![]() ![]() You may or may not prefer the newer version.I haven't heard them, but shortly after I got the M30's, I heard some of the older C7's at a dealer, and was favorably impressed. As you no doubt know, the C7's were recently revised to present more detail. In your space, you may like the C7's better. How "forward" they sound depends at least somewhat on what you run them with. As mentioned, I found that tube gear produces the warmest and friendliest effect. However, I will say that they are very sensitive to whatever you run them with.with the wrong pre-amp, amp, etc., they can sound bright and irritating and probably a bit forward. They have very nice bass for a box that small, and the top is smooth and easy, with detail, but not drowning in it. They are 3 feet from the rear wall, and set up a pretty darn good soundstage (although they take some work, positioning-wise, and do have a sweet spot). In my room, I would characterize the M30's as somewhat fat sounding, in a very pleasant way. It was one of the best things I ever did. I had been using Vandersteens for some years before that and was suffering from substantial "detail fatigue," and one evening, after suddenly getting frustrated with the Vandersteens one too many times, located a pair of M30's and acquired them in the space of about an hour. In fact, I hadn't heard ANY Harbeths before I got my M30's. I also recall that one of the on-line reviewers described the M30's in such a way that I can imagine them seeming perhaps more forward than the HL5's. I've heard something like that elsewhere, which suggests to me that the "leanness" you report in the M30s probably reflects a consistent difference in the speakers. One Harbeth dealer I know does not favor the HL5's because he considers them a bit bass-heavy. In fact, a three way active PMC may be a speaker worth looking into given your tastes (think ATC with a more polite or less revealing mid range and significantly more bass).īill - Fair questions. Just my two cents but I thought I would pass on this advice rather than mindlessly plug something that now appears less well suited to your taste. I suspect you would find ATC's sound "edgy" or "harsh" in the upper mid range compared to your preferred taste. Given more clarity about your preferences in your last comment, I suggest you probably will not like ATC. as it is your choice of speaker for your tastes. If this more polite sound is what you prefer then go for the SHL5.although a jazz musician may find that this flavor lacks the proper harshness or brashiness you typically get from brass instruments (often better produced by horn speakers).at the end of the day, who cares what others think. The "edgy" sound you especially get from brass instruments mostly occurs around 4 Khz. This may explain your impression that they are articulate without sounding harsh or edgy. I read somewhere that the Harbeth SLH5 is slightly recessed in the 2 Khz to 4 Khz region - they are deliberately a polite sounding speaker. As one dealer buddy of mine from way back said to me recently, "Harbeths are for when you're tired of everything else." (And he's not a Harbeth dealer.) I can really see where he's coming from. The overall sound seems notably more transparent and holographic, and I'm a sucker for that, and, after some agonizing, decided to buy the Avalons. The "semi-exception" to the list was the Avalon Ascendants because of everything else they do well, but I'm not sure their mid-range is exactly better than the Harbeths. I listened to Wilson Sophias (which didn't impress me much at all in 2 different set-ups), a Wilson-Benesch something-or-other, some Revels, some ProAcs (D28? I think, which were interesting-I could have spent more time with them), Sonus Faber Cremonas (which had a very interesting mid-range, but the tweeters had a bit too much "tizz" in them), some mid-priced Dalis (blah), some little Sonus Fabers (Cremona Auditors?-too much "tizz" in the highs), those wierd looking German speakers (MBL? - I couldn't get out of the room fast enough), Audio Physic Scorpios (which I kind of liked, though not because of fabulous mids).and I can't remember what else. I auditioned a few other speakers in high end shops both before and after getting Harbeths, none of which struck me as being as pleasant as the Harbeths, with one semi-exception (though the electronics were not the same as mine of course, so one could argue that the comparison was flawed). I listen to a lot of classical music, and the sound of strings (massed or otherwise) on the Harbeths was richer and more fleshed out than the Vandersteens.so much so that certain CDs I considered almost unlistenable on the Vandersteens were suddenly listenable on the Harbeths. I own a pair of Harbeth M30s, which I brought in to replace Vandersteen 3a sigs (which had replaced 2ce sigs). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |