Which Harbeths?


Trying to decide between the the M30.1/2 and the C7es3/XD. I’ve researched it a fair amount and I’m coming up a bid confused. Like most things it seems people have conflicting opinions. I’m coming from using various Totems for the last decade. I also just had a pair of Dynaudio special 40s for a short time before selling. I found the 40s were better at playing louder and had a bit softer top end, but overall just lacked that something special, ironically. What I’m really after is that just rightness I get with Totems. While I find there top end a bit much I’ve been willing to work with it because of the just rightness I personally get from them. My wife likes to say they sing which I think gets the just of it as well. Harbeth has sounded very attractive to me for a while and hope to find another version of a special speaker in them.  One that hopefully is a bit smoother in the presence and treble areas while also being very engaging and musical. I use a McIntosh mc302 and C46, so plenty of power for any of the Harbeths I’d think.  Anyways, I’d appreciate any feedback in these two models I can get. Anybody who has experience with both Harbeth and Toen I would have particular interest in your take. I live about 4 hours from any dealer and I don’t like to waste their time since I will inevitably buy used anyways.  
brylandgoodman
- if you feel more treble energy with the Totem, it is very likely that the cause is that they emphasize energy on the treble (often in order to grab the listener’s attention). Conversely, Harbeth not not emphasize treble, and it is a relief when nearly all the speaker industry do that (here are the measurements of the M30.2 Anniversary, made by John Atkinson: no treble emphasis). My reference is live performance with acoustic, unamplified instruments: I barely can listen to any current hifi speaker at all, as the huge majority of them just sound wrong. Due to the pervasiveness of digital, people have lost the reference with live concerts.

What if your reference to live music isn't unamplified acoustic music; is Harbeth still the best in this case?  i.e. the many other modern HiFi speaker manufacturers are just plain wrong?

Many folks and myself included go to live amplified music events.   I live in the Boston area and go to many concerts in venues like the Orpheum Theatre, Wang Theatre, Berklee Performance Center (amazing place to see a concert by the way...), Paradise Rock club, etc...

For me, part of the experience of a live event like that is the not only the clarity and detail I hear at the live event, but very much the speed, attack, and plain visceral excitement of the show.  No, I don't like to be in the first row, but mid row in the venues I go to with the artists I see still allow me to hear the speed/snap of the snare drum and quick thump of the electric bass.  I'm not talking heavy metal and make your ears bleed shows either, artists as diverse as Nick Cave, Cowboy Junkies, Valerie June, to Cheap Trick, Smashing Pumpkins, etc...   All of these artists seen live still present shows with great impact and detail.

Over the years I've owned a decently diverse set of speakers: big powerful but warmish speakers like the Energy Veritas 2.8, B&W Matrix, two models of the Klipsch Heritage line, a well balanced to maybe a little forward Revel,  a super fast and detailed Magico with beryllium tweeter, and recently demoed both the Harbeth SLH5s and 40.2s (not XD) before choosing Spendors.

I get why folks love the Harbeth sound and the midrange and the many other things they do very well; it is talked about over and over again on these threads.   But, being a person who attends a lot of live amplified shows, I also feel they come up short in others areas compared to other speakers.

One or the other isn't right or wrong, this is all about personal taste and preference.
I just find it sometimes a little frustrating that these threads often seem to imply the non Harbeth way is just plain wrong; either the rest of us can't hear, or we have chosen sub-par speakers because we didn't end up with Harbeth...  

Cheers
@ddafoe

[please excuse my bad English]
Thanks for your reply, it is a nice opportunity for me to clarify: I was indeed talking about UNamplified acoustic instruments only (i.e. mainly classical, and unamplified jazz&folk if this still exists).And given that the way @jjss49 reported his own experience was so close to mine, especially in the way he puts it in his post, I could not helped copy-paste what I wrote elsewhere on the very same topic; therefore it may have not been totally clear that the scope of what I was saying was not "universal", but roughly limited to classical ;-)
So,
What if your reference to live music isn’t unamplified acoustic music; is Harbeth still the best in this case?
Maybe not, indeed. Especially if my preferred music were amplified rock, pop and electronic music, I probably would have bought other speakers.
On rock, I like bigger speakers (than my Harbeth M30.2 Anniversary), with higher efficiency and deeper bass (big JBL’s, etc).
(my M30.2 anniversary play fairly good on rock; but one could wish better - and I don’t know their XD serie which is said to be better on rock than previous iterations; I have no opinion).
And as you wrote
part of the experience of a live event like that is the not only the clarity and detail I hear at the live event, but very much *the speed, attack, and plain visceral excitement of the show*
I cannot agree with more on speed and attack, especially with live amplified non-classical music (though I attended very few of them)

i.e. the many other modern HiFi speaker manufacturers are just plain wrong?
I was just saying that on *acoustic music* (UNamplified instruments), Harbeths speakers sound right (so said a sound engineer at Herb Reichert’s place while reviewing the M30.2 Anniversary: "they just sound right!"). They are not the only ones, but they are amongst the last Mohicans: yes, on *acoustic music*, many speakers play wrong. My compatriot Bruno Putzeys (Hypex, purifi, etc) says that too.

