Genelec 8351B Review (Studio Monitor)

[outfaced]

The point is very simple: Independent of internal DAC details you shouldn’t be worrying about, the Genelec 8351/8361, Kii Three, and D&D 8C are examples of exceptional speakers that will sound vastly better than an inferior passive speaker even if the latter is fed with the world’s best DAC and amp. So it’s pointless and irrational to worry about internal DAC specs in an active digital crossover speaker.

I also think that is rightly said
therefore it is interesting to read People sharing experience that have actually made the correct comparison in this price range. For the price of pair 8351B you can get a pretty much top of the line DAC with perfect messurments for 1000-1500, then the cutting edge D-amp technology from purify for 1500-2000 and that still leaves 5000 for speakers and cables, for which there is definitely some to be found.
I find Genelec's allinone solution quite charming, but I still can't really make up my mind.

 

[YSC]

I also think that is rightly said
therefore it is interesting to read People sharing experience that have actually made the correct comparison in this price range. For the price of pair 8351B you can get a pretty much top of the line DAC with perfect messurments for 1000-1500, then the cutting edge D-amp technology from purify for 1500-2000 and that still leaves 5000 for speakers and cables, for which there is definitely some to be found.
I find Genelec's allinone solution quite charming, but I still can't really make up my mind.

But then you still need to find some DSP solution to correct for room modes, which GLM takes care of quite well. sure at that price point a lot more options are available, but good coaxial+almost full range+ample amp and dac. considering all those if you really want one you don't have too many choices.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Thanks to this forum and Amir I ended up ordering a pair of 8351bs. Below are my measurements after calibration with zero room treatment besides yoga matts in the corners .
These replaced Salk Sound power play actives.
View attachment 228154

View attachment 228152

How are you liking the sound so far?

 

[outfaced]

But then you still need to find some DSP solution to correct for room modes, which GLM takes care of quite well. sure at that price point a lot more options are available, but good coaxial+almost full range+ample amp and dac. considering all those if you really want one you don't have too many choices.

NAD C 399 has DIRAC for 2000€
DIRAC for PC/MAC standalone is 400$ US ...
Digital preamp/streamer with dirac - miniDSP SHD studio for 1000$ US
DIRAC is more sophisticated software then GLM. Cant remember where, but there was a subjective comparison from a user with miniDSP and genelec in favor of the DIRAC. Beside that DIRAC make only this and for a lot longer.

But its true, there is just no passive analog of the genelec coaxial speakers. If there was a passive version, would bye it right away and keep mine mini DSP and purify amp and nice R2R dac. Now if i want the speaker, i have to make a compromises with the other hardware, because genelec just cant give you for those money the top of the line dac and amp and software. The big question for me is, if they manage to squeeze out of the integration so much additional performance, that compensate the not so refined hardware.

 

[Peluvius]

NAD C 399 has DIRAC for 2000€
DIRAC for PC/MAC standalone is 400$ US ...
Digital preamp/streamer with dirac - miniDSP SHD studio for 1000$ US
DIRAC is more sophisticated software then GLM. Cant remember where, but there was a subjective comparison from a user with miniDSP and genelec in favor of the DIRAC. Beside that DIRAC make only this and for a lot longer.

But its true, there is just no passive analog of the genelec coaxial speakers. If there was a passive version, would bye it right away and keep mine mini DSP and purify amp and nice R2R dac. Now if i want the speaker, i have to make a compromises with the other hardware, because genelec just cant give you for those money the top of the line dac and amp and software. The big question for me is, if they manage to squeeze out of the integration so much additional performance, that compensate the not so refined hardware.

These are the sorts of speculative claims that must be supported by relevant data. Based on the measured performance of the speaker, there is no reason for anyone to doubt the capability of the onboard amp, DAC or processing circuitry. Paying silly money for transparent improvements is not logical as Mr Spock would say.

