• 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 1961 Bookshelf review (by Erin)

beaRA

Active Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
223
Likes
315
Cool to see Erin's first on-wall measurements! What do we think about strategies to mitigate that dip centered at 400Hz?
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
3,422
Likes
2,407
Location
Sweden
Damping panel behind speaker.
 

Thomas_A

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
3,422
Likes
2,407
Location
Sweden
Right. If I understand it as SBIR, a 4in absorber around the speaker could effectively mitigate the dip.
Yes, but also a thinner one and air gap would help some.

Another solution is to use another shape of the speaker. Less deep and wider baffle. 45 degree bevels added left and right of speaker to the wall?
 
Last edited:

Smitty2k1

Active Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2022
Messages
276
Likes
229
I'm looking for a wall mount LR pair of speakers for my listening area. At the $1000 price point, does anyone have experience with the Arendal 1961 MONITORS or the Revel S16 wall mount bookshelves? The 1961 bookshelves and M16 bookshelves both measure well and seem well liked. I like the form factor of the 1961 monitor (slimmer and taller) but I suspect the S16 would perform better without a sub with the larger cabinet and driver and being a purpose built wall mount speaker.

Eventually I'll add a center channel and sub, but the sub is lower priority due to having a small child and less opportunities to listen to loud bass heavy music. So for now I'm prioritizing 2.0/3.0
 

JayGilb

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 22, 2021
Messages
1,371
Likes
2,308
Location
West-Central Wisconsin
I'm looking for a wall mount LR pair of speakers for my listening area. At the $1000 price point, does anyone have experience with the Arendal 1961 MONITORS or the Revel S16 wall mount bookshelves? The 1961 bookshelves and M16 bookshelves both measure well and seem well liked. I like the form factor of the 1961 monitor (slimmer and taller) but I suspect the S16 would perform better without a sub with the larger cabinet and driver and being a purpose built wall mount speaker.

Eventually I'll add a center channel and sub, but the sub is lower priority due to having a small child and less opportunities to listen to loud bass heavy music. So for now I'm prioritizing 2.0/3.0
The Revel S16 specs show a low end of 70hz at -3db whereas the Arendal 1961's low end specs are 73hz at -3db, so the Revel does have a slightly better lower end response.
 

mastermind

New Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2022
Messages
4
Likes
3
I'm looking for a wall mount LR pair of speakers for my listening area. At the $1000 price point, does anyone have experience with the Arendal 1961 MONITORS or the Revel S16 wall mount bookshelves? The 1961 bookshelves and M16 bookshelves both measure well and seem well liked. I like the form factor of the 1961 monitor (slimmer and taller) but I suspect the S16 would perform better without a sub with the larger cabinet and driver and being a purpose built wall mount speaker.

Eventually I'll add a center channel and sub, but the sub is lower priority due to having a small child and less opportunities to listen to loud bass heavy music. So for now I'm prioritizing 2.0/3.0
I've owned the Arendal 1961 Monitors for a while now, sounds really good. My plan was to wall-mount them but to me they didn't sound as good flush against the front wall as with a 10 cm gap behind them on stands.
Eventually I switched to use them as surrounds and ordered 1723 Monitor S instead as fronts.
 

Actungz

Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2022
Messages
33
Likes
16
I do wonder if the S16 would also have that dip around 400hz due to the front and back wall reflections canceling each other out, since revel does advertise it as an on wall speaker.

But like Erin said not a lot of manufacturers specifically engineer their speakers to account for that dip, so I doubt revel accounted for the peak when designing the crossover, or else the speaker would sound weird on a normal speaker stand
 

Smitty2k1

Active Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2022
Messages
276
Likes
229
I've owned the Arendal 1961 Monitors for a while now, sounds really good. My plan was to wall-mount them but to me they didn't sound as good flush against the front wall as with a 10 cm gap behind them on stands.
Eventually I switched to use them as surrounds and ordered 1723 Monitor S instead as fronts.
Thanks, too bad to hear but I suppose you can't design a speaker for every situation. Being that the Revel is specific for wall mount makes me think it's the way to go.
 

Steve Dallas

Major Contributor
Joined
May 28, 2020
Messages
1,201
Likes
2,784
Location
A Whole Other Country
I do wonder if the S16 would also have that dip around 400hz due to the front and back wall reflections canceling each other out, since revel does advertise it as an on wall speaker.

But like Erin said not a lot of manufacturers specifically engineer their speakers to account for that dip, so I doubt revel accounted for the peak when designing the crossover, or else the speaker would sound weird on a normal speaker stand

Thanks, too bad to hear but I suppose you can't design a speaker for every situation. Being that the Revel is specific for wall mount makes me think it's the way to go.

