It's not so much your room size I'd be concerned with but the 15' listening distance. If you play your music loud (as heard from your seating position) you're likely to strain speakers of that size and power handling.
Whether they're the best speakers under $5K is totally dependent on your personal preferences, not any pro review or marketing hype. I found them to be underwhelming and tonally inaccurate - somehow they managed to make plastic and fabric diaphragms sound like metal. That's how I hear them anyway.
I would look into a used pair of Devore O/93s or new Tannoy Eatons.
For fast and tight kickdrums, nothing I've heard at that price will beat Klipsch Cornwall IIIs. They can handle rock, classical and jazz with equal aplomb. Surprisingly, they're just as "warm" if not more so, than the Harbeths I've heard. They'll fill your space with rock concert SPLs if needed, but sound just as good at background levels.
|
I’ve Heard Harbeth sound the most like real with instruments and Klipsch will excite but aren’t as true That’s the problem with relying on opinions of others. Everyone hears differently. Harbeths are good but I had the opposite experience in which Klispch Heresy 3s had greater tonal accuracy, to my ears anyway. Harbeth has a strong fan base and potent marketing, but they’re hardly the only competent player. Personally, I think most of the other BBC lineage brands: Graham, Stirling Broadcast and Spendor produce more accurate tone. I can’t exactly claim I’m a musician but my daughter is and I have guitars, a cello and viola at home. If you want a crazy accurate speaker in terms of tonal accuracy, you’d be hard pressed to beat the Stirling Broadcast LS3/6s at any price. They’re priced right at $5K. Unfortunately, they also are too small for your space. The Devores will load your room. The Vandys 3As might be good as well, but like the BBC derivatives - they’re not really designed for high SPLs -- nor are they best for rock. For EDM and Rock, you want hard-hitting, kick in the chest bass. You won’t get it with the British monitors, or planars, or electrostats. You want a large-cone-surface speaker with high power handling. |
|
HELOMECH ...here’s the deal with that , its a trap to a degree , once you get the 30.1’s , Harbeth comes out with the BETTER bigger, ones 40.1 , then 40.2’s ....I want to buy something and be done with it , not worry that the upgraded model is so much better....but you’re right 40.1 better for my room for sure...40.2! $15K! done :) BTW , most of the people I’ve talked to on Audiomart selling their 30.1’s are upgrading to 40.1 or 40.2 !
I called Klipsch and they referred me to a place in Sacramento that may have their Heritage lines on floor....if not I’ll definitely get to LA eventually to scope out...thanks! They make small changes periodically, like every 8 years or so, if that. I can’t imagine the difference would be worth replacing a pair of .1s. I also doubt they’ll be coming out with a larger model anytime in the near future. If you’re patient, you could probably find a near-mint pair of Spendor SP100s for under $4K - approximately same size as 40.1s and better sounding IMO - better than some $20K speakers. However, they too are not really designed for hard rock. The Spendor D7s might just fit your needs - British midrange with some real bass power. When I was in Sac last year, the only Hi-Fi dealers were Magnolia - inside Best Buy, and Paradyme Sight and Sound. Neither had Klipsch Heritage, but hopefully that’s changed. Good luck. |
@murphythecat
It’s clear you have an obvious bias for Harbeth being that you own the SHL5s. I’m sorry you get so easily offended, but I hear what I hear and in my opinion, Harbeths are the least natural sounding of the BBC derivatives. My first experience with the brand was buying a pair of C7s - against my dealer’s recommendation as he too prefers the other brands despite selling a lot of Harbeths. He said they’re one of his best sellers because people don’t even bother to audition the competition - they just drink the Harbeth Kool Aid and insist on buying them, just as I did in the beginning.
Even after I went with a different brand I continued to give other Harbeths a chance, but they just don’t hold a candle when it comes to tone, microdynamics and inner detail. People often refer to them as BBC speakers with a "modern" sound. I’d agree with that because I find them just a bit fatiguing as I do many modern speakers. I’ll admit they throw a wider soundstage than the others, and I like their appearance the best - sort of ironic considering Spendor manufactures their cabinets.
BTW, there's no way in #€(( the SHL5s go clear down to 30Hz, and you certainly woudln't know buy listening to them in your tiny space. |
@gosta
I wouldn’t call the Harbeth bass "muddy," but it’s definitely not as punchy or dynamic as ATC. - that goes for all the BBC derivatives. What bothered me about the C7s, especially, was their cabinet was very easy to localize in the sound "picture." They didn’t perform the disappearing act very well. The bass was sort of like what I find in stock automotive speakers - overblown in the upper bass. It’s hard to describe, other than to say it sounded like the cone was working a little too hard and the cabinet needed a larger port. That wasn’t the case as much with the SHL5 but it was with the M30s.
