Genelec 8341A SAM™ Studio Monitor Review

[stevenswall]

I don't know what they would claim in average for their speaker at 30-100 Hz (i.e. THD <10%) or below. They don't even tell size of the bass driver. I haven't listened to it either. Laws of physics must apply though. I'm highly sceptic about 101 dB SPL | 18Hz – 21kHz without support of the room.

What laws of physics is this breaking? There are measurements showing the Phantom line to be similar to the specs they claim. If other companies stopped insisting on legacy boxes with archaic drivers blowing air through their chuffy-puff tubes, they could probably get as deep or deeper.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Haven't looked into it enough to call people out, just sounds like the person suggesting it doesn't do it, AMIR doesn't do it, Genelec doesn't do it, on forums people mention not correcting above the schroeder frequency of a room, etc.

Maybe there's a better way for me to phrase that, as it's an observation, and I'm not saying I've tested it or have an opinion besides right now "don't screw with it if many people who are smarter don't, and it's already relatively flat in my room."

My strongest opinion on the matter is that by default newer speakers should be getting more and more accurate, and it's too bad the specs don't show that, and I don't think someone should have to use GLM to manually tweak things as it can probably automatically work better than a human tweaking stuff.

Sorry, I think I misunderstood your earlier post. I thought you were saying that EQ'ing a speaker in the high frequencies to correct its anechoic response (as opposed to its in-room response) was thought to be a bad idea.

I agree that it's a bad idea if you're trying to correct the in-room response. Perfectly fine if you're correcting the speaker's response though IMO (indeed, this is what all these DSP-based active speakers are doing internally anyway).

 

[Sancus]

Can you please give couple of examples of bigger loudspeakers (excluding dipole and cardioid principles) that have higher directivity than 8341A?

I was thinking about this as well, although I see little evidence that speaker size correlates with high/low directivity. It seems to be more driver type and design. The Genelec 8341a seem to have +/- 60 degrees before they fall off, which is pretty wide for studio monitors. The KH80 for example seem to be more like +/- ~35 degrees.

There are certainly speakers with wider directivity than this, although I think many of them are NOT large speakers. There was another thread on here where this was discussed, and the Philharmonic BMR and Devialet Phantom came up as examples of speakers with exceptionally wide directivity.

The large speakers with widest directivity I'm aware of are Revel Salon 2 and GoldenEar Triton Reference. But they don't seem to be as wide as the two small speakers above.

It seems possible some people might prefer the widest directivity over the controlled-moderate-width of the Genelecs. But certainly you're not going to get that from any random large speaker...

 

[test1223]

@LTig
Neumann didn't even provide a DSP in its KH310. The Genelec equivalent is the 8050 (which is cheaper and has better directivity and slightly less max SPL). The 8350 is simply better and cost the same (better directivity, DSP DA converter, and comparable Max SPL with pros and cons here and there) and the 8351 is much better, way more expensive with slightly less Max SPL. Genelec has put much more effort in research, is way ahead and it pays of. If you are truly interested in a faire comparison try a blind test and you will mostly notice the differences in the directivity but there are more things like the genelec stand which make sense and can give a very slightly better performance....

 

[amirm]

Keep in mind that the measurement is conducted at 33cm. IIRC, the CTA-2034 specifies a distortion measure at the equivalent of 85dB/1m for active speakers, which is far from stressful (or IMHO very useful).

Are you referring to my measurements? If so, CEA-2034 calls for 79 dB SPL at 2 meters (or 85/1 meter as you state). This translates to 94 dB at 1/3 meter which is what I am using as my rig won't go out that far.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Are you referring to my measurements? If so, CEA-2034 calls for 79 dB SPL at 2 meters (or 85/1 meter as you state). This translates to 94 dB at 1/3 meter which is what I am using as my rig won't go out that far.

Thanks Amir, yes exactly

 

[bobbooo]

I wanted to speed up the measurements for the mic cage tests (after the review measurements were done without it) so checked the symmetrical option thinking it would half the measurement points. It did not. Instead it completely changed the density of them. This likely changes the wave expansion a bit making it better on one axis, and not so good in another. Until I run more controlled experiments, I won't know.

Looking forward to seeing measurements from those more controlled experiments on this issue. As I'm sure you know, it's very important to make sure only one variable is changed between tests when properly investigating systematic errors, otherwise it's impossible to pinpoint which variables are contributing to the error in the results, by how much, and in what way.

We are talking couple of dB errors here. Any computation you make would have to know how close the mic was to the driver, the size of the driver, etc. As I said, you can just file off the tops of those little peaks and be there if you like.

I will emphasize again that we should not be so focused on small differences.

