• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Arendal 1528 high end speakers

wadeb said:
SoundStage measurements of the Arendal 1528 Tower 8 can be found here.

SoundStageNetwork.com | SoundStage.com - NRC Measurements: Arendal Sound 1528 Tower 8

www.soundstagenetwork.com www.soundstagenetwork.com
Click to expand...
Beat me to it! Looking really smooth with low distortion and they measured with the jumpers in different positions. Pretty impressive and I'd say a success even at $9500 a pair. 10 year warranty, HDF - built like tanks, very good measurements, and the white/polar looks really good (IMO). I guess the question is will the "audiophiles" accept a direct to consumer speaker in their living room without the exotic veneers of other brands that don't measure as well or are built as robust. Time will tell.
 
PJ 1 said:
Beat me to it! Looking really smooth with low distortion and they measured with the jumpers in different positions. Pretty impressive and I'd say a success even at $9500 a pair. 10 year warranty, HDF - built like tanks, very good measurements, and the white/polar looks really good (IMO). I guess the question is will the "audiophiles" accept a direct to consumer speaker in their living room without the exotic veneers of other brands that don't measure as well or are built as robust. Time will tell.
Click to expand...
I guess I am too used to polar diagrams for dispersion, but at least on the horizontal plane, it looks quite, quite good. We don't have data for the vertical plane, but it seems it may be quite similar to a coaxial.
 
Vacceo said:
I guess I am too used to polar diagrams for dispersion, but at least on the horizontal plane, it looks quite, quite good. We don't have data for the vertical plane, but it seems it may be quite similar to a coaxial.
Click to expand...
I'm conjecturing but assume the cost of the NRC in Canada keeps them from doing more planes and they probably figure these paint enough of a picture for the majority of their readers. These towers are so large and heavy, I doubt anyone will pay to ship them to the Klippel testers. I know I wouldn't as I bet that's a large cost. But perhaps a "GoFundMe" for a future Arendal 1528 owner. I've got $2!
 
PJ 1 said:
I'm conjecturing but assume the cost of the NRC in Canada keeps them from doing more planes and they probably figure these paint enough of a picture for the majority of their readers. These towers are so large and heavy, I doubt anyone will pay to ship them to the Klippel testers. I know I wouldn't as I bet that's a large cost. But perhaps a "GoFundMe" for a future Arendal 1528 owner. I've got $2!
Click to expand...
We can probably infeer from testing done on the bookshelves and the monitors, thought.
 
These are pretty helpful. However, I would like to see the distortion and FQ response/compression test at 100, 105, 110 and 115 db.

Just as a side note, these are the measurement of an ancient speaker that is 1/4 of the size. Not very extensive measurements but indicative of SPL and distortion. Not saying that ancient speaker is winning, just to provide context what 20 years of advancement has brought us to (while we don't really know that point). And where all the bulk of the new design has gone to?


hometheaterhifi.com

Anthony Gallo Acoustics Reference 3.5 Speakers - HomeTheaterHifi.com

In 2007, I reviewed the Gallo Reference 3.1 speakers along with Gallo’s Reference AV center, A’Diva rears and the Reference SA subwoofer amplifier. I liked them so much I bought the entire system. Recently, Gallo has released the new Reference 3.5 speaker, replacing the venerable Reference 3.1.
hometheaterhifi.com hometheaterhifi.com
 
Vacceo said:
We can probably infeer from testing done on the bookshelves and the monitors, thought.
Click to expand...
Probably when James Larsen at AH does his review of the Monitors. I think what's provided is more than enough for many to at least get them in-house for a 60 day trial. Although, shipping these babies back will take effort and wouldn't be something I'd want to do.
 
Oddball said:
These are pretty helpful. However, I would like to see the distortion and FQ response/compression test at 100, 105, 110 and 115 db.

