Genelec 8341A SAM™ Studio Monitor Review

[Pearljam5000]

I would definitely go for the 8351B
Has more SPL, the bigger midrange / tweeter unit etc

 

[Colonel Bogey]

Will probably end up with a Genelec version of The Swarm - 3 7350a subs and one 7360a sub - a bit pricier, probably less bass extension and poorer value for money than The Swarm but much easier to integrate.

At home? How do you solve the aesthetics? I have hidden my 7360a away in a somewhat suboptimal position, but I cant imagine how I could add three 7350's.

 

[infinitesymphony]

I know Genelec themselves only differentiate speakers in the Ones range based on listening distance bass extension, but can we say anything about other differences based on the spins on the website? Has anyone computed preference ratings based on those?
My naive impression looking at the charts in this is that the 8351B has the smoothest response of all while the 8331A seems to have a big peak at 3.5kHz for example. The 8361 seems a bit all over the place in comparison to the 8351.

For now I'm only looking for a nearfield speaker but based on that I'm leaning towards the 8341 over the 8331. I might even be persuaded to go for the 8351 if someone more knowledgeable can confirm my impressions regarding the measurements.

Not based on spins, but here are some generational differences described by Ilkka Rissanen at the Genelec forums:

"The coaxial driver in the 8351A was introduced already in 2009 when the 8260A was published. That means it had its 10 year anniversary this year. It is the 1st generation coaxial driver we have made. Since that, we have learned a lot when it comes to designing a high performance coaxial driver, and in 2017 we launched the 2nd generation coaxial in the 8331A and 8341A monitors. Now, in the 8351B and 8361A we are launching the 3rd generation coaxial driver which is a completely new design compared to the original coaxial. Please notice this is not the same as the physically smaller coaxial driver used in 8331A and 8341A monitors.

-neodymium magnet vs. ferrite which reduces the mass of the driver
-1 inch tweeter vs. 3/4" which leads to higher SPL capability but also larger bandwidth (up to 43 kHz)
-larger voice coil to provide more power handling as well as help to drive the cone from an optimum position
-lower woofer to mid crossover (470 Hz to 320 Hz)
-higher mid to tweeter crossover (2600 Hz to 2800 Hz)
-better overall performance, lower distortion
-better manufacturability and tighter tolerances"

---

Additionally, from another thread about changes from 1st to 2nd generations:

"...material of oval woofers was changed on the second generation (from Kevlar to more traditional paper variant?) and the cone of the mids was reversed (hard surface outwards, foamy stuff inwards)...

Essentially all components have got a redesign between these generations. All amplifiers are Class-D on the second generation, DSP processing capacity has increased, power supply has changed to a universal switching supply (just one of details enabling such a compact design) and the speaker elements have been redesigned, including a new shared magnetic core between mids and tweeter element."

---

It follows that the 3rd generation (8351B and 8361A) would receive incremental improvements from that point.

 

[Senior NEET Engineer]

I know Genelec themselves only differentiate speakers in the Ones range based on listening distance bass extension, but can we say anything about other differences based on the spins on the website? Has anyone computed preference ratings based on those?
My naive impression looking at the charts in this is that the 8351B has the smoothest response of all while the 8331A seems to have a big peak at 3.5kHz for example. The 8361 seems a bit all over the place in comparison to the 8351.

For now I'm only looking for a nearfield speaker but based on that I'm leaning towards the 8341 over the 8331. I might even be persuaded to go for the 8351 if someone more knowledgeable can confirm my impressions regarding the measurements.

The choice is mainly room size and listening distance. You can ask for help on their community forums.

 

[killdozzer]

This is indeed a fascinating monitor judging by this test. It is not cheap. Not anywhere near. Still, a question remains how good would it be in the role of main L/R in a mid-sized room. You'd probably need to buy a sub and then the price would skew the entire achievement, since in that case you could go for example KEF Ref.1 and could do in a 18x12feet room without a sub or for some of you, it could be a pair of some Revels.

I bet the next in line is some Revel, Paradigm, RBH or something from that line... How much behind is the BMR (be it Philharmonic or Salk)?

 

[infinitesymphony]

This is indeed a fascinating monitor judging by this test. It is not cheap. Not anywhere near. Still, a question remains how good would it be in the role of main L/R in a mid-sized room. You'd probably need to buy a sub and then the price would skew the entire achievement, since in that case you could go for example KEF Ref.1 and could do in a 18x12feet room without a sub or for some of you, it could be a pair of some Revels.

Just depends on your SPL requirements, musical tastes, and room characteristics. As Amir notes in the review, his impression is that the 8341A was not all that loud, probably because it holds together and performs well up until a certain point and then falls apart quickly past that point. Consider these near- to mid-fields, and if you want to use them for larger purposes you may need to make concessions or add a sub to reduce the workload as you say. Otherwise, floorstanders may be a better fit for the money (Revel F35, F208, etc.) even if you have to sacrifice some performance in terms of directivity, out of the box frequency response, and complications from multi-driver and multi-port design vs. an integrated 3-way coaxial.

