Spendor S3/5R - advantages over the SA1?

I auditioned both and at first went with the SA1's. The SA1's are technically superior and have a much higher build quality. Listening fatigue would set in over extended periods however as the SA1's have no warmth to their presentation. Quite clinical in fact, though very accurate.

I went back to the S3/5R's and found they had a warmer sound that is easier going over extended listening periods. The R's sounded better with my Naim equipment than the SA1's which are now used with my Sonneteer amp which has a very euphonic and warm sound and they nicely compliment each other. Balanced eeach other out, if you like?

Eventually though I settled for an ex-demo pair of Spendor S3/5se's which blew both of them out of the water. (sadly not made any more )

FYI: my Naim setup is NAC202 NAP200 HiCap2 napsc CDX2

Be interested to see how you get on..

I own the s3/5r. It replaced my s3/5 of 5 years old. Every bit better in this newer version. You can listen for hours...

I had a brief listen of the sa1. Very nice build, seems to sound similar to the s3/5r, perhaps a little more dynamic and detailed. Overall, not enough for me to make me go for it.

I prefer the sound of the classic series, so I would wait for the next iteration of the s3/5!

JoexNaim & kmchow98 - many thanks for your replies, it's much appreciated. Sounds like an audition is called for asap!

Cheers guys!

I've lived with both S3/5Rs and SA1s, and what Joe said is spot on. I admired the SA1s greatly (fast, detailed, "airy"), but found myself wishing they had a bit more bass warmth. The S3/5Rs were easier to listen to for long periods.

I really wanted something in between - and found it in the Harbeth P3ESR.

Thanks for the input Droodzilla. So far, it sounds like the S3/5R offers very good value for money and might even outperform the SA1 in some areas. I'll give it a listen first but since it's relatively inexpensive, I might just take a gamble and buy it to use in rotation with the SA1s.

Thanks again.

Have you determined that the Harbeth P3ESR is not to your liking? I prefer it to either Spendor, which I do indeed like.

I would consider the P3ESR if it were priced similar to the Spendor choices.

It is at least 2x more expensive than the S3/5R. And also more expensive than the SA1 in my country.

harbeth not in the same direction as spendor, i wouldn't go with them with naim. the sound is dry and restrained, and lacks dynamics, compared to similar spendor models.

between s3/5r and sa1, i would not hesitate over the classic model. richer sound, more musical, better in bringing the real feel to the audience, quite a marvel...

sa1 changed that tipical spendor sound and it is not to the better, imho...

but do try older R models higher up, 3/1 or 2/3. they really really kick ass, and to me, makes harbeth sound somewhat broken, and never that full bodied as a spendor...

Interesting comments about the SA1's being technically superior (and, I feel a little more transparent)yet more fatiguing in the long term -I agree.

And, I felt so strongly that the same applied to the A series that I purchased the S5e over the A-5 then less than a year later went in to trade-up and again chose the S8e over the A-6.

The only thing more I could ask for would be for Spendor to re-introduce the S8e with an integrated 'super-tweeter'.

For what its worth, Bob

This is the first time I hear that someone preferred Spendor over Harbeth. There are a lot of Harbeth fans in this world and this forum.

Comparing the spender range, I prefer the classic series over the more modern S and A series. What I would like is a s3/5r XL. Haha, the sealed
enclosure makes it more room friendly.

quote:

Originally posted by catalinmetal:
harbeth not in the same direction as spendor, i wouldn't go with them with naim. the sound is dry and restrained, and lacks dynamics, compared to similar spendor models.

between s3/5r and sa1, i would not hesitate over the classic model. richer sound, more musical, better in bringing the real feel to the audience, quite a marvel...

sa1 changed that tipical spendor sound and it is not to the better, imho...

but do try older R models higher up, 3/1 or 2/3. they really really kick ass, and to me, makes harbeth sound somewhat broken, and never that full bodied as a spendor...

Very interesting catalinmetal - thanks, I really appreciate it. Especially since - like kmchow98 - I was under the impression that most people would prefer Harbeth over Spendor. It's certainly refreshing to hear the opposite and to find that there are quite a number of people who prefer the S3/5R over the SA1!

quote:

Originally posted by catalinmetal:
harbeth not in the same direction as spendor, i wouldn't go with them with naim. the sound is dry and restrained, and lacks dynamics, compared to similar spendor models.

but do try older R models higher up, 3/1 or 2/3. they really really kick ass, and to me, makes harbeth sound somewhat broken, and never that full bodied as a spendor...

