jmtabernero
Member
Thanks @Nuyes, much appreciated this measurements/review.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Genelec 1031A Measurements & Review
- Thread starter Nuyes
- Start date
-
- Tags
- genelec genelec 1031a
This speaker is a perfect example of great measurements and bad sound!
You often found these in studios, also at the university I studied sound engineering we had our surround studio equiped with 5 of these. While relatively linear in frequency response (so you can judge a mix on these when you are used to them) - highs are painful, mids have no resolution and low frequencies are resonant and not precise. But they go loud for the size - which makes the high frequencies even worse.
Through the obtrusive high frequencies you very easily hear mix decisions - at least for a while ... ;-)
I'm very happy that new Genelecs moved away from these and sound more relaxed (but still more "agressive"/"forward" as Neumann to stay in the "company sound" - that's why I prefer the Neumanns)
You often found these in studios, also at the university I studied sound engineering we had our surround studio equiped with 5 of these. While relatively linear in frequency response (so you can judge a mix on these when you are used to them) - highs are painful, mids have no resolution and low frequencies are resonant and not precise. But they go loud for the size - which makes the high frequencies even worse.
Through the obtrusive high frequencies you very easily hear mix decisions - at least for a while ... ;-)
I'm very happy that new Genelecs moved away from these and sound more relaxed (but still more "agressive"/"forward" as Neumann to stay in the "company sound" - that's why I prefer the Neumanns)
OP
- Thread Starter
- #23
In fact, there's something I haven't shared with you all. It's a behind-the-scenes story about this speaker measurement.
First, could you please take a look at this data?
After completing the measurements and organizing the data, I was shocked. There was a dip around the frequency I assumed to be the crossover point.
Based on the test results, I was convinced that the units' polarity might have been assembled in reverse. I contacted the owner of the speaker and got permission to disassemble it.
Upon disassembling and testing the speaker, I discovered that the tweeter was indeed assembled with reversed polarity. However, there were no separate polarity markings on the post side of both the tweeter and woofer, and the post standards were the same. Therefore, I believe it was a mistake that could easily have occurred on the production line.
added ---- 07-12-2023 ----
I have been in communication with a technical expert from Genelec, who thoroughly investigated this speaker sample and informed me about it.
Since he will provide detailed data and explanations, I will only share the conclusion.
In conclusion, the Genelec 1031A sample I measured was originally shipped in proper condition by the manufacturer. It is speculated that the polarity of the tweeter was altered during disassembly and reassembly, either by the importer or a private repair service.
The cabling was done so meticulously and bonded so well that even I was deceived..
I apologize for any confusion caused.
Last edited:
Waxx
Major Contributor
It's not with this model alone i had this problem, all designs of the brand of that era (before the dual concentrics) have this issue for me and many others, and the newer generation still have it, but in a way lesser amount. This speaker i can listen to for maybe an hour, but the 8030C i almost weekly use in a radio studio where i have my weekly show is much more ear friendly and i can listen to for a few hours before ear fatigue kicks in. The dual concentric models are on the point that it hardly becomes a real issue (altough i still would not buy them for this).
It intriges me, as they measure very good on most factors, all factors that Amir measures and i could not find an objective reason for it from his measurments. The ear fatigue problem is also not a problem for everybody, only a fraction of the listeners have a problem with it and there is no clear sign or pattern why.
It intriges me, as they measure very good on most factors, all factors that Amir measures and i could not find an objective reason for it from his measurments. The ear fatigue problem is also not a problem for everybody, only a fraction of the listeners have a problem with it and there is no clear sign or pattern why.
martijn86
Active Member
I'm surprised that I still hear about this mistake occasionally. I had B&W 683 S3 towers and Audessey noticed that one speaker was out of phase. Apparently the speaker terminals where wired incorrect internally.
Thanks for the great review! I imagine that anyone who still has a set will not easily part with them.
Interesting, but not surprising. If you look at the predicted in-room response of some of the Genelec speakers, you see that they're top-heavy. In my own experience the flat on-axis target doesn't combine well with constant directivity in the higher frequencies in a reflective environment. Examples where the trend is a flattening out of the high frequencies;
For this particular speaker the answer may lie in the multi-tone distortion plot and the tweeter break-up, but I would first try to EQ the speaker flat to eliminate that as the main problem as the broad v-shape slope is questionable in my opinion.
Sokel
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2021
- Messages
- 6,127
- Likes
- 6,205
Not only is top heavy but on top of that is elevated at 2-4Khz,the worst possible region.
The exact opposite of my favorite small 8030.
ocinn
Senior Member
Narrow vertical dispersion is hugely desirable in studio situations due to console bounce.
Now obviously you want the vertical fall-off to be smooth, which this isn’t exactly a shining example of, but there are FAR FAR worse 2 way monitors than this.
Incredible such an old Genelec product is this good.
Unfortunately many studios place these (and other small speakers like NS10s) horizontally which is awful. It’s a shame.
Now obviously you want the vertical fall-off to be smooth, which this isn’t exactly a shining example of, but there are FAR FAR worse 2 way monitors than this.
Incredible such an old Genelec product is this good.
Unfortunately many studios place these (and other small speakers like NS10s) horizontally which is awful. It’s a shame.
Vertical dispersion is only narrow in the crossover region. That means desk reflection will be tonally uneven.
There are very good speaker since a long time - big ATCs for example. When you hear them in comparison ... but that's probably a "little" unfair ;-)
Surprisingly many studios seem to not really care about their monitoring situation when you look at the pics. Laying 3 different speakers on the meter bridge has nothing to do with monitoring (maybe for impressing musicians?). There is a reason they need 3 different monitors and non of them sound right ...
