The Harbeth phenomenon

See here for the video of the amplifier power demonstration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRMR9JZ1m0s

I own the harbeth 40.2 speakers and my 85 watt VAC tube integrated sounded great with certain types of music but could not provide adequate instrument separation or tight bass for more complex musical passages....

I am now running the harbeth pass labs 250 watt integrated and have better grip and slam while still sounding sublime on vocals and small scale jazz 

Rogers LS3/5a’s are not dynamic and their efficiency is very low and they have no low bass. The internal crossover is more like a small amplifier and sucks up a lot of power. And Rogers LS3/5a’s really do sound best with tube electronics. Plus they can be quite fussy about placement and stands, and other things. It depends a lot on what your listening priorities are as to whether you think Rogers LS3/5a’s are better than some other particular speaker. Obviously bass freaks need not apply. Or rock freaks for that matter. But in certain important areas, like voices, Rogers LS3/5a’s are very difficult to beat. At the end of the day requirements for dynamics and loudness can trump other factors.

The BBC research department  was sadly closed ages ago. For a few years their designs were still being produceed by license holders, but this gradually ended with the demise of successive manufacturers (it never was a very profitable business) and the increased difficulty to obtain the original drivers. So all that remained were BBC inspired designs, following in the same tradition of thin walled damped panels, complex crossover designs  etc. Some of these manufacturers marketed these new designs under their own name and as their own designs (Harbeth, Spendor) but the commercial people in the BBC decided they could make some bucks selling licenses to the orginal model names, even though these speakers only share the name, and are not designed by any BBC department. In the best cases, what they share is the design principles and the ethos of neutrality. But they no longer are the original designs. Personally I own both the original BBC designed Rogers LS3/5a and the modern Harbeth P3ESR and to my mind there is not a shade of doubt that the Harbeth is the by far better speaker. It is far more neutral, has  more and better bass (and almost no bass hump) and handles way more power. Manufacturing quality is also better.

I use a 70 watt EAR 890 tube power amplifier with my Harbeth 30.1s. It sounds spectacularly good. This amplifier replaced a pair of solid state Exposure 16 monoblocks which produced 140 watts. The tube amps sound much better.

I’m a bit perplexed by the Harbeth popularity myself. I think they are decent speakers but to my ears, their BBC brethren is much better. People often describe them as "warm," "rolled-off," or "romantic," but I found they sounded a tad bright, clinical, and forward. Their tone is more neutral than warm, similar to a studio monitor.

AS has an obvious penchant for marketing, which I believe accounts for much of their follwing. They also have a much larger dealer network than Graham, Stirling, or Spendor.

Alan Shaw himself argues that you need power, and the more the better. At a recent show in Hilversum in the Netherlands the power meters on the amplifier showed it was producing some 500 watts per channel to drive the M40.1 during peaks in the music. Even Alan Shaw was surprised and it most certainly persuaded me.

Lol, a good track to play at high volumes if you want to promote such a fallacy. I doubt you'd ever blast that song on your P3ESRs.

Understood.   I take a less scientific approach to audio and just go with what sounds best to my ears.  

I am a fan of Harbeth: they are the only dynamic speakers that I have heard that are almost as transparent and invisible as Quad electrostats. My main system has Quad 2805 electrostats (plus a 400 watt powered sub) driven by a refurbished 2x140 watt Quad 606-2. My earlier refurbished 2x45 watt Quad 303 was clearly not powerful enough in the quite large room, and sounded strained. The 606-2 sounds the same as the 303 at low levels, but is more dynamic and cleaner at higher levels. I may even opt for a pair of 2x260 watt Quad QMP monoblocks as my next upgrade.
My desktop system uses Harbeth P3ESR speakers, driven by a refurbished Quad 405-2, and I think that is about right for these inefficient speakers in a small/medium size room. It was Harbeth’s Alan Shaw himself who persuaded me that you need power, and the more the better. See here for a thread on the Harbeth User Group, with quite a few contributions by Alan Shaw himself, who, I think, would know best what his speakers like: http://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/forum/the-science-of-audio/amplifier-matching-mismatching-and-cli...
I know there are good valve amplifier designs, but with many their for me fatal flaw is their load dependent frequency response, and that is why I would never contemplate them. There are many Stereophile tests that show these deviations in embarrassing clarity. Their distortion figures are also a lot higher, so what do I get in return for more money, more hassle, less energy efficiency and a fequency response that sometimes looks as if an equalizer has been at work to produce that glowing warm and/or airy sound? An amplifier with a frequency response that has big and audible peaks and dips is not a straight wire with gain. Everybody is free to want their own tone control system, but for me neutrality is what I want.

