• 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 8361A Review (Powered Monitor)

Rate this speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 6 0.9%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 4 0.6%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 30 4.3%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 652 94.2%

  • Total voters
    692

BrokenEnglishGuy

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
2,057
Likes
1,220
Yeah but if i think correctly, put a accelerometer in the cabinet doesn't tell you much about what are you going to hear but the behavior between the accelerometer with the surface, wood by itself translate more the sound to the object that touch. This is not even much of a real test.
By other hand, doing an alum enclousure without any more solution ain't going to kill the mid and highs frequency stuff, this is clearly translate into reality-measurements at the '' cumulative spectral-decay plot on HF axis '', this is pretty much what are you going to hear and more of a reality test.

The concept clearly shows a much better measurements there <comulative spectral decay HF axis>, and if you take a look at the solution made by Q acoustics it's just better, and this translate exactly at the measurements in the cumulative spectral decay ''. My take is the cumulative is more of a real test rather than a raw measurement.
For example, the amir benchmark salon n°2:
View attachment 370014
genelec:
index.php


Is just a mess vs the Genelec, and i don't think in any day at the week the genelec 8030 is better cabinet in real listening vs the salon n2.
And these are the cumulative from Salon n°2
708Revfig10.jpg

But this looks kind of similar, which again is more connected to the reality.
And this Genelec 8030.
722GenG3fig6.jpg


---
That's my take. Sorry but I'd say the cumulative spectrial decay worth a lot more than the other one, i'd say it's only usefull for find huge resonances in the enclouse and see if is going to be problematic in the real world, but not for test how clean the whole cabinet is, or more specific, are not going to tell you how clean the mids and highs are going to sound in real listening.
i haven't noticed but you pointed the incorrect measurements from the concept 300.
index.php

The concept 300 come with it's stand, and this is the measurements mounted as you are going to listen the speaker, it's 5.4dB as the reviwer noted
120Q300fig04.jpg

This mode was the only one present on any of the panels; it is sufficiently high in frequency and Q (Quality Factor) that even without the attenuation provided by the speaker's sprung base, it probably wouldn't have any audible effects.
While the accelerometer acc is fine in both cases, if the measurement is interpreted correctly, it's very good anyway with that high Q peak, if you don't believe lets take a look a highly recommended tower here Revel F228BE:
119Revelfig2.jpg

These High Q are much much much worse than the Q acoustic with it's stand. Just imagine if you were right and the accumulative using acc is the important one, that graph is not a indicate of a quality cabinet neither what are you going to hear in listening, the revel must don't even know what they do with cabinets if having the plot clean using the acc were that important.

And here is the important thing: The on axis HF acumulative indicate the Concept 300 as Outstanding. So as a whole, interpreted correctly, the best cabinet is the concept 300.
So:
Acc: Both are good, because as the reviewer point,
HF acc: Gelenec is fine, concept 300 is impressive.
Who won? Concept 300, genelec use the same solution for the ones tbh.

The G Three's cumulative spectral-decay plot on the tweeter axis (fig.6) is superbly clean, the only significant ridge of delayed energy occurring at the tweeter's dome-resonance frequency
Thanks to Q acoustics for take care this much for a cabinet, let's reconize the speakers companies that do an impressive job too using proper engineering. Cabinet is very important. This MF-HF acc is better, so in real world listening.
So the solution maked by Q acoustic is better than the Genelec. The Triple MDF with dual gelcore layer plus in how the drivers are implemented in the cabinet do a impressive job.
120Q300fig11.jpg
 
Last edited:

RobL

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 4, 2021
Messages
949
Likes
1,622
i haven't noticed but you pointed the incorrect measurements from the concept 300.
index.php

The concept 300 come with it's stand, and this is the measurements mounted as you are going to listen the speaker, it's 5.4dB as the reviwer noted
120Q300fig04.jpg


While the accelerometer acc is fine in both cases, if the measurement is interpreted correctly, it's very good anyway with that high Q peak, if you don't believe lets take a look a highly recommended tower here Revel F228BE:
119Revelfig2.jpg

These High Q are much much much worse than the Q acoustic with it's stand. Just imagine if you were right and the accumulative using acc is the important one, that graph is not a indicate of a quality cabinet neither what are you going to hear in listening, the revel must don't even know what they do with cabinets if having the plot clean using the acc were that important.

And here is the important thing: The on axis HF acumulative indicate the Concept 300 as Outstanding. So as a whole, interpreted correctly, the best cabinet is the concept 300.
So:
Acc: Both are good, because as the reviewer point,
HF acc: Gelenec is fine, concept 300 is impressive.
Who won? Concept 300, genelec use the same solution for the ones tbh.


Thanks to Q acoustics for take care this much for a cabinet, let's reconize the speakers companies that do an impressive job too using proper engineering. Cabinet is very important. This MF-HF acc is better, so in real world listening.
So the solution maked by Q acoustic is better than the Genelec. The Triple MDF with dual gelcore layer plus in how the drivers are implemented in the cabinet do an impressive job.
120Q300fig11.jpg
Hmmm…so your point is what? You started with:
and i was curious to see what results give a alum small cabinet vs a floorstanding MDF for example
While the R11 is not the best cabinet u are going to find, i see the genelec to look worse, what about that?
And now have graduated to:
So the solution maked by Q acoustic is better than the Genelec. The Triple MDF with dual gelcore layer plus in how the drivers are implemented in the cabinet do a impressive job.
That’s a long way from a simple mdf cabinet. Certainly good cabinets can be made from mdf. Also from aluminum. So what?
 

BrokenEnglishGuy

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 19, 2020
Messages
2,057
Likes
1,220
Hmmm…so your point is what? You started with:

And now have graduated to:

That’s a long way from a simple mdf cabinet. Certainly good cabinets can be made from mdf. Also from aluminum. So what?
I just trying to understand the whole cabinet behavior, there is some speakers that sound remarkable clean in the MF/HF.. not only great but remarkable

Apparently, only doing cabinet from alum or mdf is not enough for the MF and HF, hence KEF invented stuff like the metamaterial and as you pointed, Q acoustic with it's long way from a simple mdf cabinet
 
Last edited:

Ricku

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2021
Messages
11
Likes
17
From my understanding, you’d need to spend a lot more for any “upgrade”. Mine are due to arrive end of June and I keep refreshing this thread daily but there’s not much chat here!

I do have a question around GLM though - has anyone experimented with different target curves? Is it easy to do?
 

cEbNVDyfMy

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 27, 2023
Messages
38
Likes
24
What's a better speaker /monitor than the 8361?
Maybe the Dutch & Dutch 8c at the price? One could argue the cardioid response is superior but then the drivers are not coaxial so there is a tradeoff. It seems the ultimate solution is to pair the 8361a or 8351b with the W371 to get cardioid response but now the price is no longer fairly comparable.
 
Last edited:

AMR78

New Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2024
Messages
2
Likes
1
From my understanding, you’d need to spend a lot more for any “upgrade”. Mine are due to arrive end of June and I keep refreshing this thread daily but there’s not much chat here!

I do have a question around GLM though - has anyone experimented with different target curves? Is it easy to do?
That’s in alignment with my thinking about upgrades.

Mine are scheduled for delivery June 7. Will then be able to adjust sound profile with GLM.
 
Top Bottom