Best 'hi-fi' audiophile bookshelf type speaker to pull mixing/mastering duties in a studio?

[Pearljam5000]

Do you still have time to cancel the order and get the 8361 instead of the 8351? Kidding (;
Can't wait for your impressions as well.

 

[nai]

Genelec fans
s360+7370

 

[Pearljam5000]

Wow amazing.
What made you choose the s360 over the Ones?

 

[q3cpma]

Genelec fans
s360+7370

Same question as above, did you need the extreme volume over the general "betterness" of the 8351B? Quoting myself:

After reviewing the specs, not sure the S360 are worth it when they're exactly the same price as 8351Bs for only 5 dB more in the peaks (with a subwoofer) but higher THD in the > 5 kHz zone and probably worse IMD due to being a 2-way.
Another problem is that, strangely, https://www.soundandrecording.de/equipment/genelec-s360a-high-spl-monitor-im-test/ shows it way less linear than Genelec's specs say it is.

Same with the 7370A, it seems quite overdone compared to the 7360A. You must have bass from hell with a setup like this.

 

[hege]

Same with the 7370A, it seem quite overdone compared to the 7360A. You must have bass from hell with a setup like this.

There is generally no such thing as too big subs in a room (let's ignore horns and stuff which might need room to breathe). If you fit in there with them, it's all good. Why would the bass be from "hell"? Or maybe I misunderstood and it was actually a compliment.

 

[q3cpma]

There is generally no such thing as too big subs in a room (let's ignore horns and stuff which might need room to breathe). If you fit in there with them, it's all good.

Well, there's the matter of price. It's 1600€ more for a pair of 7370 over the 7360, here.

Why would the bass be from "hell"? Or maybe I misunderstood and it was actually a compliment.

Sorry, French took over. Meant extremely high headroom.

 

[hege]

Sorry, French took over. Meant extremely high headroom.

Bigger simply sounds bigger (and of course cleaner) in my experience, even at moderate volumes. No, I don't have a scientific explanation for it, I think there was a thread about it somewhere too.

 

[hege]

Well, there's the matter of price. It's 1600€ more for a pair of 7370 over the 7360, here.

Of course the price is completely subjective. Such difference might be peanuts for someone. I do think G-subs are quite pricey for what they are, that's why I went DIY. Also the form factor.. ugh..

 

[Rja4000]

You really can't go wrong with any Genelec monitor.
And if you're a pro, that may have a positive impact on customers' confidence. An important added value.
On top of it, resale value will hold up way better than any HiFi solution.

 

[A800]

I prefer Focal.

 

[Zvu]

I'm sure you could find some working 1978~1980 Genelecs like the S30 or 1019A. Honestly, reliability of good brands is probably very similar and actives having had more or less advanced limiters for quite some time is something you can't ignore on that subject.

Thing about reliability is very questionable to me and my experience differs from yours. It could be just bad luck for me and my social bubble, i wouldn't know for sure. Part about limiters i don't understand. I listen my music from computer and there is lots of software that enables you to protect your passive speakers. I guess it holds true of you don't use computer but analog or closed source that you can not modify.

You're generalising from a very small sample there ...

It was not my intention to generalize, i argumented against generalization. It is a small sample but who else measures his passive loudspeaker with same form active loudspeaker in such depth and posts his results ? Kudos to Herr Heißmann for that. Also, i didn't mean to make it active vs passive but to show that you can do with passives almost everything you can do with actives (other than protection and linear phase for what you need a computer). I know i came pretty damn close with this one.

Measuring and prototyping before i enter anechoic chamber - 1m distance, 1dB grid resolution, 20dB grid height. Measurements are good down to about 150Hz, i have groundplane measurements somewhere for lower frequencies.

0, 10 and 20 deg off axis

https://i.postimg.cc/9XDGrLWj/0-10-20.png

30, 40 and 50 deg off axis

https://i.postimg.cc/GmCYgrvc/30-40-50.png

60, 70 and 80 deg off axis

https://i.postimg.cc/P5QDBcM1/60-70-80.png

0 and 90 degrees off axis - 5dB gridline

https://i.postimg.cc/dtdr9DkH/0-90.png

180 degrees horizontal response window - averaged black above

https://i.postimg.cc/5Nmv5XP9/image.png

Impedance and phase

https://i.postimg.cc/rwF4fqb1/image.png


https://i.postimg.cc/Z5GbZXQb/3.jpg


https://i.postimg.cc/6QGQdkmz/IMG-ae13b8ba59c0afdf2559744d0b0bb98b-V.jpg


https://i.postimg.cc/WpmvcNZ0/IMG-20200607-005756.jpg

...Having said that, I agree with you that, in the case of simple conventional 2-ways in particular, active designs don't offer many significant advantages over passive designs.And I would really love to see Amir measure a pair of KH120. I measured a pair at one point, and they didn't measure near as well as Neumann's published data or Amir's measurements of the KH80-DSP.

I'm also waiting for KH120 and for someone to make DXT-MON in USA and send it to Amir

Genelecs are known to work for 30 years easily

They do and they are superb but even lousy passive loudspeakers are still working after many many years. I still have kabuki Sansui SP5500X from 1975. They are awfull sounding and still working.

