Differences between Harbeth, Spendor, Graham, etc. ?


This is perhaps a foolish question, given the subjective nature of this hobby, but is there any consensus regarding differences between the above brands? I’m interested in their "traditional" or "vintage" lines, not the more modern-voiced models.

For example, I’ve read that the Spendor Classic series speakers are, overall, warmer/darker than Harbeths and offer a bit more punch in the bass. If this is true, I would lean toward the former.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

stuartk

Showing 4 responses by helomech

Spendor Classics are generally warmer than Harbeth IME. Stirling Broadcast LS3/6s and SB-88s mostly split the difference between the other two (assuming like for like model/size comparisons).

It’s also been my experience that Spendors can handle substantially more power and SPL before they begin to strain, again, when comparing similarly sized models.

Some of the current Grahams and Stirlings, and earlier Spendors (90s) were designed by Derek Hughes. His designs tend to sound better than those of Alan Shaw IMO. 

I suppose that tendency for sibilance in the upper mids is another way of describing what I heard in the 30.2’s (and also in some 40.2’s I’ve heard in a friend’s system). But sibilance is too hard a word, I think. A shade of sibilance, No such thing in the Classic series Spendors I’ve heard ( 3/5 - those before the R2 series I think - , SP 2/3R2, Classic 100) at all, though.

I know exactly the “shade of sibilance” you mentioned. Of all the Harbeths, I find it most apparent in the C7ES3s and SHL5+. Naturally, one would presume it’s the result of their metal tweeters in those models. However, I also heard it to a lesser extent in the 30.1s, and least in the 40.2s and P3ESRs. This leads me to hypothesize that the 8” Radial cones are exhibiting more audible breakup, since they are crossed over relatively high.

To the OP:

The common (perhaps unfortunate) misconception is that world-class midrange performance is the exclusive jurisdiction of these BBC inspired brands and their trademark polypropylene cones. The reality is there are many brands that match and even exceed the midrange performance. Good examples are some of the Joseph Audio and Tyler Acoustic models that employ magnesium Seas Excel drivers. Those drivers can actually make a Harbeth or Spendor sound a little distorted and homogenous by comparison. The truth is that that these BBC-derived brands are all employing drivers that are equivalent in quality and performance to <$100 off-shelf models from Seas, Scanspeak and SB Acoustics. I would pit my Tyler Taylo Ref monitors against any of the aforementioned Brit boxes in terms of all freqs above ≈60Hz. As much as I enjoy and respect these old guard brands (Harbeth/Spendor/Graham et al), they simply do not keep up with speakers equipped with top-shelf parts and drivers IME. I replaced the OEM drivers in my Stirling Broadcast monitors with off-shelf Seas models and they now perform in an entirely different league. The Brit boxes are good among dealer hawked speakers, but their hype (and prices) have become misaligned with their performance in recent years, in my opinion, FWIW.

Hmmm….the only time I’ve heard Harbeth do vocals “exceedingly well” was when I hadn’t yet experienced lower distortion, higher resolution speakers. In more recent years I simply fail to hear what all the fuss is about with regard to their purported midrange and vocal ability. Not only are they readily matched, and in some cases exceeded, by competing BBC derivatives, they are significantly lacking in resolution, realism and tactility relative to brands employing true high end drivers. To my ears, speakers like Joseph Audio, Rockport and Borresen do pretty much everything better, while sounding more realistic and less fatiguing in the process But one must consider some of those are like 4X the price of SHL5s.

The M40.2s are unquestionably the best Harbeths in my opinion, but for their price, I simply don’t understand the appeal. Some other options around the $25k mark are in entirely different leagues to my ears.

I have simultaneously owned the Spendor SP2/3R2 and the Harbeth M30.2 Anniversary for about a year. My amplifier at the time was the Audio Analogue Maestro Anniversary integrated. My take (both speakers used without grills as I found the grills to obscure some detail):

- Spendor: bigger sounding with deeper bass (as expected, given the box and midbass driver size difference), silkier and comparatively more restrained highs that I found to be somewhat better integrated with the mids, and very colorful, natural, organic, textured, lovely mids but with what seems to be a bit of a (rather wide and shallow) hole in the lower mids / upper bass. Robert Greene also mentions a more restrained 200Hz area in his review of the Spendor SP1/2R2. Bass is of the round variety, better suited for reproducing the reverberant body of a double bass than the sharply delineated start / stop of the bass in something like Kraftwerk. They need to be placed well away from the walls and the bass could also be a bit weak compared to the midrange in this case. I'm using them now with an Accuphase amplifier with its loudness button engaged and I'm getting wonderful midbass to midrange body and even quite enough low bass. The midrange is the star of the show, anyway. All in all, wonderful for acoustic music.

- Harbeth: a very refined tweeter, a bit more detailed than the Spendors', but cymbals have less body and midrange centered instruments have a bit of an overemphasis on overtones, I think, making for a less rich gamut of colors. It's a less saturated midrange, like looking at a picture that is a bit more black - white - silverly, comparatively speaking. Robert Plant's voice is too recessed on Led Zeppelin's "Immigrant Song" for example, making the whole piece less musically convincing - I suppose the "BBC dip" is more pronounced in the Harbeths' case?! Texture is a bit more emphasized, which is really nice for strings, especially in the upper bass which is a bit stronger than the rest of the frequencies, making the bass and mids better integrated than in the Spendors' case - especially nice when listening to cello music. Midrange and bass seem drier, though, and harder in a way, as if the midbass driver is made from a harder material than the better self-damping polypropylene of the Spendors (which I suppose it is). Also, the sound is smaller and the bass rolls off quite high, around 60-70 Hz I think, if listened t away from the walls. A more "sober" sound than the more extrovert, joyful Spendors. I sold them and kept the Spendors. 
 

I agree wholeheartedly with this description between these two specific models. I haven’t owned the 30.2s but have auditioned them a few times. I did own the SP2/3R2s for a few years.


A speaker that mostly splits the difference between these two models is the Stirling Broadcast SB-88.