SLike probably all of you, I just received notice from Audiogon of a 20% discount on Harbeth XD. I clicked on the tab and found that the sale price is about $2700. I have read so many glowing comments here about Harbeth — as if just saying the name is the password for entering aural nirvana. I admit, I haven’t listened to Harbeth speakers. But looking at these, they just look like smallish bookshelf speakers. I’m not questioning how good others say these speakers are, but HOW do they do it out of an ordinary-looking box?
Is it the wood? Is it the bracing? Is it the crossover components? Is it the cone material? What is the reason why these Harbeth’s are such gems compared to other bookshelf speakers? What is it about the construction or technology that makes these speakers a deal at $2700 on sale versus the $800, 900 or $1,000 that others normally cost? What is the secret that makes audiophiles thrill to get such a costly bargain?
On the "what is special about Harbeth?" question, here's part of my answer.
Having auditioned an insane amount of speakers - the Harbeth have just stuck out in terms of being able to produce the "gestalt" of the human voice, as well as acoustic instruments. But human voice in particular.
I've long been obsessed with live vs reproduced. Not that I expect a sound system to be able to reproduce sound truly indistinguishable from the real thing. Just the opposite! In paying attention to live vs reproduced it's only highlighted the differences between live vs reproduced. I've done recordings of my family's voices (as well as instruments we own being played) and done direct live vs reproduced comparisons with various speakers I've had (and also used those tracks sometimes when auditioning speakers). The ways some speakers do better in these comparisons than others was always fascinating to me.
Just as when I audition speakers, when I go to audio shows I'm constantly comparing live vs reproduced. How? By comparing the sound of the live human voices talking all around, vs the sound of voices being played through the various sound systems. Inevitably many systems are playing a well recorded vocal that is supposed to impress us as sounding "realistic." Very often these are certainly producing a VERY vivid and clear "something" in between those speakers. But it's not really a human voice. It's usually still electronic sounding, like a voice "reconstructed through hard materials" and often insubstantial, like you can wave your hand through it. Human voices sound "organic," made of "damped flesh" and they have an acoustic density, where eyes closed you sense it has density, it's occupying space in the room. It's this amazing combination of clarity and the organic warmth and density that to me distinguishes the real thing.
So at shows if they are playing a vocal I will close my eyes and listen to the (invetable) sound of someone talking in the room and compare it to the reproduced vocal. "What is it that the sound system isn't getting about the real thing?" It always shows up the artificiality of reproduced voices.
EXCEPT....to some degree...the Harbeth speakers for which I've done this "test."
I remember a full day at the last show doing this eyes-closed "live vs reproduced voice" comparison and in a Harbeth room I was simply astonished to finally hear a speaker that came that close to the real thing. I'd listen to the real voices in the room, the voice coming through the Harbeth, and the "gestalt" in how it was reproducing the human voice was amazingly close. No other system had quite done that, to my ears.
I owned some Harbeth speakers for a while and to this day the thing they did better than any other speaker I've owned, was to find the "human quality" in voices.
Which is a pretty damned impressive thing, and something the designer should rightly be proud of. I certainly get why the brand is coveted by many.
- buying a $2700 speaker blindly is like having your cat ordered on Amazon, and have it delivered by drone: completely, totally, dramatically nonsensical. But I am European (nobody’s perfect)...
- Harbeth speakers sound better
on acoustic instruments (classical music, vocals, folk). They are not for rock, IMHO.
listened near- or mid-field. Do not try to put them in a big room, sitting 5m away, pumping up the volume, in hope they will deliver the thrills of a live rock concert. They won’t. Instead, they will play like a "big radio gear".
Sitting not too far, you have to look into the sonic landscape they produce, instead of expecting that the scene "jumps to you" //hope this is understandable...
at low to moderate volume. The can play louder, but it is not what they prefer.
In these conditions, they are terrific speakers if you favor timbres, emotion et delicacy (ex: unamplified acoustic music), at the expense of sheer energy and attack (ex: amplified rock concerts).