Your comments are interesting. There are many Harbeth users who matched their speakers with Naims. I certainly do not find the Harbeth to sound dry, restrained and lacking in dynamics when driven by the Naims, and I have listened to the Spendor SP2/3r2. In actual fact my experience was the opposite from yours. Out of half a dozen amps I've tried with the Harbeths the speakers sound the most open, dynamic and involving with the Naims. The Harbeths are more toward warm and organic(opposite of dry) and the Naim's speed and energy matched these speakers well.

I have listened to the Spendor SP2/3r2 driven by Sugden amps, and the sound is certainly full bodied. However, one man's full-bodied may be another man's thick and shut-in. A warmer, tube-like and full bodied presentation can be achieved with the Harbeth by using amplifiers such as the Plinius for instance. However, the sound is too thick and full-bodied for my listening preference, almost sounding like mud. Some folks prefer that sort of presentation though.

quote:

Originally posted by catalinmetal:
harbeth not in the same direction as spendor, i wouldn't go with them with naim. the sound is dry and restrained, and lacks dynamics, compared to similar spendor models....

Hi Catalinmetal -

Have listened to both extensively, and I could not disagree more with your comments.

But we all hear things differently, and we are all entitled to our own opinions.

That said, may I politely suggest that your sentence should have begun with IMHO (In My Humble Opinion)?

Hook

quote:

Originally posted by ghook2020:

quote:

Originally posted by catalinmetal:
harbeth not in the same direction as spendor, i wouldn't go with them with naim. the sound is dry and restrained, and lacks dynamics, compared to similar spendor models....

Hi Catalinmetal -

Have listened to both extensively, and I could not disagree more with your comments.

But we all hear things differently, and we are all entitled to our own opinions.

That said, may I politely suggest that your sentence should have begun with IMHO (In My Humble Opinion)?

Hook

I completely agree. I've listened to both and bought the Harbeth's. I'd take pre owned P3's before the S3/5R or SA1, and again I like both of the Spendor speakers just not as well as the Harbeth.

quote:

harbeth not in the same direction as spendor, i wouldn't go with them with naim. the sound is dry and restrained, and lacks dynamics, compared to similar spendor models

I'd say this is a minority view, and doesn't match my experience. I always take a keen interest when the "Spendor vs Harbeth" question comes up on forums (here, PF, etc). Based on these informal straw polls, Harbethians outnumber Spendorians by at least 2 to 1. It's a made up statistic, but I don't think it's far from the truth.

The question of A series Spendor vs Spendor Classic is interesting. I think Spendor have deliberately tried to combat their boring "pipe and slippers" image with the new range, but, arguably,have overshot the mark, and ended up on the cool and lean side of neautral.

Regards
Nigel

Hello.
I am not interested in how many people go with harbeth against spendor… I think this is a childish approach.
Of course, every opinion is supposed to contain IMHO…

I have the opportunity to test lots and lots of speakers and electronics, many in my home, and thus I have some opinions formed…

There are many here who recommend ProAc with Naim, which I always said that is a mismatch. I played real intruments, and I know when I hear a mismatch.
The fact is that, here in UK, and in France, there are a lot of dealers who happen to sell both Naim and ProAc, and it would be bad business to state that these 2 don’t mix well together. That’s what I think… I really love the ProAcs, I have owned several models in the past (but there are many known speaker brands that I have owned in the past) but I did not liked them with Naim, only with class A (like Sugden) or high-slass tubes like Audio research. Try ProAcs with Audio Research, and you will see what I mean! If I would ever change direction from Naim+Spendor, that would have to be the replacement…

About harbeth, I have tested side by side model 7ES and spendor’s sp2/3R, over various amps by Naim, Creek, Sugden, Octave, Audio research, Cary, Simaudio, Jadis and some amps produced in my own country, and the only amp that really matched with the harbets was the Creek destiny.

I strongly think that time alingnment is the key to musical coherence (which is the main sound philosophy at Naim) and without it you can have any other aspects settled on, like dynamics, resolution, soundstage you name it, but you won’t have music… the musical flow is mostly timing dependent.

