The wait is over: Genelec 8381A point source main monitor has arrived

[localhost128]

I also said "whatever the reason, they are not used," hence I do not see your counter-argument is relevant.

except your statement you stated as "fact" is completely incorrect and easily disproved. it bewilders me someone would even make this claim and then attempt to infer it with global authority.

 

[dfuller]

What these Genelec mains provide is a near-flush-mounted sound without the gigantic pain in the ass that is flush mounting. That said, lordy they are expensive. Probably more expensive than getting decently capable mains (e.g. 1237s or 1236s) and hiring somebody to properly design soffits for them.

 

[RobL]

What these Genelec mains provide is a near-flush-mounted sound without the gigantic pain in the ass that is flush mounting. That said, lordy they are expensive. Probably more expensive than getting decently capable mains (e.g. 1237s or 1236s) and hiring somebody to properly design soffits for them.

I think a pair of 1236A’s are around the same price and you’ll still have to build the wall and won’t have the placement flexibility the 8381’s offer.

 

[dfuller]

I think a pair of 1236A’s are around the same price and you’ll still have to build the wall and won’t have the placement flexibility the 8381’s offer.

Oops, I wasn't thinking of the 1236s, they're a mess with that dual mid thing. I was thinking of the 1238s!

 

[Pearljam5000]

Oops, I wasn't thinking of the 1236s, they're a mess with that dual mid thing. I was thinking of the 1238s!

But they wouldn't sound anything close the 8381
on the other hand Obviously I also think they're very expensive

 

[Anthony LoFi]

It’s bizarre that you can’t read the posts and understand what is said in its entirety and argue against the re-posting my words in quotes.

Besides, anyone who has any knowledge about studio design enough to argue about their monitor systems should have known that Church Studios is not a recent built studio; it was a refurbishments of an existing, well established studio. Similarly, Chemical Brothers studio is listed as a refit. I can see a habit here of not reading anything properly.

Anyway, I had enough. Go find someone else to argue senselessly — please!

The Bear is correct generally speaking Newman. I like you was under the impression that all high end recording studios fitted their main monitors to the building structure.
Due to I believe the rapid developments in all levels of professional audio, replacing soffit mounted mains where going to require the acoustics engineer who designed the room and matched the mains with angled precision to the mixing engineers listening position costs (lots). And with HT being another income source, studios now offer 5.1 (plus) to meet the demands of their customers so its easier and less costly to install floor mounted, As the room will be very well treated, there may be little remedial work to be done when installing a new suite of mains.
Also the manufacturers now are more technically involved in assistng the resident studio engineer to perform acoustic measurements to ensure as flat a response as possible and also we see them supplying their own custom phase and eq systems. There are some studios that will still go the soffit mounting path but I believe that is not the norm.

 

[Newman]

No problem with general trends and reasons. I was simply responding to a global statement by spotting a few examples to the contrary. Then quite a few more examples came to the fore contradicting the statement.

The rudeness that followed was in character, I am afraid.

cheers

 

[dfuller]

But they wouldn't sound anything close the 8381
on the other hand Obviously I also think they're very expensive

Sure they would. Soffited, as mains that aren't cardioid down to LF should be, they are probably pretty close to equal. Will they be the same? no. But most definitely in the same ballpark.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Sure they would. Soffited, as mains that aren't cardioid down to LF should be, they are probably pretty close to equal. Will they be the same? no. But most definitely in the same ballpark.

So why bother with the coaxial driver and all those extra mid drivers ?

 

[Newman]

Isn’t the answer on the website? “…with the full flexibility of free-standing monitor placement…”

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I understand these discussions but we need to keep things in perspective. Companies that operates in a competitive environment often introduce a "Statement" product one that in their opinion and hopefully that of the public at large represents the SOTA. THis is one of those. It does numerous things (on paper) better than what is currently available> Genelec reputation and trustworthiness is well known, in other words, independent measurements tend to match theirs. Their excellence in engineering is well known. For most audiophiles these may be (are ?) too much: not too many people require 130 dB playback capabilities . Most of us however require a system capable of flat FR from 20 to 20,000, capable of achieving healthy SPL up to 100 dB at the LP, with great directivity above 300 Hz... at least I do and like the Harman curve and its slope. There are numerous ways to achieve that, with or without Genelec or even with a combination of Genelec and non-Genelec products. It depends of room size and output needs. I would venture that systems capable of similar performances, may approach the cost of these, and perhaps be much more complex: Make not mistake about it, 120+ dB clean, full range, Low THD, Excellent directivity in both the vertical and horizontal plane, flat FR is not joke and cost a lot. I could surmise that most of those HEA contraptions you see on magazines or on forums, do not approach such heightened and, yes, SOTA, levels of performance in everything that matters... For these HEA folks... $64,000.oo is the price of just one amplifier with audible level of THD!...

A SOTA product with a high but IMHO, fair price, in line with its out-wordly performance. One may not need such performance, the same way most people don't need a car capable of 0 to 50 in 3 seconds or less...
For those who can afford a pair (or more!!? ). These represents a World Class SOTA system, as endgame as one is likely to ever find... A gem.

Peace.

P.S. It would behoove the HEA people, those who speak in term of Galactic Background and soundstage, black level of noise, organic sound .. etc.. to look seriously at these audio systems (that is what these are) before spending one more dollar on nonsenses....
...
.
Fat chance but , I am a dreamer.

