This review page is supported in part by the sponsors whose ad banners are displayed below

Something similar proved true for the mid/treble transition. With the B10, colleague Markus Sauer had mentioned a minor emphasis in the lower mids which didn't bother him since the compact from Berlin played it very clean and resolved. The latter applies also to the 30.1 though the presence region here struck me as minimally softer than dead neutral rather than being emphasized. This also matched my recall of the Super HL5. The sonic result?


The Harbeth 30.1 plays it comparatively less close-up on the initial moment when a guitar or piano string is plucked or tapped. This box focuses more on instrumental body particularly because the lower midrange is quite juicy and sonorous. Female voices take up room with such silky charm that one simply falls for them. Perhaps the Harbeth moves them five centimeters back from the microphone to have other speakers feel more decisive about whether the tongue hit the left incisor or right molar but who cares? Granted, counting teeth can be fun but so is the body building which the 30.1. applies to voices. The question is one of taste and what type of seduction one prefers. With the 3.01 sibilants and sizzling 's' sounds get less exposed which can pay dividends with collections that aren't packed with audiophile pearls.


I just mentioned the juicy lower midrange. This affects the vocal range with a slight tendency for warmth and makes for marvelous embodiment of both voices and instruments. Even the bass exhibits a finger's width of extra volume. For a monitor this size this arrives us at a quite ideal mix of low-down substance and definition. The double-bass solo of the earlier “Tilldess” Jazz cut gets a bit lean over my Thiel SCS4 whereas the Brit boxes showed proper size. The American monitor goes more after fingering noises and snappiness of string plucks, less so after instrumental corpus where the Harbeth 30.1 had the more believable capture.


For all its substance the lower registers remained quick and mobile so that the e-bass time change on Miles Davis' “Amanda” (clock ca. 3.5 minutes into it) kicked in with grinning verve, articulation and shove. The Thiels tightened things up even further but also made them thinner, less robust and as such a tad more 'theoretical'. Max air displacement has never been their strength but extension did eclipse the Harbeth. For music whose very life depends on infrasonics I'd not recommend either box (particularly at higher levels one simply needs bigger) but all that's relative. In direct opposition the Thiel reached a bit lower, the Harbeth put out more pressure. With these physical dimensions one simply can't get it all. That said and given my ca. 30² room, the 30.1 never once felt starved for vigor, grip or depth which all maintained admirable balance.