I use both GLM and Dirac on separate systems and would struggle to give any relevant detail around comparing the two acoustically but I can confirm both do overcome problematic room acoustics well. Dirac is harder to tune and has less user configurable capability than GLM.

 

[YSC]

NAD C 399 has DIRAC for 2000€
DIRAC for PC/MAC standalone is 400$ US ...
Digital preamp/streamer with dirac - miniDSP SHD studio for 1000$ US
DIRAC is more sophisticated software then GLM. Cant remember where, but there was a subjective comparison from a user with miniDSP and genelec in favor of the DIRAC. Beside that DIRAC make only this and for a lot longer.

But its true, there is just no passive analog of the genelec coaxial speakers. If there was a passive version, would bye it right away and keep mine mini DSP and purify amp and nice R2R dac. Now if i want the speaker, i have to make a compromises with the other hardware, because genelec just cant give you for those money the top of the line dac and amp and software. The big question for me is, if they manage to squeeze out of the integration so much additional performance, that compensate the not so refined hardware.

actually R2R IME are more psychological than actual enjoyment, (I am using Holo Spring 2 in NOS though, which I admit is more of a bias effect). But if I am in that budget I possibly go the 8351B and GLM route, since GLM have enough config options for my need and clean up the room modes, thing is the integrated package have a lot less cables to mess around, which saves trouble when moving homes, plus wife with vaccum cleaner would have far less complain. to me parts performance of course is the better, better. but then since the resulting sound linearity and distortion is what matters, I don't care how the coponents is performing as long as it don't degrade the outcoming sound.

One extra benefit of having a internal DSP crossover is that it removes the analogue caps and resistor crossover, which is both costly and way more difficult to integrate the various drivers, which in turn don't tax the amp as much and make a chip amp feisable, and the auto standby+protection is a bit plus for me too.

 

[outfaced]

I was at the Berlin Experience Centre yesterday ... quite an interesting Experience indeed.
My focus was 8351, I also listened to 8361 and 8341. The 8341 definitely sounded more tense and squashed and with less detail. The 8351 and 8361 as you might expect have a similar signature, with the 8361 a bit lacking focus and sounding too wide and big, at least for my taste. The 8351 drew me into the music more.
The most impressive thing though, for me at least, was that the sound was unlike any home hifi system I've listened to. I wouldn't immediately say better or worse in any absolute sense, because I can think of at least a few reasons why this sound wouldn't appeal to many people for home listening. The main one that I'm still pondering is that these speakers don't sound relaxing ... and at home, sometimes that's exactly what one needs. A few hours later I was listening to a system with a hegel H5xx amp and sonus faber sonetto 5 speakers ... similarly priced, which had no less details and dynamic but presented it in a much more delicate way. In any case, it should be noted that genelec sounded much truer and closer to reality, with a much more audible presence. The resolution in the mids is just a smashing relistic. On the other hand, many people would describe the sound as slightly edgy or aggressive. However, it became quite clear to me what tone engineers appreciate in these speakers - no hidden detail remains in the record.
Perhaps the only thing I can point out as a definite minus is the resolution in the bass section. I've definitely heard better there (from ATC for example). They go low ... but just not so clear. And the other thing is that they doesn't have that depth and layering in the bass that big floorstanders give. We attached also subs in tha audition, but still is not the same.

 

[Tailwagger]

I was at the Berlin Experience Centre yesterday ... quite an interesting Experience indeed.
My focus was 8351, I also listened to 8361 and 8341. The 8341 definitely sounded more tense and squashed and with less detail. The 8351 and 8361 as you might expect have a similar signature, with the 8361 a bit lacking focus and sounding too wide and big, at least for my taste. The 8351 drew me into the music more.

Funny, I'm just back from demo-ing the 31/41/51s at Genelec's demo room here in MA. Pretty much why you have to go and hear them for yourself. I came away thinking the 3's where a bit squished in the midrange, but that the difference between the 4s and 5s was pretty marginal, especially with a sub on the 4s which I preferred to the 5s without. I frankly would be over the moon with any of them, but my dealer insisted take home a pair of the 4s for the next week or two. How could I say no? It will be interesting to A/B them to my newly restored S30Cs (which I've owned since 1992) to see if their keepers or not. Undoubtedly not everyones cup of tea, very 'modern' sound, but if you're into sound stage and definition, these things simply have to be heard to be believed.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Funny, I'm just back from demo-ing the 31/41/51s at Genelec's demo room here in MA. Pretty much why you have to go and hear them for yourself. I came away thinking the 3's where a bit squished in the midrange, but that the difference between the 4s and 5s was pretty marginal, especially with a sub on the 4s which I preferred to the 5s without. I frankly would be over the moon with any of them, but my dealer insisted take home a pair of the 4s for the next week or two. How could I say no? It will be interesting to A/B them to my newly restored S30Cs (which I've owned since 1992) to see if their keepers or not. Undoubtedly not everyones cup of tea, very 'modern' sound, but if you're into sound stage and definition, these things simply have to be heard to be believed.

Did you also audition the 8361?

 

[Tailwagger]

Did you also audition the 8361?

Sadly no... there were none available, even in their showroom. They are scarce as hen's teeth around here at the moment, demand is extremely high. Just as well as I'm sure if I had heard them I would have been compelled to find a way to afford them.

 

[Axo1989]

I read this review again after a discussion with another poster about subjective listening. In some cases (but not always) we have interesting commentary from Amir about listening impressions. For this one we do, with comparison to the Salon2. These Genelec give an excellent result on the Klippel of course. I was interested in the commentary on bass and overall scale and correspondence (if any) in the measurements.

I don't doubt the subjective impression but nonetheless looked again at the graphs. From the Klippel we see bass rolling off fairly steeply below ~35 Hz which is illustrative, that diminishing lower octave (which I expect is amply covered by the Salon2 based on measurements elsewhere) provides a sonic foundation that may be missing from the smaller speaker.

If I remember correctly the distortion graphs don't come from Klippel measurements (a pity—I'm sure there's good reason but I wonder why they don't provide this output—anyway separate issue) and are done separately. The FR trace on that graph shows the speaker almost flat from the treble to a high point around 100 Hz followed by an almost 10 dB drop to 80 Hz and a smoother roll-off below 50 Hz. Quite a bit less bass than the Klippel shows. I'd imagine that accentuates the gap between the two speakers in the lower octaves. On top of that we have likely dynamic compression/limitation at higher levels in the Genelec, which isn't measured directly here.

Does this latter graph represent a single point measurement in Amir's listening room? Or something else?

 

[youngho]

Funny, I'm just back from demo-ing the 31/41/51s at Genelec's demo room here in MA. Pretty much why you have to go and hear them for yourself. I came away thinking the 3's where a bit squished in the midrange, but that the difference between the 4s and 5s was pretty marginal, especially with a sub on the 4s which I preferred to the 5s without. I frankly would be over the moon with any of them, but my dealer insisted take home a pair of the 4s for the next week or two. How could I say no? It will be interesting to A/B them to my newly restored S30Cs (which I've owned since 1992) to see if their keepers or not. Undoubtedly not everyones cup of tea, very 'modern' sound, but if you're into sound stage and definition, these things simply have to be heard to be believed.

I am sometimes a bit surprised that more discussion doesn't occur relatively to certain frequency bandwidths. For example, the human voice typically ranges from a few hundred to several thousand Hertz (fairly similar for the violin), while modal effects typically predominate from several hundred Hz on down. Maybe some part of this "modern sound" has to do with the peaks in the upper part of this part of this critical frequency spectrum contributing to the perception of "detail". I could imagine that the rising on-axis response for the Salon 2 relative to the Genelec monitors could contribute to @amirm's perception of "taller image," consistent with Toole's and Blauert's comments on vertical perception above 8 kHz or so, as I recall.

 

[Eetu]

@Axo1989 IIRC For full range sound Genelec does recommend adding the 7370A sub (or bigger). It's not designed to directly compete with a speaker like the Salon2.

To level the playing field somewhat and match the area of the Salons' 6x 8" woofers you would look at a pair of 14-15" subs such as 2x 7380As or equivalent from other brands.

@youngho Re: the 'taller image'. I'm assuming it's simply due to the Salons' wider dispersion combined with the tall cabinet and multiple drivers (as opposed to the point-source design of the Genelecs).

 

[Axo1989]

@Axo1989 IIRC For full range sound Genelec does recommend adding the 7370A sub (or bigger). It's not designed to directly compete with a speaker like the Salon2.

To level the playing field somewhat and match the area of the Salons' 6x 8" woofers you would look at a pair of 14-15" subs such as 2x 7380As or equivalent from other brands.

I agree of course. The driver area for the bass is decisive. What I was getting at was how (and how much) we see that reflected in the measurements. On the Klippel, the Genelec bass looks somewhat better that the FR shown in the distortion graphs (I guess the latter may be the listening area, but I'm not sure of that).

Someone nearby should definitely crash Amir's place with a bottle/case of his favourite beverage/s and get that Salon up onto the Klippel.

@youngho Re: the 'taller image'. I'm assuming it's simply due to the Salons' wider dispersion combined with the tall cabinet and multiple drivers (as opposed to the point-source design of the Genelecs).

Perhaps those Genelecs do better mounted higher on the W371? Not that it changes the mid/tweeter arrangement.

 

[Sancus]

: the 'taller image'. I'm assuming it's simply due to the Salons' wider dispersion combined with the tall cabinet and multiple drivers (as opposed to the point-source design of the Genelecs).

Salon 2s, and many large floorstanding speakers, have tweeters that are above ear level for most people sitting on living room furniture. This can lead to that.

Most configurations put tweeters of bookshelves/monitors closer to actual ear level.

Anyway, for proper large floorstander competition you're supposed to get the W371A. Which will outperform any passive floorstander on the market due to its configurable directivity that will reduce boundary interference above subwoofer frequencies. And yes, it's expensive, but that's more of an us problem than a Genelec problem

 

[youngho]

Salon 2s, and many large floorstanding speakers, have tweeters that are above ear level for most people sitting on living room furniture. This can lead to that.

Most configurations put tweeters of bookshelves/monitors closer to actual ear level.

Sure, that's possible, as well as listener expectation based on the visual aspect, but the mid-bass and midrange would predominantly reproduce what I think of as the critical frequency range for voice and violin, and I was just wondering if there was some degree of contribution to this from the frequency response difference at the highest frequencies. Anyway, just a throwaway comment. Mostly, I'm wondering what in the Genelec's frequency response curve might contribute to some of the comments above mine in this page.

 

[Tailwagger]

My semi conscious notion going in was that the designers assumed that the speaker would generally be placed above the listeners head and tilted down. These are, at root, near fields designed for mixing in control rooms with massive consoles between the listener and the speaker. This assertion is supported by simply glancing at the photo below as to how they have laid out their demo room in Natick. At the moment, I have the 41s resting atop my S30s and pointed down at the listening spot, but once the deal is finalized I'm going to look for new stands to position them roughly at the same height once the S30s exit. Having listened to several speakers recently in my quest to replace the S30s, YG, Sonus Faber and others, my utterly unscientific opinion is that while I enjoyed the signatures of some of those offerings, the Genelecs are far more accurate and revealing... even prior to running SAM... not to mention quite a bit less expensive, especially when one considers the added cost of amplification. In the end, while these aren't inexpensive, AFAIC they are a bargain. The only question around keeping the 41s at this point is whether I'd get them in raw instead of black.

 

[youngho]

My semi conscious notion going in was that the designers assumed that the speaker would generally be placed above the listeners head and tilted down. These are, at root, near fields designed for mixing in control rooms with massive consoles between the listener and the speaker. This assertion is supported by simply glancing at the photo below as to how they have laid out their demo room in Natick. At the moment, I have the 41s resting atop my S30s and pointed down at the listening spot, but once the deal is finalized I'm going to look for new stands to position them roughly at the same height once the S30s exit. Having listened to several speakers recently in my quest to replace the S30s, YG, Sonus Faber and others, my utterly unscientific opinion is that while I enjoyed the signatures of some of those offerings, the Genelecs are far more accurate and revealing... even prior to running SAM... not to mention quite a bit less expensive, especially when one considers the added cost of amplification. In the end, while these aren't inexpensive, AFAIC they are a bargain. The only question around keeping the 41s at this point is whether I'd get them in raw instead of black.

Hi, when I visited the Genelec Experience Room (https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-visit-to-genelec-usa-natick-ma.28687/), the 8351bs were actually positioned much farther than what you show here. I believe that what you are showing are the 8331a on their stands. As you can see in my pictures, the 8351bs are not actually tilted down, but they are positioned higher than typical listener ear height, and they are indeed designed for nearfield use (or up to 8 ft away, acc to https://www.genelec.com/correct-monitors).

 

[Spocko]

I was at the Berlin Experience Centre yesterday ... quite an interesting Experience indeed.
My focus was 8351, I also listened to 8361 and 8341. The 8341 definitely sounded more tense and squashed and with less detail. The 8351 and 8361 as you might expect have a similar signature, with the 8361 a bit lacking focus and sounding too wide and big, at least for my taste. The 8351 drew me into the music more.
The most impressive thing though, for me at least, was that the sound was unlike any home hifi system I've listened to. I wouldn't immediately say better or worse in any absolute sense, because I can think of at least a few reasons why this sound wouldn't appeal to many people for home listening. The main one that I'm still pondering is that these speakers don't sound relaxing ... and at home, sometimes that's exactly what one needs. A few hours later I was listening to a system with a hegel H5xx amp and sonus faber sonetto 5 speakers ... similarly priced, which had no less details and dynamic but presented it in a much more delicate way. In any case, it should be noted that genelec sounded much truer and closer to reality, with a much more audible presence. The resolution in the mids is just a smashing relistic. On the other hand, many people would describe the sound as slightly edgy or aggressive. However, it became quite clear to me what tone engineers appreciate in these speakers - no hidden detail remains in the record.
Perhaps the only thing I can point out as a definite minus is the resolution in the bass section. I've definitely heard better there (from ATC for example). They go low ... but just not so clear. And the other thing is that they doesn't have that depth and layering in the bass that big floorstanders give. We attached also subs in tha audition, but still is not the same.

You can tune the frequency curve of the 8351 to closely match what you prefer via GLM's acoustic editor - there's nothing magical about any system beyond its room response curve. As long as you know what you like or dislike, you can set your Genelecs to always match your preference in any room ultimately, sounding like the Sonus Faber. What you describe as "delicacy" could be a slight dip at 4K (I'm just making this up obviously) but if you memorize your personal preference curve then you're already half way there!

The house curve for Genelec is neutrality for monitoring and mixing which is not necessarily what an audiophile might want - but you can make them "warm" or "lively" or "Harman" however you wish.

 

[Tailwagger]

Hi, when I visited the Genelec Experience Room (https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/a-visit-to-genelec-usa-natick-ma.28687/), the 8351bs were actually positioned much farther than what you show here. I believe that what you are showing are the 8331a on their stands. As you can see in my pictures, the 8351bs are not actually tilted down, but they are positioned higher than typical listener ear height, and they are indeed designed for nearfield use (or up to 8 ft away, acc to https://www.genelec.com/correct-monitors).

Yep, that's correct... that photo was from their website, when the room was announced. The room has more gear in it now. As I didnt take my own photo, I ref'd it to prove the point. They had the 31/41s near field just above and behind the console and, as you mentioned, the 51s on stands several feet behind on the stands.