Genelec 8361A Review (Powered Monitor)

[holdingpants01]

It really wants to make me stamp my foot!
If they had used proper shaped drivers then they would jell ( sic) properly.
Keith

doesn't matter without beryllium tweeter anyway

 

[dfuller]

Yes I too experienced the same thing.
The mids are very capable. Maybe because of odd shape, the woofers don't jell well with the mids. Then the tweeter struggles with high spl in the transients and can not keep up with the mids. The difference in effeciency in the drivers is just too different. Again it's mostly noticeable in the transients.

I also have genelec 8050b and they do not have this problem. If I could go back in time I would get the genelec s360 or Alcons audio and be done.

Strangely the 8341a is excellent, no issues. Likely related to the drivers being more proportionally sized and work better together.

I don't know if I'd agree with this; the shape of the driver largely isn't that important given it isn't impacting the directivity pattern. My guess is it's something not easily measurable, maybe some kind of intermodulation or diffraction, but that's a spitball guess.

 

[Sacha]

I don't know if I'd agree with this; the shape of the driver largely isn't that important given it isn't impacting the directivity pattern. My guess is it's something not easily measurable, maybe some kind of intermodulation or diffraction, but that's a spitball guess.

What about all this stuff:

Doesn't appear to be there on a KII Three for instance although this is a different visualization:

 

[MAB]

What about all this stuff:

View attachment 392911

Doesn't appear to be there on a KII Three for instance although this is a different visualization:

View attachment 392912

Not that I stare at the cum decay plots, especially since they are not normalized, but that is one of the cleanest aspects of the Genelec. Those resonances are 25 dB down at a few ms. Hard to comp[are to the Kii, but looks similar if you were to zoom in.

Many other well designed monitors:

Again, completely different scale, but also quite good. Possibly worse if this was normalized for amplitude and time. Also the Genelec trace was done at 20dB higher volume.

These nice sounding speakers also have resonances:

Incredibly hard to compare given all of the above variables.

Most speakers look way worse than the above examples, for instance this speaker which works well in some spaces despite the resonances:

 

[dfuller]

What about all this stuff:

View attachment 392911

Doesn't appear to be there on a KII Three for instance although this is a different visualization:

View attachment 392912

It could be reflections off the baffle itself, but resonances I don't think so.

 

[Dgob]

It really wants to make me stamp my foot!
If they had used proper shaped drivers then they would jell ( sic) properly.
Keith

 

[Dgob]

On the question of gelling:

If they weren't so aesthetically low in WAF (and high in £££'s), 'maybe' this is where I would reintroduce a subwoofer that is worthy of the 8361A's!

 

[Dgob]

Sometimes, the written word is less clear than the spoken word!

On the merits of the 8361A's bass response (alleged deafness and equipment faults not withstanding! ) the following might prove useful in clarifying my perspective:

Anecdotes, also, not withstanding?

 

[MAB]

It could be reflections off the baffle itself, but resonances I don't think so.

Some coaxial have odd performance on-axis. One example is Elac BS U5 which Amir commented on. Erin has commented on this on-axis performance on several coaxial models he tested. I built a pair of Seas T18RE/XFCTV2 coax for my dad, they demonstrate very poor on-axis and better off-axis. A few of the older coax from the '80s had had already soured me to the configuration. Now Genelec, KEF, and others have started addressing some of the intrinsic issues.

Regarding reflections, the fugly front of the Genelec Ones is a waveguide to minimize reflections and match directivity to the woofer array, the racetrack woofers make up that array. There may be a better approach to impedance matching (which is part of minimizing reflections), but IDK. And Genelec's approach sounds mesmerizing to me, and doesn't have the on-axis issues some of the other coaxial products have. And certainly the measurements are crazy-good in almost every category. The Ones in general do sound different compared to competition. But so do JBL vs. Neumann for example.

 

[Purité Audio]

Since we had their 8260’s I have thought them super speakers, the only really noticeable difference is their slightly light tonality, which is purely their fairly flat ( out of the box) target which of course is easily adjusted.
People believe they hear all sorts of things but unless you really compare two designs side by side in your own space…
Keith

 

[RobL]

What about all this stuff:

View attachment 392911

Doesn't appear to be there on a KII Three for instance although this is a different visualization:

View attachment 392912

Sound And Recording measured the 8361A as well, for apples to apples comparison:

They noted the absence of resonances. I think a lot of the hash in Amir’s measurement are possibly reflections off the Klippel microphone arm etc.

 

[Impossible]

Is Amirm deaf?

Do they measure better then salon ultima 2? If so why keep the salon ultima instead of getting the genelec?

You cant measure everything e.g. Transient response.

Amirm prefferd the wall of sound from the salons and I bet he prefers the beryllium tweeters over the genelec's as well. Likely they will have better decay time and less breakup.

 

[Dgob]

Do they measure better then salon ultima 2? If so why keep the salon ultima instead of getting the genelec?

You cant measure everything e.g. Transient response.

Amirm prefferd the wall of sound from the salons and I bet he prefers the beryllium tweeters over the genelec's as well. Likely they will have better decay time and less breakup.

Would that make you a clairvoyant or a gambler?

 

[Impossible]

Would that make you a clairvoyant or a gambler?

No I'm going by what he said. He prefers his salon 2. Specifically he mentioned liking the wall of sound from the salon 2 over the 8361a. Beryllium tweeters generally perform better then aluminum and titanium.

I could be wrong about the tweeter but I don't think I'm reaching. Nothing clairvoyant about it.

Maybe Amirm will chime in.

 

[Purité Audio]

Everything can be measured and it is implementation rather than cone material.
Whilst a beryllium tweeter may on paper offer slightly better performance it is highly unlikely that it will be audible.
Keith

 

[Sancus]

Do they measure better then salon ultima 2? If so why keep the salon ultima instead of getting the genelec?

You cant measure everything e.g. Transient response.

Amirm prefferd the wall of sound from the salons and I bet he prefers the beryllium tweeters over the genelec's as well. Likely they will have better decay time and less breakup.

There are tons of differences other than the tweeter, and it's quite strange to just randomly pick it like that. Dunno why people are so often concerned with driver materials, unless you're the actual speaker designer they don't matter.

For example, the Salon 2 have significantly wider dispersion than Genelecs. This matters a lot if you're still stuck with crappy stereo and not multichannel, because more dispersion means more envelopment, generally speaking. That's due to the different waveguide, the crossover designs, and the midrange driver. Not the tweeter material.

Not everybody wants that, though. You can't simplify this stuff to one thing is better than the other. Nor can you simplify things to driver materials. Nor do transients have some magical status that has no connection to other measurements.

 

[Dgob]

There are tons of differences other than the tweeter, and it's quite strange to just randomly pick it like that. Dunno why people are so often concerned with driver materials, unless you're the actual speaker designer they don't matter.

For example, the Salon 2 have significantly wider dispersion than Genelecs. This matters a lot if you're still stuck with crappy stereo and not multichannel, because more dispersion means more envelopment, generally speaking. That's due to the different waveguide and the midrange driver, not the tweeter material.

I agree with the first part of this: the key point is how the materials perform/measure when treated and assembled.

Not so sure about claims on the dispersion patterns. The Ones are famed (amongst other things) for precisely that.

 

[holdingpants01]

Not so sure about claims on the dispersion patterns. The Ones are famed (amongst other things) for precisely that.

wider doesn't equal uniform, one is wider the other is more uniform, it's up to preference

 

[Soniclife]

For example, the Salon 2 have significantly wider dispersion than Genelecs. This matters a lot if you're still stuck with crappy stereo and not multichannel, because more dispersion means more envelopment, generally speaking. That's due to the different waveguide, the crossover designs, and the midrange driver. Not the tweeter material.

Dispersion width is part of why he thought he preferred them. Plus as far as I remember he only listened to a single 8361, compared to his normal stereo, which is going to make a big difference.

 

[Impossible]

This is my 8361a and my Kef Ref 2c.

Both duel concentric up to the mid driver and similar dispersion. Where the tweeter, mids and woofer of the 8361a are more distinct, the Kef 2c is more homogeneous. And because of this it has a more cohesive sound signature.
I much preffer the sound of cymbals, kick drum and bass from the kef.
Both excellent with mids.