Woody is an excellent description. That's how I heard them, too.
What high efficiency speaker for Classical Music ?
- Thread starter jbercovici
- Start date
Woody is an excellent description. That's how I heard them, too.
The C7ES-3 is the only Harbeth that has impressed me. The host of our local audio club has a pair in the room where we meet. He listens mostly to classical music, has excellent taste and has built a really nice system around them. He also has a pair of the more-costly M30's, which to me are quite ho-hum and colored...go figure. I have also heard the Super HL5 at RMAF, and found it disappointing.
The C7ES-3 aren't perfect, but in my listening sessions with classical music they have made very beautiful and lifelike sounds. Maybe it's an especially happy combination with the room.
At least this is a speaker that one can listen to before taking the plunge, which is often impossible with DIY projects.
Gary Dahl
The C7ES-3 aren't perfect, but in my listening sessions with classical music they have made very beautiful and lifelike sounds. Maybe it's an especially happy combination with the room.
At least this is a speaker that one can listen to before taking the plunge, which is often impossible with DIY projects.
Gary Dahl
Interesting that you bring up piano. A piano's sound radiates from such a large area, I don't think it's very easy to recreate with small drivers and cabinets. The Harbeths that I wrote about sound excellent on strings and voices, but I haven't heard them reach the same standard on piano. I should also mention that I haven't heard any large-scale music on them, which wouldn't seem to play to their strengths.
My existing HE system does a fabulous job with piano, best I have heard. And it plays both small and large-scale classical music with ease. Come over sometime for a listen and let me know what you think!
Gary Dahl
I've not heard Gary's speakers, but I've spent time with a direct predecessor, which combined the GPA 416/Alnico, the AH425, and the Radian 745P with aluminum diaphragm. Although it was far from finished ... that's what Gary has done ... it sounded very different than any vintage 1950's style speaker, and also very different than modern speakers like the JBL DD66000 Everest. The low diffraction of the AH425 LeCleac'h horn was evident in the spatial realism, natural-sounding vocals, and freedom from the expected "horn" coloration, and the overall response of the speaker (including the GPA 416) was obviously flatter and less colored than the majority of speakers at high-end trade shows. But you'd expect a speaker with flat, non-peaked response and low diffraction to sound that way. It's unfortunate the majority of the high-end manufacturers don't honor these goals, and aim their speakers at the oddball tastes of the magazine reviewers.
But don't take my word for it; give Gary a PM, schedule a visit, and hear for yourself. Flat response, low diffraction, and high efficiency are not in conflict any more. The whole point of the "Beyond the Ariel" thread was to get people to explore that combination of qualities.
But don't take my word for it; give Gary a PM, schedule a visit, and hear for yourself. Flat response, low diffraction, and high efficiency are not in conflict any more. The whole point of the "Beyond the Ariel" thread was to get people to explore that combination of qualities.
Last edited:
It s not a problem of trusting or not trusting, the basic thing is this stuff, your stuff after the Ariel, lol, is mainly based on weird circuits/designs using non obtainum parts, drivers, valves, transformers, and hipster theories on audio quality assessment made up from nowhere ( Rosetta, Rosetta...) and leading to nowhere...😕
The only good news is that some available models by Harbeth deserve some consideration by the highest priests of non obtainum audio.
In a nutshell, thanks...😀
The only good news is that some available models by Harbeth deserve some consideration by the highest priests of non obtainum audio.
In a nutshell, thanks...😀
Last edited:
Valves and transformers: this is a speaker forum & the OP has a speaker question.
Hipster theories? Which part - "flat response" or "low diffraction"?
Non obtainum? All of the speaker parts are obtainable:
The HF and midbass drivers are available from the usual suppliers.
The horn: go to the Azura website, place an order - the postage is pretty reasonable. Or get an equivalent from another manufacturer, such as Auto Tech. Or make / modify your own (this being the DIY forum).
The subs: current production, just place an order ... and wait. Or use equivalent units from a larger manufacturer.
My guess is that there's no need to get hung up on this exact combination of parts. For example, I really like the look of the FAITAL PRO LTH142. I imagine it could have it's mouth extended to result in a horn equivalent to a AH-425, but giving a slightly closer centre-to-centre spacing.
Note: the Beyond the Ariel was originally intended to be based on a coaxial. Lynn went off this because "every blessed one of them has the worst freq resp curves imaginable" (post 473). However:
a) The OP has access to newer drivers - the BTA thread is a decade old.
b) The OP says "DSP crossovers and EQ (room correction) with Rephase and Minisharc can be applied", whereas Lynn was frankly picky about parts, saying he wasn't willing to use DSP (except for bass) and "I find most electronics unlistenable" (post 1010). This difference in approach opens up options for the OP (and most people) that Lynn might reject.
If one was dreaming about the best of both worlds - a coaxial that incorporates a few BTA concepts - the RCF CX15N351 looks like a pretty good choice.
- visually, the RCF's horn looks like a truncated AH-425 (no rollback)
- the RCF also uses a 1.4" and a 15"
- the RCF also suits a 800Hz crossover
- high sensitivity
- decent freq resp curves (assuming a steep crossover and/or notch, to suppress the 2kHz breakup of the LF cone).
You need to get out more then.
Their speakers are extremely coloured. While there are many high end speakers that don't sound very good, there are plenty that sound better than Harbeth.
Well... their are certainly some that are more neutral than Harbeth, but "Sounds Better" is difficult. I think the Harbeth sound great, but not in a neutral way at all.
Gary, thanks for the explanation. I may not have heard the C7ES, tho I have heard a number of Harbeth models and they had a similar sound.
Gary, thanks for the explanation. I may not have heard the C7ES, tho I have heard a number of Harbeth models and they had a similar sound.
Gary or Lynn,
Can you provide more info on the bass cabinet for 416 ?
For the Horn, I was thinking to an Iwata 300 (Autotech) or SEOS 24 : do you have any experience with them and radian CD ?
The other possibility is Linesource proposition : SEOS 24 + BMS 4594 + MLTL 15.
Can you provide more info on the bass cabinet for 416 ?
For the Horn, I was thinking to an Iwata 300 (Autotech) or SEOS 24 : do you have any experience with them and radian CD ?
The other possibility is Linesource proposition : SEOS 24 + BMS 4594 + MLTL 15.
a Karlson or Karlsonator made for 416 (or maybe better, new 515) would be good - am not sure how well a 416 would reach a K-tube.
xrk971 has an akabak model for the "Karlsonator" which seems to do pretty well in prediction
this is just a plain old style Karlson with 18" speaker and K-tube. Its tuned higher than a Karlsonator alignment. The tube normally mounts inside - very nice on opera
xrk971 has an akabak model for the "Karlsonator" which seems to do pretty well in prediction
this is just a plain old style Karlson with 18" speaker and K-tube. Its tuned higher than a Karlsonator alignment. The tube normally mounts inside - very nice on opera
Neutral probably sucks by uninspiring definition but...any suggestion for a neutral speaker sounding great?
Imho, Harbeth's voicing and tonal balance might not match everybody's taste, but i consider their speakers less colored than speakers plagued by all sorts of resonances that high eff stuff is bound to offer with a least one order of magnitude more than low eff alternatives. Sadly enough, no free Hi eff lunch, great part of the added dbs is garbagge mainy built on resonances...
Last edited:
The 416 cabinet was previously described as:
Midbass
GPA 416-8B Classic Series (alnico) in 3 cf sealed enclosure, -3 dB at about 60 Hz, passive 2nd order low pass at about 800 Hz.
More info here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/clubs-events/273106-puget-sound-diy-meet-august-29th-10.html
I found this description by mistake when I was looking for something else:
-what's the minimum listening distance for this system?
-would this distance be reduced if the centre-to-centre spacing was reduced?
...and the Iwata was briefly discussed here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/278698-autotech-iwata-600-anyone-used.html
Probably, I'm a minority here, but I'm not a believer of ultra low diffraction speakers any more.
After experienced many type of those speakers, I came to believe that "rightly diffracted" design would be more preferable than ultra low diffraction design. So I guess it would be one of the reasons why Gary was impressed with Harbeth.
After experienced many type of those speakers, I came to believe that "rightly diffracted" design would be more preferable than ultra low diffraction design. So I guess it would be one of the reasons why Gary was impressed with Harbeth.
I'd add a bit more box volume (maybe 4 cf) if I was doing it again; the Q is just a little bit high. The box was originally designed for the Acoustic Elegance TD15M but turned out to be a happier combination with the GPA416. The sealed enclosure brings some nice benefits when used with the 416. The LF response shape drops off in a way is relatively easy to blend with the subwoofer. The stuffed cabinet interior helps to avoid the boxy sound that I have usually heard with these kinds of woofers in ported cabinets.
Never heard the Iwata, sorry.
Gary Dahl
Never heard the Iwata, sorry.
Gary Dahl
My speakers are 12 feet apart (center to center). In the main listening position, each speaker is 12 feet from my head. The sound improves a bit if I scoot forward about two feet because I am really a little too close to the back wall, but it isn't really practical for me to move the sofa from its present position. The speakers should be a little closer together, but the equipment racks and 123" Stewart Filmscreen dictate the existing layout.
I think that a reasonable minimum listening distance is 10 feet.
Gary Dahl
I think that a reasonable minimum listening distance is 10 feet.
Gary Dahl
10 feet is closer than I expected, thanks for the info.