The wait is over: Genelec 8381A point source main monitor has arrived

[phile2]

Hi,
my thoughts about this "nice" speaker from Genelec. (sorry, no time to read the pages b4, sure my post doubles another one )
1st => question & joke=> they produced that for who ? a Russian oligarch to show off in front of his "friends" (these guys have no friends )
Then, if it is for a ballroom... ok... cool ! A bit expensive cause you care "less" about SQ when you dance with your sweet honey than when you sit & relax to listen any tiny details of a recording.

No joke now (for SQ / pleasure / precision & so on) :
Just 1 thing is wrong in this product => you can't have top notch SQ when you have 2 such a speakers in front of you !
They are wide-band => no go !
The top notch SQ is => 2.1 ! basic / simple/ efficient / whatever the budget !
=> 2 speakers dealing from top HF down to 80Hz => then the nice speakers are cut (DSP) below 80Hz
=> and 1 or 2 sub relays the speakers below 80Hz
that's it !

The trick here is => of course... to get the top-notch SQ => the sub(s) is/are placed at locations =< following measurements / room modes & so on => and sub locations are NOT the same as the speakers locations !

My conclusion => based on "above" => well.... this product is a toy for $$$$$ jerk. That's all.
Please note that these speakers have AES or anologue input => my 2 cents 90% of the buyers will use the analogue input... LOL !
Rgds

 

[Pearljam5000]

Hi,
my thoughts about this "nice" speaker from Genelec. (sorry, no time to read the pages b4, sure my post doubles another one )
1st => question & joke=> they produced that for who ? a Russian oligarch to show off in front of his "friends" (these guys have no friends )
Then, if it is for a ballroom... ok... cool ! A bit expensive cause you care "less" about SQ when you dance with your sweet honey than when you sit & relax to listen any tiny details of a recording.

No joke now (for SQ / pleasure / precision & so on) :
Just 1 thing is wrong in this product => you can't have top notch SQ when you have 2 such a speakers in front of you !
They are wide-band => no go !
The top notch SQ is => 2.1 ! basic / simple/ efficient / whatever the budget !
=> 2 speakers dealing from top HF down to 80Hz => then the nice speakers are cut (DSP) below 80Hz
=> and 1 or 2 sub relays the speakers below 80Hz
that's it !

The trick here is => of course... to get the top-notch SQ => the sub(s) is/are placed at locations =< following measurements / room modes & so on => and sub locations are NOT the same as the speakers locations !

My conclusion => based on "above" => well.... this product is a toy for $$$$$ jerk. That's all.
Please note that these speakers have AES or anologue input => my 2 cents 90% of the buyers will use the analogue input... LOL !
Rgds

So you're basically saying they're a joke?

 

[phile2]

well...
please elaborate vs my post... I explained some point...
Such a reply is level-0.
Rgds

 

[Pearljam5000]

well...
please elaborate vs my post... I explained some point...
Such a reply is level-0.
Rgds

After reading this , I don't feel the need to elaborate :
"My conclusion => based on "above" => well.... this product is a toy for $$$$$ jerk. That's all."
But OK

 

[phile2]

come on...
please elaborate... just a bit.... don't be shy (vs tech only of course )
my point is clear enough : 2 speakers (like these ones), full range leads a soso SQ vs 2.1 or 2.2 setup.
Simply because the low freq range is not direct, vs the mid/HF range is direct ("direct" to the ears in front... to be precise)
Thus the low freq range is driven by the room (shape / acoutics)
Where the mid/low freq is more direct to ears in front, thus => less related to the room effect.

I admit that my assumption is => the room is not "perfectly" symetric.
(as simple as that)

then, who will buy such a stuff ? even Genelec don't care !
There is a market for this kind of product => their product is awesome as usual with Genelec (perso, I prefer my cheaper/far better Core59, after comparison vs Genelec.. but that's off topic)
=> they launch that product.... => cool !
The trick is => few customers asked for it (deaf but no one care) => GEneelec ask => OK !
then we have a flagship product =< cool !

