Genelec 8050B Speaker Review (and how to read speaker measurements)

[thefsb]

Now this is a good topic for a video. I haven't watched it yet but I'll make time. Speaker measurements are hard to properly understand. So this should be educational! I was surprised to see topics like the audiophile ethernet switch or grossly overpriced cables. Important but complicated and tricky topics like like how to make corrections to your system with eq and or room treatment would be very welcome.

 

[Spocko]

For additional context here's Amir's discussion of this review on our livestream yesterday

 

[JStewart]

Thanks for the well done video @amirm . I'm not usually a video guy, but I'm liking yours.

I do have a question about the early reflections graph if anyone can offer a laymen's answer. How would you get a ceiling bounce that causes a dip at 2000kHz(ish) when the vertical directivity information shows little sound at the frequency if any is going toward the ceiling? Obviously something I'm not grasping.

And questions about the Klippel NFS too. I'm guessing that for the spin data there is a specification for listening distance, ear height, speaker and height and room dimensions and the absorption characteristics of the room. If this is correct then:

- Can these variables be changed in the software to something different, a real room for example?
- Can absorption numbers be changed to show the effect of damping a reflection point(s)?

I have no intention of ever suggesting that this be done by you, Amir Really just curious about the capabilities/other uses for the device.

 

[Ron Texas]

This speaker appears to be typical of most of the Genelec line with robust construction, excellent measured performance, limited output and high prices. Probably just the ticket for a deluxe desktop setup, but not for the living room.

 

[Maiky76]

Hi,

Here is my take on the EQ. a bit late but was on CNY break...

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:
Score no EQ: 6.25
With Sub: 7.47

Spinorama with no EQ:

• Fairly flat but trough at the Xover point
• A bit disappointing to see the port resonances
• Great directivity

Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height
The data was probably not measured on the exact axis

EQ design:

I have generated two EQs. The APO config files are attached.

• The first one, labelled, LW is targeted at making the LW flat
• The second, labelled Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.
• The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose.

Score EQ LW: 6.91
with sub: 8.13

Score EQ Score: 7.25
with sub: 8.47

Genelec 8050B APO EQ LW 96000Hz
February242021-113946

Preamp: -2.2 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 26.4 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 1.15
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 70 Hz Gain -2 dB Q 0.79
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 513 Hz Gain -0.61 dB Q 10
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 901 Hz Gain -1.66 dB Q 7.65
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2048 Hz Gain 2.67 dB Q 2.87
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 2553 Hz Gain -1.1 dB Q 2.87
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 3639 Hz Gain -0.71 dB Q 1.82
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 6752 Hz Gain 0.51 dB Q 7.6
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 7600 Hz Gain -0.7 dB Q 5.47
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 12374 Hz Gain 1.3 dB Q 2.7

Genelec 8050B APO EQ Score 96000Hz
February242021-113801

Preamp: -2.1 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 26.3 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 1.12
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 74.3 Hz Gain -2 dB Q 0.85
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 527.7 Hz Gain -1.23 dB Q 7
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 910 Hz Gain -1.9 dB Q 6.92
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 2000 Hz Gain 2.74 dB Q 2.63
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 2466 Hz Gain -1.48 dB Q 16.4
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 3443 Hz Gain -1.55 dB Q 1.06
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 9609 Hz Gain 1.1 dB Q 1.77
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 8481 Hz Gain -1.66 dB Q 2.73
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 19253 Hz Gain -1.97 dB Q 2.44

Spinorama EQ LW

Spinorama EQ Score

Zoom PIR-LW-ON

Regression - Tonal

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Surprising improvements

The rest of the plots is attached.

 

[Hugh Jass]

Amir, you talk about optimization of the amplifier with the speaker and how it is difficult to do this on your own with passive speakers. Are you talking about built in DSP? If not, what other things would the speaker companies do to optimize the setup?

I am guessing that if you were able to measure the amps and DACs in these units separately, they wouldn’t measure spectacularly well. They are probably chosen to be “good enough”. Is that optimization?

 

[Xyrium]

For additional context here's Amir's discussion of this review on our livestream yesterday

Wait, who is that young guy on the left?

 

[Sancus]

I am guessing that if you were able to measure the amps and DACs in these units separately, they wouldn’t measure spectacularly well. They are probably chosen to be “good enough”. Is that optimization?

I'll leave the technical question to Amir, but yes, good enough is the definition of optimization. Why would you want to spend part of your speaker BOM on components that produce no audible improvement?

 

[amirm]

Amir, you talk about optimization of the amplifier with the speaker and how it is difficult to do this on your own with passive speakers. Are you talking about built in DSP? If not, what other things would the speaker companies do to optimize the setup?

I meant crossover optimization and any DSP eq.

 

[Hugh Jass]

I'll leave the technical question to Amir, but yes, good enough is the definition of optimization. Why would you want to spend part of your speaker BOM on components that produce no audible improvement?

If you are going to take that philosophy, doesn’t it make sense to look at the distortion measurements of each speaker, and any other component with a SINAD of roughly 10 or greater should be good enough? If our threshold of “pretty good distortion” in a speaker is 50dB, then isn’t 70 dB “good enough” for everything else (Amp, Preamp, DSP, DAC)?

 

[richard12511]

If you are going to take that philosophy, doesn’t it make sense to look at the distortion measurements of each speaker, and any other component with a SINAD of roughly 10 or greater should be good enough? If our threshold of “pretty good distortion” in a speaker is 50dB, then isn’t 70 dB “good enough” for everything else (Amp, Preamp, DSP, DAC)?

That's not far from my actual philosophy. I don't pay attention to Amp, preamp, DAC, etc. at all. At least not the performance aspect of those components(power not included).

DSP is super important, though, so I wouldn't group that with those others.

For active speakers, I'd actually prefer them to skimp on electronics if it means that they can charge me a little less for the exact same sound quality.

 

[Sancus]

If you are going to take that philosophy, doesn’t it make sense to look at the distortion measurements of each speaker, and any other component with a SINAD of roughly 10 or greater should be good enough? If our threshold of “pretty good distortion” in a speaker is 50dB, then isn’t 70 dB “good enough” for everything else (Amp, Preamp, DSP, DAC)?

Yep, pretty much. I think the 8050B is fully analog internally, but for the digital Genelecs(83xx) most of those steps would be done digitally so SINAD is probably not even relevant except for the amplifier which is doubtless the bottleneck. I am in the camp that doubts anyone could even tell an 80dB SINAD amplifier from a 100dB one(all else equal eg power), double blind and hooked up to any known speaker.

FWIW according to the internet, the 8050A(and B, since it wasn't changed) chip amp is a Sanyo STK442-130, which is specced at 0.2% THD. In the manual, Genelec gives a spec of 0.05% THD at "nominal output" whatever that is(probably less than max power). So, probably SINAD somewhere around 60-65dB in reality, assuming they haven't changed anything.

They give a spec of 0.01% THD(-80dB) for the improved 8350A.

As I mentioned in the other thread, the 8050B is a nearly untouched design from 2005. The fact that it is still reasonably competitive in 2021 is impressive. But although I don't think there is anything wrong with it, personally I would prefer to buy one of their newer, higher-end models, or stick to the 8030C(which is a newer design using Class D amps). I do feel it's rather past time that Genelec updated some of these ancient models. But I bet the margin on these now that the R&D has been amortized unto death is solid! And I'm sure studios are happy to buy a consistent, time-tested product and don't much care about these things.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Yep, pretty much. I think the 8050B is fully analog internally, but for the digital Genelecs(83xx) most of those steps would be done digitally so SINAD is probably not even relevant except for the amplifier which is doubtless the bottleneck. I am in the camp that doubts anyone could even tell an 80dB SINAD amplifier from a 100dB one(all else equal eg power), double blind and hooked up to any known speaker.

FWIW according to the internet, the 8050A(and B, since it wasn't changed) chip amp is a Sanyo STK442-130, which is specced at 0.2% THD. In the manual, Genelec gives a spec of 0.05% THD at "nominal output" whatever that is(probably less than max power). So, probably SINAD somewhere around 60-65dB in reality, assuming they haven't changed anything.

