Message Boards

8240 or 8330?

folan, modified 7 Years ago.

8240 or 8330?

Padawan Posts: 54 Join Date: 10/13/14 Recent Posts
I have a small mid treated room about 10 square meters and I have installed Dirac Live to check its performance. In general the software did a good work on bass frequencies but it destroyed the stereo image, everything sounded like 2D, very static.
Besides that, the program revealed the following nulls in my room -12db at 45Hz, -13db at 68hz, -5db at 180Hz, -4db at 430Hz, -5db at 500Hz.
And peaks +5db at 50Hz, +6db at 90Hz, +16db @110Hz, + 8Hz at 145Hz + 6db at 920Hz and various others + - 1 to 2db peaks and nulls.

Will the GLM software take care of these peaks and nulls? Having in mind these peaks and nulls what speaker would be more adequate for my room, 8240 or 8330?
ilkka-rissanen, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Yoda Posts: 2564 Join Date: 3/23/09 Recent Posts
Hi,

GLM will take care of the peaks but it won't do anything to nulls as it is equivalent to pumping more energy to a black hole. I would recommend 8330 to you because your room seems to require quite a lot of response compensation due to high number of peaks and their magnitude. 8300 series speakers provide four to five times higher number of tools for room response compensation compared to 8200 series speakers.
folan, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Padawan Posts: 54 Join Date: 10/13/14 Recent Posts
Hi Ikka,

In what areas the 8330 provide more tools than 8240? I was looking for greater LF response, 8330 is limited to 58Hz. Are you planning a 8340-8350 in the near future?
ilkka-rissanen, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Yoda Posts: 2564 Join Date: 3/23/09 Recent Posts
Hi Ikka,

In what areas the 8330 provide more tools than 8240?

More AutoCal filters for room response compensation.


I was looking for greater LF response, 8330 is limited to 58Hz.

Actually 8330 is specified to 45 Hz (-6 dB) in anechoic space which means that in a typical room and with AutoCal calibration, it will go even lower. But of course 8240 will go lower due to larger woofer and cabinet size, 41 Hz (-6 dB).


Are you planning a 8340-8350 in the near future?

Unfortunately I can't disclose any information about future product launches.
folan, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Padawan Posts: 54 Join Date: 10/13/14 Recent Posts


Actually here its says 45Hz (-6db), which number is correct? http://www.genelec.com/products/8330a/
ilkka-rissanen, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Yoda Posts: 2564 Join Date: 3/23/09 Recent Posts
Actually 8330 is specified to 50 Hz (-6 dB) in anechoic space which means that in a typical room and with AutoCal calibration, it will go even lower. But of course 8240 will go lower due to larger woofer and cabinet size, 41 Hz (-6 dB).


Actually here its says 45Hz (-6db), which number is correct? http://www.genelec.com/products/8330a/

Hi,

45 Hz (-6 dB) is correct for 8330. 50 Hz (-6 dB) is the specification for the analogue 8030 model. Sorry for this error.
folan, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Padawan Posts: 54 Join Date: 10/13/14 Recent Posts
Hi Ilkka,

Can you clarify what 45 Hz (-6 dB) really means? Does it mean that the loudspeaker can reach the 39Hz at loud levels?

Also, as I said on my first post at the moment I’m using 8040, after installing Dirac Live the program revealed several deeps and peaks in my room. I was hoping that 8240 or 8330 will address these problems, especially the peaks. You still believe it’s better to go with 8330? I’m afraid that 8330 might sound thin compared to 8240. What do you think?
ilkka-rissanen, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Yoda Posts: 2564 Join Date: 3/23/09 Recent Posts
Hi Ilkka,

Can you clarify what 45 Hz (-6 dB) really means? Does it mean that the loudspeaker can reach the 39Hz at loud levels?

It means the frequency where the frequency response is attenuated by 6 dB (example picture shows -3 dB point) compared to the average pass band level.





Also, as I said on my first post at the moment I’m using 8040, after installing Dirac Live the program revealed several deeps and peaks in my room. I was hoping that 8240 or 8330 will address these problems, especially the peaks. You still believe it’s better to go with 8330? I’m afraid that 8330 might sound thin compared to 8240. What do you think?

