|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
184.167.101.33
In Reply to: RE: Kef Ls-50 vs Harbeth Monitor 30.1 posted by jasonpatrickbrowne on June 27, 2015 at 17:01:08
You might be paying a lot of extra money for UK manufacture, old-style construction methods, finish quality, etc... Nothing wrong with that, of course.
Follow Ups:
I dont think going harbeth is just for nice finish
"Just for the nice finish"? No one said or implied such a thing.I can think of a few different reasons for the higher cost of Harbeth speakers, as I've stated. The 30.1 speakers cost four times as much as LS50 speakers do and they almost look four times nicer than the LS50 does. Let's hope the Harbeths can whip some ass sonically as well.
Edits: 06/28/15
What he thinks is better sounding and what you wind up thinkink sounds better may be quite different.
First - they won't sound the same and that is fairly obvious. Beyond that it's going to come down to preference. The Amphion's tizzy metalic sounding tweeters he seemed to be quite impressed with telling me what giant killers they are and then selling them a month later now for something smoother (ie not an irritating disaster).
Second - the Harbeths cost more to make likely because of where they are made. England versus China. Things like wages, unions, health care etc - you know caring about the plight of the worker at least a "little bit." On the flip side they likely don't invest nearly as heavily in marketing and other facilities/overhead so they may save money there.
Personally, I find the Harbeths on the too expensive side of the equation for what you get BUT I would say that they are more musical and more satisfying than the KEFs (exception is the P3 which to me is an overpriced LS-3/5a in a nicer cabinet) - but I get why some would prefer it over the LS-50. So while the Harbeths may (IMO) be too expensive I think there is higher pride of ownership and higher resale value.
Ultimately, how much you like, love or dislike the KEF is how well the treble plays in your room with your gear - the metal tweeter is a metal tweeter and you know it is a metal tweeter.
The Harbeth is going to just be able to sound more right without a helluva lot of work - even in HK in a CD shop they were up on the ceiling facing down with rubbish front end and it sounded really musical - bad positioning, bad electronics and sounded engaging. The Kefs are fussier - so while you may save some money on the actual speaker you may have to spend much more of the difference saved to get them to sound right.
I would take the Harbeth Super HL5 Plus over either my AX Two or KEF LS-50 any day of the week. But at several times the price I would kind of expect that.
I (and presumably others) would be curious to read your recommendations in different price ranges. This would be assuming that all could be driven with low to moderate power.
1) $1,500
2) $2,500
3) $3,500
4) 5 - 10k
The fact that you are a reviewer and have access/opportunity to hear far more makes than the average audiophile on the street is of value (at least in my view).
Thanks.
Meat; It's the right thing to do. Romans 14:2
The list is pretty long and I would leave too many out. I am better at higher price ranges because I have kind of moved a little above the "up and over the $2k price points now.
I did list some of the brands I have liked over a cross section of prices but I am sure to have left some ones I quite like off.
Yes, that would explain the price.
Oz
Don't worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you.
- Winston Churchill
Yeah, that explains in all. Those greedy unionists causing audiophiles the world over uncontrolled grief and sorrow. Damn those people who are trying to achieve a better life for their families by fairly negotiating for wages, health care, and working conditions.
Damn, from now on I'm buying Chinese hi-fi gear only.
I mean why would anyone want those things - and more pay.
In the US many bosses can demand that you provide urine samples, can basically fire you without cause - you look a little fat - you're fired. You vote liberal - you're fired. You're black - you're fired. "At will"
Unions have their problems - but as the saying goes - "Companies deserve the Unions they get" so if you're union is a brutal disaster - the chances are it's because the company was an even bigger arse to start with.
If companies treated their workers half way fairly no one would need a union. There is a reason they form - the boss is an ass.
The bottom line is self interest - as an employee it's my job to look out for me and if the boss is a turd then I can either leave or force the boss to pay up. The boss' job is also to look out for him/herself and history has shown (indeed present day has shown) that companies ALWAYS choose profit over lives. Pretty much the entire clothing industry is actively or "looking the other way" on child slave labour they use in third world countries. I mean they're not white kids.
If you don't believe unions have outlived their usefulness (like the NAACP), then you are fooling yourself. Both had their time and place, long since gone.
carry on.....
Oz
Don't worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you.
- Winston Churchill
Wasn't it George Bush who said that we must constantly fight to keep our freedoms? It's quite easy to grow passive and allow freedoms to be slowly chipped away if you don't stay vigilant.
Granted at least we can have the option to have a union - in many of the slave labour markets they'll just kill you. Big Business always has your interests in mind. They're just the NICEST of people now aren't they.
Donald Trump - a bastion of kindness and caring.
Fortunately there ARE (well WERE) intelligent conservatives and Republicans: This fellow might have been the last
*"Workers have a right to organize into unions and to bargain collectively with their employers. And a strong, free labor movement is an invigorating and necessary part of our industrial society."
*"Only a fool would try to deprive working men and women of their right to join the union of their choice."
*"Should any political party attempt to abolish Social Security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things, but their number is negligible and they are stupid."---Republican President Dwight Eisenhower
So, should Alan Shaw of Harbeth ban unions? Maybe that will make you happy because it will lower prices a bit. The workers? Who cares about them as long as you can get your speakers at a cheaper price. If Alan transferred production to China, prices would be even lower. Nirvana.
As far as the NAACP is concerned, the constitution allows us to join any organization we want. That includes the Klu klux klan, too.
"As far as the NAACP is concerned, the constitution allows us to join any organization we want. That includes the Klu klux klan, too."
Well only one of them is slightly less worthless than the other.
As far as the speakers and their price. I really don't give two s&*ts.
Oz
Don't worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you.
- Winston Churchill
Which one would that be?
Lest you take me for a racist, I will just say the answer to that question is obvious. And I will leave it at that.......
Oz
Don't worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you.
- Winston Churchill
Blaming unions for offshoring is drinking the KoolAid - I bet you also believe in "trickle down"
Most of the economic wisdom of the last 40 years is upside down - unless you want to create an oligarchy like we currently have.
As Paul Weller wrote 30 years ago "They take the profit, you take the blame"
JaroTheWise
.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: