• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Harbeth speakers

OP
T

ThoFi

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
221
Likes
74
Sweetspot *as heard* is wider than you'd think on modern Harbeths you know. Don't shoot the messenger where the grilles are concerned, but the hf response is objectively better (verified by third party tests) with grilles on.

There was a massive thing about Harbeth grille design from the SHL5 and C7 onwards. The cloth just touches the fronts of the tweeters so has less effect it's claimed,than distancing it out *apparently* and the 'frameless frame,' which needs their special tool to remove on mine, is deliberately recessed into a groove to minimise diffraction issues (the entire dispersion 'thing' with speakers like this may really be of academic interest in a larger room well away from boundaries as recommended by the manufacturer as sidewall reflections may be well down in level). Recommendation has always been away from walls with main tweeter at ear level, so toed towards the listener. It's only peeps like me with small rooms and a near to mid field distance that suffer boom and relection issues... In my case if using Harbeths, the C7-XD would almost certainly be better due to narrower baffle and slightly less bass extension, at least now th ebasic 'tone' is so similar to the 5+-XD.

Thofi, in your post #140 above - what the heck are you doing posting here on ASR when you say you don't care what the designer intended from his designs he spent so long developing? I repeat, the grilles *on this model* were carefully researched to be as nonintrusive as possible and to AID the performance of the speakers. Obviously once purchased, you can do what you like to them (one bod converted his XD Harbeths to bi-amp passive use, thereby destroying almost any residual value they had. But hey, they're his boxes so he can do whatever he likes with them...:facepalm: I remember the same with a now ancient Epos speaker, where the final design meant the port being turned into a 'controlled leak' with stuck in foam plugs. All the 'expert audiophiles' tore the foam out and liked the 80Hz boom that resulted (they all used Linn vinyl players mostly which back then added to the bassy syrup). the designer got so pissed off he just pushed the foams in tightly but didn't glue them in, so the end user could do what they liked - I put mine in sideways as a nice compromise with his blessing ;)

I've been through the whole valve/tube thing twice in my hifi life, once with Quad and rather nice Radford amps in th emid 70's when the Radford wasn't that old and again around 1989 with some Tube Technology mono amps (with ARC SP14 preamp) which proved to be a disaster as they ate the poor thrashed 4 x EL34's a channel to 100W, said valves being knackered after less than a year! Maybe if I'd got a set of same-price (then) E.A.R. 509 cozy-toned mono's, they'd have lasted far longer! All these glowing bottles and over-lush tones just don't interest any more and I rather like the idea now of some of the new tiny power-boxes that can be hidden away (better still, half decent active speakers with amps inside, but hey, this is a Harbeth thread).

I experienced the sweetspot of my SHL5+ is very narrow. When moving my head a little out of the sweetspot the high frequencies changes dramatically. To me this looks like bad off-axis performance of the Harbeth.
Because the differences between on/off grilles are very little in FR I think it is negligible.

I reply to tube amps because you didn’t like those. And I post here at ASR because I did refer to my tube amp because of the effect to my Harbeth speaker (Harbeth thread). My Harbeth didn’t work with Hypex Class D amps but they do with tube amps very well!
And yes, in my room with my setup the equalized sound with tube amps do sound the best.
The speakers FR (design) gives you an indication of the sound but at the end the room/listening position/positioning has a lot more impact to the sound.
And sorry for you if did choose the „wrong“ tube amps etc for you In the past.
And by the way tube amps do not sound lush.

Another comment about amps vs speakers.
I also do not think that totally overpriced amps so make sense.
But recommend/promote cheapest amps from Asia, as A.S. and HUG do, is not correct.
To me this looks like: „Buy the overpriced made in the UK Harbeth speaker and buy the cheapest speaker online from Asia“
And no I am not against products from Asia!
 

DSJR

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 27, 2020
Messages
3,314
Likes
4,427
Location
Suffolk Coastal, UK
My 1962 era Quad II's are lush to excess - and I love them to bits :D No good for a modern high fidelity system though as they tend make everything sound much the same here and I do like to hear different production differences...