For sure the 8330 will have little bit less bass extension compared to your 8040s, so the safest option for you would be the 8240. Of course the larger model is also better when it comes to mids, highs, dynamics, distortion etc.
folan, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Padawan Posts: 54 Join Date: 10/13/14 Recent Posts
For sure the 8330 will have little bit less bass extension compared to your 8040s, so the safest option for you would be the 8240. Of course the larger model is also better when it comes to mids, highs, dynamics, distortion etc.

But as I said on first post with my 8040’s and after installing Dirac Live the program revealed several deeps and peaks in my room (check the numbers). In your first answer you suggested to go with 8330 because GLM will do nothing to nulls, on you last answer you suggested 8240. Of course everybody’s enjoying a fuller frequency range that’s why I bought 8040’s in the first place, but if 8330 will perform better in my room then I think it’s wise to go with 8330.
If you were in my position what model would you choose?
ilkka-rissanen, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Yoda Posts: 2564 Join Date: 3/23/09 Recent Posts
For sure the 8330 will have little bit less bass extension compared to your 8040s, so the safest option for you would be the 8240. Of course the larger model is also better when it comes to mids, highs, dynamics, distortion etc.

But as I said on first post with my 8040’s and after installing Dirac Live the program revealed several deeps and peaks in my room (check the numbers). In your first answer you suggested to go with 8330 because GLM will do nothing to nulls, on you last answer you suggested 8240. Of course everybody’s enjoying a fuller frequency range that’s why I bought 8040’s in the first place, but if 8330 will perform better in my room then I think it’s wise to go with 8330.
If you were in my position what model would you choose?

Hi,

Both speakers models employ GLM's AutoCal calibration, it's just that 8330 will have more filters to play with which may be useful especially in a difficult room. That was the reason for my initial recommendation. But since you currently own 8040s, I would recommend 8240 in order not to change the overall performance of the speaker too much.
folan, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Padawan Posts: 54 Join Date: 10/13/14 Recent Posts
Both speakers models employ GLM's AutoCal calibration, it's just that 8330 will have more filters to play with which may be useful especially in a difficult room. That was the reason for my initial recommendation. But since you currently own 8040s, I would recommend 8240 in order not to change the overall performance of the speaker too much.


I don't care about callibration in different spots of the room, all I want is the best possible flat performance in the sweet spot. So in other words you believe the more extended lower response of 8240 will not cause more problems to my room?
ilkka-rissanen, modified 7 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Yoda Posts: 2564 Join Date: 3/23/09 Recent Posts

I don't care about callibration in different spots of the room, all I want is the best possible flat performance in the sweet spot. So in other words you believe the more extended lower response of 8240 will not cause more problems to my room?

Both speaker models support multipoint calibration, no difference there. 8330 does have more parametric filters to work with so at least theoretically it is able to achieve little bit flatter response if the room is extremely challenging. Extended low frequency response of the 8240 won't be a problem, AutoCal will handle that just fine.
folan, modified 6 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Padawan Posts: 54 Join Date: 10/13/14 Recent Posts
Hi,

GLM will take care of the peaks but it won't do anything to nulls as it is equivalent to pumping more energy to a black hole.


Hi Ilkka,

I'm really curious why DSP can't take care of nulls? Can you please explain? When I'm applying EQ to the whole frequency spectrum on my projects I'm able to hear all plus and minus adjustments. So why DSP can't apply EQ on nulls?
folan, modified 6 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Padawan Posts: 54 Join Date: 10/13/14 Recent Posts
Forget it Illka, I found the answer on this article. www.hifizine.com/2010/09/the-three-acou ... y-correct/

Thanks.
ilkka-rissanen, modified 6 Years ago.

Re: 8240 or 8330?

Yoda Posts: 2564 Join Date: 3/23/09 Recent Posts
Forget it Illka, I found the answer on this article. http://www.hifizine.com/2010/09/the-thr ... y-correct/

Thanks.

Hi,

Sorry for not noticing this earlier, but I am glad you found your answer already. :) It is obviously possible to apply wideband (low Q value) boost but EQ'ing true nulls (high Q value) is not possible by any EQ, analogue or digital. Those need to be fixed by room acoustics.