• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Genelec S360 Review (Studio Monitor)

Rate this speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 3 1.1%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 8 3.0%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 99 37.2%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 156 58.6%

  • Total voters
    266

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
38,593
Likes
168,367
Location
Seattle Area
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Genelec S360 (S360A) studio monitor. It was sent to me by the company and costs US $3995 each.
Genelec S360A S360 Review Studio Monitor.jpg

It comes in both white and black. As you can see, it is quite a departure from other Genelec speakers with rectangular shape and non-coaxial drivers. The latter was changed in order to allow for higher output level. The port is down firing. Fit and finish is superb. It is also quite heavy for its size, clocking at 30 kg/66 pounds. Many mounting holes are provided for various mounting options which is a major plus over traditional hi-fi speakers.

There is a digital input in this active bi-amped speaker and can be calibrated using Genelec GLM software.

Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. In a nutshell, the measurements show the actual sound coming out of the speaker independent of the room.

Likewise listening tests comply with the latest research into proper evaluation of speakers calling for mono, instead of stereo listening:

Reference axis was not documented but based on trial and error, I found it be at the outer ring of the woofer. Company was kind enough to review and approve the measurements you are about to see.

Genelec S360 Measurements
As usual we are start with our "spin" frequency response measurements:
Genelec S360A S360 Frequency Response Measurements Studio Monitor.png

On-axis response is smooth but has a slight sloping down. Hard to find any faults other than the directivity error at around 1.4 kHz. This is caused entirely by vertical directivity:
Genelec S360A S360 Early Window Frequency Response Measurements Studio Monitor.png


Which you can see better in the drill down:
Genelec S360A S360 Horizontal and Vertical Directivity Measurements Studio Monitor.png

Floor and ceiling reflections could be absorbed to better controlled that vertical response error. Perceptually though, this is not nearly as significant as horizontal dispersion.

Predicted in-room response for far-field listening as a result has a small kink:
Genelec S360A S360 Predicted in-room Frequency Response Measurements Studio Monitor.png


Here is our near-field response of the radiating surfaces showing excellence in response of the port/cabinet and that of the tweeter:
Genelec S360A S360 driver and port Frequency Response Measurements Studio Monitor.png


Back to directivity, we see the perfection again in our horizontal graphs:
Genelec S360A S360 Horizontal Beamwidth Response Measurements Studio Monitor.png



Genelec S360A S360 Horizontal Directivity Response Measurements Studio Monitor.png


Vertical dispersion advises sitting at reference axis relative to your ear height:
Genelec S360A S360 Vertical Directivity Response Measurements Studio Monitor.png


The reason for switch to standard 2-way configuration from coaxial is better power delivery. We can see this in the 106 dBSPL response best:

Genelec S360A S360 relative THD Distortion Measurements Studio Monitor.png

Genelec S360A S360 THD Distortion Measurements Studio Monitor.png


Genelec S360A S360 106 dBSPL THD Distortion Measurements Studio Monitor.png


Compared to Genelec 8361, we see no limiting of the tweeter at 106 dBSPL:
index.php


The sweep at 106 dBSPL was scary loud even though I had full hearing protection!

I am sorry but I forgot to run the waterfall plot but there is the step response:
Genelec S360A S360 Step Response Measurements Studio Monitor.png


Genelec S360 Listening Tests
Due to heavy weight logistics, I had to listen to the S360 in our living room setting as you can see in the review picture above. This is a very live room/surrounding so different than my usual setup where there is for example a thick floor carpet. Still, performance was excellent with the single S360 capable of filling the entire room with authority. Bass is not super deep but what is there is very clean. I was only able to get the clipping light to blink once on a single track but could not detect any impairment.

I attempted broad 1 dB EQ to flatten the on-axis response but the result was inconclusive. In controlled AB tests, I preferred it with or without EQ equal number of times.

Compared to my memory of the 8361A, I thought bass extension was not quite as deep. And clarity while excellent, was not quite as impressive as that speaker.

Conclusion
The S360 moves the dynamic headroom forward compared to rest of Genelec line. It is clearly well engineered and built. By standards of traditional 2-way speakers, it performs excellently. It is only compared to the perfection of coaxial Genelecs that we see slight errors.