That's exactly what I also hear - I was surprised with the "ONEs" models, they sounded "right" and not typical Genelec.
In the old ones it was the sound of the Seas metal tweeters. I never liked them, also in other speakers. They have their resonance very close to 20kHz and sound stressful. But they put all the details directly in your face, for e.g. cymbals are very good to hear. Some people (drummer ;-)) like them cause of that.
I just resently talked to a friend (also a drummer
) who used a lot of this Seas tweeters (the newer ones are better btw!). And I always told him to check out Bliesma or ScanSpeak Beryllium. After hearing the metal 1" Bliesma he was surprised how much cleaner this tweeter is. And now he built his reference Speaker with Bliesma Beryllium ... which sounds "soft" compared to these older metal tweeters but still with all the details.These more modern tweeters have their membrane resonance way higher (T25A 30kHz, T25B about 45kHz) - so my current theory is that this helps with less "metal" sound.
But don't aks why ...
(maybe perfect pistonic behaviour or something like that ... not sure)
Waxx
Major Contributor
I heared these metal domes from seas in other speakers also, and there it's not an issue. Genelec does use the Seas H1124-06 25TAFD/GW-G tweeter in this speaker, the same that is used in the Harbeth HL5+, and that is a speaker i can listen to for hours. My ex wife had (and still has) those in her house in Geneve, and I did listen to it for hours without ear fatigue. I'm very sure that it's not the tweeter itself that is the cause. And other Seas metal domes are the same in my experience.That's exactly what I also hear - I was surprised with the "ONEs" models, they sounded "right" and not typical Genelec.
In the old ones it was the sound of the Seas metal tweeters. I never liked them, also in other speakers. They have their resonance very close to 20kHz and sound stressful. But they put all the details directly in your face, for e.g. cymbals are very good to hear. Some people (drummer ;-)) like them cause of that.
I just resently talked to a friend (also a drummer
These more modern tweeters have their membrane resonance way higher (T25A 30kHz, T25B about 45kHz) - so my current theory is that this helps with less "metal" sound.
But don't aks why ...
Bravo for the test !
For years, this Genelec and its big sister the 1032 were used in the studios of France Musique, the public classical music and jazz station in France (Radio France).
I listened to them a lot, a lot during the broadcasts and in particular during the Record Critics' Tribune where blind recordings are broadcast and where we have to give our choices. Heard therefore with instrumental, vocal, orchestral, operatic music, etc. These speakers have never been a hindrance to our listening and comments whatever the repertoire...
We listened to them at a distance generally equal to 2.5-3 m... No hearing fatigue, no particular brilliance in the treble (in treated and large volume studios)... but a very open, very free, dynamic sound making the acoustics of the places where the records were recorded very well heard.
They have just been replaced by Neuman KH 310s announced as better, more efficient but we are not crazy about it... in our listening conditions of a studio with rather dull acoustics. In short, we preferred the old ones... to which we were accustomed: this explains... we will eventually get used to the Neumann KH 310.
For years, this Genelec and its big sister the 1032 were used in the studios of France Musique, the public classical music and jazz station in France (Radio France).
I listened to them a lot, a lot during the broadcasts and in particular during the Record Critics' Tribune where blind recordings are broadcast and where we have to give our choices. Heard therefore with instrumental, vocal, orchestral, operatic music, etc. These speakers have never been a hindrance to our listening and comments whatever the repertoire...
We listened to them at a distance generally equal to 2.5-3 m... No hearing fatigue, no particular brilliance in the treble (in treated and large volume studios)... but a very open, very free, dynamic sound making the acoustics of the places where the records were recorded very well heard.
They have just been replaced by Neuman KH 310s announced as better, more efficient but we are not crazy about it... in our listening conditions of a studio with rather dull acoustics. In short, we preferred the old ones... to which we were accustomed: this explains... we will eventually get used to the Neumann KH 310.
Can imagine it works in a dull room? Maybe they also built the rooms at these times with all that carpet and too much high frequency absorption to deal with the speakers?
How do you perceive bass quality of the Neumann in comparison? Do you get enough level?
How do you perceive bass quality of the Neumann in comparison? Do you get enough level?
Transitioned from 1031a to O310, granted theres been some good mixes on the genelecs, but it was like a veil on the mids was lifted from the mix. 1031a, although the graphs here dont really show it, always seemed very smiley curved. I never disliked them but the 310 translate better and a bit more revealing in the mids, neither have a fatigue.
I have known 1031 and 1032 for years and years in the broadcast booths of French Public Radio as well as on the other side of the glass for broadcasts during which guests listen to music.
The acoustics are obviously worked and different depending on the studio and the use made of it. I also know them in the editing room for recordings made by Radio France of its orchestras and concert series. There, they are listened to in close proximity: approximately 1.5 m.
In none of these configurations have these Genelecs ever tired my ears! The Neumann KH 310 replaced them recently. I don't know them well enough to comment, but listened to in the same place and for the same use, they didn't seem "better" than the old Genelecs and perhaps even a little dull: but I repeat, we'll see good to use because they are in any case much better than other crosses during the tests...
The acoustics are different at the Radio depending on how the studio is used: very absorbent when you just talk, semi-reverberant when you listen to recorded music or can play it in very small groups: typically a piano , a harpsichord, a solo violin, etc.
The Genelec behaved well everywhere and even listened to at a relatively great distance in a studio of approximately 40 m2 with more than 3 m under the ceiling...
The Neumann KH 310, as far as I could judge, had excellent, deep bass. and very clean when the volume is relatively high, as well as the midrange and treble very well integrated: very homogeneous, beautiful and quite dull in sound, quite smooth without anything highlighted. Which is a very good sign. But I don't know them well.
Similar threads
