Stand Loudspeaker Reviews

Harbeth Super HL5plus loudspeaker Page 2

Thus supported, the Harbeths best suited my 19' by 12' listening room when toed-in slightly but not fully toward the center of the listening area, and when each was approximately 41" from its sidewall and 56" from the wall behind it (all dimensions measured from a central point on the front baffle). My 25Wpc Shindo Corton-Charlemagne monoblocks, their use preapproved by Harbeth's US distributor, sounded super with the Supers—but so did the 45Wpc Croft Phono Integrated, which I used to drive the Harbeths in my considerably larger living room (ca 23' by 27').

A final note: The Super HL5plus is supplied with a removable fabric grille, the slender frame of which can be pressed into a groove at the perimeter of the front baffle, just inside the front molding. As one who has mild doubts about the advisability of hiding powerful grille-fastening magnets within the front baffles of dynamic loudspeakers, I think the Harbeth approach is fine; that said, I did most of my listening with the grilles removed.

515harb.side.jpg

Listening
With both of the amplifiers I used, and in both of my rooms—but especially in the larger—the Harbeth Super HL5plus sounded conspicuously, even startlingly, clear. It wasn't the sort of clarity that comes from a tipped-up treble or an absence of bass—neither of which the Harbeth had—and the speaker's presentation, although a little more forward than those of most other British boxes of my experience, wasn't excessively so. Instead, the Super HL5plus simply emanated a greater amount of sonic detail and musical information, especially in terms of pitch and timing, than I hear from most speakers, and did so with ease, beauty, and an utter lack of artifice or strain.

And for a loudspeaker of sufficient but not generous efficiency, the Harbeth had surprisingly good tactile qualities, in which sense it brought to mind—and exceeded—the ostensibly similar Stirling Broadcast LS3/6. As I listened to "Cortez the Killer," from Neil Young's Zuma (LP, Reprise MS 2242), it was Ralph Molina's snare drum that first caught my attention: spatially set back from the front of the stage, but very impactful and present and crisp, if not as forceful as through my Altec horns. The tone of Young's electric guitar also struck me as just right—the perfect combination of electric snarl and rich sustain—and his voice was texturally realistic and, again, present.

Notably, commendably, the Harbeth's talent for impact extended to its bass range. Tony Garnier's double bass on Bob Dylan's recent Shadows in the Night (LP, Columbia 88875057961) sounded appropriately deep and rich, with good timing when plucked—as in the opening of "The Night We Called It a Day"—and superb texture and tactile qualities when bowed. I noted the same qualities when listening to Ben Tucker's bass playing in "'Round About Midnight," from Grant Green's Green Street (LP, Blue Note/Analogue Productions ST-84071): The Harbeths succeeded at conveying the extra force Tucker put behind each note as the performance wound down. And with Sir Adrian Boult and the New Philharmonia Orchestra's recording of Vaughan Williams's Symphony 6 (LP, EMI ASD 2329), the Harbeths let through a good sense of menace from the bass-drum rumblings in the opening measures, and from the battery of percussion that repeatedly builds to a climax under the three-note trumpet signature of the second movement. The very believable timbre of the solo oboe in the symphony's epilogue was icing on the cake. Again, I'm not talking compression-driver-and-horn levels of impact here—but the Super HL5plus had considerably better touch than I would have expected from a comparatively small and undeniably uncolored loudspeaker.

The Harbeth was a fine, clear communicator of musical timing. Up-tempo music, including the piano-driven "Re-Make/Re-Model" and other favorites from Roxy Music (LP, EG Records EGLP6, footnote 2), had excellent momentum and no signs of soggy tempos. The same could be said for the two takes of "Chance It" from Enigma, a recently released 10" mono LP by Miles Davis (Blue Note B0021528-01). The first version, labeled "take 3," has, in addition to Oscar Pettiford's relentlessly fast bass line, a brief solo by trombonist J.J. Johnson that, via the consistently articulate Harbeths, left me wondering how a mortal could coax from a trombone such inhuman speed. On a calmer wavelength, guitarist John Fahey's fingerstyle performance of "John Henry," from Selections by John Fahey and Blind Joe Death (LP, Takoma K80P-4447/8), lost none of its eerie rhythmic insistence through the Harbeths. And in a new reissue of Sir John Barbirolli and the Berlin Philharmonic's recording of Mahler's Symphony 9 (LP, EMI/Electric Recording Company ASD 596/597), the Harbeths followed tenaciously the intricate changes in tempo occasioned by the shifting, in the first movement, from D major to D minor and back again.

