Harbeth 30.1 Questions

Didn't you own the A6R that had the tweeter with the shallow wave guide? This one?:

Spendor A6R Floor standing speakers review, test

They used that tweeter for only a couple years.

Shortly before the creation of the A7, they fitted a handful of A6Rs with the newer 22mm tweet.

I've been told by multiple folks that the D series has a hot tweeter. The A4s I auditioned were incredibly neutral, though they were in a well-treated room.

 

Yes.

 

The D-series has people on both sides of the fence- very perplexing.
If you look at the plots there is a pronounced peak at 2500 hz which could make them sound "hot" also another small peak at 10Khz. Other than that they are impressively neutral. They really look similar in response to the LS50s through the lower treble.
I am guessing that because the bass response is so neutral (so many speakers have midbass peaks) that it sounds unbalanced on the high end. Also many people may hear them before they are broken in, to the
I believe I might like the sound of these - I can handle a neutral / bright response - as long as the sound is refined. The Stereophile review of the D7 is off the charts enthusiastic. I plan on listening to them soon (even though this is a Harbeth 30.1 thread )

 

I think you're probably right, that it's more a matter of balance perception, or a break-in issue - might also be gear synergy. I'd really like to hear a pair. My Spendor dealer doesn't much care for them but said he has a few customers that have been thrilled with their sound. I thought @freesole 's D9s sounded quite balanced in his vids.

I've yet to hear a more neutral speaker than the A4s, not that they measure the flattest. They have a dip in the upper midrange where my hearing happens to be most sensitive.

 

Side note— @Helom and others interested—stereophile just published online the review for the Spendor A7

 

I'm clearly bias since I ended up with the D9's and really enjoy them but after listening to various other highly raved about speakers, I am convinced that this was the best sound - for me. Neutral is a great way to describe these speakers. Not overly detailed, yet it doesn't miss much - even compared to the super analytical Magico A3's. Has a gorgeous midrange that works so well with the music that I listen to. The bass response is the best I have had at home but then I still supplemented it with a REL sub at the end of the day.

@avanti1960 I heard the D7's for about 2 hours in a store and that is what convinced me to get the D9's unheard. I was very impressed with how easy the D7's were to listen to and could see myself listening to them for hours without worry of fatigue. We're all in this to enjoy music - at the end of the day. The D9's are the D7's with more extension. It digs deeper and as a result, provides a much "fuller" range of sound. I think you would be quite pleased and would be curious to hear your thoughts.

 

Spendor A7 loudspeaker Measurements

weird dip at 170hz. not acceptable for a 5000$ speakers

 

I recall reading a review of the A4 Hi Fi News and Record Review not long ago where they said that the A4 had one of the flattest frequency response curves they had ever measured.

 

Correct, even despite the small dip in the upper midrange I mentioned, which in theory, should result in a flatter sound to the human ears than a washboard-flat monitor.

 

looks like a winner.

 

With protection circuitry which I view as a must then Quads can be played loud. I generally agree about the other weaknesses, but I’d say that those same weaknesses are present for 30.1s. None of these speakers are optimal for head banging or large scale symphonic works.

I’ll add that while I do think Harbeths sound lovely (I’ve owned 30.1s and SHL5s), my ESL 57s are on another level. But they’re more dependent upon the right room and the right amp.

 

I say every speaker is dependent on amp and room matching!

I also have heard the super 5's [the pre +'s] in a room where they sounded wonderful with orchestral / symphonic works. The 40's also do this well I believe

 

I agree, and Quads too can sound wonderful with orchestral work, but it still wouldn’t stand out as a particular strength of each speaker. I can’t comment on the 40s, I’ve never heard them.

 

I listened to the D7s for about two hours today. Very nice. I'll post more detail in the D7 thread.

 

What amp are you using? I've been thinking about getting a set of 30.1's but every time I've heard them they are paired with a tube amp. I've got a 200WPC solid state amp and I'm wondering if it will work well with the Harbeths.

 

Powerful solid state on the M30.1 should be perfect! It is also recommended by Harbeth. So if you want to hear them the way they were designed, that's the way to go.

On my M30 I alternated between Yamaha A-S1100, Audio Note Oto SE, Naim Nait 5i and Classé CAP151. All in all the Yam drove them the best.

One note: room size is important. Too small and the M30 were bass heavy, too large and they were bass light. The latter can be solved with a sub of course.

 

The Harbeth 30 line were used to build the LFD entry level amp which sits at sub 100wts!

 

Sure, a 50-100 W/Ch amp can work wonderfully well too, if it's a good amp design. I was just thinking of Shaw's recommendation to use every Watt that you can get.

 

Jtycho,

I agree, the Quad 57's are on a completely different level of reproduction, even given its ultimate volume level and deep bass limitations. With speakers like the Quad, there is no need to jack up the volume to get a satisfying sound. Whenever I hear about certain speakers or systems "needing" a high number of watts to come alive, I think that is a major defect. I love systems that are alive and engaging at lower volume levels (they make it possible to use low-powered amps, which are, the best sounding amps).

I have heard stacked Quad 57's that could play at scary volume levels and with quite decent bass extension. They had custom active crossovers and built in tube amplification (designed and built by Emia). This is NOT your father's Quad.

I sort of disagree with the idea that Harbeth 30's should be used with high-powered solid state amps. I think they sound best with low-powered tube amps, as long as one is not going for head-banging levels. The 5's seem a bit more picky about the right amps to use, and the 40.2's are particularly picky. I've heard the 40.2's sound very nice with medium powered tube amps, but, I've heard them also sound a bit slow and muddy with fairly powerful tube amps, so I suspect that they are harder to please.

 

My M30.1 are matched with the new Dynaco ST-70 Series 3 (35 watts per channel) and I feel it’s a great match. Won’t play ear-bleeding loud with only 35 watts, but loud enough for me.

 

I've been reading audio forums for 20 years...I wish we could talk in actual decibels instead of "headbanging levels", etc. I've been interested in Quads...never heard 'em...but I'd like to know specifically what is too loud for Quads, db-wise.

 

That weird dip is caused by a line resonance at that frequency. It seems the speaker is designed as a quasi-transmission line.

 

Larry, thanks for sharing your thoughts. My recommendation for somewhat powerful ss amplification is based on a comparison I did in my home, and the resulting conclusions were of course purely subjective. However, when I tried my Oto SE on the M30, it sounded simply wrong to me. There was audible clipping going on, even at conversation level loudness.

 

Don't know if you'd be able to audition but, consider also Chartwell LS6's. For $3,500 or so, competitive with M30's and, for me, preferable to C7ES3's.

Speakers are super-subjective so take this with the usual bushel of salt.

 

Thanks for the feedback. My room's 16'/23' and I can arrange the speakers however I want, so I can pull them out away from any boundaries. Plus I've got a Real Strata III which I've had great luck with in the past. I've got to keep an eye out for a set of 30.1's!