Thank you for this! It is nice choosing between things we like. It is more difficult, but at the same time we can discover our preferences. Of the three I find the Harberth to be the most neutral, but a little too Dynaudio. If you like also Dynaudio you will prefer this. I prefer the Rogers. The expression of the Mid range is more expressive. Slightly, but more expressive for me. More inflection, more subtle in the presence range.
Harberth sounds more linear than Graham and Rogers, Graham and Rogers emit a shshshshs peak in the high-pitched sound zone, like a home budget speaker but no monitor class.
If you play Michael Jackson's Smooth Criminal and compare it with speakers using paper woofers and soft dome tweeters, all three will reveal their weaknesses. This is because the paper woofer is very similar to the sound of a real drum.
If you want to emphasize vocals from a speaker, you can use a soft dome tweeter and a polypropylene or polystyrene woofer. The three sound almost the same, so there is no need to compare them.
It really is at 11:05 transition, and, yet, it is down to personal preferences: one can clearly hear that Rogers is boomy but this also makes it sound more open, while Graham -compared to Rogers- comes across as more nasal and constrained. Having designed some speakers myself, I'd venture to speculate that the main difference in sound is not so much due to cabinet or drivers but to amount and placement of damping material within each cabinet: Rogers is slightly undsr-damped and sounds livelier, Graham is over-damped and sound too controlled and somewhat nasal... cheers!
Мне понравился graham-впереди идет голос потом инструменты,в других колонках инструменты подавляют голос.И от Graham не утомишся слушая их долго.Понравилось фортепьяно приближено к настоящему инструменту.
Graham and Harbeth tone sounds closer to each other. Both don’t emphasize the top end as much as the Rogers. Harbeth is more airy than Graham. I prefer the Graham, Harbeth, then Rogers.
Rogers #1, Harbeth #2. The Rogers is more airy and open, less shut in, less coloured. Graham sounds too tonally warm, no HF extension, air. Harbeth is quite similar to Graham, but slightly better.
The Rogers LS5/9 were the clear winners in this comparison. Out of the 3, they were easily the more transparent. The Grahams almost seemed to have non-working tweeters and sounded overly congested and thick. The Harbeths were a little cleaner and detailed sounding than the Grahams but sounded a little brittle. Rogers sounded like real music even if they were a tad bass shy compared to the others. Rogers LS5/9 are the winners in this video.
Spot on ! Harbeth makes speakers with very "sterile" sound, I could never enjoy them except for the mid driver, but then, the way how Alan Shaw put he's crossovers together, no way this can ever sound good.
I wouldn’t say there is a clear winner. Just preference. The Harbeth has the most natural midrange. The Rogers soundstage is large but not as focused as the Harbeth. The Graham has a rich midrange and bass. Bear in mind each of these speakers will sound different when partnered with different amplifiers. You could get the same sound from either one of them.
I though so too, I knew Jim Rogers, used to go to the factory in South London to pick up his cast offs and sometimes got to home trial his prototypes, all were good. Great man Jim.
These 3 spks are the epitome of the BBC sound. Out of the 3, the harbeth has the most extended beautiful highs bcos of that expensive SEAS Excel tweeter. However, the rogers have the most expressive midrange which is strange cos polypropylene not supposed to hv more detail than Harbeth’s radial cone. I don’t really like the Graham, find them a tad veiled. But i can see alot of people liking the midrange of Graham as its mid seems the warmest & bloomy.
1st place Rogers (artist in the room and revealing), 2nd place Harbeth (rich tonality, artist almost in the room, but coloured), 3rd place Graham (laid back, veiled, lacks dynamics). In my experience, a speaker that can give the impression that the artist is "in the room" always wins. The Rogers do this, at least on the tracks played here.
Strange how 3 BBC designs can sound different. The Harbeth M30.2 appears to have the best drivers but somehow the sound doesn't appear to breathe as well as the other 2. The Graham 5/9 by a small edge.
