At last, here it is, the 2nd instalment of my studio monitor speaker shootout. Last year I built an audio post-production sound studio in my garden, which was a lot bigger than our spare bedroom, and my Genelec 8010s just weren't going to cut it. I now had a bespoke soundproofed and well-treated room. After hours of internet browsing, I soon realised that although there are speakers that are clearly better than others within the same brand, and some brands are favoured by bigger professional studios, it wasn't quite as black and white as I had hoped. Speaker choice truly is a personal preference thing when it comes to the difference between various professional audio brands.

Long story short, I posted on LinkedIn and Twitter asking my connections and followers what speakers I should try out on loan and I was really surprised at the huge a response I got! I went through every comment, made a note on how many times each speaker came up, and read reviews and tech specs on all speakers people recommended. I ended up with a list of about 11 that I wanted to try based on these posts/reviews, but I had to cut the list down and I got it down to 7 pairs of monitor speakers…

• Genelec 8340a SAM

• Focal Shape 65

• Focal Solo 6be

• Dynaudio LYD 48

• Neumann KH310

• PSI A17

• Dynaudio Core 7

In part 1 we looked at the technical specifications, the pricing, the functionality and back panel settings, the frequency response in my studio using Sonarworksand the aesthetics of how well they looked in my studio. I left you on a cliffhanger waiting to find out how they sounded in my studio and which pair I finally chose for my new studio. So now we have completed the ‘previously on’, let’s get on and see how they sounded.

Listening Tests

Before I get into the comparisons, I would like to stress that these are purely my own observations and opinions. What I can hear/notice may differ to what someone else might pick up. Everyone prefers different things – some like bright speakers, some can't stand them. Everyone's circumstances are different. I also want to stress that I am not an expert in this area, I didn't study acoustics, I haven't done years of listening tests, and I am not a speaker engineer!

The first thing I did with each of these speakers was to work on them for two or three days straight. I was working on a TV series at the time so had a solid workload which helped. This was to allow time to get used to the sound of the speakers, and also see whether my ears/I got tired at the end of the day. Now that I have my lovely purpose-built garden studio, I listen to things a lot louder than I used to when at home. Ear fatigue is a common issue for sound engineers – loud noises for 8-12 hours straight is a lot for anyone to handle! Wikipedia defines it as such (I know Wikipedia isn't the most scientific source, but it was the most succinct and least scientific definition I could find for you!) :

 “Listener fatigue (also known as listening fatigue or ear fatigue) is a phenomenon that occurs after prolonged exposure to an auditory stimulus. Symptoms include tiredness, discomfort, pain, and loss of sensitivity”

 The extreme tiredness can cause you to hear things differently, and also causes a drop in productivity. Not ideal!

I know this is a boring outcome, but I did not experience any extreme ear fatigue from any of these speakers. Given, I only used them for a few days in a row, but the onset of fatigue can occur from just one long shift! I did feel slightly more drained after working with the Dynaudio LYD 48s and a big day on the Genelecs, however, it is hard to tell whether that is because of the speakers, or whether I was particularly tired for another reason, or I had some particularly tricky scenes that I had to push myself more on. It wasn't noticeably a speaker issue. 

In terms of the actual evaluations, I wasn't sure where to begin. When I did my initial trials of the speakers (working a few days on each) I didn't find any problems with any of them. I found all of them enjoyable to work on, and would happily buy any of them! However, the point of this shootout is to find which I would prefer to work with, regardless of all of them being good.

So I asked my good friend Google to suggest listening tests. I found a website that had an audio test for Stereo Imaging. In J. Gordon Holt's  book "The Audio Glossary,", Imaging is defined as "The accuracy with which a stereo system recreates the original sizes and location of the instruments across the soundstage.” I then found this useful site’s suggestions of songs for listening tests.

The first clip I chose to use was Can by Spoon. This song is good for analysing the stereo imaging as lots of the instruments have been cleverly placed in different 'virtual' positions of the soundscape. It also has varied instrumentation, but not orchestral, and some nice drum fills. So I found it good for testing the clarity of these instruments in different frequencies. You can check out what it sounds like with this Youtube clip.

I then recorded my husband talking and used this as a dialogue test. I know his voice extremely well and felt it would be a good way to see how accurate the speakers were – how much they coloured the sound and essentially listening to how true to the source the sound was.

I bounced a clip of a documentary film I had recently mixed, called Disparity that had heavily featured VO and music. With permission from the director of Disparity - Renu, here is the clip I used.

