Differences between Harbeth, Spendor, Graham, etc. ?

@larryi +1

We two hear the same.

@larryi

What I’ve noticed is that most often when reviewers use terms such as "lively" or "exciting" they then go on to say that whatever they’re reviewing presents highs in a tipped up, forward, accentuated fashion that prioritizes detail. I regard this as a red flag because I’m extremely sensitive to highs. I understand that verbal descriptions are no substitute for listening (and I’d never buy speakers without a home demo) but at this point I’m confused. Most descriptions I’ve encountered of Harbeths praise their "warm" midrange. Are you are saying they are both warm and lively? 

All of the speakers we are talking about are "warm" (they are tipped up a bit from about 60 to 200 hz), but, warm speakers can also have a peak much further up or some other characteristic not necessarily associated with frequency response to can be associated with hardness or an edge to the sound.  I hesitate to ascribe this to frequency response because measured frequency response often does not correlate with what I hear--I cannot reliably say what a speaker or any component will sound like from most measurements.  

Harbeth speakers are both warm and reasonably lively.  They are not in the same class of lively as horn-based systems, but they are good as far as box speakers go.  Most horn systems are much more peaky than other types of speakers and those that pull off being smooth, lively and reasonably free of harsh peaks are often very expensive and large (I heard a good custom made example this weekend that was about 30" wide by 30" deep by more than 60" tall that I am guessing will sell for around $70k).

@larryi 

Thanks for your patience. Out of ignorance, I'm apparently oversimplifying things. 

I suppose that tendency for sibilance in the upper mids is another way of describing what I heard in the 30.2’s (and also in some 40.2’s I’ve heard in a friend’s system). But sibilance is too hard a word, I think. A shade of sibilance, No such thing in the Classic series Spendors I’ve heard ( 3/5 - those before the R2 series I think - , SP 2/3R2, Classic 100) at all, though.

I know exactly the “shade of sibilance” you mentioned. Of all the Harbeths, I find it most apparent in the C7ES3s and SHL5+. Naturally, one would presume it’s the result of their metal tweeters in those models. However, I also heard it to a lesser extent in the 30.1s, and least in the 40.2s and P3ESRs. This leads me to hypothesize that the 8” Radial cones are exhibiting more audible breakup, since they are crossed over relatively high.

To the OP:

The common (perhaps unfortunate) misconception is that world-class midrange performance is the exclusive jurisdiction of these BBC inspired brands and their trademark polypropylene cones. The reality is there are many brands that match and even exceed the midrange performance. Good examples are some of the Joseph Audio and Tyler Acoustic models that employ magnesium Seas Excel drivers. Those drivers can actually make a Harbeth or Spendor sound a little distorted and homogenous by comparison. The truth is that that these BBC-derived brands are all employing drivers that are equivalent in quality and performance to <$100 off-shelf models from Seas, Scanspeak and SB Acoustics. I would pit my Tyler Taylo Ref monitors against any of the aforementioned Brit boxes in terms of all freqs above ≈60Hz. As much as I enjoy and respect these old guard brands (Harbeth/Spendor/Graham et al), they simply do not keep up with speakers equipped with top-shelf parts and drivers IME. I replaced the OEM drivers in my Stirling Broadcast monitors with off-shelf Seas models and they now perform in an entirely different league. The Brit boxes are good among dealer hawked speakers, but their hype (and prices) have become misaligned with their performance in recent years, in my opinion, FWIW.