Borresen X3 vs Harbeth 40.2 -- my impressions


After reading so many glowing reviews of the Borresen X3 speaker, I decided to go and audition them at a local dealer who was gracious enough to let me stay there for over 4 hours. I went there with the intention of buying the X3 if they appealed to me. I thought I’d share my impressions here for those who are interested, especially in comparison to my Harbeth 40.2 speakers that I adore.

 

The dealer at first hooked them up to the Axxess Forte 1 integrated amp. To be brutally honest, I was about ready to bolt in the first 10 minutes. I just don’t understand why Axxess is getting so much praise. It was the most flat, dry, and boring sound I’ve heard. Luckily, the dealer had some very high end Burmester amp, preamp, and music server (close to $100K retail for the three pieces), which he agreed to use instead. Huuuuuge difference! The Burmester really made those Borresens come alive and sing. IMO, AGD is really doing a disservice to the X line by pairing them with the Axxess in audio shows. They are capable of scaling with much better gear. Shame!

 

If a massive, immersive, and holographic soundstage is your primary criteria and your budget is $11k max, you should stop reading at this point. Run and get these speakers before AGD decides to raise the price. I have yet to hear a speaker in this price range with this kind of soundstage. But if you value other aspects of music reproduction, keep on reading ...

 

Soundstage Width, Depth, and Height:

No contest. Borresen is noticeably better. The soundstage is as tall as it is deep. I heard sounds coming from besides me and behind me. Depth, while not outstanding, is there for sure. Just not as impressive as the height and width relatively speaking. I still can’t get that immersive feeling out of my head.

 

Ability to disappear:

This is one area where Harbeth always struggles. Owing to the thin walls of its cabinets, one is always aware of the big box the sound emanates from. The X3s totally disappeared. Again, very impressive for a speaker in this price range.

 

Vocals:

Sorry, but the X3 is simply not in the same league as the 40.2 when it comes to vocals. There’s this little extra, lifelike quality to vocals in most Harbeth speakers that is hard to beat. I listened to some very familiar songs on the X3, and it became clear why I fell in love with the Harbeth sound many years ago. Female voices are more ethereal and nuanced, male voices have more chestiness. You hear the emotions and every little inflection in the singers’ voice. It simply gives more of the ‘singer in the room’ feeling.

 

Instrument Separation:

This is a tough one. Both are excellent in this regard. But I will give a very slight edge to 40.2s here. Or maybe not. I don’t know. Let’s call it evens.

 

Transparency and Realism:

This is where Harbeth pulled ahead of the X3s in a major way. I’m not saying that the X3s are deficient by any means, but the 40.2s just give you a lot more of it. You really have to live with them for a while to truly understand and appreciate what this speaker brings to the table. It’s truly addictive. The only other speakers I’ve heard that are better in this regard are the Quads or other electrostatics.

 

Midrange and Lushness:

My impression of Borresen speakers prior to this was that they were very fast, neutral, and quiet. But, much to my surprise, the X3s (or perhaps the X line itself) has been voiced to be more on the warm side of things. Sound was warm and had body. Unfortunately, this is being achieved by adding a bit of a mid bass bump. While it gives the speaker an overall warm predisposition, I felt it came at the expense of hiding details in the mid bass region. Harbeth is also known for a lush midrange but it doesn’t get here by sacrificing detail or exaggerating the sound. Another side effect of this characteristic was that acoustic instruments felt bigger than life. Guitars felt like they were 10 foot long. Piano strokes lacked the bite and immediacy that I get with 40.2s – and by the way this is not a particularly strong point of Harbeth either.

 

Tone and Timbre:

Harbeth to the front of the line, please. The timbre and tonal accuracy of the 40.2s is on another level. X3s are also very good in this regard but are somewhat outclassed by Harbeth.

 

Overall Refinement:

I apologize in advance if this is going ruffle some feathers, but the 40.2s are overall much more refined sounding than the Borresen X series. Again, this is only in comparison. On its own, I would never label the X3s as unrefined. The Harbeth just has this extra layer of refinement that you come to appreciate the more time you spend with it.

 

Bass:

As they say, there’s no replacement for displacement. The 4.5” drivers on X3 produce a prodigious amount of bass which is hard to believe considering the size of the drivers. Yet, the 12” woofer on 40.2s gives you more of that deep and tuneful bass. It just sounds more satisfying and fuller.

 

Look and Feel:

This is very subjective, of course, so please feel free to take it with a grain of salt. But I was not impressed by how the X3s looked in person, they lacked elegance. It kind of reminded me of Tekton – okay, maybe that’s too harsh, I take it back. But I was a little disappointed as they looked really nice in pictures. Wish they would lose the carbon fiber touch and the checkered driver patterns. The Harbeths, on the other hand, don’t look as impressive and nice in pictures. I mean what do you expect from an oversized shoebox on stands. But, the quality and craftsmanship of hand-built cabinets has a more timeless and elegant feel to it that has to be seen and felt to be appreciated. I just feel this style, boring as it is, just ages more gracefully.

 

Long story short, I have decided to stay with my 40.2s. They have many quirks, as pointed out by several members on this forum. But what they do, they do it exceedingly well. I found the Harbeth 40.x to be overall more transparent, lifelike, refined, and balanced. They don’t do dynamics as good as other speakers or disappear as much as other speakers in this price range, but they more than make up for it in other ways. I’ve heard people claim that the X3 are twice (or even thrice!) as good as their asking price. If soundstage is your primary criteria for judging speakers, then I wholeheartedly agree. But if you value transparency, vocals, timbre, tonal accuracy, and overall refinement ... the Harbeth 40.x series justifies its higher price, despite the shortcomings.

 

Having said that, I was still very impressed by Borresen X3 and won’t mind having it as a second pair once they hit the used market. But I feel the hype doesn’t quite align with what I actually heard during the audition. In this price range, I find Audio Vector to be a better value.

 

Please note that these are my opinions based on a ‘mere’ 4-hour demo, and only in comparison to my favorite speakers. It’s totally fine if someone draws a completely opposite conclusion, or tells me that I’m biased. My taste, my preferences, IMO, IHMO, etc. etc. etc.

 

 

128x128arafiq

@missioncoonery 

Anyway I owned the 40.1 for a short time Ive owned the Raidho C3 (a Boressen design and much better than the X series we are discussing) ,I pretty much agree with your assessment

I auditioned the 40.1 maybe 7-8 years ago and was disappointed. I pretty much wrote off the big Harbeths from consideration. I found them to be not resolving enough, bass heavy, and a bit boomy. However, IMO, the 40.2 is a much different animal. It is vastly superior (again, based on for my listening preferences) to the 40.1. 

@helomech

Truthfully, presuming the OP still possesses good hearing acuity (which many/most audiophiles do not, because one cannot elude age-induced loss), I think he would come to a much different conclusion if he were to live with the X3s in his own system for some time.

This is a valid point. Often times, it takes some getting used to the sound signature of a new speaker to appreciate the full spectrum of capabilities, subtleties, and nuances. As I mentioned, I plan to purchase the X3s when they show up in the used market. I will be the first one to admit if they turn out to be better, or even the same.

Having said that, it will good if you can take your own advice. Maybe buy a Harbeth 40.2/3 and live with it for some time? Who knows you might reach a different conclusion too :)

Having said that, it will good if you can take your own advice. Maybe buy a Harbeth 40.2/3 and live with it for some time? Who knows you might reach a different conclusion too :)

I get why my suggestion comes off as hypocritical considering I too have not compared these speakers back-to-back in the same system. However, I am confident enough in my auditory memory of the 40.2s that I am certain it would be a waste of my time, because I’ve yet to encounter any variant of Harbeth that approaches the resolution of speakers like the X3s, whether we’re talking upper bass, midrange, or treble. To my ears they are simply in different performance classes. If we were debating the performance of the Graham LS5/8s VS the 40.2s, then I would be far less confident in my assessment. That would be a comparison in which the speakers are too similar to declare a victor without a side-by-side.

For perhaps a more relatable analogy, the gap between these two speakers, to my ears, is similar to that between a Monitor Audio Platinum and MA Silver series, or Revel Salon vs Revel Concerta. Of course, the Harbeth 40.2 outperforms those brands’ budget speaker lines, I only mentioned them because many listeners have encountered them and I’m trying to better illustrate my perception of the performance gap.

Please bear in mind, I am not one who finds there are equal tradeoffs between speakers like Rockports/Perlistens/Borresens/Joseph Audios and the “warmer” vintage-inspired brands like Harbeth/Graham/Stirling/Spendor. I know many listeners consider the latter to have a less fatiguing, more musical presentation, but to my ears the former, more modern designs are actually less offensive over extended listening, in addition to being unquestionably higher in resolution and detail—both macro and micro. Honestly, I cannot fathom how one could audition these different speaker approaches and conclude the BBC derivatives keep up in terms of resolution and refinement, unless by “refinement” they are actually referring to treble roll-off. Again though, I wonder if some of this merely comes down to hearing acuity, as statistically, someone in their 60s will have a lower hearing threshold by approximately 5dB from around 2kHz on up vs the average person my age. I’m not saying that’s definitely what’s at play here with your assessment, only pondering what other factors possibly account for our big difference in opinion.

Anyhow, it’s certainly not my intent to denigrate BBC-type speakers, I still own a pair of Stirling Broadcasts with upgraded drivers and don’t plan on selling them anytime soon. But even with the upgraded drivers, the Stirlings are to my X3s what a Wharfedale Diamond would be to a Harbeth.

YMMV….I suppose.
 

 

 

However, I am confident enough in my auditory memory of the 40.2s that I am certain it would be a waste of my time, because I’ve yet to encounter any variant of Harbeth that approaches the resolution of speakers like the X3s, whether we’re talking upper bass, midrange, or treble.

Based on my auditory memory, which is very recent, I found Harbeth to be superior in resolution, including midrange and treble. X3s had a much wider and taller soundstage though. There are too many variables here -- you are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. Anyways, audio is highly subjective and it makes no sense to engage in these types of arguments. I am going to keep an open mind and seek to purchase an X3 so I can listen in my own system. Will truthfully share my impressions after that. I might change my mind after all. Or maybe not.

One thing I would like to add is that when a manufacturer creates a product which performs so well at it's respective price point, us as audiophiles, must acknowledge and appreciate it. Whether you like Borresen or not, AGD has delivered a solid product which definitely punches above its weight. Yes, there is some hype, but it's not totally unjustified either. I suspect the next generation of X3 will be tuned even better to overcome some shortcomings (e.g. exaggerated midbass bump). It seems more of a tuning decision than a deficiency in design or quality of parts.