mheinze wrote:
Harbeth they are too warm, with very bad resolution
--------
If you are confronted, and willing to accept the fact that what you like is only 50% of the resolution (Harbeth speakers)
^^ File this under "Audiophiles say the darnedest things!"
You may not like Harbeth speakers, but I suggest you not go from there to making silly comments like the above.
You have your experience of course and have every right to decide which speakers sound best to you. But you are taking your opinion into making objective claims about resolution. You aren’t in a unique exalted position in deciding among speakers; many of us here have long experience playing instruments, lots of exposure to acoustic instruments and other "real" sounds (everyone knows what a real person sounds like), and many of us are just as interested in understanding the difference between real and reproduced sound.
Harbeth speakers have been highly reviewed as having exceptionally accurate timbre for voices and instruments by reviewers well familiar with other high resolution systems. A great many audiophiles have agreed.
I have previously owned the Harbeth Super HL5plus and recently completed a several-years-long audition of many top contender speakers (including Paradigm Persona, Audio Physic, Joseph Audio, Focal, Raidho, Revel, Magico A3, etc). The Harbeth speakers held up quite well and showed plenty of detail and resolution.
As everyone knows, reproducing the human voice in a natural manner is one of the biggest challenges for any system, given how familiar we are with the sounds of real voices. Harbeth is renowned for the natural sounding reproduction of the human voice. And indeed, in my auditions where I specifically check this aspect out, between the Magico and the Harbeth speakers, voices tended to sound more realistic, natural and organically believable on the Harbeth speakers, to my ears.
The ridiculous claims about Harbeth being low resolution speakers, or having "50%" resolution are unfounded opinion. Harbeth has been just as fanatical about developing their radial driver, in terms of reducing coloration, as pretty much any other manufacturer attempting realistic sound reproduction, which is why they have some renown in the audiophile world. And the measurements support the high level of performance, as can be seen in the Stereophile review:
https://www.stereophile.com/content/harbeth-super-hl5plus-loudspeaker-measurementsAtkinson’s comments in the measurements section:
AD commented that "the Harbeth Super HL5plus sounded conspicuously, even startlingly, clear." It came as no surprise, therefore, to see that the Harbeth’s cumulative spectral-decay plot (fig.8) demonstrated a superbly clean decay throughout the midrange and treble. Harbeth’s RADIAL2 material does indeed result in a well-behaved woofer cone.
-----
Other than that lively enclosure, which is a deliberate design decision—note AD’s comment about "the consistently truthful, present manner with which they reproduce singing voices"—THE Harbeth Super HL5plus’s MEASURED PERFORMANCE IS BEYOND REPROACH.
So if I’m looking at evidence for a claim, I can see the great amount of praise Harbeth has garnered among reviewers and many audiophiles for
sonic excellence and truth of timbre. I can note my own experience actually owning Harbeth speakers and being able to compare them to a broad range of speakers I’ve owned and audiotioned. And measurements support that they are a high resolution speaker via excellent engineering.
Or...I can take the comment from a forum audiophile that Harbeths only give you "50% resolution."
Hmm...I wonder which is more credible ;-)