Which Harbeths?


Trying to decide between the the M30.1/2 and the C7es3/XD. I’ve researched it a fair amount and I’m coming up a bid confused. Like most things it seems people have conflicting opinions. I’m coming from using various Totems for the last decade. I also just had a pair of Dynaudio special 40s for a short time before selling. I found the 40s were better at playing louder and had a bit softer top end, but overall just lacked that something special, ironically. What I’m really after is that just rightness I get with Totems. While I find there top end a bit much I’ve been willing to work with it because of the just rightness I personally get from them. My wife likes to say they sing which I think gets the just of it as well. Harbeth has sounded very attractive to me for a while and hope to find another version of a special speaker in them.  One that hopefully is a bit smoother in the presence and treble areas while also being very engaging and musical. I use a McIntosh mc302 and C46, so plenty of power for any of the Harbeths I’d think.  Anyways, I’d appreciate any feedback in these two models I can get. Anybody who has experience with both Harbeth and Toen I would have particular interest in your take. I live about 4 hours from any dealer and I don’t like to waste their time since I will inevitably buy used anyways.  
brylandgoodman

Showing 7 responses by orfeo_monteverdi

@brylandgoodman,

[please excuse my bad English]
- Give your Harbeth C7es XD plenty of time for the running/breaking in. I suggest to avoid any decision before you spent the whole winter listening to them. Fast A/B comparisons can mislead. Yes, time would downgrade the resell value of the 7’s, but the experience is worth it, imho.

- if you feel more treble energy with the Totem, it is very likely that the cause is that they emphasize energy on the treble (often in order to grab the listener’s attention). Conversely, Harbeth not not emphasize treble, and it is a relief when nearly all the speaker industry do that (here are the measurements of the M30.2 Anniversary, made by John Atkinson: no treble emphasis). My reference is live performance with acoustic, unamplified instruments: I barely can listen to any current hifi speaker at all, as the huge majority of them just sound wrong. Due to the pervasiveness of digital, people have lost the reference with live concerts.


- I totally agree with @jjss49, especially on *that point*
by and large, harbeths present music as an integral whole, many would say other more ’hifi’ speakers let you hear ’into’ the music more -- harbeths, from a bbc design heritage (like classic spendors, grahams, stirlings, etc etc) are trying to *present music as one hears from a mid hall position in an acoustic concert hall*, playing acoustic instruments in an orchestral or chamber group type of setting ... if you have been to a music event like that, you feel the music comes as you as a fairly unified wave of energy, with cymbals, string leading edges, vocals revealing details in a gentle way, there is less sparkle and ’etch’ - similarly bass is smooth energy and has a reverb component, there is not too much ’slam’
I came exactly to the same conclusion, and shared it on the HUG (membership required, so I will copy it, see hereafter):
As a recent Harbeth owner, I realize that all the grievance classically found on other forums (from some members though) against Harbeth speakers (they’re pipe-and-slippers) are just an irrelevant complain over the fact that those speakers just place them in the best seat for the concert, but they are not aware of it."


_______________________
"I think it all is a matter of: listening distance, size of the triangle (listener - leftSpeaker - rightSpeaker), position of that triangle in the room, room acoustics (absorbant, reverb), preferred sonic level, kind of music, and most of all: attendance (or not) at live acoustic instruments, and where do you usually sit in the concert hall: are you a forefront listener? (not always a good choice). Or do you sit (too) far in the back ? (you are unlucky, the best seats were sold out...).

On this latter point (the best seat for a particular concert and hall),
I once had quite a revealing experience:
I attended to a classical music concert (piano & violin) in the concert hall of the Brussels Conservatory with my cousin and her husband. Both are violinists. They studied violin in Brussels, in that Conservatory, and heard lots of colleagues playing in that concert hall, where they played themselves many time in front of the jury. So they know its acoustics by heart, as musicians as well as listeners. We entered the concert hall. There were free places left, and we were free to sit where we wished to. I said them: "please have a seat wherever you wish, I will sit besides with you". I expected them to sit around the first third of the stalls. They both chosed (without the faintest hesitation) a place much further, around the second third of the stall. To me, we sat surprisingly far from the musicians (sure, one of them played piano, and a half-size piano already peaks at 115dB...). I was surprised, as I personally would have sat -as an audiophile/music lover- much closer to the scene (!). I have to admit that I had even some doubt about the pertinence of their choice: will we be able to hear all the nuances of the violin? (please note that I did not write: "will we be able to hear all the noises of the turn of the pages, as with audiophile test discs"...).​
The concert began. It was sheer magic. You could not have dreamed a more perfect balance for our ears (>< the microphones were placed on the scene). Everything was there: all nuances and details (they had used some reflectors in the back of the scene), a perfect subjective balance between details and fusion of the work as a whole. But, no, we could not hear pages being turned...


This leads me to a point: do we expect from our hifi systems to place us at the 5th row of a concert hall, where such noises (which are not part of the music) can be heard? And where there is no music/fusion of instruments yet as we sit ways too close? The 5th row offers just a tsunami of high pressure level sound, and we quickly feel that we sit too near of that "big bang", that sonic explosion, which is not quite music yet (though the conductor has to cope with it) as the "sound fusion" is not complete, and is realized later and further. Some lower circle (balcony) seats also can be great for orchestral music.​​

As a recent Harbeth owner, I realize that all the grievance classically found on other forums (from some members though) against Harbeth speakers (they’re pipe-and-slippers) are just an irrelevant complain over the fact that those speakers just place them in the best seat for the concert, but they are not aware of it. Not at the 5th row for sure (no, you won’t hear the pages being turned, nor the fly ’farting’ at 12’34’’ of track 6 on your preferred audiophile disc of high technical performance, but of -sometimes- poor musicality). Instead, you are seated at the best place, where my cousin Caroline and her husband naturally sat. Caroline is now violin teacher. Fabian, her husband, is 1st violin at the Luxembourg Philharmonic. My speakers let me hear all the music, and all necessary details, not more. It is amazing how, while other, more ’resolving’ speakers can be found (usually more expensive), Harbeths are absolute no-brainers from a music-lover point of view. I love them. They may sound different from my highly musical, resolving-and-unfatiguing system in town (budget is not the same, based on panels, etc), but they’re absolutely lovely.​"

I arrive too late, as you have already made a decision (for C5es XD). For others, just wanted to share this...

##### M30.1 vs M30.2 comparison (What Hifi Australia)

##### my personal M30.1 vs M30.2 comparison:
(terrible Google Translation of *my* post, on a French forum). Please first note that:
  • - I have never heard the C5xx
  • - I now only the following models:M30.1, M30.2 Anniversary, M40.2 (regular), SHL5 Plus.


( < Google Translate from *my* post on a French forum, slightly corrected)
I recently own Harbeth M30.2 (40th Anniversary), an opportunity that unexpectedly occured, and decided me sell my M30.1.
I am satisfied with the change. Comparatively with the M30.1, here are the main differences in my view:
  •  the M30.2 are more "straight", more neatly defined,
  •  M30.2 have better stereo image, more "built" and more precise. Very good 3D effect..
  • the ’plom-plom’ effect sometimes a little systematic (it seemed to me) in the low-mid of the M30.1 has disappeared,
  • The treble is simply sublime, and wonderfully blends with the midrange.
  • Maybe the M30.2 lose a little the (excessive?) sweetness of the M30.1 (which was a little systematic, even denoted a slight pinkish coloration?), the M30.2 verging a little more towards a ’monitoring’ listening ( well, everything is relative), always with British signature (but the M30.2 do NOT recess the midrange, unlike many British speakers/monitors).
In short, I would say that M30.1 and .2 are more different than incontestably in a hierarchy. The M30.2 is a better speaker for my context, and in my opinion.


NB: the laid-back character of the M30.1 could be slightly compensated by
1) removing the grilles (it was easy with M30.1 >< do NOT try with the M30.2) and
2) listening a bit closer, in order to get more energy in the treble.If one can do this, and have a rather fast and transparent amplifier, the M30.1 can be a good choice 2nd hand (especially for classical and jazz; not for rock tough, I’m afraid).

Both require appropriate stands, preferably open: dedicated TonTräeger stands highly advised (better than my home-made closed stands I had previously).
As for the initial question -Which Harbeths?- in general, my favorite model is, by far, the TERRIFIC M40.2 (and later models, I assume). Because:
  •  the midrange cone is relieve from the task of reproducing any low frequancy signal => the midrange reaches a breathtaking clarity, while remaining perfectly full-bodied. In short, incredibly lifelike.
  •  you get more bass, of course (3 way) than with the smaller Monitor model (M30.2).


Please have a look at my pic of the M40.2 and the comment written on it, which says a lot (though not yet corrected by Google, please excuse the grammar mistakes!). I think that comment is fully readable on the smartphone version of the webpage only (not sure).
=> Please Like the pic, if you do !
Tx
@ddafoe

[please excuse my bad English]
Thanks for your reply, it is a nice opportunity for me to clarify: I was indeed talking about UNamplified acoustic instruments only (i.e. mainly classical, and unamplified jazz&folk if this still exists).And given that the way @jjss49 reported his own experience was so close to mine, especially in the way he puts it in his post, I could not helped copy-paste what I wrote elsewhere on the very same topic; therefore it may have not been totally clear that the scope of what I was saying was not "universal", but roughly limited to classical ;-)
So,
What if your reference to live music isn’t unamplified acoustic music; is Harbeth still the best in this case?
Maybe not, indeed. Especially if my preferred music were amplified rock, pop and electronic music, I probably would have bought other speakers.
On rock, I like bigger speakers (than my Harbeth M30.2 Anniversary), with higher efficiency and deeper bass (big JBL’s, etc).
(my M30.2 anniversary play fairly good on rock; but one could wish better - and I don’t know their XD serie which is said to be better on rock than previous iterations; I have no opinion).
And as you wrote
part of the experience of a live event like that is the not only the clarity and detail I hear at the live event, but very much *the speed, attack, and plain visceral excitement of the show*
I cannot agree with more on speed and attack, especially with live amplified non-classical music (though I attended very few of them)

i.e. the many other modern HiFi speaker manufacturers are just plain wrong?
I was just saying that on *acoustic music* (UNamplified instruments), Harbeths speakers sound right (so said a sound engineer at Herb Reichert’s place while reviewing the M30.2 Anniversary: "they just sound right!"). They are not the only ones, but they are amongst the last Mohicans: yes, on *acoustic music*, many speakers play wrong. My compatriot Bruno Putzeys (Hypex, purifi, etc) says that too.

