Why do some people say that Genelec sound too “flattering” or “too forgiving”? Specifically for mixing

[nqikz]

I’ve seen this said quite a bit, usually on Reddit forums to be specific. But how does that make any sense though? Genelecs have a flat frequency response and are analytical. They don’t flatter your mix or make things sound pretty?

I’ve never used Genelec before, so I’m really trying to understand why some people say that.

Here’s a thread about it on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/audioengineering/comments/16r7fxn/anyone_else_find_genelecs_really_hard_to_mix_on

He says“genelecs are hard to mix on” but then says that they are “too forgiving” that makes no sense. Maybe someone can pinch in on this and clear it up.

 

[nqikz]

Bump

 

[kemmler3D]

The HS5 has a terrible frequency response for a studio monitor: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/yamaha-hs5-powered-monitor-review.10967/

Specifically to this user's comments, it's boosted above 400hz or so, which explains why they think the flat genelec is boosted below that.

It also has extra energy at 1khz and it's missing some at 2khz which explains some of the harshness and "more detail" comments, along with the HS5 suffering from fairly high mid-range distortion.

The genelecs sound "nice" (compared to the HS5) because they're more accurate... This may diminish one's ability to find problems in a mix (or enhance it) but that's more due to the user than the speaker.

This all goes to illustrate the fact that mixing depends on your ears more than the speakers. If you're accustomed to hearing everything one way, you also need to mix that way. Changing to new monitors, even much better ones, demands that you acclimate to those speakers and how mixes sound on them, before you can work with them effectively.

This is why monitors with known problems can still be used to create good mixes. IMO The limit to that is when/ to the extent frequency response deviation or resonances cause masking effects during the mixing process. You can only properly mix what you can hear, but using references it's possible to mix well on "bad" monitors.

 

[DVDdoug]

People say a lot of meaningless things. If someone says something like that it helps if they explain what they mean. Even better if they can back it up with measurements.

Of course, not all Genelecs sound the same. And most of their line-up wouldn't qualify as main monitors in a "real studio".

You want flattish on-axis and off-axis response and good performance in the room. As long as the monitors are reasonably accurate a good mixing engineer will get good results. And it wouldn't be unusual for the room to be EQ'd. Not all monitors will exactly the same but the engineer should have some reference mixes so he/she can adapt.

 

[tmtomh]

I think @kemmler3D 's comment sums up the likely reasons behind that claim. I'll only add that it's a new one to me, as any criticisms I've read of the Genelecs' alleged "house sound" are on the other end of the spectrum, with people claiming they're too "revealing" or not "warm" enough.

 

[Multicore]

If you're accustomed to working with a certain monitor with a peculiar sound then transitioning to something without a peculiar sound may be difficult and hard to articulate.

 

[nqikz]

People say a lot of meaningless things. If someone says something like that it helps if they explain what they mean. Even better if they can back it up with measurements.

Of course, no all Genelecs sound the same. And most of their line-up wouldn't qualify as main monitors in a "real studio".

You want flattish on-axis and off-axis response and good performance in the room. As long as the monitors are reasonably accurate a good mixing engineer will get good results. And it wouldn't be unusual for the room to be EQ'd. Not all monitors will exactly the same but the engineer should have some reference mixes so he/she can adapt.

People say a lot of meaningless things. If someone says something like that it helps if they explain what they mean. Even better if they can back it up with measurements.

Of course, no all Genelecs sound the same. And most of their line-up wouldn't qualify as main monitors in a "real studio".

You want flattish on-axis and off-axis response and good performance in the room. As long as the monitors are reasonably accurate a good mixing engineer will get good results. And it wouldn't be unusual for the room to be EQ'd. Not all monitors will exactly the same but the engineer should have some reference mixes so he/she can adapt.

I saw another comment on a different reddit post saying “ the kh310 is not flat that’s why people like them” I don’t understand where people get these ideas from maybe I need to do more research?

 

[Multicore]

I saw another comment on a different reddit post saying “ the kh310 is not flat that’s why people like them” I don’t understand where people get these ideas from maybe I need to do more research?

Do you think researching why people who don't know something and aren't clear about what it is they don't know assert what they do is a productive use of your time?

 

[nqikz]

Do you think researching why people who don't know something and aren't clear about what it is they don't know assert what they do is a productive use of your time?

It’s not a big deal to me. It doesn’t take up my time. I do research on audio related things and try to gain more insight and truth about certain speakers. While I do that it just so happens I come across people that have different opinions.

 

[krabapple]

I’ve seen this said quite a bit, usually on Reddit forums to be specific.

Upvotes don't constitute science-based quality control.

Use better information sources for this.

 

[kemmler3D]

If you scroll that Reddit thread, you see a bunch of comments that are basically (reading between the lines) relying on masking effects from distortion and uneven frequency response to force the user to make mixes that are clear and have a pleasing sound. Another user comes along and says that's poor practice and neutral, clean monitors help you hear what your mix actually sounds like.

I think the latter user is correct and the other folks just need to check mixes on legitimately bad speakers if they're not sure about translating for home listeners.

 

[pablolie]

Bump

... and why would anyone care about what "people" say? the measurements show they are meticulously engineered, all around.

"Reviewers" have flowery worded *opinions* that are about as accurate as anyone's wet thumb in the wind.

Genelecs are about the most accurate you can get anywhere. Guaranteed. Anyone that says different either likes coloration or chooses to ignore basic engineering facts.

My personal gripe is that they have always been ugly to my eye, but now they are addressing it with an unmatched color pallette. They are on my radar in red.

 

[VintageFlanker]

I need to do more research?

Or reading ASR instead of Reddit would be a good place to start...

 

[diddley]

I visit reddit only once, and that was enough.

 

[pablolie]

I visit reddit only once, and that was enough.

Indeed, Reddit is an information vs misinformation roulette. And seems to trend towards the latter.

 

[DVDdoug]

I do research on audio related things.

Be careful! MOST of what you find online or in publications is nonsense. Audiophiles have always been somewhat crazy... This is one of the few rational-scientific audio-related resources.

HydrogenAudio is also good but they are focused on blind listening tests. They avoid measurements (because you can measure things that you can't hear.)

Floyd Toole and Ethan Winer both have good "scientific" books. Both of them are good without being aren't overly-technical nor overly-simplified.

Ethan Winer has a good article called Audiophoolery on his website. He explains the FEW REAL characteristics of "sound quality" so you can ignore people who say "flattering" or "forgiving" or the thousands of other undefined "audiophile" words.

Another "good guy" is Sean Olive.

The Audio Engineering Society is probably mandatory for "serious research". (I've never been a member but apparently some of their publications are free.)

 

[IngMishael]

I’ve seen this said quite a bit, usually on Reddit forums to be specific. But how does that make any sense though? Genelecs have a flat frequency response and are analytical. They don’t flatter your mix or make things sound pretty?

I’ve never used Genelec before, so I’m really trying to understand why some people say that.

Here’s a thread about it on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/audioengineering/comments/16r7fxn/anyone_else_find_genelecs_really_hard_to_mix_on

He says“genelecs are hard to mix on” but then says that they are “too forgiving” that makes no sense. Maybe someone can pinch in on this and clear it up.

Cos they're used to speakers having obvious tonal shifts which are less on the Genelecs so basically means they have to retrain how they approach mixes. Some people have become very used to certain monitors so using Genelecs throw them off initially.

But that's my one man's opinion of seeing acquaintances initially experience my setup in my home lol

 

[theREALdotnet]

Be careful! MOST of what you find online or in publications is nonsense.

The Internet does not lie!

 

[Multicore]

If you scroll that Reddit thread, you see a bunch of comments that are basically (reading between the lines) relying on masking effects from distortion and uneven frequency response to force the user to make mixes that are clear and have a pleasing sound. Another user comes along and says that's poor practice and neutral, clean monitors help you hear what your mix actually sounds like.

I think the latter user is correct and the other folks just need to check mixes on legitimately bad speakers if they're not sure about translating for home listeners.

I can see some logic in mixing for the end users playback characteristics (and tastes perhaps) but didn't see why that means a studio monitor with a peculiar sound. This logic means they should be mixing on AirBuds, no?

 

[Multicore]

It’s not a big deal to me. It doesn’t take up my time. I do research on audio related things and try to gain more insight and truth about certain speakers. While I do that it just so happens I come across people that have different opinions.

Ok. There's also this coming up later this month...

Dr. Toole's 4th Edition Book is Coming! (Discount)

I don't know about you but I am quite anxious to get my hands on the much expended 4th edition of Dr. Toole's book: https://www.routledge.com/Sound-Reproduction-The-Acoustics-and-Psychoacoustics-of-Loudspeakers-Rooms-and-Headphones/Toole-Olive-Welti/p/book/9781032761930 Sound Reproduction...

www.audiosciencereview.com