@HIfipf... Thanks for your input. How about scale as in size of image I.e. Instrument and voice size? Pretty close?
Harbeth SHL5 vs SHL5 PLUS
Hi Guys,
Seeking feedback on sonic differences between the two. Woofer and crossover changed. Have heard that there are differences in bass quality. My main concern is midrange and high frequencies. What are the differences? If there are...I am seeking the one with a smoother, more relaxed top end (non etched...eg...less leading edge and more body in vocals/string instruments). Thanks so much for your help.
Seeking feedback on sonic differences between the two. Woofer and crossover changed. Have heard that there are differences in bass quality. My main concern is midrange and high frequencies. What are the differences? If there are...I am seeking the one with a smoother, more relaxed top end (non etched...eg...less leading edge and more body in vocals/string instruments). Thanks so much for your help.
- ...
- 30 posts total
Image size is tough for me to comment on because of my set up.The plus is a bit better focused as a result of its improved extension and overall improved clarity.The height is improved, as a result the cymbals hang higher and pin point a tad better. Voice is same size but more focused. Scale is tough but I would say about the same The in your face improvement is the bass.Tighter and better integrated, so coherence is improved. Both models are great but Plus is just a more coherent and clearer sound. |
hifipf9 posts07-22-2015 6:10am I have had both plus and original SHL5.All things being equal the difference I hear are as follows: May I ask the amplifier that was used on both Harbeth SHL5 and SHL5 Plus when you had them? I have lived with the SHL5 for more than 5 years now. A recent upgrade from the Naim NAC 202 and NAP 200 to the NAC 282 and NAP 250 had caused the sound to be a tad warm. I could actually live with the bass of the speakers but I want a more extended top end and an overall leaner sound. Reading your comments above it looks like the new Plus may be the ticket? A less fuzzy midrange with more snap would suggest that the midrange is more in focus and sounds leaner. A treble that is clearer and more extended may render the predecessor to have rolled off highs in comparison. In short, all the traits you have mentioned above are things I am looking for. |
I have heard the 40.1, 40.2, SHL5 Plus and Compact 7ES-3. I compared SHL5 Plus with Compact 7ES-3 in the same room/system. I liked the C7ES-3 better. I wish I could have a chance to compare the C7ES3 with my SHL5 before my purchase but I couldn't pass up the deal. I don't know; I may still like the C7ES3 better than my SHL5 by a hair but I know that to my ears SHL5 sounds more like Harbeth than SHL5 Plus. I had a feeling that the Plus had little hi-fi sound. Different flavor. My pick would be SHL5. I love them. @ryder I almost thought we had exactly the same taste in sound until I saw that you had purchased the Plus:) I still think we do have very similar taste because somewhere I read your post explaining the sound of the C7ES-3 and that was exactly why I loved them. I have been trying amps with my SHL5 (I recently purchased them) and all the amps I have; mediocre Class D, Class T and Class A/B sound very similar with them. Would you mind me asking if you still have the Naim and if it is still your best amp for the Harbeths? I may buy a used Nait 5si from this guy at a reasonable price but not too sure about it. |
- 30 posts total