I do accept your point that not all valve amps are lush or overly warm in tone, but most do have a high output impedance and that troubles 'me' these days if perhaps few others. if you use live unamplified music as a refrence occasionally as I used to do in the 90's a lot when single, it does kind of change the requirements of the stereo set at home, or at least it did me. These days I feel lucky to get a few hours a week to play the sodding thing :(

We're going to have to agree to disagree about amps though. As long as the speaker has a benign load for a solid state amp and isn't so inefficient to drive, a well balanced (tech wise) solid state amp should be fine in my experience. Class D amps may need to be 200 - 300WPC as their one difficulty *appears to be* peak power on transients where a linear supply AB amp may only need to be half that power (a Quad 606 family amp may well be all you need here for harbeths - and none I've ever heard over thirty plus years have ever sounded bright, dry, grainy or overly lean toned and all will reproduce what's going on upstream, even the first models which did need time to warm through to remove some 'grain' in the sound (it was repeatable and later mk1's and subsequent issue generations didn't do this at all, sounding great from switch on - (ok, sighted subjective impressions here).


The one comparison I do want to do is the Linton Classic compared to the C7-XD at nigh on three times the price. Far eastern production can save a fortune it seems, but the high end markets over there reportedly put huge value on the price tags and appearance, which leaves the rest of us floundering at the high prices asked...

Anyway, you claim to have found a 'sound' which suits you. If it means you play plenty of music, what does it matter about people like us on audio forums?
 

posvibes

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2020
Messages
362
Likes
490
I have a pair of C7-es2's that I love dearly. I thought at first there was a little congestion in upper bass lower mids but it was something that I got used to and they are simply lovely to listen to. They are large speakers and on stands they are considerably bigger than many floorstanders, although I like the traditional look a sort of scandinavian cool, I just wish they had grilles in an ecru colour as opposed to the unimaginative black stretch stuff that Harbeth use.

But then in the exactly same position my ugly little JBL305p Mkii's hold their own against the Harbeth's, a slightly different presentation and I am happy with either set for all types of music, neither fail to entertain and offer to my ears viable and enjoyable hi-fidelity. The JBL's offer the extra sense of amazement not necessarily because of their price but despite their price.
 

Willem

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,658
Likes
5,276
I am afraid Thofi continues to push his subjective audiophoolery.
 
OP
T

ThoFi

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
221
Likes
74
My 1962 era Quad II's are lush to excess - and I love them to bits :D No good for a modern high fidelity system though as they tend make everything sound much the same here and I do like to hear different production differences...

I do accept your point that not all valve amps are lush or overly warm in tone, but most do have a high output impedance and that troubles 'me' these days if perhaps few others. if you use live unamplified music as a refrence occasionally as I used to do in the 90's a lot when single, it does kind of change the requirements of the stereo set at home, or at least it did me. These days I feel lucky to get a few hours a week to play the sodding thing :(

We're going to have to agree to disagree about amps though. As long as the speaker has a benign load for a solid state amp and isn't so inefficient to drive, a well balanced (tech wise) solid state amp should be fine in my experience. Class D amps may need to be 200 - 300WPC as their one difficulty *appears to be* peak power on transients where a linear supply AB amp may only need to be half that power (a Quad 606 family amp may well be all you need here for harbeths - and none I've ever heard over thirty plus years have ever sounded bright, dry, grainy or overly lean toned and all will reproduce what's going on upstream, even the first models which did need time to warm through to remove some 'grain' in the sound (it was repeatable and later mk1's and subsequent issue generations didn't do this at all, sounding great from switch on - (ok, sighted subjective impressions here).


The one comparison I do want to do is the Linton Classic compared to the C7-XD at nigh on three times the price. Far eastern production can save a fortune it seems, but the high end markets over there reportedly put huge value on the price tags and appearance, which leaves the rest of us floundering at the high prices asked...

Anyway, you claim to have found a 'sound' which suits you. If it means you play plenty of music, what does it matter about people like us on audio forums?

I do think (audio) forums are there to share opinions, experiences.
Moderated forums such as the Harbeth forum HUG are not correct because opinions could be manipulated. And HUG is moderated/regulated.

Different preferences are a normal human behavior.
Why should audio be different.
Ear/Brain
 
OP
T

ThoFi

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
221
Likes
74
I have a pair of C7-es2's that I love dearly. I thought at first there was a little congestion in upper bass lower mids but it was something that I got used to and they are simply lovely to listen to. They are large speakers and on stands they are considerably bigger than many floorstanders, although I like the traditional look a sort of scandinavian cool, I just wish they had grilles in an ecru colour as opposed to the unimaginative black stretch stuff that Harbeth use.

But then in the exactly same position my ugly little JBL305p Mkii's hold their own against the Harbeth's, a slightly different presentation and I am happy with either set for all types of music, neither fail to entertain and offer to my ears viable and enjoyable hi-fidelity. The JBL's offer the extra sense of amazement not necessarily because of their price but despite their price.

