, but we'll see what room treatment can do about it.
I have also owned a pair of Harbeth M30.2 Anniversary and frankly preferred the Spendors. You can read my impressions here: https://forum.audiogon.com/posts/2700741. For others or in a different system the Harbeth's could simply be the ticket. |
@deep_333 hahahahahahahaaa,I've seen some delusional,absolutely asinine statements on this site but yours has to rank right up there in the top 2 or 3! |
Sound quality wise, getting a harb 40 would be a waste of these Pass Lab amps, i.e., these are good amps. 20k for that Harb is broad daylight robbery of old men on social security. The Harbeth with its poor quality design/build at most is worth 1k or 2k. It really does not sound any better. Get a Wharfedale Elysian Or Get a Mofi Sourcepoint 888 for 5k and pair it with those Pass amps....Both the Wharfedale and Mofi were designed by higher aptitude British guys, i.e., much higher aptitude than heritage Harb’s daddy and hence they tend to walk all over 20k Harbs.
|