• 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). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Rank studio monitors/active speakers you have heard

q3cpma

Major Contributor
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
2,981
Likes
4,004
Location
France
So you're telling me that this kind of ringing is okay since you can't pinpoint it on a FR graph? (It's not Genelec btw)
That's what Toole says, and it's backed up by data, but I like to look at spectrograms to be sure, too. That FR graph you posted is way too smoothed to gather anything on the resonance front.
Fair point. How would you explain that some speakers (like Genelec) are so challenging to listen to for x hours for some people?
The thing is that their models are undoubtedly neutral in the HF region, so we must find fault elsewhere:
* Very probably: early GLM versions did equalize for flat on-axis at the listening point, which is something that will produce unnatural brightness in most situations (except ultra nearfield, basically).
* That neutrality may clash with sound habits or bad material.
* Another thing may be their unusually good directivity in the very top end: their waveguide design usually allows for less narrowing than flat baffle at the very top end.
* It could be unusually high IMD, but I doubt it, as S&R measures it and the 8350A/S360A didn't show any problem (for 2-ways, at least).
* May be psychological since, after all, their metal tweeters are very visible, which may influence people with strong beliefs about metal tweeters.

Some questions one may ask:
* Do you have data other than audiophilia nervosa from forums such as Gearslutz?
* If this was an actual problem with their speakers, wouldn't such a result oriented company solve it? Especially, since it seems very easy to, as most other manufacturers, even some clearly lacking Genelec's R&D budget and capabilities, don't suffer from this problem, right?
* Are you putting all their models in the same bag, including 2-ways and 3-ways?
 
Last edited:

mjvbl

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2021
Messages
21
Likes
16
I would not be surprised if genelecs tweeter performs poorly in a still undefined aspect.

It's almost like you're implying that tweeters are not fully understood things still or that something important still hasn't been uncovered about treble sound quality and this is exposed by some feature that is most present in Genelec's tweeters from what we know so far. (But it sounds more like confirmation bias really.)

Btw. the tweeter in the 8030/8330 models is 3/4" one, that means it'll have higher ultrasonic breakup frequency than 1" metal domes. So in that metric it should be better actually than most metal domes.

I wonder if it's preference vs. the extended flat off-axis response of the Genelecs above 6-8kHz where speakers without a waveguide would be significantly rolled-off. You say you wouldn't want to apply a slight EQ tilt to the treble response cause that's not a flat response anymore. But look at how rolled-off the off-axis response is of tweeters without a waveguide.

For mixing though I'd imagine erring on the (subjectively) bright side would be preferable as you'd wan't to detect and fix harshness in the audio you're working on.
 

carewser

Active Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2020
Messages
217
Likes
177
Location
Victoria, BC
Depends what you're using them for. The (true) joke about the Yamaha active monitors is that they are best monitors ever for mixing because they are worst speakers ever.

I've heard that as well, if your recording sounds good on a pair of Yamaha studio monitors it'll sound good on anything

I'm all about active/powered speakers as I own sets from Edifier, M-Audio, Klipsch, Logitech, Audioengine, Kanto and Corsair because I basically live in a little stereo shop with nothing but active/powered speakers:
 

Attachments

  • USER_SCOPED_TEMP_DATA_orca-image-2013917586.jpeg
    USER_SCOPED_TEMP_DATA_orca-image-2013917586.jpeg
    169.4 KB · Views: 121
Last edited:

MaxRockbin

Member
Joined
May 26, 2021
Messages
88
Likes
99
Location
Portland, Oregon
...this kind of ringing is okay since you can't pinpoint it on a FR graph?
Tweeters DO ring. They all ring. In fact, in the manufacturer specs, they tell you the frequency they ring at! Scanspeak (one of the best driver manufacturers in the world) conveniently lists it on their datasheet. Here's one for a metal tweeter: Scanspeak Beryllium tweeter 1" and here's another for a cloth tweeter: Scanspeak Textile Dome tweeter 3/4" I chose them pretty much at random, but go to their website and look up any kind you like. The resonances frequencies for these two tweeters are 450hz and 600hz respectively. The thing is, any sane speaker designer will have the crossover WAY over the resonance frequency. Your glass of scotch will ring more audibly. scotch resonance frequency

ALL THAT SAID: I happen to own speakers with a 1 1/4" copper dome tweeter. It rings like a MF at 18kHz. They actually concocted a fancy power sucking crossover that notches that out (don't ask me why it sucks power. I never understood that. But it's supposed to be a reason for the 82dB sensitivity. And the designers actually thought they'd knock it down to 80dB but marketing said most people don't have 500W amplifiers. But that's all irrelevant) .