Just as a side note, these are the measurement of an ancient speaker that is 1/4 of the size. Not very extensive measurements but indicative of SPL and distortion. Not saying that ancient speaker is winning, just to provide context what 20 years of advancement has brought us to (while we don't really know that point). And where all the bulk of the new design has gone to?


hometheaterhifi.com

Anthony Gallo Acoustics Reference 3.5 Speakers - HomeTheaterHifi.com

In 2007, I reviewed the Gallo Reference 3.1 speakers along with Gallo’s Reference AV center, A’Diva rears and the Reference SA subwoofer amplifier. I liked them so much I bought the entire system. Recently, Gallo has released the new Reference 3.5 speaker, replacing the venerable Reference 3.1.
hometheaterhifi.com hometheaterhifi.com
Click to expand...
Why? I've seen 76, 86, 96, and 102. I can't think of anyone that tests above that. Isn't that kind of like asking people to test all channels of an amplifier even though few, if any, multichannel systems require it. Or test driving a car at the limit of the speedometer to see how it handles at 160 mph? Seems excessive and your ears will go out long before the speaker at 115 db at the recommended listening distance of 13 feet or so.
 
PJ 1 said:
Why? I've seen 76, 86, 96, and 102. I can't think of anyone that tests above that. Isn't that kind of like asking people to test all channels of an amplifier even though few, if any, multichannel systems require it. Or test driving a car at the limit of the speedometer to see how it handles at 160 mph? Seems excessive and your ears will go out long before the speaker at 115 db at the recommended listening distance of 13 feet or so.
Click to expand...
Testing is usually at 1m, so less SPL at MLP. I am not really asking for anything unusual. Your $10K speakers should be capable of reaching 105dB at MLP for a reference system with some kind of acceptable distortion. I certainly know of few.

So I would really like to know what kind of distortion I can expect at various volume levels, when the graph will start compressing and what will be the in-room SPL for lower bass - understanding that that is for a specific room, not necessarily my room. If I ever buy these speakers, sure as hell I will not run them "small" in my system.

The data we have from Arendal says max SPL 118dB, 112dB RMS, no distortion noted.
 
Oddball said:
Testing is usually at 1m, so less SPL at MLP. I am not really asking for anything unusual. Your $10K speakers should be capable of reaching 105dB at MLP for a reference system with some kind of acceptable distortion. I certainly know of few.

So I would really like to know what kind of distortion I can expect at various volume levels, when the graph will start compressing and what will be the in-room SPL for lower bass - understanding that that is for a specific room, not necessarily my room. If I ever buy these speakers, sure as hell I will not run them "small" in my system.

The data we have from Arendal says max SPL 118dB, 112dB RMS, no distortion noted.
Click to expand...
1 meter anechoic with one speaker. That's a LOT of output at 96 db. There is also nearly always distortion but is it audible? Probably not at normal listening levels. 115 db exposure can cause immediate hearing loss regardless if it's "distortion free". I guess these won't be for you then since I doubt anyone will be testing to those levels.
 
PJ 1 said:
1 meter anechoic with one speaker. That's a LOT of output at 96 db. There is also nearly always distortion but is it audible? Probably not at normal listening levels. 115 db exposure can cause immediate hearing loss regardless if it's "distortion free". I guess these won't be for you then since I doubt anyone will be testing to those levels.
Click to expand...
Some people have ball room-sized living rooms. That's where such a massive SPL capability make sense, because you might be listening from 10 meters away and peaks may need that extra push. Niche? Absolutely, but It exists.

For more conventional users, I agree you can do great with a lot less decibels.
 
Hmm, continue to be puzzled by some responses. Does not make sense at least to me to argue that $10K speakers should be forgiven anything, including not supplying a comprehensive set of measurements for all tastes (mine included). Especially when the basic premise is that $10K direct speakers are worth $15K or more compared to the dealer distributed speakers.

Let's look into some of the competition, that admittedly has not been also measured perfectly, but since it has been around for a while, there is helpful feedback from the owners as well so we do understand these speakers better.

Perlisten Rt7 vs St7 - there is plenty out there, and might be confusing, but my take is eventually that you will pay a lot (lot) more for S series playing a bit louder and a bit more ruler flat. I would certainly not be a taker of S vs R series. But then there is S limited, that takes it to another level and some people love them. R class is in Arendal range, and S and S limited a fair bit above it.