515harb.2.jpg

In fact, the Harbeth's exceptionally good musical timing served well Ivo Jansen's flowing, almost imperceptibly elastic performance of the Prelude and Fugue in C from Book I of J.S. Bach's Well-Tempered Clavier (CD, Void Classics 9805-A). And even when Jansen's technique takes a turn toward the mechanical, as it does in portions of the beginning of the Prelude and Fugue in c, the Harbeths kept things musical and human, perhaps by sheer dint of their good, warm tone. Were notes centered around 80Hz very slightly prominent, and their counterparts around 200Hz recessed to a similarly slight degree? I was tempted to dismiss such frequency-response inconsistencies as artifacts of my admittedly wiggy room, but I did hear pretty much the same thing when I tried the Harbeths in my much larger room, with the hybrid Croft Phono Integrated. Even so, piano sounded consistently impressive through the Harbeths, which allowed the more lyrical portions of György Sándor's thoughtful, intense performance of the Bartók Piano Sonata (CD, Sony Classical SK 68278) a good, human sense of flow, while preserving the power and drama of the more decidedly modern passages. The above also applied to the same disc's recording of Bart¢k's more accessible Sonatine, the opening movement of which always reminds me of the fiddle tune "Old Joe Clark." Throughout the Bartók set, I heard great, barking tone, with lots of bass-string purr: There was a whole pet shop in there!

Shortcomings? Although, as moderately sized cone-and-dome speakers go, the Super HL5plus did a better-than-expected job of communicating force, it was nonetheless bested in that regard by my Altec Valencias, or by any number of other vintage speakers built around horns and tautly suspended woofers. Additionally, while listening to big music through the Harbeths, I often wished for a better and altogether larger sense of scale: another illusion better conjured by horns and big woofers. (To the extent that that quality can result from a surplus of unwanted early reflections tricking listeners into thinking that what they're hearing is bigger than it actually is, I suppose you could read that as: I wished for more distortion. So be it.) Even in my bigger room, the Super HL5plus did not reward the larger space with a larger sense of scale: With indifferently recorded piano tracks, such as Chopin's Prélude in D-flat, Op.28 No.15, performed by Jean-Yves Thibaudet (CD, Decca 466 357-2), the instrument sounded decidedly small.

Still, that shortcoming did nothing to detract from the Harbeths' ability to focus my attention on the essentials of music making—perhaps best exemplified by their consistently fine way with well-recorded acoustic music, such as Tony Rice's 58957: The Bluegrass Guitar Collection (CD, Rounder 1166-116622-2). On the instrumental "Monroe's Hornpipe," the Super HL5plus proved its prowess with timbre, touch, and a really good sense of pitch certainty—the latter heard best in Todd Phillips's acoustic bass line. This is one of the more close-up recordings of Rice's steel-string acoustic guitar, and the Harbeths perfectly captured both the instrument's tonal warmth and the timbral and textural variations Rice manages to achieve with his masterful use of slurs, slides, hammer-ons, and subtle bends.

Conclusions
I enjoy writing about classic British boxes. I'd looked forward to my time with the Harbeth Super HL5plus, and I was not disappointed.

Now comes the hard part. First of all, notwithstanding the fact that even the best British box can't provide the extremes of drama and scale to which I have, in recent years, become addicted, I'll miss the Harbeths' easy clarity, and the consistently truthful, present manner with which they reproduce singing voices in particular. Shallow though it may seem, I will also miss the way they look—or, more accurately, I will miss the way my room looks with something like the Harbeths at one end of it. Second, when this review goes up on our website, a few members of the "I prefer to think of my mother's basement as an apartment with a shared entrance" crowd will write in to tell us how much smarter they are than the manufacturers who design and build classic British boxes, and how stupid Stereophile is to write about such things. That may be funny or it may just be sad, depending on what kind of day I've had: I'll have to wait and see.

Far easier is the task of putting the Harbeth Super HL5plus into perspective for the many hobbyists who might be in the market for such a thing. As one who has owned the Spendor SP1/2 (in its late-1990s iteration) and who recently reviewed the Stirling LS3/6, I suggest that most listeners would consider the Harbeth somewhat more modern sounding, in the best way, than either. The Super HL5plus sounds more forward and more realistically vivid than that version of the Spendor SP1/2, and its bass range is clearer and faster than that of the Stirling LS3/6. Comparisons to the latter, however, are complicated by the matter of value: While the Harbeth offers reasonable value for the money ($6695/pair), the Stirling ($4995/pair) goes farther in that regard.

The British box endures, as does the vision of Dudley Harwood and his BBC compatriots: For the listener who wants a loudspeaker that is both explicit and truthfully beautiful, the Harbeth Super HL5plus is an excellent choice.


Footnote 2: Not the original edition, but a pretty good-sounding UK reissue from the 1990s.
COMPANY INFO
Harbeth Audio, Ltd.
US distributor: Fidelis AV
460 Amherst Street (Route 101A)
Nashua, NH 03063
(603) 880-4434
www.fidelisav.com
ARTICLE CONTENTS

COMMENTS
jporter's picture
Submitted by jporter on May 28, 2015 - 12:09pm

when this review goes up on our website, a few members of the "I prefer to think of my mother's basement as an apartment with a shared entrance" crowd will write in to tell us how much smarter they are than the manufacturers who design and build classic British boxes, and how stupid Stereophile is to write about such things...

Harbeth is obviously an extremely "smart company". The profit margin on this design must be truly remarkable. I commend them for getting reviewers like you to call them a bargain at $6600...I commend them even further for getting people to buy them. Feel free to dismiss me, but I do own a home and I obviously have a much better grasp of budgets and bargains than you do.

ppgr's picture
Submitted by ppgr on May 28, 2015 - 5:22pm

Canadian suggested retail price is $6299 which is roughly equivalent to $5000usd given today's exchange rate. My advice to smart US buyers is to drive north, have a nice meal (hell! stay for a weekend at the Ritz-Carlton!) and bring the Harbeths back with some spare change.
http://audioallianceinc.com/product-category/harbeth-speakers/

william.meredith's picture
Submitted by william.meredith on May 28, 2015 - 7:33pm

The construction of this speaker looks like it came from the local five and dime.

remlab's picture
Submitted by remlab on May 29, 2015 - 3:47am

without the destructive interference.

jmsent's picture
Submitted by jmsent on May 29, 2015 - 5:47am

for studio monitors from more than 40 years ago. The tweeter they used back then was the Celestion HF1300, which died very quickly above 13kHz. So an STC (Coles) "super tweeter" was added to fill in. Modern tweeters are for more capable and can easily make it well beyond 20kHz with little problem. I don't really see why Harbeth continues this practice, other than to stay faithful to the old design. But the extended frequency response of the modern tweeters seems to work against this arrangement as evidenced by the horribly choppy response above 10kHz; caused by the interaction of the 2 tweeters both operating over much of the same range. I don't recall the older BBC designs with tweeter/super tweeter configurations exhibiting this behavior...at least not to this extent.

avanti1960's picture
Submitted by avanti1960 on May 29, 2015 - 9:52am

I heard these at AXPONA. The super tweeter sounded incredible. Added a significant amount of smooth "air" and breathy presence, especially with female vocals. A highlight of the design IMHO.

james alan's picture
Submitted by james alan on May 29, 2015 - 5:49am

At best this looks like a $200 DIY kit from Parts Express! Opening that 1980's looking speaker box is to peer behind the Wizard of Oz curtain. And who needs shielded magnets on woofers these days, especially on $7000.00 speakers?

jmsent's picture
Submitted by jmsent on May 29, 2015 - 6:59am

is probably not for shielding. What would be the point, given that the tweeters aren't shielded? 2nd magnets are often used to get a little extra flux into the magnet system. Sometimes manufacturers use this method to "trim" their woofers; i.e., to compensate for variations in magnet strength from batch to batch. So you may find the 2nd magnet only on some woofers and not on others.

avanti1960's picture
Submitted by avanti1960 on May 29, 2015 - 9:50am

why no comments about the quality of sound stage imaging and precision of location queues? weak spot in the design given the wide profile and rectangular box shape?

Nellomilanese's picture
Submitted by Nellomilanese on May 29, 2015 - 1:44pm

I can't see where 6700 $ have gone into building one of these...it really looks horrible...more like 300$.
Look I took apart a Dali Zensor 3 ( 450$ pair ) and it looks MUCH MUCH better constructed than these...including the cables and the foam used inside...not to mention the actual walls of the speaker !!
I'm sure they sound great..but for God's sake these are off the shelf drives from ScanSpeak...look on their website. What i'm see in' here is a 2k TOPS speaker and i'm being generous.
Cudos to them if they manage to actually make a living by selling at these inflated prices !

utubecomment21's picture
Submitted by utubecomment21 on January 16, 2016 - 3:53am

Whist i agree with you that this obviously doesn't represent over $6k, there are few speakers that do ... your suggestion for Dali included.