If the wave expansion change in the second Genelec measurment does not contribute significantly to the results, and the systematic error due to the mic cage is approximately the same for all speakers tested so far, all their current preference ratings could be ~0.5 points too low (as would be the case for the original Genelec measurements according to @MZKM's calculations). This is assuming the scores change by the same amount for different spinoramas when adding the same correction curve. All these 'ifs' can be confirmed or denied by measuring a few different speakers using the original and corrected method (with no other differences), and comparing the resultant scores.

The big picture here is this means 6 of the speakers measured so far could be in the wrong preference rating tier (when used with a subwoofer) if their current scores are 0.5 points too low - the Harbeth, Neumann and Revel should all be in the top, blue tier (excellent) along with the Genelec instead of only in the 2nd, green tier (good), and the Elac, Klipsch and NHT should all be promoted to the 2nd tier, instead of languishing in the 3rd, yellow tier (fair) as they are right now. These changes could significantly affect people's perception of these speakers' sound quality. Both in fairness to the manufacturers, and to make sure the preference ratings are as accurate a guide as you can for consumers trying to judge the sound quality of these speakers before purchasing (one of the main motivations behind these measurements), I think it's important to get this right.

 

[LTig]

@LTig
Neumann didn't even provide a DSP in its KH310. The Genelec equivalent is the 8050 (which is cheaper and has better directivity and slightly less max SPL). The 8350 is simply better and cost the same (better directivity, DSP DA converter, and comparable Max SPL with pros and cons here and there) ...

I don't know how you come to this conclusion. I just cite the measurements of sound and recording (I've bought the PDF with tests of around 80 studio monitors) of both KH310 and Genelec 8350a and the graphs are clear. Agreed they are not far apart but as I wrote KH310 is often a little better, clearly not worse. And I don't care whether Genelec or Neumann use a DSP inside. It's the result that counts.

... and the 8351 is much better, way more expensive with slightly less Max SPL. Genelec has put much more effort in research, is way ahead and it pays of. If you are truly interested in a faire comparison try a blind test and you will mostly notice the differences in the directivity but there are more things like the genelec stand which make sense and can give a very slightly better performance....

Surely you have noticed that WRT to max SPL the 8351a is not better than KH310. And to make the comparison meaningful please compare 8351a with KH420 (with 7400 € closer in price) and have a look at those measurements. 10 to 15 dB higher SPL at 50 Hz, 10 dB less distortion below 200 Hz. The KH420, I mean. Even the horizontal dispersion is similar, only vertical it's a little worse.

 

[napilopez]

I don't know what they would claim in average for their speaker at 30-100 Hz (i.e. THD <10%) or below. They don't even tell size of the bass driver. I haven't listened to it either. Laws of physics must apply though. I'm highly sceptic about 101 dB SPL | 18Hz – 21kHz without support of the room.

Devialet claims 101dB for stereo playback on the Reactor 900s at 1m, which is pretty close to what my in-room measurements suggest. I think my measurements fall a bit under that, but there's some room for error in my very casual compression measurements and their interpretation.

The following was a quick and dirty measurement of two Reactor 900s done from my LP 3m/9-10 feet away (I didn't verify the exact distance at the time - I will have a better procedure for my compression tests in the future). Timing is a bit off between the two speakers, hence the especially wavy in-room response, but it should still give you a decent idea of the speaker's relative SPL capabilities.

The purple line is maximum volume in devialet's app. Also note I have a room null at about 17Hz, so I'm estimating from 25 Hz or so.

For reference here's my quasi-anechoic spin of them.

The bump below 100 Hz is not an artefact of the nearfield splice, but rather seems to be built into the response for some reason. It's why there's such a massive rise in this region in my in-room response. (Note, either don't keep these next to walls orbe sure to EQ the bass down).

So taking it all together bass seems to begin compressing below 60Hz at ~95dB for my listening position 3m away. If we subtract 6 dB for room gain and then add 9.5 for dB the difference in distance you get about 99.5dB at 1m. Round that up to 100 and I'd call that close enough.

No way to tell more specifically without actual anechoic compression measurements, of course, but I just present this rough data and calculation to make the point that it doesn't seem impossible they'd hit 101dB down to the 20s anechoically.

 

[infinitesymphony]

The Genelecs 8050 cost about 300€ less and I would bet the Genelecs will provide a better preference rating despite the fact that the current Genelec to compete with in this class should be the one form the one series which is their newest and best model in the class with room correction and all the other features...