I experienced that the C7-ES3 do have not so well controlled, a little boomy, bass.
Their sound was more relaxing, so not too forward.
And yes, the C7 upwards are big speakers who do need special stands.
 

Willem

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,658
Likes
5,276
If bass is boomy it is mostly from room effects. How did you isolate speaker effects from room effects?
 
OP
T

ThoFi

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
221
Likes
74
It would be very interesting to see the FR measurements (on-and off-axis) of the Harbeth C7ES-2 / C7ES-3 / C7ES-3 XD.
The measurements would tell us about the development evolution.
 
OP
T

ThoFi

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
221
Likes
74
I experienced that the C7-ES3 do have not so well controlled, a little boomy, bass.
Their sound was more relaxing, so not too forward.
And yes, the C7 upwards are big speakers who do need special stands.
..older design
 

Willem

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,658
Likes
5,276
Sure, there has been: different woofer material, different crossovers, different damping. The result has been far smoother frequency response. Fine if you don't want to sell them, but don't pretend that the modern ones are virtually the same as those of two or three decades ago.
 

Purité Audio

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
9,051
Likes
12,150
Location
London
Let’s be honest they are virtually identical, the only changes probably being forced upon the manufacturer by cessation of manufacturing.
Keith
 

Willem

Major Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2019
Messages
3,658
Likes
5,276
As it so happens I own both the 11 Ohm LS3/5a (not quite Harbeth but a real BBC design, and briefly also produced by Harbeth) and the more modern P3ESR, both used as desktop speakers in the near field situation for which such speakers were designed. They not only measure vastly differently, but they also sound it. The modern P3ESR is far far better. Of course, no speaker is perfect, and you clearly prefer a different compromise, and that is fine. My main speakers are QUAD 2805s (plus sub) and those are better, but they will not fit my desk (nor will a bigger Harbeth, of course).
 

Mart68

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 22, 2021
Messages
2,609
Likes
4,861
Location
England
I experienced that the C7-ES3 do have not so well controlled, a little boomy, bass.
Their sound was more relaxing, so not too forward.
And yes, the C7 upwards are big speakers who do need special stands.
I wouldn't class the C7 as 'big'. it's a small two-way bookshelf speaker.

-3dB point is 46hz although I'm not dear if that is in-room or anacoustic. So might be a bit boomy in a very small room with programme that excites the bass nodes. Regarding 'special stands', if it were me I'd use open frame stands of the correct height.

'Special' stands usually means perfectly ordinary stands sold at a stupid mark-up to rubes. And which are probably not the correct height anyway.
 

DWI

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2021
Messages
495
Likes
437
I've had three pairs and absolutely love them. The neutrality is that they sound great with virtually any kind of music. I changed them because my wife changed the colour scheme and the wood finish was banned, and in my office I now have ceiling speakers.

I bought mine before recent price rises and I got a discount as well, so they were good value and I could have lived with them for many more than the 5 years I had them.

I don't like thundering bass, they were more than sufficient for me, and they were never fatiguing.
 
OP
T

ThoFi

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
221
Likes
74
I wouldn't class the C7 as 'big'. it's a small two-way bookshelf speaker.

-3dB point is 46hz although I'm not dear if that is in-room or anacoustic. So might be a bit boomy in a very small room with programme that excites the bass nodes. Regarding 'special stands', if it were me I'd use open frame stands of the correct height.

'Special' stands usually means perfectly ordinary stands sold at a stupid mark-up to rubes. And which are probably not the correct height anyway.

…but they are not small two-way bookshelf speaker

For year I listened to the C7ES-3 and they had a relaxed not very dynamic sound.
Then I changed to the SHL5+ 40An with Tonträger stands (very expensive and recommend by Alan Shaw).
Listening to the Super at the exactly same position, no changes, they did sound totally different with much less bass boom and far more dynamics!
Both at the recommended height…
 
OP
T

ThoFi

Active Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2021
Messages
221
Likes
74
Last development was Radial 2 many, many, many years ago.
Later on maybe different screws
 

Mart68

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 22, 2021
Messages
2,609
Likes
4,861
Location
England
…but they are not small two-way bookshelf speaker

For year I listened to the C7ES-3 and they had a relaxed not very dynamic sound.
Then I changed to the SHL5+ 40An with Tonträger stands (very expensive and recommend by Alan Shaw).
Listening to the Super at the exactly same position, no changes, they did sound totally different with much less bass boom and far more dynamics!
Both at the recommended height…
Maybe I am confused but here is a picture I found supposedly of the C7E3 and it looks like a small speaker to me -



Here's a big speaker for comparison

 
Top Bottom