Arendal 1961 Bookshelf review (by Erin)

[greenpsycho]

eh, I dunno, but if you are a hi fidelity company, basing your designs on objective science, don't say "its fine, most people can't hear it"

My response would be along the lines of "we are really interested in bulking up our home theater offerings in the future, including some 3 way offerings. Because our current center channels are designed with a wide dispersion, we think they offer a great balance of flexibility, affordability, and while offering nearly the same dispersion as a 3 way in a typical home situation" something like that.

 

[abdo123]

Honestly if they keep the distances the same for their MTM the horizontal response should be ‘okay’.

 

[Sancus]

I think $500 for the 1961 center is OK, it's not the best price, but there really are not a lot of good 3-ways cheaper than that. So saying "yeah the center is good enough for that range, considering how good our other speakers are, we think it's a reasonable product line." makes sense to me.

The 1723 center is $1100 USD though which is just way too much to pay for that fundamentally flawed design, that's my main objection. And you aren't getting any better dispersion out of it either. You're literally just getting bigger woofers, that's it. Pretty lame upgrade.

 

[JRiggs]

UPS just delivered a pair of the Arendal 1961 bookshelf’s to me this afternoon. They are replacing LS50 as my desktop monitors. LS50 are moving to surround duties.

Really impressed so far.

 

[Doctors11]

UPS just delivered a pair of the Arendal 1961 bookshelf’s to me this afternoon. They are replacing LS50 as my desktop monitors. LS50 are moving to surround duties.

Really impressed so far.

More info please. Set up, distances, types of music etc. Comparisons to the LS50s. Exciting that more people are going with these for nearfield listening. Pictures?

 

[JRiggs]

More info please. Set up, distances, types of music etc. Comparisons to the LS50s. Exciting that more people are going with these for nearfield listening. Pictures?

Give me some more time with them for any comparisons. Music genre is very diverse, but jazz and blues heavy.

The desktop set up, Roon Rock installed on a NUC8i7, Roon endpoint at the desk is a Bluesound Powernode. The Powernode is also connected to a 2018 Mac mini via auxiliary. In addition to ripped CD collection, I also use Tidal and Qobuz for streaming via Roon. They are 4 ft. apart, slightly toed in and 3.5 ft. from the listening position.

For comparison, my main system consists of a Matrix Audio Mini-i Pro3 endpoint, this is connected via XLR and passes through a Yamaha RX-A3080. A Parasound A31 powers KEF R3. Dual subs. This system is also the HT system, 5.2.4.

The output from the Arendal is impressive, especially given the tiny size. They are really small compared to the LS50 and look to be at least 1/3 the size of my R3. Very compact but very heavy.

 

[JRiggs]

 

[Doctors11]

Give me some more time with them for any comparisons. Music genre is very diverse, but jazz and blues heavy.

The desktop set up, Roon Rock installed on a NUC8i7, Roon endpoint at the desk is a Bluesound Powernode. The Powernode is also connected to a 2018 Mac mini via auxiliary. In addition to ripped CD collection, I also use Tidal and Qobuz for streaming via Roon. They are 4 ft. apart, slightly toed in and 3.5 ft. from the listening position.

For comparison, my main system consists of a Matrix Audio Mini-i Pro3 endpoint, this is connected via XLR and passes through a Yamaha RX-A3080. A Parasound A31 powers KEF R3. Dual subs. This system is also the HT system, 5.2.4.

The output from the Arendal is impressive, especially given the tiny size. They are really small compared to the LS50 and look to be at least 1/3 the size of my R3. Very compact but very heavy.

Thanks J, looking forward to your impressions after you've had some time with them. Will you be using a sub with them? And you mentioned using the LS50s for surrounds, did you mean for this desktop set up? Will you be listening to multi channel music?

 

[JRiggs]

Don’t have a plan to add a sub right now, we’ll see.

No the LS50 were moved to the main system for surround duties. The replaced KEF Q50a that I was using for surrounds. Still using two pair of Q50a for front and rear height/Atmos speakers.

The desktop is just 2 channel stereo.

 

[sdiver68]

This is one of the speakers that cases, where the speaker has a lower (than normal) preference value but highly recommended (by Erin, in this case).