I upgraded from M30.1 to M30.2 Anniversary. I compared them at home. The M30.2 Ann gives me more detail, is more transparent, lifelike. Its low-mid is less exaggerated. And the M30.2 Ann remains a highly musical monitor.
I've seen some used 40.3s recently going for prices I would feel comfortable paying for them if I thought I could make them work in my smallish room.
It is not like there are no other high quality speakers that MSRP around its used prices though. Here is my current upgrade list and I've been able to demo 3 of them so far with more to come shortly hopefully.
I'm not going to argue any or all of these are 'better' than the $24.5K 40.3, but I think it is safe to say the 40.3 has some serious competition at its current price point in the US...
Vandy Quatro Wood CT $18K
Vivid Kaya 45 $18K
Joseph Audio Perspective2 $15K
Yamaha NS5000 $15K
Spendor D9.2 $13K (currently own D9s when MSRP was $10K and 40.2 $15K).
@ddafoeThat’s an awesome list you got there. I am clearly a fan of the Harbeth sound, but I do believe that Harbeth is going to price themselves out of the market if they continue to raise their prices. I feel that SHL5+ and 30.2 (not 30.1 though) are very competitive with respect to their competition, but both P3ESR and 40.3 are in a segment where their competitors offer performance that is at least as good if if not better.
I listened to Joseph Audio Perspectives last year, and I must say it really moved me like few other speakers have so far. If I ever decide t replace my SHL5+, the Perspectives are definitely at the top of my list. Also heard good things about Fleetwood Deville, but haven’t had a chance to listen to them in person yet.
Since you own a pair of REL’s, consider auditioning the TAD CE1’s before settling with your next set of speakers. If I ever built a 2nd system, they will be my top choice.
few more points to add to the discussion, given recent comments
1. i don’t think there should be any exclusive emphasis on harbeths... it is just that it is the topic of this thread, where the op specifically asked what is so special about harbeths... indeed there are many brands of speakers, past and current who uphold the bbc heritage and design philosophy
2. spendor’s 7 and 9 series couldn’t sound more different than their brethren classic series of bbc lineage... the modern floorstanding spendors are designed and voiced to compete with focals, revels, magicos, that ilk... it is a purposeful bifurcated product strategy to cover both bases, sonically and aethestically, one is for a modern sound modern look (for better or worse), the other is, well, ’classic’...
3. vandy’s certainly belong in the same conversation with the fine bbc heritage speakers like harbeths in that they offer a non-hifi, easeful, non-hyper-detailed sound... and as you would expect, vandy’s also often engender the same criticisms (lack of ’super-clarity’, slam, sound ’dead’, blah blah) from those wanting a more overtly hifi presentation... but make no mistake -- to make vandy’s sound right, they need the right, hella strong and sweet amp, even moreso than harbeths... this to such a degree that upper end vandy’s build in the bass amp into the speakers to take a load off...
4. agree that new harbeths are now darned expensive, too expensive, and there are many alternatives out there, many of which are very fine indeed, if different in how they present music, especially vocals... but really good stuff is never cheap... and yet cost and value are in the eye of each beholder and wallet
5. finally, i am currently lucky to have both the spendor classic series sp100 r2 and the harbeth mon 40.3xd... each also presents music differently, in numerous subtle ways, subtle tonal differences, while maintaining many common, endearing attributes such as an utterly natural sound with excellent transparency, full bass, easeful, effortless presentation (and the ability play loudly without strain if so desired)...
@bob540, absolutely nothing. They are made better than most but in terms of sound quality there are many similar speakers that sound just as good and are much better values.
For those that say they are overpriced I would be interested in which less expensive speakers sounded better to you.
Vandersteen 1Cis and Magnepan .7s are two speakers I would much rather own than the 3X costlier C7ES3s. The Vandys with the caveat of attenuating their treble by 1db (adjustable on the rear panel). The Vandys had as good a midrange with less cabinet coloration and deeper, tighter bass. The treble was smoother on the C7s but only by a smidge. The Magnepans are not as resolving in the highs as the C7s and other Harbeths but their midrange is a class above -- with a textural realism I haven’t heard matched by any of the BBC derivatives, and they can play louder.