Willem,
Do you own Harbeth...and if so, have you tried many moderate powered tube amps? 

As it relates to the flagship M-40.1's, reviews from Stereophile, 6moons and Tone Audio share my experience that moderate power tube amps (as low as 25 wpc) can drive this speaker with excellent results.   

Alan Shaw himself argues that you need power, and the more the better. At a recent show in Hilversum in the Netherlands the power meters on the amplifier showed it was producing some 500 watts per channel to drive the M40.1 during peaks in the music. Even Alan Shaw was surprised and it most certainly persuaded me.
Alan Shaw also warns that many tube amps have a non linear frequency response under real speaker loads. Harbeths have a relatively benign impedance curve, but even so, why degrade the carefully crafted flat frequency reponse of the Harbeth designs?

Cantorgale,
I'm on my second pair of 40.1's and have also owned SHL5's.  I prefer tube amps with both speakers... and I've tried a lot of amps, both SS and tube.  I'd be surprised if you'd need anything more powerful than a tube amp with 40 to 60 WPC to adequately drive your 30.1's.  I currently swap between a Music Reference RM9 MKII (125 WPC) and a VAC Renaissance 30/30 MKIII Signature (32 WPC).   The VAC 30/30 is not great for cranking up the volume with rock music, which I rarely do, but it's outstanding with female vocals, jazz and acoustic music.  Don't hesitate to try a tube amp... you don't know what you are missing!   

Just because this thread has been bumped...

An audio store has opened up nearby me and they sell Harbeth.  So I'm often strolling by and stop in, sometimes to buy some vinyl.  They usually have a pair of Harbeths playing.

I have to say...damn the Harbeth sound is seductive!

And this is coming from someone who actually sold his pair of Harbeth Super HL5 plus speakers not long ago!  (I kept my Thiel speakers instead).

Harbeths have such a comfy sound, with beautiful tone, so rich and full and big and mid-rangey.   I always marvel at voices through the Harbeths.  Somehow they are portrayed in a more naturally soft and round, realistic way, vs most speakers which make vocalists sound more hard and electronic.

And the Harbeths seem more amplifier agnostic than other speakers in my experience (as Alan Shaw would claim).  I favor tube amps for my speakers, and the SHLplus speakers sounded great on my Conrad Johnson tube amps.  But at the shop they are hooked up to SS amps and they still make me stop in my tracks, beckon me to sit down and stay to listen. 

Ultimately I know through comparison that I find my Thiels overall more satisfying for my tastes.  But if I didn't have a wife wagging her finger about my speaker addiction, I'd likely grab a pair of Harbeths for a second system.

@el34 
Recognizing this an old thread, it is relevant to my current situation. Like you, I am a classically trained musician (singer) with decades of performing experience, and so find my Harbeth m30.1s both accurate and immensely satisfying.  

I currently run them on a Musical Concepts modded Hafler 125 wpc solid state amp. I just swapped out my solid state MC/Hafler DH 110 pre for a tube line stage and am very satisfied with the effect.

I remain interested in a tube amp. However, I have been warned off by so many because of the Harbeths 85db efficiency that I am concerned about low power tube amps - contra your experience. 

If you are still around this user group, I'd be very interested in your input. 

cantorgale@gmail.com

Pubul57 - I'm sorry. I was a little harsh with my comment. I get frustrated when I read some of the advice given on the forum and I was lashing out. There was a point when most advice given to me was based on specs. It got to a point that specs was all I cared about, and I bought a lot of brand new equipment based on advice, specs, and what used to work well with what equipment. I read on here recently where someone asked a question about the Harbeth and Rogue Audio combo and someone replied that it would absolutely not work, yet it was a wildly popular room in Montreal in 2010 and it's what I own. The OP made his decision based on that one persons comment. He might love what he has now, but it's a shame that he never got the chance to hear the Rogue with C7's. Giving advice on how something sounds is similar to advice on how something tastes. I love tomatoes but you might hate them. You will never know until you try them. If I told you they were disgusting, you may never try them.

fwiw...i have listened to spendors many times....a direct competitor to Harbeth...both in terms of cosmetics and performance...and I must say...impressive results...a very relaxed, somewhat polite presentation...but that is the old school.Brit sound...they too for years.
avoided computer modulations for exhaustive listening tests...good.old lymey engineering mates!

Constructive.....not.

I suppose that would depend on who is commenting. Some people that like music and listening to it as an aesthetic experience, also have critical faculties for judging their equipment - these to traits are not mutually exclusive - though not always guaranteed to be found in the same person. I find many folks whose comments seem very constructive - they do not justify their purchases, they explain the reason for their purchase - it is not a question of the blind leading the blind, though it does happen occasionally on AGON -- you can usually tell the difference, with patience.