 

[Sancus]

What does it claim to do that is audibly superior to what is otherwise possible with multi subs and EQ?

Cancel audio directly so that reverberation decays faster than would otherwise be possible without physical room treatment. There are measurements showing that it actually does seem to do that. This is the first time that any consumer DSP solution has been shown to replace room treatment for that purpose.

they produced that for who ?

This is a dumb post. They're a tool for mastering rooms and maybe some larger spatial mixing rooms. The pricing is completely normal for main monitors. They're not for homes. If you want to put them there, you can, but that is not the market.

Also, learn to write a readable sentence.

 

[Newman]

Cancel audio directly so that reverberation decays faster than would otherwise be possible without physical room treatment. There are measurements showing that it actually does seem to do that. This is the first time that any consumer DSP solution has been shown to replace room treatment for that purpose.

And the audibility aspect?

 

[Sancus]

And the audibility aspect?

Reports in the thread are that it is quite audible, and based on the graph it should be. It's quite a bit more than 100ms the lower you go. The frequency response is also even further improved over what MSO can do in at least that case.

Also, my understanding is it currently is enabled up to 150hz only but will eventually go as high as 300hz. Previously room treatment or something like the W371A was the only way to solve underlying issues above the subwoofer range like that(other than moving speakers/listening position etc, obviously).

 

[Newman]

I was asking about experimental psychoacoustic evidence (not by Dirac of course), relating to the audibility (and preference) of reducing the room reverb decay time at bass frequencies, to the degree that ART achieves, compared to multiple subs crossing to main drivers and all expertly equalized up to 300-500 hz.

Not “reports in the thread”, they just make me smile.

 

[Sancus]

I was asking about experimental psychoacoustic evidence (not by Dirac of course), relating to the audibility (and preference) of reducing the room reverb decay time at bass frequencies, to the degree that ART achieves, compared to multiple subs crossing to main drivers and all expertly equalized up to 300-500 hz.

Not “reports in the thread”, they just make me smile.

Sorry, I don't think this is the right thread to go back and forth trying to convince you of anything unrelated to the 8381A. I don't see this technique as fundamentally different from room treatment, just more practical. Toole suggests room treatment for bass is useful if you can accommodate it, in both his book and his guide to building home theatres. That's good enough for me. Multi-sub cannot help you at all above the range the subwoofers are playing, either.

 

[Newman]

Sorry, I don't think this is the right thread to go back and forth trying to convince you of anything unrelated to the 8381A.

Actually you started this diversion, and diversions are a routine feature of threads, so I don’t see the justification for bringing a scythe so quickly to my enquiry. Your contributions summarised:-

Start: “Dirac ART is a game changer”
Middle (when asked for evidence): “glowing user reports in a thread”
End (when asked for real evidence): “it’s off topic so I won’t answer”

Impressive.

 

[Sancus]

Actually you started this diversion, and diversions are a routine feature of threads, so I don’t see the justification for bringing a scythe so quickly to my enquiry. Your contributions summarised:-

Start: “Dirac ART is a game changer”
Middle (when asked for evidence): “glowing user reports in a thread”
End (when asked for real evidence): “it’s off topic so I won’t answer”

Impressive.

Dirac ART is a game changer because it allows you to achieve the same thing that extremely bulky room treatment does without any such treatment. Measurements have been shown, that is real evidence, whether you think it is or not. Research studies are not the only form of evidence in the world.

Given the above, it has the same benefit (or lack thereof) as room treatment. And an argument about the benefit of room treatment is not appropriate for this thread. There's plenty of others about that topic.

Honestly your quote above is such an absurd misrepresentation of what I wrote that I have to assume you are intentionally trolling, so if you continue I will not respond to your posts again.

