• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Genelec 8330A Review (Studio Monitor)

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
35,383
Likes
135,872
Location
Seattle Area
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Genelec 8330A studio monitor (powered speaker). It was kindly purchased by a member and drop shipped to me. The 8330A costs US $895 each.

The 8330a naturally follows the current design style of Genelec 2-way non-coaxial speakers:

Genelec 8330a Review Powered Studio Monitor.jpg


This is part of the smart speakers from Genelec so naturally sports Ethernet connectivity:

Genelec 8330a Review back panel Powered Studio Monitor.jpg


I performed a factory reset before testing. I was surprised how sensitive the input was. I had to really dial down the output on my Klippel analyzer to measure it. I expect devices targeting professional market to have less gain by default when using XLR connections.

Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Using computational acoustics, far-field response is computed and that is what I present. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber.

I performed over 1000 measurement which resulted in error rate of about 1%. Clean high frequency response is responsible for ease of measurement in this regard.

Reference axis is approximately the outer rim of the woofer as instructed in the manual.

Genelec 8330A Measurements
Acoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker is and how it can be used in a room. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws:

Genelec 8330a Frequency Response Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


I am so used to nearly ruler flat on-axis response from Genelec that the little bit of variation around crossover region stands out. As does some directivity error. Here is the near-field response:

Genelec 8330a Driver Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


Can't figure out why the woofer response is sloping down and then rising. That is responsible for on-axis response going above flat response.

Early window reflections are less smooth than I expect from Genelec:
Genelec 8330a Early Window Frequency Response Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


Fortunately it all averages out quite well for far field listening:

Genelec 8330a Predicted In-room Frequency Response Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


I was surprised to see the clipping light (amber and red) come on during the bass region of 96 dBSPL sweeps. Measurements show that the speaker is outside of its comfort at that level:

Genelec 8330a distortion vs Frequency Response Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


Genelec 8330a relative distortion vs Frequency Response Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


Ignoring the bit of directivity error around crossover, the rest of the response horizontally is good:

Genelec 8330a horizontal beam width Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


Genelec 8330a horizontal directivty width Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


Vertically response is above average with good bit of leeway above and below tweeter axis before you get into trouble:
Genelec 8330a Vertical directivty Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png



We see the directivity error at 3 kHz visualized better in our 3-D contour map:

Genelec 8330a 3-D directivty Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


Notice how the pattern has become quite directional and complex.

Finally, here are the timing graphs for the fans of such:

Genelec 8330a CSD WaterFall Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


We see some clear resonances around 2 kHz center frequency.

Genelec 8330a Impulse Meaurements Powered Studio Monitor.png


Genelec 8330A Listening Tests
It doesn't take but a minute of listening to know that a) the tonality is right and b) matches other Genelec speakers. I attempted to EQ out the resonances around 2 kHz but it was hard to decide whether that was always an improvement or not. Taking that out makes the speaker sound a bit warmer but also more closed in. It is subtle though.

Dynamic range even in near field listening that I was using is not great. It is easy to get the red clipping light to come on during playback of anything with bass notes. Mind you, it is reasonably loud before that but it just isn't enough.

Conclusions
By most other speakers, the Genelec 8330A speakers have excellent measurements. But using a much higher standard, I feel that they are not as well matched and executed as the 8320A which I reviewed before. The larger woofer has resulted in less perfect crossover response. And there is not enough amplification here to do the speaker justice.

Still, if you don't exceed its playback limits, you have a wonderful sounding speaker here. Tonality is almost as good as it gets. It is not only correct but very enjoyable.

I am going to recommend the Genelec 8330A.

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
 

Attachments

  • Genelec 8330a frequency response.zip
    87 KB · Views: 49

dfuller

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 26, 2020
Messages
1,570
Likes
2,037
I expect devices targeting professional market to have less gain by default when using XLR connections.
This has been the case with every active monitor I've ever owned, they all have super hot inputs. The KH310s and the Footprint01s were the only ones that haven't been way, way too hot.
Hmm... This is interesting. I wonder why this one is more sloped down than most monitors. Doesn't seem to quite be in line with the rest of Genelec's offerings.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
35,383
Likes
135,872
Location
Seattle Area
This has been the case with every active monitor I've ever owned, they all have super hot inputs.
They usually have a switch though or a knob. With neither here, I am surprised the default is consumer levels.
 

sam_adams

Active Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2019
Messages
193
Likes
466
Genelecs always seem to perform very well. They have a smooth, controlled bass rolloff that allows them to integrate well with a sub—especially if you're using GLM. These probably wouldn't dissapoint in the least in a studio setting with all the bells and whistles added.
 

Sancus

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
1,764
Likes
4,259
Location
Canada
The slope isn't really that different from the 8030C is it? Both slope from 86dB at 100hz down to 81dB at 10khz. Perhaps the 8330A is like 0.25dB lower by that point, hard to tell, but looks pretty similar to me. Other than the 1-2khz region, it's flatter in general, which one would expect from a DSP-corrected monitor.

Kind of weird that the 8030C has a dip from 2-3khz and the 8330A has a peak in almost the same region. Overcorrection?
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
12,870
Likes
19,543
Also notice the distortion is much lower on this Genelec from 150 hz to about 8oo hz at 96 db compared to the 8320a. Not surprising with the larger woofer.
 

Sancus

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
1,764
Likes
4,259
Location
Canada
They usually have a switch though or a knob. With neither here, I am surprised the default is consumer levels.

They set all their monitors to the same for consistency. The 8320A/8330A lack the analog pot, not sure why(physical internal space issue?), but larger ones have them. I do find it odd that they set all their monitors to highest sensitivity by default, but perhaps it reduces support requests with "why is my monitor so quiet".

You can, of course, change the sensitivity with GLM, but I'm sure you're aware of that.
 

MaxRockbin

Active Member
Joined
May 26, 2021
Messages
103
Likes
117
Location
Portland, Oregon
Isn't the only difference between 8330A and 8030C the SAM room correction? Amps, drivers, enclosure all the same?
So it's strange that these have that 1-3K bump. And I don't remember a mention of the clipping light coming on for the 96dB distortion sweep with the 8030c.
 

wwenze

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 22, 2018
Messages
747
Likes
1,021
The impulse response looks nice.

Maybe one day somebody will do an experiment of "Are impulse responses audible?"
 

Sancus

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
1,764
Likes
4,259
Location
Canada
So weird that these measure worse than the 8030c.

Do they, though? The on-axis appears worse, however, these were measured with the higher number of points so one would expect it to be worse. The 8330A's PIR though ends up marginally better, perhaps. The slight broad dip from 100-500hz is better corrected, so is the sharp drop above 15khz, and the broad crossover dip is instead a dip and then peak. It's possible that this is intentional and ends up sounding better than the broad dip, I don't know.

In any case even looking at Genelec's own measurements and specs I don't think they were ever a sound upgrade, it's purely for GLM. Unlike some other 8000-series, the 8030C already has the newer Class D architecture.
 

YSC

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 31, 2019
Messages
1,477
Likes
1,019
Do they, though? The on-axis appears worse, however, these were measured with the higher number of points so one would expect it to be worse. The 8330A's PIR though ends up marginally better, perhaps. The slight broad dip from 100-500hz is better corrected, so is the sharp drop above 15khz, and the broad crossover dip is instead a dip and then peak. It's possible that this is intentional and ends up sounding better than the broad dip, I don't know.

In any case even looking at Genelec's own measurements and specs I don't think they were ever a sound upgrade, it's purely for GLM. Unlike some other 8000-series, the 8030C already has the newer Class D architecture.
I personally would expect with DSP inside the default tuning was calibrated more to be anechoically flat though
 

buxtehude

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
42
Location
New York, NY
For my apartment living room with no treatment, 8330 with GLM correction made a huge difference. I am not versed in this area so please forgive me but without the correction, there was some kind of unpleasant ringing in the lower mid-area. Making the sound muddy. After the correction, all the ringing is gone. Crystal clear to my ear. I know the GLM kit was not cheap but 8330 & GLM combo was worth every penny :)
 

Maiky76

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
302
Likes
2,149
Location
French, leaving in China
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Genelec 8330A studio monitor (powered speaker). It was kindly purchased by a member and drop shipped to me. The 8330A costs US $895 each.

The 8330a naturally follows the current design style of Genelec 2-way non-coaxial speakers:

View attachment 147023

This is part of the smart speakers from Genelec so naturally sports Ethernet connectivity:

View attachment 147024

I performed a factory reset before testing. I was surprised how sensitive the input was. I had to really dial down the output on my Klippel analyzer to measure it. I expect devices targeting professional market to have less gain by default when using XLR connections.

Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Using computational acoustics, far-field response is computed and that is what I present. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber.

I performed over 1000 measurement which resulted in error rate of about 1%. Clean high frequency response is responsible for ease of measurement in this regard.

Reference axis is approximately the outer rim of the woofer as instructed in the manual.

Genelec 8330A Measurements
Acoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker is and how it can be used in a room. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws:

View attachment 147025

I am so used to nearly ruler flat on-axis response from Genelec that the little bit of variation around crossover region stands out. As does some directivity error. Here is the near-field response:

View attachment 147026

Can't figure out why the woofer response is sloping down and then rising. That is responsible for on-axis response going above flat response.

Early window reflections are less smooth than I expect from Genelec:
View attachment 147027

Fortunately it all averages out quite well for far field listening:

View attachment 147028

I was surprised to see the clipping light (amber and red) come on during the bass region of 96 dBSPL sweeps. Measurements show that the speaker is outside of its comfort at that level:

View attachment 147029

View attachment 147031

Ignoring the bit of directivity error around crossover, the rest of the response horizontally is good:

View attachment 147032

View attachment 147033

Vertically response is above average with good bit of leeway above and below tweeter axis before you get into trouble:
View attachment 147034


We see the directivity error at 3 kHz visualized better in our 3-D contour map:

View attachment 147035

Notice how the pattern has become quite directional and complex.