They give a spec of 0.01% THD(-80dB) for the improved 8350A.

As I mentioned in the other thread, the 8050B is a nearly untouched design from 2005. The fact that it is still reasonably competitive in 2021 is impressive. But although I don't think there is anything wrong with it, personally I would prefer to buy one of their newer, higher-end models, or stick to the 8030C(which is a newer design using Class D amps). I do feel it's rather past time that Genelec updated some of these ancient models. But I bet the margin on these now that the R&D has been amortized unto death is solid! And I'm sure studios are happy to buy a consistent, time-tested product and don't much care about these things.

I asked @Ilkka Rissanen from Genelec when are they gonna update the 8040B and 8050b, he said they don't disclose anything about future products.
But it is odd that these are the only 2 models in the series that weren't updated.

 

[Sancus]

I asked @Ilkka Rissanen from Genelec when are they gonna update the 8040B and 8050b, he said they don't disclose anything about future products.
But it is odd that these are the only 2 models in the series that weren't updated.

I mean to be fair, if I asked the average studio buyer if they were worried about the SINAD of the chip amps in their Genelecs, they would probably look at me as if I had grown an extra head.

But yeah, they won't say anything until they're about to release stuff because of course they don't want people to avoid purchases due to waiting for the upgrade

 

[Pearljam5000]

I mean to be fair, if I asked the average studio buyer if they were worried about the SINAD of the chip amps in their Genelecs, they would probably look at me as if I had grown an extra head.

But yeah, they won't say anything until they're about to release stuff because of course they don't want people to avoid purchases due to waiting for the upgrade

That's exactly what I'm doing, not buying the 8050 until it's updated
I'm sure others are doing the same which is a shame, I mean I love Genelec but this just doesn't make any sense.

 

[Hugh Jass]

Yep, pretty much. I think the 8050B is fully analog internally, but for the digital Genelecs(83xx) most of those steps would be done digitally so SINAD is probably not even relevant except for the amplifier which is doubtless the bottleneck. I am in the camp that doubts anyone could even tell an 80dB SINAD amplifier from a 100dB one(all else equal eg power), double blind and hooked up to any known speaker.

FWIW according to the internet, the 8050A(and B, since it wasn't changed) chip amp is a Sanyo STK442-130, which is specced at 0.2% THD. In the manual, Genelec gives a spec of 0.05% THD at "nominal output" whatever that is(probably less than max power). So, probably SINAD somewhere around 60-65dB in reality, assuming they haven't changed anything.

They give a spec of 0.01% THD(-80dB) for the improved 8350A.

As I mentioned in the other thread, the 8050B is a nearly untouched design from 2005. The fact that it is still reasonably competitive in 2021 is impressive. But although I don't think there is anything wrong with it, personally I would prefer to buy one of their newer, higher-end models, or stick to the 8030C(which is a newer design using Class D amps). I do feel it's rather past time that Genelec updated some of these ancient models. But I bet the margin on these now that the R&D has been amortized unto death is solid! And I'm sure studios are happy to buy a consistent, time-tested product and don't much care about these things.

Hmmm. That would basically render most of Amir's testing (apart from speaker testing) as irrelevant; not much different than his own debunking of the minuscule effects of cables and EMF. The relevant measure is not audibility (loosely based at 120 dB) but noticeability given the distortion and noise limits of current speakers, which is a much more cheaply achievable ~70 dB (or lower than the value of the most broken DAC's known to man). That value is achievable by probably the vast majority of average consumer integrated amps and receivers, isn't it?

 

[Sancus]

Hmmm. That would basically render most of Amir's testing (apart from speaker testing) as irrelevant; not much different than his own debunking of the minuscule effects of cables and EMF. The relevant measure is not audibility (loosely based at 120 dB) but noticeability given the distortion and noise limits of current speakers, which is a much more cheaply achievable ~70 dB (or lower than the value of the most broken DAC's known to man). That value is achievable by probably the vast majority of average consumer integrated amps and receivers, isn't it?

