Harbeth SHL5 vs SHL5 PLUS

I have learned that everything makes a difference but I have not heard the veneer thing myself.

That would be very hard to test unless you could be sure the speakers are in the exact same sport each time. A couple of degrees of difference in toe in are more likely to make a difference.

BTW Sterephile has an excellent review of this speaker in thie latest issue (June 2015). The comment largely reflect what I have heard from these speakers.

I firmly belive if you love the classic Brit monitor sound, these will be your forever speakers. Interestingly they compare it with the large Stirling which is cheaper. I owned the excellent Stirling LS3/5a and can vouch for that company's excellent products and commitment to the BBC sound.

Thanks so much for your input again everyone.

@Banerjba or anyone who has experience with the SHL5+....regarding volume levels...do they sing between low and moderate levels? Or are they one of those who shine and come alive only when played loudish?

Thanks.

Good question. I find all Harbeth speakers (actually most classic BBC designs) play well at lower volumes, especially the larger ones. The slight exception is the M30.1 which sounds a bit bass light at low volumes, although still quite good.

I used to run B&W 700 and 800 series and still own 600 series. The higher B&Ws definitely prefer a higher volume to sound their best. Or a very high current amp if you want to play well at low volumes.I used McIntosh.

Other modern speakers with super stiff cabinets and driver materials also tend to prefer a bit of volume (Wilson, Focal etc) so sound good.

One thing to keep in mind though the SHL is a big speaker so it will not sound as fast as the M30.1 not offer the pinpoint imaging of the P3. But I think it offers a nice full presentation where instruments sound natural and reasonably full bodied in real space.

BTW, not sure if I mentioned, mine took a while ot break in, like over 200 hours. Before that they sound fine but a bit sluggish and slightly uneven.Nothing nasty, just not as musical as after they break in.

I have had both plus and original SHL5.All things being equal the difference I hear are as follows:
1) top end a bit more extended and clearer. Enough so that older model is more forgiving.
2) midrange a bit less fuzzy and a bit more snap.
3) bass is where the Plus benefits MOST.Tighter which address a bit of bloat that would a times be present on original SHL5.
4) drivers are more coherent as a result of improvement's.
I will not comment on imaging or staging because those aspects are too subjective.
Next stop 40.2. BIG FAN

@HIfipf... Thanks for your input. How about scale as in size of image I.e. Instrument and voice size? Pretty close?