The point is, you don't see the ringing on the frequency response because the tweeters are not tweeting when their resonance frequency is playing. The midrange is. And the midrange doesn't ring there.
 

Martijn W

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
24
I suspect it is because their ‘natural’ in room target curve is a little more horizontally flat than some other designs, but I have only measured their 8351B’s here, you can of course change that target to your own preference.
Keith
I suspect it is because their ‘natural’ in room target curve is a little more horizontally flat than some other designs, but I have only measured their 8351B’s here, you can of course change that target to your own preference.
Keith

That sounds somehow plausible. But would that also make a big difference when using high amounts of absorption like i do? I think broad radiation is mostly absorbed. Especially in the trebble, which falls down after travling a distance. It would have to travel +5meters (2 x 2,5m) via the side walls (if there would not be any absorption there).

It's almost like you're implying that tweeters are not fully understood things still or that something important still hasn't been uncovered about treble sound quality and this is exposed by some feature that is most present in Genelec's tweeters from what we know so far. (But it sounds more like confirmation bias really.)

What I do know is that Genelecs are very problematic to listen to for prolonged periods for me and for lots of people I know. That does not show very clearly in any measure. That's it.. I did not mean to imply anything with it. There is just no good explanation for it, it seems (to me)..

It could be personal. I am actually very sure it is, as some people recognise this issue and others don't.. And I can say that I am 'highly sensitive' in other areas as well..

But then I would still like to know for what causes it.. Because my Geithains give me all the info and none of the fatigue..
I don't get a headache from looking at Genelecs, that's for sure.. It's love and hate. Because I purchased them more than once, and I still use them occasionally. Most of times I really like what I hear initially. I just don't like speakers to be that sharp. I like speakers that give me all that info without going through me.
 
Last edited:

Martijn W

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
24
That's what Toole says, and it's backed up by data, but I like to look at spectrograms to be sure, too. That FR graph you posted is way too smoothed to gather anything on the resonance front.

The thing is that their models are undoubtedly neutral in the HF region, so we must find fault elsewhere:
* Very probably: early GLM versions did equalize for flat on-axis at the listening point, which is something that will produce unnatural brightness in most situations (except ultra nearfield, basically).
* That neutrality may clash with sound habits or bad material.
* Another thing may be their unusually good directivity in the very top end: their waveguide design usually allows for less narrowing than flat baffle at the very top end.
* It could be unusually high IMD, but I doubt it, as S&R measures it and the 8350A/S360A didn't show any problem (for 2-ways, at least).
* May be psychological since, after all, their metal tweeters are very visible, which may influence people with strong beliefs about metal tweeters.

Some questions one may ask:
* Do you have data other than audiophilia nervosa from forums such as Gearslutz?

My opinion is not based on any data. I have used Genelecs a lot and after a while my ears start burning. I have the same thing with my (late) Sennheiser HD25 DJ headphones. After a while my ears start to burn and it won't stop.

* If this was an actual problem with their speakers, wouldn't such a result oriented company solve it? Especially, since it seems very easy to, as most other manufacturers, even some clearly lacking Genelec's R&D budget and capabilities, don't suffer from this problem, right?

Good question. I ask myself the same thing. for me it simply means that Genelec makes good monitors, but cannot compete with the best; monitor brands that make monitors that deliver the same amount of information as Genelecs (or better) which after prolonged listening are not fatiguing to listeners. People I know that use genelec are not typically users that use thos speakers 8 hours per day 5 days per week.

* Are you putting all their models in the same bag, including 2-ways and 3-ways?

Another good question. No, but I think it is good that you mention it. A friend of mine has 8351 with 7360 sub with GLM setup.
I did not participate in the GLM ccorrection but he told me he decreased high-end output more than the proposed response, and it still sounded forward to me. Midrange was really good (much better than for example 8040).

I think that is the best Genelec speaker setup I have heard. With initial correction the treble still was way to loud/rough for my (and his) perception. So he turned the treble down. I remember it was something like -3dB >8kHz but i am not sure (and will ask him).

Midrange in that setup sounds very good imo. Very smooth. But also very different than high frequencies. Which still sound harsh to me..
 
Last edited:

Purité Audio

Major Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
4,738
Likes
3,646
Location
London
I tried some Geithains here the 944’s? they were ok, a little rolled off to my ears and a little congested compared to more contemporary designs but pleasant enough.
Keith
 

olivier salad

Member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
59
Likes
33
Tweeters DO ring. They all ring. In fact, in the manufacturer specs, they tell you the frequency they ring at!

Yes, they all ring, i.e. show oscillation of a signal in the step response, but in a different way. This is a silk dome tweeter, and it's much smoother then the previous one which I posted, which was aluminium.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled-1.jpg
    Untitled-1.jpg
    103.6 KB · Views: 35

Pearljam5000

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
1,372
Likes
1,366
I think when it comes to Genelec people confuse clarity and detail with "brightness"
Either way their sound is polarizing, look at the giant "Hate/ love relationship with Genelec" thread on Gearsltz lol
 

Martijn W

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
24
I think when it comes to Genelec people confuse clarity and detail with "brightness"
Either way their sound is polarizing, look at the giant "Hate/ love relationship with Genelec" thread on Gearsltz lol

my friend that has Genelec 8341 with sub also has Geithain rl944k1’s with subs. howcome the Geithains provide more information without being harsh? The Genelecs sound less clear, provide less info, but are bright and fatiguing.

I used to think that if you want lots of information you have to bare bright sounding monitors, but that is not the case I know now. Bright fatiguing sound is just a flaw imo. Some manufacturers just can’t make clear sounding monitors without them being harsh..

Genelec is making good progress with their ‘Ones’ imo, but that haven’t solved yet.. i read on their side that their monitors are non fatiguing (so they are aware of the issue). Too bad that the issues aren’t really resolved yet..

edit: or more probably that is just how they want it to be (as it seems to be perfect for lots of people), and people with preferences like me are not within their target audience.
 
Last edited:

Pearljam5000

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
1,372
Likes
1,366
my friend that has Genelec 8341 with sub also has Geithain rl944k1’s with subs. howcome the Geithains provide more information without being harsh? The Genelecs sound less clear, provide less info, but are bright and fatiguing.

I used to think that if you want lots of information you have to bare bright sounding monitors, but that is not the case I know now. Bright fatiguing sound is just a flaw imo. Some manufacturers just can’t make clear sounding monitors without them being harsh..

Genelec is making good progress with their ‘Ones’ imo, but that haven’t solved yet.. i read on their side that their monitors are non fatiguing (so they are aware of the issue). Too bad that the issues aren’t really resolved yet..

edit: or more probably that is just how they want it to be (as it seems to be perfect for lots of people), and people with preferences like me are not within their target audience.
That's your subjective experience , someone else could listen to the Genelecs and rl944k1’s and think the exact opposite, everybody hears differently
 

Martijn W

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
24
Yes I believe so too.

edit: I believe so too that everybody hears differently.
But imo Genelec makes very good monitors in their price range. I also own Neumann KH 310 with KH 750 sub. Imo that is more something Genelec can be compared with (at least the 8341 / 7360 setup i know)..

But they do not compete well with the best solutions available (for example Geithain, PSI, ATC). I am aware that these are more expensive. But also different league imo..

Maybe if they would get rid of this piercing high-end they would..
 
Last edited:

Purité Audio

Major Contributor
Industry Insider
Barrowmaster
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 29, 2016
Messages
4,738
Likes
3,646
Location
London
ATC and PSI are certainly expensive for traditional active designs, does that make them the ’best’ in your opinion?
Keith
 

