• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Genelec 8351B Review (Studio Monitor)

MBI

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2021
Messages
46
Likes
32

dfuller

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 26, 2020
Messages
3,339
Likes
5,063
End-to-end performance is always what really matters. When the distortion from the physical speaker drivers is orders of magnitude more than that of the DACs/amps, the latter really don't matter as much as some audiophiles might want to believe (because it feels good to think your tinkering and purchase of expensive components makes a difference).
Yep. As long as distortion is reasonably under control then it's not a big deal in electronics.
 

MBI

Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2021
Messages
46
Likes
32
Yes it should be quite easy to calculate. I really doubt you'd hear any difference even after may such loops, and to be honest this is probably true even for the worst performing of the 'ASR recommended' DACs, let alone the super high SINAD ones we buy for the simple reason that we can (and because we appreciate the engineering).

I have yet to see any blind test show that there is any audible difference between a 95db SINAD DAC and a 120db SINAD DAC.

End-to-end performance is always what really matters. When the distortion from the physical speaker drivers is orders of magnitude more than that of the DACs/amps, the latter really don't matter as much as some audiophiles might want to believe (because it feels good to think your tinkering and purchase of expensive components makes a difference).

Of course every bit counts to some degree, but ~-40db or so of distortion at medium/loud SPL is state-of-the-art from some of the best, lowest distortion speakers in the world, then the DAC/amp distortion barely make a dent in the overall end-to-end distortion picture. Perhaps we don't have an easy intuition that chaining a -40db distortion device through a -100db device yields a total distortion result of... still -40db (the difference is so small my calculator won't even show it, but it's probably something like -39.9999999999db)!

Many thanks for this response!
 

echopraxia

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
1,109
Likes
2,696
Location
California
Maybe I'm wrong looking at the measurements though. From what I've gathered, wider, smooth off axis response and bass extension boost a speakers preference score. Not SPL, newness, or being used in a studio (PMC and ATC come to mind.)
I don't think it's a settled conclusion that wider beam width is always preferred, though.

I am also someone who really enjoys (often prefers) the soundstage experience from wide beam speakers in the appropriate context. But as an owner of both wide (Salon2's) and medium (8351B's) beam speakers, I find that both styles have some very meaningful strengths over the other if you listen to a diverse variety of music. If you told me I had to choose just a single pair to keep, while this would be a very difficult decision with no definitive answer, I would probably choose the 8351B precisely because its beam width is medium and not extremely wide (or narrow). The beam width of the 8351B is a really excellent middle ground IMO, and makes it probably the most versatile of any speaker I've heard when used across a diverse range of genres and listeners.

The Salon2's particularly wide beam (at least below 10khz) is better for orchestras and 'real' instruments and voices where I want it to sound like the performance has been transported into my room, but the 8351B's medium beam width is better for rock, electronic, and other 'amplified' style music that you don't necessarily want surrounding you but rather coming from a focused/energetic 'front' stage feeling. On the other extreme end of the spectrum, I don't much like narrower beams (e.g. I had JBL SRX835Ps for a while indoors, and even the KEF R3 I think is too narrow for my taste) because they are too specialized, but they do sound amazing for certain kinds of music (e.g. EDM) that suits this style.

So if anything, my most unbiased impression I can give you would be that the Genelec 8351B's beam width is nearly perfect for the widest range of music styles/genres, and also tends to be the most likely to really impress when demoing to people (probably because most people tend not to listen to the niche of 'audiophile style music' for which the Salon2 really shines, like live recordings of orchestras and real instruments and voices).
 
Last edited:

stevenswall

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
1,366
Likes
1,075
Location
Orem, UT
...it seems weird to call a discontinued product the flagship. It seems to me that Genelec thinks the 8361 is superior.

Superior for SPL and narrower dispersion, midfield monitoring, etc. I could see, yes.

Guess it's the difference in how we think of flagships. What word do you think would be more clear? Maybe if I said their top model or most accurate model, and based on the power response that is looking like the 8351B or 8341 to me, though others who value SPL would likely see one of the 1xxx models as the "top model."

I need a word to describe the most accurate speaker with on and off axis response... If we define that as the flagship, another example would be when sometimes larger speakers are less balanced than their lower model counterparts. (Adam and JBL come to mind, particularly when Kali noted with JBL that the frequency response wasn't as similar between different sizes of the 3 series compared to their LP series. Could have been the Yamaha HS series and I'm not remembering correctly because they couldn't just come out and say it.)

