Harbeth 40.3 XD + Ton Trager First Impressions
I’ve had the 40.3’s (Walnut) in for a week now – they replaced the 30.2 XD’s (Cherry) which are ready for a new home.
I bought the 40’s used (locally) in mint condition. Even used, this is the largest investment thus far in a single component. They came with some decent “homemade” oak stands that did not match the geometry, or height (11in vs. 14.4in) of Ton Trager or Resonant Woods (which I have under the 30.2’s).
I found some open-box TTs for a great price from The Music Room which arrived yesterday. (Hat’s off to Ryan – the transaction/communication/product was great!). The TT’s are beautiful esthetically and the construction, fit and finish are meticulous and although more expensive than RW’s, I think they are worth the extra money.
Side note: Unfortunately, Resonant Woods isn’t manufacturing anything atm – the owner is currently looking for a new shop.
These massive speakers sounded good initially; detail, sound stage, imaging, depth etc. were vastly bigger and better than the 30’s (obviously) but the bass was a tad bloomy/bloated (with or without the RELs). You could feel and hear the unpleasant bass response, especially standing behind the speakers.
Honestly, I was a little worried that I’d made a mistake, but hoped the Ton Trager’s would solve the problem…
…and they did. Big time.
WOW! The sound is really something to behold. Bass is expansive and much tighter, really nice. Very warm and musical with fantastic detail. I’m going to enjoy revisiting every album.
I thought these would be harder to drive than the 30’s but that is not the case at all. In fact, they sound much more satisfying at lower listening levels than the 30’s, but get really loud, easily.
Having said all that, the 30’s are damn impressive for their size. Paired with 2 RELs, they really are the next best thing to the 40’s at roughly ½ the cost.
I owned a pair of TT stands with a pair of M30.1, and agree that they are excellent. However, this claim (above):
is patently false. The stands certainly do not "decouple" the speakers from the ground. |
@curiousjim My room is really wide so side walls are a non-issue. However moving them further away from the rear wall increased bass-resonance - they sound much better 2ft from the rear wall which is where I had the 30’s. This surprised me - I really thought they would like being further out in the room. @jjss49 I’m not surprised the RW and TT’s were similar - the geometry and build quality are similar, with the TTs having a slight edge esthetically IMO. Last night’s listening session was almost surreal while sitting in the sweet-spot. Do you like the Maggie’s better than the 40’s? @whipsaw The RW/TT stands absolutely decouple the speakers from the floor - the "homemade" ones for sure coupled the speakers to the floor, almost as much as if they were placed directly on the floor. The difference wasn’t subtle. You might say they don’t "completely" decouple them - maybe spikes would, and maybe the ball-feet of the RW’s do a better job than the TT’s. |
What you seem to be reporting is that the TTs are much better at isolating the speakers than your home made ones, and that I don't doubt. But no, they don't decouple them, let alone "completely". And neither do spikes! In fact, spikes couple stands to the floor, despite any marketing claims to the contrary. That doesn't mean that the TT stands, or well-designed spikes, cannot improve the sound of systems – of course they can. But they don't "decouple"! The closest that you can get to decoupling would be damped springs, such as Townshend products, or Isoacoustic Gaia, etc. You may think that I am being pedantic, but the TTs don't come close to decoupling. I originally used high-quality spikes and pucks on my current speakers, and they sounded very good, When I switched to the Gaias, which are designed to decouple (though not 100%), the sound improved significantly.
|
