The Harbeth phenomenon

Mlsstl,

I see your comments on the box design and you have a valid point that a lot of thought went into the box design. Again I have never heard them but the problem with the absorption method is that it will only work at certain frequencies.

But I was really just commenting on the very wide boxy shape that will definitely lead to a lot of unwanted diffraction and poor off axis tonal balance. The wide front baffle will lead to beaming at high frequencies and the Harbeths are wide enough (larger models) that the beaming effect could even reach down into the midrange.

But don't take my word for it I am no expert by any means. You can see in the Stereophile lateral response graph the the off axis response is very poor. This would make them very hard to work into my narrow (12X20) room where I get a lot of side wall energy.

Again I have never heard them but the problem with the absorption method is that it will only work at certain frequencies.

And the frequencies it does work well at are the frequencies where human hearing is most sensitive.

You forgot to address the point that with rigid wall speaker cabinets, the rear wave simply doesn't magically go away. Your re-radiation problem is still there - it has simply been moved to a different spot.

From a historical standpoint, keep in mind this cabinet type was designed by the BBC for monitoring purposes. There was a lot of reasoned thought and study that went into them by a group of very talented designers whose primary goal was to give the recording engineers an honest representation of their work.

Keep in mind that every choice one makes in engineering any product involves a compromise. When one addresses one problem, there is always another one created. The question is which of the issues is less a problem?

The wide baffle is a good example. A wide baffle can help move the step effect away from an area where hearing is sensitive. Robert E. Greene has discussed the technical aspects of this in great detail in various articles and on his web site. Narrow speakers may solve one issue, but they increase problems in an area where hearing is sensitive.

Same thing with off axis frequency response. This can actually increase problems in a reflective room situation since wide dispersion increases the ratio of reflected energy to direct arrival sound. This can cause smearing problems of its own. The BBC design philosophy is intentionally not interested in a lot of off-axis energy in the higher frequencies.

Again, that is a conscious design decision.

Many people would think such a speaker would work better in your room than a model with wide dispersion at higher frequencies.

The crux of the matter is that different professionals can have legitimate disagreements as to what issue is more important for any given design aspect. You may not agree with their choice but that's fine. Just don't think that wide baffle was some careless and arbitrary choice made by someone who didn't know what they were doing.

I just finished a short listening session of Michael Feinstein with a solo piano singing some Jerry Herman material. I have Spendor SP1/2Es. It would be hard for me to imagine a more natural presentation of this recording than what I heard. So, for whatever design flaws you consider the classic BBC design to have, it works for me. ;-)

How about 'em Tidal owners ... they can wax lyrical also (understatement)

Actusreus,
you'll be asking next why some still eat hotdogs...
seriously, nothing to worry about, most Harbeths go to Asia anyway.

This is an interesting thread, many of you out there will have a problem with my two cents worth, but here it goes:

I'm not saying this to sound superior, but I have the blessing of being a professional musician. I teach music all day, five days a week, and am performing or rehearsing with a variety of musical groups most days of the week (I'm a trombonist, and you don't get paid by anyone to play this instrument if you don't have a very discerning ear-I've been blessed with this as well). The point I'm trying to make here is that I'm exposed to the sounds of real musical instruments all day, every day, and my Harbeth speakers (Compact 7 ES-2's and Monitor 30's) reproduce the subtleties of these sounds as well as anything I've heard.

I'm a member of the Harbeth User Group, and I get the impression that many of the folks who own these speakers attend live musical events on a regular basis and are very familiar with the sound of real instruments being played in a real acoustical space-they fall into the category of music lovers. The other broad category of folks who are into this hobby are audiophiles, and hey, there's nothing wrong with this at all. Here we have people who enjoy listening for the differences between various pieces of gear, playing around with cables, etc. If this brings you enjoyment and relaxation, go for it! Harberth speakers, however, may not do it for you. I've found that these speakers sound great with low powered tube amps, high powered tube amps, low powered solid state. I often have my Monitor 30's (85 dB sensitivity) hooked up to a 12 watt Aleph clone Class A solid state amp and the sound is glorious. The speakers sound good with a variety of relatively inexpensive wires-so I'm just not thinking about this stuff anymore, I'm just enjoying the music.

Harbeths are for people who have more going on in their lives than just audio and they'll allow you to get off the audiophile merry-go-round, if that's where you'd like to go. If I could do it all over again, I'd dump 80% of my money into a pair of Monitor 40's and use the rest for source and amplification-this sounds crazy, but trust me, it would work.

If you've not heard these speakers, ignore the specs, ignore the box (which, by the way, is highly engineered)and check them out if you can find them. Take them home for a trial, if possible. You may find that the entire way you think about audio and listening to music will change dramatically.