dfuller

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 26, 2020
Messages
1,381
Likes
1,743
Tweeters DO ring. They all ring. In fact, in the manufacturer specs, they tell you the frequency they ring at! Scanspeak (one of the best driver manufacturers in the world) conveniently lists it on their datasheet. Here's one for a metal tweeter: Scanspeak Beryllium tweeter 1" and here's another for a cloth tweeter: Scanspeak Textile Dome tweeter 3/4" I chose them pretty much at random, but go to their website and look up any kind you like. The resonances frequencies for these two tweeters are 450hz and 600hz respectively. The thing is, any sane speaker designer will have the crossover WAY over the resonance frequency. Your glass of scotch will ring more audibly. scotch resonance frequency
That's not the ringing in question. The ringing we're talking about is more breakup modes and uncontrolled resonances than anything else. Metals are way less damped than treated cloth (then again, basically nothing is damped that well).
ALL THAT SAID: I happen to own speakers with a 1 1/4" copper dome tweeter. It rings like a MF at 18kHz. They actually concocted a fancy power sucking crossover that notches that out (don't ask me why it sucks power. I never understood that. But it's supposed to be a reason for the 82dB sensitivity. And the designers actually thought they'd knock it down to 80dB but marketing said most people don't have 500W amplifiers. But that's all irrelevant)
The "rings like a MF at 18khz" is the point here. If that gets excited, it can cause issues in other parts of the tweeter passband by way of IMD components. Better to push it far enough out of the audible band that it isn't likely to be excited (see: Beryllium's breakup modes at 40khz or so) or damp it well enough that it isn't an issue (Neumann's metal/cloth composite approach); aluminum's usual breakup mode is I believe around 27khz which should be fine.

ATC and PSI are certainly expensive for traditional active designs, does that make them the ’best’ in your opinion?
Keith
I think for me the thing about ATC that makes them excellent is they've spent a lot of time and money fixing driver-side issues. They could still do with a larger waveguide design for their tweeter, but... Eh. I also like their serviceability-comes-first approach, but that's not speaker related, really. I've never used a PSI.
 

temps

Active Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2020
Messages
156
Likes
217
Just checked sweetwater which is one of the most known US studio monitor shops and the the difference is actually only $34
Right, because North America = America

No and no.

Off the top off my head I though of a few reasons why you might buy the Neumanns even if they are more expensive.

I can't be bothered to say what they are because I don't like your attitude.
I don't care, you guys apparently missed the thread title where we offer our own rankings of studio monitors - which are clearly going to be subjective. I already clearly stated perceived value is factored into mine, and what the price difference is in my area and that's what KH 120s rank poorly. Funny doing weird shit like ranking Adam T5V ahead of the S2V or including Kef LS50s on a list of studio monitors got no comment but the KH 120 fanboy army showed up like always :rolleyes:

But by all means guys keep defending an indefensible product all you want. Three entire semi-tones more bass extension, eight parametric EQs and two shelfs less, for 50% more than a KH 80... LOL
 
Last edited:

badboygolf16v

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 24, 2018
Messages
162
Likes
170
I couldn't care less what speaker anyone likes, I'm not here to promote Neumann.

You're flat out wrong to say someone's a moron to buy a product that's more expensive.

But I get where you're coming from, subjectivity is fine, as long as it matches your opinion.
 

CMB

Active Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2019
Messages
102
Likes
126
Heard at Thomann in Köln and not in any ideal environment/conditions for a short time only.
Ranking absolut subjective and only personal preference under given situation :

1 Neumann KH420
2 ADAM S5V
3. Focal Trio 11 BE (I think)
4. Genelec 8361
5. EVE Audio SC 3012

If I would have had to decide there, I would have taken the Neumann. I hate to say it as they just have raised the price.
 

carewser

Active Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2020
Messages
217
Likes
177
Location
Victoria, BC
clearly I don't live in Europe - using a dollar sign was a clear indication of that. Here the KH 120 is $200 more per speaker than the 8030. So your own post lays it out very clearly... if they measure the same, but one costs far more, you'd have to be a moron to buy the more expensive one wouldn't you? That is very, very obvious

This post sure showed the people here that have delicate sensibilities as some finger wagging happened but i'm not one of them. I agree, while two speakers that measure the exact same probably won't sound the exact same I think they'd sound close enough that spending more would be foolish
 

Martijn W

Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2021
Messages
33
Likes
24
I think having the monitor that works best for you (which would differ per person per room) is more important than having the cheapest monitor based on specs only comparison..

And fwiw; by hearing only I would never have estimated these monitors measure so alike.. they sound very different to me..
 
Top Bottom