Arendal Sound 1961 1S and 1V Subwoofers Review (2022)

We were greatly impressed byArendal’s top-of-the-line subwoofer, the 1723 2V, in our review last year. While it was truly a magnificent beast, it did have twoqualities that precluded it from ownership by a lot of people: it was verylarge and heavy, and it was also somewhat expensive. With this in mind, wedecided to check out what Arendal could do at more accessible sizes/weights andpricing. When Arendal suggested their entry-level 1961 series, either the 1S or 1V, we answered: whynot both! Today’s review examines Arendal’s efforts around the $1k price point,in both a ported and sealed form factor. Our question here is how well do theyscale in price/performance next to the mighty 1723 2V? Let’s now dig in to findout…

Packing and Appearance

The Arendal 1961 subwooferboxes arrived at my house wrapped in the plastic sheet covering that was boundby security tape. The boxes were very heavy-duty, as they must be to surviveinternational transit, and the subs were packed in thick polyethylene foamblocks to give it a buffer for shocks and jolts. The subs were wrapped in acotton sack so as not to get scuffed in the unpacking process. Since anyone whobuys these subs will receive them via parcel shipping, it is important thatthey be well protected from commonly abusive shipping practices, and on thiscount, the 1961 subs have some very sensible packing.

Arendal’s subwoofers all havea similar industrial design, so the 1961 subs look much like their larger 1723siblings except a bit smaller. And smaller size is almost always a welcomeattribute for people who are trying to get their audio equipment not to clashwith their interior decor. I would characterize the 1961 1S as a small sub andthe 1V as a medium-sized sub. However, I frequently receive such large substhat my idea of subwoofer sizes might have become a bit skewed. Their sizeadvantage notwithstanding, the 1961 subs benefit from the tasteful andrestrained trickle-down aesthetics of their larger siblings. The cabinets arefairly simple oblong boxes with the vertical edges having a significantbeveling. All of the edges have a very slight rounding so there are no sharpedges anywhere.


The 1961 subs only come inmatte white and matte black finishes. As matte finishes go, the 1961s arepretty nice, and I have found the quality in “matte” finishes to range widelybetween manufacturers. The 1961 finishes aren’t as fine as the finishes fromthe 1723 series, but the 1723’s “matte” finish was really a true satin finishthat was downplayed by Arendal for some reason. The 1961’s “matte” finish is atrue matte finish, and a bit rougher and more textured than the satin finishesof the 1723s. The advantage of the slight texturing is that the matte finish ismore durable and is not a fingerprint or scuff magnet like a satin finish.

The 1961s are rathermonolithic in appearance with the exception of the cone. The cone is a smoothmatte black surface surrounded by a trim ring so there aren’t any exposedscrews. One point of detail within the cone is the Arendal insignia printed inwhite in the concave dustcap. The cone can be hidden by a magnetic grille, butthe whole sub is already so minimalistic that the grille doesn’t improve theappearance. Its only use is to protect the cone. The only other aesthetic detail in the sub isan Arendal logo in the lower front of the sub. The 1961 subs are simple andunobtrusive, so they aren’t likely to stick out in most people’s rooms ifplaced in a corner or out of the way.

Design Analysis

As was mentioned before, the1961 subwoofers come in both a vented and sealed model (the 1V and 1Srespectively), and the vented model also comes with a port plug in case youwanted sealed sub performance but in a heavier and larger enclosure than the 1Sfor some reason. To get into the specifics of design, let’s start with thedrivers. The 1961 subs tout their drivers as having a 12.2” diameter cone asopposed to normal 12” size cones. That may well be true in some technicalsense, but the reality is that there is a wide range of actual cone areas thatfall into the rubric of claimed 12” cone sizes, and what is more, an additional0.2” of diameter isn’t likely to make a big difference even if there were sometrue point of comparison against other 12”s. The cone is made from aheavily-treated long fiber pulp, which is a good material for this applicationon account of its high stiffness-to-weight ratio.

The cone is attached to astamped steel basket via a Nomex/poly-cotton spider and isoprene rubbersurround. These suspension components are engineered with very sophisticatedmodeling techniques and then fine-tuned using a Klippel laser scanner. Thesuspension is engineered to not exert a lot of tension on the moving assemblyuntil very high excursions, thus allowing for lots of linear throw, and it alsoshould not add a significant amount of weight, which would lower sensitivity.

The motor uses two 6”diameter magnets with a ⅞” thickness which ought to give it a lot of force forthe energized coil to react against. There are aluminum shorting rings in themotor which should lower inductance thereby increasing the bandwidth of thedrivers and lowering even-order harmonic distortion. The voice coil usesaluminum which has most of the conductivity of copper yet without nearly asmuch of a weight penalty; that ought to give it greater efficiency than copper.Venting is done in the basket under the spider. The backplate has been heavilybumped out to allow for high excursions without the former hard-bottomingagainst the backplate which can wreck the former in an instant. As with thesuspension, the motor has been heavily optimized via computer modeling andKlippel scanning.

The 1961 subs use Arendal’sAvalanche 550 IQ amplifiers, a very sophisticated class-D design controlled bya powerful DSP engine. As the name suggests, it can output 550-watts RMS whichshould be plenty for the 12.2” drivers. Instead of the traditional knobs tocontrol the basics like volume, phase, and low-pass frequencies, the 550 IQuses a single knob and two buttons to control a 1.8” color LCD screen. Thisdesign enables a much wider and deeper control over all aspects of the sub’soperation. Phase can be controlled out to a single degree, volume can befine-tuned to a single-decibel, and the low-pass filter can be set to exactfrequency. The 550 IQ also features a 3-band parametric equalizer, so the 1961subs do not need an external equalizer to manually alter the response. Responseproblems created by the room can be addressed on the sub itself. Operationmodes and subsonic filters can also be engaged by the amp. The amp has two RCAinputs and outputs, and the inputs can be individually controlled so that thesub can accommodate connectivity with two different systems simultaneously.

Backpanel View of Arendal Sound 1961 Subwoofer Amp

In addition to the extensivelevel of control permitted by the 550 IQ amp, it also constantly monitorsaspects of system operation to ensure that the sub is never running inpotentially damaging situations. Power supply voltage, output voltage, andsystem temperature are a few of the properties always being monitored inreal-time. If the amp senses anything amiss among a multitude of operationalproperties, it will immediately shut itself down rather than risk any damage tothe sub itself. As with any other computerized system, upon activation, theamplifier runs through a series of self-tests to make sure everything is inorder before becoming fully functional. Toward this end, the inclusion of anonboard tone generator makes it easy to deduce a problem within the largersystem to see where a problem might lay if the sub isn’t producing sound.

A Useful 3 band Parametric EQ to help tame problematic bass modes

The enclosures are made fromhigh-density fiberboard which is denser and tougher than the standardmedium-density fiberboard that most sub enclosures are made of. The side-panelshave a ¾” thickness and the driver baffle has a 1 ½” thickness. The 1V’s slotport paneling spans the width of the enclosure and snakes all the way up to thetop of the sub on the interior of the cabinet; this adds a considerable amountof bracing as well as mass to the cabinet. There is also a fair amount ofstuffing inside the cabinet to damp resonances. A nice side effect of enclosurestuffing is that it can help to lower the system resonant frequency. The feetare some stiff rubber cylindrical pieces with the Arendal logo molded into thebottom. The 1961 enclosures are built like boulders which is what I have cometo expect from Arendal. These subwoofers feel very solid, and their size beliestheir weight. Just trying to lift the 80 lbs. 1V sub brings home the reality oftheir mass very quickly.

Interior View of the Internals of the Arendal Sound 1961 Subwoofer

The overall design andconstruction of the 1961 subwoofers fall in line with the other products fromArendal that I have encountered. The quality of materials and workmanship arewell above average, even here in their entry-level subwoofers. The constructiondoesn’t go as far over-the-top as the 1723 series, but that is to be expected.But now we are faced with the question of what does all of this engineering addup to? Let’s give them a listen to find out…

Listening Sessions

The best placement for asingle sub in my room gives me a relatively flat response for an un-EQ’d singlesubwoofer, with a window of +/- 4 dB from 25 Hz to 100 Hz with no broad dips inimportant ranges. This location trades low-end room gain for a relatively flatresponse, a worthwhile trade for my tastes. The receiver used was a PioneerElite SC-55 and the crossover was used mostly at 80 Hz. As always, I will notehere that since room acoustics have a huge effect on low frequencies, the waythese subwoofers sound in my room at my listening position is not necessarilygoing to be the way they sound anywhere else for anyone else, so readers woulddo well to keep that in mind, and not just for this subwoofer in this reviewbut for any subwoofer in any review.

Music Listening

All devotees of JohannPachebel are sure to have CPO’s “Complete Organ Works” albums in theircollection, which are recordings of performances of all of Pachebel’s survivingcompositions in very high sound quality. The most recent of this set is the2019 release “Complete Organ Works III” which was played on the Trost organ atthe church of St. Walpurgis in GroBengottern in Germany. Most of thecompositions in this album don’t really take advantage of the deep frequencyprowess that a subwoofer is capable of, but the ones that can do so in a way noother acoustic instrument can come close to. Some of the tracks lean on thelower registers heavily, some lightly, and some don’t have any bass whatsoever,but I was interested in how the 1961 subwoofers could balance the light basstouches against the moments when the full low-frequency force of the pipe organcould kick in.

While the subwoofers’integration with the speakers is mostly a matter of calibration, the quality ofthe subs is still important in achieving a good blend. On this count, theArendal 1961 subwoofers made for a seamless fusion in sound with the mainspeakers. Both the 1S and 1V proved to have a delicate enough touch toreproduce the more full-throated moments of the lower frequencies with vervewithout overdoing the softer bass that comprised the majority of this album. Onthe tracks with heavier deep bass, the subs could help to simulate a space muchlarger than my actual room size. They could recreate the sound of this massivepipe organ with authority and were able to convey the size and scope of this,the “king of all instruments.” Switching between the subs, they both soundedvery similar. At high volumes, I thought that the 1V might have had an edge inlower-pitched notes, but they were both so close that may well have been myimagination. If there are no size restrictions, the 1V is the one to getregardless, since it will naturally have an advantage in deep bass on accountof the port. However, if size is a concern, the 1S is hardly a compromise atall for organ music in my experience in listening to this album. There is nodoubt that both subs are fine choices for pipe organ music.

...theArendal 1961 subwoofers made for a seamless fusion in sound with the mainspeakers.

One of the most influentialartists on modern electronic music is surprisingly looking to be none otherthan John Carpenter, who, of course, is more popularly known as a moviedirector. While his movies are fairly influential themselves, he is, more thananyone, responsible for spawning the entire subgenre of “synthwave,” music thatcan best be described as ‘Carpenter-esque.’ Carpenter is retired fromfilmmaking these days, but he continues to make music, and his music is verymuch in the synthwave vein. His most recent album, “Dark Themes III: AliveAfter Death,” is relatively bass-heavy with a fat vintage synth sound. Growlingelectric guitars also round out the low-frequencies in this music, and it allgives the subwoofers a lot to do, thereby making it a good demo of a sub’sabilities.

Both 1961 subs were able togive Carpenter’s music a strong foundation. The bass line pulsated with energythat could be felt as well as heard, and kick drums were also given a physicalas well as aural dimension. Hearing these tracks so dramatically realized makesme wish there were accompanying movies to go with them (the 7th track,“Skeleton,” definitely justifies a movie). Again, switching between the subs, Ididn’t get a sense that the 1S and 1V were especially different on thiscontent. I thought maybe the 1V had slightly more weight on some tracks. Thisisn’t surprising since the 1V’s port advantage probably doesn’t extend muchhigher than 40Hz, and the vast majority of bass in this music is likely above40Hz, but then again expectation bias may be coloring my experience on this.Regardless, both subs killed it with “Lost Themes III,” and anyone looking fora sub to give their retro-synthwave music some more oomph would do well witheither one.

For bass-heavy music of amuch subtler nature, I selected a dark ambient album from the Cyclic Law labelentitled “Syvys” by Otavan Veret. This album is comprised of four long-formpieces using a variety of sounds that employ deep bass to varying degrees.There are timpani-type drums, drawn-out basslines, atmospheric drones, anddistant rumbling noises, so there are plenty of sounds for a subwoofer to feaston. It should be an interesting test of the 1961 subwoofers to see if therewere any perceivable differences between the sealed and ported models in thismusic. There is a lot of bass in “Syvys” but it all forms a part of a largersound, so how well would the 1961 subs keep the low-frequency elements intactwith the rest of the sound?

The 1961 subs were able tokeep track of the multitude of low-frequency sounds on this album withoutblurring them together or lumping them into an ambiguous mess. The sound neverbifurcated into a “sub/satellite” divergence that cheap systems can have, andthe album was reproduced as a cohesive whole. The subwoofer’s presence onlybecame undoubtable when bass reached much deeper than what the main speakerscould plausibly reproduce. Alternating between the subs, there did seem to be asomewhat more clear difference between them during passages that had a nearsubterranean rumbling noise. The 1S could reproduce this rumbling, but notquite with the strength that the 1V could manage. Aside from that, the subswere indistinguishable. “Syvys” was recreated to an evocative degree and feltlike a soundscape that was explored by the listener in detail. The gentledeep-bass repetitions of the third track, “III,” had a mesmeric effect thatkept the subs busy with a plethora of low-frequency sounds. While I have togive the 1V a slight edge in reproducing this album, either sub is sure toplease anyone looking for some deep bass assistance in this lower-key type ofmusic.

For bass of a far less subtlecharacter, I found a terrific new release on Division Recordings from Sleepnettitled “First Light.” Sleepnet is a solo project from Noisia’s Nick Roos, and“First Light” has a slew of tracks that cover a range of different electronicmusic styles. Few of these tracks are shy about the use of heavy bass, which isno surprise coming from a member of the drum and bass supergroup Noisia. Thealbum has some calm tracks but it also has some real bangers that can serve asa stress test for any sub at a high enough playback level. Usually in this typeof test, either the sub gets pummeled or the sub ends up pummeling my ears, butsomething is going to get a beatdown, so the question is what was going to givefirst?

Both subs could throw aserious punch. While they weren’t able to get louder than I could actuallytolerate, they were able to get as loud as I would ever listen to this albumfor enjoyment, and that is pretty loud. Bass drops and kick drums could be feltas well as heard. I cranked the volume, and neither sub exhibited any signs ofover-driving nor did they produce any audible distortion. The sharp attacks ofthe kick drums showed a seamless merging of subwoofer and loudspeaker, and I didn’t detect anysluggishness or extra decay from either of the subs. Anyone who thinks thatsealed subs have some kind of inherent transient superiority over a ported subshould give these subs a close listen to dispel that delusion. As was heard onsome other content, the 1V did give a meatier presentation in passages withdeeper bass, but the difference was not huge, and both subs made this albumsound great. In particular, the track “Angel Blade” (that tune is a realbanger, by the way) did have a more intimidating opening sound on the 1Vsubwoofer. This album turned out to be a blast to listen to on the 1961subwoofers, and it leaves me wanting to hear more from both Arendal andSleepnet.

Movie Watching

I have enjoyed NeilBlomkamp’s movies since he first appeared on my radar with 2009’s fantastic“District 9,” so it was a treat that he had come out with a new movie that wasquietly made during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 that was titled “Demonic.” Inthis movie, the estranged daughter of a comatose woman gets a chance toreconnect with her mother despite it coming by way of entering a virtualreality reconstruction of her mother’s psychic landscape. Before falling into a coma, the mother had gone on a horrific killing spree,and the daughter was driven to know why her mother committed such heinouscrimes. Things get complicated when she learns that her mother may not have hadfull agency over her actions during the murders, and there may have beenanother malevolent force at work within her. The trailer for “Demonic” promiseda movie with a lot of deep bass, so I decided that a good time to watch it iswith the 1961 subwoofers on hand.

Most of the deep bass momentsin “Demonic” occurred in the virtual reconstructions of a disturbed mentallandscape. Much like the effects work involved, those scenes had an oddglitchiness in the sound mix that the 1961 subwoofers recreated with fullpotency. Another source of low frequencies was Ola Strandh’s music score withheavily incorporated electronic elements that perfectly matched the movie’stheme of modern technology versus ancient evil,. It was given a satisfyinglysolid foundation by the 1961 subs. In fact, I enjoyed the music so much that Ilooked to see if a soundtrack was available, but sadly that doesn’t seem to bethe case. Another aspect of the sound mix given a frightening aural presence bythe 1961 subs is the sound of the film’s antagonist, which I will not say muchabout so as not to spoil the movie for those who haven’t seen it. Suffice tosay it is accompanied by a truly intimidating sound. I switched from the 1S tothe 1V sub in the middle of the movie and didn’t really notice any significantchange, but it may be that the movie doesn’t often dig to frequencies below30Hz or that frequent A/B switching would have been needed to reveal thedifferences. In either case, the 1961 subwoofers helped to make thismovie-watching experience an enjoyable one, even if the movie turned out to bea bit hokey.

Another movie I watched withthe 1961 subwoofers was the recent WW2 naval war movie “Greyhound” starring TomHanks. In “Greyhound,” a convoy of Allied ships crossing the Atlantic is hunteddown one by one by a group of German U-boats. The inexperienced commander ofthe Allied fleet has to figure out how to ward off the invisible threat and getas many ships in the convoy to their destination as possible. It is based onthe true story of one of the longest and most complex battles in naval history.Naturally, any modern movie with destroyers, depth charges, and torpedoes should make for some serioussubwoofer fodder, so I thought it would be a great test of the subwoofers’ability to recreate a big Hollywood sound mix.

After watching “Greyhound,”it turned out to be a more continuous exercise for the subwoofers than I hadexpected. This movie had the subs working from nearly start to finish since ittook place in the rough Atlantic waters. Large ocean waves pounded against thesides of the ships constantly. The 1961 subwoofers had no problem recreatingthe tumultuous conditions of the stormy Atlantic. Blake Neely’s bombastic musicscore was also a point of low frequencies for the film, and the Arendal subsdid a good job of keeping the music separate from the effects sounds.Rewatching the first skirmish and switching between the two subs, the 1V didgive more full rendering of the battle noises. It was notably more forceful andgave the scene a more violent depiction. That is, of course, predictable, giventhe design differences between the 1V and the 1S, but that is something thatshould be kept in mind for those who might think that these subs are close intheir capability. They can hold a rough parity in performance in mid-bass, butnot in deep bass, and there was lots of deep bass in “Greyhound.” This isn’t tosay that the 1S gave a poor showing. On the contrary, it acquitted itself well,but there is only so much a small sealed subwoofer can do below a certainfrequency range. If you don’t have the room for a larger sub like the 1V, the1S really doesn’t embarrass itself, even on heavy-duty bass content like thismovie, but if the large size can be accommodated, there is no doubt that the 1V is the sub to have for amore lifelike recreation of deep bass effects sounds.

Next Page ⇨

Arendal Sound 1961 1S and 1V Subwoofers Review (19)

Like This? Check out our other Subwoofer Reviews!

lovinthehd posts on January 30, 2022 21:36

dutchholic, post: 1535725, member: 96854
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).

dutchholic posts on January 30, 2022 21:14

lovinthehd, post: 1535720, member: 61636
Seriously, performance of the signal is “extremely degraded by an rca connection”. Whut?

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.

lovinthehd posts on January 30, 2022 20:57

Seriously, performance of the signal is “extremely degraded by an rca connection”. Whut?

dutchholic posts on January 30, 2022 20:15

shadyJ, post: 1535421, member: 20472
The controls are too vulnerable underneath the sub. What is more is that is a very poor place due to heat dispersion. You never want to put a plate amp on the bottom of any sub. Furthermore, any cables will need a 90-degree bend on the connecting terminal. A better solution would be to mount the driver on the bottom with a metal grille to protect it. That way you can have left/right symmetry, if that is what concerns you.

This is not true, the connections don't have to be vulnerable underneath the sub. You can make the controls fit DEEPER inside the sub then the bottom itself. As I said: Google image the Kef T2 and you see that there is zero problem regarding this subject when you have the connections on the bottom(you can even put the connections 5-10cm deeper then at the T2 of course).

