New Genelec Main Monitor

[Pearljam5000]

RAM-L2 amplifier topology is identical to the older RAM-L so the decision to use Class AB amplifier for the tweeter channel was made more than 10 years ago. Back then we were able to achieve better overall performance with it compared to Class D amplifiers. Still today the performance is extremely good so there was no reason to change it.

Is there going to be a new 8000 MKII series with newer drivers/amps?

 

[thewas]

A narrow beam becomes wider at a great distance.

This is the reason why high directivity is needed if someone doesn't want reflected sound to dominate at higher listening distances.

 

[Neadych]

This is the reason why high directivity is needed if someone doesn't want reflected sound to dominate.

It turns out that the greater the distance, the lesser the relative directivity, and vice versa. So, if you use large speakers at close range, their absolute directivity will be very narrow.

 

[thewas]

It turns out that the greater the distance, the lesser the relative directivity, and vice versa. So, if you use large speakers at close range, their absolute directivity will be very narrow.

Directivity as an index doesn't change, only the resulting radiated surfaces as a function of the distance. The good thing is that this new monitor is based on a coaxial design so it can be used according to Genelec already from a minimum distance of 1.3m which is rare for such a large main monitor.

 

[Neadych]

Directivity as an index doesn't change, only the resulting radiated surfaces as a function of the distance. The good thing is that this new monitor is based on a coaxial design so it can be used according to Genelec already from a minimum distance of 1.3m which is rare for such a large main monitor.

That's understandable.
I mean, if you use it with, say, a 1.8m, its focus is narrower than, say, an 8341.

 

[thewas]

That's understandable.
I mean, if you use it with, say, a 1.8m, its focus is narrower than, say, an 8341.

That is correct.

 

[Neadych]

That is correct.

Will the 8380 be much better than the 8341 at 1.8m if you supplement the 8341 with a subwoofer or two?

 

[thewas]

Will the 8380 be much better than the 8341 at 1.8m if you supplement the 8341 with a subwoofer or two?

From max SPL point clearly (although this would be very unhealthy at this distance) but otherwise it is not something univocally better or worse but rather a matter of preference for higher or lower directivity/direct sound.

 

[Neadych]

From max SPL point clearly (although this would be very unhealthy at this distance) but otherwise it is not something univocally better or worse but rather a matter of preference for higher or lower directivity/direct sound.

Of course, the 8380's power won't be needed at short range. What about its dynamic power?
I asked a similar question – comparing the 1234 and 8340 at 1.9m. I was told the 1234 would be much better precisely because of its dynamic power.

 

[Tovarich007]

I haven't read the whole thread but, if I didn't missed an important point, as for me this new speaker is "just" a modernised coaxial version of the 1238 non coax main speaker :
same dimensions, same amps, same basic design except for the the medium/treble section and the bass reflex output shape, and consequently largely similar specs except for the directivity patterns.

That's a very good speaker indeed, I don't doubt one single second it should perform admirably and sound great, but that's not a revolution at all. (BTW I admit nobody in the audio pro industry actually needs a revolution in speaker design, but just SOTA speakers, not too expensive and reliable). And of course, a well done coax design like this improves directivity patterns and thus listening window compared to a traditionnal separate multi way speaker.

But the overall design is much more conservative than The Ones series or than the huge 8381A. For medium sized rooms, domestic or studios as well, The Ones should stay a better solution, except for SPL max and a few Hz of bass extension, and except if you need a new flush mounted solution with the same dimensions as the 1238.

The question is : how many pro studios will replace their faithful and excellent 1238 by this new model ? Is it worth the investment ? I mean, the price is high but not so massive for such a speaker, we're not in silly high end hifi there, but 8000 € per speaker is not begnin for a budget anyway.

 

[srrxr71]

Directivity as an index doesn't change, only the resulting radiated surfaces as a function of the distance. The good thing is that this new monitor is based on a coaxial design so it can be used according to Genelec already from a minimum distance of 1.3m which is rare for such a large main monitor.

Just waiting for him to upgrade.

 

[Pearljam5000]

In any case I assume the 8380 will sound "bigger" than the 8361
So that's already an advantage

 

[Ilkka Rissanen]

I haven't read the whole thread but, if I didn't missed an important point, as for me this new speaker is "just" a modernised coaxial version of the 1238 non coax main speaker :
same dimensions, same amps, same basic design except for the the medium/treble section and the bass reflex output shape, and consequently largely similar specs except for the directivity patterns.

"Same amps" part needs some clarification. Even though the power supply and power amplifier parts are the same as in RAM-L, the signal processing part of the RAM-L2 is completely new and improved. The RAM-L signal processing is based on much older design and therefore for example the processing power is much more limited. As a user, it is best visible in the amount of available filters in GLM. RAM-L based products have only 6 filter slots (4 notch + 2 shelving) while RAM-L2 has 20 filter slots (16 notch + 4 shelving, equal to other recent SAM monitors and subwoofers). In a very good room this might not make much difference, but in most rooms more filters mean better/flatter frequency response. Also, you have more control over the overall response shape even after using the sound character profiler which uses two of the available shelving filter slots.

Other new signal processing feature is the possibility to use the FIR based extended phase linearity option which will improve the impulse response, phase response and group delay of the speaker. This option is not available in the older RAM-L based products.

So, even though it might look to be the "same", it is far from it in reality.

 

[TheKoC]

I haven't read the whole thread but, if I didn't missed an important point, as for me this new speaker is "just" a modernised coaxial version of the 1238 non coax main speaker :
same dimensions, same amps, same basic design except for the the medium/treble section and the bass reflex output shape, and consequently largely similar specs except for the directivity patterns.

That's a very good speaker indeed, I don't doubt one single second it should perform admirably and sound great, but that's not a revolution at all. (BTW I admit nobody in the audio pro industry actually needs a revolution in speaker design, but just SOTA speakers, not too expensive and reliable). And of course, a well done coax design like this improves directivity patterns and thus listening window compared to a traditionnal separate multi way speaker.

But the overall design is much more conservative than The Ones series or than the huge 8381A. For medium sized rooms, domestic or studios as well, The Ones should stay a better solution, except for SPL max and a few Hz of bass extension, and except if you need a new flush mounted solution with the same dimensions as the 1238.

The question is : how many pro studios will replace their faithful and excellent 1238 by this new model ? Is it worth the investment ? I mean, the price is high but not so massive for such a speaker, we're not in silly high end hifi there, but 8000 € per speaker is not begnin for a budget anyway.

True, it seems to me clearly be a response to pro request for "we would like a coaxial design that fits in our current studio environment".

 

[Moti]

In any case I assume the 8380 will sound "bigger" than the 8361
So that's already an advantage

If distance remains the same, 8380 will not add as much room as 8361 so it will sound ”smaller”?

 

[Reddoc]

will not add as much room

can you please explain what this bit means, Moti?

 

[Neadych]

In any case I assume the 8380 will sound "bigger" than the 8361
So that's already an advantage

What's important is how much undistorted midrange and peak volume you need for your environment, along with the other characteristics. Otherwise, louder won't be better, but more expensive.
Or maybe worse and more expensive.

 

[thewas]

Of course, the 8380's power won't be needed at short range. What about its dynamic power?
I asked a similar question – comparing the 1234 and 8340 at 1.9m. I was told the 1234 would be much better precisely because of its dynamic power.

Same for the 8380.

 

[Tovarich007]

"Same amps" part needs some clarification. Even though the power supply and power amplifier parts are the same as in RAM-L, the signal processing part of the RAM-L2 is completely new and improved. The RAM-L signal processing is based on much older design and therefore for example the processing power is much more limited. As a user, it is best visible in the amount of available filters in GLM. RAM-L based products have only 6 filter slots (4 notch + 2 shelving) while RAM-L2 has 20 filter slots (16 notch + 4 shelving, equal to other recent SAM monitors and subwoofers). In a very good room this might not make much difference, but in most rooms more filters mean better/flatter frequency response. Also, you have more control over the overall response shape even after using the sound character profiler which uses two of the available shelving filter slots.

Other new signal processing feature is the possibility to use the FIR based extended phase linearity option which will improve the impulse response, phase response and group delay of the speaker. This option is not available in the older RAM-L based products.

So, even though it might look to be the "same", it is far from it in reality.

Thanks a lot for this precise informations. Of course, these infos are only available to people who know what's inside the electronics section, so it's very fine you accept to share them on an open forum like this.

But you confirm that except for signal processing (which is nowadays quite important of course), the amplifiers by themselves are the same.

What about the other 123. models ? Coax versions on their way for a next future ? Smaller versions with 30 or even 26 cm bass drivers will be just fine for many people who wish a more traditional design and a bit higher SPL than The Ones.

 

[Multicore]

But the overall design is much more conservative than The Ones series or than the huge 8381A. For medium sized rooms, domestic or studios as well, The Ones should stay a better solution, except for SPL max and a few Hz of bass extension, and except if you need a new flush mounted solution with the same dimensions as the 1238.

Not as I see it. The Ones and 8380 are optimized for different things. I can well imagine studios set up with both.