- On acoustic unamplified instruments, even if there are different violinS, pianoS, clarinetS, concert hallS (thus acousticS), musicianS, etc, there is still a direct reference/connection with the instrument played (modulated by the room’s acoustics): nothing sits between the instruments and the listener. Moreover, there is a hugely wide range of instrument timbres (woods, brass, strings, percussion, stringed&percussion (=piano), etc). So on one hand, it may be very, very difficult for a speaker to reproduce all various instruments. But at least, a direct reference is accessible.

Roughly, it’s pretty direct. You have:
instruments---(acoustics)--->listener
If one attends live acoustic concert, one has his ear-brain shaped, or trained, by that repeated direct experience.
With some experience, one can identify more easily a speaker that "plays just right" (on acoustic instruments), as real-world direct "references" can be used to evaluate. So, one can feel a bit less lost on a hifi show when facing a profligacy of speakers. This reference serves as a compass.
(and if one does not attends concerts, then one feels lost anyway, and then just chooses the speaker preferred by feeling/sensation).
Attending classical concert (in Belgium) cost approx. €12, and you can change your seat after the interruption, and chose a better one (in this concert hall, for instance).

- On amplified instruments, even more with electronic and synthesized music, the sound system (amplifiers&speakers used by the band in the concert hall) sits now between the instruments and the listener, and becomes a part of the live experience: for instance, the wave guide Electrovoice used here or there sound plays an active role in the perceived "speed, attack, and plain visceral excitement of the show" on the listener’s side. So does its fine-tuning by the sound engineer.

Roughly, now you have:
[instruments + soundSystem]---(acoustics)--->listener.
Does it still make sense to talk here about timbral accuracy? I don’t think so. Speed, attack and sheer energy are probably more important here.Since the sound system used in concert hall is part of the whole, it is more difficult to speak of a direct reference to the instruments: the sound system is a prism which hugely biases the listener’s sensation.
So as "reference" does not really matter here, I think we can chose more "freely" the speakers we prefer, without the hassle of conforming to a "reference", wondering if they are playing right or not. Basically, it’s almost easier in this case, I think. The listener may just choose the one he prefers.
Sure, a few outstanding speakers can reconcile both exquisite naturalness and accuracy on timbres, with speed, attack and excitement, but they are very expensive.

(a clear expression of those simple ideas is beyond the reach of my poor English, sorry... ;-)




[please excuse my bad English]

I am, too, glad that you found the right connection to your Mc Intosh amp.


You mentioned the C7's are a bit forward now on the 8 Ohms output of the amplifier. A few points to try
  1. you had removed the grilles => try to put them back. The grilles are part of the design loop, and John Atkinson did not removed them to measure the M30.2 Anniversary (which does not emphasize treble). The grilles off -> +1.5dB above 6KHz, IIRC.
  2. Let them running in. A few weeks minimum is necessary. If the speakers are brand new, you can let them play at relatively low level when you are outside.


[please excuse my bad English]

@ryder 
M30 - rolled off treble and sounds excessively warm and dead // not heard
M30.1 - sounds brighter and more open but still warm
M30.2 Anniversary - sounds brighter and more open
M30.2 XD - ?? (no experience with this one) // idem; not heard

I totally agree. I heard neither the M30, nor the M30.2XD though. But I know the M30.1 and 30.2 Anniversary very well, as I owned the first, sold it it, and upgraded towards the latter.

I second too the finding that one can upgrade to a component which sound sweeter AND delivers more details, as you noticed. This simply means that the more detailed but sweeter speakers have a lower distortion rate.

I describe my M30.1-->M30.2Ann upgrade hereafter.
The Stereophile measurements of the M30.2 Anniversary -made with the grilles ON- suggest that there is no treble or high-mid emphasis at all on the M30.2 Anniversary. There is even room for a very little bit more energy in the high-mid (around 3KHz).

I sincerely hope that @brylandgoodman (OP) is relieved now...

________________
- I owned Harbeth M30.1 (a bit too rosy-view but lovely; medium & treble a bit too muffled), sold;
- upgraded to M30.2 Anniversary (present); better speaker; sound a bit more "monitor", but still very musical. I love them.



PS: used M30.1 can be a good choice though, if some precautions are taken to make them sound a little "brighter":

  • remove the grilles (it was still easy to do with the M30.1)
  • listen closer, so you have more treble energy (mid-field, even near-field is still OK - note that ALL Habeth can be listen mid-field, EVEN the M40.x !)
  • chose a very transparent and fast-sounding amplifier (solid state preferably). Note that the "ideal" amplifier for M30.1 and M30.2 respectively, is not necessarily the same.