The Harbeth midrange is pretty good but they just don’t resolve as much of the music as the competition. They have a brighter treble and upper midrange, which I suspect may be mistaken for greater detail by many listeners. I think the inherent benefits of a plastic cone are lost on Harbeths, because to my ears, they sound like what I associate with ceramic-coated aluminum drivers. It’s as though their goal of creating a very stiff plastic cone resulted in negating the inherent dampening properties of the plastic - so they sound almost like a metal cone. That’s just how I hear them and it goes for the whole range, from the P3s to the M40s.
I’m reluctant to provide these opinions because as you’ve probably noticed, their fanbase is an extremely sensitive and defensive bunch. As I’ve said before, this isn’t to say they’re bad speakers in the grand scheme of things, but I strongly feel they are over-hyped. I can only guess their popularity has to do with their much larger distribution network (in the U.S. anyway), their greater presence at hi-fi shows, and Alan Shaw’s subtle but effective prowess in content marketing. I also have to wonder if some of the audio rags are on their take. Tone Audio wrote a comparison piece where they claimed the C7s were a much better speaker than the Stirling Broadcast SB-88s. I couldn’t have disagreed more with that review. IME and opinion, the reality is quite the opposite. The SB-88s are the better speakers unless one judges them solely on expanse of the soundstage.
Being that you’re accustomed to ATC and Tannoy, I don’t know that you should bother with a BBC type speaker unless you want something a little warmer, in which case I’d recommend either the Grahams or Spendor Classics.
|
@murphythecat
I could really care less what you’re "tired of" me doing. I couldn’t give to licks about your opinions and they are just that - opinions - they’re no more valid than my own. You’re not going to stop me from posting my own. Yes, the C7s are the only Harbeths I’ve actually owned, but I’ve heard the others in dedicated listening rooms, driven by high-end gear. I’ve heard them enough to have formed my conclusion - that they don’t sound as natural or as resolving as the others. It’s just my opinion and it’s no more valid than yours. Folks here can take it for just that. I’ve become a bit of a Spendor fanboy, but in case you didn’t,
notice, I recommended the OP consider Klipsch or Tannoy for his needs. I won’t claim that Spendor are the end-all be-all of speaker design or that they’ll sound most natural to every listener.
I can tell you that I really wanted to prefer Harbeths, because I love the aesthetics of their cabinets - especially the Eucalyptus and Zebrawood veneers. Unfortunately, they just don’t do it for me sonically. I’m glad you’re happy with the SHL5s - really, because all that matters in the end is that we’re happy with our individual systems. All I suggested to the OP was that he give the competition a chance, and not assume the M30s are the best speaker under $5K. I’m sure you would agree that it’s foolish to make such an assumption about any speaker without some auditions.
|
08-12-2018 1:07pmi dont know
i feel like theres a limit to opinions and sometime we need to compare two speakers in the same room and the preference will be much less subjective then we think.
everyone who both heard, in my room, the graham ls59 and harbeth shl5plus prefered the harbeth. all i care to say. This debate could go on endlessly if we start throwing in the differences in partnering gear and rooms. If we all heard exactly alike, we'd have the same size and shape of ears - our ear bones would have to be identical in shape and size as well, and have suffered the same level of deterioration. It seems to me you're inferring that you have the final say in what constitutes "natural" sound, simply because you've made some A/B comparisons with a few buddies. You apparently believe in the importance measurements. If measured performance is so critical to the enjoyment of a speaker, you might as well go buy a $500 pair of studio monitors. Peace. |
Harbeth mid range uses a soft cone material that is inert. Some form of polypropylene that remains soft and stable. Similar to ATC which use a doped fabric both drivers are intrinsically damped. I believe this is the trick to audibly superior mid range - others are chasing highly rigid materials for cones and these all have a characteristic resonances that are imparted on top of the music. An intrinsically damped cone has blacker blacks to use a visual analogy. This is why Harbeth mid range sounds so clean.
FWIW - the other BBC designs with the harder polypropylene material a la Rogers etc. can not compare to Harbeth. The harder polypropylene cones used in most other BBC knock offs imparts a nasal character to the mid range. How on earth did you come to this conclusion? It couldn't be any further from reality. Harbeth by far uses the hardest polypropylene. It's obvious by simply tapping on them. The surface-doped cones of Stirling, and Spendor's EP77, and the clear cones of Graham and Spendor's EP38 are much softer to the touch. It's easy to understand how they're considered intrinsically damped - not at all like the Harbeth Radial material. as for believing my own experience, i do. first, i believe in good procedure when testing and comparing gear: level matched AB testin: any other test have been proven to be very susceptible to bias. then using a well treated room, with the same electronics.
you clearly never did such extensive pre requisite or even went close to this to compare the graham ls59 and harbeth shl5plus. you never even heard both in the same room. yet, you go around multiple forums claiming youve heard them all bbc speaker companies and that harbeth is the worst of the bunch. I really don't need to do such tests. They've been proven to be unreliable anyway, as has been discussed to death in SHF. I claim they're the least good of the bunch, because to my ears, they don't even belong in the same conversation. Their sound doesn't justify the price. An example: the $1350 Vandersteen 1Cis blow the C7s away in almost every regard. The SHL5s have good clarity but they do nothing significantly better than many $2k speakers. Their resolution is lacking and they struggle to do the disappearing act. Harbeths as a whole are slightly warmer than many brands but are much brighter than all other BBC derivatives. One doesn't even have to listen to them in person, let alone the same room, level-matched with the same gear to hear it. It's a glaring difference that's obvious even in YouTube clips. I suppose I can understand the "warmth" claim if it's coming from an old timer, assuming that person has considerable high-frequency hearing loss. Once again, I'm not a Harbeth hater as you claim. I simply believe they offer the lowest value proposition out of the BBC family. Again, I really wanted to prefer them, as they have the best aesthetics by far. Unfortunately, their sonics just don't compete. And next time a thread like this pops up, I will certainly chime in with my opinion, especially now that I know how much it gets your goat. Bye Bye now. |
@d2girls
troll
trōl/
noun
a mythical, cave-dwelling being depicted in folklore as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having a very ugly appearance.
Well, I’m no Brad Pit doppelganger but no, not a troll. As I mentioned earlier, I’m not going to quit sharing my honest assessment out of concern for the sensitivities of others here. So you’re a millennial and bought 30.2s? Being that you’re young and probably haven’t suffered much hearing loss yet, do try to audition Stirling Broadcast SB-88s or Graham LS5/9s. Like yourself, I’m a relatively young guy around these parts, and I find these speakers sound far more natural. They have a warmer balance without any loss in detail (more detail in fact).
|
@murphythecat Interesting, in 2017 you bought unheard harbeth c7es3. was it because there was no dealer around? Did you really only heard the C7es3 model, yet go on and on talking about harbeth but only heard the C7es3 and rely on Youtube videos? My experience with c7es3 was that the treble was tiny bit edgy. is that why now you say that Harbeth are bright speakers? You’re making assumptions based on my past threads here. I’ve heard other Harbs in person, including the SHl5+. I went to RMAF the last 2 years. Heard the 30.2s just last year and the 40.2s the year before. I live fairly close to a Harbeth dealer. As I stated earlier, the C7s were the only ones I’ve owned. I bought them unheard because my dealer didn’t have any set up for demo at the time, but they were the model within my budget. Earlier that week, I spoke with Gene Rubin (not my dealer) and he claimed the Harbeths are best, regardless of model; so being that I preferred the Harbeth aesthetic, I ignored the advice of my dealer and took the plunge on the C7s. I’d agree with you that they’re Harbeth’s least enjoyable (or the least pleasing tonal balance) speaker. I’d also agree that they have an edgy treble. However, it’s not so much the treble that bothers me when it comes to Harbeth, it’s a "house sound" I’ve heard in all my auditions -- a sort of cold, metallic-like overtone in the midrange/upper midrange. Since they use various tweeter types, I can only guess that it’s attributable to the Radial cones. I only mentioned YouTube because I found that sound character is even apparent through some video clips, such as those made by Cyrus Audio. I also found it was very apparent in HR’s binaural recording of the 30.2s. I didn’t expect it to be so through compressed YouTube audio, but it is. Please read over this paragraph again, so you don’t make any more false assumptions regarding my experience. The Grahams I heard at the home of a guy who bought some Maggies from me. He had a large collection of speakers. I couldn’t understand why he wanted 1.7s when IMO, he had a wealth of far superior speakers, but that’s a conversation for another day. I’d agree that the Grahams don’t throw as large a soundstage, if that’s what you meant by "distribution." I already mentioned earlier that Harbeths throw a larger soundstage. They are better in creating a sort of "wall-of-sound" experience. I personally don’t care for that type of presentation. In fact, it reminded me of the Maggies, in that they created an expansive soundstage but at some expense of resolution. I find it odd that I’m being the one accused of having an agenda, yet you are the one who is claiming a single brand (Harbeth) is the all-around superior BBC-lineage brand. I have my favorites so far, but if Harbeth ever comes out with a speaker that knocks my socks off, I won’t hesitate to buy it (assuming I can afford it of course). That’s all I have to say on the matter, we’ve hijacked this thread enough already. I hope the OP will audition many brands and decide for himself, which is what I initially suggested. |
