Seeking recommendations: Best active speakers for $10k/pair? (Would also be offered for measurement.)

[Frank Dernie]

This calculator claims that's the equivalent to 90 dB at 3.5m which is my distance to the speakers.
http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-distance.htm

That means that they'll play 70 dB average with 20 dB of headroom for transients, which is not loud at all.

Yes but in a tiny room at super close listening distances he may well get away with it.

 

[richard12511]

He says long term is 101 not peak at 101 that's different. Also it was reply to someone who listening at 3 feet not 3M.

What frequency is that at? Didn't they cap out at 90db at 1m in the bass?

 

[ReaderZ]

What frequency is that at? Didn't they cap out at 90db at 1m in the bass?

I edited that post to include the following: you can find all short term and long term SPL at different distance for each of Genelec speakers.
https://www.genelec.com/correct-monitors

 

[richard12511]

I edited that post to include the following: you can find all short term and long term SPL at different distance for each of Genelec speakers.
https://www.genelec.com/correct-monitors

I was more thinking of the graphs posted awhile back here showing their output is limited heavily the bottom end.

 

[detlev24]

I don't think this is an acceptable excuse, and as a loudspeaker manufacturer, you're supposed to know that on-axis and horizontal off-axis is the most important and bare minimum. I'd say something about THD/SPL by frequency being useful too (missing from Genelec, sadly). You can do it like Neumann and simply dump a lot of it, we can sort it out.

The real point of measurements is that you stake your reputation on them: you simply can't lie, otherwise you're toast the next time your speaker is measured. Like JBL, you can only wonder why when they got an incredible anechoic chamber.

By the way, they give a partial but very useful spinorama with contours for their LYD monitors, so I really don't know why they play it like this for the Core serie. You should be worried about it, too.

I do agree. Yet, we will only know for sure after somebody provided measurements of the Core series for us, as we have no insight into the company's politics. Dynaudio certainly is capable of building great loudspeakers and it would be awkward if they screwed up their reference monitors - but everything is possible. For the Focus 600 XD for example, I did not find any manufacturer measurements and yet, they passed @mitchco's review with a truly great performance + Dynaudio offers 8 years of warranty on their consumer loudspeakers and a great spare parts policy, providing stock from 10 to 25 years after end of production. [Pro audio loudspeakers are generally exempted from such a long warranty extension, due to the different type of use and likely more electronic components involved.]

For me personally, the lack of controls for phase and finer level adjustments (than the 3x4x4 = 48 steps with the backside controls) on the Core Sub would not matter, since for convenience, I am anyways using external bass management and monitor controlling + the AES3 signal path. This type of subwoofer is clearly intended to be used in such an environment, rather than with analog inputs (although available) and manual tuning. Furthermore, Genelec provides just -90° and -180° phase jumpers [on the 7380A], for integration at a fixed 85 Hz crossover frequency. The manual adjustment method does not give enough flexibility for a seamless subwoofer integration without "external" - GLM - refinements; if my interpretation of the operating manual is correct. Those are both no Rythmik Audio subwoofers, who offer perfect manual controls. For best subwoofer integration, a calibrated measurement microphone is essential in every scenario; so why not invest into external bass management/room EQ to improve things, where no on-board solution like GLM is provided? - Especially in the target price range of ~10.000 USD.

The price for the Core Sub is high but I do not think relatively worse, compared to Genelec's MSRP. If it turns out to deliver great performance true to its specifications, it might easily be one of the best subwoofers from a European company and it has, similarly to the 7380A, those rare digital inputs - an advantage from my point of view.

We shall see and hopefully not get disappointed, once the first measurements of the Core series become available!

 

[stevenswall]

You sound like you are looking for the Genelec 8260:

-The most accurate frequency response.
-Controlled Directivity similar to the 8351.
-Not listening as loud as some I think SPL is fine.
-If you don't want separate subs this goes to 18hz in room.
-The 8361 approaches it for extension, not the 8351.

I'm not sure if they resolved issues people brought up before with slot woofer issues compared to "normal" woofers on the pre-ones 800 series, see link below.

https://www.community.genelec.com/forum/-/message_boards/message/1004384#/

That combined with the slightly less accurate response for the sake of SPL and buried woofers and how much less the minimum diffraction coaxial on the 8260 drops when off axis compared to the ribbed ones now, leads me to believe the 8260 is the peak of engineering, and the acoustically "tri-axial" Ones series is still being perfected.

