Genelec 8341A SAM™ Studio Monitor Review

[denzel200219]

Does anyone know how "The Ones" compare to Genelec Main monitors? Are the ones superior acoustically?

 

[srrxr71]

Does anyone know how "The Ones" compare to Genelec Main monitors? Are the ones superior acoustically?

I’ve never compared. However consider that the latest great main monitor is a “Ones”

 

[YSC]

Does anyone know how "The Ones" compare to Genelec Main monitors? Are the ones superior acoustically?

hardly will there be a side by side comparison, but IMO within it's distortion limits the ones are the technically better speakers, the main monitors are for much better dynamic ranges and SPL capability

 

[srrxr71]

hardly will there be a side by side comparison, but IMO within it's distortion limits the ones are the technically better speakers, the main monitors are for much better dynamic ranges and SPL capability

There are. In fact recently I read an article where the studio had soffited Genelec Mains but brought in 8361/w371 to try out. I think the idea was to use both since the Mains were already installed.

I’d imagine they each have strengths and weaknesses and ther uses. If were not alone in the room probably the Mains are better.

 

[HairyEars]

Does anyone know how "The Ones" compare to Genelec Main monitors? Are the ones superior acoustically?

You’re asking for a subjective opinion, and so you shall receive.

I own pairs of 8341 & 8331, alongside a pair of Genelec mains. The Ones are superb nearfield monitors that should meet the most strenuous demands of sound professionals. However, the sound isn’t particularly euphonic. The metal coax driver leaves an “aftertaste,” and the bass drivers plays through slits that adds a touch of reverb. Personally, I tried hard to love them for one long year and eventually gave up.

The Genelec mains are less precise than the 83x1, although quite linear on their own right. Still, the sound signature is fantastic. I always draw an immense pleasure from listening to them. The bass is punchy, the mids pristine, and the high flawless (although requiring a gentle downward slope, lest they’re too dominating). They just should natural and clean. For me, the Genelec mains offer the most enjoyable experience possible. (Bear in mind, the only mains I compare them too were the ATC150 pro and some big Blackfoot). I suppose there’s a good reason why Genelec has barley changed their acoustic-mechanics in the last 30 years or so. Once you reach perfection, let it be.

I find it interesting that this opinion is shared by some professionals; from an acoustician who worked for me, to a pro gear shop owner. This is not an appeal to authority, mind you. You have to audition the products and make up your own mind.

Lastly, the mains require a well-treated room. A typical living room will not allow them to shine.

Oh, one more: if you can flush mount the mains, expect a permanent grin on your face.

 

[srrxr71]

Are the mains GLM compatible? I suppose at that level one would use an outboard correction system anyway. Seems like they need proper room design more than the Ones. I guess that’s the trade off.

Also perhaps the 8381 is the best of both worlds?

I have a pair of 8341 and went to 8361. The 8361 has some sort of padding on the slits. I wonder if that makes any difference. Probably it still reverbs a bit but might be less than the 8341. Honestly I didn’t notice as I didn’t do a proper A-B comparison.

 

[HairyEars]

Are the mains GLM compatible? I suppose at that level one would use an outboard correction system anyway. Seems like they need proper room design more than the Ones. I guess that’s the trade off.

Also perhaps the 8381 is the best of both worlds?

I have a pair of 8341 and went to 8361. The 8361 has some sort of padding on the slits. I wonder if that makes any difference. Probably it still reverbs a bit but might be less than the 8341. Honestly I didn’t notice as I didn’t do a proper A-B comparison.

Yes, the mains are all SAM (GLM compatible).

I've never felt any need to resort to any other signal correction systems. As you alluded to, if the room is well-treated, the corrections are minimal anyway, and mostly confined to the low end.

In general, nearfield monitors work better in an untreated room since the close proximity to the listener negates some of the adverse room influences.

I've never auditioned the 8381, but it's quite a consensus among pros that the best bass comes from a flush-mounted system. Of course, cardiod is an improvement over omni in a free-standing system. I was told by a person who had auditioned the 8381 that it doesn't sound like the "One," which for me is a promising prognosis.

 

[srrxr71]

Yes, the mains are all SAM (GLM compatible).

I've never felt any need to resort to any other signal correction systems. As you alluded to, if the room is well-treated, the corrections are minimal anyway, and mostly confined to the low end.

In general, nearfield monitors work better in an untreated room since the close proximity to the listener negates some of the adverse room influences.

I've never auditioned the 8381, but it's quite a consensus among pros that the best bass comes from a flush-mounted system. Of course, cardiod is an improvement over omni in a free-standing system. I was told by a person who had auditioned the 8381 that it doesn't sound like the "One," which for me is a promising prognosis.

Yes I think the entire premise of the Ones is to “democratize” audio production. I’m sure some sacrifices were made towards that goal.

For people who cannot flush mount or cannot treat their room it’s the best that is possible. I think the Trinnov system is the other piece of that goal and together they are making it possible to do production level work at a fraction of the cost of building out a proper studio.

