Genelec good enough?

[soundwave76]

Genelecs are fantastic speakers. I have had all the smaller models over the years. Now I have a near field setup with 8331+7350 and 8340 in the living room. You should go for the 83xx models beacuse of the awesome room correction.

 

[audiophool]

Are these brands known to go on any decent sales around e.g. Black Friday?

JBL does 50% deals for their 705P/708P speakers. But don't expect any discounts for Genelec or Neumann gear.

 

[Spocko]

I'm a big fan of the new One Series, and specifically I'm looking closely at the 8361a and 8351b. With their GLM/SAM, I can tune them to taste. Their off-axis performance is pretty flat thanks to that co-ax design. The 8361 (peak SPL 118dB) is a big on the expensive side at $10,000 for the pair, but considering it packages an all in one volume/dac/amp/room-EQ, it's not bad for "high end", really. Since this is "pro" gear, they are built to a very high level for durability. I'm still figuring out how to integrate it as part of my 5.2.4 home theater system if they are to be used as L/R mains.

 

[audiophool]

I'm a big fan of the new One Series, and specifically I'm looking closely at the 8361a and 8351b. With their GLM/SAM, I can tune them to taste. Their off-axis performance is pretty flat thanks to that co-ax design. The 8361 (peak SPL 118dB) is a big on the expensive side at $10,000 for the pair, but considering it packages an all in one volume/dac/amp/room-EQ, it's not bad for "high end", really. Since this is "pro" gear, they are built to a very high level for durability. I'm still figuring out how to integrate it as part of my 5.2.4 home theater system if they are to be used as L/R mains.

I'm planning to do

NAD 758 V3 -> miniDSP SHD or SHD studio -> Genelecs

while waiting for Monoprice HTP-1 measurements

 

[ahofer]

It would be really interesting to hear those against my Harbeths. The Harbeths are still a little cheaper, but it’s a contrast of old/new approaches claiming the same goal.

 

[splattened]

I'm planning to do

NAD 758 V3 -> miniDSP SHD or SHD studio -> Genelecs

while waiting for Monoprice HTP-1 measurements

Do you use the miniDSP or Genelecs software for room EQ?

 

[audiophool]

Do you use the miniDSP or Genelecs software for room EQ?

I use Dirac Live

 

[LTig]

It would be really interesting to hear those against my Harbeths. The Harbeths are still a little cheaper, but it’s a contrast of old/new approaches claiming the same goal.

When I visited the Harbeth Booth at Highend 2019 in Munich I asked why their monitor speakers have no wave guides to ensure a smooth off axis frequency response. They had not answer but said that the off axis response would be smooth due to other means they did not know. I'm not so sure about this statement though:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/harbeth-super-hl5plus-loudspeaker-measurements
https://www.stereophile.com/content...-anniversary-edition-loudspeaker-measurements
https://www.stereophile.com/content/harbeth-m401-loudspeaker-measurements

 

[ahofer]

@LTig : I enjoy them, subjectively, and find them very different from KEF, Wilson, ADC, Legacy, Thiel, and some others I don’t remember. But I’m not sure I understand why. I haven’t heard Shaw make a lot of claims about off-axis response, but He certainly makes a lot of claims about being the “least colored”. He’s not very clear on the measurements that show this, although he is a measurement-oriented guy. He does make a very big deal about driver deformation (RADIAL material) and the idea that the resonances have to go somewhere, hence the lossy cabinet.

Instrument and voice timbre sounds uncannily accurate to me, but I can’t tie it to anything particular in measurements. I could even be falling for something. Impulse response?

So it would be interesting to compare to a reference benchmark.

 

[LTig]

@LTig : I enjoy them, subjectively, and find them very different from KEF, Wilson, ADC, Legacy, Thiel, and some others I don’t remember. But I’m not sure I understand why.

Very dry room, close listening distance? If the reflections are damped enough the influence of the off axis response maybe so small that it does not count any more.

I haven’t heard Shaw make a lot of claims about off-axis response, but He certainly makes a lot of claims about being the “least colored”. He’s not very clear on the measurements that show this, although he is a measurement-oriented guy. He does make a very big deal about driver deformation (RADIAL material) and the idea that the resonances have to go somewhere, hence the lossy cabinet.

Instrument and voice timbre sounds uncannily accurate to me, but I can’t tie it to anything particular in measurements. I could even be falling for something. Impulse response?

I second a neutral frequency response. I listened to pair of big Harbeths at Highend only for 2 minutes. SQ was nothing spectacular but they did nothing wrong which may be better in the long run. We are easy fooled by a speaker with uneven FR to sound better than a neutral speaker in direct comparison with "proper" chosen demo music.

So it would be interesting to compare to a reference benchmark.

Is there a reference benchmark? I don't think so. You could compare with speakers having good spinorama results (KH420, Revel Salon2 come to my mind).

 

[ahofer]

@LTig i was thinking of the Genelecs as a stand-in for reference. I’d love to get a pair in my room, although my wife would barf again.

 

[Ilkless]

When I visited the Harbeth Booth at Highend 2019 in Munich I asked why their monitor speakers have no wave guides to ensure a smooth off axis frequency response. They had not answer but said that the off axis response would be smooth due to other means they did not know. I'm not so sure about this statement though:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/harbeth-super-hl5plus-loudspeaker-measurements
https://www.stereophile.com/content...-anniversary-edition-loudspeaker-measurements
https://www.stereophile.com/content/harbeth-m401-loudspeaker-measurements

Their design is regressive and there is no excuse for it.

JBL does 50% deals for their 705P/708P speakers. But don't expect any discounts for Genelec or Neumann gear.

http://www.proaudiostar.com/2x-neumann-kh-120-ms-90-45b-mkii-mogami-cables.html

Yep, I haven't seen discounts on Neumann ever, but occasionally I see deals bundling them with pretty expensive stands at the same price. One nice thing about Neumann is that their warranty is international for end-users. Genelec prices does wiggle a little iirc.

 

[HammerSandwich]

There's ALWAYS an excuse. Usually something like, "That's how we've always done it here."

 

[matt3421]

Their design is regressive and there is no excuse for it.



http://www.proaudiostar.com/2x-neumann-kh-120-ms-90-45b-mkii-mogami-cables.html

Yep, I haven't seen discounts on Neumann ever, but occasionally I see deals bundling them with pretty expensive stands at the same price. One nice thing about Neumann is that their warranty is international for end-users. Genelec prices does wiggle a little iirc.

Neumann is currently selling the KH 80 DSP for $800 a pair.

 

[Ilkless]

There's ALWAYS an excuse. Usually something like, "That's how we've always done it here."

Unfortunately the consumer base is uncritical and thinks a leaky passive ply box without any directivity matching is worth 2.3k (P3ESR). At least the ATC SCM7 costs much less than that and somewhat more modern, though still unremarkable.

Neumann is currently selling the KH 80 DSP for $800 a pair.

I stand corrected. Didn't realise it. Wish it was 120 on sale instead though. Can confirm the discount is international - it's also on my local Sennheiser site. One hell of a price for as good as a speaker can be engineered in that size and shape.

edit: 120A is also on sale at Thomann and Amazon.

 

[matt3421]

i can't get enough of the speakers. other than the fact that mine are partially defective (auto standby turning on with audio playing and the limiter prematurely activating in one speaker), i cant see a single flaw in their performance. everything just sounds perfect. soon i will call for a warranty replacement or repair though

 

[ahofer]

It’s a bit OT, but there is an interesting discussion of thin-walled speaker construction here. It goes on a bit, but clears up some misconceptions about Harbeth’s approach:

https://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/threads/bbc-style-thin-wall-cabinets-why-so-special.215/

I suppose I may have preferred their sound due to distortion, the way some prefer tube amps, or for no audible reason at all. Or Shaw is on to something. Maybe it’s futile, but I’d love to understand the measured differences and their correspondence to my experience better.