If you are interested in the film then there is a Youtube clip…

Next, I made a stereo bounce of a fight scene from a 5.1 mix of mine I did last year, Rising Free (it slightly differs from my surround mix but was useable for this test). I chose this scene because it has some lovely rich orchestral music, low sound design-y booms and whooshes, but also crisp sound effects and foley, like the punches, body grabs, and gunshots. Again with the permission of the director here is the clip I used..

Initial Listening Tests

These were the observations I had:

• Focal Solo 6be: Good imaging. Nice attack on the Can - Spoon song and the fight scene in particular.

• Neumann KH310: Bassier – quite boomy. Feels less bright also – When I listened to my documentary clip I felt I wanted to take a lot more out the low end/ low mids than I did. Good stereo imaging. Nice instrument distinction in mid frequencies. Speakers felt physically hot at the end of the day which isn't ideal.

• Focal Shape 65: Good imaging, same reverb tails as the solos.

• PSI A17: Drum fills in the Can song incredibly clear with a nice attack, sound really good. Generally good clarity in the Can song. Nice crisp SFX ad foley in the fight scene.

• Dynaudio Core 7: Clear drums in the documentary clip The music didn't seem as 'wide' for some reason. Violins were lost in the fight scene from Rising Free

• Dynaudio LYD 48: One word: BASS. I could hear some lovely bass definition that I couldn't before, and my low booms in the fight scene were much closer to how they sounded in my surround mix. Nice drums Brighter than the Neumanns (the only other 3-way speakers). Stereo imaging not as accurate in the online test as the others.

• Genelec 8340a: Generally nice sound – a bit harsh/bright at some points. 

I can't speak about these Genelecs without mentioning their SAM feature, measured with the GLM software. Although my tests were done with 'default' settings, the ability to measure and store settings on the speakers is very useful not to mention not having to open software/plugins to use like Sonarworks.

Another advantage is that their calibration can be used for more than 2 speakers which would be useful if I was investing in my 5.1 set up at some point although Sonarworks currently only works with stereo speakers. For a detailed look into the Genelec SAM software, you can read and watch Alan Sallabank's review. The speaker review is for a different model, but he speaks about the GLM software in detail.

As useful as it is, the GLM kit does need to be bought separately, so it's up to you whether you use it, or use different calibration software. I guess you could potentially set the Stored setting on these, and then also use Sonarworks etc to flatten the curve further. However, I assume most people would not want to invest in more than one calibration software.

Initial Test Conclusion

There are certain things I was trying to listen out for, which other reviews speak about like low-frequency overhang and group delay, differing reverb tails etc. But I didn't particularly notice them – and, to be honest, found them quite hard to judge.

So apart from the odd specifics, there isn't a lot distinguishing these monitors from each other. The initial tests did not give enough to make an informed decision. Although there were some things I liked about some of the speakers, it really wasn't easy to actually directly compare them all. It took time to switch the speakers over (carefully) and get them all connected, and playing at the same volume. I have a very bad memory in general which didn't help!

Admittedly, I did expect there to be a much greater, or should I say a much more obvious difference between these speakers based on the many reviews I read, their price, and also other engineer's comments to me like “oh you'll absolutely love X”, “you'll notice immediately how much better Y are than everything else” etc.

Listening Tests - Round 2

So I decided to work out a method where I could directly compare them, by A/B-ing as quick as possible. To do this, I set up one speaker on the left, and a different one on the right, with the idea of playing something continuously and switching between the two speakers. Obviously they'd need to be the same volume to accurately compare because our brains usually favour the loudest source, thinking it is 'better' when in fact just louder, therefore potentially clearer for that reason. I downloaded an SPL meter app on my phone and used that just to measure the loudness of each before beginning the tests each time.

I set up all my reference clips on one track and panned them all to the left. I then duplicated the track underneath a panned that track to the right. I set the level of each track to around the same on each speaker using the SPL meter I mentioned above. I set my Pro Tools Solo function to X-OR (cancels previous solos) , which enabled me to switch quickly between the two tracks by soloing one, then the other. Here were my direct comparisons, which became a kind of knockout contest.