 

[Newman]

Dirac ART is a game changer because it allows you to achieve the same thing that extremely bulky room treatment does without any such treatment. Measurements have been shown, that is real evidence, whether you think it is or not. Research studies are not the only form of evidence in the world.

Sure, measurements are evidence, I'm not stupid. But we should all know here on ASR by now, measurements are not all audible, and only specific changes in measurements are audibly preferred. Without validly-obtained evidence of audibility and preference, for all we know, ART could be yet another product seeking a problem for its solution.

One of the core functions of ASR is to weed out such products. I'm not about to give Dirac a special free pass, why should I?

Given the above, it has the same benefit (or lack thereof) as room treatment.

Oh dear! I know and respect you for your posting history, so I know you are more logical than this. Room treatment has been extensively experimentally tested for audibility and preference. But room treatment imparts a range of changes across all frequencies, some of which make things better, some of which make things worse, and some of which are probably psychoacoustically neutral. That's why room treatment recommendations are so specific, and laced with warnings about how many room treatment details are a bad idea, or a waste of money. Dirac ART doesn't do everything room treatment does, so it doesn't have the same benefits (or lack thereof). Plus, one could equally say that room correction EQ below transition frequencies achieves some of the benefits of room treatment (and more!). But that doesn't mean it's the same benefits (or lack thereof).

Like I said, I know and respect you for your posting history, so I know you are more logical than this. I think I have gotten under your skin for whatever reason, and I apologise if that happened, but all I am doing is sincerely pressing for quality evidence to back up a huge claim (see below in bold) about Dirac ART. Why shouldn't I?

And an argument about the benefit of room treatment is not appropriate for this thread. There's plenty of others about that topic.

I agree that it's not the optimal thread. But you chose this thread to bring it up. I can't help that.

And it's not like no-one would consider combining 8381A with Dirac ART and wonder if it's going to be a massive improvement on the 8381A alone, plus room correction. It's a valid line of thought.

Honestly your quote above is such an absurd misrepresentation of what I wrote that I have to assume you are intentionally trolling, so if you continue I will not respond to your posts again.

That's your choice, but...misrepresentation?

Your exact words (my emphasis): “Dirac ART seems to change the bass management game so much that I've stopped considering any other upgrades/solutions until it becomes more widely available and I can test it out in my room. Because if it does what the measurements show it may well just obsolete everything else.” Is it an absurd misrepresentation to paraphrase this to “it’s a game changer”? I don’t think so. Especially since you just confirmed with your top-of-post words above, “Dirac ART is a game changer…”.

Your exact words: “Reports in the thread are that it is quite audible, and based on the graph it should be.” Is it an absurd misrepresentation to paraphrase this to “glowing reports in a thread”? I don’t think so.

Your exact words: “Sorry, I don't think this is the right thread to go back and forth trying to convince you”. Is it an absurd misrepresentation to paraphrase this to “it’s off topic so I won’t answer”? I don’t think so.

Honestly, lashing out at me and calling me an intentional troll, based on the above, well...a bit of an insulting and low act.

Let's return our eyes to the ball. All I am, sincerely, pressing for, is quality experimental evidence that Dirac ART is clearly perceptually preferred to an expert implementation of multiple subwoofers plus EQ up to the transition frequency, in a sensibly furnished or modestly treated home audio room. Without that, it's just an ambit claim and a pretty graph.

And since you keep mentioning other better threads to discuss it than the thread where you started it, you can put your reply and evidence in whatever thread you choose, and put a link here. It's not hard.

cheers

 

[Fredygump]

Dirac ART is a game changer because it allows you to achieve the same thing that extremely bulky room treatment does without any such treatment. Measurements have been shown, that is real evidence, whether you think it is or not. Research studies are not the only form of evidence in the world.

Given the above, it has the same benefit (or lack thereof) as room treatment. And an argument about the benefit of room treatment is not appropriate for this thread. There's plenty of others about that topic.

