Wish list for new model Harbeth

[hifi_dave]

It also works the other way. US gear sells here at more than Pound per Dollar, making even reasonably priced equipment very expensive over here.

[Tryfan]

If you want it you pay for it regardless.

Try paying UK, European prices for vinyl, CD's DVD's Blueray etc. This stuff cost twice the US price.

So much so that I buy my vinyl Box sets in the US and even with shipping (often £25) it works out a lot cheaper.

Sure, you can't do this with speakers and the like but that same issue applies if I want a US built piece of kit.

[JamesBrown]

A Super HL5.1

Obviously with a Radial2

But hopefully a super tweeter that goes beyond the current models 24khz

As I understand it, the old HL5 single tweeter model went up to 18khz, so I'm assuming the "Super HL5" addressed this with adding a super tweeter prob taking over at 16-18khz up to the 24khz quoted.

But with high def music and now high def audio on blurays I think it would be a good ideal for a speaker that can handle these frequencys (45khz odd in theory, from 96khz movies/music)

{Moderator's comment: Thanks for your feedback. Can you actually hear 20kHz?}

[Pluto]

Can you actually hear 20kHz?}

I quite like some SACDs. However, I would rather not use a speaker that makes too good a job of reproducing all the noise shaping artefacts that exist above 20kHz - put there in the knowledge that few human beings have any chance of detecting them.

Did you know that the Scarlet Book (SACD specification and license rules) requires players to have a 50kHz low pass filter in their (analogue) output to ensure that the vast quantity of said artefacts do not make it further down the listening chain?

[mikegtar]

I found a Hifi News article about listening to Supertweeters through our eyes. I couldn't read it very well as I had my earphones on.

http://www.townshendaudio.com/Supert...iFi%20News.pdf

[JamesBrown]

RE: Super HL5-R

{Moderator's comment: Thanks for your feedback. Can you actually hear 20kHz?}

sure, from 10/15hz to way up past 20khz, using sony mdr-ex700s+mdr-7520s

But yea, theres always one "humans cant hear XYZ"

{Moderator's comment: without turning up the volume? Are you under about 20 years old?}

[JamesBrown]

{Moderator's comment: without turning up the volume? Are you under about 20 years old?}[/QUOTE]

About 20 out of 30 on my x1060 and about 50% on my 8740w

And no.

Anymore doubtful questions?

And yes I use otex :p

If the stance here that humans can't hear 20khz or over
And when your 30odd you can't hear 15/16khz or over
And your average customer is 30+

Does this not make the current super hl5 (and even entire range of harbeths)
Over spec'd ??

{Moderatator's comment: If you can hear 20kHz without lifting the volume (a lot) then you should definitely offer your services to the audio industry and be paid very well for it! We have never experienced such acuity except in the very young. Please refer to ISO226 hearing acuity curves. If consumers demand a supertweeter, that is what we have given them for > 10 years whether we (now) or they (now) can hear to 20kHz.}

[Pluto]

Any more doubtful questions?

Yes - what musical content do you perceive above 10kHz?

[thurston]

I´d guess that Harbeths (and most speakers) ARE over-spec´d in that sense.
Which means: in that area we have no probems left.
Therefore the need to push these spec´s any further is near zero.

[JamesBrown]

I find it telling that my post had my {-} ls {-} remark not posted

{Moderator's content: these products exist and have existed since about 1987 in the Harbeth line-up. We don't reinvent the already reinvented.}

[JamesBrown]

Yes - what musical content do you perceive above 10kHz?

The line after my question was to underline it was retorical, and if my post was intact in full, ie not cut by whatever reason by mods, it was trying to point out the fact of staying on topic.

Or is there going to be more bs aimed at me regarding hearing? Profession? Or music taste?

Can't people just take a response on the chin instead of trying to undermine it with blahblahblah.

Furthermore regarding the "consumers demanded a super tweeter and we have been giving them this for 10+years" is a bit of a oxymoron considering the apparent stance this mod here regarding upper kHz right??

The way I see it the hl5 was/had a "super tweeter" added for 1or2 reasons

1: the hl5 only went up to 18khz, so instead of changing the aluminum tweeter to on that hits the standard 20khz or so, a 2nd tweeter was added (is it really a "super tweeter" when it can only resolve music with a samplerate of 48khz fully, ie: not hi Rez music?)

2: 2000 (when the super hl5 was launched?) you could say it was invogue for speaker makers to jump on the (then) high Rez bandwagon. Ie: sacd coming in late 1999 and DVD-audio a year later?

[Pluto]

How about simply answering my question, which, for the sake of clarity, I shall repeat.

What musical content do you perceive above 10kHz?

[czekhaan]

The way I see it the hl5 was/had a "super tweeter" added for 1or2 reasons

1: the hl5 only went up to 18khz, so instead of changing the aluminum tweeter to on that hits the standard 20khz or so, a 2nd tweeter was added (is it really a "super tweeter" when it can only resolve music with a samplerate of 48khz fully, ie: not hi Rez music?)

2: 2000 (when the super hl5 was launched?) you could say it was invogue for speaker makers to jump on the (then) high Rez bandwagon. Ie: sacd coming in late 1999 and DVD-audio a year later?

Hi JamesBrown,

I'm afraid you are mixing up sampling frequency and audio wave frequency. They are two completely different things. You could have high resolution files 24-bit 192kHz producing sub-kHz notes only, if one desires. Conversely, you don't need high resolution files to produce sound wave with kHz contents.

[garmtz]

We all know that higher sample rates have little to do with better fidelity. Going from 44.1/48 kHz to 88.2/96 kHz (giving maximum bandwith of 24 kHz vs 48 kHz) MIGHT give better sound in specific cases, but anything above that will normally give more problems than solutions. Higher bit depths CAN give better sounds, but only the best DACs have resolution up to 18, maybe 20 bits. It's all academic. Furthermore, I think the supertweeter used in the SHL5 actually goes beyound 24 kHz, but does it matter??

To get back on topic... A SHL5.1 would be nice, with all the 'tricks' that were done to go from M30 to M30.1.

[michaelp]

As an SHL5 owner, the only thing on my wish list would be improved aesthetics - narrower, or floor-standing, or at the very least matching stands. I appreciate form follows function and that it is a traditional construction method, but couldn't it be slightly modernised?

{Moderator's comment: it would be a brave man that 'modernised' one of our best selling models!}

[Gan CK]

Oh please no modernising whatsoever. I LOVE the classic BBC box appearance. Looks more like serious loudspeakers.

[EricW]

Change the classics? No. But a more contemporary design using the RADIAL technology? Why not? People like different things.

(I know there's a host of practical reasons why this might be impractical, unfeasible or too risky. But in a fantasy world, it wouldn't be a bad thing to see.)

[michaelp]

Just to clarify, by "modernised" I don't mean they should look like something Tracy Emin constructed out of acrylic, I just mean narrower (even slightly) with the (now) traditional trade-off of increased depth - and given the woofer is roughly two-thirds the width of the cabinet, wouldn't there be scope for this? I just find myself wishing they looked as subtle and understated as they sound!

[keithwwk]

Yes. Shl5.1 without changing the size, sound closer to M40.1....with denser midrange and less obvious high than now.
Without raising in price.

[hifi_dave]

Thing is, the majority of speakers are designed with 'style' as the first priority and they often sound like it. Harbeth speakers are designed with sound quality and performance as the first priority, so we might just have to accept the wider than normal cabinets.