Harbeth Super HL5+

[shrink]

Hi All, new guy here!

I've been reading this forum a lot over the last few months and finally decided to sign up.

I'm an SHL5+ owner, and for me it was an interesting journey and one that I feel might be worth sharing here.

I will start by saying that one of the primary reasons for wanting the SHL5+ was looks. We have a very mid-century themed livingroom and they slot right in and look at home in our lounge. Reviews always seemed good and the descriptions made me think they'd be exactly what I was after.

So, i get a pair (at this point, it was a pair of the 40th anniversary units) and plugged them in. Rather significant disappointment followed. They were bright, sharp, thin, had zero bass. I almost had to check the bass drivers were plugged in properly. What was going on? Well, At that time I owned a McIntosh 2275 Valve amplifier, and the two just did not like each other at all. I ended up moving the amplifier on and changed to a Luxman L505 instead. This was a significant improvement, but still wasn't there for me. I gave up, moved on the Harbeths and got some big tannoys instead.

Fast forward a year, and another pair of standard SHL5+ came up for sale, and for some odd reason, I was tempted. I felt like i'd misunderstood them completely. So to my home they come....

Firstly I had them briefly on the end of a Parasound Halo Integrated, and boy, did this system sing. Suddenly I understood what the reviews had been on about, lucid open yet smooth midband, extended tight bass and clean top end. The Harbeths were on point and sounding fantastic. Sadly that amplifier developed a fault and went back to the dealer and I moved on to order another amplifier. This time a Gato Amp150 AE. Turned out there was a significant wait time on this model so the dealer was kind enough to loan me an Electrocompaniet ECI 80D.

Sadly, now the magic was gone. The Harbeths sounded thinner again, brighter, lacking bass. This from a fairly gutsy 80w amplifier. It just wasn't working out. Eventually the Gato arrived, and this was a huge improvement, the jump from a solid 80w amp to 150w seemed to pay dividends, even at low volumes. I had the chance to audition a Hegel at the same time though, and finally, it all snapped back into focus again, the way the parasound had.

So what's the moral of this story... well, regardless of how silly it seems for domestic listening levels, the Harbeths seem to want amplifiers with large power reserves to sound their best. The more power I gave them, the better they sounded. The Hegel has been by far the best thing I've ever run the Harbeths through. Finally I have a sound that has depth, punch, huge soundstage, holographic imaging, stunning vocals and it does so at any volume I can tolerate.

I guess it's easy to misunderstand a speaker if it's driven poorly, or set up badly. But I can safely say, the SHL5+ are the most enjoyable speakers I've ever owned (and that's a LOT of speakers).

p.s. it's worth noting, I also added quite a bit of rear room acoustic treatment (absorbers and bass traps) which made a difference as well.

 

[Willem]

First of all, welcome, and congratulations for a nice home decor. And as for sound, power is indeed king, and not only for Harbeth speakers.

 

[UCrazyKid]

Harbeth: How much power neededHi All, new guy here!

I've been reading this forum a lot over the last few months and finally decided to sign up.

I'm an SHL5+ owner, and for me it was an interesting journey and one that I feel might be worth sharing here.

I will start by saying that one of the primary reasons for wanting the SHL5+ was looks. We have a very mid-century themed livingroom and they slot right in and look at home in our lounge. Reviews always seemed good and the descriptions made me think they'd be exactly what I was after.

So, i get a pair (at this point, it was a pair of the 40th anniversary units) and plugged them in. Rather significant disappointment followed. They were bright, sharp, thin, had zero bass. I almost had to check the bass drivers were plugged in properly. What was going on? Well, At that time I owned a McIntosh 2275 Valve amplifier, and the two just did not like each other at all. I ended up moving the amplifier on and changed to a Luxman L505 instead. This was a significant improvement, but still wasn't there for me. I gave up, moved on the Harbeths and got some big tannoys instead.

Fast forward a year, and another pair of standard SHL5+ came up for sale, and for some odd reason, I was tempted. I felt like i'd misunderstood them completely. So to my home they come....