These are people that listen to tiny clips of music to critique their gear. They're not music fans.

actually listening music through harbeth makes me listen music and concentrate on beauty of music .Emocional impact created by harbeth sings all day long in my soul .That is what i like very much abaut harbeth.

harbeth owners are no different than any other hi-end owners...including myself... point being we all feel the need to justify our purchases....similiar to mac/apple users...that being said... Harbeth garners great reviews and loyal customers...something to said for that

: Brianmgrarcom
This is my personal opinion and I will not tell you why I like them because that doesn't pertain to anyone but me.
Then I don't get the point of your post. These are opinion forums.

Opinion forums? Maybe. Constructive.....not. These are people that listen to tiny clips of music to critique their gear. They're not music fans.

All I can say is the Compact 7ES-3 is the first speaker I've heard where I couldn't hear the speaker, just hear the music. Low volume listening is superb. My B&W's have to be cranked up a little for low volume, but not the C7's. They're very natural sounding. The cabinet doesn't put out any off noises. I love front firing ports as well. I've recently come to the conclusion that for me, I don't like floor standers with rear firing ports. Five or 6 inch drivers don't sound as good as 8 inch to me, especially for low volume. They don't move enough mass.

Donjr, what you like is indeed your decision and preference, what is helpful are descriptions of what you hear and comments on performance. So your tastes are yours, but your observations are worth sharing.

This is my personal opinion and I will not tell you why I like them because that doesn't pertain to anyone but me.

Then I don't get the point of your post. These are opinion forums.

I travel around the U.S. for work and am out of town with nothing to do many weekends throughout the year. In my spare time I like to audition gear. I don't currently own Harbeth's (that might change tomorrow) but they've been my all around favorites. I'm finally going to hear them paired with my amp tomorrow. Of all the speakers I've encountered over the past 32 years since I purchased my first new pair of Genesis G1's............ the Harbeths are my favorites. This is my personal opinion and I will not tell you why I like them because that doesn't pertain to anyone but me.

El34,

What's the difference between a musician and a large pizza?

*
*
*
*
*
*

A large pizza can feed a family of four !!! :)

Mlsstl hits the nail on the head. Generally it depends on the size of the room and preference. The C7ES3 will still sound good in near-field configuration. A C7 owner had his speakers 7' distance away in his small room and had no issues. I've tried a distance of 6.5' with my SHL5s and do not perceive any serious shortcomings. I settled with a distance of 9' though and thought the sound was more coherent in the lower midrange and airier with more extended highs. To summarize, it depends on what kind of presentation you would prefer.

I recently auditioned a pair of 7-ES3s for a couple of hours. The distance was more like 7 1/2 or 8 feet, but I didn't notice any driver integration problems at that distance. I found them a very natural sounding speaker, devoid of any audiophile gimmicks.

But then Sam T. is a professional reviewer and by trade has to find something to call out. And different people are sensitive to different things. That said, I've read Tellig uses this model Harbeth as his reference, so it can't be too much of an issue.

Sounds like you're at the point where you simply need to listen for yourself.

In his review of the Compact 7s, Sam Tellig said you've really got to listen to them from at least nine feet away. Any closer, he said, and the drivers don't really come together as one. Has anyone else found this to be true?

-Bob

I have a pr of 40.1's. They really are amazing speakers.
I too attend live concerts regularly. I also have a musical household - my son plays piano and violin, I play violin, and my other son plays trumpet. I know what instruments should sound like.
These speakers do not beam sound. They reproduce music.
What is your desire? I am truely impressed by them.
I have been doing audio stuff for years now. I have spent lots of money. I think these speakers will be the last I own for some time.

Addendum:

Tone of Music will exhibit the $12,900 Harbeth 40.1 and the $4,995 Super HL5 at the 2010 California Audio Show.

Thank you.

Constantine Soo

Hello all,

I have the privilege of informing you that Tim Nguyen of Tone of Music, a Simon Yorke dealer in the SF Bay Area, will be exhibiting the $15,000 euro Simon Yorke S-10 Record Player at the 2010 California Audio Show.

www.caaudioshow.com

Thank you.

Constantine Soo

I am enjoying the little PsEsr very much during some in-home testing. Not the Quatro Woods I am replacing, but very, very nice for my purposes.

I have a friend that had HL5's with a good front end. I was not impressed. especially for the price. They sounded lifeless to me in his room. For the sake of friendship I sd nothing. I have owned Spendor SP1/2e and found them to be an excellent speaker that worked well with my equipment and room. My only reason for giving them up is they would bottom out with sub 40hz. Rather than go with a sub I went to a true full range speaker the Revel F52. They dont have the midrange magic, but they do everything else better and the midrange is ok.

I currently own Spendor, have heard Harbeth and Dynaudio(too expensive for me), i like them all, but then i like the string sound best on Spendor, piano sounds so realistic with Harbeth, Dynaudio has its signature sound that's difficult to describe, somehow they got the receipes to a very unique musicality, very musically involved.
i guess one thing these 3 brands share is, they might not give you the best measurement(probably with the exception of Dynaudio) from hi-fi aspect, but they reproduce and reflect your system so well, in a long run, you end up with exploring more music, and it's a realisation with changing and participating in the upgrade game with this hi-fi hobby, that if we set our goal on those measurement, focusing on bass, midrange etc, we usually end up in a circle chasing the same thing only with price and brand differences, as i like these speakers they remind me of how nice that cup of coffee was when the music was playing in the background, or a nice conversation with my fellow musician about the performers on the recording. Life becomes simpler that way.
andy

Great thread. Another line that people rave about are Devore speakers. Those who have heard both Devore and Harbeth, how would you compare the two sounds? I've been lead to believe that Harbeths are for music lovers but with a warmer colored sound, while Devores are considered more "truthful" but perhaps more "audiophile." Any truth to this? (Unfortunately there aren't many dealers that carry both.)

What an interesting post! I just replaced my long term reference Thiels 3.6 which I had for the last ten years with the HL-5! I tried many other speakers but still could not part with my thiels. I also spent a lot of money on equipments to best match my Thiels too. But now, I have made up my mind to sell it! Not to say which speaker is better than which as they all have their merits. As I have been in this hobby for more than fifteen years, doing the merry go round thing as a lot of audiophiles have done. This is the first time I found I am put my audiophile thoughts away and start listening to the music itself! I can’t explain it but it is like learning to listen with a whole new perspective. Let say the other speakers let me believe I am hearing the realism of the individual instruments more while the Harbeths brings me closer to the whole musical event. I am now enjoying most Lps or CDs without skipping tracks unless the music itself is poor while in the past, I had more concerns with the recordings than the musical performance. Interestingly, listening to some highly regarded audiophile disks become far less rewarding as the speaker does not emphasise on those factors and that is why some people will not find these speakers love at first hearing.

no no no.. I love Harbeths...I even own a pair of 7's... as for the Dynaudios, I've never heard a pair that I cared for--at dealers. Perhaps if I took a pair home it might be different, although I doubt it.
I like planars, yet I've never liked Magnepans.
So like Actureus, I read about many brands I scratch my head over, if that's indeed what he's doing.

Chashas1 - so you don't like Harbeth or Dynaudio. What speakers have you owned that you like?

Frankly speaking, "phenomenon" and "Harbeth" are mutually exclusive.

Sorry Actusreus, I'm too snarky or obtuse for my own good.

I assumed you were asking why people buy or lavish praise on Harbeths when you assume the specs are mediocre---much like the ingredients on a pack of hotdogs wouldn't add up to the taste or pleasure they give to some people.

And you seem to think that Harbeths have taken over the market here, where in reality the vast majority of sales are not in the US, even less in England, but overseas.

To me you could have replaced any number of manufacturers names for Harbeth....names I could much more easily do without, like Dynaudio.

I'd take their advice, Banyon; who should know better than these artists how to electronically reproduce their craft?;)

Just heard back from LeBron and Paul....... They both said go with LCD Panels. The specs on LED are too ordinary.

You do raise some interesting issues, though. I'm shopping for a flat screen TV to watch sports. Will LeBron James or Paul Pierce give me better advice on which equipment to buy?

I think your analogy is rather incorrect. If instead of going to panting exhibits you were in a habit of watching them on your TV set, then yes, the artist could give you advice on which particular flat screen TV renders the colors and the palette balance best, in their opinion. You might not agree with them, but it doesn't mean that their opinion would not be valid.

Actusreus,
you'll be asking next why some still eat hotdogs...
seriously, nothing to worry about, most Harbeths go to Asia anyway.

I don't mind sarcasm, but yours has eluded me here, especially the Asia comment. Please explain, if you will. Thank you.

EL34, what is the difference between the HL5 an the 30s? Why choose one over the other? Type of music? Tyoe of amplification?

The speakers sound good with a variety of relatively inexpensive wires

That is what i have noticed.And now I use cheapest simple copper wires 8 meters long:)
Harbeth tends to sound a little bit forward,so in my opinion speakers needs to be connected to laidback sounding amps:)

EL34:

"I'm not saying this to sound superior."

All respect, but as I'm sure you anticipated, you handsomely succeeded in doing so.

You do raise some interesting issues, though. I'm shopping for a flat screen TV to watch sports. Will LeBron James or Paul Pierce give me better advice on which equipment to buy?

Cheers!

John

El34 I feel you could say similar comments about Audio Note and Reynaud speakers - and probably Merlin as well though I have not heard them. Have you listened at length to any of these? I am glad you got off the merry go round...

This is an interesting thread, many of you out there will have a problem with my two cents worth, but here it goes:

I'm not saying this to sound superior, but I have the blessing of being a professional musician. I teach music all day, five days a week, and am performing or rehearsing with a variety of musical groups most days of the week (I'm a trombonist, and you don't get paid by anyone to play this instrument if you don't have a very discerning ear-I've been blessed with this as well). The point I'm trying to make here is that I'm exposed to the sounds of real musical instruments all day, every day, and my Harbeth speakers (Compact 7 ES-2's and Monitor 30's) reproduce the subtleties of these sounds as well as anything I've heard.

I'm a member of the Harbeth User Group, and I get the impression that many of the folks who own these speakers attend live musical events on a regular basis and are very familiar with the sound of real instruments being played in a real acoustical space-they fall into the category of music lovers. The other broad category of folks who are into this hobby are audiophiles, and hey, there's nothing wrong with this at all. Here we have people who enjoy listening for the differences between various pieces of gear, playing around with cables, etc. If this brings you enjoyment and relaxation, go for it! Harberth speakers, however, may not do it for you. I've found that these speakers sound great with low powered tube amps, high powered tube amps, low powered solid state. I often have my Monitor 30's (85 dB sensitivity) hooked up to a 12 watt Aleph clone Class A solid state amp and the sound is glorious. The speakers sound good with a variety of relatively inexpensive wires-so I'm just not thinking about this stuff anymore, I'm just enjoying the music.

Harbeths are for people who have more going on in their lives than just audio and they'll allow you to get off the audiophile merry-go-round, if that's where you'd like to go. If I could do it all over again, I'd dump 80% of my money into a pair of Monitor 40's and use the rest for source and amplification-this sounds crazy, but trust me, it would work.

If you've not heard these speakers, ignore the specs, ignore the box (which, by the way, is highly engineered)and check them out if you can find them. Take them home for a trial, if possible. You may find that the entire way you think about audio and listening to music will change dramatically.

Actusreus,
you'll be asking next why some still eat hotdogs...
seriously, nothing to worry about, most Harbeths go to Asia anyway.

How about 'em Tidal owners ... they can wax lyrical also (understatement)

Again I have never heard them but the problem with the absorption method is that it will only work at certain frequencies.

And the frequencies it does work well at are the frequencies where human hearing is most sensitive.

You forgot to address the point that with rigid wall speaker cabinets, the rear wave simply doesn't magically go away. Your re-radiation problem is still there - it has simply been moved to a different spot.

From a historical standpoint, keep in mind this cabinet type was designed by the BBC for monitoring purposes. There was a lot of reasoned thought and study that went into them by a group of very talented designers whose primary goal was to give the recording engineers an honest representation of their work.

Keep in mind that every choice one makes in engineering any product involves a compromise. When one addresses one problem, there is always another one created. The question is which of the issues is less a problem?

The wide baffle is a good example. A wide baffle can help move the step effect away from an area where hearing is sensitive. Robert E. Greene has discussed the technical aspects of this in great detail in various articles and on his web site. Narrow speakers may solve one issue, but they increase problems in an area where hearing is sensitive.

Same thing with off axis frequency response. This can actually increase problems in a reflective room situation since wide dispersion increases the ratio of reflected energy to direct arrival sound. This can cause smearing problems of its own. The BBC design philosophy is intentionally not interested in a lot of off-axis energy in the higher frequencies.

Again, that is a conscious design decision.

Many people would think such a speaker would work better in your room than a model with wide dispersion at higher frequencies.

The crux of the matter is that different professionals can have legitimate disagreements as to what issue is more important for any given design aspect. You may not agree with their choice but that's fine. Just don't think that wide baffle was some careless and arbitrary choice made by someone who didn't know what they were doing.

I just finished a short listening session of Michael Feinstein with a solo piano singing some Jerry Herman material. I have Spendor SP1/2Es. It would be hard for me to imagine a more natural presentation of this recording than what I heard. So, for whatever design flaws you consider the classic BBC design to have, it works for me. ;-)