I have a pair of $3100 Revel Performas in a secondary system that have superior bass and treble to all the Harbs below the M40s, though admittedly, they do fall short in midrange presence and realism. Still, on balance, I feel they’re a superior speaker for a dual HT/Music setup.
On the "what is special about Harbeth?" question, here’s part of my answer.
Having auditioned an insane amount of speakers - the Harbeth have just stuck out in terms of being able to produce the "gestalt" of the human voice, as well as acoustic instruments. But human voice in particular.
@prof, who stated the above, has contributed perhaps the seminal thread here on his hearing and assessing a whole host of excellent, mid to upper tier loudspeakers - for all interested, especially relative newbies, i strongly suggest you use the search function, or click @profto see his past posts, and find that lengthy, but exceptionally broad reaching, informative thread - the value of this forum is only in small part the live threads, it is what has been written, covered and discussed in the past...
for others, who might feel a pair of used harbeths for under 2 grand is a poor value, well, neither @prof’s wonderful thread, nor i, can help you much... there is always youtube...
Well… with the right electronics there is very little that come close to the sound quality of the 30.1/2 and 40.1/2. The rich sound is almost unmatched except for the Quad ESL57s.
But… “the right electronics” are the key words (eg. Hegel and Mac MA252 MA452.
I should clarify - they are superb for discerning "audiophile sound" (e.g. jazz, classical, country, acoustic, vocals, etc.). For this type of music, they are almost unmatched.
Any old speaker is fine for rock and hip hop, etc. - better off with JBL or Klipsch.
@lalitk Thanks for the TAD CE1 recommendation. It's a little outside my budget but you never know if a used pair becomes available for sale. I need to figure out if there's a way to audition them first though.
I am a 30+ year working pro musician and my sound engineer (best in the nation in my opinion) has been saying for years that Harbeth is the best , most true speaker he’s ever heard. He was at "The Show" in Newport and said he heard a band playing , turned a corner and it was the Harbeth 30.1’s....no band. I have Tekton Encores because I’m a rock guy and want the PA experience like I’m at a live show with powerful bottom.
I auditioned these Harbeth’s years back and found them to be a very "polite" speaker , seemingly more for classical /jazz listener...so I purchased the Tekton massive towers to the disdain of my sound engineer 😆 He calls them my "Star Trek speakers"
Recently I found some 30.1’s at a reasonable price and took the plunge. My first feeling was they will never be able to compete with the bottom, but lets be reasonable and maybe find a different gear. After a couple of weeks I have found the Harbeth 30.1’s to be ultra clear and precise. Obviously they can’t keep up with the Tektons in the low end , but I have to say they are incredibly great in clarity and especially with audiophile tracks like Steely Dan.
HIGHLY recommend and I’m actually thinking about 40.1’s now (lord help me) and I do like the fact that they make their own speakers .. plus they are stunning cabs.
@bassdude- totally agree that Harbeths are superb for those genres you listed; that was my problem - I had Harbeths, but that ain't the kind of music I listen to!
Dunno about that 'any old speaker' being fine for rock, hip-hop, etc, though....
Harbeths are well-designed chinless dynamics that audiophile types crave for playback of the absolute sound. Unless your version of the absolute sound has gestalt and dynamics then you are out of luck.
Whether a speaker is "good" for X, Y or Z genre is always going to be a subjective call. It’s "good for X music" insofar as you enjoy that music on the speaker.
For my kids, apple earbuds are "good" for everything they listen to. There are people who love classical music, but who listen through small speakers utterly incapable of anything like orchestral dynamics...but the musical message is coming through loud and clear for them.
So you always have to take someone’s assessment "X speakers are good for X but not for Y" with a grain of salt, since that only means "I enjoyed X music but not Y music" on the speakers.