Firstly I had them briefly on the end of a Parasound Halo Integrated, and boy, did this system sing. Suddenly I understood what the reviews had been on about, lucid open yet smooth midband, extended tight bass and clean top end. The Harbeths were on point and sounding fantastic. Sadly that amplifier developed a fault and went back to the dealer and I moved on to order another amplifier. This time a Gato Amp150 AE. Turned out there was a significant wait time on this model so the dealer was kind enough to loan me an Electrocompaniet ECI 80D.

Sadly, now the magic was gone. The Harbeths sounded thinner again, brighter, lacking bass. This from a fairly gutsy 80w amplifier. It just wasn't working out. Eventually the Gato arrived, and this was a huge improvement, the jump from a solid 80w amp to 150w seemed to pay dividends, even at low volumes. I had the chance to audition a Hegel at the same time though, and finally, it all snapped back into focus again, the way the parasound had.

So what's the moral of this story... well, regardless of how silly it seems for domestic listening levels, the Harbeths seem to want amplifiers with large power reserves to sound their best. The more power I gave them, the better they sounded. The Hegel has been by far the best thing I've ever run the Harbeths through. Finally I have a sound that has depth, punch, huge soundstage, holographic imaging, stunning vocals and it does so at any volume I can tolerate.

I guess it's easy to misunderstand a speaker if it's driven poorly, or set up badly. But I can safely say, the SHL5+ are the most enjoyable speakers I've ever owned (and that's a LOT of speakers).

View attachment 214390

p.s. it's worth noting, I also added quite a bit of rear room acoustic treatment (absorbers and bass traps) which made a difference as well.

There is a video on YouTube I saw long ago that shows the Harbeths dropping below 2ohms for some low frequences. That is really hard on an amplifier that doesn’t have huge power reserves and a lot of current output. I think you have exactly found the issue.

Here, I found the video: Harbeth power needed

 

[Willem]

The video shows that these speakers (M40.1) like a lot of power (as do many others). However, there is no reference to low impedance in the video, and in fact the Stereophile measurements show that impedance never gets below 4 Ohm. These are easy to drive speakers. The Super HL5Plus did not even get below 6 Ohm in the Stereophile measurements.

 

[shrink]

There is a video on YouTube I saw long ago that shows the Harbeths dropping below 2ohms for some low frequences. That is really hard on an amplifier that doesn’t have huge power reserves and a lot of current output. I think you have exactly found the issue.

Here, I found the video: Harbeth power needed

That’s the huge 40’s though. The SHL5 don’t go anywhere near that low impedance wise.

 

[MattHooper]

Hi All, new guy here!

I've been reading this forum a lot over the last few months and finally decided to sign up.

I'm an SHL5+ owner, and for me it was an interesting journey and one that I feel might be worth sharing here.

I will start by saying that one of the primary reasons for wanting the SHL5+ was looks. We have a very mid-century themed livingroom and they slot right in and look at home in our lounge. Reviews always seemed good and the descriptions made me think they'd be exactly what I was after.

So, i get a pair (at this point, it was a pair of the 40th anniversary units) and plugged them in. Rather significant disappointment followed. They were bright, sharp, thin, had zero bass. I almost had to check the bass drivers were plugged in properly. What was going on? Well, At that time I owned a McIntosh 2275 Valve amplifier, and the two just did not like each other at all. I ended up moving the amplifier on and changed to a Luxman L505 instead. This was a significant improvement, but still wasn't there for me. I gave up, moved on the Harbeths and got some big tannoys instead.

Fast forward a year, and another pair of standard SHL5+ came up for sale, and for some odd reason, I was tempted. I felt like i'd misunderstood them completely. So to my home they come....

Firstly I had them briefly on the end of a Parasound Halo Integrated, and boy, did this system sing. Suddenly I understood what the reviews had been on about, lucid open yet smooth midband, extended tight bass and clean top end. The Harbeths were on point and sounding fantastic. Sadly that amplifier developed a fault and went back to the dealer and I moved on to order another amplifier. This time a Gato Amp150 AE. Turned out there was a significant wait time on this model so the dealer was kind enough to loan me an Electrocompaniet ECI 80D.

