Arendal 1961 Bookshelf review (by Erin)

[thebabyparrot]

Keep in mind, this is my "final takeaway" as a whole. The 1961 bookshelf is small. Photos don't do it justice. It's smaller than the Neumi BS5 bookshelf speaker.

By the metrics, the 1961 bookshelf is 0.2478 ft^3 while the Kef LS50 Wireless II (I tested, I didn't test the passive Meta version) is 0.6752 ft^3. Assuming I grabbed the correct dimensions. That puts it at under half the volume of the LS50 WII.

The bigger takeaway here is how good the directivity is. You can fix the frequency response issues with EQ. You'll have something that stands head and shoulders above its peers with DIRAC

 

[hardisj]

The bigger takeaway here is how good the directivity is. You can fix the frequency response issues with EQ. You'll have something that stands head and shoulders above its peers with DIRAC

Yes. I mentioned that in my review. Quoted in bold below.



This is a very compact 2-way speaker that has excellent performance at low to high volume. The linearity is really impressive with deviations coming into play above about 8kHz due to the symmetry of the waveguide; these peaks/dips are fairly common in waveguide designs. I don’t intend to write this non-linearity off, nor do I want to make it into a topic that may be overblown. The simple truth is “I don’t know”. The audibility of them is something I can’t say with any certainty; not without spending some time comparing blind.

Compression results are superb. And when you realize just how small this speaker is, the results are even more impressive. The limits are reached at 102dB @ 1m below about 70Hz. I’ve tested speakers twice this size with larger woofers that didn’t perform this well.

Overall, in my humble opinion, this is an excellent speaker. The size is reminiscent of a legitimate “bookshelf” speaker; not an oversized “monitor” size, but a true bookshelf speaker. The cabinet is “dead” and resonance free. Great linearity (again, with the aforementioned caveat). Great horizontal directivity (and, thus, great EQ’ability to season to taste if so desired). Excellent output capability down to 70/80Hz with a proper crossover filter. These make very capable bookshelf speakers as mains in a small-to-medium room and would also work well for surround speakers. They even have the ability to be wall-mounted.

I rarely, if ever, use the term “best” but I have to think this is the best speaker in its size class I’ve reviewed to date.

 

[Doctors11]

Yes. I mentioned that in my review. Quoted in bold below.



This is a very compact 2-way speaker that has excellent performance at low to high volume. The linearity is really impressive with deviations coming into play above about 8kHz due to the symmetry of the waveguide; these peaks/dips are fairly common in waveguide designs. I don’t intend to write this non-linearity off, nor do I want to make it into a topic that may be overblown. The simple truth is “I don’t know”. The audibility of them is something I can’t say with any certainty; not without spending some time comparing blind.

Compression results are superb. And when you realize just how small this speaker is, the results are even more impressive. The limits are reached at 102dB @ 1m below about 70Hz. I’ve tested speakers twice this size with larger woofers that didn’t perform this well.

Overall, in my humble opinion, this is an excellent speaker. The size is reminiscent of a legitimate “bookshelf” speaker; not an oversized “monitor” size, but a true bookshelf speaker. The cabinet is “dead” and resonance free. Great linearity (again, with the aforementioned caveat). Great horizontal directivity (and, thus, great EQ’ability to season to taste if so desired). Excellent output capability down to 70/80Hz with a proper crossover filter. These make very capable bookshelf speakers as mains in a small-to-medium room and would also work well for surround speakers. They even have the ability to be wall-mounted.

I rarely, if ever, use the term “best” but I have to think this is the best speaker in its size class I’ve reviewed to date.

Really looking forward to the video on this one Erin. Thanks for doing this!

 

[Teo]

Hello @hardisj and thank you again for this review!
Would it possible to see the step response and the group delay of this great little one.
Also, please, can you post the group delay graph for the March Audio Sointuva too ?
Thank you!

​

 

[Laserjock]

Yes. I mentioned that in my review. Quoted in bold below.



This is a very compact 2-way speaker that has excellent performance at low to high volume. The linearity is really impressive with deviations coming into play above about 8kHz due to the symmetry of the waveguide; these peaks/dips are fairly common in waveguide designs. I don’t intend to write this non-linearity off, nor do I want to make it into a topic that may be overblown. The simple truth is “I don’t know”. The audibility of them is something I can’t say with any certainty; not without spending some time comparing blind.

Compression results are superb. And when you realize just how small this speaker is, the results are even more impressive. The limits are reached at 102dB @ 1m below about 70Hz. I’ve tested speakers twice this size with larger woofers that didn’t perform this well.

