Genelec 8361A Review (Powered Monitor)

[dfuller]

Lol it does look big in that picture but I think KH420 and 8C are going to dwarf it, not to mention Focal Trio 11, it's a monster

KH420 is slightly taller and quite a bit deeper but actually slightly narrower. Trio11 Be is about the same size as the KH420.

 

[Ardrazzt]

IMO, the 8341 will display a smaller image than the Focal, as that's one of the main "benefits" that a coaxial point source provides. It really gives that pinpoint imaging where you can pick out where in the mix everything is. If you see that as a negative, coax may not be the way to go, but rather maybe a giant tower.

Then I should test them and decide... Thanks

 

[Haskil]

Revel ultima Salon 2 har une bobine de fer dans son crossover. [ATTACHER]165583[/ATTACHER]

Elle n'est pas là par économie : deux selfs à air l'entourent, mais parce que parfois il est utile d'utiliser qui lorsqu'elles sont bien dimensionnées et de qualité peuvent éviter d'employer des résistances supplémentaires car elles font légèrement chutter le niveau... Revel est une marque sérieuse qui ne fait pas d'économies stupides et n'emploient pas plus des condensateurs horribles qui ne présentent aucun avantage.

 

[Tonygeno]

Elle n'est pas là par économie : deux selfs à air l'entourent, mais parce que parfois il est utile d'utiliser qui lorsqu'elles sont bien dimensionnées et de qualité peuvent éviter d'employer des résistances supplémentaires car elles font légèrement chutter le niveau... Revel est une marque sérieuse qui ne fait pas d'économies stupides et n'emploient pas plus des condensateurs horribles qui ne présentent aucun avantage.

I love these side discussions.

 

[ex audiophile]

I love these side discussions.

Could be terrorists, video game character communications are passe'.

 

[ex audiophile]

For all those who are interested in AES/SPDIF/whatever digital connections, this might be of interest: It is an answer from Genelec, taken out of the community forum:

Good to know; this is the response I got from Genelec when asking about connection options, esp spdif vs balanced:

My inquiry:

Nov 14, 2021, 22:27 GMT+2 which is the best option of connecting to the monitors for sound quality? 1-Balanced analog cables from hi quality DAC/streamer (Matrix X-sabre 3) 2-Direct digital connection but with spdf source using RCA/XLR cable or adapter 3-Direct digital using full balanced connection (Altair Aries G1) Is there any downside to the analog inputs? In other words is it important to try and use the digital input if possible? My use is home audio, not commercial mixing.

The response from Genelec:

Thanks for contacting Genelec. I'd recommend no on the SPIDIF option - you can often get noise with longer cable runs, and converters can often yield more problems than they solve.

Concerning options 1 and 3, it's up to you! Our ADCs (and DACs) are of high-quality, so the sound quality difference you get from going digital vs. a quality analog source is typically very minimal, if not negligible. That said, if you're trying to minimize different processing and staging, going AES/EBU does skip the ADC stage, and would also allow you to run a single AES/EBU cable to provide signal to both 8361As, so there is that. Both your streamers are of high-quality, so personally I don't think you could go wrong with either - comes down to personal preference!

Hope this helps, let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.

 

[voodooless]

No.

Proportionally, the size of the gaps is about the same I guess? But since for the same SPL you need the same airflow, it does go through a larger gap for the larger speaker, yielding fewer flow noises. That would mean that with higher volume, the noises would come back again?

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

What does he mean with bass slot?

 

[samysound]

What does he mean with bass slot?

the two woofers are loaded by a slot that is formed by the front baffle

 

[BrokenEnglishGuy]

the two woofers are loaded by a slot that is formed by the front baffle
View attachment 165911

Oh.. I see
So, the noise its the driver hitting that part?

 

[lherrm]

Rather resonance from air flow I think. Driver hitting the case would be a serious design flaw.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Maybe the flaps(slots?) are thicker on the 8361A so there are less resonances? I remember someone saying there's a design flaw and when you knock on the flaps of the 8351B you could hear some weird noise
But take this with a grain of salt

 

[Ron Texas]

@amirm first off I appreciate your comprehensive reviews. There is a lot to measure and interpret in speakers. Above you made the comment $10k and be done with your audiophile journey. I guess that means this is top tier performance. You made a similar (but different in crucial ways) comment about the JBL 708p "if you have $3,600, you can buy a pair of these and be done with it as far as superbly sounding system."

There is obviously a big difference in price. Most around here can afford what is now $3778 for a pair of powered speakers, far fewer $10k. I'm just fishing for your comments on why both of these get the similar be done with it praise. I imagine not needing a sub and the ability to play loud have a large part in it. However, is there some other factor?

