Current or Previous Harbeth Owners…

@toddcowles nice post

I enjoyed a few models from Harbeth; SHL5+XD, C7ES3 XD, M40.2 and M40.3XD.
Tried them all in a few different rooms and with tons of different electronics. My favorite was the SHL5+XD in a smaller room with high ceilings; some might call it a near field setup. Not sure. In any case I really loved and appreciated the special magic well setup Harbeths bring to the table. Very satisfying speakers on the long term. I recently discovered ATC SCM40 V2 passives and I’m driving those with Moon North 761 amp. I honestly think that ATC has an even better more authentic midrange and overall tonality than any of the Beth’s I owned and listened to for months in my space. The ATC speakers scale better, have more top end refinement and sweetness. The bass is absolutely better - at least so far in my smaller space; the sealed design makes for easy room integration and awesome well defined and clear bass. The midbass energy has swing and flow to it; I could hear the limitations of the Beth’s in this area with faster music. I could sometimes hear the lossy boxes Harbeth deploys coloring the midbass. Bass ripeness or a kind of raw uncontrolled resonant thing. I will always love Harbeths and will probably try another pair someday but for now I’m super happy and satisfied with ATC. Wish I would have discovered these years ago.

good luck!

I’ve owned every Harbeth minus the 40 ( room too small ). I liked all of them and I am now using the Super HL5 plus and in my room it is perfect. Head Bangers need not apply lookin’ at Harbeth! A Cerwin Vega type speaker would be more to your liking! 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gm091w0sSKk

At last someone mentions the cabinets. In my opinion, the thin walled, "lossy" cabinets used on the Harbeths is a major detriment. I think this applies to all speakers with this type of construction. The designer offers an explanation as to why this is a viable method of construction, but this explanation makes no sense. 

@akg_ca Why would you call the thin wall design a major detriment? Many other speakers use this design including Spendor, Graham, Falcon, Stirling, etc., etc,. It's been around for over 60 years and many enjoy BBC type speakers!

Simple fact that the energy dissipates by vibrating the cabinet which creates coloration through resonance. Now if you like this type of sound then more power to you, but I believe that speaker cabinets should be inert with only the sound of the drivers contributing. Dissipating this energy properly is not a simple proposition however. When you check out some of the more prominent speaker manufacturers they spend an enormous amount to time, energy and expense in the construction of the cabinet. Some may disagree but things like wide baffles, thin walled cabinets and parallel surfaces are not  things that typically contribute to accurate reproduction. They are also very inexpensive, comparatively, to other types of construction. 

So when people discuss the nature of Harbeth sound they describe the texture, tone and natural presentation of the speaker. I take this to mean that they dont hear these attributes on other speakers to the same degree. I attribute this to the fact that Harbeths and similar are coloring the sound in ways that other speakers do not. Some really like this presentation, but I think it is far from natural. My preference is for a transducer that comes as close as possible to the original signal and editorializes less.