It's a pretty old argument, tbh. As Amir has explained in the past, he looks to provide a guarantee of audible transparency(theres probably a better post but that's what my search found). There's more to electronics reviews than SINAD too. Amir's testing has revealed what I would describe as actually-broken mainstream products. For example, Marantz with their insane 2.5dB down at 20khz filter in a $2000 product. Audible as far down as 15khz most likely! In the case where I am actually buying an individual DAC or amplifier on its own, the peace of mind that it passes all of its Amir's tests is still very useful as long as some minority of products fail those tests, and they do. I personally don't read most of the electronics reviews, but you better believe I always double check before buying something.

There is a fundamental difference between active speakers and separates as well, which is that you know exactly what the whole chain is and you won't be using those electronics with anything else, ever. Many people use the DACs on ASR for either headphones or speakers, and it's obviously much easier to pick out distortion and other small flaws on some types of headphones. There is pride of ownership in something like a Benchmark or RME product, and absolute certainty that it is forever 100% audibly transparent even if someone invents some kind of magical superspeaker 30 years from now that noise cancels your room's noise floor and has a THD of 0.001% @ 130dB output.

Obviously I agree that the speaker reviews are the most useful in general and IMO Amir buying the Klippel is really what made ASR into something special.

 

[q3cpma]

This speaker appears to be typical of most of the Genelec line with robust construction, excellent measured performance, limited output and high prices. Probably just the ticket for a deluxe desktop setup, but not for the living room.

Would probably work very well with a subwoofer. In fact, I almost wonder if this is not an intentional and/or commercial "feature" to get deep bass in nearfield and to require a sub for mid/far field. Though everything would be solved with a bit more amp juice and a better woofer, which is why the current theoretical performance is a bit of a shame.

 

[Ron Texas]

Would probably work very well with a subwoofer. In fact, I almost wonder if this is not an intentional and/or commercial "feature" to get deep bass in nearfield and to require a sub for mid/far field. Though everything would be solved with a bit more amp juice and a better woofer, which is why the current theoretical performance is a bit of a shame.

I get a lot more volume out of my LS50's by using 2 subs and a 100hz crossover. The large mid/woofer excursions noted in the review here are absent.

 

[Hugh Jass]

It's a pretty old argument, tbh. As Amir has explained in the past, he looks to provide a guarantee of audible transparency(theres probably a better post but that's what my search found). There's more to electronics reviews than SINAD too. Amir's testing has revealed what I would describe as actually-broken mainstream products. For example, Marantz with their insane 2.5dB down at 20khz filter in a $2000 product. Audible as far down as 15khz most likely! In the case where I am actually buying an individual DAC or amplifier on its own, the peace of mind that it passes all of its Amir's tests is still very useful as long as some minority of products fail those tests, and they do. I personally don't read most of the electronics reviews, but

There is a fundamental difference between active speakers and separates as well, which is that you know exactly what the whole chain is and you won't be using those electronics with anything else, ever. Many people use the DACs on ASR for either headphones or speakers, and it's obviously much easier to pick out distortion and other small flaws on some types of headphones. There is pride of ownership in something like a Benchmark or RME product, and absolute certainty that it is forever 100% audibly transparent even if someone invents some kind of magical superspeaker 30 years from now that noise cancels your room's noise floor and has a THD of 0.001% @ 130dB output.

Obviously I agree that the speaker reviews are the most useful in general and IMO Amir buying the Klippel is really what made ASR into something special.

Fair point. I didn't mean to imply that SINAD was the be all/end all of measurements. After all, if frequency response is the single biggest determinant of speaker sound quality, it stands to reason that linearity of amplifier speaker response is a significant contributor to sound quality as well. I was actually more referring to ALL of his distortion measurements (Not just SINAD or THD+N): the idea being that regardless of what he is measuring, levels of >70dB should probably be acceptable.

I also definitely did not believe that I was the first one to bring up this idea; I am sure it has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere. I just didn't know how to find it. I am happy to have links pointed out to where people discuss this. I am currently in buyer's paralysis. I really don't want to clutter my place with more stuff if it doesn't make a noticeable sound quality difference.