@Djohm - Are yours the same same as these ? They're spec'ed at 52 Cm... TONTRAEGER SUPER HL5Plus REFERENCE STANDS FOR HARBETH HL5
I guess the specs on mine are the ones from TonTrager's official website. 44 cm Reference Stand Harbeth HL5
That's strange ...You'd think that they'd be the same height no matter where they would be bought. All the other specs and notes are identical on both web sites . Maybe a typo ?
It may be... but it would be great if they're available at 52cm as some people prefer the higher tweeter height than others. I'm good with the standard height as mine.
52cm is the height for the C7 from Tonträger: Reference Stand Harbeth Compact 7 They forgot to change the specs: TONTRAEGER C7ES-3 REFERENCE STANDS FOR HARBETH COMPACT 7
SHL5+ no sub iPad, audio tools, umik w/calibration file, 20-20000 Hz hi res file. Only computed to 2 kHz. FFT 8192, 1/6th octave smoothing, 1 Hz resolution. The 250 Hz hole is my TV 1/4 wavelength. With the cover it is a few dB less. Solid to 30 Hz, nice bass rise slope 40-400 Hz sweep
With sub Xover all the way down Gain ~1/4 sub alone Down 35 dB by 100 Hz Does not interfere with the bass tonal range >80 Hz
Seven to eight weeks is nothing. I have vendors at 6 months, one at a year and one who has stopped accepting new orders until they catch up. Absolutely maddening.
New sub integrated Room response almost +/- 3 dB 30-16000 Hz with a few excursions to 5 dB. Slope ~1.5 dB/Oct Listening to In a Silent Way... awesome, almost spiritual not perfect, but perfect for me Approaching end game result
Not to belabor a point but I find this surprising. HLS5+, no sub Large room 14 x 32, open to the rest of the house Speakers are 3.5' out and 3' from sidewalls (one is next to an open entryway) mic was ~10', 20-20,000 Hz sweep, only computed below 2,000 for low end accuracy 2 Hz resolution, 1/3 oct smoothing, lines are 6 dB, +/- 3 dB basically flat to 25 Hz could be boosted <100 Hz by moving towards corner I'd say heck ya' Harbeth is doing something right!
Stereophiles measurements agree with you....my room flat to 35hz...-3db at 30hz....-6db at 25hz.... and don't trust my spl meter below that
I found it kind of thrilling that M. Bangalter (of Daft Punk fame) has the same speakers I do in his office. Good article. Looking forward to hearing the album. Daft Punk’s Thomas Bangalter Reveals Himself: As a Composer
Judging from the on-shelf positioning and the distance between the speakers, this is a guy that doesn't expect a simple office system to sound like what he's used to in the studio. Makes sense.
I’m with you. Also looks like he’s using a basic technics sl-1200 and some Sennheiser hd25’s. Timeless classics, but no frills. Just did an image search for the amp and it appears to be this one: HiFi Bargains: Sansui AU-555A (1971 - 1973) - Twittering Machines
Hey guys. My wife and I our moving to a new house. My man cave listening room is 17 x 32 (ft). Would that be too big for my HLS5 plus XD? I'm kind of worried about that. My current room is 14x20 and it works really well.
I don't know much about anything, but it seems like there are too many unknown variables to give you any kind of a reasonable answer! That said, I bet they'll sound great.
No. My room is slightly shorter than yours but has an open stairway and the HL5+ were in no way too small. They like breathing room.
I'm sure that you can push volume more, if need be to 150W From Harbeth website, SHL5+XD SHL5plus XD - Harbeth " ... Impedance 6 ohms, easy to drive Sensitivity 86dB/2.83V/1m axial Amplifier suggestion Works with a wide range of amplifiers – suggested from 25W/channel Power handling 150W programme "
No port at all like my P3, and front port like my C7 make placing them easier, even very close to the wall. I didn't know that ... this is something well-know, though.