This subjectivity plays out with Harbeth speakers like any others. There are those who will say "Harbeth speakers are only good if you like THESE genres of music" while plenty of other Harbeth fans will say they like Harbeths BECAUSE they seem so well balanced they seem to play all genres pleasingly.
I’m in the latter camp. I found Harbeth speakers, e.g. the SuperHL5plus (and even the smaller 30s) to be beautifully balanced, in that all the elements in a mix seemed to come through sounding "right" - nothing shortchanged, nothing over emphasized. That went for all the funk, rock, prog rock etc that I loved, as well as acoustic material. It was all very satisfying.
Now that doesn’t mean I can’t get as much or more pleasure through certain other speakers I like or own. For instance I’m currently using my Thiel 2.7s, and I love the depth of bass, impact and sheer scale they provide. So I do like certain aspects of the Thiel sound over the Harbeth (and visa versa). But that’s not to say I found myself thinking the Harbeths were a failure in any particular genre of music. No more than the fact there are plenty of more powerful speakers than the Thiels means I'm feeling the Thiels are substandard with some genres.
The Thiels rock my world with some Rush I was playing yesterday, with tons of punch and dynamics for my taste. But I’m sure to a horn fanatic they "just don’t do dynamics" as they want, and they’d find some genres unsatisfying on the Thiels, where I enjoy everything. And so it goes...
The sound of my SHL5+ goes across musical genres with ease. Rock guitar and vocals have presence and clarity that sounds real. Drum skins have pop and snap.
When I listen to Klipsch for example the sound is fun and dynamic but overly colored and vocals are nasal. This is kind of distracting to me. Sounds like listening to a band on a bad PA system.
Are you looking for a certain sound, or an accurate representation of the music as recorded? How many professional live performances have you attended in a proper acoustically balanced environment have you attended?
i own a pair of 30.2 XDs connected to a Belles Virtuoso power amp and have can tell you that what is so special about them is that they present the music, not a brand’s house sound. If you like a brand’s house sound you should buy that speaker, because our hearing can be subjective if we don’t know what we really are supposed to be hearing, not what you like hearing.
My 30.2XDs are accurate, and never tiring to listen too. I used to enjoy a pair of top-tier B&Ws and thought they sounded great, until I retired and had the time to sit and actually listen to them for long periods of time- they turned out to be bright and fatiguing. I found similar fatigue when auditioning many other speakers.
My C7ES3’s are a very nice second system speaker option to my Shindo/Altec’s. They get the all important (to me) tone correct, and are engaging at low/moderate listening levels. When fed properly, they do not get lost in my med/large listening area. That is a 23 X 12 ft room with 8 ft ceilings, with a large opening to the dining room. If I do part with my C7’s, the low-ish efficiency/impedance will be the main reason. I am planning on a return to tubes after a short run with the Luxman 550, and prior to that, a Croft phono int amp. The latter was actually quite good, but lacked the depth of tubes.
to me, the stark reality of the matter is that all speakers have a sound, and of course, any speaker in a room then has even more of a sound -- this truism is absolute and unavoidable
people like to say xyz is ’accurate’ - but no one really knows what 'accurate' it is... it is subjective, not objective... it is what we hear, as what we can measure to be ’accurate’ is woefully incomplete in explaining what we hear, how we feel a sounds different than b
that said, all experienced folks in this pursuit understand that speakers by far, by far, produce the greatest distortion (i.e. variation) from input to output, than any other part of the signal chain -- even based on rudimentary measurements of frequency and phase response -- so speaker choice is naturally the most intensely personal
what we can do (and should do), though, is hear real things (human voice, piano, acoustic guitar, drum set, cymbal shimmer, bowed bass, cello) and ideally hear them in the same or a similar room, then try to remember that sound, and compare to what similar reproduced sound/music of the same sounds like, and judge how close, how truthful it is to the real thing
when done in this way, many who judge harbeths feel they do quite well, and better than most
I remeber a few years back I visited an old friend of mine in Philadephia and he had a set of the largest Harbeths, a Linn Sondek deck with Vandehul cartridge and Ayre electronics from phono to preamp to power amp. It was one of the nicest systems I have heard. The evening after dinner he played everything from classical symphonies to Daft Punk to Steely Dan to Nora Jones and it was very realistic powerful and also not too sharp or edgy like many big deal hifis are. I just remember being very impressed.