The dip is speaker boundary interference (SBIR). It is caused by reflections off the front wall, floor, ceiling, and side wall interfering, out of phase, with the direct sound. There is a formula for predicting its frequency center based on the distance between the front baffle and front wall: =340/(4*D) where D is distance in meters.

The closer the front baffle is to the wall, the higher the SBIR frequency center, which can be a good thing, as treating it with broadband absorption requires thinner panels.

Distance (in)Distance (m)SBIR Frequency
60.1524558
70.1778478
80.2032418
90.2286372
100.254335
110.2794304
120.3048279
130.3302257
140.3556239
150.381223
160.4064209
170.4318197
180.4572186
190.4826176
200.508167
210.5334159
220.5588152
230.5842145
240.6096139
250.635134
260.6604129
270.6858124
280.7112120
290.7366115
300.762112
320.8128105
340.863698
360.914493

1648171701984.png
 

cwatt

Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2022
Messages
12
Likes
12
I have been listening to the 1961 bookshelf speakers in my main system for the past few weeks and am thrilled with these speakers. The 1961 subwoofer was ordered at the same time, however delivery was delayed for over a month. Just received the sub the other day and now in the process of integrating it into a 2.1 system.

My prior system was a 5.2 setup with Kef R500s. It was a fantastic system, however I decided I wanted to simplify and not have as much stuff in the living room. Once I removed the 5.2 setup it was like a whole new living room. I rarely have time for critical music listening these days and most of the time the system was being used for watching tv or movies.

The appeal of the 1961's is their size and appearance. In a living room these diminutive white speakers with no visible screws on the contrasting black drivers disappear much better than towers or larger monitor speakers plus they are super easy to move when needed. I looked at active speakers however decided for my use case the 1961's offered incredible value even when adding an amp and preamp to the cost of the system. The depth of these speaker is only 6 inches, which makes placement in all kinds of spaces a snap.

While no bass monsters, I could easily live with these speakers without a sub. Cranking the volume on my PA5 amp these speakers can hit peaks of 95 dBA at the seating area which is 13 feet from the speakers with no strain. They do a credible job with bass material. Of course with a 5.5" woofer my bass expectations are modest. My listening levels rarely exceed 75 - 80 dBA these days and having a subwoofer or two subwoofers is just not a priority anymore. As the system is in a wide open living room it does look much cleaner without subs.

Well done Arendal!
 

Doctors11

Active Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2020
Messages
167
Likes
79
I have been listening to the 1961 bookshelf speakers in my main system for the past few weeks and am thrilled with these speakers. The 1961 subwoofer was ordered at the same time, however delivery was delayed for over a month. Just received the sub the other day and now in the process of integrating it into a 2.1 system.

My prior system was a 5.2 setup with Kef R500s. It was a fantastic system, however I decided I wanted to simplify and not have as much stuff in the living room. Once I removed the 5.2 setup it was like a whole new living room. I rarely have time for critical music listening these days and most of the time the system was being used for watching tv or movies.

The appeal of the 1961's is their size and appearance. In a living room these diminutive white speakers with no visible screws on the contrasting black drivers disappear much better than towers or larger monitor speakers plus they are super easy to move when needed. I looked at active speakers however decided for my use case the 1961's offered incredible value even when adding an amp and preamp to the cost of the system. The depth of these speaker is only 6 inches, which makes placement in all kinds of spaces a snap.

While no bass monsters, I could easily live with these speakers without a sub. Cranking the volume on my PA5 amp these speakers can hit peaks of 95 dBA at the seating area which is 13 feet from the speakers with no strain. They do a credible job with bass material. Of course with a 5.5" woofer my bass expectations are modest. My listening levels rarely exceed 75 - 80 dBA these days and having a subwoofer or two subwoofers is just not a priority anymore. As the system is in a wide open living room it does look much cleaner without subs.

Well done Arendal!
Great to hear, thanks for that. Got any pictures?
 
D

Deleted member 19122

Guest
I don't know...1,000 euros for Chinese manufactured bookshelf speakers that are cheap looking just screams profiteering to me
No way I could justify it tbh.
 

Matias

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 1, 2019
Messages
5,029
Likes
10,799
Location
São Paulo, Brazil
I have been listening to the 1961 bookshelf speakers in my main system for the past few weeks and am thrilled with these speakers. The 1961 subwoofer was ordered at the same time, however delivery was delayed for over a month. Just received the sub the other day and now in the process of integrating it into a 2.1 system.

