• Welcome to ASR. 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!

Dang, somebody talk me out of the Arendal 1528 Monitors!

So, talk you out of them? That's hard to do, they are good, but I'll try.

...


Have you considered all the options at $6k, because there are a lot of options. Some already provided.

Have you considered what you could do with $4k for AV and $2k for stereo listening? Or 3k and 3k?

Do you need speaker that will play that loud?

Do you gain anything in your room from these + stands compared to towers (same floor footprint, really, generally play louder)?

Will you want to move the speakers for music, because that's going to take some doing! Hefty things.

Do you like how they look? Will looking at those make you happy? Those circle grills, bleh!

....

Can you do equal to them or better for less money, all issues considered?

...

My advice, such as it is, is to compile a list of 3 other options, then compare. If you still have the Arendal at the top, go for it and never look back.
Thanks, excellent questions!
 
Yes, $6K is a chunk of money, but is there anything else out there at that price that will be a better option for a 50/50 mix of two channel music/5.1 movies? I was close to picking up a set of Martin Logan Motion XT F200 on sale, but after hearing the 1528's in videos, I may be sold on them.

But where to get some capable stands for these that are not as wide as the Arendal stands?
What about Philharmonic BMR Monitors? A lot cheaper, and we already have the (excellent) measurements.
 
Just to be clear, this is the video that most piqued my interest in the 1528's. Yes, I understand that you, in general, can't go by YT videos and, yes, this is a subjective comparison with no measurements. But the recording quality seems decent and it seems pretty level-matched to me.

When I first listened to the comparison of the two speakers over my audio system, I could not tell any difference between the KEF's and the 1528's. However, upon listening via my ear buds, the difference between the two was quite apparent, with the 1528's being much more to my liking, especially for a 50/50 mix of music/movies. Make of it what you want.

Yeah for sure same one I saw very recently also!

I watched it on a decent stereo system, and the biggest difference I discerned was a good bit more bass on the arendal speaker.

But the KEF sounded more neutral overall. I think KEF also uses the extended bass shelf, which makes it appear a bit bass shy UNLESS against a wall.
 
Not to take it too seriously, optimizing directional behavior has now become a sport. Don't exaggerate with the weights ... .

Early reflections result in boosts and cancellations, depending on the frequency. This results in a rollercoaster anyway depending on the exact sitting position. A few dB from the side of the speaker do: nothing.
For the diffuse field, in addition to the familiar jittering, there are also focal points where the peaks are all slightly higher or lower. That's simple statistics. Here, too, the speaker has no major influence. If the box is not particularly bad, it works. This box is not particularly bad. Don't exaggerate.

Some people say that the early reflections are important for the stereo effect. I can't understand that. They come from the speakers, not from the virtual sound sources in the stereo panorama. Well?

Another somewhat more difficult question. When I measure the in-room frequency response, I get pretty much the same results for left and right individually. But if I measure both at the same time with a correlated mono signal, then it looks different - not only in the treble (travel time). This means that a signal panned to one side produces a different diffuse field than one in the middle. Is that good or bad?
I think I'm mostly saying that these aren't good value. For lesser cost, you will find speakers with nicer directivity pattern and flatter on-axis responses. For my defense, I'd remind you that OP specifically requested being talked out of the purchase. I'm drumming up the problems I see as hard as I can.

My impression is that room contributes something like 50 % of what we hear in terms of the total level received (and possibly much more in case of room modes). This is why it is necessary to pay attention to the directivity pattern because if the directivity is uneven and side walls are close by, maybe it could become quite meaningful. Does this speaker have enough problems with directivity to warrant my concern? Well, I don't know, to be honest. I'd prefer to hand this over to the preference score algorithm and autoeq and draw my conclusions from there. There's a very good chance that after autoeq has done its thing, there's a pretty good speaker in there -- that's usually how it goes.

I do not have any opinion about stereo effect and early reflections, and I have no context for this discussion. I am not sure why you are bringing it up. I for my part prefer to avoid side walls because I find the sound to be way more beautiful, smoother and simply more listenable, if early reflections are attenuated.

The mono signal question is an important thing. Of course, human listens in stereo, so we have a head in between and "microphones" at both sides. What ear on opposing side of the head can receive will be attenuated due to head shadow, so a mono microphone is probably not a great model for human hearing in this kind of situation. Comb filtering is also common, and in moving mic method, you seem to lose about 3 dB in treble for those effects, and you'll also see comb filtering unless microphone is very well centered almost within the millimeter. It is probably true that stereo speaker pair can't completely substitute for real center speaker for more than one reason. I would add that the wavefront angle relative to ear changes if sound is coming from a genuine center speaker. As with the prior point, I do not entirely understand why you bring this up, though. It seems a bit of a non-sequitur for the thread.
 