weakest things of harbeths are these.Far away from natural
drum set, cymbal shimmer, bowed bass
All good observations made by existing Harbeth owners and ex-owners. I agree that the Harbeth are very good in reproducing tone and timbre of instruments and human voice. In my limited experience, not many speakers do well in this area. I find voices on Harbeth to be one of the best if not the best. Some (or many) costlier high end speakers fail to match the Harbeth in reproducing voices to sound close to the real thing.
I somewhat agree with this remark made by Extravaganza, only if it’s relating to the intensity or power of the striking of drums, the dynamics of the bass or shimmer and decay or cymbals. The dynamics are slightly lacking but if we are talking about the tone and timbre of instruments such as piano, acoustic guitars, violin, trumpet etc. it’s as close to the real thing as you can get. Human voice, it’s very very good, perhaps not the best but based on my limited experience I haven’t found one that reproduces voice to sound better and more believable than the Harbeth. The M30.2 does voices the best in the Harbeth line but I was made to understand that the new C7ES3 XD now gives the 30.2 XD some competition.
weakest things of harbeths are these.Far away from natural
drum set, cymbal shimmer, bowed bass
I respectfully disagree. Just got done listening to Zuill Bailey's most recent attempt at the Bach cello suites (Octave Records OCT-0008), and while not a bowed bass, the sounds I heard expressed the humanity of both the performer and the composer with spine-tingling authenticity. Earlier today I had on Basie "Live at the Sands" (their performance in 1966 before Sinatra took the stage – MFSL 2-401). When Sonny Payne cracked his drums I just about leapt out of my seat. I had to play it again to believe it. I was there (who needs Frank anyway when the Count's in town)! That on a humble set of PSesr speakers (with a little help from an REL T/5).
Now I'm sitting in a smallish, well damped room (13' x 21') about 9' from the speakers listening at about 80dB (pretty loud for me, but my wife wasn't home). The speakers behaved admirably (as usual).
Note that these speakers require some juice to get going (I've got 2x 110W with 120,000µF caps). Not really huge, but more than you would expect you would need for such small speakers, and enough for my needs. My old 60w amp didn't have the punch to drive them.
PS: Frank would always request Sonny Payne whenever he played with Basie (yeah, he's that good)!
My own tastes run more to mellow music that Harbeth’s are noted to excel at. I rock out in my car or via headphones while working out at the gym. Gotta give these things a listen.
I sometimes think that the Harbeth 40 could be my ultimate speaker. (The Super HL5plus didn't quite make it when I owned it, but I've heard the 40 do some remarkable things).
Unfortunately the form factor (aesthetics etc) just won't work in my set up.
Accurate on voicing, Can sound very musical with the right gear.
Not suitable for all music Type. I would not say these are dynamic speakers so really fast classical music or likewise anything that requires speed its gona sound too soft.
Perfect speakers for the bedroom, when your making love and listening to soft music :-)
I always like the Quested Speakers over the Harbeths, Voicing is almost similar but Harbeth is allot warmer and sweeter. Quested is more Transaprent but low fatique and more exciting and can get your hairs standing up at times.
Quested is another UK Brand one of the most Underated speakers.
Never heard of Quested — I wonder what the chances are that anyone near me carries them?
