And if you guys would read what Chris wrote the inserts are in the bottom of the speaker already for using whatever after market product you want to use.
Yes, it was mentioned here, but question is why not use them to default stands as well. Maybe better suspension…
Hoffman is a rule of thumb and outlines a set of compromises. I use a relatively small cabinet Harbeth SHL5+ 40th AE. The next product up, the M40.2, is exactly double the volume. The former has a super tweeter, the latter a 12" woofer. Both share the same mid/bass and tweeter drivers. The relative dimensions of the cabinets are similar. Although the lower end on the spec sheets is stated at 40Hz for the former and 35Hz for the latter, the difference in the scale of the sound is quite dramatically different.
So how much bass extension you actually need to make a good speaker is really a matter of judgement. A full range speaker is not broken if it does not go down to 25Hz, the M40.2 for example do piano magnificently even though most pianos go below 35Hz. At the launch event the first half hour was only piano music.
The previous M40 iteration was reviewed in Sterephile in 2008 and the conclusion included the following:
Over the years, a handful of loudspeaker manufacturers have suggested that active and, presumably, ongoing comparisons to real, live music are at the foundation of all their design efforts. That principle seems noble, even unassailable—but it can lull designer and consumer alike into a blinkered perspective in which flat frequency response is assigned greater importance than anything else. The fact is, a loudspeaker must be more than just sonically pure: It must be musically competent as well, inasmuch as it should communicate the momentum, flow, and sheer rightness of pitch relationships that distinguish music from sound. A very good loudspeaker should also convey the drama, scale, and sense of touch that contribute to holding the listener’s interest: Not only is it possible for a speaker to sound “natural” and “uncolored” and yet make a hash of those other things, it’s depressingly common.
Harbeth Audio is among the specialists whose efforts are driven by the quest for “natural” sound: unsurprising for a company that got its start making studio monitors. Yet as their new flagship loudspeaker so ably demonstrates, Harbeth has the rare ability to bundle tonal neutrality with excellent performance in virtually every other regard that matters. To put it more plainly: Here, finally, is a loudspeaker that achieves flat frequency response without sucking all the life out of recorded music.
The Harbeth M40.1 doesn’t push the envelope in any one particular respect; instead, it breaks ground by being the first loudspeaker of my experience to excel at so many things. The M40.1 is a commendably nonfussy, nonfragile loudspeaker that’s reasonably easy to install, reasonably easy to drive, and allows music to sound colorful, present, and fun. And while it’s far from cheap, I daresay a greater number of serious hobbyists could stretch to afford this one than they could for a great many other contenders. Again, to be blunt: There’s a depressingly high number of loudspeakers out there that sell for more than $20,000/pair and make music sound like chrome-plated plastic.
There are more sensitive speakers than the Harbeth M40.1, as there are speakers with more drama, or momentum, or bass weight, or overall sonic clarity. But I’ve never before had a speaker in my home that offered such generous measures of all of those qualities at once.
To me there is a lot of truth in the first paragraph and thereafter this is a pretty good statement of a balanced design, that measures very well and excels at many things, without necessarily being the best at anything. It is not surprising, as the speaker has been a highly regarded studio monitor and reference consumer speaker for some 40 years. It also happens to be a passive speaker. For these reasons I am not turned on by statements like “no speakers can do proper bass like the AN3”, because it ignores the issue of a balanced design. I am not questioning that claim, but I do not consider it is the basis of a good speaker, which to me is balance and overall presentation. For me the $40k Wilson Sasha DAW has fantastic balance, whereas the bass-heavy $100k Magico M3 is a disaster.
Whilst being the only person here who apparently likes the feet (no comment about the cabinet), I look forward to the time, hopefully soon, that these speakers get out into the field for some independent critical assessment.
2 Likes
My perception is, that those stands are not chosen for optimal resonance control (it really doesn’t look like that, but I may be wrong), I think and understand, that the nice but very unspectacular look of the speaker cabinet needed an add. optical focus set on something to avoid that the speaker looks too boring, charmless and simple (which to be honest indeed it would when paired with the other kinds of stands I’d prefer as many here).
That’s where I understand the decision for such a striking clashing with the style. I’m just not sure yet, if this even emphasizes the rather simple design of the cabinet or compensates for it…and I’d still look for another idea for myself.
3 Likes
Thanks. Keep in mind these speakers have never been properly photographed. The picture you saw was a simple snapshot by a cell phone camera and just a tease. We’ll take some real photos and give you all a better view.
While you’re never going to please everybody, after 285 posts so far one thing is clear: the stands are extremely polarizing and the majority don’t seem too hot on them. I’m not sure better pictures will change that.
5 Likes
Forget about the feet… note these posted speakers above look good… they look like furniture. If you are going to charge the bucks, well sorry, they are going to be furniture in a home and they should look like it. I guess I am the only one who does not like your new design… the feet ain’t gonna change that.
Peace
Bruce in Philly
1 Like
Rounded edge design like their electronics. Side firing force canceling subwoofers I get. Not as certain about the mid bass as that gets more directional and room fussy but the crossover design should iron out that decision. Love the modularity as now one could do setup with one or two people. Also I could see the AN2 just being another subwoofer module on top and voila you have a true D’Appolito similar to Focals approach on their Utopia lineup. The AN1s I can see now as a full stack of midrange drivers and tweeters and mid bass couplers, with separate bank of force cancelling subwoofers similar to the IRS speakers.
IMO need 2 color choices and 2-3 feet choices for decor reasons.
Nice work Chris and PS Audio team.
My 0.01 cents.
1 Like
I’d wonder if there’s not further potential market feedback research ongoing in the background. Of all components, a speaker is most depending on design and optical integration, which is quite relevant for its sales numbers I guess. Pure trust in the own idea with „mixed feedback“ as a positive interpretation of what was given here might not be enough to hit the road with it like that. Let’s see how it’s looking finally.
Well, I totally agree and a number of the finishes and fine details are not exactly what was specified and we have some work to do still on that. We really want to nail these details.
You guys are getting a peek behind the curtain and that is always a challenge because I want it to be a best foot forward and show them more in a complete lifestyle context, but we treat the forum and our customers in a different way than many and will often share progress, warts and all, for feedback etc.
6 Likes
That this exact design is just a draft (and not even intended this way) is new and explains a lot and makes many posts obsolete 
Would have caused less traffic in the thread in case made clear initially I guess.
Well, draft may be overstating it. There area few finish details that weren’t as-specified.
However, with simple lines and shapes I think the fine details really matter because it can change the impression and perceived elegance. Also, the feeling that a company has obsessed about the outside gives a good feeling that they also had that level of obsession inside the box.
1 Like
Exactly
But no one really doubts the ingredients I’d say
I definitely will listen to them as soon as they hit the distributors.
This is exactly the way how I look at any design (not only audio related). I am tooling designer in automotive industry and all the die tools designed by me have to look great from outside too (even if it doesn’t matter for its actual function).
1 Like
Aside from the exterior look, I’m still wondering about the perceived intent. Yes, it needs to look reasonably attractive and not out of place in a typical living room. But, what about how each speaker fits into a family line. Will modules stack on each other, or will each speaker be complete unto itself? What characteristics unite and define the family? For example, Harbeth is all about midrange liquidity, Vandersteen is all about neutrality and time and phase coherence, Magico has it’s pronounced bass, while Focal emphasizes treble details, etc. Sandy Gross at Golden Ear offers a line which seems to have many of the same characteristics of the AN, with a ribbon and opposing woofers, but at lower price points. And, there are other offerings with somewhat similar designs at much higher price points, such as T+A. What is the selling proposition of this speaker at $20K +/-?
Maybe, but essentially at the end of the day it’s a poorly designed and incoherent leg, I am not sure any industrial designer was involved on this. The main cabinet is OK, but the legs are essentially an afterthought and completely ruins the look. I sure hope there’s enough time and feedback here to FIX THIS ASAP, BEFORE the final product!
1 Like
Love the fact that you guys do this, and do appreciate it very much. Not many companies would do this. Makes us feel part of the same family. But, PLEASE take our design feedback, the LEGS MUST CHANGE! I’d highly recommend an industrial designer take on the overall look of the speakers. A simple metal leg with spikes at bottom should fix this quickly and economically!
5 Likes
I’d say Magico has it’s pure accuracy (and not much more imo) while Focal has its coherence and musicality delivered with its technically top performance…and by my conclusions the stregths of the AN could be speed, transparency, resolution, extension both ends, full range bass performance and dynamics, soundstage/imaging, matching to room. How all this works together to deliver an emotional, coherent and natural music experience has to be checked by the final product. So far my prognosis by ingredients.
The whole “it’s a draft, sneak-peak, prototype” seems a little cat-and-mouse to me. The early iterations have been put out for public in at least two audio shows. I argued then, and I maintain today, it’s a strange form of market research. The designs are not clearly advertised as provisional. They are “nearly ready” with a few, small tweaks before being “ready.” Then we have seen considerable, if not major, revisions of the function—and form. The fan boys are gleeful that “things keep getting better.” Change means improvement. I, and the rest of us, have no way to know if the sound has gotten better. The form factor is another matter. We can see the design and higher quality photos will not sway us much in one way or another. The process of soliciting feedback via marketing sneak peaks is suboptimal in my opinion.
Can we agree to disagree? The legs were not an afterthought, in fact, they were THE thought and everything built up from there. The legs define the product not the other way around.
We will work on different finished and tweaks, but the legs, in my opinion, are what make this product the beauty she is.
3 Likes