As for your comment on Scanspeak, i haven't seen any scanspeak with inverted surrounds, but that would also be true of so many brands including Wilson Audio, Sonus Faber, Totem and a host of other overpriced brands.

My question is; why do acoustical engineers use more humble equipment, whilst so-called audiophiles get more excited the higher the price tag or the shinier the speakers are? .. again, your suggestion of Dali speakers kicks in there!

Nellomilanese's picture
Submitted by Nellomilanese on January 7, 2016 - 1:37pm

Dali makes their drivers and tweeters in-house. So does B&W, Focal, Elac (which sells them to other brands also) and a few others.
I think these brands offer best bang for ur money for obvious reasons.
While from the outside it would seem like SonusFaber just slaps german DKM drivers and sells speakers at inflated prices the reality in this case is quite different.
I co-wrote an article on Sonus Faber 3xtrema speakers and visited their factory in Arcugnano (200 km from my home).
The drivers are made for them only under their requirements (which are high). I was allowed to observe the whole manufacturing process in the factory and trust me you would be mind-blown at the level of artisan hard work that goes into these speakers (unlike these piece of cr@p boxes presented here). we also interview Paolo Tezzon which is their chief R&D.
After a whole day there I realised their speakers are priced just right and you really do get what you pay for! The leather-pulling and fitting over the cabinet was amazing to witness.

utubecomment21's picture
Submitted by utubecomment21 on January 16, 2016 - 4:01am

Your reply I've heard 100 times, but that still doesn't guarantee any kind of acoustical performance enhancements over 'Store Bought' components. The car audio industry in the U.S. are going through the same nonsense, and so-called M.I.A. products offer no acoustical benefits over those made in China!

At best it might secure a cost saving to the manufacturer, but in my 30+ years of testing such drivers against the like of Scan, Seas, Morel, and other OEM manufacturers, building in-house offers little to no benefits acoustically. Believe me over the years i've ripped apart and tested enough speakers to last me 3 life times, which is why for serious listening I haven't bought a pair of commercial speakers in over two decades.

jazzman1040's picture
Submitted by jazzman1040 on May 3, 2018 - 7:59am

So do you make your own?

utubecomment21's picture
Submitted by utubecomment21 on May 3, 2018 - 8:37am

For the serious Audiophile, DIY is the best way to go. The only reason to buy commercial products are:

1) You've won the lottery and are putting it about a bit!
2) You're incredibly stupid
3) You've never heard the terms;
'money management'
'value for money'
'clinically insane'

In recent times Beonicke in particular are one of the most egregious offenders with Wilson Audio claiming the Silver & Bronze medals

jazzman1040's picture
Submitted by jazzman1040 on May 3, 2018 - 8:49am

From experience, I believe everything you are saying. Would you take my call?

utubecomment21's picture
Submitted by utubecomment21 on January 16, 2016 - 3:54am

And whatever you do, don't look into the Boenicke speakers, you will be disappointed.

rogeronimo's picture
Submitted by rogeronimo on August 29, 2018 - 10:22am

"... these are off the shelf drivers from Scanspeak..."

NO... as Art Dudley makes clear : "the woofer is constructed in-house, while the tweeters are made by SEAS in Norway to Harbeth's specifications".

Try to read first before blurting out your prejudices.

smileday's picture
Submitted by smileday on September 15, 2020 - 2:30am

See Fig. 3. The bass driver amplitude suck out is around 30Hz. The port is tuned at a very low frequency. Typical with Harbeth and Spendor models.

Which $450/pair speaker has such a low port tuning frequency and is still listenable?

lo fi's picture
Submitted by lo fi on May 30, 2015 - 1:47am

I find it telling how the comments disparaging this speaker are in no way based on how it actually sounds. Also, Harbeth isn't the only speaker company that uses OEM drivers (from SEAS, not Scan-Speak). I was under the impression that it's rare for speaker companies to manufacturer their drivers in-house these days, particularly relatively small enterprises such as Harbeth. Having said that, it's notable that Harbeth does produce its proprietary RADIAL2 bass/mid driver in-house. But with all hi fi, the true test of a component's merit is in the listening and Art Dudley clearly liked what he heard from the unprepossessing Super HL5 plus.

bounce177's picture
Submitted by bounce177 on May 31, 2015 - 3:11pm

the prices of Harbeth speakers in the USA are determined by Fidelis AV. The prices are higher than the prices in the UK and Canada. I have seen claims on the internet that Fidelis has higher quality wiring in the USA versions. Many people resent the high USA prices. Sterling Broadcast's LS3/6 started out with a price of $4,000 and now is $5,ooo. If anyone knows whether USA Harbeths have upgraded wiring please tell. Harbeth has come out with a new 40.2.

