Harbeth C7ES-3

Seafinch,

Did you have version 1 or 2 of the SCM11s?
How far away do you sit?

Nice looking room.
I was seriously considering a pair of C7s before I bought the SCM11v2s.
My desire to try the Harbeths has diminished somewhat since the ATCs arrived.

Thanks,
Lin
 
Seafinch,

Did you have version 1 or 2 of the SCM11s?
How far away do you sit?

Nice looking room.
I was seriously considering a pair of C7s before I bought the SCM11v2s.
My desire to try the Harbeths has diminished somewhat since the ATCs arrived.

Thanks,
Lin

Thanks. I love this room. The other side of the room has the rest of my vinyl and a desk. I work from home.

I had the v2's. I sat about 7ft from them. The fact that the C7's go down to 46hz (-3db) as opposed to the 56 (-6db) of the SCM11's is a pretty big deal for me.
 
I was curious because I don't have any problems with the 11s at any distance in a 22' long room. Obviously speaker height or tilt can be problems.

Understand about the bass extension and you have first hand knowledge having had both, so I am not questioning your experience or the validity of it, just thinking out loud.
The math would be easier if ATC used the -3dB rating also, but they are not as far off as one might think since the ATCs are sealed and rolloff at 12dB/oct, whereas the Harbeths are ported and rolloff at 24dB/oct. I wonder if the Harbeths have just a bit of fattening up above resonance since I have never seen measurements. The p3esr definitely have a BBC midbass hump. Having said all that I could see where some might feel a sub* is needed with the ATCs.

*it better be a very good one :D
 
Last edited:
As you're kind of spitballing I would simply add that bass is a matter of listening for yourself in a specific room. I have seen plenty of speakers that claim 40hz -3dB from standmount speakers (and honestly rated) that have absolutely no real world bass at any reasonable level versus my Wharfedales Vanguards that are also rated 40hz (without dB points) that have crushing bass at high levels where the standmout is utterly outclassed in every way. Distortion is also a factor because speakers distort with bass depth and with volume. So some people hear a speaker with rather large amounts of distortion as "added" bass which in a way I suppose it is. And a speaker that exhibits very low distortion can come across a bit lean due to what people are "used to" hearing. Sealed cabinets can sound quicker leaner than ported speakers although virtually all modern ported speakers can sound just as quick but rely more (or affected more) by the room and by positioning. The P3 is just an LS-3/5a.

Ultimately - adding subs comes with their own shortcomings and if you really want more bass - go with the bigger "more bass" models. Most speaker companies offer several house sounding speakers wherein the difference is added bass depth, higher efficiency, louder levels, and in some cases better midrange and treble. The more you want from a speaker the more it is going to cost. It depends on your experience and how much bass and loudness you want (and of course accounting for the room size). And the music you listen to. Both the ATC and the Harbeth go pretty deep and the ATC should be able to go really loud. Both would go louder than I would need. Neither has the bass I would require to be a main speaker but in a second room they'd be enough. It's just that I am used to having a certain amount of bass and it's hard to give it up unless I'd get massive gains somewhere else which isn't the case. And you asterisk the * which I would add you generally need two subs that need to be good and by good they usually cost around $3k each. So you add $6k to the price of the standmounts and all the space you add - you might have been able to just by the 40.1 or SCM 100 on the second hand market and get better sound - of course you need a bigger room so just noting it as a money issue. Plus better sound may trump absolute bass for many people. Ie they'll take better midrange and forgo the added bass. For this price range ATC and Harbeth offerings are in my top 10 speakers. Indeed, both are in my top 10 at prices well above this price range too. The Line Magnetic 211IA is utter gold with ATC on a budget.

But hey ATC makes a great looking sub for the SCM 11 here http://atcloudspeakers.co.uk/hi-fi/multi-channel/subwoofers/c1-sub/ Plop that down between the two standmounts and it will likely be amazing. ATC knows what they're doing (So does AS at Harbeth) so adding the C 1 sub for $1500 US should get you a really high quality and perfectly matched sub to the standmounts. I love that ATC makes the whole audio chain. Complete systems by the same ears controlling the overall sound. Harbeth is also looking into making their own amps for their speakers if they've not already done it.

I really liked the pictures of Art's room with the CD wall behind them serving as room practical room treatments and I like the finish on Seafinche's Harbeths. That's probably the finish I would get too.
 
Am a bit surprised that 15 wpc (Line Magnetic 211) works so well. It is really enough power? Would the LM 501 be a better (albeit more expensive) choice?
 
In the room Art photographed the LM 211 would be more than enough power. More money generally gets you better output transformers which is more important so the 501 may be better - I have not heard it.

