Arendal Sound 1723 Subwoofer 2S Review

[shadyJ]

Among Arendal Sound's subwoofers, I have reviewed all but one, but today, I will be examining the final sub of the six that they offer, the 1723 Subwoofer 2S. I don’t expect any surprises in this review since I am familiar with Arendal’s design philosophy at this point. However, I am still excited to get my hands on this sub since I think it may be the sweet spot among Arendal’s subwoofer offerings. The reason why I think the 2S could be their finest sub is the performance density per liter that it could provide. To put it another way, it could possibly pack more punch for its size than any other sub from Arendal. While the 1723 Subwoofer 2V is certainly Arendal’s highest performer, it is a behemoth that weighs over 130 lbs., and stands 27” tall. It is simply too large and heavy for most people. It is almost twice the size of the 2S at 13,000 cubic inches vs. 7,000 cubic inches, and that extra 40 lbs. pushes it over from being merely heavy to massively heavy. While the 2S will give up output from perhaps 40Hz to 16Hz versus the 2V, it is far more physically manageable and won’t be a gigantic presence in-room, but I would still expect pretty tremendous performance from this dual 13.8” driver, 1,200-watt subwoofer.

But the question is, does it actually provide the performance that it promises based on Arendal’s other subs? Read our full review to find out…

READ: Arendal Sound 1723 Subwoofer 2S Review

 

[ryanosaur]

Right on, Shady. Thank you.

In my book the 2V would still be the way to go.

 

[TLS Guy]

View attachment 63706​

Among Arendal Sound's subwoofers, I have reviewed all but one, but today, I will be examining the final sub of the six that they offer, the 1723 Subwoofer 2S. I don’t expect any surprises in this review since I am familiar with Arendal’s design philosophy at this point. However, I am still excited to get my hands on this sub since I think it may be the sweet spot among Arendal’s subwoofer offerings. The reason why I think the 2S could be their finest sub is the performance density per liter that it could provide. To put it another way, it could possibly pack more punch for its size than any other sub from Arendal. While the 1723 Subwoofer 2V is certainly Arendal’s highest performer, it is a behemoth that weighs over 130 lbs., and stands 27” tall. It is simply too large and heavy for most people. It is almost twice the size of the 2S at 13,000 cubic inches vs. 7,000 cubic inches, and that extra 40 lbs. pushes it over from being merely heavy to massively heavy. While the 2S will give up output from perhaps 40Hz to 16Hz versus the 2V, it is far more physically manageable and won’t be a gigantic presence in-room, but I would still expect pretty tremendous performance from this dual 13.8” driver, 1,200-watt subwoofer.

But the question is, does it actually provide the performance that it promises based on Arendal’s other subs? Read our full review to find out…

READ: Arendal Sound 1723 Subwoofer 2S Review

Shady, I really enjoy your in depth reviews. They really are warts and all. Obviously there is need and demand for good sealed subs to maintain domestic bliss.

However your reviews continue to reinforce my belief that I would never want a sealed subwoofer. As usual it displays the problems of the forcing of the design below its natural F3. Those distortion measurements in particular lay it all bare, and superbly illustrate the problem.

So my advice is sealed only if you don't have room for something bigger.

 

[Matt34]

I run a 1S as a nearfield sub and I appreciate it's form factor and build quality. I imagine the 2S would be a better pairing to my SB4000.

 

[Nondemo01]

GREAT REVIEW AGAIN! Thanks James! I wish people would focus more on your in-room response/listening comments instead of the raw numbers these items produce in a parking lot. I've played a TON of gigs with some amazing systems and NONE of the Front of House (FOH) engineers relies on how the PA sounds without an audience! Bottom Line- thank you for your OBJECTIVE AND your written SUBJECTIVE comments that equate to excellent performance from this subwoofer! Cheers!

 

[isolar8001]

Another sub gets a time out....bad sub !!

 

[TLS Guy]

GREAT REVIEW AGAIN! Thanks James! I wish people would focus more on your in-room response/listening comments instead of the raw numbers these items produce in a parking lot. I've played a TON of gigs with some amazing systems and NONE of the Front of House (FOH) engineers relies on how the PA sounds without an audience! Bottom Line- thank you for your OBJECTIVE AND your written SUBJECT comments that equate to excellent performance from this subwoofer! Cheers!

How many rooms do you want Shady to test the subs in? How do you know which one has any relevance? That is a daft suggestion that Shady should ignore. A free air measurement is the only valid information you need. It is up to you to understand your room, and engineer accordingly.

 

[isolar8001]

How many rooms do you want Shady to test the subs in?

Yeah...Shady's kinda petite. Just hauling these beasts out to the parking lot is a lot to ask !!
Just kidding, Shady...

 

[Nondemo01]

How many rooms do you want Shady to test the subs in? How do you know which one has any relevance? That is a daft suggestion that Shady should ignore. A free air measurement is the only valid information you need. It is up to you to understand your room, and engineer accordingly.

Uh, what?

Wasn't aware I made any suggestion. I simply thanked him for his great subjective and objective review. You are welcome to your opinion and I mine. I do enjoy Daft Punk however. Cheers to you TLS Guy. Cheers to you.

 

[Bobby Bass]

Thanks for reviewing another Arendal sub. I’ve had a great experience with their speakers. Wish I had room for 2 of these but happy with what I have and the money I saved is always welcomed.

 

[TLS Guy]

Uh, what?

Wasn't aware I made any suggestion. I simply thanked him for his great subjective and objective review. You are welcome to your opinion and I mine. I do enjoy Daft Punk however. Cheers to you TLS Guy. Cheers to you.

You asked for an in room response, did you not?

 

[lovinthehd]

You asked for an in room response, did you not?

That was my impression, too....and even shadyJ put this disclaimer in the review:

"The best placement for a single sub in my room gives me a relatively flat response for an un-EQ’d single subwoofer, with a window of +/- 4 dB from 25 Hz to 100 Hz with no broad dips in important ranges. This location trades low-end room gain for a relatively flat response, a worthwhile trade for my tastes. The AV processor used was a Marantz AV7705. The crossover was set to 80Hz at the receiver and the sub’s LFE connection was used. The speakers used were some PreSonus Eris E8 XTs.


As always, I will note here that since room acoustics have a huge effect on low frequencies, the way these subwoofers sound in my room at my listening position is not necessarily going to be the way they sound anywhere else for anyone else, so readers would do well to keep that in mind, and not just for this subwoofer in this review but for any subwoofer in any review."

The least helpful parts of shadyJ's reviews, for me, is the subjective part with particular content.

 

[Nondemo01]

You asked for an in room response, did you not?

Flatly, NO. I did not. I said exactly:

"I wish people would focus more on your in-room response/listening comments instead of the raw numbers these items produce in a parking lot."

This: "in-room response/listening comments" refers to James' written review of how this sub sounded in his living environment and I thanked him for that as I found it informative.

The sentence is a comment NOT a question. You can tell by the lack of a "?".

Perhaps in your future commentary, you can seek clarity before.... NM. It's a message board and nobody seemingly does that.

To suggest other from my comments on his expository writing, as you so aptly put it, is daft. Cheers.

 

[Nondemo01]

That was my impression, too....and even shadyJ put this disclaimer in the review:

"The best placement for a single sub in my room gives me a relatively flat response for an un-EQ’d single subwoofer, with a window of +/- 4 dB from 25 Hz to 100 Hz with no broad dips in important ranges. This location trades low-end room gain for a relatively flat response, a worthwhile trade for my tastes. The AV processor used was a Marantz AV7705. The crossover was set to 80Hz at the receiver and the sub’s LFE connection was used. The speakers used were some PreSonus Eris E8 XTs.


As always, I will note here that since room acoustics have a huge effect on low frequencies, the way these subwoofers sound in my room at my listening position is not necessarily going to be the way they sound anywhere else for anyone else, so readers would do well to keep that in mind, and not just for this subwoofer in this review but for any subwoofer in any review."

The least helpful parts of shadyJ's reviews, for me, is the subjective part with particular content.

Thank you but you have the wrong impression of my comments. I wasn't at all suggesting James provides in-room responses from his reviews.

I also do not share your opinion in regard to subjectivity in written reviews - and that's okay.

I read Audioholics because I believe Gene and his team do a phenomenal job both testing for objective performance as well as providing valuable information on how a product works day-to-day. If you come for just the measured performance page, cheers too you. I however, find the other 80% of their written word equally as valuable and appreciate their efforts in providing them. Have you been to AudioScienceReview? They focus solely on measured performance to the exclusion of all else. I don't read them because they seemingly treat everything like a DAC with only their testing criteria. You'd be hard pressed to get manufacturers who already conduct Klippel near-field or Audio Precision testing to send their product to ASR without so much as a comment on how a speaker "sounds" or an item "performs". On the contrary, I would think a manufacturer would be more concerned people would overlook something and provide erroneous information from a lack of understanding on how something works. Look no further than their "review" of the Monoprice HTP-1. Cheers!

 

[lovinthehd]

Thank you but you have the wrong impression of my comments. I wasn't at all suggesting James provides in-room responses from his reviews.

I also do not share your opinion in regard to subjectivity in written reviews - and that's okay.

I read Audioholics because I believe Gene and his team do a phenomenal job both testing for objective performance as well as providing valuable information on how a product works day-to-day. If you come for just the measured performance page, cheers too you. I however, find the other 80% of their written word equally as valuable and appreciate their efforts in providing them. Have you been to AudioScienceReview? They focus solely on measured performance to the exclusion of all else. I don't read them because they seemingly treat everything like a DAC with only their testing criteria. You'd be hard pressed to get manufacturers who already conduct Klippel near-field or Audio Precision testing to send their product to ASR without so much as a comment on how a speaker "sounds" or an item "performs". On the contrary, I would think a manufacturer would be more concerned people would overlook something and provide erroneous information from a lack of understanding on how something works. Look no further than their "review" of the Monoprice HTP-1. Cheers!

I just don't need a review to have that subjective aspect aside from things like controls/ergonomics/build perhaps. I'll figure the how it sounds part out on my own. The description of how something sounds particularly to any one person just varies too much for it to mean much to me. YMMV. Yes, am familiar with ASR and yes, that is one of the main purposes of the forum/testing, not for subjective impressions as they can be fraught with issues, which does frustrate a lot of people who can't work with the measurements and need someone to tell them how something "sounds" (which with electronics is pretty useless in most cases). Don't think I checked out the Monoprice pre-pro review, but will look at it. Cheers.

 

[Nondemo01]

I just don't need a review to have that subjective aspect aside from things like controls/ergonomics/build perhaps. I'll figure the how it sounds part out on my own. The description of how something sounds particularly to any one person just varies too much for it to mean much to me. YMMV. Yes, am familiar with ASR and yes, that is one of the main purposes of the forum/testing, not for subjective impressions as they can be fraught with issues, which does frustrate a lot of people who can't work with the measurements and need someone to tell them how something "sounds" (which with electronics is pretty useless in most cases). Don't think I checked out the Monoprice pre-pro review, but will look at it. Cheers.

I hear ya. Some review sites can be OVERLY "flowery" with their written word. Audioholics for me, strikes a nice balance between measured performance and how it translates to sound. Erin's audio corner is similar on a smaller scale. Having worked in many studios throughout the years cutting various tracks for people, I can very confidently say always trust YOUR ears over any measurements. If the snare and kick sound too loud, they are. I don't care what the meters say! (Having a properly tuned room and predictable response curves are important, just not the "end all be all". Mixing music happens with all kinds of speakers in a variety of listening environments. From F-150 pickups to Porsche 911 Turbos, AirPods to Wilson Audio and everything in between....)

 

[lovinthehd]

I hear ya. Some review sites can be OVERLY "flowery" with their written word. Audioholics for me, strikes a nice balance between measured performance and how it translates to sound. Erin's audio corner is similar on a smaller scale. Having worked in many studios throughout the years cutting various tracks for people, I can very confidently say always trust YOUR ears over any measurements. If the snare and kick sound too loud, they are. I don't care what the meters say! (Having a properly tuned room and predictable response curves are important, just not the "end all be all". Mixing music happens with all kinds of speakers in a variety of listening environments. From F-150 pickups to Porsche 911 Turbos, AirPods to Wilson Audio and everything in between....)

That's all most "audiophile" sites offer unfortunately. Here, ASR and Erin's are my most used internet destinations for audio. I wouldn't know how to measure a kick drum, tho. I just like to filter out the gear that's probably not worth spending time on via the measurements.

 

[stevestrike]

The Arendel 1723 2S is $2400, but Dual ULS-15 MK2 are $1778. Granted, the HSU don't have the fit and finish or on-board processing that the 1723 comes with, but the HSU should have more than double the output of the 2S below 40Hz. Is that a fair statement?

So I guess my question is given a $1,800-2,400 budget, how important is getting dual subs? If it's very important, then the HSU seems like a good choice. But if a single, sealed sub works just as well then the 1723 2S offers more features and more luxury, which I am good with as well.

I've been looking a subs, and CEA-2010 data, and watching review videos for weeks now. I was set to purchase a 1723 2S when someone brought up the SB16 Ultra and I'm super confused again. Arendal, HSU, SVS, and to a lesser-extent Rythmik and Paradigm (the X15 piques my interest).

I honestly can't tell if the "sealed vs. ported" debate has any actual merit to it, or if it's just another thing audio geeks like to fight about on the internet. I was always taught that sealed subs gave better/faster response with more chest thump and kick for music. Now I read that ported (can) offer better effciency, more SPL, and a better/flatter response curve.

Physically, I assume that SPL is SPL at a given frequency, so that all else being equal (group delay, distortion, etc..) a sealed and ported sub would sound (and feel) exactly the same while playing material that was in a standard 20-80Hz range. Is that crazy? Apologies for the long rant and @shadyJ I really appreciate the reviews you write. I think I've literally read all of them, and some of them 2-3 times.

 

[Nondemo01]

The Arendel 1723 2S is $2400, but Dual ULS-15 MK2 are $1778. Granted, the HSU don't have the fit and finish or on-board processing that the 1723 comes with, but the HSU should have more than double the output of the 2S below 40Hz. Is that a fair statement?

So I guess my question is given a $1,800-2,400 budget, how important is getting dual subs? If it's very important, then the HSU seems like a good choice. But if a single, sealed sub works just as well then the 1723 2S offers more features and more luxury, which I am good with as well.

I've been looking a subs, and CEA-2010 data, and watching review videos for weeks now. I was set to purchase a 1723 2S when someone brought up the SB16 Ultra and I'm super confused again. Arendal, HSU, SVS, and to a lesser-extent Rythmik and Paradigm (the X15 piques my interest).

I honestly can't tell if the "sealed vs. ported" debate has any actual merit to it, or if it's just another thing audio geeks like to fight about on the internet. I was always taught that sealed subs gave better/faster response with more chest thump and kick for music. Now I read that ported (can) offer better effciency, more SPL, and a better/flatter response curve.

Physically, I assume that SPL is SPL at a given frequency, so that all else being equal (group delay, distortion, etc..) a sealed and ported sub would sound (and feel) exactly the same while playing material that was in a standard 20-80Hz range. Is that crazy? Apologies for the long rant and @shadyJ I really appreciate the reviews you write. I think I've literally read all of them, and some of them 2-3 times.

Have a look here: https://www.audioholics.com/subwoofer-setup

Sometimes much of what gets discussed is in the land of hypothetical. I too was stuck in a never ending cycle of moving speakers and subs into and out of online "shopping carts" in building my system. Understand that nearly all of us (yes even the dedicated home theater peeps) have to make compromises on our systems. Sealed vs ported was one of mine. I needed to blend them in to my living environment and went smaller sealed subs. (Followed Audioholics guides and listened to my integrator and did 2: one on the front wall and one on the back. Gives a very smooth response throughout the listening area.) Do I get infrasonic response? No. Do I NEED it? No. I tried the Arendal 2s. Used them as end tables along my sofa. Didn't get the response I desired and sent them back. (Open space and they were "free standing".) Once I went smaller and against the wall for the benefits of boundary gain, I got the response I desired without rattling everything in my room. It's one thing to have those infrasonic and sub sonic frequencies in a "studio/theater", it's quite another to have that in a living environment where EVERYTHING rattles every time I watch a movie. It's super annoying.

Anyway, the 2s was awesome just not for my use. I think Techthusiasm just got in 2x SB16s and has 2x Arendal 2s in his theater. He might be doing a comparison soon. (Probably without measurements but that's a topic for another day. People get very triggered about that...)

 

[shadyJ]

The Arendel 1723 2S is $2400, but Dual ULS-15 MK2 are $1778. Granted, the HSU don't have the fit and finish or on-board processing that the 1723 comes with, but the HSU should have more than double the output of the 2S below 40Hz. Is that a fair statement?

So I guess my question is given a $1,800-2,400 budget, how important is getting dual subs? If it's very important, then the HSU seems like a good choice. But if a single, sealed sub works just as well then the 1723 2S offers more features and more luxury, which I am good with as well.

I've been looking a subs, and CEA-2010 data, and watching review videos for weeks now. I was set to purchase a 1723 2S when someone brought up the SB16 Ultra and I'm super confused again. Arendal, HSU, SVS, and to a lesser-extent Rythmik and Paradigm (the X15 piques my interest).

I honestly can't tell if the "sealed vs. ported" debate has any actual merit to it, or if it's just another thing audio geeks like to fight about on the internet. I was always taught that sealed subs gave better/faster response with more chest thump and kick for music. Now I read that ported (can) offer better effciency, more SPL, and a better/flatter response curve.

Physically, I assume that SPL is SPL at a given frequency, so that all else being equal (group delay, distortion, etc..) a sealed and ported sub would sound (and feel) exactly the same while playing material that was in a standard 20-80Hz range. Is that crazy? Apologies for the long rant and @shadyJ I really appreciate the reviews you write. I think I've literally read all of them, and some of them 2-3 times.

Thanks for the compliments! To answer your questions, it may not be a fair statement to say dual ULS-15 mk2s would have double the deep bass output vs a single 1723 2S. It's trickier to measure the 1723 2S, and there may be some headroom that I didn't capture, but if my measurements fall short, it is probably only a couple decibels. However, there is no doubt that dual ULS-15 mk2s will have a substantial advantage, especially in deep bass.

As the post above states, multiple subs have a major qualitative advantage, so I advocate for that whenever I can. However, you do need freedom of placement in order to gain this advantage. If you aren't able to place the multiple subs where they can address acoustical problems, then they aren't that much better than a single sub solution.

The SB16-Ultra has a significant deep bass advantage over the 1723 2S, but the 1723 2S has a mid-bass headroom advantage. Both are great subs. As it happens, we are planning to release a video that compares sealed subs in this price range sometime next week. But you already have all of the objective data you need to compare these subs; just keep in mind that the 1723 may be getting short-changed just a bit in dynamic range tests.

The classic sealed vs ported sub debate is fraught with audiophile nonsense. The bottom line is that if you want real deep bass headroom and have the floorspace to accommodate them, go with ported subs. Sealed subs will be down from two to four times less output in deep bass versus ported subs, all other things being equal. The idea that sealed subs have a qualitative advantage is nonsense, at least if the ported sub has been designed well.

Regarding your point about same SPL per frequency with all other metrics being equal, yes, ported and sealed would sound the same. One of these days I would love to do a formal blind test among listeners to see if they can distinguish the difference between the two designs where the frequency response is the same. I have a feeling it would end up in a statistical tie.