Honestly your quote above is such an absurd misrepresentation of what I wrote that I have to assume you are intentionally trolling, so if you continue I will not respond to your posts again.

To be fair, you seem to be in the habit of making broad statements as fact, and you neglect to explain the presuppositions you based those statement on. And when challenged, you fail to give any insight into your presuppositions! So if anything, you misrepresent yourself! If you explain yourself better, people might agree more.

Dirac apparently calls their system "active room treatment". This is kind of hilarious, but I suppose their marketing department has the right to call it whatever they want? It is likely that they have found messaging difficult, because the general public is unlikely to understand how low frequency waves work in a small room. So while it is kind of wrong, it may be necessary to communicate the benefits of a complicated system to people who will only respond to a couple key words?

You echo this marketing about room treatment, which means you have been deceived. The fact is that bass response is only minimally affected by typical room treatment, so Dirac controlling low frequencies does not in any way replace room treatment. It can equalize and improve sound, but room treatment is still essential for mid and high frequencies.

This technology isn't new. Genelec has been selling a proprietary version of this tech for years. Probably others too, but I'm not sure... And I've been reading about people doing DIY versions of multiple sub integration for 10+ years!

So what part of this is new? The Dirac is going to be an (1) easy way for (2) consumers to get controlled bass response in a small room, and it will work with (3) any combination of speakers and subwoofers.

My question: What took so long? Having a 3rd party develop this system is legitimately a big deal, because it is easy and works with anyone's existing speaker system. But a system like Genelec's will always be better.

Why will Genelec be better? Because they control every aspect of the system. Dirac has to work equally well with $100 subs and $10,000 subs....but Genelec designs every aspect of their speakers to integrate into their system...

 

[Curvature]

Genelec has been selling a proprietary version of this tech for years.

Really? I'd love to buy it.

There's been measurements showing ART works as promised up to 100Hz or so. The complicated SBIR region is not addressed by it, but might be at some point.

Compared to other electronic bass traps out there, this does more or less the same thing but takes the extra equipment out of the picture. Passive bass traps of the membrane or resonator type struggle to be as effective.

We can speculate about ART being worthwhile or how nice it is or isn't to the ear, and we won't know too much more until more users try it. I'm sure there are good papers out there that would help us make sense of it, since the idea itself is fairly old, although this implementation of it is new. Unless of course you have a Genelec example ready to show, which I doubt.

 

[Fredygump]

Really? I'd love to buy it.

There's been measurements showing ART works as promised up to 100Hz or so. The complicated SBIR region is not addressed by it, but might be at some point.

Compared to other electronic bass traps out there, this does more or less the same thing but takes the extra equipment out of the picture. Passive bass traps of the membrane or resonator type struggle to be as effective.

We can speculate about ART being worthwhile or how nice it is or isn't to the ear, and we won't know too much more until more users try it. I'm sure there are good papers out there that would help us make sense of it, since the idea itself is fairly old, although this implementation of it is new. Unless of course you have a Genelec example ready to show, which I doubt.

Come on now! Or should "LOL"? It's called GLM! The built in calibration system integrated into every modern Genelec product....

"Proprietary" means it only works on their gear.... Hopefully you are joking?

 

[holdingpants01]

Come on now! Or should "LOL"? It's called GLM! The built in calibration system integrated into every modern Genelec product....

"Proprietary" means it only works on their gear.... Hopefully you are joking?

I find it interesting that so many audio enthusiasts fail to grasp how the Dirac ART works, probably because the marketing materials are not too straightforward in communicating it? It have nothing to do with what GLM does or multiple sub setups, it's closer to active noise cancelling but based on measurement and calculation, not microphone and realtime DSP manipulation. In the end it's just EQed and delayed original sound that cancels the room reflections, all the magic is in integration and software

 

[Fredygump]

I find it interesting that so many audio enthusiasts fail to grasp how the Dirac ART works, probably because the marketing materials are not too straightforward in communicating it? It have nothing to do with what GLM does or multiple sub setups, it's closer to active noise cancelling but based on measurement and calculation, not microphone and realtime DSP manipulation. In the end it's just EQed and delayed original sound that cancels the room reflections, all the magic is in integration and software

LOL! How you contradict yourself! Is it "...closer to active noise cancellation", or is it "...just EQed and delayed original sound"? Please choose one. It can't be both! (Spoiler: "just EQ and delay" = literally every multi-sub system in existence.)

