Short answer: the Arendal 1961 Monitor. It ranks #8 of 168 bookshelf speakers by sound quality (rated 4.3/5) at $1,150 and is still sold new; the Jamo C 93 II ranks #163 (rated 1.5/5) and is discontinued, so it is only an option used.
The Arendal 1961 Monitor is the better-sounding pick. A physically robust build the reviewer calls “a little bit of a tank,” delivering low compression, low distortion, and overall really good neutrality: one of the reviewer’s top 10 picks under $1,500 across roughly 250 speakers tested. Watch for: Bass rolls off around 70-80Hz, so it cannot be used as full-range mains for music without a subwoofer, and a sub is recommended for home theater use as well.
The Jamo C 93 II is the deeper-bass option. Attractive cabinet and finish for the price. Its bass reaches about 68.8Hz before falling 3dB, against 84Hz for the Arendal 1961 Monitor. The tradeoff: Extremely non-linear tonal balance: Erin measured treble averaging roughly 5dB above the midrange, with local swings from near the midrange level to +6dB by about 12kHz.
Buy the Arendal 1961 Monitor. It is rated higher for sound quality, and the Jamo C 93 II is discontinued, so it is only available used.
Still deciding? The full Passive Home rankings cover every ranked option.
Specifications Side By Side
| Arendal 1961 Monitor | Jamo C 93 II | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $1150 per pair | $299 per pair Discontinued |
| Ranked | #8 of 168 in Medium Size Bookshelf Speakers | #163 of 168 in Medium Size Bookshelf Speakers |
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 60Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 53.2Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 84Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 68.8Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Crossover Frequency | 1500Hz | - |
| Dimensions | 16.6”H x 6.4”W x 5.9”D (421.6 x 162.6 x 149.9 mm) | 13.8”H x 7.9”W x 10.2”D (350 x 200 x 260 mm) |
| Impedance | 4 ohms nominal (4.1 ohms minimum above 80Hz, measured by Erin’s Audio Corner) | 6 ohms nominal (manufacturer specified) |
| Sensitivity | 85.9dB (measured average, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 84dB (measured average, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Drivers | 2 x 5.5” woofers, 28mm tweeter | 6” HCCC cone woofer, 1” silk-dome tweeter with waveguide |
| Weight | 16 lbs (7.25 kg) each | 14.1 lbs (6.4 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | sealed | ported, rear |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 3.38 | 3.35 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 6.69 | 5.97 |
| DIY Kit | No | No |
Related Speaker Comparisons
More worthwhile head-to-heads for Arendal 1961 Monitor:
- Audio First Fidelia vs Arendal 1961 Monitor
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs Philharmonic Ceramic Mini
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs Ascend Sierra 1 v2
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs KEF LS50 Meta
- XMechanik Mechano23 DIY vs Arendal 1961 Monitor
Prices on this page were last checked October 9, 2026 at 8:01 AM UTC. Product prices and availability are accurate as of that date/time and are subject to change; the price and availability shown on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply to the purchase of this product.
As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.
The Two Speakers In Full
Arendal 1961 Monitor: $1150 per pair Arendal Sound eBay
Same family: the Arendal Sound 1961 Bookshelf (smaller bookshelf, ranked lower, rated 4.2/5), the Arendal 1961 Tower (floorstanding, rated 4.4/5) and the Arendal Sound 1961 Center (center, rated 3.6/5).
Pros: A physically robust build the reviewer calls “a little bit of a tank,” delivering low compression, low distortion, and overall really good neutrality: one of the reviewer’s top 10 picks under $1,500 across roughly 250 speakers tested. Works well both as home theater mains and as surrounds. Independent ASR Klippel measurements corroborate the low-distortion finding: THD at 86dB SPL/1m stays well below the reviewer’s audibility threshold, and even at 96dB SPL/1m it stays “far better than most bookshelves” thanks to the built-in high-pass filter that protects the woofers. Measured bass extension of 84Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 85.9dB.
Cons: Bass rolls off around 70-80Hz, so it cannot be used as full-range mains for music without a subwoofer, and a sub is recommended for home theater use as well. Vertical radiation window is narrow, typical of MTM (mid-tweeter-mid) layouts (tighter than a standard two-way’s roughly ±20°) so a second home theater row sitting above or below the tweeter axis will hear a noticeably different tonal balance. ASR’s CEA2034 measurements show the response is elevated above 2kHz with resonant peaks around 3kHz and 9kHz, leading the reviewer to predict it will “likely sound bright.” Those same resonances show up as lingering ridges in the cumulative spectral decay (waterfall) at 96dB SPL/1m.
Full Arendal 1961 Monitor review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 60Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 84Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Crossover Frequency | 1500Hz |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 16.6”H x 6.4”W x 5.9”D (421.6 x 162.6 x 149.9 mm) |
| Drivers | 2 x 5.5” woofers, 28mm tweeter |
| Impedance | 4 ohms nominal (4.1 ohms minimum above 80Hz, measured by Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Sensitivity | 85.9dB (measured average, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 3.38 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 6.69 |
| Weight | 16 lbs (7.25 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | sealed |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs SunAudio Purified 4
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs Ascend Acoustics HTM-200SE2
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs XMechanik Mechano23 DIY
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs Ascend Acoustics Luna V2 Mini-Monitor Titan
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs Aalto Speakers Aalto 1 EVO
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs KEF LS50 Meta
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs Ascend Sierra 1 v2
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs Moondrop M4P MTM
- See all 55 comparisons
Jamo C 93 II: $299 per pair Discontinued eBay
Pros: Attractive cabinet and finish for the price. The mild midbass rise can add subjectively enjoyable punch at modest playback levels, and the speaker is reasonably compact. Erin measured about 84dB sensitivity through the midrange. Harmonic distortion at moderate output is not the central problem; the much larger limitations are frequency-response accuracy, directivity and compression. Measured bass extension of 68.8Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 84dB.
Cons: Extremely non-linear tonal balance: Erin measured treble averaging roughly 5dB above the midrange, with local swings from near the midrange level to +6dB by about 12kHz. The result is hollow midrange, exaggerated apparent detail and a bright, fatiguing balance. Multiple diffraction discontinuities around the crossover and waveguide prevent reliable EQ correction; turning the speakers 30 degrees outward does not fix the irregularity. Midwoofer directivity narrows before the tweeter abruptly widens, indicating poor crossover/directivity matching. Vertical listening position should remain near tweeter axis. Output behavior is exceptionally poor: Erin found compression running off the plotted scale at high level and multitone distortion crossing -20dB (10%) across roughly 200Hz-1.2kHz, which produces audible grain. The grille makes response still less linear. Erin judged the cheaper Emotiva B1+ better in accuracy, soundstage and output. Discontinued.
Full Jamo C 93 II review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 53.2Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 68.8Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 13.8”H x 7.9”W x 10.2”D (350 x 200 x 260 mm) |
| Drivers | 6” HCCC cone woofer, 1” silk-dome tweeter with waveguide |
| Impedance | 6 ohms nominal (manufacturer specified) |
| Sensitivity | 84dB (measured average, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 3.35 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 5.97 |
| Weight | 14.1 lbs (6.4 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons