Genelec 8361A Measurements and Multitone comparison with other speakers.

[Tangband]

Thanks for the measurements ! The Genelec 8361 seems to be one of the worlds best measuring loudspeaker for hifi-use.

 

[Sokel]

I'm impressed by the compression measurement.Every time I see it.

Thanks Nuyes!

 

[sweetchaos]

Thanks for more data and measurements @Nuyes

I have a few questions:

1. Is the previous "Compression of Transfer Function H(f)" the same as your current "Compression test" graph?

Spoiler

2. Previous test showed from frequency from 50hz to 20khz, while current test shows only 100hz to 20khz.
It would be nice to see lower value, since we can see when to use a subwoofer or not.
Erin's Audio Corner provides compression tests down to 20hz, for example.


3. Are these graphs the same as Erin's Audio Corner's "Reponse Linearity" graphs (see below)?

Spoiler

4. I still have trouble finding all of your posts (here on ASR).
For example, you talk about Genelec and Kef speakers inside this thread alone.
Consider creating a spreadsheet, or main thread (like the countless ones I created) in order to aggregate/combine all of your reviews into one place.
It will make finding your reviews much easier.
Just a thought.

Love your work.

 

[Nuyes]

Thanks for more data and measurements @Nuyes

I have a few questions:

1. Is the previous "Compression of Transfer Function H(f)" the same as your current "Compression test" graph?

Spoiler

2. Previous test showed from frequency from 50hz to 20khz, while current test shows only 100hz to 20khz.
It would be nice to see lower value, since we can see when to use a subwoofer or not.
Erin's Audio Corner provides compression tests down to 20hz, for example.


3. Are these graphs the same as Erin's Audio Corner's "Reponse Linearity" graphs (see below)?

Spoiler

4. I still have trouble finding all of your posts (here on ASR).
For example, you talk about Genelec and Kef speakers inside this thread alone.
Consider creating a spreadsheet, or main thread (like the countless ones I created) in order to aggregate/combine all of your reviews into one place.
It will make finding your reviews much easier.
Just a thought.

Love your work.

1.They are the same.
I sometimes forget to modify the title...

2.Because I measure in a room, the influence of the room is dominant below about 100Hz in the data I measure.
So to avoid this as much as possible, I limited the frequency range.


3.
My compression measurement data is similar to Erin's Response linearity data.

But there is a slight difference.

Erin seems to be using Sine sweep, but I use Multitone.

And Erin displays the compression in a positive (+) direction through separate postprocessing, but I use Klippel's module as it is, so it displays the compression in a negative (-) direction.

Therefore, Erin and my data are in opposite directions.


4.
Your idea of how to manage measurement data seems very good.
In particular, it would be good to create a separate thread and manage it separately.
I'll think about this a lot.

Thank you for enjoying my review.

 

[RobL]

If they share the same mid/tweeter driver and amp why does 8351 show higher compression?

 

[RobL]

If they share the same mid/tweeter driver and amp why does 8351 show higher compression?

Ok no takers…my guesses:
1) Genelec modified the drivers on the 8361
2) Genelec lessened the protection on the drivers on the 8361
3) The waveguide/vestigial horn is more efficient on the 8361

 

[samysound]

Ok no takers…my guesses:
1) Genelec modified the drivers on the 8361
2) Genelec lessened the protection on the drivers on the 8361
3) The waveguide/vestigial horn is more efficient on the 8361

Did the OP measure both the 8351 and 8361 in the same setup and room? If not, perhaps that could account for the differences? perhaps this was stated somewhere in thread and I missed it

 

[AudioJester]

Do they have different amps/electronics? Would this cause a difference?

 

[Pearljam5000]

Ok no takers…my guesses:
1) Genelec modified the drivers on the 8361
2) Genelec lessened the protection on the drivers on the 8361
3) The waveguide/vestigial horn is more efficient on the 8361

Is there a chance that the size of the cabinet has any effect?

 

[RobL]

Did the OP measure both the 8351 and 8361 in the same setup and room? If not, perhaps that could account for the differences? perhaps this was stated somewhere in thread and I missed it

As far as I understand the tests are comparable.

Is there a chance that the size of the cabinet has any effect?

The larger baffle would impact directivity (which it does) but I don’t think it would have any effect on compression.

Ok no takers…my guesses:
1) Genelec modified the drivers on the 8361
2) Genelec lessened the protection on the drivers on the 8361
3) The waveguide/vestigial horn is more efficient on the 8361

Ok I hope it’s not #2 as that would be rather low tech for Genelec.

 

[Pearljam5000]

As far as I understand the tests are comparable.

The larger baffle would impact directivity (which it does) but I don’t think it would have any effect on compression.

Ok I hope it’s not #2 as that would be rather low tech for Genelec.

Maybe possible to ask Genelec via email

 

[Sancus]

If they share the same mid/tweeter driver and amp why does 8351 show higher compression?

Not clear to me that there is a significant difference? We are talking about 1/10ths of a dB. There does seem to be something a tiny bit weird going on with the 8351B above 10khz but it is still so tiny it's hard to conclude it means anything. E: The comb-filtering-like appearance on the graph makes me think it's probably tiny reflections off the mic or something.

Both speakers have shockingly impressive near perfect results even compared to other expensive actives like the Buchardt A700 or the Mesanovic that Erin reviewed recently.

This is the freakin kii3 after all

 

[Pearljam5000]

Not clear to me that there is a significant difference? We are talking about 1/10ths of a dB. There does seem to be something a tiny bit weird going on with the 8351B above 10khz but it is still so tiny it's hard to conclude it means anything.

Both speakers have shockingly impressive near perfect results even compared to other expensive actives like the Buchardt A700 or the Mesanovic that Erin reviewed recently.

This is the freakin kii3 after all

8361 or KH420
Which in your opinion is better?

 

[stevenswall]

8361 or KH420
Which in your opinion is better?

I'm curious about this too if there is something in addition to SPL and bass extension that makes the 420 better.

 

[Descartes]

It's part2 now.
Multitone test comparison


The speakers used in this comparison are the products I measured before.

We selected and compared some products that have good multi-tone distortion performance.
Among them are personal DIY works from other Korean.



Genelec 8361A vs 8351B

View attachment 252685








BeAR159
This product is custom-made by Jinsung Ko in Korea.
(Currently sold out.)
View attachment 252686







KEF Reference 1 Meta
View attachment 252687







KEF R11
View attachment 252688









Panda MK1 by Jinsung Ko.
This work is a DIY.
(He also made the BeAR159.)
View attachment 252689








KEF R3
View attachment 252690







Arendal 1961 Tower
View attachment 252691







Arendal 1961 Monitor
View attachment 252692









Arendal 1723 Monitor S THX
View attachment 252693







Kali Audio IN-8
View attachment 252694









The following is a comparison at 96 dB SPL@1m.
This time, the tone used for the measurement is not a flat curve, but a music curve.




The fundermental level of this measurement data is -40dB.
So consider the +40 dB offset from data and enjoy it comfortably.





Genelec 8351B

View attachment 252695










BeAR159
View attachment 252696









KEF Reference 1 Meta
View attachment 252697







KEF R11
View attachment 252698







Panda MK1 by Jinsung Ko
View attachment 252699








KEF R3
View attachment 252700







Arendal 1961 Tower
View attachment 252701






Arendal 1961 Monitor
View attachment 252702






Arendal 1723 Monitor S THX
View attachment 252703







Genelec 8331A
View attachment 252704






Kali Audio IN-8
View attachment 252705










Finally, ported/sealed comparison data for speakers that officially provide port cap.





KEF R3
View attachment 252706







KEF R11
View attachment 252707






Arendal 1961 Tower
View attachment 252708







I hope my poor English has not caused you any inconvenience.
Enjoy these data and have fun discussing them!

Interpretation please I don’t understand all the graphs, please explain if you don’t mind!

 

[Ciobi69]

Interpretation please I don’t understand all the graphs, please explain if you don’t mind!

Good speaker

 

[Sam Ash]

Hi Nuyes, how close is the IN-8v2 to the 8361A? I remember reading somewhere that the IN-8v2 incorporates a limiter which affects the lows. However, if a pair of IN-8v2 was used in conjunction with the WS-12 then that would resolve any potential of clipping at higher levels. Please let me have your views.

 

[Descartes]

View attachment 252684



Hi, I measured a pair of Genelec 8361A.
And I have attached multitone distortion comparison data with other loudspeakers, so I hope enjoy it.




Frequency response

View attachment 252644
This is 3-way loudspeaker.

I'm using near-field measurement(LF) and window gating(5ms, 1m distance) to get a frequency response,
so I can't measure perfectly(of this design).

Therefore, I hope you enjoy this data(Frequency response) only for fun.




Next,

Directivity

Likewise, they have a 5ms window.



View attachment 252645View attachment 252646View attachment 252647View attachment 252648View attachment 252649View attachment 252650






Beamwidth

View attachment 252651View attachment 252652















Polar plot
View attachment 252653View attachment 252654


















THD

Measured at 85/95dB SPL@1m.


View attachment 252655View attachment 252656View attachment 252657View attachment 252658

Very clean!





Next is THD comparison. (Sample A and B)

The owner of these loudspeakers told me, "The 3rd HD is slightly different."
So, I measured them.




View attachment 252659View attachment 252660View attachment 252661View attachment 252662View attachment 252663

It's interesting.
Sample B is higher at 85 dB SPL, but mitigates back to the same level at 95 dB SPL.

But I know this is a tricky nitpicking.
They're still close to perfection.




Next,
Multitone test

85dB SPL@1m


View attachment 252664View attachment 252665View attachment 252666


The data limited to 80Hz or higher, and the deviation between samples are all beautiful.