Genelec 8340 vs Dynaudio LYD 48

• Dynaudios nicer on Phil's voice

• Dynaudios muddier on orchestral music

• Genelecs had more depth on the mixes with everything (music, sx etc)

• Genelecs had nicer instrument distinction in Can song

Winner: Genelec 8340

Genelec 8340 vs PSI A17

• Orchestral music sounded a bit nicer on Genelecs

• Genelecs were harsher sounding on Phil's voice - PSIs were clearer on his voice

• Genelecs has better bass extension; could really hear my bass booms in the fight scene

• PSIs had better clarity on the Can song with a better distinction between instruments.

• PSIs had really crisp drums.

Winner: PSI A17

Genelec 8340 vs Focal Shape 65

• Shapes were nicer on Phil's solo voice – Genelecs  were a bit harsh

• Genelecs had better clarity in percussion in documentary and Can song, and crisper fx and foley in fight scene

• Genelecs nicer bass-booms

Winner: Genelec 8340

Genelec 8340 vs Focal Solo 6be

• Genelecs clearer on Phil's solo voice, but harsher.

• Solos had a better distinction between instruments in Can, but also clearer vocals in the song.

• Solos were punchier in the fight scene – crisper fx and foley, with nice sharp bass.

Winner: Focal Solo 6be

Genelec vs Dynaudio Core 7

• Genelecs were bassier.

• Core had better distinction and clarity in Can song

• Genelecs handled the bass and punches in the fight scene – Core distorted on these so I would need to change settings

• Both nice on solo voice – Genelecs sounded more like Phil.

• Genelecs crisper fx and foley on the fight scene

Winner: Genelec 8340

Genelec 8340 vs KH310

• Neumann had better distinction on Can song

• Neumann was slightly muddier on the lower instruments in orchestral music, but warmer and nice to listen to

• Genelecs clearer on Phil's voice, but harsher. Neumann's sounded more like Phil.

Winner: Neumann KH310

Neumann KH310 vs Dynaudio LYD 48

• Dynaudios were clearer on Phil's solo voice

• Neumanns had better instrument distinction, and voice was clearer on this song, and the documentary VO over music.

• LYD had cleaner bass in the Can song, but was muddier in the mids

Winner: No overall winner - a tie.

Neumann KH310 vs PSI A17

• PSIs were punchier in fight scene with crisper fx and foley

• They both handled the solo voice well, but PSIs sounded slightly more like Phil's natural voice.

• Neumanns were warmer in the can song, but PSIs had better clarity/instrument distinction

• PSIs brighter sound overall

Winner: PSI A17

PSI A17 vs Focal Solo 6be

• PSIs clearer on fight scene – crisper fx and foley

• Solos handled the punch better (the high punch with bass boom)

• Both very clear distinction between instruments in Can song.

• Solos were ever so slightly clearer on Phil's voice, but PSIs were warmer and more like Phil's natural voice

• PSIs had better clarity on vocals in Can song and VO on documentary

Winner: PSI A17

PSI A17 vs Dynaudio LYD 48

• Dyaudios were bassier but the bass was cleaner/crisper on the PSIs

• Music was hidden under the fx in fight scene a bit by Dynaudios

• PSIs were nicer on the Can song – LYDs seemed muddier in the low mids

• LYDs were brighter but harsher on Phil's solo voice

Winner: PSI A17

PSI A17 vs Dynaudio Core 7

• Upper registers of the strings in orchestral music better on Cores and the Orchestra sounds slightly richer

• PSIs were punchier on fight scene

• PSIs were richer on Phil's solo voice

• Cores seemed to have a wider mix on Can

• PSIs had more distinction between instruments on Can

Winner: PSI A17

Dynaudio Core 7 vs Dynaudio LYD 48

• Cores were clearer on Phil's solo voice

• LYDs muddier on mid-range in orchestral music

• Core had better distinction/more prominent instruments in Can song

Winner: Dynaudio Core 7

Dynaudio Core 7 vs Focal Solo 6be

• Core sounded richer and broader in orchestral music, and better in the upper register on the strings

• Solos handled the punch and bass hit much better (I think I need to change settings on the Cores to help)

• The fx and foley in the fight scene were crisper and punchier on the solos

• Cores were nicer on Phil's solo voice – Sounded a bit thinner on the solos

Winner: No overall winner - a tie.

Focal Solo 6be vs Focal Solo Shape 65

• Percussion and vocals clearer on Solo in Can song

• During the fight sequence, the music felt muddier on the Shapes

• Phil's voice was harsher on Shapes.

Winner: Focal Solo 6be

Focal Solo 6be vs Dynaudio LYD 48

• LYDs had better bass

• Very similar on solo voice

• The FX were crisper and punchier in fight scene on Solos; the strings sat under the fx a bit too much on the LYDs.

