Arendal 1961 Tower vs KLH Model Five

Short answer: the Arendal 1961 Tower. It ranks #19 of 54 floorstanding speakers by sound quality at $1900; the KLH Model Five ranks #35 and costs $1999.98, so there is not much of a tradeoff to weigh.

What the Arendal 1961 Tower offers: Exceptional output cleanliness for a slim tower: Erin measured under 1% THD to about 100Hz at 96dB/1m and only crossed 3% near 80Hz, while compression was better than several physically larger competitors. Watch for: Erin measured F3 at 62Hz and F10 at 43Hz, so the four woofers prioritize clean output over deep extension; a subwoofer remains necessary.

What the KLH Model Five offers: Exceptionally wide and even horizontal radiation of roughly +/-70-80 degrees gives a spacious soundstage without sacrificing image focus when toed out about 10 degrees. Watch for: On-axis response is visibly irregular because the wide vintage baffle creates diffraction, and the upper/lower midbass mismatch around 200Hz can sound lean away from the intended wall placement.

Buy the Arendal 1961 Tower. It ranks higher for sound quality than the KLH Model Five and costs less, so there is no real case for the other one.

Specifications Side By Side

Related Speaker Comparisons

More useful head-to-heads from the same speaker class:

• KEF Q11 Meta vs Klipsch RP-8000F II
• KEF R11 Meta vs Revel F206
• KEF Q11 Meta vs Klipsch RP-6000F II
• Arendal 1961 Tower vs Morel Avyra 633
• Morel Avyra 633 vs KLH Model Five

The Two Speakers In Full

Arendal 1961 Tower: $1,900/pair Arendal Sound

Pros: Exceptional output cleanliness for a slim tower: Erin measured under 1% THD to about 100Hz at 96dB/1m and only crossed 3% near 80Hz, while compression was better than several physically larger competitors. The response and listening window are broadly neutral, early-reflections and sound-power directivity are well controlled, and the waveguided dome supports stable imaging. A sealed HDF cabinet, four 5.5-inch woofers and a ten-year warranty provide serious theater-grade engineering in a tiny footprint.

Cons: Erin measured F3 at 62Hz and F10 at 43Hz, so the four woofers prioritize clean output over deep extension; a subwoofer remains necessary. Sensitivity is a moderate 86.5dB and impedance dips below four ohms, which may challenge budget AVRs even though a competent power amplifier has no issue. The optimal axis is roughly 5° above the tweeter and radiation begins narrowing around 1.3kHz, so seat height and toe-in deserve attention.

Full Arendal 1961 Tower review and specifications →

Bass Extension (-10dB)	43Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner)
Bass Extension (-3dB)	62Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner)
Drivers	Four 5.5-inch woofers; 28mm waveguided soft dome
Enclosure	Sealed HDF
Impedance	4 ohms nominal; dips below 4 ohms (measured, Erin's Audio Corner)
Sensitivity	86.5dB/2.83V/1m (measured, Erin's Audio Corner)

As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.

• Links
  • Official Arendal 1961 Tower page
• Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
  • Erin’s Audio Corner video review
  • Erin’s Audio Corner written measurements
  • Reddit Search for Arendal 1961 Tower Review
• Head-to-Head Comparisons
  • Arendal 1961 Tower vs Morel Avyra 633
  • Arendal 1961 Tower vs JBL Studio 698
  • Arendal 1961 Tower vs PSB Imagine T65

KLH Model Five: $1999.98 Crutchfield

Pros: Exceptionally wide and even horizontal radiation of roughly +/-70-80 degrees gives a spacious soundstage without sacrificing image focus when toed out about 10 degrees. Three rear-panel mid/high attenuation settings are genuinely useful for room and placement matching; Erin preferred Low in his room, with the grille fitted and slight toe-out. The sealed 10-inch acoustic-suspension woofer reaches an Erin-measured F3 near 52Hz and integrates gradually with a subwoofer. At 96dB/1m, harmonic distortion stays mostly below 1%, and multitone distortion is also well controlled. Compression is good at ordinary and high listening levels until the most extreme sweep, supporting convincing dynamics. The included slanted stands aim the unusually low tweeter toward seated ear height. Near-wall placement naturally fills the mild 200Hz baffle-step depression, as the manual intends.

Cons: On-axis response is visibly irregular because the wide vintage baffle creates diffraction, and the upper/lower midbass mismatch around 200Hz can sound lean away from the intended wall placement. Erin heard a mild 800-900Hz resonance that coincides with a clear impedance blip, plus occasional hardness around the 2-4kHz crossover region at elevated level. Vertical directivity is narrow; the included five-degree slant bases are important because the tweeter otherwise aims below seated ears. The top end rolls off relative to the midrange, producing a warm balance that may not suit listeners seeking maximum air. At the highest test level the tweeter develops substantial compression. Large size, 52lb weight with stand and roughly $2,000/pair price are significant commitments, and subwoofers remain necessary for the lowest octave.

Full KLH Model Five review and specifications →

Bass Extension (-3dB)	52Hz (measured, Erin's Audio Corner)
Dimensions	26"H x 13.8"W x 11.5"D (660 x 350 x 292 mm) without stand
Drivers	10" paper-cone woofer, 4" paper-cone midrange, 1" aluminum-dome tweeter
Impedance	6 ohms nominal, 3.5 ohms minimum at 140Hz (manufacturer specified)
Sensitivity	About 85dB @ 2.83V/1m (measured, Erin's Audio Corner; 87.5dB free-field manufacturer specified)
Weight	44.1 lbs / 20 kg each without stand; 52 lbs / 23.6 kg with stand
Woofer Cabinet	sealed acoustic suspension

As an eBay Partner, we may be compensated if you make a purchase.

• Links
  • Official KLH Model Five Website
• Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
  • Erin’s Audio Corner: KLH Model 5. The Safest Audiophile Speaker?
  • Erin’s Audio Corner Website: KLH Model Five
  • Reddit Search for KLH Model Five Review
• Head-to-Head Comparisons
  • KLH Model Five vs KEF Q11 Meta
  • KLH Model Five vs Klipsch RP-8000F II
  • KLH Model Five vs Morel Avyra 633