As an aside a friend of mine is doing a modest home theater and he flush mounted his subs in custom built wooden structure. Now he complains of some rattle and asked if he could pad the whole area around the sub with fiberglass. So really to get it right with regard to all those factors one would have to hire an acoustician.

The Ones obviate that need.

I haven’t heard a proper soffit mounted main monitor yet and i’m lucky to have made the acquintance of a local studio professional so I will get the chance to hear what that sounds like.

For now I find the back steering mode of the w371 to be absolutely incredible. Almost as good as listening to an outdoor sub setup. With the caveat that I have done some not so professionally designed extensive room treatment.

Edit: I suppose it’s the Pareto principle at play. 20% of the cost gets you at least 80% there. If you want that last 20% you will pay 5x.

 

[HairyEars]

Yes I think the entire premise of the Ones is to “democratize” audio production. I’m sure some sacrifices were made towards that goal.

For people who cannot flush mount or cannot treat their room it’s the best that is possible. I think the Trinnov system is the other piece of that goal and together they are making it possible to do production level work at a fraction of the cost of building out a proper studio.

As an aside a friend of mine is doing a modest home theater and he flush mounted his subs in custom built wooden structure. Now he complains of some rattle and asked if he could pad the whole area around the sub with fiberglass. So really to get it right with regard to all those factors one would have to hire an acoustician.

The Ones obviate that need.

I haven’t heard a proper soffit mounted main monitor yet and i’m lucky to have made the acquintance of a local studio professional so I will get the chance to hear what that sounds like.

For now I find the back steering mode of the w371 to be absolutely incredible. Almost as good as listening to an outdoor sub setup. With the caveat that I have done some not so professionally designed extensive room treatment.

Edit: I suppose it’s the Pareto principle at play. 20% of the cost gets you at least 80% there. If you want that last 20% you will pay 5x.

If I may say so, wood is the worse material for flush-mounting. Cement is the best; bricks are very good; dry wall panels + heavy insulation can also serve. Wood is guaranteed to suffer from resonance.

 

[srrxr71]

If I may say so, wood is the worse material for flush-mounting. Cement is the best; bricks are very good; dry wall panels + heavy insulation can also serve. Wood is guaranteed to suffer from resonance.

That’s good to know. In case one day I want to do it.

I guess he was guided more by the appearance of the project than the performance.

 

[Pearljam5000]

You can also flush mount the Ones

 

[Sokel]

Best mid-bass I have heard in my life was from flush mounted ATCs.
And I'm 100% convinced that it was not only about the speaker but the method cause I have heard big ATCs before and they weren't near that sound.

 

[Wiredforsound]

Wonder if Amirm would change his thought process going in, testing this speaker today, compared to back then.

With what he now may know about these series and type of speakers from Genelec, considering his recent test of the Genelec 8361a's.

 

[dj94030]

Wonder if Amirm would change his thought process going in, testing this speaker today, compared to back then.

With what he now may know about these series and type of speakers from Genelec, considering his recent test of the Genelec 8361a's.

What is wrong with current test and what's so good about recent test?

 

[Wiredforsound]

What is wrong with current test and what's so good about recent test?

Nothing wrong.
It is kind of a bias of unfamiliarity.
Something new.
As a reference, you buy a new album, whether familiar artist or unfamiliar artist.
Your first impression is not good or indifference, maybe one track stands out, that's why you bought the album.
Then after time it becomes your favourite album, some of the deep cuts now stand out as your favourites, possibly of all time, and that first song you liked becomes something less.
That is a long winded way of thinking.
Hope it makes sense.

These later looks at the series in the Genelec line have revealed something new possibly?

This also shows how important proper consistency in testing and testing are.
The new bias reveals something correct, which becomes a surprise.

 

[Esprit]

Wonder if Amirm would change his thought process going in, testing this speaker today, compared to back then.

Why?

 

[Tovarich007]

@Wiredforsound : Indeed, why should Amir change his process ? He has tested three of the four models among The Ones series -the 8341, 8351 B and 8361- using basically the same tests, giving very good results for these three models. That's definitely consistency. Can you precise what you ask for more ?

 

[Tovarich007]

You can also flush mount the OnesView attachment 370910View attachment 370911

That's not real flush mounting.
The speakers being a little round shaped, they protube slightly from the wall surface, which can be a source of light diffractions. And I guess their outsde cabinet has been designed purposely by the studio architects, not by Genelec. It's seriously built and it certainly works well, but the term flushmouting isn't appropriate IMO.

 

[srrxr71]

It seems like a lot of overthinking going on. Better to just go audition a pair.

 

[srrxr71]

That's not real flush mounting.
The speakers being a little round shaped, they protube slightly from the wall surface, which can be a source of light diffractions. And I guess their outsde cabinet has been designed purposely by the studio architects, not by Genelec. It's seriously built and it certainly works well, but the term flushmouting isn't appropriate IMO.

That cabinet is designed by Genelec for this purpose. I bet they considered the diffraction situation.