For example, at this point...
Bookshelves Under US$700/pair:

	Recommendation	PS	LFX
#1	Elac Debut Reference DBR-62 (Amir)	5.8	43
#2	Elac Uni-Fi 2.0 UB52 (Amir)	5.6	41
#3	Polk R100 (Erin)	5.6	52

Whereas the Arendal is PS of 4.4.

Ignoring the implications, this is interesting...

You hit the nail on the head. It's hard to see the objective value here.

Are we really using high (but distorted and limited above 100hz) output as a barometer for a small speaker? Sure, there are use cases for that but few of them have anything to do with Hi-Fi.

 

[hmt]

Not really. The score w Sub is good.

 

[beaRA]

You hit the nail on the head. It's hard to see the objective value here.

Are we really using high (but distorted and limited above 100hz) output as a barometer for a small speaker? Sure, there are use cases for that but few of them have anything to do with Hi-Fi.

This very small speaker is penalized in preference score due to the LFX. Certainly, you shouldn't consider them without a subwoofer, but with a sub the preference score is within half a point of the DBR-62. I find these (well actually the Monitor version) most interesting for a multichannel system where the narrow directivity and excellent compression are beneficial.

 

[nigio]

Erin suggests the Arendal 1961 bookshelf as a center channel

 

[mastermind]

Hello, new forum member from Sweden.
Based on this review I ordered the 1961 monitors and I received them on Friday.

First impressions: wow they sound really good, compared to my previous speakers(DBR62) these have a bit more slam in the midbass and sound tighter in the bass as well. They also behave really well when placed close to the wall and integrate flawlessly with my Arendal subs.

However, upon inspecting the finish when unpacking I noticed what looks like a small dent/scratch on one of the speaker cones and I assumed it was from the shipping. I contacted Arendal and they replied that the cones on the drivers are made of long fibre pulp and what I'm seeing is a strand of the pulp. So according to them it's completely normal, I haven't seen this before on any of my speakers. I'm aware that I'm super picky and most people might not care about these kinds of cosmetic "faults".
What do you guys think?
Attaching the image I sent them and a couple of my setup.

 

[EAXAE]

What do you guys think?

I personally wouldn't bother, it seems like a tiniest cosmetic issue to me. Congratulations on your purchase!

 

[Doctors11]

Hello, new forum member from Sweden.
Based on this review I ordered the 1961 monitors and I received them on Friday.

First impressions: wow they sound really good, compared to my previous speakers(DBR62) these have a bit more slam in the midbass and sound tighter in the bass as well. They also behave really well when placed close to the wall and integrate flawlessly with my Arendal subs.

However, upon inspecting the finish when unpacking I noticed what looks like a small dent/scratch on one of the speaker cones and I assumed it was from the shipping. I contacted Arendal and they replied that the cones on the drivers are made of long fibre pulp and what I'm seeing is a strand of the pulp. So according to them it's completely normal, I haven't seen this before on any of my speakers. I'm aware that I'm super picky and most people might not care about these kinds of cosmetic "faults".
What do you guys think?
Attaching the image I sent them and a couple of my setup.

Nice set up! That tiny pulp wouldn't bother me either. I'm guessing you can't see it at a meter's distance. Is this just for movies or are you doing music too?

 

[mastermind]

Nice set up! That tiny pulp wouldn't bother me either. I'm guessing you can't see it at a meter's distance. Is this just for movies or are you doing music too?

Thanks!
Correct, I need to get quite up close to see it. Thanks for the advice, I'll keep them and try to stop thinking about it.

About 50/50 music/movies. Awesome sounding setup for both, everything sounds really tight and clean and it can really shake the room if i want to!

 

[HooStat]

I was wondering how it might look to put those speakers on top of their subs. It looks nice, actually.

 

[mastermind]

I was wondering how it might look to put those speakers on top of their subs. It looks nice, actually.

Yes it looks really good but unfortunately the 1961 1s sub is only 43cm tall so I'll most likely mount them on the wall. I suppose it would be perfect with their larger ported versions though.

 

[HooStat]

Yes it looks really good but unfortunately the 1961 1s sub is only 43cm tall so I'll most likely mount them on the wall. I suppose it would be perfect with their larger ported versions though.

I was thinking of their really big ones. Should be enough bass for most any room!