Harbeth 40.3 and 40.2 Anniversary

This month's Absolute Sound has the yearly Editors' Picks feature.  One editor picked the 40.3's and previously owned the 40.2A's.  His comments on the differences between the two are pretty much identical to arafiq's.  Apparently the special material (Radian?) that they have used for the mid-range driver is now used for the woofer too.

It's been a while since I've owned Harbeth 40 series, but fwiw, I preferred 40.1's (owned them twice) to 40.2 Anniversaries.   I assumed the 40.2 Annie's had to be better vs. the predecessor... and even the reviews said it was better, but I never grew to appreciate them the way I did the 40.1's.     While I haven't heard 40.3's, I'd pick 40.1's without hesitation if I had to choose any model from the 40 series. 

It looks as if The Music Room is selling the 40.3s. I’ve never dealt with TMR in any way, shape or form, but from what I have read on their site when researching speakers that I was interested in is that they do allow an audition period. What I have read about TMR here on A’gon is that they are reputable and on the up and up. That might be an option to consider.

On edit:  their site does say 60 day return.

I've been listening to a pair of Graham LS 5/5s for almost a year.  Before making the purchase, I compared them with the 40.3xd directly at a dealer who has both brands.  The dealer put down painters tape in the room and swapped the speakers in and out at about 30 minute intervals.  The Grahams had the matching stands and Gaia footers.  The Harbeths were on some type of steel stands, not sure of the brand.

The speakers sound more alike than different, not surprising given their BBC heritage.  Great midrange, everything is just the right size - neither too big nor too small, unobtrusive treble, no listening fatigue.  In my demo, which was conducted in a very big room with concrete floors, I thought the Grahams were noticeably better.  They had more resolution, greater depth of image and clarity with no drawbacks.  By comparison, the Harbeths sounded a bit smeared.  Maybe it was the Gaia footers - those are the kind of improvements that I would expect good footers to make. FWIW an employee who used to work at Gig Harbor Audio told me he agreed with the assessment.

PS: if you read the previous thread comparing Harbeth 40s to Joseph Audio, you might be interested in Christian Puunter's take on the Graham ls 5/9 and 5/9f.  I think he gives a pretty good description of why some people really like the BBC sound and others prefer "higher end" speakers such as Magico, planers/ribbons, etc.  Different strokes…

Thanks for the comments.

I guess it all comes down to where one stands in terms of increased resolution and if it takes away from the original house sound. It makes me wonder when they advertise it as "more of a modern sound". One persons ideas of more resolution is another persons ideas of clinical. Of course I can't see Harbeth throwing the baby out with the bath water with the XD.

I did think the LS5/5 sounded nice tonally, but I dont think they were setup right. The imaging was not good. There was no real instrument placement except everything sitting between the speakers together, I will probably stop back down to the dealer on the way home and play with the speaker placement. The dealer is also going too get a 40.3 for me to try if I commit to buy one or the other, which os fair. He is just waiting for me to commit. Does the 40.xx and the LS5/5 image well?

What I am waiting on, as an odd coincidence is @paullb comment regarding the Joseph Audio Perspective2 Graphene speakers.  I actually have a demo set up for Thursday. I have heard a lot of great things about the speaker but I don't know if they will sound too polite for me. Btw, I believe the Harbeth sound there best on the Tontrager wooden stands.