I would especially like to hear the Harbeth 40.2. But at $20,000 for a pair, there is next to no chance I would ever own them — not unless I win the Lotto!
quested’s are second gen brit studio monitors, very very limited distribution - basically a pro line product, not really for home hifi - like atc, they are true modern studio monitors, which may or may not please the home listening audiophile, a very very different sound than harbeths
harbeth monitor 40’s in 40.2 form run about 10-13 grand a pair in the usa, depending on finish and condition... it is the latest versions 40.3 xd or anniversary, that generally trade at 16-19k a pair used (but still approximate new given their very recent release), then you add stands...
I have auditioned a few iterations of the 30 series and most of the 40s and can second the points made by @orfeo_monteverdi above (and many others). Harbeths are polite and, when you adjust to their presentation, you get musical cohesiveness -- as many have said: it sounds natural, real.
The frequency extension is not gut-wrenching on either end, but the critical mid-range is well done on both the 30 & 40 series. Not surprisingly, the 40s offer more weight / volume and amplitude than the 30s and can fill a medium-sized room quite well. I too found that electronic music came out too polite, probably because I expect harsh / dirty sounds with this music -- that you don't get with the big Harbeths... (that said, Tupak's voice was very clear!)
I too found that electronic music came out too polite, probably because I expect harsh / dirty sounds with this music -- that you don’t get with the big Harbeths... (that said, Tupak’s voice was very clear!)
The SHL5+ sounds more open / less polite than M30 versions with electronic and rock or dynamic music.
I think they sound awfully good, but, as has been mentioned, are rather overpriced for what they are. They do that magical midrange thing so many BBC monitors are known to do. If that meets your needs, and you don't mind the relatively narrow restrictions they put on your choice of amplifier, and you have the cash, they'll be hard to beat.
That's not meant to sound smarmy. As far as I can tell, getting one thing extremely right is basically what Harbeth set out to do, and I'd say they did it. That's worthy of respect. It just isn't worth what they're charging for it, to me.
I have the 30.1’s and the 40.2’s driven by the Hegel H590 integrated DAC/Preamp/Amp... and... they are superb for classical, jazz, country... all things acoustic. You will find very few speakers that can match them when driven by matching electronics - which means Hegel, or McIntosh MA252 or MA352, or similar high current SS amps with high damping factors. Their bass and lower mids need the control provided by a high current SS amp.
They sound very similar to the Quad ESL57’s - the best speaker there is for that type of music. When I first got them, I was not impressed and would not have kept them had I not purchased the Hegel integrated - which is the amplification Harbeth demos them with at shows. It makes a noticeable difference - in their resolution, clarity, dynamics and detail. I also supplement them with the Townshend Super Tweeters, which I think helps them a bit with detail resolution, clarity and air.
They’re mids and lower mids / upper bass are superb - very rich with wonderful presence. Some call it "warm." They will not give you the ear piercing highs of a BE or Diamond tweeter - they have more natural highs. And... though they do sound fine at low volumes, they really need to be driven to produce their best clarity, dynamics and detail. Unless you really are a basshead... you will find their bass very good - so long as driven with a high current SS amp. They’re best with other components that are not voiced with a "warm" sound.
Though - if you are a "rocker" you will want JBL or Klipsch - which will provide you greater impact and a bit faster, cooler bass and mids, while still sounding great with the types of music noted here.
While the SHL5+ will have greater treble emphasis and maybe a bit faster bass, the 30.1’s, 40.2’s and P3ESR all have a very simiar sound, with the P3ESR being superb for nearfield listening in small rooms. The others have a bit too much bass for smaller rooms. If you are wanting to try them... you might start with the P3ESR’s in a smaller room (e.g. say 10x12, or so), though they will sound great in a bit larger rooms. The key is the matching electronics.
This will give you a great idea of the sound that we’re describing - mine sound very much like these:
Well... If I were going to spend as much as some of you have suggested for the 40.3's... I probably would go for the ATC-100's... because they are so transparent, and the clarity is superb. I'm uncertain, if they have as much "magic" (rich, weighty sound) as the 40.2's / 40.3's...
Although, as I sit here and listen to the 40.3's just now... they do have a very real tone, timbre and texture with strings, and horns - it is difficult to imagine much better.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