I don't think that even with the Harman rating the 8050 would do better, both their horizontal and vertical angle measurements aren't great.
https://assets.ctfassets.net/4zjnzn...ae580f2968fd576/8040b_8050b_en_fi_opman_e.pdf
Regarding to max SPL not even the 8351b fully reaches to the KH310 and costs almost double.
Room correction is of course nice, but am sure the successor of the KH310 will also have it, same like the first of the new DSP based generation, the KH80, did.

Can't wait to see Genelec 8050B vs. Neumann KH 310. Battle of the ~$2K speakers.

Edit: What the heck, throw in the Focal Twin6 Be in that same price range. These are in a ton of studios. I A/B'd them in the same room against Genelec 8050As about 10 years ago and found them to sound very different.

 

[andreasmaaan]

If we subtract 6 dB for room gain and then add 9.5 for dB for changing the difference in distance you get about 99.5dB at 1m. Round that up to 100 and I'd call that close enough.

6dB for room gain is very conservative though...

EDIT: also interesting that the NRC didn't seem to get the same (I presume) equal loudness DSP that your measurements show for the Reactor when they measured the Gold Phantom. Not to doubt your measurements at all in this respect, just pondering why Devialet decided to put this feature in the Reactor but not the Gold Phantom for whatever reason.

PS have you measured other speakers with good low-bass extension in the same room? Maybe you could estimate the room gain by comparing those measurements to published anechoic measurements of those speakers?

EDIT2: scrap all of that, including EDIT 1

I'd misread the labelling on your measurements @napilopez. Very hard to infer from that whether the dynamic EQ shown there is designed to simply protect the woofers or also to compensate for equal loudness. Does seem to suggest you have about 10-12dB of room gain in the low bass though, wouldn't you agree?

 

[MZKM]

6dB for room gain is very conservative though...

EDIT: also interesting that the NRC didn't seem to get the same (I presume) equal loudness DSP that your measurements show for the Reactor when they measured the Gold Phantom. Not to doubt your measurements at all in this respect, just pondering why Devialet decided to put this feature in the Reactor but not the Gold Phantom for whatever reason.

PS have you measured other speakers with good low-bass extension in the same room? Maybe you could estimate the room gain by comparing those measurements to published anechoic measurements of those speakers?

Data-Bass has an article on room gain:
https://data-bass.com/#/articles/5cb5fb285389a80004c7e58a?_k=9e6hvj

 

[cheatingboy]

Please review the product below 200 $. Expensive speakers are not available for purchase.

 

[infinitesymphony]

Please review the product below 200 $. Expensive speakers are not available for purchase.

There have been some:

Master Preference Ratings for Loudspeakers

(link courtesy MZKM's signature)

All of the speakers in that list have been reviewed by Amir on ASR.

 

[amirm]

Looking forward to seeing measurements from those more controlled experiments on this issue. As I'm sure you know, it's very important to make sure only one variable is changed between tests when properly investigating systematic errors, otherwise it's impossible to pinpoint which variables are contributing to the error in the results, by how much, and in what way.

I have exactly that (cage bare and cage with absorber). I shared one of these samples as a quick check and it is posted here and got compared with no cage and with different settings. So I provided the context for that.

 

[amirm]

If the wave expansion change in the second Genelec measurment does not contribute significantly to the results, and the systematic error due to the mic cage is approximately the same for all speakers tested so far, all their current preference ratings could be ~0.5 points too low (as would be the case for the original Genelec measurements according to @MZKM's calculations).

I don't think that is the case. The slight ripple here only matters when the speaker has very flat response. Otherwise it gets lost in the noise of high level of variations. This is why Klippel has not focused on fixing this problem even though they are well aware of it.

 

[MZKM]

I don't think that is the case. The slight ripple here only matters when the speaker has very flat response. Otherwise it gets lost in the noise of high level of variations. This is why Klippel has not focused on fixing this problem even though they are well aware of it.

You’d think them selling $100,000 systems would warrant them addressing bugs/errors (even if slight).

 

[soundwave76]

I don't understand why this monitor with 550W of power and no losses through passive crossovers has output too limited for large rooms.

It should not. There might be something wrong with the volume settings during the measurement...?

 

[Doodski]

It should not. There might be something wrong with the volume settings during the measurement...?

Possibly you are forgetting these Genelec 8341A SAM speakers have two tiny little woofers per cabinet >@^_*@< They simply can't fill a large room.

 

[Sancus]

It should not. There might be something wrong with the volume settings during the measurement...?

Based on what? You should read the thread before flatly stating things. It's pretty obvious, even from the manual(which says 2% THD @ 90db SPL 50-100hz) that these rapidly lose steam above 90db in bass. And that's definitely NOT enough for a large room.

It's not really a problem, it's just a fact of life for the design and size of the speaker.