Genelec 8030C Studio Monitor Review

[YSC]

The 8030C is a better loudspeaker than former 8030B. The sound is better, the distortion is lower. The Genelec 8030C has tpa3118 inside - its a better sounding chip than class A/B chip amps like 3886. I have two 3886 chip amp A/B amplifiers at home but they are collecting dust right now.

I have played around with many tpa 3116 and done modifications and so on... its really good. Noone of my klass A/B amps is sounding better. The opposite in fact.
Tpa 3251 is even better and the sound from that chip can rival high end amplifiers in class A/B.
I think the upcoming Genelec 8040C will be a killer.

I just wonders how can you be better than a speaker this flat on axis! If I remember and understand correctly the 8040 and 8050 currently is less flat due to physical limit of a larger and resulting distortion or resonance so I guess a better amp won’t likely make it better than a 8030c? Maybe more bass extension ?

 

[Pearljam5000]

I'm waiting for the the 8050C, The B model is 15 years old, I'm sure it can be improved.
It's kind of weird that some models of the range were updated (there's already a 8020D) and others are the same since day 1.

 

[YSC]

I'm waiting for the the 8050C, The B model is 15 years old, I'm sure it can be improved.
It's kind of weird that some models of the range were updated (there's already a 8020D) and others are the same since day 1.

Maybe they’ve tried improving the amp but that don’t result in meaningful improvements so didn’t change it, say the resonance of port or driver is the reason for any deficiencies where changing amp module don’t do a thing. If so it makes sense they developing resources goes to other models and the ones makes sense

 

[Sancus]

I'm waiting for the the 8050C, The B model is 15 years old, I'm sure it can be improved.
It's kind of weird that some models of the range were updated (there's already a 8020D) and others are the same since day 1.

Hm, really? The 8050A was in production until 2013 according to Genelec site and the 8050B seems to have first reviews around late 2012. That would make the 8050B ~7 years old only. Looking at the old models on their site, it seems most of the 80X0 line was last refreshed in 2013/2014.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Hm, really? The 8050A was in production until 2013 according to Genelec site and the 8050B seems to have first reviews around late 2012. That would make the 8050B ~7 years old only. Looking at the old models on their site, it seems most of the 80X0 line was last refreshed in 2013/2014.

The B model only added the auto-sleep mode, nothing else has changed from the original A model.

 

[Sancus]

The B model only added the auto-sleep mode, nothing else has changed from the original A model.

Ah OK, nevermind!

 

[YSC]

The B model only added the auto-sleep mode, nothing else has changed from the original A model.

but with this perfect FR I can’t imagine a reason why try to “fix” and update it, it basically is as good as one could imagine

 

[thewas]

Although even above on-axis response isn't totally great nowadays for an active monitor, what is more important is its radiation/directivity and that rather shows its age:

Vertically it will be even less good, for example a 8351B is on different level, unfortunately though also in the price.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I'm waiting for the the 8050C, The B model is 15 years old, I'm sure it can be improved.
It's kind of weird that some models of the range were updated (there's already a 8020D) and others are the same since day 1.

If it ain't bust don't fix it!

 

[YSC]

Although even above on-axis response isn't totally great nowadays for an active monitor, what is more important is its radiation/directivity and that rather shows its age:

View attachment 94097
Vertically it will be even less good, for example a 8351B is on different level, unfortunately though also in the price.

A coaxial driver as in the 83x1 series is another beast as coaxial is a hell lot difficult to design out the interference between the coaxial drivers! And price did reflect that!

tbh in my opinion when my listening space accept the 80x0 series dispersion characters I won’t want an update of the current design at all, R&D requires a lot of money and the 83x1 is IMO already an update on the existing 80x0

 

[thewas]

Sure, the 80x0 are absolutely fine monitors (used to own myself a pair of very similar Genelec M040 and now have a very similar Neumann), was only "complaining" on a very high level to the statement "as good as it gets" which is rather suitable for their new coaxials.

 

[Pearljam5000]

A coaxial driver as in the 83x1 series is another beast as coaxial is a hell lot difficult to design out the interference between the coaxial drivers! And price did reflect that!

tbh in my opinion when my listening space accept the 80x0 series dispersion characters I won’t want an update of the current design at all, R&D requires a lot of money and the 83x1 is IMO already an update on the existing 80x0

Yeah but other models in the series have been updated (better class D amps for example)
Only the 8040 and 8050 are unchanged,so it only makes sense they will get the same upgrades sometime in the future.
Maybe they don't want to hurt the sales of the 8350A
I have no idea.

 

[thewas]

I think all the models with larger mid(woofer) drivers than 5" (so 8040, 8050, before 103x) are not really favoured by Genelec as they are a compromise in the mid quality and directivity, a reason why I remember them writing in a paper they rather used 2x 5" drivers for the mids in their large main monitors instead of a larger one and also the reason why Neumann doesn't have a 2 way monitor with a larger than 5" midwoofer.

 

[daftcombo]

I think all the models with larger mid(woofer) drivers than 5" (so 8040, 8050, before 103x) are not really favoured by Genelec as they are a compromise in the mid quality and directivity, a reason why I remember them writing in a paper they rather used 2x 5" drivers for the mids in their large main monitors instead of a larger one and also the reason why Neumann doesn't have a 2 way monitor with a larger than 5" midwoofer.

Very interesting. If you could find the source again, it would be super.

 

[thewas]

Very interesting. If you could find the source again, it would be super.

Just found it again
https://assets.ctfassets.net/4zjnzn...of_High_Power_Active_Control_Room_Monitor.pdf

 

[TimVG]

I think all the models with larger mid(woofer) drivers than 5" (so 8040, 8050, before 103x) are not really favoured by Genelec as they are a compromise in the mid quality and directivity, a reason why I remember them writing in a paper they rather used 2x 5" drivers for the mids in their large main monitors instead of a larger one and also the reason why Neumann doesn't have a 2 way monitor with a larger than 5" midwoofer.

But that had to do with the particular system in mind:

Since a compression driver was selected for high frequencies, the upper cutoff frequency was to be kept high enough to avoid 2nd order harmonic distortion occurring at midband. The upper crossover frequency was selected to 3.5 kHz and thus the midrange driver passband will be 400 Hz ... 3.5 kHz. Conventional 200 mm ... 315 mm midrange drivers (developed from woofers), although showing an acceptable sensitivity of 98...102 dB/W and a continuous power handling of 75..150 W, cannot cope with the high crossover frequency without considerable colouration and non-uniform directivity because of their large cone diameter.

So the 8040 (or 1030) would be at the limit with its 3kHz acoustical crossover - but the larger 8" and 10" woofer models had (have) a crossover of 1.8kHz and all had a different tweeter arrangement with less 2nd order distortion compared to a not-properly loaded compression driver.

So saying the larger models aren't preferred by Genelec is a stretch, in my opinion, since they are very different designs (and different application).

 

[thewas]

Yes, its a stretch I must admit, but generally talking with many loudspeaker developers (also Neumann) they don't favour mid drivers above 5", although now with high tech drivers like Purifi we might see more exceptions to that old "rule of thumb".

Also that Genelec doesn't update them as often as the smaller ones can be an indication to that tendency.

 

[TimVG]

Yes, its a stretch I must admit, but generally talking with many loudspeaker developers (also Neumann) they don't favour mid drivers above 5", although now with high tech drivers like Purifi we might see more exceptions to that old "rule of thumb".

Also that Genelec doesn't update them as often as the smaller ones can be an indication to that tendency.

I guess it depends, as it usually does. Moving to a 3 or 4 way it's possible to keep wider directivity and maintain more lineair driver behaviour, although there is nothing wrong with a large, well designed, 2-way to my ears. It's (usually) also cheaper.

 

[thewas]

I guess it depends, as it usually does. Moving to a 3 or 4 way it's possible to keep wider directivity and maintain more lineair driver behaviour, although there is nothing wrong with a large, well designed, 2-way to my ears. It's (usually) also cheaper.

Definitively also good larger 2-way loudspeakers can be engineered nowadays, although for me till now they usually didn't fully reach the qualities of a similar sized and quality class 3-way (which is obviously also more expensive), but maybe also that is partially an optical placebo and on the other side I haven't unfortunately heard yet a JBL M2 which on the other side shows also the efforts need to be done for a great high end 2-way design.
Usually its a cost question and then I would usually also say, rather a very good 2-way then a poor(er) 3-way implementation.

 

[Pearljam5000]

I'd rather sacrifice some midrange quality for more bass and SPL, also bigger speakers just sound bigger to me, so it's a much more "realistic" experience, if that wasn't the case everyone just would have bought the 8010 with a tiny 3 inch woofer