Arendal Sound 1723 1S & 1V Subwoofer Review

[shadyJ]

​

After having reviewed three of Arendal’s subwoofers, I like to think I am pretty familiar with their design philosophy and performance targets. I have dealt with their massive $3k flagship, 1723 2V (Audioholics Arendal 1723 2V Review), as well as their smallest and most affordable unit, the petite 1961 1S (Audioholics Arendal 1961 1S & 1V Review). I think I know what to expect from the middle of the pack 1723 1S and 1V, but I have decided to take a look at them anyway so readers can get a look at these subs from our informed perspective.

READ: Arendal Sound 1723 1S & 1V Subwoofers Review

 

[ryanosaur]

Wonderful review, Shady. Arendal is gonna have to design and build some new Subs just to help keep you busy!

Arendal has impressed, thus far. They might not be the best solution for everybody, but they do a pretty excellent job across the board in delivering what seems to be a very well designed and built product at two different levels of cost and where performance quality is pretty much nailed.

Thank you!

 

[Dinger928]

@shadyJ Now that you have reviewed and measured both the 1961 1S and 1723 1S I was hoping you could give your opinion on something that I have been struggling with (or others as well).

I like a sealed subwoofer let's get that out of the way. I'm having trouble deciding between these two subs in a dual sub setup. My listening will be 100% movies in a multipurpose room that is around 2100 cubic feet with a couple doors that can be closed off. It looks to me like from the measurements that the 1961 actually plays a little louder and lower and this is what is throwing me off a little. Just trying to figure out what the extra $$$ between these models gets me outside of the inclusion of the app.

 

[gene]

 

[shadyJ]

@shadyJ Now that you have reviewed and measured both the 1961 1S and 1723 1S I was hoping you could give your opinion on something that I have been struggling with.

I like a sealed subwoofer let's get that out of the way. I'm having trouble deciding between these two subs in a dual sub setup. My listening will be 100% movies in a multipurpose room that is around 2100 cubic feet with a couple doors that can be closed off. It looks to me like from the measurements that the 1961 actually plays a little louder and lower and this is what is throwing me off a little. Just trying to figure out what the extra $$$ between these models gets me outside of the inclusion of the app.

The 1961 1S doesn't play louder or lower. You might have mixed up the measurements when comparing them, but the 1723 has a 2 to 3dB advantage on average. That is a 33 to 50% increase in headroom. The finish and build quality are also better in the 1723 subs. The 1723 amps also have more features such as XLR inputs and more deeper controls in the amp.

 

[Dinger928]

The 1961 1S doesn't play louder or lower. You might have mixed up the measurements when comparing them, but the 1723 has a 2 to 3dB advantage on average. That is a 33 to 50% increase in headroom. The finish and build quality are also better in the 1723 subs. The 1723 amps also have more features such as XLR inputs and more deeper controls in the amp.

I may have been looking at it wrong. I was referring to Arendals own measurements on their website prior to the freshly published results you had obtained. It just looked like to me at 20Hz and below, the 1961 ever so slightly excelled over the 1723.

Thanks for the clarification. Keep up the good work.

 

[TLS Guy]

@shadyJ Now that you have reviewed and measured both the 1961 1S and 1723 1S I was hoping you could give your opinion on something that I have been struggling with (or others as well).

I like a sealed subwoofer let's get that out of the way. I'm having trouble deciding between these two subs in a dual sub setup. My listening will be 100% movies in a multipurpose room that is around 2100 cubic feet with a couple doors that can be closed off. It looks to me like from the measurements that the 1961 actually plays a little louder and lower and this is what is throwing me off a little. Just trying to figure out what the extra $$$ between these models gets me outside of the inclusion of the app.

Well lets get the idea about sealed subs back in the equation. Closing the port of a tuned enclosure does not make it a properly designed sealed sub. A driver in a vented enclosure optimally loaded requires an enclosure of a totally different and smaller volume to perform properly as a sealed sub. In addition drivers have parameters known as Thiele/Small parameters that optimize them for vented versus sealed alignment. Plugging ports is a machination of sales departments, and not engineers. The only advantage of a sealed enclosure is that it has a smaller volume and foot print, after that everything is negative. So sealing the port of a vented enclosure only has negative consequences.

 

[Verdinut]

There is a real possibility of overall improvement in the response of a subwoofer when plugging one the vents on a ported enclosure, if the cabinet is located near the corner of a room. Lowering the tuning frequency of the box reduces low frequency output above the new resulting tuning frequency and below 100 Hz, which to some extent counteracts some of the room gain effects.

I know because I've experienced some improvement when I tried it.

 

[leelee1]

These subwoofers are not inexpensive. For the asking price I would be expecting a really high end/ high excursion driver with a cast aluminum frame and possibly a cabinet built from birch. For less money, the starke 15 inch subwoofer seems like a better deal when they have their BOGO deal. 2 subwoofers for more even in room bass response.

 

[leelee1]

Well lets get the idea about sealed subs back in the equation. Closing the port of a tuned enclosure does not make it a properly designed sealed sub. A driver in a vented enclosure optimally loaded requires an enclosure of a totally different and smaller volume to perform properly as a sealed sub. In addition drivers have parameters known as Thiele/Small parameters that optimize them for vented versus sealed alignment. Plugging ports is a machination of sales departments, and not engineers. The only advantage of a sealed enclosure is that it has a smaller volume and foot print, after that everything is negative. So sealing the port of a vented enclosure only has negative consequences.

