Genelec 1030s' vs Mackie 824s' (opinions)?

[mmiikkee]

I'm trying to decide between the Genelec 1030A's & the Mackie 824s'. I'm looking for opinions between these two monitors only. Has any one
actually A/Bd' these two side by side? If I could afford it I'd get the Genelec 1031s', but it's just not in my budget. I've used the 1030s' and Mackie
824s', in different situations, but not had the oppurtunity to use them in a side by side comparison. The 824s', seem to have hyped low frequencies (
to my ears )...not actually in the original source material, as opposed to the Genelec 1030As' ( what you put in, you get out ). But I'm looking for the
truth, not a colored or hyped sound. Any and all opinions welcome...( only comparing these two models ). And yes I know this thread has been
discussed in the past, but I'm looking for some more recent opinions.

[Mount Royal]

Owning them both, I've concluded they're both fine monitors. Too, I've concluded they're both colored but in different ways.

If your work lies more in evaluating midrange frequencies, with acoustic instruments and voices and such, I'd use the 1030's. The 1030's are truer to that sort of program, in my view. Price no object, I'd choose the 1030 over the 1031 for the same reason. An 8 inch driver, of any manufacture, presents inherant disadvantage in reproducing midrange wavelengths, I believe. The Mackie does a good job of full spectrum reproduction, I think, but I have found it necessary to use the Mackie's LF and HF contour controls to reduce the highs and especially the lows. The low end is "hyped", as you suggest, but I find it to be workable and translatable. We own the 1092 subwoofer, incidentally, which extends the 1030's LF monitoring appreciably, but I prefer the 1030 without the sub for critical midrange evaluation. Given that sins of omission are better tolerated in the long run, one might lean towards a 1030 for that reason alone. Some observers find, though, that the Genelec tweeter has a prounouced signiature; a sin of commission. I'd agree somewhat with that notion.

Imaging and spatial concerns seem similarly addressed by both speakers to me. Both focus very well.

Both 1030 and 824 monitors offer you the advantage that they are commonly found, and border on offering a known reference standard of their own.

In short, I lack the dogmatic advice that you might have hoped for. I can't imagine you'd really regret either purchase, given their performance for the dollar. As is said over and over, you can properly use any tool of this caliber (or muss less caliber) for fine overall results.

Best wishes,

John Caldwell

[nozza1]

Think I'd have to agree with John on this one. I own the 1030's and I'm very happy. For recording/ mixing rock/ pop they give good results. I found the Mackies a little to hypey. I never actually liked the 1031's so the 1030's were a real find for me. Don't think you'll be disappointed if you go with the Genelecs. I must have tried out pretty much every pair of active nearfields and I can't actually imagine owning anything else than the 1030's at this point.
Good Luck, Richard.

[Dutchmuzik]

Genelec 1030 hands down. I do have the 1092A sub. I love it.

[Steve Smith]

I would tahe almost anything over the Mackies.. the year I spent with them could be the worst monitoring experence I have ever had to live through

I have 1031's, I havent really used the 1030's, but I suspect the top and mids are similar, and I love the gennies in the mids and on top...

YMMV

[audiaudio]

I like 1031s (haven't heard the 1030).

I can't figure out the bottom two octaves on the Mackies. That area is poorly defined when compared to Genelecs.

BTW, a pair of 1031s can be had for about $2300 on eBay. Bought mine that way--smooth transaction, no problems.

[tomhartman]

I have 1031s, but actually prefer the 1030s for detail. They just don't play loud enough for my room. The 1031 do not express the clarity of the 1030s, but they have a pretty well balanced all around sound and good bass. At least in my room. The 1030s actually deliver more of an audiophile result than most pro audio speakers I've heard. Even Stereophile reviewed them highly, and they think everything in pro audio is junk (and a lot of it is).

I would run screaming from the Mackies. I can't imagine anyone thinking they are even in the same league as the Gennys, but it's what makes horse races, I guess.

. I have never taken a mix I've done on either 1030s or 1031s and had it not translate well to cars, boom boxes, etc. My first mixes on them worked, long before I was familiar enough with them to compensate for any of their character traits.

Good luck with your decision, whatever it turns out to be...

[advid]

For 1030's price, you might need to consider the ADAM P11 or P22 with the P series Sub woofer. www.mccave.com.

I have experiences with 1030, 1031,1032 amd also the Mackie HR824 for years in our studios.

If your listenning envirement is not well tuned, then all the monitors will bring you troubles in adjusting the mid/low-end sound.

To me, HR824 can do the decent job as the Genelecs if once again your studio is well tuned. But things are changed since the ADAMs come out. We installed the S3A stereo pairs and the ADAM sub-1 subwoofer. Before that, we tested 1032, S30D,KRK E8 and it's compatiable KRK Sub, PMC Series..to find out the ADAMs are far better than all the monitors tested in any way. P11 & P22's got some good comments these days. At your budget range, you should go and check them out. We will place our order for the P11 and/or P22 with P series Sub to replace our NS10Ms for arranging room and during tracking.

In my opinion, I think Genelecs are good monitors to work with, but they bothered me on the mid/low-ends as I mentioned. It sound muddy on the low-ends. Especially when to compare with the ADAMs and the KRK E8. When you adjust the level and EQ the Mid/Low-end to sound right on the Genelecs, it's too much there already some times. It's just hard for us to get the right balance. As a Near field Monitor, it's hard for you to judge on the Low-End - when you sit near the monitors. Thus the ADAMs are a better choice for its wider, clearer image, details...to name a few.
It's very easy for us to tell from right to wrong after installed the ADAMs. The greatest value monitors we had so far...( I'm not working for the ADAMs. )
No offence, just my 2cents and hope this helps !

[haze]

I just picked up the Adam P-11. Great monitor. I was looking at the Bm6a (dynaudio) and the Genelec 1030a. I'm Very happy with the P-11a. I'm also very happy with the price i paid. I had them shipped from Europe to California for less than $1,250 (yes, including shipping).

jh

www.johnhaze.com

[DrTone]

Hi,

I used both, the 824's and the 1030's for different projects. To my ears the 1030's deliver cripsper high's, leaning almost towards the harsh side. Also the stereo-projection is somewhat narrower than on the mackies. However, as stated above, the all-important mid range (including the problematic transition range of the frequency separating filter at around 2K) is more forward and easier to judge. Since this is often more important than the extreme lows and highs, the Genelecs are suited well for this kind of applications.

Regarding hearing fatigue I prefer the Mackies; they are very pleasant because of the wider stereo field and the lesser highs (with the roll-off engaged). However, the mixes on them translate sometimes with slight problems in the 100-140Hz range.

In the end it is your taste and the compromises you are willing to accept. However, judging a (good) monitor takes some time; at least a week or two (I for one need more than that . The long-term acceptance of a monitor stays a secret to me and is really a personal decision. If you can firstly rent either of these for one or two projects, go for it.

Daniel