I think the Graham LS 5/9 wins...better mids and strings...Rogers 2nd place and Harbeth 30.2 last place...because it has a boxy hollow sound ...😂...If you had the Graham LS 5/8, it beats all easily🎶 and my own Spendor S100 is quite sweet and beats all these...😂
The Harbeth is a bit to harsh in the mids. Rogers and Graham are really good. The Graham only lacks some transparency and resolution in the upper highs. I prefer the Rogers.
They are harsh because they have the grills off. Check the review in Stereophile wher the reviewer describe this. They ended up reviewing them with the grilles on
I preferred the Harbeth 30.2 the most. I liked the more forward projection of the voices and a more natural presentation. Rogers was my 2nd choice although it sounded slightly boxy to me in comparison to the Harbeth. The Graham didn't grab me as much. All excellent speakers though, so it's just basically what flavour you prefer. Also need to brush up on my Japanese 😁
เรียน HiFi House ขอขอบคุณที่ทำวิดีโอเปรียบเทียบนี้ เนื่องจากการฟังผ่าน RU-vid จะไม่แม่นยำเท่าการฟังในที่เกิดเหตุ โดยส่วนตัวแล้วคุณเปรียบเทียบระหว่าง Graham LS5/9 กับ Rogers LS5/9 ได้อย่างไร? คุณชอบอันไหน? ขอบคุณ! (Google แปลภาษา) Dear HiFi House, thank you for making this comparison video. As listening through RU-vid will not be as accurate as listening on the spot, personally how do you compare between Graham LS5/9 and Rogers LS5/9? Which do you prefer? Thanks!
The winners are Harbeth and Rodger for me. The main difference for me is that the Harbeths have a richer tone but they might be a little less accurate.
This is timely. I'm looking at speakers in this price range/size. I listened to your video on high quality headphones and switched between the three at the same point in the music. I found them pretty similar - unsurprising given that they are variations on the same design. For voice quality, the Rogers shaded it for me, with Harbeth a close second and Graham a little way back (it sounded slightly nasal to my ears). The Rogers seemed to have more of a sense of the recorded acoustic (not necessarily telling as I've no doubt it was created by an algorithm, rather than a room). Bass end was very slightly fuller/better defined on the Rogers, too. I wonder how they might compare on denser music.
harbeth is messing with the room more than the Graham that is more directional. Harbeth has an artificial fullness artifact. Graham is more dead and not as open Rogers is most accurate
I prefer Graham. Harbeth and Rogers are mainly focused on midrange but Graham has it all, best bass of the 3 and excellent midrange too, good detail and soundstage.
Le Rogers hanno il medio più bello e reale ma secondo me hanno bisogno di più corrente,Graham simili a Rogers ma meno trasparenza del medio,Harbeth più equilibrate ma hanno un leggero effetto loudness on...
전체적으로 저음들이 시스템이랑 안맞는것 같습니다 특히 그라함 저음을 통제를 못하네요 그라함 특징이 고음에서 저음까지의 연속적인 부드러운 느낌인데 여기서는 분리되는 느낌이 들 정도네요 한 악기안에서 나오는 고 중 저음의 연속된 음색이 아니라 다른 유닛에서 나온다는 느낌이 강하게 나오네요 매칭이 안맞는건지 자디스 오케스트라 fl3s랑 써봤는데 훨씬 깔끔하고 명징한 저음 나옵니다
I prefers the Graham then Rogers and I’m not to happy with the Harbeth. My issue with the Harbeth is that I can hear the treble until as a separate source So the coherence is lost. It might be a level thing had it had a level 1 decibel lower it might have been fine but it isn’t. Transparency is nothing if coherence is lost.
for 10.000€ you get a lot better speaker then Rogers. I pay for a pair old Braun Monitor 20€ and sound a lot better, sometime is better to check old speaker then paya new shiitt, if you want hear old, slow, soft music it's more importend to test speaker of year 1975~1990, like watchdrive time of top
Rogers comes first. I can't hear much of the snares with regard of the Grahams. Shame on Graham! This happens when old men only do the engineering. There's likely too many grannies working inside an "echo chamber of the elderly" in that company. They just won't hear all that due to hearing decline which is all too natural - but should be compensated by getting youngsters involved.