Sealed subs also have the advantage of no port noise at high spl (svs pb 16 for example) and some of the larger sealed subs (18' or larger) have more usable low frequency extension 15hz or lower useful for home theater tactile feel. Not having to worry about a subsonic filter to prevent over excursion and placement behind a projector screen are also advantages of sealed subs. Perhaps I have not heard any really high quality ported subs but I've always preferred the sound of a sealed subwoofer as they just sound less boomy and tighter to me.

 

[shadyJ]

Sealed subs also have the advantage of no port noise at high spl (svs pb 16 for example) and some of the larger sealed subs (18' or larger) have more usable low frequency extension 15hz or lower useful for home theater tactile feel. Not having to worry about a subsonic filter to prevent over excursion and placement behind a projector screen are also advantages of sealed subs. Perhaps I have not heard any really high quality ported subs but I've always preferred the sound of a sealed subwoofer as they just sound less boomy and tighter to me.

Ported subs can produce a lot more clean deep bass than sealed, all other things being equal.

 

[Verdinut]

Sealed subs also have the advantage of no port noise at high spl (svs pb 16 for example) and some of the larger sealed subs (18' or larger) have more usable low frequency extension 15hz or lower useful for home theater tactile feel. Not having to worry about a subsonic filter to prevent over excursion and placement behind a projector screen are also advantages of sealed subs. Perhaps I have not heard any really high quality ported subs but I've always preferred the sound of a sealed subwoofer as they just sound less boomy and tighter to me.

With a vented cabinet properly tuned to a woofer or subwoofer, the overall response is as tight as in a sealed cabinet. The idea that sealed sealed subs are tighter is just BS published in magazines and by some sealed sub manufacturers.

I have been building speakers for more than 50 years. The 3 front 15 inch subs in my front speaker enclosures produce a very tight sound with the use of pro audio QSC Cinema amps:

My 7 Channel System

SYSTEM: MARANTZ SR5010, 3 QSC DCA 1222 AMPS. DRIVING THE FRONT CHANNELS IN ACTIVE BI-AMP CONFIG. QSC DCA 1824 (4 CH. AMP.) FOR SURROUND CHANNELS OPPO BDP-95, REVOX B77, TEAC AN-80 (NR), AUDIO-TECHNICA AT-LP1240, SHURE M97XE, HITACHI HCA-8300, PANASONIC TH-50PZ80U, FURMAN PS-8R, APC H15 FRONT...

forums.audioholics.com

 

[Exmortis]

While I'm sure they are fine subs I take issue with the high cost for Chinese made goods.It's just too expensive for what it is.Plus the company has been on a few forums taking in my view unprofessional shots at their former bosses SVS.As they used to be the exclusive EU distributor for SVS but lost that.Combine that sour grapes with the profiteering low paid China factory labor and SVS,still made in the USA, is a no brainer.

 

[Uncle_Big_Green]

While I'm sure they are fine subs I take issue with the high cost for Chinese made goods.It's just too expensive for what it is.Plus the company has been on a few forums taking in my view unprofessional shots at their former bosses SVS.As they used to be the exclusive EU distributor for SVS but lost that.Combine that sour grapes with the profiteering low paid China factory labor and SVS,still made in the USA, is a no brainer.

I'm pretty sure that SVS products are not made in the US. I think they're made in China.

Maybe we could make a thread on where stuff is made.

 

[XaVierDK]

While I'm sure they are fine subs I take issue with the high cost for Chinese made goods.It's just too expensive for what it is.Plus the company has been on a few forums taking in my view unprofessional shots at their former bosses SVS.As they used to be the exclusive EU distributor for SVS but lost that.Combine that sour grapes with the profiteering low paid China factory labor and SVS,still made in the USA, is a no brainer.

SVS manufacture in China as well.
Regardless, even domestic production will inevitably use components made in China or similar. It's a fundamental for electronics in this day and age.

 

[gene]

OK guys check out our livestream:

Arendal 1723 1S vs 1V Subwoofer Review Discussion

Arendal offers their 13.8” drivers and advanced 800-watt amplifiers in both sealed and vented designs in their 1723 1S and 1V subwoofers. In this livestream,...

www.youtube.com

 

[tn001d]

@shadyJ how would the 1723 1S compare to the SVS SB3000? I am having a major dilemma

 

[XaVierDK]

@shadyJ how would the 1723 1S compare to the SVS SB3000? I am having a major dilemma

According to their CEA-2010 numbers they are basically equal, so my bet is that for most purposes they'd sound the same. It comes down to price and aesthetics.

 

[tn001d]

According to their CEA-2010 numbers they are basically equal, so my bet is that for most purposes they'd sound the same. It comes down to price and aesthetics.

Also the arendals have flatter response and increased low end

 

[XaVierDK]

Also the arendals have flatter response and increased low end

Slightly flatter ground-plane basically means nothing in-room. If you care about it academically, both subs employ PEQ to let you flatten it out yourself.
Deeper extension nominally is also somewhat pointless when both subs can be tuned with DSP anyway. Then maximum headroom makes more sense to compare.