- On acoustic unamplified instruments, even if there are different violinS, pianoS, clarinetS, concert hallS (thus acousticS), musicianS, etc, there is still a direct reference/connection with the instrument played (modulated by the room’s acoustics): nothing sits between the instruments and the listener. Moreover, there is a hugely wide range of instrument timbres (woods, brass, strings, percussion, stringed&percussion (=piano), etc). So on one hand, it may be very, very difficult for a speaker to reproduce all various instruments. But at least, a direct reference is accessible.

Roughly, it’s pretty direct. You have:
instruments---(acoustics)--->listener
If one attends live acoustic concert, one has his ear-brain shaped, or trained, by that repeated direct experience.
With some experience, one can identify more easily a speaker that "plays just right" (on acoustic instruments), as real-world direct "references" can be used to evaluate. So, one can feel a bit less lost on a hifi show when facing a profligacy of speakers. This reference serves as a compass.
(and if one does not attends concerts, then one feels lost anyway, and then just chooses the speaker preferred by feeling/sensation).
Attending classical concert (in Belgium) cost approx. €12, and you can change your seat after the interruption, and chose a better one (in this concert hall, for instance).

- On amplified instruments, even more with electronic and synthesized music, the sound system (amplifiers&speakers used by the band in the concert hall) sits now between the instruments and the listener, and becomes a part of the live experience: for instance, the wave guide Electrovoice used here or there sound plays an active role in the perceived "speed, attack, and plain visceral excitement of the show" on the listener’s side. So does its fine-tuning by the sound engineer.

Roughly, now you have:
[instruments + soundSystem]---(acoustics)--->listener.
Does it still make sense to talk here about timbral accuracy? I don’t think so. Speed, attack and sheer energy are probably more important here.Since the sound system used in concert hall is part of the whole, it is more difficult to speak of a direct reference to the instruments: the sound system is a prism which hugely biases the listener’s sensation.
So as "reference" does not really matter here, I think we can chose more "freely" the speakers we prefer, without the hassle of conforming to a "reference", wondering if they are playing right or not. Basically, it’s almost easier in this case, I think. The listener may just choose the one he prefers.
Sure, a few outstanding speakers can reconcile both exquisite naturalness and accuracy on timbres, with speed, attack and excitement, but they are very expensive.

(a clear expression of those simple ideas is beyond the reach of my poor English, sorry... ;-)




@ddafoe

What if your reference to live music isn’t unamplified acoustic music; is Harbeth still the best in this case? i.e. the many other modern HiFi speaker manufacturers are just plain wrong?


good questions, and certainly no right and wrong, just different objectives for sonics in design of various speakers (and thus no 'best' in any objective sense, only 'right for you' and/or 'right for me')

it is indeed an important distinction to understand WHAT kind of live music one listens to as points of reference, obviously an umamplified chamber group or piano recital will sound very different from a rock o blues band in a smaller club, or a live rihanna or springsteen concert at an amphitheater or say the meadowlands

most venues, even small ones, amplify the music with industrial grade solid state amps and use large horn loaded speakers for some or all the artists, depending on seating position, one will hear a mix of direct unamplified sound vs amplified

i think this is why hifi loudspeakers also span such a very wide range of sonic traits... some more alive, emphasizing slam and speed and edgy clarity, others (like spendor vandersteen and harbeth), with a warmer fuller slower less edgy tone and nature to the sound
Amplifier (and source/DAC if it’s not transparent enough).

Investigate the gear if you want to salvage the Harbeth. I’m not sure about the Mcintosh you have. Try other options such as Pass Labs, higher range LFD or Naim etc. Use open frame lightweight stands. Also, good suggestion to give the Harbeth some run in time. It will open up a bit more after few hours.

Totems are brighter and have higher energy in the treble so it will sound more lively and engaging although the amp and source have a warm or dark sound. The Harbeth will sound duller with the same components. I have tried the Totem Model 1 in my system before so I know who a Totem would sound.

Fwiw I ALWAYS change the amp when I get new speakers into the system. It’s a vicious cycle. The amp needs to match the speakers, that’s the first critical step. Further improvements with the source, accessories and cables can come later but the amp must come first. Just to share, when I bought the SHL5 about 15 years ago, I swapped 6 or 7 amp combinations within the first year to make the Harbeth work on the system. The Harbeth sounded like mud with the Plinius amp I owned during that time. The Naim NAC 202 / NAP 200 did it for me and the SHL5 stayed for 7 years before it was replaced with the SHL5+ which I currently own right now.