Harbeth 40.2 or Vandersteen Quatro CT

And if you do go with the Vandersteens, the Pass Labs amps will probably hold you back from what they are truly capable of. I say that as a former owner of XA 60.8s, but I have not heard the 260.8s. A no global feedback amp is a better choice. I have the M5-HPAs which were a major improvement. Gone was upper midrange glare. Welcomed was a better sense of realism and immediacy.

I agree that the Harbeth will have a different mid-range sound.  You can probably find a used pair of Vandy 5As for close to $6500 or less at this time so that may be a great option.

Since the Quattros have built-in amps in each speaker for the subwoofers, your amps will only be driving the mids and tweeters (using the hi-pass filters) - completely false statement.  Increasing the power supply capacitors in the amplifier we build also added to the bass improvement in my 5As.

The Vandersteens do so much right and can be adjusted for your room now and in the future.  I do miss the mid-range of my Alon V MKII speakers though in direct comparison.

I also built a pair of the HP filters for my 5s, the original ones to me use basic parts which I upgraded and now they sound much better to my ears.

Happy Listening.

I owned the Harbeth 40.1's for almost ten years and sold them for the Treo CT's. I've since moved on to the Vandy Kento's. Both Harbeth and Vandersteen have loyal fan bases and both are great product lines, but with very different objectives. The Harbeth's were warm, smooth, rolled off in the treble, somewhat overly ripe in the bass, with a very liquid midrange. They were really suited to close field listening, maybe 4-5 feet from the speakers. The 40.2's may be somewhat more flexible as a result of a crossover change, but the key problem, for me, is that they are not time and phase coherent, which affects transient response and ultimate realism. If you listen at low volume and drink several glasses of wine, they'll be fine.

The Vandersteen's are built around time and phase coherence using superb drivers and minimum cabinetry. I had the Treo's, but the Quatro's would add a separately amplified bass module with analogue equalization to smooth out the impact of room nodes. The midrange is superb, and the frequency range is extended top and bottom, but without either edginess or excess bloom. I think both the Treo's and Quatro's are bargains in today's speaker market. What you get with properly set up Vandersteen's and a great recording is the feeling that you could reach out and touch the performers. 

Thanks for everyone’s input.

I previously had 73s3 harbeth speakers and liked them too.

I have heard the vandy 5A and enjoyed it but it’s too big for my moderate sized long but somewhat narrow room where I listen in midfield. I listen approx 9 feet from speakers. Speakers are a little bit over 2 feet from side walls and roughly 3.5 feet from back wall.

I am looking at having to spend 5-6K to upgrade to new Quattro CT installed with balanced adapters.

I might regret the move for sure ....but life’s an adventure

I will try a different preamp then the pass xp32 first see if that makes me less inclined to sell the Harbeth

@karmapolice ,
I don't think you will be disappointed.
If space is an issue, you can do as I have and buy the Treo's and add a pair of 2wq subs-which is probably in the price range you mentioned, if buying used. Though a pair of Sub 3's would probably get you closer to a Kento if not a Quatro. Plus, you'd have the ability to place the subs where they are out of the way.
Bob