 

[Senior NEET Engineer]

This is indeed a fascinating monitor judging by this test. It is not cheap. Not anywhere near. Still, a question remains how good would it be in the role of main L/R in a mid-sized room. You'd probably need to buy a sub and then the price would skew the entire achievement, since in that case you could go for example KEF Ref.1 and could do in a 18x12feet room without a sub or for some of you, it could be a pair of some Revels.

I bet the next in line is some Revel, Paradigm, RBH or something from that line... How much behind is the BMR (be it Philharmonic or Salk)?

They have a guide on their website: https://www.genelec.com/correct-monitors

For 3000 cu ft room and 10 ft distance, they estimate around 104 short term 95 long term dB SPL per speaker.

Peak output with music will be similar to KEF Reference 1 if you normalize frequency response. Almost 10 dB difference at 50hz...

 

[Pearljam5000]

Pretty funny

 

[killdozzer]

They have a guide on their website: https://www.genelec.com/correct-monitors

For 3000 cu ft room and 10 ft distance, they estimate around 104 short term 95 long term dB SPL per speaker.

Peak output with music will be similar to KEF Reference 1 if you normalize frequency response. Almost 10 dB difference at 50hz...

Thank you for the info. In that case I don't think I'd need anything louder. First they get some extra when you have two in room (amir tested one). Second, I keep measuring my listening sessions, to be honest, I don't go beyond average 90 (and rarely even that). I mostly enjoy music between 85-90. I avoid most noise that is louder that that (but the doc told me my ears are like that of a teenager; probably has to do with these listening habits, plus I've never worked in a loud environment).

They would be more than enough.

 

[Senior NEET Engineer]

Thank you for the info. In that case I don't think I'd need anything louder. First they get some extra when you have two in room (amir tested one). Second, I keep measuring my listening sessions, to be honest, I don't go beyond average 90 (and rarely even that). I mostly enjoy music between 85-90. I avoid most noise that is louder that that (but the doc told me my ears are like that of a teenager; probably has to do with these listening habits, plus I've never worked in a loud environment).

They would be more than enough.

8351B will be great choice. I would have went with that one if it was released at the time.

 

[samysound]

This is indeed a fascinating monitor judging by this test. It is not cheap. Not anywhere near. Still, a question remains how good would it be in the role of main L/R in a mid-sized room. You'd probably need to buy a sub and then the price would skew the entire achievement, since in that case you could go for example KEF Ref.1 and could do in a 18x12feet room without a sub or for some of you, it could be a pair of some Revels.

I bet the next in line is some Revel, Paradigm, RBH or something from that line... How much behind is the BMR (be it Philharmonic or Salk)?

I have a pair of the 8341 setup in a medium room and high passed with a pair of smallish subs. Plenty of clean loudness for me.

They have a guide on their website: https://www.genelec.com/correct-monitors

For 3000 cu ft room and 10 ft distance, they estimate around 104 short term 95 long term dB SPL per speaker.

Peak output with music will be similar to KEF Reference 1 if you normalize frequency response. Almost 10 dB difference at 50hz...

Interesting, the the long term rating for the 8341a is actually 1 db higher than the 8351b while the short term is a couple db lower for the 8341 vs 8351b

 

[q3cpma]

Interesting, the the long term rating for the 8341a is actually 1 db higher than the 8351b while the short term is a couple db lower for the 8341 vs 8351b

Probably because the 8351B goes lower.

 

[samysound]

Probably because the 8351B goes lower.

makes sense

 

[Pearljam5000]

Are you sure?

 

[Sancus]

The table values definitely contradict the specs, but dunno why. You'd have to ask Genelec.

 

[Pearljam5000]

I think there's a confusion between 8351A and 8351B

 

[samysound]

I think there's a confusion between 8351A and 8351B

The table does list 8351B. However, maybe an oversight where Genelec did not update the 8351A to 8351B values

 

[Senior NEET Engineer]

The table values definitely contradict the specs, but dunno why. You'd have to ask Genelec.

It doesn't contradict. The table includes SPL gain from reflections. See "Listening Distances and SPL".

 

[Sancus]

It doesn't contradict. The table includes SPL gain from reflections. See "Listening Distances and SPL".

How would reflections increase 8341A's long term SPL output more than 8351B's? 8341A is 101dB in spec(in half-space, 100-3khz), 8351B is 103dB. Yet at 1m in the chart, they are equal at 102dB.

 

[Senior NEET Engineer]

How would reflections increase 8341A's long term SPL output more than 8351B's? 8341A is 101dB in spec(in half-space, 100-3khz), 8351B is 103dB. Yet at 1m in the chart, they are equal at 102dB.

Maybe the simulation uses different measurements.