JA Pulsars vs Harbeth 30.2

Harbeths need a beefy amp to drive them. If they sound thin or soft, usually because the amp is not powerful enough to drive them. But yes compared to Joseph Audio or Focal etc, they’re not treble-focused. 

I've heard the Pulsars many years ago but they burned a very good impression in my brain, was very impressed (although don't think they are made anymore). Harbeths are very soft sounding IMO not my cup of coffee.

One more thing, Harbeths will never sound thin. Whether you like them or not, one thing they’re not is thin sounding. 

Both Harbeth 30.2 and JA Pulsars are excellent speakers but they’re not going for the same buyer profile IMO. 30.2 is more of a monitor speaker and has a distinct sound. I would never advise anyone to buy the 30.2 without listening. You will either hate it or fall in love with it. 
 

Pulsars are more traditional in the sense that they will sound more similar, but overall much better, than your existing speakers. 
 

Having said that, given your room size why are you looking at bookshelves? You can easily accommodate floorstanders in that room. 

I’ve got the original Pulsars and have heard the Harbeths as well. IMO, the Pulsars will give you all for which you are looking, plus some more. The Harbeths aren’t bad, but they sound a bit thin, particularly in the upper registers.

I got to hear the 705 S2 and the original Pulsars in the same room, and the Pulsars will provide all the improvements you’re looking for in spades.  Performance wise the two speakers are on different planets, as they should be given the price differential.  The Pulsars excelled at providing a larger, deeper, more 3D soundstage while pulling off a much better disappearing act that JA speakers are known for, and they sounded much more natural and balanced without any perceived lack of detail/air.  Bass capabilities were also at another level entirely.  I also much preferred the Pulsars to the 805 D3 (also in the same room) for many of the same reasons although the performance differential was not as severe as you might expect.  Given what you’re looking for I think you’d be mightily impressed with the Pulsars.  I’m not familiar with the Harbeths, but I would be a little concerned the treble might be a little shelved down compared to what you’re used to and/or looking for, but that’s just a guess FWIW.  Hope this helps, and best of luck.

I am familiar with a friend's B&W 705s and have owned the Harbeth 30.2 for about an year. They are very different to the B&Ws. The bass is not better IMO, just a different take on it (less punchy / tight, different timbre, probably somewhat less extended, better suited to reproducing a cello than an electric bass). Treble is not as elevated and is softer. Overall the Harbeth's are more refined but less dynamic and fun - depending on the rest of the system, probably better for classical and jazz and equal or worse for most everything else. Listen before buying, if at all possible.

I haven't heard the JA speakers.

Forgot to add. My current speakers are B&W 705 S2s. So what I am looking for over the B&Ws are:

• keep detail
• better base response
• bigger and fuller soundstage
• smidgen warmer treble/highs
• better musicality
• i love clarity in female/male voices

I hope this helps.

Tom