At Bristol Harbeth showed off their active speaker with DSP. The whole range will have an active part eventually. I would be really tempted by a P3 active, if the price isn't outrageus. Taken from: Harbeth coming out with a “digital” speaker "We will be following-up this announcement with a formal Press Release in due course, but I thought that I owe it to you to give you a heads-up. For the last 18 months we have been developing digital equivalents of the existing Harbeth speakers. We first set ourselves a challenge with the most complex model, the three-way Monitor 40.3, and worked our way through the range to the P3ESR and to other concepts. At the Bristol show next week in one of our three adjacent demo rooms (230, 232, 234) we will be demonstrating the Monitor 40-D amongst other speakers, on open frame studio-style stands. Over the coming weeks we plan to discuss the development of these digital Harbeths in as much detail as we can in a public forum, hint at the sort of technical challenges we encountered and overcame, and consider together where this digital technology takes our brand. Digitising the existing models is a logical but hardly radical move: the M40-D is our 'concept car' that hints at a journey which is already significantly mapped-out. But first, for the avoidance of any doubt, I want to make it absolutely clear that there has been no change in ownership of the Harbeth company, no buy-ins or buy-outs, all R&D has been self-funded from our reserves and most importantly, there have been no tie-ups or commercial or contractual arrangements with any third parties with the exception of expert guidance in PCB physical layout of our prototype circuits to avoid hum and noise problems from digital circuitry sharing a PCB with analogue circuitry. In short, the entire design has been undertaken in-house with my continuous guidance as to what sounds 'right' as my colleagues experiments with different potential DSP implementations. The team collaboration has worked effectively because we have given each other space and time to experiment and respect each other's contribution, and no timescales of any sort were set. And when they invite me to listen to alternative candidate DSP strategies, I'm confident that they have carefully pre-selected potential winners from a myriad of possibilities. My colleagues know that I'm going to listen carefully and give them constructively feedback in meaningful language that they can understand, absorb and build in to DSP code. Absolutely no hi-if mumbo jumbo guff. No audio poetry. Comments on frequency, level, balance, distortion and integration. They can work with that sort of feedback. The power of even a moderately sophisticated DSP engine is simply incredible. The smallest lump and bump in the already world-class frequency responses of our Harbeth-made drive units can be completely eliminated. The energy in sub-sub-sub octaves can be minutely adjusted on a Hz by Hz basis to achieve any desired sonic experience. The relative timing between drive units can be adjusted to subsample accuracy (a few microseconds): none of this would be remotely achievable using passive crossover components at any cost or complexity. That said, the investment that we've made in designing sophisticated passive crossovers over the past near 50 years has stood the test of time: the passive solutions have set a high benchmark, and will continue to be honed and refined as our digital solutions trickle down to new passive implementations. Both can and will coincide - forever - as they solve different problems. There are and were many unknowns at the start of our journey, not all technology matters, many are pragmatic consumer-led issues. Will enough consumers abandon their love-affair with hi-fi amplifiers and cables and opt for an all-in-one, buy-and-forget digital solution? How would such a package make business sense to a hi-fi retailer whose income depends upon continuous upgrades? What sort of connectivity is required at a minimum and how would that allow the continuing use of existing sources (incl. vinyl)? Then there is the issue of how much access to give to the user to tinker with the Harbeth DSP. This is really a serious matter and our opinion has much altered as we have purchased and analysed many competitive DSP speakers and familiarised ourselves with how they have addressed that question. In every case, the graphical user interface (GUI) that sits between the DSP chip and the user's plugged-in laptop both (reasonably) protects the DSP and speaker but locks-out more than a superficial sub-set of the available DSP facilities. In some cases, the speaker manufacturer's default ex-factory (reset) DSP settings are so bizarre, that the motivated and able user could indeed sort-out and dramatically improve the speaker if only he had deep access to the DSP. So the question is, do you give the user complete access to the DSP, for which he will need a minimum level of acoustics/DSP/loudspeaker design knowledge as the 'real' DSP code is not managed through a pretty consumer GUI but in a much less familiar engineering language - or none at all? Or somewhere in between? For me, the experience of taking the M40.3 that I designed and know well and digitising it has confirmed, above all, the excellence of the 'raw' electro-mechanical-acoustic properties of the Harbeth-made woofers/midrange drivers and their exclusive material science and injection moulded cones. I assumed, wrongly, that the 40.3 was as about as good at it got for transparency, neutrality, imagery: the 'being there' sensation. But I was wrong. We'd love to see you at Bristol new week. If you do come, please introduce yourself and allow us to take you on a new sort of journey into sound." Did anyone hear them at Bristol?