• LYDs had better clarity on the upper mids on the Can song, but were muddier in the lower mids

Winner: Focal Solo 6be

Listening Tests Conclusion

So now what? I have all this information, which of course ended up favouring different speakers in different categories. Useful. Based on all the tests, my choice comes down to what I am personally after in a pair of monitors – there is no right or wrong. What is the most useful for the type of work I do? What can I afford? Do I care about the look of them?

I noticed when going back doing the second pass of my dialogue edit, that I would hear some clicks, hums or knocks on some speakers that I had previously not heard on others. I do a lot of dialogue editing so it is very important to me that I can hear every minor detail, especially in the upper mids and high end. Same goes for mixing dialogue. I am very funny about clicks! Like nails down a chalkboard for me!

I won't be using my speakers for leisure particularly, I won't be sitting and listening to my favourite album for example, so it's not as important to me that the music sounds “nice” - I'd rather hear everything clearly (but accurately) so I can make the necessary adjustments. For example, both 3-way speakers are slightly muddier in the mid-range, which sometimes created a warmer tone to the music and was quite nice. But for me, that wouldn't be helpful as I would then push certain instruments or sound effect elements louder because they are lost in the mix, and then on other speakers, they would then stick out like a sore thumb!

For the work that I do, I also am not overly concerned about having huge bass extensions. I appreciate that for music producers this is probably more important. In terms of hearing very low frequencies – for the work I do for TV, this isn't as much of a problem as most home setups you wouldn't hear them anyway, or they can be EQed out.

For the 5.1 work I do, I will have a subwoofer (whether I buy or rent) so again, these low frequencies will be covered. It's more important for me how well the speakers handle the bass that can be heard. The PSIs, Genelecs and Solos were particularly sharp and clean on bass notes and effects.

So I'm sort of after an all-rounder, but with clarity around the mids to highs for my dialogue editing work. As we all know, the dialogue is KING in TV and Film.

Looking at all the categories, and the winners of my side-by-side comparisons, my decision came down to either PSI A17s or Focal Solo 6be.

I repeat this is my own personal opinion based on my likes and needs. Looking at the prices, the Solos would be an obvious choice at this point. The Solos are effectively half the price of the PSIs. Especially important when thinking ahead to the 5.1 upgrade (although the PSIs you can get the smaller A14s for your rears, With the Focals you would use 5 Solos and a sub). Even with this in mind, a 5.1 setup with the PSIs is still much more expensive.

That being said, the PSIs won every single A-B comparison (including against the Solos), and they were clearer in the higher frequencies (often where my clicks and 'S's sit. They are both compact and would fit nicely into my studio aesthetics (I prefer the look of the solos, but the purple PSIs are very different looking also which I like.) The frequency graph of the PSIs is slightly more favourable in my opinion. The DSP settings on the back of both sets of monitors were very similar, with only one or two adjustable settings.

Because the difference between my opinion of these two isn't as big as you would expect from the price difference, I wasn't sure if I wanted to spend the extra money on the PSIs. Believe it or not, I don't like spending money! Almost everything in the studio is B-stock, ex-display or second hand etc (more on that in a separate article!). So I almost went with the Solos. Fantastic value for money, they look great, and I know I would not be disappointed with this choice. Focal are a distinguished pro audio company with great longevity in their products.

However, I had had a good year work-wise, and thought – why go for my second favourite just because of the price? If I can afford to go for the PSIs, then I should! I would have to re-think my timescale on my 5.1 upgrade. I am looking at a long term investment for my studio, plus this is for my business - not just a side hobby. As many sound professionals have said in the past, including our very own Russ, your monitors are one the most, if not THE most important equipment choice you can make.

If you are an amateur or hobbyist, I would probably recommend the Focal Solos. If you are a professional but do not have the money for the PSIs, I would 100% recommend the Solos. However, if your budget can stretch, then the PSIs have the edge in my opinion.

So overall the winners in my search for a pair of studio monitors for my studio are the PSI A17Ms

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the following people for helping me out with loans for this test and for their excellent customer services, answering all of my questions!:

• Joffrey Ghiringhelli​ and Matt Ward from Jigsaw24 for both Focals and the Neumanns

• Paul Mortimer from EmergingUK.com for the PSIs

• Bruce Davison and Tom Bodfish at Dynaudio

• Howard Jones, Andy Bensley and Perry Swain from Genelec.