Revel 228 vs 328 - is another example where you are paying much more for some improvements that might not immediately seem so expensive. 3rd 8" bass driver, bigger box etc. Some people are saying that 228 would do, some don't. There are measurements of both, although not quite so detailed (compression tests) that might be warranted for (especially 328) speaker class. When on sale 328 is a bit above Arendal, and 228 about roughly half the price.

Perhaps a logical story from Arendal would be to start with 1723 speakers and compare how and why are 1528 so much better. Just to explain their journey, like this is the point of origin and this is where we got, and that's why you need to pay the premium.

A separate question is why are their speakers so big and heavy - so comparison to Perlisten and Revels (and potentially others) is needed to see it there is benefit from this design, or if it will just break you back and pollute the space for the heck of it.

I keep drilling at this as it is really difficult to understand why is Arendal not trying to market these speakers in a more transparent way. They are playing with the big boys that have plenty of history and recognition in the market. Just being silent and not compelling others to talk on their behalf is a bit strange.
 
Here's how a pair of 1528s arrive at your house. 175 lbs. each. Own a pallet jack? Tbh, this is how huge speakers come packed in general.

Evidently they're shipping these around the world, duties included. Shipping 400 pound pallets world-wide as a direct-to-consumer business model is a bit ballsy, although the subwoofer makers ~do this. Made in China. I wonder if all shipments originate from there directly, or if everything goes through Norway first. Probably a bit of both, market-dependent.

You do seem to get a lot of speaker for ~$10K US. Those four eight-inch drivers are about the same as a 15-inch driver. :cool:

arendalsshipment.jpg
 
Oddball said:
Hmm, continue to be puzzled by some responses. Does not make sense at least to me to argue that $10K speakers should be forgiven anything, including not supplying a comprehensive set of measurements for all tastes (mine included). Especially when the basic premise is that $10K direct speakers are worth $15K or more compared to the dealer distributed speakers.

Let's look into some of the competition, that admittedly has not been also measured perfectly, but since it has been around for a while, there is helpful feedback from the owners as well so we do understand these speakers better.

Perlisten Rt7 vs St7 - there is plenty out there, and might be confusing, but my take is eventually that you will pay a lot (lot) more for S series playing a bit louder and a bit more ruler flat. I would certainly not be a taker of S vs R series. But then there is S limited, that takes it to another level and some people love them. R class is in Arendal range, and S and S limited a fair bit above it.

Revel 228 vs 328 - is another example where you are paying much more for some improvements that might not immediately seem so expensive. 3rd 8" bass driver, bigger box etc. Some people are saying that 228 would do, some don't. There are measurements of both, although not quite so detailed (compression tests) that might be warranted for (especially 328) speaker class. When on sale 328 is a bit above Arendal, and 228 about roughly half the price.

(..)

I keep drilling at this as it is really difficult to understand why is Arendal not trying to market these speakers in a more transparent way. They are playing with the big boys that have plenty of history and recognition in the market. Just being silent and not compelling others to talk on their behalf is a bit strange.
Click to expand...

But does Perlisten provide measurements? Does Revel provide measurements? Almost no one provides measurements. Why is it suddenly super strange that Arendal doesn't?
 
sigbergaudio said:
But does Perlisten provide measurements? Does Revel provide measurements? Almost no one provides measurements. Why is it suddenly super strange that Arendal doesn't?
Click to expand...
New kid on the block trying to push a difficult product? And there are plenty of measurements for both brands way in excess from what we have on Arendal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Have decided on Revel Ultima Salon 2_Questions
Replies
8
Views
877
PJ 1
P
S
Still trying to pull the trigger on some towers. 10,000 budget. Please help me decide.
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
4K
Mart68
M
S
Home Theatre Upgrade Discussion
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
4K
Oddball
Oddball
G
Arendal 1961 Towers vs Revel Concerta2 F36
Replies
6
Views
2K
Deleted member 68267
D
O
  • Locked
KZ SAGA - Balanced.
Replies
8
Views
713
AdamG
AdamG
Back
Top Bottom