In the looks department, the S360 is now housed in a more home friendly enclosure and as such, should find more buyers. Many have walked away from Genelecs due to their somewhat polarizing look. Now you have a great alternative in the form of S360A.

I am happy to put the Genelec S360 speaker in my recommended list.

----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
 

Attachments

  • Genelec S360 Frequency Response.zip
    61.8 KB · Views: 31
Last edited:

SDC

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 3, 2019
Messages
159
Likes
287
Location
S.Korea
crossover is higher than expected but perfect anyway!
With 2nd HD dominating it must be warm and smooth even in extremely high level ;)
 

jhaider

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
1,977
Likes
2,884
For some reason I thought these were $2k/pr more than their actual cost. With Neumann KH310 and JBL 708 creeping up in price that improves the value proposition here. Textbook performance for the geometry (as one expects from Genelec).

It is too bad they don’t have at least an optional grille on the woofer.
 

Maiky76

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
346
Likes
2,673
Location
French, leaving in China
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Genelec S360 (S360A) studio monitor. It was sent to me by the company and costs US $3995.
View attachment 221806
It comes in both white and black. As you can see, it is quite a departure from other Genelec speakers with rectangular shape and non-coaxial drivers. The latter was changed in order to allow for higher output level. The port is down firing. Fit and finish is superb. It is also quite heavy for its size, clocking at 30 kg/66 pounds. Many mounting holes are provided for various mounting options which is a major plus over traditional hi-fi speakers.

Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. In a nutshell, the measurements show the actual sound coming out of the speaker independent of the room.

Likewise listening tests comply with the latest research into proper evaluation of speakers calling for mono, instead of stereo listening:

Reference axis was not documented but based on trial and error, I found it be at the outer ring of the woofer. Company was kind enough to review and approve the measurements you are about to see.

Genelec S360 Measurements
As usual we are start with our "spin" frequency response measurements:
View attachment 221807
On-axis response is smooth but has a slight sloping down. Hard to find any faults other than the directivity error at around 1.4 kHz. This is caused entirely by vertical directivity:
View attachment 221811

Which you can see better in the drill down:
View attachment 221812
Floor and ceiling reflections could be absorbed to better controlled that vertical response error. Perceptually though, this is not nearly as significant as horizontal dispersion.

Predicted in-room response for far-field listening as a result has a small kink:
View attachment 221813

Here is our near-field response of the radiating surfaces showing excellence in response of the port/cabinet and that of the tweeter:
View attachment 221814

Back to directivity, we see the perfection again in our horizontal graphs:
View attachment 221815


View attachment 221816

Vertical dispersion advises sitting at reference axis relative to your ear height:
View attachment 221817

The reason for switch to standard 2-way configuration from coaxial is better power delivery. We can see this in the 106 dBSPL response best:

View attachment 221818
View attachment 221819

View attachment 221820

Compared to Genelec 8361, we see no limiting of the tweeter at 106 dBSPL:
index.php


The sweep at 106 dBSPL was scary loud even though I had full hearing protection!

I am sorry but I forgot to run the waterfall plot but there is the step response:
View attachment 221821

Genelec S360 Listening Tests
Due to heavy weight logistics, I had to listen to the S360 in our living room setting as you can see in the review picture above. This is a very live room/surrounding so different than my usual setup where there is for example a thick floor carpet. Still, performance was excellent with the single S360 capable of filling the entire room with authority. Bass is not super deep but what is there is very clean. I was only able to get the clipping light to blink once on a single track but could not detect any impairment.

I attempted broad 1 dB EQ to flatten the on-axis response but the result was inconclusive. In controlled AB tests, I preferred it with or without EQ equal number of times.

Compared to my memory of the 8361A, I thought bass extension was not quite as deep. And clarity while excellent, was not quite as impressive as that speaker.

Conclusion
The S360 moves the dynamic headroom forward compared to rest of Genelec line. It is clearly well engineered and built. By standards of traditional 2-way speakers, it performs excellently. It is only compared to the perfection of coaxial Genelecs that we see slight errors.

In the looks department, the S360 is now housed in a more home friendly enclosure and as such, should fine more buyers. Many have walked away from Genelecs due to their somewhat polarizing look. Now you have a great alternative in the form of S360A.

I am happy to put the Genelec S360 speaker in my recommended list.

----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Hi,

Here is my take on the EQ.

Please report your findings, positive or negative!

The following EQs are “anechoic” EQs to get the speaker right before room integration. If you able to implement these EQs you must add EQ at LF for room integration, that is usually not optional… see hints there: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...helf-speaker-review.11144/page-26#post-800725

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 6.2
With Sub: 7.9

Spinorama with no EQ:
  • rather flat
  • Probably does not need anechoic EQ (but will need in-room EQ for bass)
  • Some port remanent resonances ("only" 20dB down at 800Hz)
  • Xover region not perfect but with a large waveguide that a very difficult task
  • The HF looks shelved down similarly to many of the Score EQ optimized on speakers with waveguides
Genelec S360 No EQ Spinorama.png


Directivity:

Better stay at tweeter height
Horizontally, superb! Better toe-in the speakers by up to 20deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the upper range.
When the cardioid down to 150Hz version coming?

Genelec S360 2D surface Directivity Contour Only Data.png

Genelec S360 LW better data.png




EQ design:

I have generated two EQs. The APO config files are attached.
  • The first one, labelled, LW is targeted at making the LW flat
  • The second, labelled Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.
  • The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose.

Score EQ LW: 6.5
with sub: 8.2

Score EQ Score: 6.6
with sub: 8.4

Score EQ Score Slope: 6.7
with sub: 8.5

Code:
Genelec S360 APO EQ LW 96000Hz
August022022-121205

Preamp: -2.4 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 175.46,    0.92,    2.55
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 300.00,    -0.54,    2.37
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 610.82,    0.72,    2.80
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 917.72,    -0.64,    3.15
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1560.30,    2.15,    1.30
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 5427.82,    1.43,    0.95
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 6396.29,    -1.68,    2.49
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 14485.11,    2.02,    0.38

Genelec S360 APO EQ Score 96000Hz
August022022-121040

Preamp: -2.3 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 174.46,    0.72,    2.24
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 314.98,    -0.78,    3.55
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 608.82,    0.63,    4.07
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 910.51,    -0.73,    3.15
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1523.26,    2.15,    1.57
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 5635.43,    1.42,    0.95
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 6403.29,    -1.70,    2.49
Filter : ON PK Fc 15642.13,    1.37,    0.38

Genelec S360 EQ Design.png


Spinorama EQ LW
Genelec S360 LW EQ Spinorama.png


Spinorama EQ Score
Genelec S360 Score EQ Spinorama.png


Zoom PIR-LW-ON
Genelec S360 Zoom.png


Regression - Tonal
Genelec S360 Regression - Tonal.png


Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Improvements?
Genelec S360 Radar.png

Bonus:

I forced the Optimizer to have more Slope on the PIR, to be closer to the initial tuning and because the Score PIR regression looked a bit shallow.
It comes down to a compromise between the LW/ON and PIR slope.

Code:
Genelec S360 APO EQ Score Slope 96000Hz
August022022-121313

Preamp: -2.1 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 171.05,    0.65,    2.45
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 318.57,    -0.95,    4.52
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 601.65,    0.48,    6.09
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 917.16,    -0.80,    3.29
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 1479.36,    2.01,    2.03
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 6148.62,    1.07,    1.35
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 6603.61,    -2.09,    3.04
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 14598.96,    0.92,    0.29
Genelec S360 Regression - Tonal Slope.png

Genelec S360 Score Slope EQ Spinorama.png


The rest of the plots is attached.
 

