PMC result6 Monitor Review

[Purité Audio]

@roog Just easier to re-hash the old, concentrate on marketing rather than innovation and aim at a demographic ( ie nearly all) that know no better.
How much are the active Harbeths?
Keith

 

[roog]

@roog Just easier to re-hash the old, concentrate on marketing rather than innovation and aim at a demographic ( ie nearly all) that know no better.
How much are the active Harbeths?
Keith

Just checked their web site, I was interested because I’m looking to down size to small monitors, they seem to be £2995 for a pair.

NLE-1

The NLE-1 loudspeaker combines the full latent performance potential of our RADIAL cone technology with DSP.

harbeth.co.uk

Typically for HiFi sites they seem very short on details and the rear view (seen in the spinny picture) doesn’t show any detail on how the DSP works or is adjustable if at all!

I noted that they also sell the NLE-3 which is a three way and sells for a sobering price of nearly £23k a pair ouch!

 

[uwotm8]

Harbeth (very traditional company) playing their little active speakers. NLE-1

Kinda baby D&D 8c for 3k pounds - well, I like the look.

...and this is what you get for 23k (sorry but ugly AF to me):

 

[roog]

View attachment 430997
Kinda baby D&D 8c for 3k pounds - well, I like the look.

...and this is what you get for 23k (sorry but ugly AF to me):
View attachment 430998View attachment 430999

Agreed, I liked the look of the little one, they had very bold red coloured NLE-1’s playing when I visited their room, they sounded OK given the circumstances, small crowded hotel room!

 

[ssashton]

British racing green. Go Britain!

They need to be quite special to be worth £3k IMO.

 

[ThatSoundsGood]

I’m waiting for data on near field monitoring in studios from you first

I have a significant amount of experience in home hifi, recording studios and live pro audio. There is a ton of data (much of which was done by Floyd Toole and cohorts) on which measurements correlate to listener preference. What works in the home environment is still the same scientific principles that happen in a studio. Sure, studios are often designed around better acoustic principles and have more sound treatment, but the physics is always physics. The idea that we can predict which frequencies will accumulate and reflect off of the mixing board is kinda silly and ultimately you will need to properly tune the speakers in any recording studio. It's also wise and much more effective to have the speakers aimed at the mixing spot rather than the console. Yes, lots of studios do this wrong, but that doesn't mean you are better off with such a poorly designed speaker and it doesn't make it right just because that's what so many of them have done in the past. If this speaker is a little further or a little closer to the console then those peaks and dips change. This is basic science and you're proving that you don't understand it. Flat on-axis, downward tilting sound power, low distortion, consistent frequency response off-axis. Do yourself a favor and listen to Floyd Toole's research. Look through the research being done on this site.

 

[ThatSoundsGood]

It’s so funny that on a forum dedicated to ‘science’ people fail to grasp that we don’t listen to speakers in anechoic chambers. Rooms are different, use cases are different. And thank god we have many options besides best-ever-sounding-unmatched-performance Neumann and Genelec

Say you don't understand the science without saying you don't understand the science........

 

[Mnyb]

many cheaper monitors have some crude switches for console bridge or desk aiming to mitigate , but this can not be exact I assume you EQ them anyway after some measurements

 

[AnalogSteph]

...and this is what you get for 23k (sorry but ugly AF to me):

Yeah, what even is this baffle design? Baffling, I guess.

 

[Ktacos]

View attachment 430997
Kinda baby D&D 8c for 3k pounds - well, I like the look.

...and this is what you get for 23k (sorry but ugly AF to me):
View attachment 430998View attachment 430999

Why didn't they just make their current models active? It seems like people liked the aesthetic of their stuff already, that thing is ugly.

 

[Ktacos]

Sound on Sound reviewed the result 6, and it showcases why I haven't taken their reviewers seriously in a long time.


They claim.

1. Classic neutral PMC voicing.
2. Improved bass extension and accuracy.
3. Improved HF control for a larger sweet spot and better imaging.

Also claims this.

"The perforated grille is not there simply for protection; it plays an important role in controlling the tweeter’s dispersion, and also helps to extend its output smoothly beyond 20kHz."

Erm, what?

 

[heflys20]

It would be nearly impossible for a manufacturer to predict these exact conditions, so building in a non-flat response to compensate for desk reflections doesn't make sense.

Reminds of the Wilson Tunetot thread, where people were trying to claim that the manufacturers intentionally gave it a bass boost to counteract room nodes. Hilarious, yes, but absolutely ridiculous.

 

[heflys20]

With a little more time he might understand! I'm hopeful but maybe that's being silly on my part

Doubtful. He'll likely go to another forum full of members who conduct the bare-minimum in regards to research and claim that "measurements aren't the only story." There, they'll bash these measurements and site, and make claims about how they "know" what they can hear; that these speakers are neutral and translate well. Certain segments on sites like Gearspace, for instance.

 

[DSJR]

Why didn't they just make their current models active? It seems like people liked the aesthetic of their stuff already, that thing is ugly.

It was said last year that the market/distributors didn't want it! There does seem to be a general resistance to active models with built-in amps in the domestic scene away from this bubble we post in, largely I suspect because dealers can't sell an amplifier and cable upgrade path to the unsuspecting, making more money out of the punter.

 

[wwenze]

Is it because they need a mixing desk to sound good and most consumers don't have mixing desks?

 

[MaxwellsEq]

The idea that we can predict which frequencies will accumulate and reflect off of the mixing board is kinda silly and ultimately you will need to properly tune the speakers in any recording studio

Which is generally what happens. These days anybody can do such measurements, but a few decades ago it was difficult and expensive. Research and knowledge has moved on quite a bit in recent years.

 

[ThatSoundsGood]

Is it because they need a mixing desk to sound good and most consumers don't have mixing desks?

No. They are poorly designed, unfortunately. They would have to be in a perfect spot with perfect reflections to even out the frequency response and I doubt that's even possible. It's just an old way of doing things and a lot of the studio world is used to it.

 

[Wesseling Audio Lab]

Any measurements for NLE-1 from the company?

 

[Wesseling Audio Lab]

Or maybe an experienced guy who had tested a lot of studio monitors really thinks they are good? Yet not ideal and have in-house sound, this is what's clear in his review

What's very clear is that SOS and PMC are in business together to sell PMC speakers and target the gullibility and lack of experience of the review audience to perpetuate the circle of confusion with the goal of generating the need for customers to upgrade PMC speakers over and over, continuously, for ever and ever. Especially if PMC owners have children and grandchildren who need a secure financial future.

 

[uwotm8]

What's very clear is that SOS and PMC are in business together to sell PMC speakers

Use it in your favor then: make a studio monitor(s) better than awful PMC and then do just a tiny bit of lobbiyng with SoS. Done, a true win-win: people are happy with greater sound, SoS don't have to "lie" and a perfect future is guaranteed even for grandchildren of your grandchildren.