Thanks to @hardisj for another review.
This is the 2.5-way tower for US$1700/pair.
ERIN's DISCLAIMER:
The reference plane in this test is at the tweeter axis.
Note: As shown in the above photos, when standing upright, the baffle is angled 5° as the typical seated ear-level height is higher up than the tweeter is mounted on the speaker. This means that, while the data is taken at the tweeter axis, the primary listening axis will be 5° above the tweeter axis. This can be adjusted mechanically though by adjusting the front to back spikes, there is a disc on the spikes that can be moved either over or under the spike bar which will change the angle for the listening axis.
Therefore, while the on-axis response shows a downward high-frequency slope, at the typical seated height, the on-axis response would be flat. This is important to keep in mind. There is no way to "correct" for this in the data without physically tilting the speaker forward 5° to flatten out the vertical axis response which is not feasible for test purposes.
Preference Score of 5.2 (7.5 /w sub) (according to Erin)
Erin's conclusion:
Discuss!
This is the 2.5-way tower for US$1700/pair.
ERIN's DISCLAIMER:
The reference plane in this test is at the tweeter axis.
Note: As shown in the above photos, when standing upright, the baffle is angled 5° as the typical seated ear-level height is higher up than the tweeter is mounted on the speaker. This means that, while the data is taken at the tweeter axis, the primary listening axis will be 5° above the tweeter axis. This can be adjusted mechanically though by adjusting the front to back spikes, there is a disc on the spikes that can be moved either over or under the spike bar which will change the angle for the listening axis.
Therefore, while the on-axis response shows a downward high-frequency slope, at the typical seated height, the on-axis response would be flat. This is important to keep in mind. There is no way to "correct" for this in the data without physically tilting the speaker forward 5° to flatten out the vertical axis response which is not feasible for test purposes.
Preference Score of 5.2 (7.5 /w sub) (according to Erin)
Erin's conclusion:
As stated in the Foreword, this written review is purposely a cliff’s notes version. For details about the performance (objectively and subjectively) please watch the YouTube video.
As I discussed previously, the reference axis for measurement in the vertical plane is at the tweeter. The baffle is angled by 5° and, therefore, puts the primary listening axis at this angle, above the tweeter. Why? Well, when you see these speakers, you’ll understand. They are compact tower speakers. The smallest tower speaker I have tested to date. The low height and the location of the tweeter places the tweeter physically below a typical ear position at a typical seated position. However, Arendal made up for this by angling the baffle which aligns the listening axis to this typical seated height. What this means, to me, is that this speaker is designed for the customer who may not have a large listening space or simply prefers a speaker that is less seen and more heard. Personally, I like a big ol’ tower speaker that looks like it would beat you up in a street fight but I understand not everyone does. Nor, does everyone have the space for such a speaker.
Speaking of ‘heard but not seen’ (relatively speaking), this tower speaker can be used in sealed or ported configuration. I tried both and rather liked the sealed version. It did not excite some of the lower frequency room modes and I liked that there was less emphasis in the 100-200Hz region that the ported configuration also results in. You can see the comparison in the above data. Use what works best for you. But also keep in mind that this means you have more luxury in placement of the speaker. No longer do you have to bring them far from the walls. If necessary, you can place them much closer to the walls when in sealed configuration as opposed to placing a ported speaker right near the wall and suffering some response issues (and potentially more wall vibrations). This is all preference, of course. I like that Arendal provides the option here. I think it fits right in-line with the overall design; compact tower that has flexibility in placement for rooms of vary sizes.
Like the Arendal 1961 bookshelf I tested previously (link), this is a very compact tower speaker that has excellent performance at low to high volume. The linearity is really impressive. Compression results are superb. And when you realize just how small this speaker is, the results are even more impressive.
Overall, in my humble opinion, this is an excellent speaker. The size is reminiscent of a legitimate “Tower” speaker; not an oversized “monitor” size, but a true Tower 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 that could possibly be ran without a crossover (depending on output needs and low frequency extension). Even better with a proper crossover filter and an accompanying subwoofer. The latter is what I would recommend if ran sealed. Ported could possibly allow you to run without a subwoofer but obviously this is going to be use-case dependent.
Discuss!
Last edited: