Arendal Sound 1961 1S & 1V Subwoofers Review

[lovinthehd]

Okay let me clarify this: This is only the case if you're running long length's or running the RCA cable together with other wires/other equipment that create noise. If this is both not the case, then you probably don't have an difference indeed. So "extremely degraded by an rca connection" is indeed not always the case.

But since most cables just "run somewhere" together with audio equipment/computer equipment/power cables etc.etc. an balanced connection is always better and a degradation in signal is practically always the case with unbalanced, simply because unbalanced is unshielded(the shield is part of the signal). Maybe audiable, maybe not, true, but it's not optimal and it should be avoided.

Maybe you never had GND hum issues with unbalanced connectors, but many others had. So there is not a single reason not to include XLR, it's simply an better connection, all these issues are avoided by simply chosing for balanced connections. The big Arendal's and most other big/huge subwoofers have XLR's, only the small sub's don't have XLR which is a shame, this is a shame since not everyone has a huge living room but some still love to have good equipment while also having a living small.

The expansion makes more sense than your original statement. I have not had particular issues with long runs of sub cable, but my longest runs tend to be from just the amp to the sub (most of my subs having external amps).

 

[luisev]

My 1961 1v arrived about week ago and so far, zero complaints within my 10' 11" x 15'7" room.

 

[Dinger928]

My 1961 1v arrived about week ago and so far, zero complaints within my 10' 11" x 15'7" room.

Any updates on your 1961 1V? I'm trying to decide on dual 1961 1S or 1V's in my 15x18x7'11" room.

 

[luisev]

Any updates on your 1961 1V? I'm trying to decide on dual 1961 1S or 1V's in my 15x18x7'11" room.

In my room, the 1961 1v works great, extremely deep bass, not bloated, it's very quick and tight; integrated easily with the other 1961 speakers that I purchased. After approx. 1 month of use, I left feedback on Arendal's site as I have no intention on sending it back. That being said, not sure if I'll get a second one as the output is that good in my room, but only time will tell. Arendal recently announced a price increase for the 1961 speakers, it goes into effect towards the end of December, so if you're interested in trying one in your room, now is the time to try it risk free before the price increase.

 

[Prolix]

Anyone have thoughts on switching from a JL e110 to a 1961 1V for theater use only? JL is showing greater CEA output over 40hz so I'm unsure whether the 1961 would actually be a downgrade for some content even though it's ported and has a larger driver and cabinet. Arendal support told me they weren't familiar with the e110. I'm just looking to get some of that ported theater experience without buying a huge box.

 

[shadyJ]

Anyone have thoughts on switching from a JL e110 to a 1961 1V for theater use only? JL is showing greater CEA output over 40hz so I'm unsure whether the 1961 would actually be a downgrade for some content even though it's ported and has a larger driver and cabinet. Arendal support told me they weren't familiar with the e110. I'm just looking to get some of that ported theater experience without buying a huge box.

It's very hard to get deep bass from a small enclosure. The 1961 1V's tuning advantage would be more around 20Hz than 40Hz, and I would expect the e110 to have a bit more output above the 1961 1V's port output range.

Are you able to get multiple 1962 1Vs and hide them or something like that? That's the way to go if you can accommodate it.

 

[Dinger928]

Anyone have thoughts on switching from a JL e110 to a 1961 1V for theater use only? JL is showing greater CEA output over 40hz so I'm unsure whether the 1961 would actually be a downgrade for some content even though it's ported and has a larger driver and cabinet. Arendal support told me they weren't familiar with the e110. I'm just looking to get some of that ported theater experience without buying a huge box.

I am actually in the same boat here. Running a single E-112 and would like to add another. The cost to do so is actually crazy considering the price increase of a new E-112 over what I paid for mine nearly 4 years ago. Thus, I was looking at adding either dual 1961 1S or 1V's. I know that size matters, just not sure really what I would be giving up moving away from the JL E-112. The charts can only tell me so much I believe, thus is why I am asking if anyone out there has their opinions, or have made a similar move, especially before the 1961 price increase of 15%.

 

[Prolix]

It's very hard to get deep bass from a small enclosure. The 1961 1V's tuning advantage would be more around 20Hz than 40Hz, and I would expect the e110 to have a bit more output above the 1961 1V's port output range.

Are you able to get multiple 1962 1Vs and hide them or something like that? That's the way to go if you can accommodate it.

Thanks! My Arcam doesn't have independent sub outs so I'm trying to stick with one, unfortunately.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Anyone have thoughts on switching from a JL e110 to a 1961 1V for theater use only? JL is showing greater CEA output over 40hz so I'm unsure whether the 1961 would actually be a downgrade for some content even though it's ported and has a larger driver and cabinet. Arendal support told me they weren't familiar with the e110. I'm just looking to get some of that ported theater experience without buying a huge box.

How big is the room? I would never use a sealed sub, but especially for HT only. Unless there’s a space issue, there’s just no reason. So imo, if Arendal is what you want, I’d at least get a pair of the V’s. I haven’t compared output numbers, but suspect that for HT the arendal V would be better overall. Room size imo would dictate what to do. If the room is large I’d think there are better options, but they will be bigger, and likely more expensive. Depends on what you really want.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Thanks! My Arcam doesn't have independent sub outs so I'm trying to stick with one, unfortunately.

You can use a splitter.

 

[Prolix]

The other thing I've been wondering about is that Arendal says the 1723 subs are "tighter and more musical" than the 1961 subs. Nemo Propaganda described the 1723 as a higher end bass experience where the bass comes from an ink black background. I've read forum accounts of the 1961 sounding maybe not quite as refined as some other options.
But, the 1961 measurements appear to show low distortion, relatively little compression, and low group delay which I believe should result in a pretty high fidelity bass situation. Are there attributes that affect perceived bass fidelity that aren't typically measured? Just feel like I'm missing something.

 

[shadyJ]

The other thing I've been wondering about is that Arendal says the 1723 subs are "tighter and more musical" than the 1961 subs. Nemo Propaganda described the 1723 as a higher end bass experience where the bass comes from an ink black background. I've read forum accounts of the 1961 sounding maybe not quite as refined as some other options.
But, the 1961 measurements appear to show low distortion, relatively little compression, and low group delay which I believe should result in a pretty high fidelity bass situation. Are there attributes that affect perceived bass fidelity that aren't typically measured? Just feel like I'm missing something.

I don't think there is much else that is measured that can tell you a lot about the sound character of subwoofers. I would say that Arendal's claims about the 1723s sounding qualitatively better than the 1961s is just marketing.

 

[ryanosaur]

ust feel like I'm missing something.

The fish hook at the end of the marketing and Audio-phool fishing line? That's not a bad thing.
Once you bite, they make you their b!tch.

Whether the 1723s are worth the price differential is a personal values decision. Good Bass does cost money, and chasing extension or a percentage point on distortion can be pricey.