Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 53

Thread: Wish list for new model Harbeth

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    826

    Default Usa > uk

    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.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    England
    Posts
    65

    Default That's a fact...

    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 Ģ25) 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.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    England
    Posts
    7

    Default Super, super

    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?}

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Harrow, UK
    Posts
    464

    Default Just noise artefacts above 20kHz...

    Quote Originally Posted by Moderator View Post
    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?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    5

    Default Supertweeters - listen with your eyes...

    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

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    England
    Posts
    7

    Default My hearing

    Quote Originally Posted by JamesBrown View Post
    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?}

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    England
    Posts
    7

    Default My super hearing

    {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.}

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Harrow, UK
    Posts
    464

    Default Music?

    Quote Originally Posted by JamesBrown View Post
    Any more doubtful questions?
    Yes - what musical content do you perceive above 10kHz?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    182

    Default HF - good enough

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

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    England
    Posts
    7

    Default Deleted content - why

    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.}

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    England
    Posts
    7

    Default My unasnwered questions

    Quote Originally Posted by Pluto View Post
    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?

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Harrow, UK
    Posts
    464

    Default An unanswered question ....

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

    What musical content do you perceive above 10kHz?

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    8

    Default Confusion - sample rate and audio frequency?

    Quote Originally Posted by JamesBrown View Post
    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.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    214

    Default Shl5?

    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.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    3

    Default Modernising?

    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!}

  16. #36
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    459

    Default Don't do it!

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

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    848

    Default A fantasy ...

    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.)

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    3

    Default The look of love?

    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!

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Malaysia/Singapore
    Posts
    430

    Default Closer to M40.1?

    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.
    "Bath in Music"

  20. #40
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    826

    Default Accept and enjoy!

    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.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •