New mysterious Genelec monitors

[Descartes]

Unless the studio uses B&W haha

Abbey Road!

 

[kemmler3D]

Yeha but if they cost $64K now...imagine how much they would cost if they applied your suggestions

Okay +$10k to domesticate it for the audiophiles. Actually yeah why not just double the price for wood trim. Like some of these cars +5000 for wood trim. +$10000 for carbon fiber. +$10000 for leather dash. Etc

None of that makes it sound better or drive better.

Sure, a premium look drives a premium price. These could look better than the whole Wilson line, sound 10x better, and cost the same.

I am not saying they SHOULD do that, I think they already look right for the intended application. But I also think you COULD give these a "hi-fi" industrial design while preserving ~99% of the performance.

 

[Sokel]

Given that even their home speakers,G,F and Signature series are no much different than the small nearfields (F series subs are strange ) I don't think they have any beautifying intentions.
You get it for what it is (not me,new ones are hot high,not as the older gentle ones)

 

[kemmler3D]

Given that even their home speakers,G,F and Signature series are no much different than the small nearfields (F series subs are strange ) I don't think they have any beautifying intentions.
You get it for what it is (not me,new ones are hot high,not as the older gentle ones)

Totally - it's all on-brand for them. It's just an interesting thought as to what else they could look like.

Maybe this is my way to break into the high-end audio scene without actually being a good speaker designer or selling snake oil.

Realistically most performance of a speaker, in terms of the physical shape, only depends on the position of the drivers/ports, the size/shape of the front baffle (including waveguide), and enclosed volume. This is leaving aside diffraction from sides or internal brancing, but you get the idea. AFAIK you can be pretty creative as long as you follow those constraints.

So to that end, you could design a prettier housing that fits those constraints (the waveguide can be copied with a 3D scanner, no problem), 3D print it, put a nice finish on it, take apart the original and re-fit the parts, and re-sell it for... I dunno, however much you want. Anybody that wants to go this high-end and also cares about looks that much is probably spending sports car money.

Hmm... I have a 3D printer, anyway...

 

[Sokel]

Totally - it's all on-brand for them. It's just an interesting thought as to what else they could look like.

Maybe this is my way to break into the high-end audio scene without actually being a good speaker designer or selling snake oil.

Realistically most performance of a speaker, in terms of the physical shape, only depends on the position of the drivers/ports, the size/shape of the front baffle (including waveguide), and enclosed volume. This is leaving aside diffraction from sides or internal brancing, but you get the idea. AFAIK you can be pretty creative as long as you follow those constraints.

So to that end, you could design a prettier housing that fits those constraints (the waveguide can be copied with a 3D scanner, no problem), 3D print it, put a nice finish on it, take apart the original and re-fit the parts, and re-sell it for... I dunno, however much you want. Anybody that wants to go this high-end and also cares about looks that much is probably spending sports car money.

Hmm... I have a 3D printer, anyway...

Absolutely.
I posted about Rockports earlier today,they do wonders with their alu-resin stuff,as killer looks as it gets and the smaller ones are in the 30-40k$ range/per pair with good drivers,Be tweeters,waveguided,etc.
Perfectly doable if someone wants to do it.

 

[benanders]

I appreciate the fact that you're willing to be banned because of me .
…

Anything for another PJ fan.

 

[DSJR]

Abbey Road!

I'm reliably informed they were placed there... I suspect the sound engineers there are well used to their oddities by now and can work with it, or they eq the hell out of them (I don't know).

 

[Pearljam5000]

I assume that British people tend to like the "British sound..."

 

[kemmler3D]

Aside from that, in theory you can mix on any speakers as long as they're full range enough. You need to be accustomed to them to the point that you have an intuition about their sound and how your mixing references sound on them, but in principle you don't need truly flat speakers to mix, it just greatly simplifies the task.

Also yeah they probably EQ the hell out of them.

 

[DSJR]

I assume that British people tend to like the "British sound..."

What's that? You mean warm and soggy? That's fifty years ago, half a bloody century ago now. Even trad makers like Spendor and Harbeth boxes are very different sounding now from their 70's to 80's models and are hobbled mainly by their passive crossovers (I eagerly await the 'D' series from Harbeth next year sometime which promise to drag their valve-n-vinyl far eastern owner-base into the twenty first century) and in ASR terms, their directivity which the BBC once put emphasis on as much as the tech then could, but which has been played down.

Not sure B&W and PMC do a 'British Sound' if ever they did, Kudos speakers are anything BUT warm and cuddly in tone and KEF certainly don't today! We may have done good research in past decades, but as with everything else in this godforsaken UK, we couldn't/wouldn't invest and the ideas are being developed and used elsewhere in the world...

 

[Pearljam5000]

What's that? You mean warm and soggy? That's fifty years ago, half a bloody century ago now. Even trad makers like Spendor and Harbeth boxes are very different sounding now from their 70's to 80's models and are hobbled mainly by their passive crossovers (I eagerly await the 'D' series from Harbeth next year sometime which promise to drag their valve-n-vinyl far eastern owner-base into the twenty first century) and in ASR terms, their directivity which the BBC once put emphasis on as much as the tech then could, but which has been played down.

Not sure B&W and PMC do a 'British Sound' if ever they did, Kudos speakers are anything BUT warm and cuddly in tone and KEF certainly don't today! We may have done good research in past decades, but as with everything else in this godforsaken UK, we couldn't/wouldn't invest and the ideas are being developed and used elsewhere in the world...

No offense meant

 

[napfkuchen]

Very tough in a small room.

That's the important bit ... Here in Europe most people don't have huge houses / apartments, unfortunately. Right after I placed my Genelec speakers in a 4m x 3,6m room (only with a desk, a sideboard and a wardrobe as furniture) RT60 between 63 Hz and 16 kHz measured by GRADE was 0,6s to 1,0s, resulting in a very "muddy" stereo image. Under these circumstances GLM couldn't do much, bass was just overwhelming... Of course you cannot effectively dampen the lowest frequencies in such a small space. but with room treatment RT60 was reduced to 0,3s at 63 Hz and 0,2 at 16 kHz. Maybe some of you would call that a dead room. For me it's quite the opposite, sound has improved in every aspect.
Finally I can listen to this at (for me) higher volume (90 dBSPL) without the wardrobe trying to act as a passive subwoofer.

 

[srrxr71]

That's the important bit ... Here in Europe most people don't have huge houses / apartments, unfortunately. Right after I placed my Genelec speakers in a 4m x 3,6m room (only with a desk, a sideboard and a wardrobe as furniture) RT60 between 63 Hz and 16 kHz measured by GRADE was 0,6s to 1,0s, resulting in a very "muddy" stereo image. Under these circumstances GLM couldn't do much, bass was just overwhelming... Of course you cannot effectively dampen the lowest frequencies in such a small space. but with room treatment RT60 was reduced to 0,3s at 63 Hz and 0,2 at 16 kHz. Maybe some of you would call that a dead room. For me it's quite the opposite, sound has improved in every aspect.
Finally I can listen to this at (for me) higher volume (90 dBSPL) without the wardrobe trying to act as a passive subwoofer.

That’s a massive improvement.

 

[suttondesign]

Very tough in a small room.

yes, which is why the dutch 8c have a null sideways and do better.

 

[YSC]

NiceView attachment 344957

As much as I like genelec, this is fugly

 

[Pearljam5000]

That's the important bit ... Here in Europe most people don't have huge houses / apartments, unfortunately. Right after I placed my Genelec speakers in a 4m x 3,6m room (only with a desk, a sideboard and a wardrobe as furniture) RT60 between 63 Hz and 16 kHz measured by GRADE was 0,6s to 1,0s, resulting in a very "muddy" stereo image. Under these circumstances GLM couldn't do much, bass was just overwhelming... Of course you cannot effectively dampen the lowest frequencies in such a small space. but with room treatment RT60 was reduced to 0,3s at 63 Hz and 0,2 at 16 kHz. Maybe some of you would call that a dead room. For me it's quite the opposite, sound has improved in every aspect.
Finally I can listen to this at (for me) higher volume (90 dBSPL) without the wardrobe trying to act as a passive subwoofer.

What model do you have ?

 

[IamJF]

i think the points made by those who favor first reflections is that, in addition to being similar in tone, they are delayed by a certain minimum amount. that is posited as allowing the brain to sort them out as indirect. perhaps the time delay interval is precisely that amount of time the brain needs to process what is going on.

When the reflection comes in the first 10ms the brain adds it to the main signal and it colours the sound. 10ms that's 3,3m extra path what you need for your reflection (e.g. 2,5m direct path from speaker to ear, reflection needs to travel 5,8m or more)
You NEVER have this in smaller roome and not possible with a normal height ceiling! That's the reason live recording rooms are high and big - you need to delay the reflections for that spacious sound.

 

[juliangst]

Will there be a subjective difference between absorbed reflections and no reflections?

A lot of studios put main monitors into the corner (mounted on a baffle wall) so that sound cannot possibly reflect off the side walls (with less than 45 degree dispersion speakers). That's also what B&O goes for with their narrow mode and constant directivity.

 

[IamJF]

Some here feel first reflections should be damped, some (Toole and maybe Amir included, I think) feel it’s not necessary and is maybe detrimental to the stereo experience. One caveat, the speakers need to have good off/axis performance, as in even dispersion and a similar tonality to the on-axis response. Speakers with poor off-axis performance absolutely need reflections damped for best experience.

Depends if you want natural soundstage or exaggerated. If you want a true to the source reproduction or just some nice listening to music.

In normal sized rooms first reflections always add to the direct sound - they are to early to just add spaciouness. In a more professional environment you ALWAYS put something at these points - very often absorption (-> reproduction) but at least diffusion or you avoid these points at all (slanted walls etc).
So for me it's pretty strange that you simply stick with direct, hard reflections when you take listening serious ...

Here is an interesting curve about the effect of reflections at what time. In PA you use this effect for delay lines - with a few ms extra delay you can add some extra dB and still have the impression the sound comes from the front stage - it adds, even when it's louder as the main signal!
In this graph they show some spaciousness effekt but you still need to dampen your early reflections otherwise you get an unprecise and smeared image. Especially the ceiling! (and hor. off axis is rarely good). To get in the not audible area you need to dampen -15dB .. that's a lot. I need to check the formulars agains, but schould be somthing over 0,9 or under 0,9 absorption coefficient.

 

[IamJF]

Will there be a subjective difference between absorbed reflections and no reflections?

A lot of studios put main monitors into the corner (mounted on a baffle wall) so that sound cannot possibly reflect off the side walls (with less than 45 degree dispersion speakers). That's also what B&O goes for with their narrow mode and constant directivity.

You always have reflections in a room!
You can try to get them late. (size and shape)
Or low. (absorption, directivity)
Or all over the place to get lower and denser. (diffusion, but only works in a frequency range, not broadband)
Even outdoors you still have a floor reflection.

I tried to ge them in the "no audible" area of the graph and I really like the precise soundstage you achieve with that. But you don't get "surroundet" by that sound, it's different to a living room where you sit in 100% reverberant field!
Nevertheless that's way more "engaging" for me, to hear what the artist/soundguy/producer created in all it's details. But as I know the creative/production side of the music I listen a bit differently as most people ...