As far as that is concerned, the harbeths took out the spendors only on resolution, in all other aspects, the spendors performed better, and more coherent, more life-like. Also, a fact that is not of small importance, the spendors were more friedly and easier to match with different tipes of amps, I personally prefer them with Naim on SS, and with Jadis on tubes, but they go very well with Simaudio or Octave for what is worth…

Also, I would wish to see that people sometimes preffer or like something based on their own experience with other systems auditioned before and also with live music and intruments… when that experience is vague, many tent to mistake compression with clear sound, boominess with bass, extended frequency range with resolution, openness of the sound with brightness and so on…

I am not trying to convert anyone, I am just sharing from my experience. Of course anyone is free to pay for whatever pleases him, but knowing the context I always thought it is useful…

Cheers!

quote:

Originally posted by catalinmetal:
Try ProAcs with Audio Research, and you will see what I mean! If I would ever change direction from Naim+Spendor, that would have to be the replacement…

That's very interesting. Before I moved to an all-Naim system I had Audio Research and Proacs. It's a very different kind of sound and performance to Naim.

quote:

Originally posted by catalinmetal:
...
I strongly think that time alingnment is the key to musical coherence (which is the main sound philosophy at Naim) and without it you can have any other aspects settled on, like dynamics, resolution, soundstage you name it, but you won’t have music… the musical flow is mostly timing dependent.
...

Hi Catalinmetal -

I agree 100% that timing is everything. In fact, would be hard to argue with any of the priorities or values you just described. It is merely your conclusions that are debatable.

My guess is that all comes down to the room(s) in which we listen. Every speaker I have tried in my small listening room has had issues with timing...except the Harbeths. Funny, eh? Several other brands gave more detail, but none were able to present that detail in a more fluid, coherent way than the Harbeths.

Am currently on a rather quixotic search to find a floorstander that would work in my small room -- not an easy task! Have heard very few speakers that work well in the near field. So far, it has been easy to find speakers that provide more detail, deeper bass and/or extended highs. But none with the time coherence that makes the music seem real (i.e., that provides that ultimate illusion that "they are here").

If I am understanding what I've read about speakers correctly, cross-over design is key. For example, if some midrange leaks into the bass speaker, or visa-versa, then there can be a doppler effect (where the sound becomes muddy because the two drivers are delivering the same signal just slightly out phase with each other). Small rooms (early reflections) can only magnify this distortion. Have been told that is why some speakers (Wilsons, Vandersteens) resort to using sloping, slanted baffles. But I digress...

My point is, at least in my experience, that the interaction between speaker and room has a bigger impact on sound quality than the interaction of the speaker with the rest of the electronics chain. If the speaker does not suit the room, nothing you feed it will sound right. But if the speaker does suit the room, then it can be greatly optimized through proper pairing with electronics. Hopefully nobody interprets this as contradicting the "source first" principle! I am merely trying to offer a possible explanation of why different people can hear the same speaker in such different ways.

Anyway, thanks for posting your thoughts.

Hook

yes, Richard, Audio Research and proac differs from Naim and spendor. but the main similarity is linked to the timing issue, it manages to get it so right. other aspects may be different, tonally different and resolution better, but it makes me smile all the time, and although for now i do not have the interest in leaving the naim/spendor boat (which i dont't think i will ever), but a second system with a small valve ARC and some slim floorstanders from proac would make me complete, somehow...

hook, i understood you point of view, and also, it is my beleif that sometimes, if not all the time, room acoustic tends to "mush" and influence the overall performance even more than the electronics and cables do.

i have experienced many occasions when certain setups, well known to me, have been able to sound almost unrecognisable.

abouth the harbets, the comparisons were done in a room which happens to be very familiar to my ears...

of course, 2 rooms are not the same, 2 pair of ears even more...

i think that opposed beliefs than ours makes us more interested in finding details and bring light to some areas of this beautiful domain of audio that we all here worship.

catalinmetal--

Thanks for reminding us of the virtues of the Spendor "classic range." I used the Spendor S20 for several years in a second system in the 90s, and there was a certain magic to the presentation. I'd really love to hear the new R2 versions, but they're pretty hard to come by over here.

I tried the S3/5se briefly a few years back, didn't like it at all.

Also agree on Audio Research and ProAc. The early Response models with the foam-surround drivers were the best, IMHO.

catalinmetal - may I ask which Spendor speakers you currently use as your profile doesn't say?

Cheers

quote:

Also agree on Audio Research and ProAc. The early Response models with the foam-surround drivers were the best, IMHO.

The Proac Studio 100 with foam-surround Scanspeak drivers is still available and is a very potent and musical loudspeaker.
I also prefer the Spendor classic range over Harbeth's.