Genelec 8030C Studio Monitor Review

[Bjorn]

Which is not possible at that small (baffle) size, unless you implement something exotic like a cardioid bass. These are small 5" "shoe-box" loudspeakers and not meant or even advised by the manufacturer to be used outside of their nearfield (usually less then 1,5 meters) and if some people do they still do better than most typical similar sized hifi loudspeakers which show also a baffle step transition from sphere radiation to forward radiation at a quite high mid frequency. By the way most highly appreciated loudspeakers here like the various Revels, Focal, Elac etc also don't have very much lower transition frequency due to their also narrow baffles but still most people enjoy them a lot even outside their near field and even the Harman researches blind tests didn't show a different preference.
PS: That doesn't mean that I also don't enjoy loudspeakers too with a low(er) baffer step which I also prefer at higher listening distances but in the end everything is a compromise, see also WAF.

Obiously.

However, a speaker with classic collapsing polar with sudden and great swift in tonality so in high frequency has very little do to with high quality. Whether is called Revel, Genelec or Magico. We shouldn't praise mediocrisy. Heck, we shouldn't call this mediocre either. It should at minimum have a uniform directivity down to 700-800 Hz to be considered ok.
Audiophiles listens for most of the part at distances 2.7 m or more by the way. And close proximity doesn't help much in small rooms unless we're talking about highs.

No preference for constant directivity lower in frequency? That's can't be, considering how Toole's researchers show the importance of frequency response. And with uniform directivity lower in frequency, the in-room response is considerably flatter. That's simply a fact.

 

[thewas]

Obiously.

However, a speaker with classic collapsing polar with sudden and great swift in tonality so in high frequency has very little do to with high quality. Whether is called Revel, Genelec or Magico. We shouldn't praise mediocrisy. Heck, we shouldn't call this mediocre either. It should at minimum have a uniform directivity down to 700-800 Hz to be considered ok.
Audiophiles listens for most of the part at distances 2.7 m or more by the way. And close proximity doesn't help much in small rooms unless we're talking about highs.

No preference for constant directivity lower in frequency? That's can't be, considering how Toole's researchers show the importance of frequency response. And with uniform directivity lower in frequency, the in-room response is considerably flatter. That's simply a fact.

Well if you call the Revel Salon 2 mediocre which have won till now in every documented blind test, even compared to the lower frequency constant directivity JBL M2, that's rather your personal opinion to which not many agree here.

Also Toole's research has not pointed out problems with such classical narrow edge designs. Talking now about smoother in-room response, Toole also say that below 500-700 Hz the room dominates so you anyway some kind of EQing there is needed.

By the way, I have measured and listened directly side by side at a friends home the Neumann KH 310 with a classic loudspeaker radiation pattern and the Dutch & Dutch 8c being a cardioid down approx. to 100 Hz and the advantages of latter both measurement- and listening-wise were (also for all other people invited) smaller then expected, so the guy in the end chose the cheaper KH 310, here I had posted some of the measurements: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/best-room-response.12715/page-7#post-382707

 

[q3cpma]

They polar plots are not great the price:
View attachment 74302
View attachment 74303


While not as full range and can’t get as loud, here is the Neumann flagship:
View attachment 74305View attachment 74306

The 1238, on the other hand...

 

[Bjorn]

Well if you call the Revel Salon 2 mediocre which have won till now in every documented blind test, even compared to the lower constant directivity JBL M2, that's rather your personal opinion to which not many agree here.

Also Toole's research has not pointed out problems with such classical narrow edge designs. Talking now about smoother in-room response, Toole also say that below 500-700 Hz the room dominates so you anyway some kind of EQing there is needed.

By the way, I have measured and listened directly side by side at a friends home the Neumann KH 310 with a classic loudspeaker radiation pattern and the Dutch & Dutch 8c being a cardioid down approx. to 100 Hz and the advantages of latter both measurement- and listening-wise were (also for all other people invited) smaller then expected, so the guy in the end chose the cheaper KH 310, here I had posted some of the measurements: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/best-room-response.12715/page-7#post-382707

I never said Revel Saon 2 was mediocre. I said a speaker with a collapsing polar "so high in frequency" had very little to do with high quality no matter the brand name. In other words, like this speaker that looses its directivity below 2 KHz.

JBL M2 isn't particurlary constant. The directvity shiftes quite a bit over a wide range. There are much better designs.