Multitone test(Increase level)

76dB SPL@1m ~ 96dB SPL@1m


View attachment 252667View attachment 252668

Most impressively, the measurement data of 76 dB SPL was not measured properly because it was low enough to be buried in the background noise of the measurement environment.

This speaker is insanely clean.
And furthermore, even when we increased the level from 86dB SPL to 96dB SPL, MD didn't grow any more.





Compression test

View attachment 252669


Wow.
I'm really lost for words.
(This is not because I am not good at English.
I have a Google translator, LOL)






Next,
Frequency response deviation between the 2 samples.
View attachment 252670View attachment 252671

Very little deviation.







I hope you enjoy these data.







Next, part2.

Could you please do the same for the 8351B!

 

[Descartes]

I thought the MD difference on this data was too big, and there was a big question about this.

Meanwhile, someone sent me a pair of R3.



View attachment 253939



Before look at the measured data, I have something to explain.

This is entirely my mistake,
I had already measured R3 once in April 2022 (existing data), and at that time I had not properly organized the project files of Klippel software for measurement.

Therefore, there was a mistake in the SPL setting for this re-measurement, and this measurement was conducted at 82 dB SPL@1m, about 3 dB lower than usual.

For this reason, I inform you in advance that this measurement is impossible to compare fully with the old data.


However, I measured a pair in the same condition.
The deviation data between the two samples is significant.




View attachment 253941
Data from sample A.
In addition to the 82dB SPL@1m test, we have enclosed data that limits the test signal below 80 Hz.






Now it's the comparison data.
Ported mode and both sealed mode(sponge & blanket) were measured.

The reason I did this was because I had to leave open the possibility that the high MD of the previous measurement was due to the leakage of a official sponge.



View attachment 253942

It's very clean!




View attachment 253943
The sample B is also clean.



Certainly, Sponge doesn't seem to be at fault.








This is a comparison between two samples.

View attachment 253944


No significant difference was found.












And this is a measurement at 93 dB SPL.
(Genelec 8361A : 96dB SPL@1m)


View attachment 253945





And let's compare it to the old data that I measured in April 2022.

View attachment 253946




This is the conclusion so far.

Of the three R3s measured, MD increase by closed mode was found in only one sample.

Therefore, this seems to be a problem with one sample itself, which was previously measured.





And while I was measuring this pair, I also measured the frequency response deviation between the two samples.







View attachment 253947



The deviation around 1kHz may be a sample problem, but I think it's a little different.

The owner of the loudspeaker saw the 'Shadow Flare Position Impact on Frequency Response' issue introduced in Erin's Audio Corner (EAC), and then repaired it himself.
(Just press it.)

But he is also human, so it is difficult to push the shadowflare of the two samples equally, and I think this is contributing to the response deviation around 1kHz.

And apart from this, a deviation from the tweeter was found.



This pair of samples has a neighboring serial number.

View attachment 253954





I think this measurement is good to solve the question about MD(Sealed mode) of KEF R3.

Is thee we new R3 Meta

 

[tifune]

It's part2 now.
Multitone test comparison


The speakers used in this comparison are the products I measured before.

We selected and compared some products that have good multi-tone distortion performance.
Among them are personal DIY works from other Korean.



Genelec 8361A vs 8351B

View attachment 252685








BeAR159
This product is custom-made by Jinsung Ko in Korea.
(Currently sold out.)
View attachment 252686







KEF Reference 1 Meta
View attachment 252687







KEF R11
View attachment 252688









Panda MK1 by Jinsung Ko.
This work is a DIY.
(He also made the BeAR159.)
View attachment 252689








KEF R3
View attachment 252690







Arendal 1961 Tower
View attachment 252691







Arendal 1961 Monitor
View attachment 252692









Arendal 1723 Monitor S THX
View attachment 252693







Kali Audio IN-8
View attachment 252694









The following is a comparison at 96 dB SPL@1m.
This time, the tone used for the measurement is not a flat curve, but a music curve.




The fundermental level of this measurement data is -40dB.
So consider the +40 dB offset from data and enjoy it comfortably.





Genelec 8351B

View attachment 252695










BeAR159
View attachment 252696









KEF Reference 1 Meta
View attachment 252697







KEF R11
View attachment 252698







Panda MK1 by Jinsung Ko
View attachment 252699








KEF R3
View attachment 252700







Arendal 1961 Tower
View attachment 252701






Arendal 1961 Monitor
View attachment 252702






Arendal 1723 Monitor S THX
View attachment 252703







Genelec 8331A
View attachment 252704






Kali Audio IN-8
View attachment 252705










Finally, ported/sealed comparison data for speakers that officially provide port cap.





KEF R3
View attachment 252706







KEF R11
View attachment 252707






Arendal 1961 Tower
View attachment 252708







I hope my poor English has not caused you any inconvenience.
Enjoy these data and have fun discussing them!

Any chance.you have compression data for the R11? Anything else you have would be appreciated. I haven't seen any independent tests on it.