My prior system was a 5.2 setup with Kef R500s. It was a fantastic system, however I decided I wanted to simplify and not have as much stuff in the living room. Once I removed the 5.2 setup it was like a whole new living room. I rarely have time for critical music listening these days and most of the time the system was being used for watching tv or movies.

The appeal of the 1961's is their size and appearance. In a living room these diminutive white speakers with no visible screws on the contrasting black drivers disappear much better than towers or larger monitor speakers plus they are super easy to move when needed. I looked at active speakers however decided for my use case the 1961's offered incredible value even when adding an amp and preamp to the cost of the system. The depth of these speaker is only 6 inches, which makes placement in all kinds of spaces a snap.

While no bass monsters, I could easily live with these speakers without a sub. Cranking the volume on my PA5 amp these speakers can hit peaks of 95 dBA at the seating area which is 13 feet from the speakers with no strain. They do a credible job with bass material. Of course with a 5.5" woofer my bass expectations are modest. My listening levels rarely exceed 75 - 80 dBA these days and having a subwoofer or two subwoofers is just not a priority anymore. As the system is in a wide open living room it does look much cleaner without subs.

Well done Arendal!
Maybe you are target customer for an SVS 3000 Micro in white. Small, still affordable, and will complement the bass of your speakers and hide away without calling attention to it.
 

RMW_NJ

Active Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2020
Messages
148
Likes
322
I don't know...1,000 euros for Chinese manufactured bookshelf speakers that are cheap looking just screams profiteering to me
No way I could justify it tbh.

They are 799 euros. And I bought some of the dipoles they have for my HT and they are incredibly well built.
 

cwatt

Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2022
Messages
12
Likes
12
Unfortunately no nice pics at this time.

I paid USD699 - got them just before the prices went up. I hear the Norwegian government have launched a probe into Arendal over the billions of dollars they have "profiteered" off these $700 bookshelf speakers. LOL. Value and beauty is obviously in the eye of the beholder. Have you heard and seen these speakers in person?

Yes, the SVS 3000 Micro would have been a perfect fit as would the more expensive KC62.
 

Doctors11

Active Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2020
Messages
167
Likes
79
Unfortunately no nice pics at this time.

I paid USD699 - got them just before the prices went up. I hear the Norwegian government have launched a probe into Arendal over the billions of dollars they have "profiteered" off these $700 bookshelf speakers. LOL. Value and beauty is obviously in the eye of the beholder. Have you heard and seen these speakers in person?

Yes, the SVS 3000 Micro would have been a perfect fit as would the more expensive KC62.
LOL! I have not heard them but it's one of the models I'm considering for my desktop. How do you think they would do in the nearfield?
 

cwatt

Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2022
Messages
12
Likes
12
I would say yes, although I have not tested these speakers in a near-field application. If you sift through the earlier posts there are comments about their suitability and recommended setup for a near-field application as well as actual user comments. I believe one user swapped out LS50s with these and without the use of a sub. Of course your tastes and usage will dictate if you need/want to add a sub to the mix.

Certainly the depth at 6" and height of 11.25" is an advantage if you are short on space. Wall mounting is also an option depending on how critical having the most accurate sound is as part of your list of priorities. We have a narrow shelf in our kitchen where we have some really tiny bookshelf speakers and these could easily replace those and provide a nice upgrade.

Until you try the speakers in your space you will not know if they are going to work for you. Not only from a sound perspective but from a usability perspective. I have had to purchase subs and speakers over the years based on whether they will fit into a specific area so dimensions were a critical part of the decision process. I also have purchased speakers with suboptimal binding posts that made connecting normal speaker wire difficult as well as the speaker wire would not sit well.
 
D

Deleted member 19122

Guest
Unfortunately no nice pics at this time.

I paid USD699 - got them just before the prices went up. I hear the Norwegian government have launched a probe into Arendal over the billions of dollars they have "profiteered" off these $700 bookshelf speakers. LOL. Value and beauty is obviously in the eye of the beholder. Have you heard and seen these speakers in person?

Yes, the SVS 3000 Micro would have been a perfect fit as would the more expensive KC62.
Well yeah,those prices for small Chinese cheaply made speakers is a rip off IMHO.Drivers are cheap,cab is cheap,covering is cheap and it looks cheap so if it looks like a duck....Oh and a speaker company that actually states a "50 hour break in for optimal performance" in their technical specs section:facepalm:.Maybe that's to get you used to the the fact that the bass rolls off @ 75hz...Maybe you are happy with no sub but i sure can't see myself being happy with it.As always YMMV
 
Top Bottom