 

[FrantzM]

Maybe the flaps(slots?) are thicker on the 8361A so there are less resonances? I remember someone saying there's a design flaw and when you knock on the flaps of the 8351B you could hear some weird noise
But take this with a grain of salt

We may need to dial back the unsubstantiated negative hearsays:
. A serious reviewers had the speaker in his own house, had to wear ear protectors, could not hear much distortion and had the sole speaker shaking his house in ways nothing he has up to then , reviewed could , yet we are talking about some "design" flaws? In the woofer department?
I mean ... really ?

 

[Pearljam5000]

We may need to dial back the unsubstantiated negative hearsays:
. A serious reviewers had the speaker in his own house, had to wear ear protectors, could not hear much distortion and had the sole speaker shaking his house in ways nothing he has up to then , reviewed could , yet we are talking about some "design" flaws? In the woofer department?
I mean ... really ?

I'm not the one claiming this as fact , like I said I read it and tried based on that info to estimate as to why there is a difference between 8351B and 8361A with that issue

That's why I wrote that whole grain of salt thing...

 

[FrantzM]

Perspective: Under what conditions were the limits reached?
?

 

[stevenswall]

I can understand the 6.7 Score being lower than a Dutch & Dutch 8C since the latter has more bass extension, but I don't understand why it would be .1 away from the 8341B.

Surely the bass extension on the 8361 should have helped it more? Loudness isn't factored in as far as I know, but the larger drivers and waveguide should have been able to control the directivity better than the smaller model.

What gives? Were too many sacrifices made to get loudness?

 

[Spocko]

@amirm first off I appreciate your comprehensive reviews. There is a lot to measure and interpret in speakers. Above you made the comment $10k and be done with your audiophile journey. I guess that means this is top tier performance. You made a similar (but different in crucial ways) comment about the JBL 708p "if you have $3,600, you can buy a pair of these and be done with it as far as superbly sounding system."

There is obviously a big difference in price. Most around here can afford what is now $3778 for a pair of powered speakers, far fewer $10k. I'm just fishing for your comments on why both of these get the similar be done with it praise. I imagine not needing a sub and the ability to play loud have a large part in it. However, is there some other factor?

You're paying extra for amazing vertical directivity in the 8361A whereas the 708P vertical directivity is average to sub-par and the recommendation from @amirm in his review of the 708P: "Vertical response is not as good so stay a few degrees above or below the tweeter axis". Good for studios where your head is is in a fairly fixed position, but maybe not so good if you require some vertical leeway.

 

[Spocko]

I can understand the 6.7 Score being lower than a Dutch & Dutch 8C since the latter has more bass extension, but I don't understand why it would be .1 away from the 8341B.

Surely the bass extension on the 8361 should have helped it more? Loudness isn't factored in as far as I know, but the larger drivers and waveguide should have been able to control the directivity better than the smaller model.

What gives? Were too many sacrifices made to get loudness?

Excellent point, I too am curious since subjective comparisons all praise the articulate upper bass "punch to the chest" between 80Hz and 160Hz lacking in the 8341B. We need to organize a sub-committee to look into this injustice.

 

[stevenswall]

Cheaper alternatives
View attachment 165285
View attachment 165284

What makes these alternatives besides being 3 way monitors?

Rant:
The Neumann has waveguides at least, but the Focal seems to be based on maximally archaic design: Purposeful placement of parallel walls to cause internal reflections, slapping drivers on a box (do they even use DSP to correct the response) that is mildly rounded but nothing like a Genelec, choosing to create lobes with the non-coaxial/non-acoustically-triaxial design, unflared port design to aid in chuffing, wood to minimize internal volume to get less bass extension than aluminum. I think they also aimed for a more ragged frequency response by excluding DSP unless this is a newer model they've changed.

Relatively speaking, that Focal looks like a busted, zero engineering DIY project intended for the aestheticyst market who values form and form over form over a word they are forbidden to say (because it doesn't matter) that ends with -unction.

Reason:
To be fair I've enjoyed Focal speakers and used some in college for basic mixing of mostly acoustic performances... They just seem like ancient relics seeing what goes into the design of modern loudspeakers like Genelecs. (Or the Sync Cell Alpha, or the Devialet Phantom, etc.) The sound isn't as terrible as the legacy design would suggest, (it's actually great from what I've listened to). It's just that from an engineering standpoint the Genelec's seem to be in a different league. In the sweet spot in a studio, I've had excellent experiences with Focal and enjoy their speakers. Just miffed they focus on exotic driver materials and don't seem to be pushing the state of the art forward.