Not quite ready to pick the final resting spot for the Harbeth's, as the new
owner of my C4's lives a few states away and won't be able to pick them up until
mid June :-(.

Even though the 40.1's are not dialed in yet, I think I have a pretty good feel for
them and can say that they have allowed me to achieve my main objective, which
is sounding wonderful at low to moderate volume level's which is something the
C4's were not good at, atleast with my moderately powered Plinius amp. The
40.1's are not an exciting speaker with high "wow" factor, but they
are well balanced, very musical and easy to listen to. The C4's are great, and I
know I will miss them, but every once in a while, I have the need to mix things
up to keep my audiophile juices flowing!

pdreher May 29, 2009 01:15

Are we there yet? Are we there yet?!!!!!!!

samhar May 28, 2009 23:12

Nice breakdown!

Thanks!

Keep it coming.....

mapman May 14, 2009 02:56

Well, I've had my new Harbeth M 40.1's hooked up for approx. 2.5 hours. I don't have them properly set up yet, as they are sharing space with my C4's as their new out of state owner is making logistical arrangements to have them picked up. Also, the M-40.1 are currently resting upon mismatched end tables, as my Skylan stands are on order, but still 2 weeks away from being delivered from Calgary.

For those that are curious about comparisons of the Dyn. C4's vs. the Harbeth M-40.1's, here's a preliminary take after a few hours of listening:

* Transparency, clarity & imaging - advantage C4
* Appearance / WAF - advantage C4
* Leading edge - advantage C4
* Decay - slight advantage to C4
* Highs / extension - advantage C4
* Midrange - advantage M-40.1
* Bass depth - advantage M-40.1
* Palpability - tie
* Dynamics - tie (but different in their own ways)
* Performance at low to moderate volumes - advantage M-40.1
* Performance at moderate to high volumes - advantage C4
* Smoothness - advantage M-40.1
* Warmth - advantage M-40.1
* Placement of musicians - large advantage C4

At the end of the day, both are exceptional speakers... just different!

Will provide a more detailed review of the M-40.1's after I have them properly set up, dialed in and mounted to Skylan stands.

pdreher May 14, 2009 02:50

Well, I know the Harbeth's won't surpass the C4's in the appearance / WAF department, as I think the Rosewood C4's are exceptionally good looking IMO. However, I am hoping / expecting the 40.1's to surpass the C4's in the area of musicality @ low to moderate listening level's and maybe eventually allow me to try a moderate powered tube amp (100 WPC or fewer) if the urge to try a tube amp gets the better of me.

pdreher May 10, 2009 17:56

I will be surprised if your mind is not blown. You look at them, and it just doesn't correlate with the way they sound. You are a lucky man. Enjoy.

roxy54 May 10, 2009 12:51

Pdreher, good to know you have pulled the trigger on the "king" of the Harbeth line. I am also equally interested to know the outcome of the comparison between the Harbeth M40.1 and Dynaudio C4 you just recently sold. You would be getting a close to optimum sound as Harbeth speakers and Plinius amps match reasonably well. Harbeth speakers need further distance apart for better soundstaging hence your new M40.1's may need to be placed closer to the side walls compared to your previous setup with the Dynaudios. I hope you would not be disappointed with the M40.1's once they are set up properly. Your benchmark is high and pretty hard to beat but I wish the M40.1's would surpass your expectations.

ryder May 10, 2009 09:13

Strange I almost went for the 40.1's!!!!!!

samhar May 10, 2009 04:54

http://cgim.audiogon.com/i/vs/s/f/1204408066.jpg

Critical listening with Jackson ("brown") ?

albertporter May 10, 2009 04:23

"..;will report back in later this week to compare & contrast the Harbeth's vs. the mighty Dyn's! "

I'm very interested to hear.