Finally, here are the timing graphs for the fans of such:

View attachment 147036

We see some clear resonances around 2 kHz center frequency.

View attachment 147037

Genelec 8330A Listening Tests
It doesn't take but a minute of listening to know that a) the tonality is right and b) matches other Genelec speakers. I attempted to EQ out the resonances around 2 kHz but it was hard to decide whether that was always an improvement or not. Taking that out makes the speaker sound a bit warmer but also more closed in. It is subtle though.

Dynamic range even in near field listening that I was using is not great. It is easy to get the red clipping light to come on during playback of anything with bass notes. Mind you, it is reasonably loud before that but it just isn't enough.

Conclusions
By most other speakers, the Genelec 8330A speakers have excellent measurements. But using a much higher standard, I feel that they are not as well matched and executed as the 8320A which I reviewed before. The larger woofer has resulted in less perfect crossover response. And there is not enough amplification here to do the speaker justice.

Still, if you don't exceed its playback limits, you have a wonderful sounding speaker here. Tonality is almost as good as it gets. It is not only correct but very enjoyable.

I am going to recommend the Genelec 8330A.

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/


Hi,

Here is my take on the EQ.


These EQ are anechoic EQ to get the speaker right before room integration. If you able to implement these EQs you must add EQ at LF for room integration, that usually not optional… see hints there: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...helf-speaker-review.11144/page-26#post-800725

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 5.6
With Sub: 7.9

Spinorama with no EQ:
  • 1-3k range not very smooth?
  • A directivity error at the XO point
  • Port seems OK
  • LF run out os steam so I added a HP.
Genelec 8330a No EQ Spinorama.png

Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height
Horizontally, up to 20deg
Genelec 8330a 2D surface Directivity Contour Only Data.png


Genelec 8330a LW Better data.png

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: 5.8
with sub: 8.0

Score EQ Score: 6.1
with sub: 8.3

Code:
Genelec 8330a APO EQ LW 96000Hz
August122021-121119

Preamp: -1.9 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 45.10,    0.00,    1.15
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 104.00,    -1.50,    1.90
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 552.00,    -1.50,    2.00
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1933.00,    -2.30,    2.87
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 4270.00,    -0.50,    0.82
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 14377.00,    0.80,    0.70

Genelec 8330a APO EQ Score 96000Hz
August122021-121006

Preamp: -0.4 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 43.59,    0.00,    0.97
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 88.88,    -1.69,    1.39
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 504.32,    -1.50,    1.45
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 1879.81,    -2.90,    2.73
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 5296.75,    -0.68,    0.62

Genelec 8330a EQ design.png


Spinorama EQ LW
Genelec 8330a LW EQ Spinorama.png


Spinorama EQ Score
Genelec 8330a Score EQ Spinorama.png


Zoom PIR-LW-ON
Genelec 8330a Zoom.png


Regression - Tonal
Genelec 8330a Regression - Tonal.png


Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Tiny improvements
Genelec 8330a Radar.png


The rest of the plots is attached.
 

Attachments

  • Genelec 8330a APO EQ LW 96000Hz.txt
    342 bytes · Views: 28
  • Genelec 8330a APO EQ Score 96000Hz.txt
    298 bytes · Views: 23
  • Genelec 8330a Vertical 3D Directivity data.png
    Genelec 8330a Vertical 3D Directivity data.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 26
  • Genelec 8330a Horizontal 3D Directivity data.png
    Genelec 8330a Horizontal 3D Directivity data.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 27
  • Genelec 8330a Normalized Directivity data.png
    Genelec 8330a Normalized Directivity data.png
    928.7 KB · Views: 40
  • Genelec 8330a Raw Directivity data.png
    Genelec 8330a Raw Directivity data.png
    1.2 MB · Views: 29
  • Genelec 8330a Reflexion data.png
    Genelec 8330a Reflexion data.png
    476.7 KB · Views: 30
  • Genelec 8330a LW data.png
    Genelec 8330a LW data.png
    423.9 KB · Views: 50
  • Genelec 8330a 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    Genelec 8330a 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    261.1 KB · Views: 25
  • Genelec 8330a 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    Genelec 8330a 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    471.8 KB · Views: 25
  • Genelec 8330a 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    Genelec 8330a 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    472 KB · Views: 26
Last edited:

soundwave76

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
618
Likes
947
Location
Finland
So weird that these measure worse than the 8030c. Thanks for the review. Was thinking of upgrading my 8030s to 8330s, so saved me some money.

Absolutelly upgrade. The 8330 are superior to the 8030 because of the GLM room correction. If you apply room correction with some other means, then that’s a different case. I upgraded my 8030 first to 8330 and the improvement was huge, thanks to room correction. Later I upgraded to 8331 and there was improvement yes, but not nearly as much as with the first upgrade.
 
Top Bottom