The room doesn't dominate already below 700 Hz. Is dominates below the Schroeder frequency which is in most room in the area of 200-300 Hz. As I said previously; a speaker with uniform dispersion lower in frequency measured much flatter in rooms. This matters besides the difference in the time domain in the room. Besides, this speaker looses it's pattern already right below 2 KHz. But it get's a score with a sub 8.5. Assuming that's out of 10, it's impossible to distinguish between better measurable speakers when giving such a high score. But sure, that's my opinion.

 

[hmt]

It is smaller and does not have the two bass/midrange drivers. Still not as smooth as the Neumann KH420.

 

[q3cpma]

It is smaller and does not have the two bass/midrange drivers. Still not as smooth as the Neumann KH420.

Yes, but really not bad when you put GLM in the loop. I guess Genelec's real flagship is the W371A+8351B/8361A, though.

 

[daftcombo]

I never said Revel Saon 2 was mediocre. I said a speaker with a collapsing polar "so high in frequency" had very little to do with high quality no matter the brand name. In other words, like this speaker that looses its directivity below 2 KHz.

JBL M2 isn't particurlary constant. The directvity shiftes quite a bit over a wide range. There are much better designs.

The room doesn't dominate already below 700 Hz. Is dominates below the Schroeder frequency which is in most room in the area of 200-300 Hz. As I said previously; a speaker with uniform dispersion lower in frequency measured much flatter in rooms. This matters besides the difference in the time domain in the room. Besides, this speaker looses it's pattern already right below 2 KHz. But it get's a score with a sub 8.5. Assuming that's out of 10, it's impossible to distinguish between better measurable speakers when giving such a high score. But sure, that's my opinion.

What you say is interesting but I am wondering which speakers aren't mediocre according to you, since even the Salon 2 and the M2 are not the best designs.

 

[Chromatischism]

The room matters a lot.

A narrow room will give a different slope when measured at the seat. The measurement mic will hear more wall reflections, and those being a larger contributor to the overall sound, will weight the graph more heavily. Thus, a steeper rolloff will be seen. But does this make the speaker sound duller or more laid back? I don't think so, but I don't know for sure. I can't expand my walls to test.

This does call into question the ideal "slope" of the estimated in-room response.

 

[Bjorn]

What you say is interesting but I am wondering which speakers aren't mediocre according to you, since even the Salon 2 and the M2 are not the best designs.

There are many important aspects to speaker designs and several often overlooked in measurements like these IMO. The preferably dispersion pattern is also highly dependend on the room and how the listeners listeners. I don't buy in to the idea that there's one beamwidth that fits all or there needs to be certain "wideness" of directivity in order for it to be a good speaker. Different rooms, different music material and treatment will all play a role.

There's no doubt though that a well designed speaker should at least have a constant horizontal directivity down to a minimum frequency, perhaps around 500 Hz. But I wouldn't call such a speaker a great speaker for that alone.

 

[tecnogadget]

The room matters a lot.

A narrow room will give a different slope when measured at the seat. The measurement mic will hear more wall reflections, and those being a larger contributor to the overall sound, will weight the graph more heavily. Thus, a steeper rolloff will be seen. But does this make the speaker sound duller or more laid back? I don't think so, but I don't know for sure. I can't expand my walls to test.

This does call into question the ideal "slope" of the estimated in-room response.

Have you measured the same pair of speaker PIR in different room ratios (wide room vs narrow room) ??

I had a narrow and long fully treated listening room. Now I have a very irregular room without treatment and to my surprise I still enjoy music and cannot detect any aberration, just the usual bass room modes inherent to any room. My PIR does not seem to be affected above transition frequency in spite of the very irregular room shape.

Before this realization I was all about investing in room treatment, now im changing that to SOTA Room EQ.

 

[temps]

There are many important aspects to speaker designs and several often overlooked in measurements like these IMO. The preferably dispersion pattern is also highly dependend on the room and how the listeners listeners. I don't buy in to the idea that there's one beamwidth that fits all or there needs to be certain "wideness" of directivity in order for it to be a good speaker. Different rooms, different music material and treatment will all play a role.

There's no doubt though that a well designed speaker should at least have a constant horizontal directivity down to a minimum frequency, perhaps around 500 Hz. But I wouldn't call such a speaker a great speaker for that alone.

The original research wasn't at all prescriptive about this. We have seen a number of giant, well resourced companies introduce brand new clean-sheet designs since this research came out, and most of them don't seem to be targeting this kind of performance. I don't think it is quite as important as you make it out to be, and hardly enough to dismiss a speaker like this (or presumably the 8341, KH 80, etc.) as worse than mediocre.

 

[F1308]

I said before I will ask Genelec about the SINAD of amplifiers built into their speakers (part of the audio chain, remember?).
Yes, sure you do.
Signal from the player goes to a DAC, then to a pair of power amplifiers (SINAD unknown) and then to the woofers...Sound is heard. You move and place everything here and there to get the best sound. And you relax and enjoy. Great.

Well, here is their saying to me... and to you all.
I think perhaps no further testing is needed any more on nothing...
You just like the sound and that is it.
Remember that as you go away from the speakers, sound will get less loud...
But I think you better read.

Oh, before you do read, remember not to complain to Audi, Rolls or Bentley for their brakes, as they make cars for you to speed up, not to come to a halt.


Jani Oksanen (Genelec)
Jul 20, 2020, 3:46 PM GMT+3

Hi F1308 ,

Thank you for reaching us. I've asked help from our R&D Director Aki Mäkivirta, and you can find his reply below:


Because Genelec manufactures active loudspeakers, the electrical performance figures, such as SINAD are not very useful in describing the overall quality. Instead, we publish figures that are more relevant from the acoustics point of view. We publish the idle channel noise level generated by a Genelec active monitor, and this figure is given as a sound pressure expressed in dB SPL. As you know, dB SPL represents the absolute sound pressure relative to the reference pressure of 20 micro-Pascals (0 dB SPL level) and this is done at a standard distance, stated as part of the specification, frequently 1 meter. We also publish the maximum SPL levels, also in dB SPL scale. These depend on the monitor type and design, and are also expressed at a standard distance and with standard quality of the outcoming audio signal (distortion).


The first specification describes the total system noise performance with no signal. The second specification describes the maximum output at a given audio quality. These two figures combined describe the dynamic range deliverable by a monitor. In practice, when you look at these figures, you have to understand your intended listening distance. The idle channel noise SPL reduces typically 6 dB at doubling of the listening distance and so does the maximum SPL unless you are very far from the monitor in a room. These two figures describe the acoustically dynamic range and consider the complete system, not just the power amplifier, and are therefore better descriptions of what you actually experience using Genelec monitors. SINAD is only related to the electronic input/output, and stating SINAD for an amplifier does not tell you much at all for an active loudspeaker. The SINAD of the Genelec integrated power amplifier becomes part of these two overall system specifications.
Aki


I hope this answers your question, and let me know if you have any other question or concerns and we will do our best to help.


Best Regards / Ystävällisin Terveisin
Jani Oksanen
Factory service team
Factory number +358 (0) 17 83881
www.genelec.com

 

[BYRTT]

Happy to say the filters make a positive difference! As always I try to balance out the on-axis/LW with respect to the estimated in-room response.
@BYRTT Care to throw them in a graph?

Here we go and sorry i'm a little late or say slow today, btw looks good work..

For other users here is TimVG filter setting numbers and curve for above 8030C correction..

Compromise for 8030C looks be that verticals DI hump pattern at 2,8kHz ruled by woofer slope sum is hotter there than tweeters sum, had been perfect if had looked like below manipulation..

TimVG don't know if its interesting but if you cascade below 7 times filters to your own 6 times filter we get 8341A like curves that could if its too bright be tilted hotter using one HS Q=0,3 @500Hz in steps of minus 0,1-0,5dB in area minus 0,1-2dB..

Animation below toggle 8030C including above blue filter curve verse magenta filter curve..

 

[F1308]

I will refrain to ask for the damping factor...

 

[TimVG]

Compromise for 8030C looks be that verticals DI hump pattern at 2,8kHz ruled by woofer slope sum is hotter there than tweeters sum, had been perfect if had looked like below manipulation..

Could it be because the tweeter and woofer aren't properly aligned (hence the downward tilt at crossover? Great work as usual, thanks!

TimVG don't know if its interesting but if you cascade below 7 times filters to your own 6 times filter we get 8341A like curves that could if its too bright be tilted hotter using one HS Q=0,3 @500Hz in steps of minus 0,1-0,5dB in area minus 0,1-2dB..

I'll give these a try tomorrow as well although I always EQ in-room below Schröder - your filters will give some slight peaking at 3kHz, will see if this becomes audible or not.

 

[daftcombo]

There are many important aspects to speaker designs and several often overlooked in measurements like these IMO. The preferably dispersion pattern is also highly dependend on the room and how the listeners listeners. I don't buy in to the idea that there's one beamwidth that fits all or there needs to be certain "wideness" of directivity in order for it to be a good speaker. Different rooms, different music material and treatment will all play a role.

There's no doubt though that a well designed speaker should at least have a constant horizontal directivity down to a minimum frequency, perhaps around 500 Hz. But I wouldn't call such a speaker a great speaker for that alone.

