advertisement


Review of new Harbeth 30.2

I had a brief listen to these in less than ideal circumstances just once and was very impressed, but they do seem to need (like all Harbs) a decent amount of power, and in this case, near field is their raisin etcetera (yes I can spell it, it was a joke, hoho). For a small room they are a 'must hear' if you have the cash.
 
Last edited:
I was at the Bristol Hi-Fi show and actually got the opportunity to sit down and chat with Alan Shaw about Harbeth speakers and its customers’ fascination with them. More than just fascination, with some the speakers regardless of the model have become the object of quasi-religious fervor.

From Alan I got to learn so much about his design philosophy and perhaps the most startling element of his speakers, the mid-range bass driver. With all that I want to hear them all over again.
 
I also went to the Bristol show and specially visited the Harbeth room to see if my hearing problem (I hear every s as ssss) was an internal problem in my brain, or, merely the speakers I use.
I listened to the HL5 speakers and heard the problem during a speech recording and then discussed the issue with Alan Shaw who was very helpful but did not hear what I hear.
Interestingly I then went next door and listened to the P3ESR speakers, no s problem!
What does this tell you all, very little except that you should always make you own mind up which speakers sound good and ignore the vast majority of press reports and forum opinions.
 
Any idea what the "UK-made polypropylene capacitors" are that Harbeth use in the special models?
 
I can't believe that a version with slightly upgraded caps warrants a whole new Stereophile review!

I find the measurements interesting, but at odds with what I heard and measured in my room. Atkinson measures very flat across the midrange, whilst I had a pronounced emphasis around about 600Hz, IIRC, followed by more of a presence region dip than Atkinson measured. Robert E. Greene found pretty much the same, if you read his interesting review of the Graham LS5/9.

Atkinson does note that the off axis response does involve significant dips. I found that to be the problem with this otherwise wonderful speaker. I loved it, but it really does need to be heard nearfield to get the best of it. As Atkinson says, it will sound too polite in larger rooms. I also found that firing down a small to medium sized room it didn't quite have the energy required to leap across the distance. Saying that, I miss it at times, and not only for acoustic recordings. With a sufficiently powerful amplifier, it can do lean and tight rock music: it just can't do lower bass (so no to LedZep, yes to Sleater Kinny). For simply listening to voices on Radio 4, it's probably my favourite of the speakers I've owned, even including ESL63.

I also found it interesting what Atkinson said about time alignment (not great!), which he suggests has been sacrificed, or given a low priority in favour of evening frequency response.
 
Last edited:
Elephantears said:
I can't believe that a version with slightly upgraded caps warrants a whole new Stereophile review!

I find the measurements interesting, but at odds with what I heard and measured in my room. Atkinson measures very flat across the midrange, whilst I had a pronounced emphasis around about 600Hz, IIRC, followed by more of a presence region dip than Atkinson measured. Robert Harley found pretty much the same, if you read his interesting review of the Graham LS5/9.

Atkinson does note that the off axis response does involve significant dips. I found that to be the problem with this otherwise wonderful speaker. I loved it, but it really does need to be heard nearfield to get the best of it. As Atkinson says, it will sound too polite in larger rooms. I also found that firing down a small to medium sized room it didn't quite have the energy required to leap across the distance. Saying that, I miss it at times, and not only for acoustic recordings. With a sufficiently powerful amplifier, it can do lean and tight rock music: it just can't do lower bass (so no to LedZep, yes to Sleater Kinny). For simply listening to voices on Radio 4, it's probably my favourite of the speakers I've owned, even including ESL63.

I also found it interesting what Atkinson said about time alignment (not great!), which he suggests has been sacrificed, or given a low priority in favour of evening frequency response.
Click to expand...
the harbeth 30.1 has not been reviewed by Stereophile. the harbeth m30 neither. its the first time they measure the M30 monitor!
not surprised by the excellent measurements on axis. My shl5plus is the most flat souding speaker ive ever measured in my room. making the graham measure like a diy projet measurements wise!
Ive also personally found that the shl5plus needs to be toe in so the tweeter is pointed directly to my ears at the listening position. this increase the soundstage pin point imaging.

I agree, 7000$ cad is too much. the 30.2 are priced higher then the shl5plus! but the shl5plus extends almost a full octave lower down to 30hz. Thismakes me worry about the next SHl5 pricing.
 
Ayya Khema said:
My shl5plus is the most flat souding speaker ive ever measured in my room. making the graham measure like a diy projet measurements wise!
Click to expand...

You said that they both measured flat when I quoted the LS5/9 review by R.E.G. in a previous thread; you seem to have changed your perspective. You've also replied to my point about the M30.1 with a defense of the SHL5Plus.

I just do not believe that the M30.1 is flat across the mid-range. I've compared it in detail to others, including SHL5Plus, ESL63, and Proac D30R, which all have superb mid-range neutrality, and whilst I like the M30.1 a lot, I cannot agree that it is neutral.

To address the issue of price; I don't think it is overpriced at all, at the UK price. It's hard to find a speaker of that quality under £3K without going to vintage models.
 
Elephantears said:
You said that they both measured flat when I quoted the LS5/9 review by R.E.G. in a previous thread; you seem to have changed your perspective. You've also replied to my point about the M30.1 with a defense of the SHL5Plus.

I just do not believe that the M30.1 is flat across the mid-range. I've compared it in detail to others, including SHL5Plus, ESL63, and Proac D30R, which all have superb mid-range neutrality, and whilst I like the M30.1 a lot, I cannot agree that it is neutral.

To address the issue of price; I don't think it is overpriced at all, at the UK price. It's hard to find a speaker of that quality under £3K without going to vintage models.
Click to expand...
No, your forgetting what I said. you mention that the graham seemed to have a dip around 700hz iirc, and I said its flat in that region. my measurements showed a dip around 2khz on the graham.
Ive measured the graham ls59 and from the beginning said that its not flat measuring.

the 30.1 have not been measured by stereophile, no idea how it measure! I thought you meant the 30.2 when you said it cannot measure flat, my bad.

I think in relation to the SHL5plus, the 30.2 is overpriced.
 
Ayya Khema said:
No, your forgetting what I said. you mention that the graham seemed to have a dip around 700hz iirc, and I said its flat in that region. my measurements showed a dip around 2khz on the graham.
Click to expand...

No, I just quoted the review by REG. I made no claims regarding the measurements of the LS5/9, but I found his comparison with the M30.1 said a lot about my experience of the M30.1.

You seem to be still claiming that the LS5/9 is flat across the mid-range, since where you mention the dip is in the presence region, where we would expect a dip from any BBC monitor. (The SHL5Plus seems to take a different approach, as does the C7ES3, in another quite different presence region presentation). This claim for the LS5/9 makes your above statement about it being a DIY compared to the SHL5Plus incoherent. You can't have it both ways; both perfectly even across the mid-range and totally inferior to the SHL5Plus. And I'm not forgetting what you said; your previous perspective was that the LS5/9 and the SHL5Plus were at an almost identical level of performance, with the exception of the higher bass output of the Harbeths.
 
Reviewer using Stockhausen's Momente as a test track? Impressive. It sounds great too through my Harbeth C7s! :)
 
Elephantears said:
No, I just quoted the review by REG. I made no claims regarding the measurements of the LS5/9, but I found his comparison with the M30.1 said a lot about my experience of the M30.1.

You seem to be still claiming that the LS5/9 is flat across the mid-range, since where you mention the dip is in the presence region, where we would expect a dip from any BBC monitor. (The SHL5Plus seems to take a different approach, as does the C7ES3, in another quite different presence region presentation). This claim for the LS5/9 makes your above statement about it being a DIY compared to the SHL5Plus incoherent. You can't have it both ways; both perfectly even across the mid-range and totally inferior to the SHL5Plus. And I'm not forgetting what you said; your previous perspective was that the LS5/9 and the SHL5Plus were at an almost identical level of performance, with the exception of the higher bass output of the Harbeths.
Click to expand...
ill repeat what ive said about the graham. they are boosted from 60hz to 120hz of about 3db. they are relatively flat up to 1.7khz, have a 3db dip up from 1.7khz to 3khz. have a slight rise of about 1.5db from 5khz upward. its a slight v response: boosted in the bass, bbc dip and slight rise in the hf. this is based on my measurements. those measurements ive shown to graham directly and they said it was normal.

the shl5plus is comparitevely ruler flat.
the graham is not neutral, its a bit coloured in its FR

i finally settled for the shl5plus due to a much better FR and overall slightly more engaging presentation and better bass. both are excellent though!!!
 
herb said:
Reviewer using Stockhausen's Momente as a test track? Impressive. It sounds great too through my Harbeth C7s! :)
Click to expand...

Some speakers can turn the Berlin Philharmonic’s Also Sprach Zarathustra into the Portsmouth Sinfonia’s version-

 
TheDecameron said:
Some speakers can turn the Berlin Philharmonic’s Also Sprach Zarathustra into the Portsmouth Sinfonia’s version-

Click to expand...

Excellent, just like my old school orchestra but we murdered Haydn! I'm sure Nietzsche would be amused....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top