Sadly, now the magic was gone. The Harbeths sounded thinner again, brighter, lacking bass. This from a fairly gutsy 80w amplifier. It just wasn't working out. Eventually the Gato arrived, and this was a huge improvement, the jump from a solid 80w amp to 150w seemed to pay dividends, even at low volumes. I had the chance to audition a Hegel at the same time though, and finally, it all snapped back into focus again, the way the parasound had.

So what's the moral of this story... well, regardless of how silly it seems for domestic listening levels, the Harbeths seem to want amplifiers with large power reserves to sound their best. The more power I gave them, the better they sounded. The Hegel has been by far the best thing I've ever run the Harbeths through. Finally I have a sound that has depth, punch, huge soundstage, holographic imaging, stunning vocals and it does so at any volume I can tolerate.

I guess it's easy to misunderstand a speaker if it's driven poorly, or set up badly. But I can safely say, the SHL5+ are the most enjoyable speakers I've ever owned (and that's a LOT of speakers).

View attachment 214390

p.s. it's worth noting, I also added quite a bit of rear room acoustic treatment (absorbers and bass traps) which made a difference as well.

Nice.

I owned the SuperHL5+ for a while. They sounded great driven by my Conrad Johnson Premier 12 140w/side tube monoblocks. They sounded very evenly balanced in my room.

 

[regtas43]

No one should use tube (valve) amplifiers for Harbeth speakers or for most other speakers. Tube amplifiers do not work on much of anything,. Secondly, with any kind of half way decent low output impedance amplifier, the response of the speakers is unlikely to change much,. Bass performance is much more likely to vary from small changes in position and related matters. Traditional audiophilia is off track in so many ways, This is one of them. [I own two kinds of Harneth, along with a lot of other speakers: Harbeth M40s , original version, and Compact 7s, original version, The original M40s have bass galore-- rather more than is suitable in most rooms. ]

 

[MattHooper]

No one should use tube (valve) amplifiers for Harbeth speakers or for most other speakers. Tube amplifiers do not work on much of anything,.

LOL.

My CJ amps have produced fabulous sound driving a large variety of speakers from small to large, including demanding loads (e.g. from Thiel to MBL and many others).

But..sure...ok. I'll take your advice and ditch them.

 

[regtas43]

"Fabulous sound" is not exactly a precise concept. The only way to get the frequency response that was intended from a speaker is to drive it with an amplifier that has nearly 0 output impedance. Of course it you have some combination of high impedance amplifier and speaker that you like(which is what fabulous sound means I suppose) , live long and prosper. But this is not a recommendation for others of that amplifier, it is a recommendation of the combination. The whole field of component audio is based on the idea that amplifiers do their job whatever they are connected to and speakers do what is intended when driver by a voltage source amplifier. Maybe this was a poor idea and perhaps speakers should be designed in combination with amplifiers-- active speakers in short. But if you are using passive speakers then a near-0 output impedance amplifier is the only way to hear what the speaker was intended to sound like. Otherwise, you are just going to spend your life in the rather tedious task of trying to match amplifiers to speakers to get a combination you like and you are going to have information not transferrable to others unless they want to use the same combination of amp and speakers. But if you are happy, fine. Just do not expect to talk about other speakers as if you knew what they were really like if your impression is derived from listening with a high output impedance amp. I am amazed that this topic needs explication on this forum, which is usually devoted to scientific audio..

 

[MattHooper]

"Fabulous sound" is not exactly a precise concept. The only way to get the frequency response that was intended from a speaker is to drive it with an amplifier that has nearly 0 output impedance. Of course it you have some combination of high impedance amplifier and speaker that you like(which is what fabulous sound means I suppose) , live long and prosper. But this is not a recommendation for others of that amplifier, it is a recommendation of the combination. The whole field of component audio is based on the idea that amplifiers do their job whatever they are connected to and speakers do what is intended when driver by a voltage source amplifier. Maybe this was a poor idea and perhaps speakers should be designed in combination with amplifiers-- active speakers in short. But if you are using passive speakers then a near-0 output impedance amplifier is the only way to hear what the speaker was intended to sound like. Otherwise, you are just going to spend your life in the rather tedious task of trying to match amplifiers to speakers to get a combination you like and you are going to have information not transferrable to others unless they want to use the same combination of amp and speakers. But if you are happy, fine. Just do not expect to talk about other speakers as if you knew what they were really like if your impression is derived from listening with a high output impedance amp. I am amazed that this topic needs explication on this forum, which is usually devoted to scientific audio..

Who says it needs explication? I think probably anyone here understands the liabilities that come with using tube amplification. Some of us feel it's worth it

I understand your point of view. And it's a defensible point of view given a certain value assumption. It's just that you started with a value statement about what people "should" or should not do, and the worth of tube amps, that may declare your values, but isn't necessarily that of others. It's like saying "No one should buy vinyl records because digitally reproduced can be more accurate, so records aren't good for anything."

That just misses that other people get value out of vinyl records that someone else does not. Same with tube amps.

I heard the SuperHL5+ on good solid state amplifiers (e.g. NAD, Accuphase, Bryston) as well as on my CJ tube amps. They retained all the characteristics I liked and heard
with solid state amplification, including the sense of overall balanced sound, but I liked the CJ/Harbeth sound even better. One of the things I loved about the Harbeths in store auditions (with solid state) was how natural they sounded with the human voice relative to other speakers I auditioned. They did that with solid state in my home too, only it took a step to "even better" "more believable sound" with voice, using my CJ amps. (YMMV).

That's been the case with every speaker I've owned. They had the characteristics I heard and liked when driven by solid state, but I always preferred the sound with the tubes amps. I've also auditioned many speakers both on tube amps and solid state, and always came away from both with a good understanding of the character of the speaker. So I (and a great many other tube amp owners) are quite happy not to follow prescriptions like "don't use tube amps with X" or "tube amps do not work on much of anything."

Again, I'm not putting down your approach at all. Not in the least! If you want to ensure the most accurate reproduction, for most speaker designs, it's more likely you'll get that using solid state amplification. But taste is taste, and many audiophiles have also been thrilled with tube amps driving their systems.

In any case, lucky you for owning the 40s! The 40 (e.g. 40.1 or .2) is one of my dream speakers. Unfortunately, even though I love the stately aesthetics, they won't fit right in my room though. Even the SuperHL5+ - which had a gorgeous rosewood finish - wasn't the right look for my listening/living room. I usually own a variety of speakers at the same time that I switch in and out of my system (not long ago I had Thiel 3.7s, 2.7s, MBL 121 Radialstrahler omnis, Waveform Mach MCs, Hales, Spendor, all at the same time. I've sold a bunch and mostly paired it down to Thiel 2.7 and Joseph Audio Perspectives, and my Spendor S3/5s)

Cheers.

 

[regtas43]

Of course it is acceptable in my mind to experiment to find something you like. But I do think it is important to think straight about what is going on. Otherwise, one is just messing about--which may be fun all right, but is not really the orientation of this website. If you like experimenting with inaccurate amplifiers-- and tube amps really are inaccurate in the literal sense-- then have fun. But I would suppose that most of the people looking at ASR are actually looking for comprehensible and predicable results. One of the main sources of error in tube amplification is frequency response changes on account of the high output impedance. This is well known. If you want to play with coloration, it would be cheaper and offer lots more possibilities right under your hand to use an EQ device. Amir suggests this, and no wonder--it really works. If the speaker driven neutrally has too much at 1 kHz say for your tastes, you can just pull it down with EQ. This is cheaper and easier and more precisely done than trying to find an amplifier that does this by output impedance effects. Of course, maybe you also like the high harmonic distortion of tube amps-- that is a little hard to arrange although one can do it with signal processors. In any case, I was just surprised to find an old style play-around with equipment audiophile on this forum,. I have nothing against this activity, as long as one is aware of what one is doing. But people who like to do this are not usually here on ASR, that is all I was really remarking on.

 

[Willem]

Stereophile measured some CJ monoblocks and they had an impedance dependent response of +/- 1.2 dB. That is a clearly audible deviation from the straight wire with gain paradigm.
Anyway, the point of this thread was that power matters, and the more the better. By the way, another way to add headroom is to high pass the main speakers, and add powered subwoofers. After all, most of the power is used for the lower frequencies. Give those their dedicated amplifier(s), and your total system power can be multiplied several times for not that much money. Your main amplifier will not be quite so stressed, and the same will be true for the main speakers.