Thanks for all the replies; some here doing a creditable job of talking me out of it!:cool:
 
I vote for the new AsciLab A6B or their upcoming MTM.
Alternatively, used KEF Reference 1, or KEF R7 META.
Having to opt out blindly, it is better to do it on models with good measurements and neutral tuning.
Spinorama.org is your friend:
1000038801.png
 
Last edited:
As with the prior point, I do not entirely understand why you bring this up, though. It seems a bit of a non-sequitur for the thread.
The o/p is not willing to pay six grand for a particular model, if he‘s in doubt in regard to the theory of operation. Rethink the purchase.
 
Personally I like the look of the bookshelf 8 more. Of course, more woofers gets louder ability.

Not as smooth as a coaxial can be, but it's generally even overall all the way to 20kHz.
Those mountain charts really seem to accentuate any unevenness compared to the standard dispersion chart.

Audioholics Reviews Arendal Monitor 8
image

image
I find it quite puzzling that they haven't published the vertical measurements.
 
after hearing the 1528's in videos, I may be sold on them.
Agree with others that listening to a speaker through a recording is not informative. It's only a little better than trying to taste food by licking your screen.

Not that I think these are bad speakers but you should have more to go on.

As others have also said, there are a lot of good options with a $6k budget. What do these speakers do that others can't do for the same or less money? What's your top priority in terms of sound, and are these the best option to deliver that? Browse speaker reviews here, on Erin's site, and/or spinorama.org and you might find more winners.
 
I have noted this before but you are paying for SPL and extension. If that matters, then these might be a right choice. Not much of the mainstream in this price range is actually going to match that, including most towers.

It seems like you like full range speakers and this is going to be close to that based on reviews and measurement.

However, I would not consider these as replacement for my towers that were just a tad more expensive but are meaningfully bigger boxes. I would however consider them as replacement for the surrounds as they seem to perform extremely well for their size.
 
Erin's Audio Corner just uploaded his Monitor 8 review with spin data to YouTube. Written review will follow soon.

In summary, great bass extension and very low distortion/compression.
On-axis linearity and off-axis directivity are fine, but not state of the art.
 
Erin's Audio Corner just uploaded his Monitor 8 review with spin data to YouTube. Written review will follow soon.

In summary, great bass extension and very low distortion/compression.
On-axis linearity and off-axis directivity are fine, but not state of the art.
Ah, cool. I've been waiting for his review, will check it out.
 
Erin's Audio Corner just uploaded his Monitor 8 review with spin data to YouTube. Written review will follow soon.

In summary, great bass extension and very low distortion/compression.
On-axis linearity and off-axis directivity are fine, but not state of the art.
It's a great review and provides a brilliant insight to these little beasts. Erin is doing God's work !
 
Hmm, after watching Erin's review, I may be back on the MoFi 888 track. And no need to buy stands with those, so they would represent a significant savings over the 1528.
 
Hmm, after watching Erin's review, I may be back on the MoFi 888 track. And no need to buy stands with those, so they would represent a significant savings over the 1528.
I would buy the Arendals. Nobody does distortion and high output better at anywhere near this price (that I have seen). They look better (subjective), and have basically the same bass output in-room. The small issues in FR can be EQ'd.

The MoFi's look awful, but are objectively a very good speaker.
 
They seem like a good home theater or general HIFI speaker but nothing that special.
 
I know it’s a thing these days, but you can’t listen to a speaker by watching a video. Sorry.

I would wait for measurements by Amir or Erin, and then listen to them (and other speakers) if the results are good enough.

"Dang, those speakers sound really good on my current speakers!" :facepalm:
 
I listened to speaker comparisons on headphones before buying some, as additional info. It is possible to get some use out of it if you can process things well or know a general house sound etc.

It's like how measurements don't tell you what a speaker sounds like unless you have heard things before. With experience you can estimate how it sounds. Without, you'll only know that you might be getting a speaker that conforms to some scientific ideal. But then you still have people who don't like the almost perfect, well recommended models.
 
Speakers are transducers…
Keith
 
"Speaker" usually refers to an object containing transducers, that is listened to at some distance away from the ear, with free air in between, unlike headphones, which is an object containing transducers, that is listened to in a mostly closed space in close proximity to the ear.

Speaker driver, headphone element, speaker transducer etc is usually used when referring directly to the transducer.
 
Back
Top Bottom