 

[Frank Dernie]

because it used an aluminum tweeter instead of beryllium

Why would these material make them sound different?
They will both be pistonic through most of the audible range (all of my audible range!)

 

[Pearljam5000]

https://www.crutchfield.com/S-sHy0XJeutTP/learn/tweeter-design-affects-sound.html
The materiel used makes a huge difference, the Alpha sounded like crap compared the Solo6.
If the materiel didn't matter all companies would have used plastic instead of metal or Beryllium or diamond.
You can hear the properties of the materiel used regardless of the design.

 

[andreasmaaan]

It was not my intention to generalize, i argumented against generalization. It is a small sample but who else measures his passive loudspeaker with same form active loudspeaker in such depth and posts his results ? Kudos to Herr Heißmann for that. Also, i didn't mean to make it active vs passive but to show that you can do with passives almost everything you can do with actives (other than protection and linear phase for what you need a computer). I know i came pretty damn close with this one.

Yeh, I agree with most of what you say, and I understand you were just giving an example

Where I slightly disagree is with the idea that linear phase and protection are the only areas where passives can’t match actives. (In fact, these can be applied to a passive speaker through the signal chain anyway).

What I see as the real advantages of actives include:

• More freedom in terms of driver orientation due to the ability to freely use delay
• Ability to implement means of directivity control not available in a passive loudspeaker (e.g. Horbach-Keele filters, cardioid bass, etc.)
• More freedom in choosing XO frequencies/slopes, EQ, etc. For example, XO frequencies can be placed very close to each other without messing up the phase relationships with neighbouring drivers, the deficiencies of less linear drivers can be overcome, etc.

I get that these considerations don’t apply much to simple two-ways like a KH120 or DXT-Mon. And if I were buying such a speaker it would be the latter.

 

[andreasmaaan]

https://www.crutchfield.com/S-sHy0XJeutTP/learn/tweeter-design-affects-sound.html
The materiel used makes a huge difference, the Alpha sounded like crap compared the Solo6.
If the materiel didn't matter all companies would have used plastic instead of metal or Beryllium or diamond.
You can hear the properties of the materiel used regardless of the design.

Sorry to bang on about this, but how can you conclude that tweeter material is the decisive factor when it is only one of many uncontrolled variables in the listening you’ve done?

Members here who design speakers and/or worked in the industry are saying that membrane material is not the all-important factor you are arguing it is. Perhaps you should take their comments more seriously than an error-riddled piece of marketing material from a retailer?

Anyway, have said my 2c now, carry on

 

[tuga]

Sorry to bang on about this, but how can you conclude that tweeter material is the decisive factor when it is only one of many uncontrolled variables in the listening you’ve done?

Members here who design speakers and/or worked in the industry are saying that membrane material is not the all-important factor you are arguing it is. Perhaps you should take their comments more seriously than an error-riddled piece of marketing material from a retailer?

Anyway, have said my 2c now, carry on

Taking into account that tweeter breakup tends to happen at or above the upper limit of the audible range it is more likely that complaints about driver material should be directed at mids and mid-woofers.
On top of that, most "hard" domes are now breaking up at 25kHz or higher.

It's very common for us audiophiles to link audible issues to the wrong cause unfortunately...

 

[Pearljam5000]

Again, I'm no expert but every tweeter I heard was massively influenced by the materiel used, my ears don't lie, and like I said if materiel didn't matter Focal would have used plastic tweeters in the Trio 11, and not beryllium on more expensive monitors , and less expensive aluminum tweeters that sound much worse on the the Alpha.
Silk or metal or whatever materiel is used has a huge impact on sound, that's what I hear.

 

[Zvu]

...Where I slightly disagree is with the idea that linear phase and protection are the only areas where passives can’t match actives. (In fact, these can be applied to a passive speaker through the signal chain anyway).

What I see as the real advantages of actives include:

• More freedom in terms of driver orientation due to the ability to freely use delay
• Ability to implement means of directivity control not available in a passive loudspeaker (e.g. Horbach-Keele filters, cardioid bass, etc.)
• More freedom in choosing XO frequencies/slopes, EQ, etc. For example, XO frequencies can be placed very close to each other without messing up the phase relationships with neighbouring drivers, the deficiencies of less linear drivers can be overcome, etc.

I get where you're coming from and certainly share your opinion. Speakers like Kii3, D&D 8C and B&O Beolab 90 wouldn't be possible without DSP. It is justified there.

It bugs me that i can't remember other loudspeakers that controls directivity by delay and because of that it needs more than one DSP channel. If i need to use more than 24dB/o acoustic slopes, than i either chose the wrong drivers for a project or i am using it out of their comfort area. So yes, the number of drivers one can use with DSP is larger than if you do it without it (be it passive or analog active).

EDIT: I've just remembered omnidirectional Axiom Audio LFR1100 active. It is also justified there. They measure great.


https://i.postimg.cc/d36czV7X/lfr1100-active-graph-1.jpg

 

[thewas]

I had written about the "sound of different membrane material" here, including scientific research with listening tests:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...rbeth-30-2-vs-kef-r3.14450/page-2#post-445233

Different sound is only due to different FR (which can be equalised), resonances & distortion (which can be made low enough to be inaudible) and due to differences in radiation pattern, no magic behind.

 

[Pearljam5000]

I really can't understand how anyone can claim materiel has no impact on sound, it defies all logic.