Note: the 8C is perhaps the only other speaker I'd be curious to compare mine to, and Napilopez makes very good points about it not having as many issues as almost any other speaker when it comes to in room response. My only beef with it is the vertical dispersion because I sit on the floor, a couch, or stand periodically watching movies 6-7 feet away.

 

[TimVG]

My search has officially concluded: I just ordered pair of Genelec 8351B! Definitely looking forward to hearing these when they arrive.

Nice choice (and general collection of speakers).

 

[q3cpma]

I do agree. Yet, we will only know for sure after somebody provided measurements of the Core series for us, as we have no insight into the company's politics.

Yes, it could be a management problem, like JBL.

Dynaudio certainly is capable of building great loudspeakers and it would be awkward if they screwed up their reference monitors - but everything is possible

Probably, though I would put them in the Focal/PSI basket, where looks or tradition don't bow before absolute performance and transparency.

For the Focus 600 XD for example, I did not find any manufacturer measurements and yet, they passed @mitchco's review with a truly great performance + Dynaudio offers 8 years of warranty on their consumer loudspeakers and a great spare parts policy, providing stock from 10 to 25 years after end of production. [Pro audio loudspeakers are generally exempted from such a long warranty extension, due to the different type of use and likely more electronic components involved.]

"Dynaudio warrants its active products (i.e.: Xeo or SUB woofers) against defects in material or workmanship in accordance to current National Legal Warranty standards in the given country"
Too bad for the Xeo. And while pro warranties aren't often long, JBL is 5 years and Genelec is 2 years + 3 years for the part cost.

For me personally, the lack of controls for phase and finer level adjustments (than the 3x4x4 = 48 steps with the backside controls) on the Core Sub would not matter, since for convenience, I am anyways using external bass management and monitor controlling + the AES3 signal path. This type of subwoofer is clearly intended to be used in such an environment, rather than with analog inputs (although available) and manual tuning.

What's the point of paying for a 3500€ sub if you don't use the DSP? You're supposed to use it if it's here. Otherwise, you could just use multiple good hi-fi subs for much less money and do your management upstream.

Furthermore, Genelec provides just -90° and -180° phase jumpers [on the 7380A], for integration at a fixed 85 Hz crossover frequency. The manual adjustment method does not give enough flexibility for a seamless subwoofer integration without "external" - GLM - refinements; if my interpretation of the operating manual is correct.

Those are SAM subwoofers, it makes no sense to use them without their DSP. Like the Dynaudio one. (There's still the 7050C if you want an analogue sub.)

Those are both no Rythmik Audio subwoofers, who offer perfect manual controls. For best subwoofer integration, a calibrated measurement microphone is essential in every scenario; so why not invest into external bass management/room EQ to improve things, where no on-board solution like GLM is provided? - Especially in the target price range of ~10.000 USD.

Idem, there is an onboard solution here, and you pay for it. Dearly.

We shall see and hopefully not get disappointed, once the first measurements of the Core series become available!

Well, indeed, they could be good; even if I expect something like Focal's Trio11 disappointment.
Still, third-party measurements are different, as the company doesn't endorse those. It's really a matter of transparency.

 

[detlev24]

[...] What's the point of paying for a 3500€ sub if you don't use the DSP? You're supposed to use it if it's here. Otherwise, you could just use multiple good hi-fi subs for much less money and do your management upstream. [...]

Dynaudio does not see their DSP as a replacement for anything like Dirac Live, GLM etc. - as far as I understood during my inquiries. It should help the loudspeakers to be able to perform to their best in any room, by simple and quick adjustments.

A loudspeaker cannot change the room (acoustics) und thus they would suggest, if desired, to apply further room correction on top of their DSP. I have no information on whether this "double" approach would allow for a better overall performance, compared to the "by-pass" of internal DSP and exclusive application of an external management solution.

Absolutely, there are always choices available, often, with a better cost/performance ratio.

 

[echopraxia]

You sounds like you are looking for the Genelec 8260:

-The most accurate frequency response.
-Controlled Directivity similar to the 8351.
-Not listening as loud as some I think SPL is fine.
-If you don't want separate subs this goes to 18hz in room.
-The 8361 approaches it for extension, not the 8351.

I'm not sure if they resolved issues people brought up before with slot woofer issues compared to "normal" woofers on the pre-ones 800 series, see link below.

https://www.community.genelec.com/forum/-/message_boards/message/1004384#/

That combined with the slightly less accurate response for the sake of SPL and buried woofers and how much less the minimum diffraction coaxial on the 8260 drops when off axis compared to the ribbed ones now, leads me to believe the 8260 is the peak of engineering, and the acoustically "tri-axial" Ones series is still being perfected.View attachment 64369

Note: the 8C is perhaps the only other speaker I'd be curious to compare mine to, and Napilopez makes very good points about it not having as many issues as almost any other speaker when it comes to in room response. My only beef with it is the vertical dispersion because I sit on the floor, a couch, or stand periodically watching movies 6-7 feet away.