The 508IA is a new amp from them and is a 48 watt per channel SET. Which for SET is positively massive and under $5k. http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=219211.0 But I have not heard it either. I have not heard a bad sounding integrated from LM and on another forum someone said it sounded better than the 518IA so if this holds true it will be a winner since the 518IA is pretty awesome. I have seen several photos of various Harbeths with my 219IA which is only 24 watts per channel.
 
That is a really cool looking amp! I hadn't heard about it.

Is it the same dimensions as the 518? Does the higher power mean it would get even hotter than the 518?

How would you cable a system like that? ATC Scm 11 v2 with LM amp?
 
Ultimately - adding subs comes with their own shortcomings and if you really want more bass - go with the bigger "more bass" models. Most speaker companies offer several house sounding speakers wherein the difference is added bass depth, higher efficiency, louder levels, and in some cases better midrange and treble. The more you want from a speaker the more it is going to cost.

I've wavered on this point over the years but I think I've landed on standmounts plus sub rather than bigger speakers. Bass is bass, right? Whether it comes from a sub or a more full range speaker, either way it's still sound waves at low frequencies. Your room won't know the difference in terms of what produces those sound waves. So if there are bass issues they will be present either way. A standmount/sub system at least allows you the ability to tweak things more than a larger speaker does. With larger speakers you have to position them in a relatively fixed place relative to your listening position, with the ability to toe in/out and move them small amounts. That's about it.

But you also can't just plunk a sub down somewhere, set it's volume and phase, then turn it on and hit play and expect to get good integration. That's all the options many lower end subs give and I've tried it with poor results. Very badly integrated sound. But get a sub that gives you tools to blend it in properly and it's a different ballgame. I have a Mordaunt Short Mezzo 9 that came with a microphone and software that enabled me to input the data from the mic. It determined at which frequencies I have bass issues and then allowed me to apply filters to even out the response. The result? Like an extension of my standmounts. No noticeable integration issues. It was a revelation. You simply cannot apply this sort of filtering on a larger pair of floorstanders, at least not without additional equipment utilized.

This experience taught me that subs get a bit of a bad rap. I simply wouldn't ever try using one without evening out it's response somehow (my preference is with tools supplied with the sub as with the Mezzo 9). And now I do prefer the idea of having smaller speakers that excel at those things small speakers excel at and another speaker (the sub) that is purpose built to excel at producing low frequencies. A floorstander seems to me to be a bit of a compromise. Not to slag any product, as any speaker can be built to a high standard to minimize these compromises. I have heard floorstanders that sound excellent. It's just that standmounts have some inherent advantages that I'd like to exploit.
 
Last edited:
That is a really cool looking amp! I hadn't heard about it.

Is it the same dimensions as the 518? Does the higher power mean it would get even hotter than the 518?

How would you cable a system like that? ATC Scm 11 v2 with LM amp?

The amp is about the same size but 85lbs - I have not heard it or seen it in person so I really can't comment - there is a thread on the amp at the Steve Hoffman forum by one of the LM dealers who has more information. http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/new-line-magnetic-508ia-integrated-amp.542333/#post-14360963

It's just so brutally hot and humid in Hong Kong right now I am not motivated to make the trip down there.

I more or less view cables as tone controls - a cable might sound great in one system and mediocre in an other. Just look at the love/hate of MIT cables. Further for me cables tend to make blatant illogical sense to me from better or worse standpoints since ALL cables in the audio chain should make an impact but audiophile's brains go out the door if they can't SEE the cable.

Most people don't buy matched stereo systems they buy piece meal rigs - so they have a turntable/CD transport/DAC/Preamp/Power amp/Loudspeakers. And they have ICs and Speaker cables. Most people have mix/match stereos.

Example:
So they have say an Arcam CD player which is internally wired with (copper) of the dirt cheap no name variety, el cheapo capacitors and parts express solder blobs and torroid transformer, they run this to an Audio Note preamp which is internally wired with silver using black gate caps silver connectors and silver solder material that only they use and is tube output via C-Core transformers, into (enter big name solid state power amp) using bigger torroid transformers, cardas connectors back to copper wiring from some different company than Arcam uses with some other brand connectors with gold plating. Then they buy Nordost silver cables to their loudspeakers which are internally wired with Tara Labs copper cables to an off the shelf woofer and or tweeter both of which come from two different driver manufactures each of which is wound using different wires internally. Not to mention different cap and resistors from the upstream components. So you could have up to what 12 different wires in all the component pieces and now we want to see if adding cable XYZ is going to sound better - it might in Joe's systems and very well may not in Frank's.

Ideally I would like the same cables from cartridge wire to loudspeaker voice coil and if not exactly the same wire the same wire type. I know of very few brands who have made the attempt to wire and "part" the whole stereo system from source to speaker - and it's usually cost prohibitive. But in terms of logic - it makes sense - the alternative is just playing with tone controls spending piles of money on a whole bunch of high depreciation cables in the "hopes" that you happen to like one better than the other for any given system. As UHF magazine once said - "Selling cables is safer than stealing and easier than working." Not anti-cable because I've heard them make pretty sizeable differences but in a mix and match system I would have to say that they're equal to a tweak and the onus is on the owner of the rig to figure out the combination of tone controls that get them the tone they like.

For me - I am building an all Audio Note system so it is very easy to cable it because I can match the cables inside the units more closely to the external cables but I certainly would not pretend to say that my AN cables would sound better than a Nordost cable in an ATC or Harbeth system - in fact I doubt that they would being silver cables and the speakers no being internally wired with silver cables!! Indeed, it could sound brutally terrible for all I know.
 
Last edited:
Fusion - well bass is bass is arguable. Subwoofers in theory should serve as sub sonic ambiance generators. They should not be "heard" and thus the main speakers should cover all of the "hearing bass" but I am not convinced this is the case in most systems since people almost always cross their subwoofers over at 80hz to the main small standmounts. So you are hearing the sub. Bass drivers also have a sound of their own and matching that to the mid/woofer of the standmount should ideally be of the same material. I suppose it depends on how picky you are with all of this and how good the subwoofer is and what type of speaker you are mating the sub to. I got good results with the dedicated subwoofers on the LS-3/5a that sit right below the speakers. And you probably know of the many many speakers on the market where they sell you the top unit and you can buy the optional extra sub bass unit. Wilson Watt and Gershman X-1 where you could buy the Sub1 unit under them. Von Gaylord is a recent example of an outstanding sounding set up. These are essentially "adding subwoofers" but they're part of the sound you hear not just ambiance feeling bass subwoofers where a guy buys say KEF LS-50s and add a big black box to them.

This latter set-up I like less but they can sound good I admit - M&K was and is still the best I've heard for sub/satellite so it can work. As you note - subs are far more sophisticated these days as well and home users are provided various tools to help set them up properly. I keep an open mind to it - but IME subs still sound better with full range speakers than speakers that are not full range. Specifically - Subs have sounded better to me when added the B&W N800D than with N805, because the subs are being used to fill an ambiance role rather than the lower midbass and bass role. I don't want bass marred or smeared or tone affected in the least. Subs IME have almost always affected these things and while they bring more bass depth and loudness - I have not liked the "fake" sound they often bring. Awesome for home theater though. I've contemplated adding to my KEF LS-50 with center channel and sub - or my AX Two. I can actually put the sub between the speakers in front of the TV as well which is generally a good position for a single sub. So I'm not against them. It's a matter of which sub. And the AX Two doesn't go that deep - around 50-60hz so I gotta "hear" the darn thing. Maybe Rel maybe M&K. Still waiting for AN's SET powered subwoofer. I've waited since 2004 so not holding my breath.
 
In the room Art photographed the LM 211 would be more than enough power. More money generally gets you better output transformers which is more important so the 501 may be better - I have not heard it.

The 508IA is a new amp from them and is a 48 watt per channel SET. Which for SET is positively massive and under $5k. http://www.xtremeplace.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=219211.0 But I have not heard it either. I have not heard a bad sounding integrated from LM and on another forum someone said it sounded better than the 518IA so if this holds true it will be a winner since the 518IA is pretty awesome. I have seen several photos of various Harbeths with my 219IA which is only 24 watts per channel.
Looks like i might have my 518IA up for sale.
 
I like these speakers and after 7 weeks I am not sure (yet) if i would consider them a "value". They are transparent, somewhat dynamic, have nice warmth and bass and seem to walk nicely along the fine line between resolution and fatigue.
But the KEF LS50s were more colorful and lively sounding and I miss those aspects in the Harbeth.
My dealer has a generous 6-month exchange policy and I am not sure what to do.
Part of the problem is the sound of the available competitor options in the price range. Not many can do what the C7s do. Still TBD.
 
To my ears the ls50 was livelier but far less colorful sounding. They gave every sound a certain sameness that I found difficult to live with. I really did like them though...
 
As much as I loved my Harbeths I did find that they didn't really bring out the character of each recording. Almost as if they painted every album with the same brush. Just a little more transparency and dynamics and they could have been the last speaker I ever owned.
 
I found that characteristic to be far worse in the KEF's. I don't really hear that with the Harbeth's. Then again, I am not sure what the character of each recording is. I want my speakers to play everything with an even handedness that makes everything listenable and that gets the tonal palette correct. Getting that correct either means that you are getting character of the recording or the recording is probably not getting tone correct...dynamics are another story.

I am using DH Labs cables now in the main system and love how neutral they are.
 
Back
Top Bottom