Overall, in my humble opinion, this is an excellent speaker. The size is reminiscent of a legitimate “bookshelf” speaker; not an oversized “monitor” size, but a true bookshelf speaker. The cabinet is “dead” and resonance free. Great linearity (again, with the aforementioned caveat). Great horizontal directivity (and, thus, great EQ’ability to season to taste if so desired). Excellent output capability down to 70/80Hz with a proper crossover filter. These make very capable bookshelf speakers as mains in a small-to-medium room and would also work well for surround speakers. They even have the ability to be wall-mounted.

I rarely, if ever, use the term “best” but I have to think this is the best speaker in its size class I’ve reviewed to date.

Is it really less than 6 inches deep?

Tiny indeed.

Was looking at Wharfedale Diamond 12.1 comparison

 

[hardisj]

FWIW, I did groundplane testing on the tower last night to verify my NFS results on the low end and also compare the sealed vs ported configuration.

And, yes, my driveway needs to be pressure washed. You’re more than welcome to come do it or donate some dollars for me to pay someone to do it while I continue churning out review after review.

 

[abdo123]

FWIW, I did groundplane testing on the tower last night to verify my NFS results on the low end and also compare the sealed vs ported configuration.

View attachment 180228


And, yes, my driveway needs to be pressure washed. You’re more than welcome to come do it or donate some dollars for me to pay someone to do it while I continue churning out review after review.

I understand that the weather in Norway is bad 10 months and 2 weeks of the year but i'm surprised the company didn't do one already and just used near field measurements.

 

[TurtlePaul]

FWIW, I did groundplane testing on the tower last night...

It looks like they have towers with 5.5", 6.5" and 8" woofers. I assume you are testing the smallest towers which match the bookshelves you just reviewed?

 

[SpinifexV]

Well, this is very interesting. Since I need a wall-mounted speaker, it was on my shortlist for my basement game/open room (7.5 m by 7.5 m, 25' by 25', low ceiling) along with its brother the 1961 Monitor and the Revel S16, to play with a subwoofer (SVS SB1000 Pro) and a Yamaha R-N803.

Is there any reason to pick the Monitor over the bookshelf? Would it be better at high level of sounds?

 

[Laserjock]

Well, this is very interesting. Since I need a wall-mounted speaker, it was on my shortlist for my basement game/open room (7.5 m by 7.5 m, 25' by 25', low ceiling) along with its brother the 1961 Monitor and the Revel S16, to play with a subwoofer (SVS SB1000 Pro) and a Yamaha R-N803.

Is there any reason to pick the Monitor over the bookshelf? Would it be better at high level of sounds?

73Hz vs 75Hz according to website specs.

 

[Matias]

It looks like they have towers with 5.5", 6.5" and 8" woofers. I assume you are testing the smallest towers which match the bookshelves you just reviewed?

Erin posted he has the 1961 Tower for review on his Facebook group.
4 x 5,5” woofers

1961 Tower

FREE Shipping10 Years Warranty60 Days Audition Period100%

arendalsound.com

 

[Brian6751]

Well, this is very interesting. Since I need a wall-mounted speaker, it was on my shortlist for my basement game/open room (7.5 m by 7.5 m, 25' by 25', low ceiling) along with its brother the 1961 Monitor and the Revel S16, to play with a subwoofer (SVS SB1000 Pro) and a Yamaha R-N803.

Is there any reason to pick the Monitor over the bookshelf? Would it be better at high level of sounds?

Less ceiling bounce due to MTM, maybe?

 

[MarkWinston]

Is it really less than 6 inches deep?

Tiny indeed.

Was looking at Wharfedale Diamond 12.1 comparison

Major price difference, but you will be mighty pleased with the 12.1.

 

[Sengin]

Whereas the Arendal is PS of 4.4.

Ignoring the implications, this is interesting...

How does PS take EQ into account? It doesn't, correct? Since his review mentions these would take EQ nicely, a "Preference Score After EQ" could be much higher and thus have a higher recommendation.

 

[sweetchaos]

How does PS take EQ into account? It doesn't, correct? Since his review mentions these would take EQ nicely, a "Preference Score After EQ" could be much higher and thus have a higher recommendation.

The PS doesnt take EQ into account by default.
Preference Score is 4.4 and would be 7.3 with a perfect subwoofer.

But if you were to add EQ, it would change to:
Preference Score is 5.6 with an EQ and would be 8.1 with a perfect subwoofer and the same EQ.
This is based on Pierre's auto-EQ algorithm which generates the following PEQ profile:

EQ for Arendal Sound 1961 Bookshelf computed from ErinsAudioCorner data
Preference Score 4.4 with EQ 5.6
Generated from http://github.com/pierreaubert/spinorama/generate_peqs.py v0.14
Dated: 2022-01-19-05:39:11

Preamp: -0.2 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 2695 Hz Gain -3.34 dB Q 0.05
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 7432 Hz Gain +2.25 dB Q 2.98
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 11896 Hz Gain +2.11 dB Q 2.99
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 837 Hz Gain +0.78 dB Q 3.00
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 236 Hz Gain -0.63 dB Q 1.06
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 8796 Hz Gain -0.78 dB Q 2.99
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 2719 Hz Gain +1.18 dB Q 2.99
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 1603 Hz Gain +1.10 dB Q 2.97
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 1148 Hz Gain -1.09 dB Q 2.89

 

[Sengin]

Oh wow, I didn't check that there was EQ for this already... Honestly, a 5.6 PS post-EQ in that small of a form factor? That's something.

 

[Descartes]

Yes. I mentioned that in my review. Quoted in bold below.



This is a very compact 2-way speaker that has excellent performance at low to high volume. The linearity is really impressive with deviations coming into play above about 8kHz due to the symmetry of the waveguide; these peaks/dips are fairly common in waveguide designs. I don’t intend to write this non-linearity off, nor do I want to make it into a topic that may be overblown. The simple truth is “I don’t know”. The audibility of them is something I can’t say with any certainty; not without spending some time comparing blind.

Compression results are superb. And when you realize just how small this speaker is, the results are even more impressive. The limits are reached at 102dB @ 1m below about 70Hz. I’ve tested speakers twice this size with larger woofers that didn’t perform this well.

Overall, in my humble opinion, this is an excellent speaker. The size is reminiscent of a legitimate “bookshelf” speaker; not an oversized “monitor” size, but a true bookshelf speaker. The cabinet is “dead” and resonance free. Great linearity (again, with the aforementioned caveat). Great horizontal directivity (and, thus, great EQ’ability to season to taste if so desired). Excellent output capability down to 70/80Hz with a proper crossover filter. These make very capable bookshelf speakers as mains in a small-to-medium room and would also work well for surround speakers. They even have the ability to be wall-mounted.

I rarely, if ever, use the term “best” but I have to think this is the best speaker in its size class I’ve reviewed to date.

How about for front channels in a home theater?

 

[abdo123]

EQing this speaker would be OCD territory, not everything needs fixing. Just enjoy what they made.

 

[pierre]

EQing this speaker would be OCD territory, not everything needs fixing. Just enjoy what they made.

I agree, but since it is 1 click away. I boosted the bass a bit and flatten the ON which I think make sense if you are not using a sub. The spider graph shows what is improving with EQ, score jumps from 4.4 to 5.7 (resp 7.3 to 8.2 with a perfect sub). The very good score with a sub proved that it is designed for this use case. For the price, that's a very nice surprise.

Visually: the 2 spins (with and without EQ) and below the EQ itself.

A zoom on the on axis:

shows how little impact the EQ have and it is very likely that with the expected variations between speakers it is not useful.

EQ for Arendal Sound 1961 Bookshelf computed from ErinsAudioCorner data
Preference Score 4.4 with EQ 5.7
Generated from http://github.com/pierreaubert/spinorama/generate_peqs.py v0.14
Dated: 2022-01-20-08:05:52


Preamp: -0.2 dB


Filter  1: ON PK Fc  2901 Hz Gain -3.73 dB Q 0.05
Filter  2: ON PK Fc  7703 Hz Gain +2.63 dB Q 2.98
Filter  3: ON PK Fc 12007 Hz Gain +2.46 dB Q 2.97
Filter  4: ON PK Fc   810 Hz Gain +1.08 dB Q 3.00
Filter  5: ON PK Fc  8933 Hz Gain -1.14 dB Q 2.93
Filter  6: ON PK Fc  2768 Hz Gain +1.22 dB Q 2.96
Filter  7: ON PK Fc  1518 Hz Gain +1.09 dB Q 2.99
Filter  8: ON PK Fc  1146 Hz Gain -1.09 dB Q 2.85
Filter  9: ON PK Fc  3540 Hz Gain -1.20 dB Q 3.00

 

[Lifer]

Thanks for the review Erin !

Would it be right to say that Arendal bookshelves (1961 & 1723S) could suit well as a center channel thanks to their small size/height and thanks to having the tweeter as close to the top/screen as possible ?
Thanks