dreite's picture
Submitted by dreite on June 2, 2015 - 7:51am

I find it amusing that what is essentially cheap construction can be rationalized into a "deliberate design decision" and the result is objective performance "beyond reproach."
I can't argue with subjective evaluation, but there are obviously numerous issues with this speaker.

lo fi's picture
Submitted by lo fi on June 3, 2015 - 6:06am

Care to elaborate upon it dreite? Notwithstanding that the speaker designer's philosophy is steeped in the BBC tradition and is a considered evolution of it, what specifically makes the construction cheap and what are the "obviously numerous issues" that you have identified?

dreite's picture
Submitted by dreite on June 3, 2015 - 8:04am

Did you look at the "Measurements" page? As with most of JA's testing, you have to read between the lines and interpret the results...objectively.
There are numerous wiggles in the impedance sweep, the cabinet "rings", the "extra" tweeter is not well implemented, etc, etc. I understand some of those are "design decisions" but nevertheless, they are easily seen as "issues" in the objective performance.

As I alluded to, subjective evaluation trumps everything else. If you like the way the speaker looks and sounds, that's all the matters. But lets stay objective about objective performance.

lo fi's picture
Submitted by lo fi on June 6, 2015 - 12:10am

Yes, I looked over the measurements and didn't see anything there that would cause me concern, and it’s clear from John Atkinson’s conclusion that he didn’t either. It seems to me that in reading between the lines, you are looking for something that isn’t there.

Reading between the lines, it appears that the “deliberate design decision” that John is referring to is the speaker cabinet’s lossy construction. Cabinet resonances are an expected consequence of this design approach, where the speaker cabinet is constructed as a tuned box rather than an acoustically inert one. Whether you agree with this approach to speaker design or not is up to you, but it is Harbeth’s way.

You say that we should “stay objective about objective performance”, which is commendable I suppose. However, in your posts you smirk at what you regard as the “essentially cheap construction” of the Super HL5 plus (presumably based entirely on a photo of its innards). You then attempt to justify your “essentially” superficial judgement of this speaker by casting doubt over John Atkinson’s positive assessment of its objective performance, and by zeroing in on anything that appears faintly negative to you regardless of how inconsequential it is. I suspect that your own “subjective evaluation trumps everything else” in this instance.

With regard to John Atkinson’s measurements, I think it’s worth mentioning that he employs a different measurement methodology to the speaker designer. This was the subject of a “lively” exchange between them some time ago. So objective performance isn’t as clear cut as you might think and speaker measurements should be regarded as indicative rather than definitive, or to put it another way, “taken with a grain of salt.”

rogeronimo's picture
Submitted by rogeronimo on October 2, 2016 - 6:45pm

" the Harbeth Super HL5plus's measured performance is beyond reproach." — John Atkinson.

Did you read that bit?
Or were you just too busy with your own subjective assessment ?

SNI's picture
Submitted by SNI on July 11, 2020 - 6:06am

And I came to the excact same conclusion as you did.
Stereophile never really do hard criticism on their DUT´s (Device Under Test).
But reading JA´s writings can eventually lead you to understand more, than is actually written.
First of all, you need to understand measurements, and need to know what the ideal is.
Anyways this speaker does not do very well in the measurement lab, and who would expect so?
Also JA´s comments on most Wilson creations are funny.
They are huge and expensive, but measurements are pretty shitty most of the time.

Ricardo's picture
Submitted by Ricardo on June 4, 2015 - 12:19pm

While it seems that the discussion of the Harbeth 5s has gotten off track, it might make a little more sense to ask those who have experience listening to the speaker to chime in. I own a pair of the previous versions (the SHL5 sans Plus), and as someone who has owned many high-end loudspeakers over the last fifty plus years, I have to say I continue to be amazed at how musically satisfying and non-fatiguing the Harbeth 5s are. I find the model five to be more engaging (less dry) than the model 3.0 (which seems to be the Harbeth model that reviewers go ga-ga over) and the C7ES-3, which I also own. And much like every loudspeaker out there, I don't think Harbeth's are right for every listener or for every type of music, i.e., in particular I don't find the 5s are as suitable for Rock music, or even large scale symphonic music. However, I do think that the 5s would be appreciated for what they can do for smaller ensemble high quality classical and jazz recordings in vinyl or on High Res Flac and DSD players, especially discriminating listeners looking for instruments that sound natural with plenty of timbrel detail and rich in harmonics captured in the best recordings. And surprisingly (I was surprised) the Harbeth 5s can do justice to a well recorded piano,(and I have a 7ft grand in my living room that I play and hear all the time). Harbeth states that the speaker is "voiced" using the human voice, but equally satisfying through these 5s are strings, woodwinds, horns, and guitars. The golden age of 1950s Jazz giants, recorded by the likes of Rudy Van Gelder, sound marvelous, Staging and imaging will require some effort with your room and with placement, but listening to the likes of Art Pepper Meets The Rhythm Section, there is both sensational tonal quality, and impact (the drums kits sound marvelous, as does the entire drum kit, as when enjoying the equally well recorded "Steve Davis Project Quality of Silence" with his cymbals seeming to float endlessly with full yet crystalline clarity that I've rarely heard and even then only wearing the best of today's newest and most expensive high end headphones).

So, in my humble opinion, if one is not primarily listening to rock music, and one is unable to purchase a pair of Quad loudspeakers due to either their cost, or the fact that one doesn't want to electrocute one's dog or house cats, allow me to suggest that such a listener take an actual LISTEN to Harbeth loudspeakers, preferably in your home, before ruling them out.

One last comment, simply because it seems misplaced. Apparently, there ARE performance considerations regarding the choice of materials out of which the speakers are built, and granted, the insides of the Harbeth's speakers are not going to win any glamor awards, but it is really a distortion to say that Harbeth loudspeakers are not finished well, and quite off the mark to say that Harbeth 5s or 5+s look cheap. As someone who looks at them each and every day under every kind of lighting condition, I would have to say that quality of the finish is really remarkable. The rosewood veneer and matching and look of the finish is remarkably professional, as good as I've seen on any speaker, quite frankly. I've had professional woodworkers in the house as guests, and they have all remarked at how beautifully finished the Harbeth 5s are. So while "finishing quality" wouldn't have been a the major consideration for me, I feel it's necessary to correct the record in this blog that Harbeth speakers look cheap. Quite the opposite, friends. Quite the opposite! Take a close at the finish next time you are near a pair of Rosewood or Tiger Ebony 5s. I'm sure others who have lived in close proximity to them, as I have, would have a similar opinion.

lo fi's picture
Submitted by lo fi on June 3, 2015 - 7:23am

Well said Ricardo.

Nellomilanese's picture
Submitted by Nellomilanese on January 7, 2016 - 2:06pm

"So, in my humble opinion, if one is not primarily listening to rock music, "
Your phrase here represents everything that's wrong with these brands and hi-fi. Basically you're ok with spending 6k $ on a speaker that in your own words is not suited for rock music?? Is this the level of marketing brainwashing in hi-fi? THAT is your expectation on a 6k speaker? so if I wanna listen to Mettalica I should spend another 6k for other speakers that do rock well? then another 6k for hip-hop speakers? LOL
Any speaker over 1k SHOULD play rock/hip-hop and what else in a satisfactory manner!
Case in point: 2 years ago I was in a high-end hi-fi store which where demoing a Spendor bookshelf (I think it was around € 3k) with a € 4k amp . They were playing jazz and I swear the trumpets and sax sounded HEAVENLY. I was mesmerised!
Then i said hey let's play Dark Side of the moon (which I always carry with me). I swear I have NEVER NEVER heard such mudded drums and basslines on DSOTM...not even from my 1st speaker (200 € Boston Acoustics standmount)! I was literally gutted and so was the dealer who openly admitted that on rock music they suck completely (not to mention electronic music or whatnot). conclusion? SOME speakers are "sugarcoated" to sound well on the "audiophile" music. truth is that for your thousands of € you're paying a speaker that can't hold a candle to a 700 € studio monitor !!

bgiliberti's picture
Submitted by bgiliberti on June 10, 2015 - 2:41pm

Don't you love the internet? People get to make any factual assertion they want, without the taking the least responsibility for it. For the record: (1) Harbeth's SEAS drivers are not off the shelf. They are custom manufactured to Harbeth's exact specifications by SEAS. (2) Anyone who has ever seen a Harbeth speaker knows that they are beautifully crafted. (3) Anyone who has ever listened to a Harbeth speaker, which apparently is not the case with the detractors on this board, would not give a crap about how they looked. The sound is what the Harbeth experience is all about, and it is amazing. Whether one likes the BBC sound is a matter of taste; factual misstatements and arrogant ignorance are not. And they are certainly not helpful.

Delbert's picture
Submitted by Delbert on June 10, 2015 - 10:58pm

Sadly, these anonymous know-it-alls are way too predominant on audio forums. They are so ignorant, that when they open there mouths to tell the rest of how it is, they tell the whole world how much they do not know. They also tell us that they have put their money where their mouths are. Experience comes with a price.