Attachments

  • Genelec S360 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    Genelec S360 2D surface Directivity Contour Data.png
    287.7 KB · Views: 25
  • Genelec S360 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    Genelec S360 3D surface Vertical Directivity Data.png
    475 KB · Views: 25
  • Genelec S360 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    Genelec S360 3D surface Horizontal Directivity Data.png
    466.8 KB · Views: 31
  • Genelec S360 Normalized Directivity data.png
    Genelec S360 Normalized Directivity data.png
    323.7 KB · Views: 26
  • Genelec S360 Raw Directivity data.png
    Genelec S360 Raw Directivity data.png
    498.6 KB · Views: 22
  • Genelec S360 Reflexion data.png
    Genelec S360 Reflexion data.png
    150 KB · Views: 18
  • Genelec S360 LW data.png
    Genelec S360 LW data.png
    141.7 KB · Views: 16
  • Genelec S360 APO EQ Score Slope 96000Hz.txt
    438 bytes · Views: 4
  • Genelec S360 APO EQ LW 96000Hz.txt
    429 bytes · Views: 6
  • Genelec S360 APO EQ Score 96000Hz.txt
    431 bytes · Views: 8

restorer-john

Master Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2018
Messages
9,123
Likes
25,772
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
@amirm With respect to the listening tests, is a smallish sheet of plywood on top of the speaker stand sufficient and representative as to how these speakers would be typically used? I ask as they appear to have some form of built in 'feet' to elevate the base so the port can breathe.

How much better would they perform in the bottom end on a larger shelf or entertainment unit?
 

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,349
Likes
2,347
Location
Minneapolis
It would be even better if the price was per pair :D
Yup, this is great speaker but I think I rather have the JBL 708p for about Half the price (or less with the right vendor). Or just go for it with the Genelec One 8361 for bit more $

TBH, at 8k with amps and room correction built in, this makes the JBL 4367 and 4349 a hard sell
I suppose this true for a few actives.
That said based on what I know now(having heard none of them) I would take deff take the 4349 over these, the 4367 is pretty pricey but again if I had the cash I prefer the look and have to suspect ultimately better dynamics and overall powerprowess.

I know I sound like a fanboy for JBL.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
38,593
Likes
168,367
Location
Seattle Area
@amirm With respect to the listening tests, is a smallish sheet of plywood on top of the speaker stand sufficient and representative as to how these speakers would be typically used? I ask as they appear to have some form of built in 'feet' to elevate the base so the port can breathe.
Speaker has four raised legs at each corner. The stand top of my stand was too small to span that. So I put the plywood there to make it larger. As shown speaker is working as designed (for stand mount of course). It is open on all four sides by the way.
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
2,905
Likes
2,477
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
Good WAF, plenty room for a plant on top :p

(just kidding)
Good HAF (Husband Acceptance Factor) too.I think they look nice.:)

By the way, thanks for the review and measurements Amir!

Edit:
You can get them in black or white, as Amir mentioned.:)

 
Last edited:

Waxx

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2021
Messages
388
Likes
1,107
Location
Wodecq, Hainaut, Belgium
It's nice to see Genelect start to move up in the looks department, that was always bothering me. Not that it's that important, but still.

The measurements are almost perfect. Now if it would survive my (subjective) listening fatigue test (most non coaxial genelecs don't) that would be great. Not that i would buy it, i prefer more the JBL or Neumann style of speakers in that league. But it's nice to have options and this one certainly is an option is that fatigue test is turning out good...
 

YSC

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 31, 2019
Messages
1,960
Likes
1,460
gave it a fair rating due to it's cost and the directivity error which is more severe than even the 8030C at reasonable volume. I know it's SPL focused but then for Genelec I do hope for absolute perfection
 

respice finem

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2021
Messages
1,359
Likes
2,406
It's nice to see Genelect start to move up in the looks department, that was always bothering me. Not that it's that important, but still.

The measurements are almost perfect. Now if it would survive my (subjective) listening fatigue test (most non coaxial genelecs don't) that would be great. Not that i would buy it, i prefer more the JBL or Neumann style of speakers in that league. But it's nice to have options and this one certainly is an option is that fatigue test is turning out good...
I thinks looks do matter a lot, for the slowly but steadily growing group of people considering active monitors for home use.
I guess, meanwhile more low- to mid-tier monitors are being sold to home users than to studios.
The home hifi manufacturers have already reacted and are issuing more active designs.
 
Top Bottom