Thanks for taking the time to explain your view.
The Kef R3 behaves better in the directivity department according to what you say:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-r3-speaker-review.12021/
Did you hear it and do you like it?

 

[richard12511]

I never said Revel Saon 2 was mediocre. I said a speaker with a collapsing polar "so high in frequency" had very little to do with high quality no matter the brand name. In other words, like this speaker that looses its directivity below 2 KHz.

JBL M2 isn't particurlary constant. The directvity shiftes quite a bit over a wide range. There are much better designs.

The room doesn't dominate already below 700 Hz. Is dominates below the Schroeder frequency which is in most room in the area of 200-300 Hz. As I said previously; a speaker with uniform dispersion lower in frequency measured much flatter in rooms. This matters besides the difference in the time domain in the room. Besides, this speaker looses it's pattern already right below 2 KHz. But it get's a score with a sub 8.5. Assuming that's out of 10, it's impossible to distinguish between better measurable speakers when giving such a high score. But sure, that's my opinion.

By your definition of mediocre, basically every speaker in existence is mediocre, or worse.

What speakers do you own? Or which do you not consider mediocre?

 

[richard12511]

I said before I will ask Genelec about the SINAD of amplifiers built into their speakers (part of the audio chain, remember?).
Yes, sure you do.
Signal from the player goes to a DAC, then to a pair of power amplifiers (SINAD unknown) and then to the woofers...Sound is heard. You move and place everything here and there to get the best sound. And you relax and enjoy. Great.

Well, here is their saying to me... and to you all.
I think perhaps no further testing is needed any more on nothing...
You just like the sound and that is it.
Remember that as you go away from the speakers, sound will get less loud...
But I think you better read.

Oh, before you do read, remember not to complain to Audi, Rolls or Bentley for their brakes, as they make cars for you to speed up, not to come to a halt.


Jani Oksanen (Genelec)
Jul 20, 2020, 3:46 PM GMT+3

Hi F1308 ,

Thank you for reaching us. I've asked help from our R&D Director Aki Mäkivirta, and you can find his reply below:


Because Genelec manufactures active loudspeakers, the electrical performance figures, such as SINAD are not very useful in describing the overall quality. Instead, we publish figures that are more relevant from the acoustics point of view. We publish the idle channel noise level generated by a Genelec active monitor, and this figure is given as a sound pressure expressed in dB SPL. As you know, dB SPL represents the absolute sound pressure relative to the reference pressure of 20 micro-Pascals (0 dB SPL level) and this is done at a standard distance, stated as part of the specification, frequently 1 meter. We also publish the maximum SPL levels, also in dB SPL scale. These depend on the monitor type and design, and are also expressed at a standard distance and with standard quality of the outcoming audio signal (distortion).


The first specification describes the total system noise performance with no signal. The second specification describes the maximum output at a given audio quality. These two figures combined describe the dynamic range deliverable by a monitor. In practice, when you look at these figures, you have to understand your intended listening distance. The idle channel noise SPL reduces typically 6 dB at doubling of the listening distance and so does the maximum SPL unless you are very far from the monitor in a room. These two figures describe the acoustically dynamic range and consider the complete system, not just the power amplifier, and are therefore better descriptions of what you actually experience using Genelec monitors. SINAD is only related to the electronic input/output, and stating SINAD for an amplifier does not tell you much at all for an active loudspeaker. The SINAD of the Genelec integrated power amplifier becomes part of these two overall system specifications.
Aki


I hope this answers your question, and let me know if you have any other question or concerns and we will do our best to help.


Best Regards / Ystävällisin Terveisin
Jani Oksanen
Factory service team
Factory number +358 (0) 17 83881
www.genelec.com

I don't think SINAD of amplifiers matters all that much when we're looking at active loudspeakers. I think breaking the speakers apart to do the measurements would probably be more trouble than it's worth. I doubt it would tell us very much about loudspeaker performance. I'd rather just say if you can hear hiss, and at what distance.

 

[Jjbb25]

For Amir and others, I own the jbl 305p mk2 and use them near field and really enjoy them. how is the experience of those similar or different from these genelecs or revels you recommend? Are you consider looking at the jbl stage a170-190s at some point?

 

[thewas]

JBL M2 isn't particurlary constant. The directvity shiftes quite a bit over a wide range. There are much better designs.

Does it?

Could you please post some measurements of such much better designs?

As I said previously; a speaker with uniform dispersion lower in frequency measured much flatter in rooms.

My LP measurements of the Neumann KH 310 and D&D 8c don't really show that, maybe you can provide some measurements to show the contrary?