 

[MattHooper]

Of course it is acceptable in my mind to experiment to find something you like. But I do think it is important to think straight about what is going on. Otherwise, one is just messing about--which may be fun all right, but is not really the orientation of this website. If you like experimenting with inaccurate amplifiers-- and tube amps really are inaccurate in the literal sense-- then have fun. But I would suppose that most of the people looking at ASR are actually looking for comprehensible and predicable results. One of the main sources of error in tube amplification is frequency response changes on account of the high output impedance. This is well known. If you want to play with coloration, it would be cheaper and offer lots more possibilities right under your hand to use an EQ device. Amir suggests this, and no wonder--it really works. If the speaker driven neutrally has too much at 1 kHz say for your tastes, you can just pull it down with EQ. This is cheaper and easier and more precisely done than trying to find an amplifier that does this by output impedance effects. Of course, maybe you also like the high harmonic distortion of tube amps-- that is a little hard to arrange although one can do it with signal processors. In any case, I was just surprised to find an old style play-around with equipment audiophile on this forum,. I have nothing against this activity, as long as one is aware of what one is doing. But people who like to do this are not usually here on ASR, that is all I was really remarking on.

Yes I agree.

In fact, even though I use tube amps and spin lots of vinyl, when I audition speakers I insist on a digital source (and play my usb of test music, or bring CDs), and I always prefer a solid state amp. You can screw things up too easily with vinyl set up, and it's not as accurate as digital in any case. That's one reason I'm annoyed with all the vinyl played at audio shows.

And there are the liabilities with the tube amps. (If I can hear a speaker with both tube and solid state, I'm ok with that, as has happened a number of times).

Basically I want a baseline understanding of the character of a speaker at it's "most accurate" and where I know any issues aren't coming from the source or amps.
Then if I like it, I know I have the option of nudging it even more towards my liking with my tube amps. This approach has generally worked out really well for me.

BTW, I sometimes pine to have a set of Harbeth speakers around (I think the 30's would be an easy speaker to pop in the system). Fortunately my classic Spendor s3/5s give me some similar "magic" midrange.

 

[ahofer]

There is a video on YouTube I saw long ago that shows the Harbeths dropping below 2ohms for some low frequences. That is really hard on an amplifier that doesn’t have huge power reserves and a lot of current output. I think you have exactly found the issue.

Here, I found the video: Harbeth power needed

There is probably a problem in this video with "apparent power" on the meters at the extreme phase angle frequency (which is playing repeatedly in the music). So I think it is misleading. There is a long discussion in a thread here:

How important is doubling down power to 2 ohm or 1ohm on Hi Fi Speakers on high dynamic range music?

From the impedance plot, the magnitude of the impedance at 50 Hz is magnitude about 20 ohms. That means that not a lot of current is required. The fact that there is a phase shift of about -50 degrees at 50 Hz just means that there will be a phase difference between the voltage output and the...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[DWI]

Hi All, new guy here!

I've been reading this forum a lot over the last few months and finally decided to sign up.

I'm an SHL5+ owner, and for me it was an interesting journey and one that I feel might be worth sharing here.

I will start by saying that one of the primary reasons for wanting the SHL5+ was looks. We have a very mid-century themed livingroom and they slot right in and look at home in our lounge. Reviews always seemed good and the descriptions made me think they'd be exactly what I was after.

So, i get a pair (at this point, it was a pair of the 40th anniversary units) and plugged them in. Rather significant disappointment followed. They were bright, sharp, thin, had zero bass. I almost had to check the bass drivers were plugged in properly. What was going on? Well, At that time I owned a McIntosh 2275 Valve amplifier, and the two just did not like each other at all. I ended up moving the amplifier on and changed to a Luxman L505 instead. This was a significant improvement, but still wasn't there for me. I gave up, moved on the Harbeths and got some big tannoys instead.

Fast forward a year, and another pair of standard SHL5+ came up for sale, and for some odd reason, I was tempted. I felt like i'd misunderstood them completely. So to my home they come....