Can you elaborate more on why you think the 8360 is the peak of engineering and not the 8351/8361/etc? Clearly, Genelec themselves would disagree with you. Don’t the latter measure better?

 

[stevenswall]

Can you elaborate more on why you think the 8360 is the peak of engineering and not the 8351/8361/etc? Clearly, Genelec themselves would disagree with you. Don’t the latter measure better?

Look at the frequency response, bass extension, and tightness of the off axis response. Also look at the smoothness of the off axis response. Check out the link and screenshot in the post. Look at the specs for both models particularly the frequency response and how many dB there are of deviation. Look at the driver and read the 8260 white paper about not having ridges for diffraction, and then look at the ridges on the newer models midrange.

I could see the 8351B being about equal, but may need a sub, and the 8361 being better as it goes about as low and has a larger waveguide/baffle, though again, it would depend on the tightness of the off axis response if you want the speaker to sound the same off-axis, or to evenly roll off quicker.

 

[richard12511]

Can you elaborate more on why you think the 8360 is the peak of engineering and not the 8351/8361/etc? Clearly, Genelec themselves would disagree with you. Don’t the latter measure better?

I would say that the 8341, 8351 and 8361 are the peak of engineering at Genelec, and Genelec themselves even say so. The 8260 is an older design, though, so it makes sense that the technology is not quite as advanced as the one series. I think you made the right decision going with the 8351, which Genelec says is the best speaker they've ever made. In comparison to the 8260, it has slightly better on and off axis response, and the point source design means that it will have better vertical dispersion. The point source design should also give it tighter stereo imaging. The only real advantage the 8260 has is the 10 inch bass driver, so it's probably better if you like to listen full range and really loud. For the listening habits that you've described, the 8351b is the better speaker. Also, if you ever add subs, then the only advantage that the 8260 has will be nullified.

The 8260 is a wonderful speaker too, especially for its time, but "The Ones" are SOTA(imo). I think you made the right decision.

 

[echopraxia]

I was more thinking of the graphs posted awhile back here showing their output is limited heavily the bottom end.

All speakers tend to be more limited in output on the bottom end -- it's generally a matter of physics. So yeah, I don't usually trust those overall "max SPL" specs, unless I'm assuming I will be using a subwoofer to remove the question of bass power from the equation.

It's therefore a little disappointing Genelec doesn't provide SPL vs Frequency distortion plots like Neumann does. But Nuemann seems quite uniquely exceptional in terms of the amount of measurements they publish on every product listing they offer.

Anyway, for these, I will see how they work in terms of SPL capabilities for me. I generally don't listen anywhere near as loud as some people here do, so I'm optimistic. When music is "really loud" to me, it usually translates to about 85-90db at most. I can't stand live concerts without ear plugs, etc. But, if I do find that I'd prefer more bass power, I'll consider buying a Genelec subwoofer to pair with them. With the price difference saved from the 8351Bs vs the 8361A, it will still end up "close" to my original budget anyway.

Though with Genelec, budget tends to creep up it seems: For example, to take advantage of the smart room equalization features, I needed to buy the $300 Genelec GLM. And if I want to use pure digital inputs, I'm going to have to figure out how to get AES/EBU outputs from USB from my PC with some converter, and then probably also will want to buy that $100 Genelec volume knob if I want the ability to physically control the volume vs using PC controls... etc...

 

[stevenswall]

I would say that the 8341, 8351 and 8361 are the peak of engineering at Genelec, and Genelec themselves even say so. The 8260 is an older design, though, so it makes sense that the technology is not quite as advanced as the one series. I think you made the right decision going with the 8351, which Genelec says is the best speaker they've ever made. In comparison to the 8260, it has slightly better on and off axis response, and the point source design means that it will have much better vertical dispersion. The point source design should also give it tighter stereo imaging. The only real advantage the 8260 has is the 10 inch bass driver, so it's probably better if you like to listen full range and really loud. For the listening habits that you've described, the 8351b is the better speaker. Also, if you ever add subs, then the only advantage that the 8260 has will be nullified.

The 8260 is a wonderful speaker too, especially for its time, but "The Ones" are SOTA(imo). I think you made the right decision.