I was surprised I didn’t really like the ATCs I listened to. Forgetting the model right now. I wonder if I’d feel the same way about Genelecs?

 

[Ilkless]

It’s a bit OT, but there is an interesting discussion of thin-walled speaker construction here. It goes on a bit, but clears up some misconceptions about Harbeth’s approach:

https://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/threads/bbc-style-thin-wall-cabinets-why-so-special.215/

I suppose I may have preferred their sound due to distortion, the way some prefer tube amps, or for no audible reason at all. Or Shaw is on to something. Maybe it’s futile, but I’d love to understand the measured differences and their correspondence to my experience better.

I was surprised I didn’t really like the ATCs I listened to. Forgetting the model right now. I wonder if I’d feel the same way about Genelecs?

Alan Shaw talks a big talk about measurements, but curiously frames them to legitimise his antiquated speaker designs rather than bringing them to their logical conclusion. He essentially argues that we should adhere to evidence-based engineering only up to some arbitrary point that coincidentally aligns with the speakers he sell (having a good driver design), while outright ignoring other empirical phenomena that would invalidate the unjustly-fetishised BBC flat-baffle approach, like diffraction or directivity control that pertain to how the drivers are integrated together. This is regressive because these designs fail to be consistent with psychoacoustics:

If the spectra of the direct and reflected sounds are significantly different, the reflections are likely to be more noticeable, from subtle timbral effects up to a premature breakdown of the precedence effect, at which point listeners may be aware of two simultaneous sound images, one located at the loudspeaker and one located at the point of reflection. This is obviously not good. Over the years this is likely a factor in listeners rating loudspeakers with uniform directivity more highly than those with uneven directivity. Wide dispersion seems to be good, but especially if it is uniform with frequency and the spectra of the reflections is not substantially altered. Hundreds of loudspeakers auditioned by hundreds of listeners in double-blind evaluations have demonstrated this; it is monotonously predictable

This lack of consistency and coherence has been discussed numerous times on ASR:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...other-winner-on-their-hands.6720/#post-149928

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/pmc-speakers.9311/#post-243129

The reality is that Harbeth is a tired old cottage industry brand that doesn't even bother to justify it's pricing by keeping it's products up-to-date with the latest engineering knowledge in acoustics and speaker design. And Alan Shaw may best be compared to his DAC compatriot Rob Watts as a competent engineer using their knowledge to be apologists for regressive designs.

 

[ahofer]

Alan Shaw talks a big talk about measurements, but curiously frames them to legitimise his antiquated speaker designs rather than bringing them to their logical conclusion. He essentially argues that we should adhere to evidence-based engineering only up to some arbitrary point that coincidentally aligns with the speakers he sell (having a good driver design), while outright ignoring other empirical phenomena that would invalidate the unjustly-fetishised BBC flat-baffle approach, like diffraction or directivity control that pertain to how the drivers are integrated together. This is regressive because these designs fail to be consistent with psychoacoustics:




This lack of consistency and coherence has been discussed numerous times on ASR:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...other-winner-on-their-hands.6720/#post-149928

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/pmc-speakers.9311/#post-243129

The reality is that Harbeth is a tired old cottage industry brand that doesn't even bother to justify it's pricing by keeping it's products up-to-date with the latest engineering knowledge in acoustics and speaker design. And Alan Shaw may best be compared to his DAC compatriot Rob Watts as a competent engineer using their knowledge to be apologists for regressive designs.

Thanks for the links and detailed answer. It never surprises me that someone is “talking book”. But there is some animus in your own worda (“tired old”) that I find puzzling.

I do like the way they sound. It’d be a shame if I was liking something inaccurate.

 

[Ilkless]

Thanks for the links and detailed answer. It never surprises me that someone is “talking book”. But there is some animus in your own worda (“tired old”) that I find puzzling.

I do like the way they sound. It’d be a shame if I was liking something inaccurate.

It is fact. It fails to accommodate significant and long-established advances in speaker dispersion and the perceptual effects of dispersion. I don't seek to apologise for regressive design disguised as high performance.