Thanks!

mapman May 09, 2009 20:48

Samhar... your quite observant. I bought the Harbeth M-40.1's listed by GiorgioP. Kind of an impulse buy, as I've never heard Harbeth's... so I'm betting they are worthy replacements for the C4's based on Harbeth's reputation and research I've gleaned from the web. I love my C4's, just wanted to try something different... and Harbeth 40.1's rarely show up on the used market, unlike C4's, so I figured I'd pull the trigger.

I'm expecting to have the M-40.1's by this coming Wednesday... will report back in later this week to compare & contrast the Harbeth's vs. the mighty Dyn's!

pdreher May 09, 2009 19:39

Inquiring minds want to know what's transpiring in the Jackson room!!! Saw the C-4's sold!!!

samhar May 09, 2009 18:55

"The Plinius SA-102 paired with a tubed preamp will be an excellent combo for the 1.3SE's "

Moving to an Audio Research sp16 tube pre-amp with existing high current ss amp helped take my Dynaudio Contour 1.3 mkIIs to a higher level in regards to detail, smooth delivery and overall musical flow of the toe-tapping variety.

mapman April 21, 2009 19:39

The Plinius SA-102 paired with a tubed preamp will be an excellent combo for the 1.3SE's (former 1.3SE owner). You'd probably be fine with the less expensive SA-100 as well.

The comparison of Plinius vs. Sim in my experience is one of comparing an apple to an orange.... Plinius is warmer, more robust with emphasis in the midrange & microdynamics, with rolled off highs... Sim is faster, leaner with more emphasis in the highs and macrodynamics. Two totally different sounding amps.

pdreher April 21, 2009 18:02

I am considering purchasing a plinius 102 to go along with my dyn 1.3 SE. I already have a simaudio w-5 to go with a dyn 3.3. I was wondering about how these two brands of amplifers compare when you tried them with your C4's. Thank you for your response.

serinp April 21, 2009 05:32

System edited: New Tuner (Magnum Dynalab MD-108) and added three Silent Running Audio VR series platforms. All excellent purchases!

pdreher April 11, 2009 16:14

Great! I was feeling that my suggestion cost you some $ for nothing!

samhar March 22, 2009 19:36

Samhar - The sorbagel definitely reduced the noise floor. I liked it best on my preamp using two Q feet on the front and two wood blocks on the back. I'm selling because I'm upgrading to Silent Running Audio (SRA) VR platforms.

pdreher March 22, 2009 18:00

The Sorbagel didn't work for you, what was the result in your system?

samhar March 22, 2009 08:12

System edited: I'm returning my recently purchased SA-102 due to a mutual resolution to a problem incurred upon receipt. So, I'm in the market again for another SA-102 (2004 vintage or newer) to bridge as a monoblock with my existing stereo SA-102.

pdreher March 22, 2009 02:47

System edited: Added a second Plinius SA-102 amp to run in bridged monoblock mode. Also had my Audio Aero Capitol repaired, replacing the Phillips CDM12 transport along with cryo'ed NOS JAN-Raytheon 6021 tubes.

pdreher March 21, 2009 18:38

Thanks for the Calypso Joule impute.

samhar February 19, 2009 19:43

System edited: I've finally taken the plunge and ventured into computer audio. I'm streaming I-Tunes wirelessly via IMAC computer to an Airport Express. Airport Express is connected to the Empirical Audio Pace Car 2 via Van Den Hul Opticoupler toslink cable. Purist Aqueous Anniversary digital rca connects the Pace Car to the digital input of my Audio Aero Capitol cdp. I've learned a lot thru this experience, but still feel like I've got a long way to go when it comes to computer audio.

pdreher December 23, 2008 01:00

Thanks again!! If you try the sorbogel please post your results they should be interesting with a system as resolving as yours.

samhar November 20, 2008 06:54

Samhar - Given the high price tag, I would not go out of my way to pursue the 10M gold pins unless you can get them for a very good price (< $500/pair), as the CV 4004's are a great value and provide more bang for your buck when compared to $850 10M gold pins. I'll do some research on the Sorbogel feet... you have sparked my interest.

pdreher November 20, 2008 01:08