Loren's picture
Submitted by Loren on June 13, 2015 - 9:29am

Here's what I can tell you after owning a pair for some weeks. The exterior cabinetry is wonderful. The grain follows continuously through the exterior on the eucalyptus wood, as a seamless piece. The sound is wonderful. I compared across a range of speakers . My listening prefers neutrality and clarity. The Harbeth design philosophy is known for this. I truly feel they were worth every penny I invested.

That being said, yes, the photo of the internals can take you a bit aback. The money is where it counts on these and I'll never be spending any time looking at the internal structure.

System: Bel Canto 2.7 DAC/Preamp, Balanced Audio Technologies VK-200 amp, Nordost Hemidall 2 XLR interconnect (brought the vocals forward nicely). Getting Nordost Heimdall 2 speaker cables and USB. Sound Anchor stands: Really improved the isolation of each speaker.

Olu's picture
Submitted by Olu on September 7, 2015 - 2:30pm

Extremely rich sound coming from these. Would use Sound Anchor stands for these. Will be an OWNER SOON.

Nellomilanese's picture
Submitted by Nellomilanese on January 7, 2016 - 2:21pm

let's just agree to disagree. Don't want to sound like those internet trolls. It's ur money...so to all you guyz who enjoy these Harbeth speakers: happy listening!
At the end of the day that's what matters most.

Tesla one's picture
Submitted by Tesla one on July 17, 2016 - 9:47am

"... when this review goes up on our website, a few members of the "I prefer to think of my mother's basement as an apartment with a shared entrance" crowd will write in to tell us how much smarter they are than the manufacturers who design and build classic British boxes, and how stupid Stereophile is to write about such things. That may be funny or it may just be sad, depending on what kind of day I've had: I'll have to wait and see."

Mr. Dudley --

I enjoy reading your reviews and articles in general, this one included, though I can't help but think that above quoted paragraph is a sly allusion to my initial gripe with a show report of yours on Volti Audio's Vittora speakers - something about their price and supposed value (and some homemade cables..). It's a shame really the Vittora's were to be placed in the center of that rather heated "debate," as I found them to be highly intriguing speakers (I've since gone on to invest in their UK sibling in a sense, namely Simon Mears Audio's Uccello - based on the Klipsch Belle). I enjoyed your follow-up on the Vittora's in the Stereophile review, as well as your addressing named intial gripe of mine through the "Tesla" surrogate, indeed too hard to overlook. I asked for it and you were right to call me out, I guess, even when it meant seeing you looking eye-to-eye with an invented mother-bound character of (mental) young age (hence the joy in reading this part of the review also); perhaps surprise was an element of my reaction, seeing you getting back to this (and yet again?) quite some time after the show report, but of course this way your bashing was all the more visible for all to see :) I'd even since come to read your article "Skin Deep," which made my griping seem somewhat awkward (and your reaction perhaps more amusingly understandable). Nevertheless, here's another post of mine, and you are free to verbally rip me to threads, should you feel like it. Indeed call me out. Or, let's move on (afterwards). Truly, I enjoy your writings and taste in speakers in particular. Sorry for the late reply (and adolescent griping).

Best,
M

Ck3's picture
Submitted by Ck3 on September 23, 2016 - 12:46am

Your fact is wrong. The 0.78" titanium-dome tweeter is not made by SEAS as Harbeth would like you to believe. It is a low quality cheap tweeter made by an unknown supplier.

rogeronimo's picture
Submitted by rogeronimo on October 24, 2016 - 2:05pm

Produce your evidence for this, Mr Ck3 please.

Ck3's picture
Submitted by Ck3 on October 19, 2016 - 5:27am

SEAS say so. [flame deleted by John Atkinson. And like the other poster, if you continue to flame, you will be blocked from posting to our site]

Ck3's picture
Submitted by Ck3 on October 2, 2016 - 9:06pm

To put the record straight, Harbeth has never said that their super tweeter is made by SEAS. Whenever SEAS is mentioned, it's referring to the 25mm tweeter. People take it to mean both the 25mm tweeter and 20mm super tweeter are made by SEAS because they are mentioned in the same sentence. However, Harbeth has also not pointed out this false belief. This seems deliberate as they are always very quick to rebut undesirable issues on the HUG forum... I think because it's cool to be associated with SEAS!

rogeronimo's picture
Submitted by rogeronimo on October 17, 2016 - 5:46pm

I don't see that Harbeth are under any obligation to refute other peoples' ignorant assumptions; I'm sure they have better things to do with their time than worry about what Internet trolls are wasting THEIR time with.

To further put the record straight, the tweeters in other models in the Harbeth range are also supplied by SEAS, namely the 19mm soft dome unit in the P3ESR and the 27mm soft dome Excel unit used in both the M30.1 and the M40.1 monitors. That pretty much covers the full range.
Professional loudspeaker manufacturers don't merely associate with reputed suppliers "because it's cool", but for proper engineering and commercial reasons.
That's because they are grown-ups.

rogeronimo's picture
Submitted by rogeronimo on October 19, 2016 - 11:17am

As a final word on this subject, while their tweeters are from SEAS and the bass/midrange unit fully manufactured in-house, Harbeth have the supertweeter built from tooling of their design.

(I trust that will put an end to some immature and ill-mannered comments which have no place on this site.)

gizmo101's picture
Submitted by gizmo101 on March 24, 2017 - 3:08am

Are you Alan Shaw or someone from Harbeth? You certainly sound like one of them on the Harbeth users group forum...someone who comes across as a petty, condescending, mean spirited despot towards anyone who politely dares to voice any negative opinion about Harbeth products.

rogeronimo's picture
Submitted by rogeronimo on March 24, 2017 - 4:01pm

Clearly you need to take your own advice regarding politeness.
If you have nothing useful to say, best not to say anything.

gizmo101's picture
Submitted by gizmo101 on October 20, 2016 - 9:55pm

I can't imagine SEAS making such poor quality driver. It's not even a super tweeter in the first place. Calling it SEAS-made would be an insult to SEAS.

rogeronimo's picture
Submitted by rogeronimo on October 24, 2016 - 1:56pm

The drive unit in question provides an extended treble response with wider dispersion up to and beyond 20khz. In case you didn't know, that is the very definition of a super tweeter.
As regards quality, I'll just refer you to J.A's conclusion : "the Harbeth Super HL5plus's measured performance is beyond reproach".
Also, it has already been pointed out here that it is not a SEAS product ... duh!

In the words of a previous poster here ("They amuse, and amaze, me", Submitted by Delbert on June 11, 2015 - 6:58am) ....
"Sadly, these anonymous know-it-alls are way too predominant on audio forums. They are so ignorant, that when they open their mouths to tell the rest of how it is, they tell the whole world how much they do not know."

Mordsith's picture
Submitted by Mordsith on August 25, 2017 - 7:35pm

I know these posts were from a while ago but...

I don't understand how people can reasonable make so many comments, frankly either positively or in this case mostly negatively without having heard the speakers in question.

If it matters, I have a pair of the above Harbeth HL5's. They are no longer my primary speakers (which are now Quad 2912's), however the Harbeth's while not cheap, were worth the cost and provided many many hours of enjoyable listening.

utubecomment21's picture
Submitted by utubecomment21 on May 3, 2018 - 8:36am

"in this case mostly negatively without having heard the speakers in question."

I'll brush the sweeping generalisation aside, and simply assert that the reason I am comment, is because I have had the misfortune of hearing them!

gizmo101's picture
Submitted by gizmo101 on November 27, 2017 - 8:19pm

Dynaudio Contour 20 puts every harbeth to shame!

Ornello's picture
Submitted by Ornello on March 2, 2018 - 10:23am

My personal experience with BBC-derived speakers (Rogers and Spendor) is that the sound is actually very good. I owned a pair of Rogers Studio 1 for 20 years before I found a set of Yamaha NS-1000M speakers and sold the Rogers. More recent designs from Harbeth, Spendor, Stirling, et al, would be even better than my old Rogers Studio 1s were. Their main failing was the 'slow' mid-range, caused by using an 8-inch driver to handle frequencies up to about 3KHz. Unlike in an air-suspension system like the Yamaha NS-1000M, a port is provided to allow the woofer/midrange full excursion and provides very deep full bass, but that bass is a bit 'boomy' and inarticulate. This is a clever compromise, but one that I felt ultimately dissatisfied with. All of these BBC-derived speakers share this approach. The Yamaha NS-1000M crosses over at 500Hz, and the mid-range (whose dome is made of beryllium) is smaller, and much, much lighter and faster than the 8" woofer/midrange of the Rogers Studio 1 and its cousins. Not having heard the speakers in review here, I cannot say that it suffers from the same faults, but I would be surprised if it did not.

A 12-inch woofer run up to only about 500Hz, and a smaller midrange, is a better system.

That said, those who doubt the quality of construction or components are barking up the wrong shoe.

X