Ambassador Eric

HOW IS YOUR ROOM SET UP?

My room is 15.2 feet long, 16.7 feet wide, and 8 feet high. It is 80% used for movies and 20% for music.

What was your goal when looking for new speakers and subwoofers?

I was looking for Atmos Height speakers to match by Martin Logan ESLX and MP10 speakers.

WHERE DID YOU HEAR ABOUT US?

YouTube (Erin’s Audio Corner, Youthman, etc.) and internet reviews when I was looking for neutral-sounding Atmos speakers to mount on my ceiling.

WHY DID YOU CHOOSE ARENDAL SOUND?

The 1961 height speakers did a better job blending with the Martin Logan LCR electrostatic speakers I had at that time than my existing surround speakers.

I have had Martin Logan electrostatic speakers for over 15 years. Last year, I decided to build a dedicated home theater room using the ML ESL X and ESL C speakers as my LCR, with four ML MP10 speakers for surrounds. Since ML does not offer a on-ceiling speaker (in-ceiling only), I ended up trying the Arendal 1961 height speakers. I liked their performance very much, and since they are neutral speakers, they blended quite well with LCR electrostatic speakers. However, the ML MP10 surrounds did not blend well with other speakers. They would get fatiguing at times. So I swapped them out with Arendal 1961 height and 1723 S surround speakers. From there, I was hooked on Arendal. I ended up selling my ML speakers and moving to 1723 Monitors for LCR and then eventually to the 1610 model once they were released.

YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH THE PRODUCTS?

I love the build quality, neutral sound, and great dynamics of the Arendal speakers. With the 1610 range, the three-way design greatly improved the clarity and soundstage.

What stood out most the first time I powered up the Arendal system was how natural and true to source they sounded.

When compared to the ML MP10, the Arendal 1723 monitors sounded more neutral with great dynamics. When compared to the Electrostatic X, they had much more impact and a larger sound stage. For music, I did prefer the electrostatic speakers, but my room’s usage is 80% movies and 20% music. For movies, the Arendal 1723 monitors dynamics and impacts were much better than either ML model I had on hand at that time.

One improvement that surprised me was the great bass while maintaining clarity and very low distortion.

Since I upgraded from the Arendal 1723 monitors to the 1610 bookshelves, listening to music is just as enjoyable as when I had the ML electrostatic X speakers. I was not able to compare these two directly, but from what I recall, the clarity and airiness of the 1610 bookshelves come very close to the electrostatic speakers. As for movies, I was very happy with the 1723 monitors, but the 1610 bookshelf and slim speakers improved movie watching more than what I thought was possible. The most noticeable improvements were the additional details in the tweeter and midrange freqs, stronger and more impactful mid-bass, and a huge sound stage. Not to mention all of this in much smaller package than the 1723 monitors.

I have a few favorite demo movie scenes, but the Top Gun Maverick 2:15 scene is tough to beat.

The system performs extremely well in my room, especially with the GIK bass traps. I am getting crystal clear dialog/sound from each channel. Much better bass performance (no muddiness/booming issues) as the GIK panels absorb down to 60Hz, and the two subwoofers are positioned to address a major node in the room.

WHAT ELSE DOES YOUR SYSTEM CONSIST OF?

• Arendal 1610 Bookshelves for LCR
• Arendal 1610 Slims for surrounds
• Arendal 1961 Heights for atmos
• Arendal 1723 1S subwoofer
• Arendal 1723 2V subwoofer
• Anthem AV70
• Starke Fierra 4 and 8 amplifiers
• Zidoo player
• Kaleidescape
• Sony 4k disc player
• Roku Ultra
• TCL 98’ QM7K TV
• 4 Dayton bass shakers and two FOSI TP02 amps
• Govee AL Sync Box
• Govee Sky Lights and Light Strips
• GIK Acoustic bass traps

HOW HAPPY ARE YOU WITH ARENDAL SOUND PRODUCTS?

Sounds better than I ever could have imagined. The 1610 speakers, in combination with the GIK bass traps, just elevated everything to another level.

Looking back, I wish I started with Arendal from the start, but I got there eventually. So no regrets.

My advice for someone considering Arendal speakers for a similar setup would be: Go for it. I believe any one of the Arendal lines would be a great buy and performer. The 60-day trial period with free to and from shipping really makes this a risk-free transaction.

ANYTHING ELSE YOU’D LIKE TO SHARE?

Hearing the 1961 height speakers in my space months ago, started me on this very fun, but expensive journey of moving on from ML to Arendal. In some cases, I took large loses selling off the ML speakers. However, when I consider the end results, the move to Arendal was worth the cost.

THE TWO CHANNEL ROOM

My 2 channel story is a little long. I had a 2-channel setup when I first started to build my dedicated home theater with Martin Logan speakers. I had the Mofi SourcePoint 8 speakers powered by an Advance Paris A10. I sold off the Mofi speakers to help fund my shift from ML to Arendal speakers in my home theater. At that time, I sold off all ML speakers except for the ML ESL X. I moved them to my two channel room for use with the Advance Paris A10, When Arendal released the 1610 series, I sold both the ML ESL X and Advance Pairs to help fund my move from the 1723 speakers to the 1610 range. So after a few months, I really started to miss my 2-channel setup in a separate room. I initially started with one LAIV Crescendo Chorus amp by testing it on my 1610 bookshelves. I could not believe how well the amp performed. So from there I know I was going to go with LAIV separates rather than an integrated amp. I purchased the LAIV Crescendo Verse Preamp/DAC and a 2nd Chorus amp for a dual mono operation.

My 2 channel room is 19ft X 18ft X 9ft. It is mainly used for music and light TV viewing. I may add room treatments in the future.

I love the 1610 bookshelves, but they were beyond my budget. So I thought I could get similar performance from the Kef Q Concerta. These speakers had a large soundstage, great imaging, and good bass extension. However, something was off. Voices and instruments did not sound natural and the decay of guitars and cymbals were truncated. So I decided to give the 1961 Arendal Towers a try and they did not disappoint. Their soundstage was smaller than the Kef Q, but it easily best it in everything else. Specifically with giving the proper weight/tone to voices and instruments and decay for cymbals, etc.

I could not believe the transient speed of the 1961 speakers when powered by LAIV mono amps. I recently listened to a pair of Totem Forest towers and the 1961 remind me so much of that more expensive speaker. It has such a lively sound aided by a punchy bass that is perfect for music and is never fatiguing. I can listen to the Arendal and LAIV setup for hours.

Two channel room equipment:

• Arendal 1961 Towers
• LAIV Crescendo Verse Preamp/DAC
• 2x LAIV Crescendo Chorus amps (dual mono)

Setup details