I don't like defaulting to the higher numbered or newer model, because there are many examples of newer models being worse: car redesigns becoming unreliable, the LG CX that couldn't handle as much HDMI bandwidth as the C9, phones that would throttle with a newer Snapdragon CPU and be slower than the old ones, the abysmal new Butterfinger recipe. :)

Thankfully a couple of people have responded in this thread for the objective data as far as why the 8351b and other models from the 83x1 series are better.
 

Senior NEET Engineer

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 6, 2020
Messages
538
Likes
591
Location
San Diego
I find that the preference of beam width varies a lot per music genre and listener though, and it certainly seems that by no means is there a settled conclusion here that wider = better.

As someone with both wide (Salon2's) and medium (8351B's), I would have a very hard time choosing one of the two if you told me I could only keep one pair, but I probably would choose the 8351B precisely because its beam width is medium and not extremely wide (or narrow). The beam width of the 8351B is a really excellent middle ground IMO, and makes it probably more versatile across a vast range of genres and preferences of any speaker I've owned or heard.

The Salon2's ultra-wide beam (at least below 10khz) is better for orchestras and 'real' instruments and voices I want to sound like have been transported into my room, but the 8351B's medium beam width is better for rock, electronic, and other 'amplified' style music that you don't necessarily want surrounding you but rather coming from a focused/energetic 'front' stage feeling. On the other extreme end of the spectrum, I don't much like narrower beams (e.g. I had JBL SRX835Ps for a while indoors, and even the KEF R3 I think is too narrow for my taste) because they are too specialized, but they do sound amazing for certain kinds of music (e.g. EDM) that suits this style.

So if anything, my most unbiased impression I can give you would be that the Genelec 8351B's beam width is nearly perfect for the widest range of music styles/genres and people who have listened to both my 8351B's and Salon2's.

Have you measured decay time of room where Salon2 was evaluated? My main listening position is around 400-550ms from the Genelecs. I think I would prefer even narrower dispersion if I couldn't install acoustic treatments.
 

echopraxia

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
1,109
Likes
2,696
Location
California
Have you measured decay time of room where Salon2 was evaluated? My main listening position is around 400-550ms from the Genelecs. I think I would prefer even narrower dispersion if I couldn't install acoustic treatments.
They may be in some REW measurement files I made a while ago, but I've also compared them across 3 different rooms so far (soon to be 4, once cross country movers finish delivery) and what I've described subjectively is basically boiling down the differences between the two speakers that remains consistent across all these rooms I've compared them in. The main differences between rooms that I've observed is that (1) the Salon2's mids/treble sound more natural and less harsh echo in a really badly reflective untreated room (very reflective due to big glass windows the speakers are pointed towards), and (2) the Salon2's bass is more consistently good even in more difficult rooms and independent of where they're positioned, whereas like any bookshelf size speakers the bass response of the 8351B in a large room will depend quite a lot on which room modes its woofer lights up.

Once I set them up again in my current new location I can take some measurements of decay time of the 8351B and Salon2, if you'd find it useful.
 

kimmosto

Active Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2019
Messages
213
Likes
498
Amir doesn't care about time domain and, considering the number of speakers he has auditionned already, he is probably right.

Probably not - or he could just prefer soft sound or something that timing does not offer/improve. Combination (~mathematical product) of effortless dynamics and excellent timing could be almost painful e.g. with piano and percussion, but very poor timing could turn sound bland. Never too late to study new or at least serve community; believe in significance for someone else no matter own preferences and resources to sense or hear.
 

richard12511

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
4,335
Likes
6,700
Yes it should be quite easy to calculate. I really doubt you'd hear any difference even after may such loops, and to be honest this is probably true even for the worst performing of the 'ASR recommended' DACs, let alone the super high SINAD ones we buy for the simple reason that we can (and because we appreciate the engineering).

I have yet to see any blind test show that there is any audible difference between a 95db SINAD DAC and a 120db SINAD DAC.

End-to-end performance is always what really matters. When the distortion from the physical speaker drivers is orders of magnitude more than that of the DACs/amps, the latter really don't matter as much as some audiophiles might want to believe (because it feels good to think your tinkering and purchase of expensive components makes a difference).