Firstly I had them briefly on the end of a Parasound Halo Integrated, and boy, did this system sing. Suddenly I understood what the reviews had been on about, lucid open yet smooth midband, extended tight bass and clean top end. The Harbeths were on point and sounding fantastic. Sadly that amplifier developed a fault and went back to the dealer and I moved on to order another amplifier. This time a Gato Amp150 AE. Turned out there was a significant wait time on this model so the dealer was kind enough to loan me an Electrocompaniet ECI 80D.

Sadly, now the magic was gone. The Harbeths sounded thinner again, brighter, lacking bass. This from a fairly gutsy 80w amplifier. It just wasn't working out. Eventually the Gato arrived, and this was a huge improvement, the jump from a solid 80w amp to 150w seemed to pay dividends, even at low volumes. I had the chance to audition a Hegel at the same time though, and finally, it all snapped back into focus again, the way the parasound had.

So what's the moral of this story... well, regardless of how silly it seems for domestic listening levels, the Harbeths seem to want amplifiers with large power reserves to sound their best. The more power I gave them, the better they sounded. The Hegel has been by far the best thing I've ever run the Harbeths through. Finally I have a sound that has depth, punch, huge soundstage, holographic imaging, stunning vocals and it does so at any volume I can tolerate.

I guess it's easy to misunderstand a speaker if it's driven poorly, or set up badly. But I can safely say, the SHL5+ are the most enjoyable speakers I've ever owned (and that's a LOT of speakers).

View attachment 214390

p.s. it's worth noting, I also added quite a bit of rear room acoustic treatment (absorbers and bass traps) which made a difference as well.

I had the same experience. Bought the SHL5+ 40th Anni and soon sold my valve amplifiers. They do need punch, Hegel is very popular, I used Quad 909, at £500/$700 a very good option.

 

[richardmathes]

Hello,

I'm considering the purchase of a pair of SHL5+. A second hand pair came up, and as a bit of a sucker of the old vintage look, I'm kinda tempted.
However, It's very important to me to know whether a piece of equipment I paid good money for, justifies it from an objective point of view.

The SHL5+'s seem to be a rather simple design, with thin walls and unremarkable drive units. However, I suppose this doesn't necessarily mean that they can't measure well.
The only measurements I know of are the ones from Stereophile (Link).
Stereophile claims that "Other than that lively enclosure, which is a deliberate design decision (...) the Harbeth Super HL5plus's measured performance is beyond reproach"

Is that so? Also, does anyone know of any other independent measurements of these speakers, or any other helpful info?

Thanks!

I'm wondering if you ever purchased the Harbeths. I have, just yesterday, based on reviews of multiple discussions and tests and needing finally to make a decision. So at present, I have no direct experience to share.

I have a lot of respect for the objectivity that ASR promotes, but this conversation became a little snarky on the part of some; you managed to maintain an even keel. Eventually, one has to do the up-close-and-personal of just hearing the damn things, and/ or standing down. Didn't Shakespeare say something about heaven, earth, and "your philosophy"? And Twain about lies, damned lies, and statistics? Anyway, Best wishes.

 

[ahofer]

This might interest you (Harbeth SHL5+(AE) in my large-ish NY living room)

Embarking on REW/Roon DSP exercise

Occasionally, REW will tell me the levels are off as well while it not being so... make sure the microphone cable and connections are good -- unplug and replug, or try another cable... -- as well as try restarting the program. Just looking at the per channel measurements the treble is louder...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[richardmathes]

This might interest you (Harbeth SHL5+(AE) in my large-ish NY living room)

Embarking on REW/Roon DSP exercise

Occasionally, REW will tell me the levels are off as well while it not being so... make sure the microphone cable and connections are good -- unplug and replug, or try another cable... -- as well as try restarting the program. Just looking at the per channel measurements the treble is louder...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Thank you! You should be pretty happy with that. And I'll keep an eye out for the Revels. My expertise in fully appreciating the data falls somewhere between good enuf and challenged... I know enough about science to stay out of the lab for everyone's safety. I do appreciate your quotations!

 

[ThoFi]

Stereophile measured the SHL5+ XD.
Can anyone explain what’s going at the FR >10kHz???

Harbeth Super HL5plus XD loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

 

[Willem]

Stereophile incorrectly measured at the supertweeter axis. The reference axis for this speaker is at the main tweeter.