The 8351B looks like it has similarly smooth off axis response, though it doesn't disperse things as wide, see the prior screenshot.

The original 8351 off axis looks more ragged as you get off axis, though I think most people assume it has better control of off axis response because it's newer. Also note the exceptional flatness of the 8260.

Yes, the newer 8351B with subs should take care of the off axis raggedness better and also have more extension.

 

[richard12511]

The 8351B looks like it has similarly smooth off axis response, though it doesn't disperse things as wide, see the prior screenshot.

The original 8351 off axis looks more ragged as you get off axis, though I think most people assume it has better control of off axis response because it's newer. Also note the exceptional flatness of the 8260.

Yes, the newer 8351B with subs should take care of the off axis raggedness better and also have more extension.

View attachment 64415

The graph you show there is of the A version, I think your first one was correct, though. To me, the 8351b and 8260a look very, very similar in terms of on and off axis linearity(the 8361 looks a bit worse then both imo). I doubt any of those differences are audible. I think the strength of the 8351b lies in its 3 way coaxial design. Somehow they managed to gain all of the advantages of the coaxial design(better vertical dispersion, better imaging), while suffering little to none of the drawbacks(on and off axis linearity), and that to me is what makes it SOTA. Tonally, I doubt people are gonna really be able to distinguish the two. My guess is the biggest differences are going to be the better output and extension of the older design, vs the better vertical dispersion and imaging of the newer design. For me personally, if I were forced to listen without subs, think I would prefer the 8260A, but OP said he never really listens loud. I listen loud quite a bit, and I also don't care that much about vertical dispersion(it's more of a nice to have for me), so the 8260A would probably work better in that situation, for me.

Sorry, I posted my initial reply before reading your post. I know you own the 8260A, and looking back on my post it seems like I was somewhat bashing the speaker, but that wasn't my intention. I still think the 8260A is one of the best speakers in existence, an incredible value, and very very near SOTA.

 

[detlev24]

Can you elaborate more on why you think the 8360 is the peak of engineering and not the 8351/8361/etc? Clearly, Genelec themselves would disagree with you. Don’t the latter measure better?

There are a few very important things, amongst others, those measurements will not tell you about:

• SPL capabilities vs. distortion levels; as previously mentioned by others
• Psychoacoustics: especially the influence of a deep, full bass reproduction to the overall listening experience
• The effects of no or improper acoustic treatment; which might mask all those small advantages in your room, that show on carefully controlled measurements.

You should be used to quality bass reproduction, since you show a collection of superb Rythmik Audio subwoofers in your signature. By ~95% chance, you would choose a pair of 8260A over the newer models - unless, you add (a) subwoofer(s) to the equation.

The W371A is meant to improve "The Ones" up to and including the 'Low mid' region: up to 500 Hz. Due to increasing directivity at these frequencies, one would absolutely require a W371A to complement every main speaker. Performance would be incredibly good, I guess, but a single W371A would already consume 90% of the target budget. At a rated frequency response down to 23 Hz (-6 dB), room gain should push it easily to below 20 Hz in a real room of average size.

The 8260A would benefit less of the W371A, hence a "typical" subwoofer - like the 7380A - would probably make more sense in this scenario.

So, stand-alone, I personally would favor the 8260A even over the 8361A.

 

[Sancus]

I honestly cannot imagine the 8351B not having enough bass for music listening in any kind of small room/office situation. Like sure, the 8260A has a hypothetical lower -6db point, but in practice GLM is probably going to need to EQ the bass down anyways due to boundary reinforcement.

 

[thewas]

As evolution both the 8351B and and 8361A show higher and more continuous directivities than the older 8260A, just look at their power responses:

Especially the 8351B is a significant improvement, also over the above posted 8351B.
As also said many times before small FR deviations and anechoic -3dB bass points are irrelevant in practice as the first can and second should be EQed according to the room and listeners position.

 

[HooStat]

As also said many times before small FR deviations and anechoic -3dB bass points are irrelevant in practice as the first can and second should be EQed according to the room and listeners position.

So, are these plots without the SAM enabled? Or with it? I assume without and that SAM is only relevant in-room. But it really begs the question of comparing these relatively minor differences without SAM. And SAM calibration "success" will vary with the room.

 

[thewas]

So, are these plots without the SAM enabled? Or with it? I assume SAM is only relevant in-room. But it really begs the question of comparing these relatively minor differences without SAM. And calibration "success" will vary with the room.

These are of course anechoic plots without SAM, as everything else like you say would depend on the room.
Here I show why a very deep linear anechoic bass isn't really an advantage in practice.