Of course every bit counts to some degree, but if -40db or so of distortion at medium/loud SPL is state-of-the-art from some of the best, lowest distortion speakers in the world, then the DAC/amp distortion barely make a dent in the overall end-to-end distortion picture. Perhaps we don't have an easy intuition that chaining a -40db distortion device through a -100db device yields a total distortion result of... still -40db (the difference is so small my calculator won't even show it, but it's probably something like -39.9999999999db)!

I really do wonder what a more "practically" audible sinad would be for more normal listeners under normal conditions. By normal, I mean:

1. Not specifically trained to hear tiny amounts of distortions in sine waves
2. No access to instant switching(ie trying to compare it against your previous DAC that you just replaced).

I think Amir's 115dB threshold is more of an "absolute and under no circumstances" bar, but I wonder how much lower that more practical bar would be.
 

Sancus

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
2,923
Likes
7,616
Location
Canada
Yes - I think people overlook the influence of distortion and max SPL a lot. This to me is what separates a good speaker from a great one - assuming similar FR and directivity behavior, the distortion behavior is what separates the good from great. A speaker like a JBL 308 is good in terms of FR and directivity behavior (and to be honest, I think constant directivity is somewhat overrated at some level), but the distortion performance firmly places it in a low-tier.

Yes, I think it's clear that it's an important attribute, especially for people listening at distances longer than 1-2m. A big problem with distortion is that the standard measurements(THD, IMD) do not correlate to audible issues in a clear and understandable manner, so it makes discussing them extremely difficult and complicated. Geddes and others have proposed better metrics, but unfortunately none have been generally adopted.

I think we need a much better distortion measurement for it to be taken seriously as an objective factor. However, comprehensive SPL testing is also time consuming and painful so I can't blame Amir too much for keeping it simple. I think people just need to keep in mind that absence of data is not evidence of absence :p
 

Sprint

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 19, 2019
Messages
455
Likes
304
Choice of speaker does depend how you intend to use it, the 8351b works really well as a nearfield monitor, but for me once you sit more than two metres away you are looking at the sound rather than being immersed in the sound.
Home comparison is always best.
Keith

I am using 8340 in a multi channel set up. For 2ch, I am with you. But for multichannel music or movies, with 8330 as surrounds, to my ears these Genelec studio monitors are fully immersive even though I do not have Atmos.
 

Sprint

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 19, 2019
Messages
455
Likes
304
Just one to support my L/C/R (2x 8360a, 1x 8351b) down to 30Hz with the JTR doing the heavy lifting down to 10Hz.

@Spocko Thanks :) for sharing! I have a similar plan. Buy one GLM sub like 7360 or 7370 to support my 2 SVS 12" subs. Did you have any issues in integrating GLM with non-GLM subs especially time and phase alignments? How did you manage? Are you also using subs in 2ch music? If yes, where do you place them? Do you also use additional Genelec monitors for surrounds?
 

daftcombo

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
3,687
Likes
4,068
Combination (~mathematical product) of effortless dynamics and excellent timing could be almost painful e.g. with piano and percussion, but very poor timing could turn sound bland. Never too late to study new or at least serve community; believe in significance for someone else no matter own preferences and resources to sense or hear.
Yes, it could be interesting to dig deeper.

But are you saying that live piano is paintful to hear?
 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,494
Hmm, one thing I just realized. Since Genelec is in the business of selling powered speakers. Would it kill them if they included a proper suite of digital inputs for goodness sake? I don't believe they have digital bypass when going Analogue In (would this also kill them to have?).
 

Sancus

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
2,923
Likes
7,616
Location
Canada
I don't believe they have digital bypass when going Analogue In (would this also kill them to have?).

I doubt this is even possible since I'm fairly certain the crossover in the Ones is fully digital, and so is GLM of course. So even if this were doable, you'd be unable to use GLM which means it would be a weird-domestic-user-only feature eg not one they're going to spend any dev time on.

Thanks for the points about Toole and stereo. I appreciate you bringing that up, I didn't know. I've only seen bits of his and Sean Olive's research, and often stuff ends up behind an AES paywall.

You should really just read his book :)
 

mkawa

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Sep 17, 2019
Messages
788
Likes
695
Pro audio is aes or analog, but analog is generally king
 
Top Bottom