 

[gnarly]

So why bother with the coaxial driver and all those extra mid drivers ?

It's a move towards a more concentric point-source-like design, than the traditional vertical stack of driver sections.

To get more SPL with a traditional vertical stack has required either larger drivers per each section, or multiple drivers per sections (1236 two mid vs 1238 one mid for example).
This comes at the cost of increasing drivers center-to-center distances through xover regions, and mucking up polars, particularly vertical.

The 8381 with its multiple low-mid drivers in a ring around the coax upper-mid and compression driver, offers improved polars, particularly vertical.

 

[fpitas]

It's a move towards a more concentric point-source-like design, than the traditional vertical stack of driver sections.

To get more SPL with a traditional vertical stack has required either larger drivers per each section, or multiple drivers per sections (1236 two mid vs 1238 one mid for example).
This comes at the cost of increasing drivers center-to-center distances through xover regions, and mucking up polars, particularly vertical.

The 8381 with its multiple low-mid drivers in a ring around the coax upper-mid and compression driver, offers improved polars, particularly vertical.

I'll add, when you use high order crossovers on a large speaker, you can (and will) get image bounce between drivers. It bothered me enough that I went to a similar concentric plan.

 

[gnarly]

Isn’t the answer on the website? “…with the full flexibility of free-standing monitor placement…”

I don't think so. I think the freestanding flexibility is more about the 3 low frequency 15" drivers, than about the 4 low-mid drivers integrating with the coax upper-mid and compression driver.
I don't see any reason the upper section of the 8381 couldn't be soffit mounted, with separated flanking sub sections tied in appropriately.

 

[dfuller]

So why bother with the coaxial driver and all those extra mid drivers ?

Because soffit mounting is a gigantic pain in the ass.

 

[Fredygump]

I don't think so. I think the freestanding flexibility is more about the 3 low frequency 15" drivers, than about the 4 low-mid drivers integrating with the coax upper-mid and compression driver.
I don't see any reason the upper section of the 8381 couldn't be soffit mounted, with separated flanking sub sections tied in appropriately.

This depends on if Genelec are planning to use directivity with this system. If they are trying to use directivity, then the spacial relationship between the front woofer and the dual opposed subwoofers matters. If no directivity, then yes, the cabinets can be separated. You could soffit mount the coax + front driver. You would have to keep these together, because of the high crossover point.

The lower cabinet, the dual opposed subwoofer cabinets, could be separated and placed anywhere in the room, like a traditional subwoofer.

But to me, deconstructing the system and rearranging it isn't the interesting part. Genelec have solved a problem that has plagued audio since it's inception. The biggest problem with subwoofers in small rooms is that setting them up is difficult to get right. The room dictates where the subwoofer should go, and it may not be where you want it to be.

So the interesting part about this design, and of the W371A, is that Genelec are proving that multiple subwoofers can be combined into a stereo pair of speakers, and it can produce near perfect bass without the user having to worry about subwoofer placement.

I don't know if anyone else shares my fascination with that idea? But yeah, I think it's pretty cool.

 

[Hexspa]

What's stopping someone from rigging this up themselves? I remember reading their adaptive woofer (W371?) was basically an automated switching system. One woofer has a null, the other less so at, say, 80Hz, and it switches that frequency over to the other monitor. How long till someone does this for less than genelec money?

 

[Fredygump]

What's stopping someone from rigging this up themselves? I remember reading their adaptive woofer (W371?) was basically an automated switching system. One woofer has a null, the other less so at, say, 80Hz, and it switches that frequency over to the other monitor. How long till someone does this for less than genelec money?

Nothing is stopping me!

The thing they said about filtering null frequencies does not work by itself. In my experience, that is just the final step to EQ a perfect response.

The technique that gives the best results for me is to "time align" the drivers at the listening position. I think the delays are needed so each low frequency driver can radiate as an independent source. If they are all in phase, then they act like a single source. I don't really know why it works, but it does. Setup isn't terrible once I figured it out. It's a doable DIY project, but to commercialize it, a great calibration system is needed. And I'm not sure if the ready made systems are capable of doing this.

 

[gnarly]

This depends on if Genelec are planning to use directivity with this system. If they are trying to use directivity, then the spacial relationship between the front woofer and the dual opposed subwoofers matters. If no directivity, then yes, the cabinets can be separated. You could soffit mount the coax + front driver. You would have to keep these together, because of the high crossover point.

Fully agree with all that
I'm kinda doubting that it uses directivity with the three 15"s, other than varying xovers points between sections. (or rather purely speculating )

The lower cabinet, the dual opposed subwoofer cabinets, could be separated and placed anywhere in the room, like a traditional subwoofer.

But to me, deconstructing the system and rearranging it isn't the interesting part. Genelec have solved a problem that has plagued audio since it's inception. The biggest problem with subwoofers in small rooms is that setting them up is difficult to get right. The room dictates where the subwoofer should go, and it may not be where you want it to be.

So the interesting part about this design, and of the W371A, is that Genelec are proving that multiple subwoofers can be combined into a stereo pair of speakers, and it can produce near perfect bass without the user having to worry about subwoofer placement.

I don't know if anyone else shares my fascination with that idea? But yeah, I think it's pretty cool.

I share your view on those points too. Looking forward to hearing how your project turns out.

 

[d3l]

Oh come on, Sarum with the studio stuff again. Just leave it dude…
Soffit mounts are done all the time, everywhere. Just sold 3 soffit mounts for 8351 for a new build.