I find it amazing how people can spend their entire lives innundated with obviously deceptive marketing and still take the bait hook, line, and sinker! And the hifi industry is the worst... I mean, speaker cables? There's a sucker born every minute.

But for now let us be reasonable adults. We all know that marketing is designed to excite our emotions and to stirr up associations that make us believe impossible things about the product. Like somehow drinking Coke will make us attractive and popular..... Humans are such silly creatures!

This is the audio science, so lets do it the scientific way. Throw the marketing in the trash. When someone with adequate testing gear and methodology gets their hands on it, we can re-visit the subject.

I am quite certain that this system is the same as every multi sub system signal processing method, because there is only one set of laws of physics. The words they use do not change physics. The physics were solved years ago!

 

[holdingpants01]

LOL! How you contradict yourself! Is it "...closer to active noise cancellation", or is it "...just EQed and delayed original sound"? Please choose one. It can't be both! (Spoiler: "just EQ and delay" = literally every multi-sub system in existence.)

I didn't contradict myself and of course it can be both, you just somehow still don't get the idea behind it. This system knows what is played back and knows the room response (let call it noise for simplicity, you don't want noise/room in either and actively removing it) as it measures it during the calibration, hence doesn't need microphones and realtime DSP later to predict what would be reflected at places where other speakers are. Therefore it sends equalized and delayed signal out of polarity where it should be, to CANCEL the room (noise) response at a given spot (speaker). The whole calculation is done at the calibration procedure, during the use it uses only static EQ and time/phase manipulation, nothing fancy. It's COMPLETELY different to any multi sub system and completely different than any room calibration, as it deals with reflected sound only to effectively cancel it.
I find it amazing how people get so emotional just because they can't wrap their head around something

 

[Jon AA]

Your exact words (my emphasis): “Dirac ART seems to change the bass management game so much that I've stopped considering any other upgrades/solutions until it becomes more widely available and I can test it out in my room. Because if it does what the measurements show it may well just obsolete everything else.” Is it an absurd misrepresentation to paraphrase this to “it’s a game changer”? I don’t think so. Especially since you just confirmed with your top-of-post words above, “Dirac ART is a game changer…”.

It's a game changer even if you remove the "Active Room Treatment" part out of it. The level of control it gives over bass management to the user is on the level one could only obtain previously with a Trinnov. Bringing that level of control to processors/AVRs that cost a fraction of that is, by itself, a game changer in my opinion.

Then you add in the "ART" part, and it can make a $5K Denon do things even a Trinnov can't do.

You echo this marketing about room treatment, which means you have been deceived. The fact is that bass response is only minimally affected by typical room treatment, so Dirac controlling low frequencies does not in any way replace room treatment. It can equalize and improve sound, but room treatment is still essential for mid and high frequencies.

So you've never heard of "Room Treatment" consisting of absorbers several feet thick, "bass traps" active and passive, Helmholtz resonators, etc? Clearly, anybody with a brain realizes for any system that only works up to 150 Hz, that's the type of treatment they're talking about replacing. Nobody has ever suggested this system is a replacement for 2" thick absorbers for mid-high frequencies. The mid and high frequencies are quite easy to "treat" in comparison, so they're much less of an issue for most users.

Come on now! Or should "LOL"? It's called GLM! The built in calibration system integrated into every modern Genelec product....

Yeah, no. GLM doesn't do anything similar to what ART does. Maybe you need to read the "marketing material" a little more closely.