About the controls I also gave the clear solution: app control, like for example SVS has a great app. That is the future, no buttons are needed then at all. The B&W subwoofers also have a app, and many others do to. I never need to touch the buttons of my current subwoofer since it's all app controlled. I don't understand how that is an issue at all.

About the heat issues, this is also not true if you think out of the box: The connections can be easilly connected to the AMP's if you put the AMP on top of the subwoofer. The AMP doesn't need to be at the bottom at all? I don't see why you think that this must be the case. For example if you create the same subwoofer with an massive aluminium top panel, the cooling+the amp could be on top and that would be perfect for cooling, even better then on the back, this while the connectors stay on the bottom of this subwoofer, the connections on the bottom could be easilly connected with wire. This is no issue at all!

So it's all easilly doable for a good designer as you can read. You simply need to think out of the box. I shared those idea's already with Arendal, they appreciated this feedback so much that we will maybe see such an optimized design in the future. When this is the case, then you know where it came from

Edit: And an another solution is as B&W solved it, with the SA1000 + CT SW subwoofers of their CT700 series, external amp's. So many way that are possible to achieve this.

shadyJ, post: 1535421, member: 20472
I don't know why most people would care about balanced inputs very much. Balanced cables are better at reducing electromagnetic noise but that only becomes an issue at a long running distance in a noisy environment. It isn't qualitatively better otherwise. Plus, you have to have an LF source that has a true balanced output for it to work, and how many people have that? The people who have balanced LF outputs are either in a pro-sound environment or someone with a high-end processor- and anyone with a high-end processor is probably shopping for a higher-end sub than the 1961 subs like say the 1723 subs which do have balanced inputs.

I look at this the opposite way. The performance of the signal is extremely degraded by an RCA connection. XLR connections of subwoofers are cheap to make, even 150 euro studio subwoofers are equipped with XLR inputs. Only consumer subwoofers are equipped with an stone age connector called RCA. Unbalanced signal should be avoided at any time. You guys here at audioholics always focus on maximum performance/measurements, then why don't you guys see this as a negative aspect. So many people have dealt with GND/hum issues with subwoofers, just google on it, it's not a small number. Besides that: you degrade the performance of the DAC massively for no reason at all. So why not add this simple feature? I don't understand how you could be against this and how this isn't a negative point of this subwoofer? Their bigger brother even has it, but that one is to big for my living room.

I don't agree that “anyone with a high-end processor is probably shopping for a higher-end sub” at all. I am such an consumer, so it's not “anyone”. There are ZERO high-end subwoofers with XLR inputs that are small enough in terms of depth of the housing. I have an high-end processor with balanced connectors but there is simply no suitable small depth case subwoofer available with room EQ and good measurements that fit my living room. All are RCA subs or come without any room EQ controls.

Besides that: This Arendal subwoofers measure close to perfect for their size, so WHY should someone with an “high-end processor” shop for an more expensive subwoofer? There is no logic in this.

This subwoofer is high end enough for me if it ticked the 2 boxed that I mentioned. All more expensive subs with XLR's are simply to big. Except the B&W DB3D maybe, but that's performance wise not that high-end since it has only 2x 8 inch.. and is way overpriced imo for what it is, the Arendal has much better value.

Eppie posts on January 30, 2022 13:42

I was surprised by the plate amp location, which traditionally is at the back. I don't want my connections visible either. I can understand the design as this obviously reduces the depth of the cabinet, but it almost calls for a left and right mounting option to keep the amp hidden. That complicates production and stocking and is unlikely.

You might also like

Latest Posts

Article information

Author: Ms. Lucile Johns

Last Updated: 08/01/2022

Views: 6201

Rating: 4 / 5 (41 voted)

Reviews: 88% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Ms. Lucile Johns

Birthday: 1999-11-16

Address: Suite 237 56046 Walsh Coves, West Enid, VT 46557

Phone: +59115435987187

Job: Education Supervisor

Hobby: Genealogy, Stone skipping, Skydiving, Nordic skating, Couponing, Coloring, Gardening

Introduction: My name is Ms. Lucile Johns, I am a successful, friendly, friendly, homely, adventurous, handsome, delightful person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.