Harbeth or Spendor?
- Thread starter dzeikei
- Start date
rockadelic
pfm Member
Does that mean that the 40.1 sounds better than the S100/SP100/SP100R/SP100R2 range?
I am curious if anyone out there had actually compared flagship speakers from these 2 brands.
Rockadelic, Unfortunately I haven't myself compared them. But when researching both a few years ago I got this reply from a Danish audio dealer who had both at the time:
'I think the Harbeth monitor 40.1 is a much better speaker than the Spendor SP100r which I have in the shop (there is a new Spendor SP100r2, with a new midrange and tweeter. I don’t know the sound of this speaker.
The Harbeth is more detailed than Spendor sp 100r, but still with natural coherent sound. More room information and ambience. I think Spendor sp100r are missing a bit of energy and level in the important midrange compared to the Harbeth. The Harbeth M40.1 is just my favorite.'
which seems to confirm hifi_dave's comments.
'I think the Harbeth monitor 40.1 is a much better speaker than the Spendor SP100r which I have in the shop (there is a new Spendor SP100r2, with a new midrange and tweeter. I don’t know the sound of this speaker.
The Harbeth is more detailed than Spendor sp 100r, but still with natural coherent sound. More room information and ambience. I think Spendor sp100r are missing a bit of energy and level in the important midrange compared to the Harbeth. The Harbeth M40.1 is just my favorite.'
which seems to confirm hifi_dave's comments.
I have briefly compared the Spendor SP100 (R) and the Harbeth M40.1.
To my ears the Harbeth is a lot more exciting, cleand and communicative. I found the Spendor shut in and slow. That goes for other similar models in the two ranges - the Harbeth always more lively and fun with natural, tactile vocals.
To my ears the Harbeth is a lot more exciting, cleand and communicative. I found the Spendor shut in and slow. That goes for other similar models in the two ranges - the Harbeth always more lively and fun with natural, tactile vocals.
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
It purely comes down to taste.
I've owned both 40.1 and SP100R2 and they are quite different in their presentation. Both are great and have their own strengths and weaknesses. It comes down to personal preference and matching the speakers with room and front end. With right setup I could probably live happily with either one.
Recently I noticed a very interesting comment in a brochure for some Spendor active studio monitors (late 1990's). I think it clearly indicates what has happened.
'over the past 25 years Spendor Audio have established themselves as the industry standard in reference monitors for both broadcasting and classical monitoring. Through the same period musical tastes have obviously changed, as have music production methods. In recognition of these changes, Spendor engineers have developed a new range of monitors aligned to modern musical tastes, styles and applications'
'over the past 25 years Spendor Audio have established themselves as the industry standard in reference monitors for both broadcasting and classical monitoring. Through the same period musical tastes have obviously changed, as have music production methods. In recognition of these changes, Spendor engineers have developed a new range of monitors aligned to modern musical tastes, styles and applications'
albany
pfm Member
I have compared the SP100R and the SP100R2 and rejected the latter.
In 'modernising' of the sound of the SP100R2 Spendor have made them more 'in-your-face' with an unpleasant peakiness around 1-2 Khz which makes them, for me, too fatiguing to listen to for any length of time. I can see they might appeal to non classical music listeners and voice is perhaps a tad clearer.
I am currently trying to arrange a demo of the 40.1. If pushed to criticise the SP100R I would agree it could be argued that there is a degree of 'veiling' of the sound so I want to hear if the 40.1 offers more clarity whilst retaining that warm 'BBC' sound.
In 'modernising' of the sound of the SP100R2 Spendor have made them more 'in-your-face' with an unpleasant peakiness around 1-2 Khz which makes them, for me, too fatiguing to listen to for any length of time. I can see they might appeal to non classical music listeners and voice is perhaps a tad clearer.
I am currently trying to arrange a demo of the 40.1. If pushed to criticise the SP100R I would agree it could be argued that there is a degree of 'veiling' of the sound so I want to hear if the 40.1 offers more clarity whilst retaining that warm 'BBC' sound.
I have SP100.
I understand your feeling of 'veiling'
I believe that the golden days for high-fidelity were in the late 1970's. More people then listened to 'classical' music and went to live un-amplified concerts of 'classical' music.
When I go to a live concert I do not hear masses of detail (fingers on strings, rattling keys etc)
Spendor could have made the 'Classic' series (Derek Hughes era) sound however they wanted them to sound (as demonstrated in the above-mentioned quote)
I have described before how IMHO musicians/recording engineers/hi-fi manufacturers have together created a totally unnatural sound over the last 25 years. An obsession with detail and slam (!) has replaced a sense of realism (and that's not front-row realism).
I believe that it is well worth giving a great deal of thought to exactly what you are attempting to recreate.
It's the 'high-fidelity' versus 'hi-fi' argument. The illusion of being at a concert.
I understand your feeling of 'veiling'
I believe that the golden days for high-fidelity were in the late 1970's. More people then listened to 'classical' music and went to live un-amplified concerts of 'classical' music.
When I go to a live concert I do not hear masses of detail (fingers on strings, rattling keys etc)
Spendor could have made the 'Classic' series (Derek Hughes era) sound however they wanted them to sound (as demonstrated in the above-mentioned quote)
I have described before how IMHO musicians/recording engineers/hi-fi manufacturers have together created a totally unnatural sound over the last 25 years. An obsession with detail and slam (!) has replaced a sense of realism (and that's not front-row realism).
I believe that it is well worth giving a great deal of thought to exactly what you are attempting to recreate.
It's the 'high-fidelity' versus 'hi-fi' argument. The illusion of being at a concert.
Just discovered this. I suspected as much, but hadn't read it explicitly stated (regarding his move to Harbeth).
http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=12078.0
'Derek has not been comfortable with the direction that the Spendor company has been taking since the once-family business has changed hands twice in the past ten years outside the founding family.'
Of course, Spendor weren't selling many loudspeakers before Mr Swift took control.
Give the customer what they want.
http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=12078.0
'Derek has not been comfortable with the direction that the Spendor company has been taking since the once-family business has changed hands twice in the past ten years outside the founding family.'
Of course, Spendor weren't selling many loudspeakers before Mr Swift took control.
Give the customer what they want.
Exactly.
And my reasoning has meant that I have reverted to a system from the 'golden era' of high-fidelity.
I tried Harbeth P3ESR and really didn't like them at all.
Martyn Miles
pfm Member
One of the reasons I prefer 'old' speakers, such as my Harbeth HLs and B & W DM1s...