Short answer: the Q Acoustics 5020, if you are buying new. The Boston Acoustics A25 ranks higher than it (#59 vs #140 of 160 bookshelf speakers, 3.6/5 vs 2.2/5) but is discontinued, so only consider it used; the Q Acoustics 5020 is still sold new at $1,199.
Why pick the Q Acoustics 5020: Attractively finished compact standmount with a 5-inch Continuous Curved Cone woofer and carefully engineered cabinet details. The catch: Erin found the tonal balance distinctly too crisp, forward and treble-heavy: the top end is roughly 3-5dB elevated while the 1-3kHz region is recessed, so vocals change level unnaturally as they move through their range.
The Boston Acoustics A25 is the better-sounding, deeper-bass option. CEA2034 spinorama is decent once you ignore a peak around 900Hz and a dip around 3kHz: directivity is good enough that the response can be EQed and won’t be too room-dependent. Its bass reaches about 90Hz before falling 3dB, against 103Hz for the Q Acoustics 5020. The tradeoff: A crazy port resonance and a tweeter with a steeper rolloff than the woofer both show up in the near-field driver measurements, creating the 900Hz peak and the crossover-region dip.
Buy the Q Acoustics 5020 new; the Boston Acoustics A25 is no longer sold new, so it only makes sense as a used find.
Still deciding? The full Passive Home rankings cover every ranked option.
Specifications Side By Side
| Q Acoustics 5020 | Boston Acoustics A25 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | $1,199.00 per pair | $299.98 per pair Discontinued |
| Ranked | #140 of 160 in Medium Size Bookshelf Speakers | #59 of 160 in Medium Size Bookshelf Speakers |
| Drivers | 5” (125mm) C3 mid/bass driver, 1” (25mm) tweeter | 1” Kortec soft dome tweeter, 5.25” ceramic/glass-fiber polymer mid/woofer |
| Crossover Frequency | 2.5kHz (manufacturer specified) | - |
| Dimensions | 11.2”H x 7.1”W x 11.5”D | 10.7H x 7.25W x 8.9D in |
| Weight | 15.4 lbs (7.0 kg) each | 10.1 lbs (4.58 kg) each |
| Impedance | 6 ohms nominal, 3.3 ohms minimum (manufacturer specified) | 8 ohms nominal |
| Sensitivity | 87.1dB (2.83V/1m, measured, Erin’s Audio Corner; 87.9dB manufacturer specified) | 85dB (2.83V/1m, measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 103Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 90Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 48Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) | 55Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Frequency Response | 53Hz - 30kHz (-6dB, manufacturer specified) | 55Hz - 25kHz (Manufacturer specified) |
| Recommended Power | 25W - 100W (manufacturer specified) | - |
| Woofer Cabinet | rear-ported | ported, rear |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 3.63 | 3.53 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 6.55 | 6.19 |
| DIY Kit | No | No |
| Power Handling | - | 10-150W recommended |
Related Speaker Comparisons
More worthwhile head-to-heads for Boston Acoustics A25:
- Ascend Sierra 1 v2 vs Boston Acoustics A25
- KEF LS50 Meta vs Boston Acoustics A25
- Arendal 1961 Monitor vs Boston Acoustics A25
- Revel M105 vs Boston Acoustics A25
- Klipsch RP-500M II vs Boston Acoustics A25
Prices on this page were last checked October 7, 2026 at 9:25 PM 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
Q Acoustics 5020: $1,199.00 per pair Amazon eBay
Same family: the Q Acoustics 5010 (smaller bookshelf, ranked higher, estimated 3.5/5), the Q Acoustics 5040 (smaller floorstanding, rated 4.1/5), the Q Acoustics 5050 (larger floorstanding, estimated 4.3/5) and the Q Acoustics 5090 (center, estimated 3.7/5).
Pros: Attractively finished compact standmount with a 5-inch Continuous Curved Cone woofer and carefully engineered cabinet details. Erin found distortion well controlled at normal levels: below 1% down to about 50Hz at 86dB/1m. Its 87dB measured sensitivity is unremarkable rather than hard to drive, and it maintains acceptable output for typical 80-85dB listening. The rear port can be plugged for placement flexibility. Measured bass extension of 103Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 87.1dB.
Cons: Erin found the tonal balance distinctly too crisp, forward and treble-heavy: the top end is roughly 3-5dB elevated while the 1-3kHz region is recessed, so vocals change level unnaturally as they move through their range. The shallow woofer crossover and steeper tweeter slope contribute to the off-axis discontinuity, while the port has a strong 1kHz resonance. Bass is limited: Erin measured F3 103Hz and F10 48Hz; at 96dB distortion reaches about 3% by 100Hz, and he bottomed the woofer when pushed hard. He preferred the less-expensive 3020i’s linearity and did not recommend the 5020 for neutral listening without EQ.
Full Q Acoustics 5020 review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 48Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 103Hz (measured, Erin’s Audio Corner) |
| Crossover Frequency | 2.5kHz (manufacturer specified) |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 11.2”H x 7.1”W x 11.5”D |
| Drivers | 5” (125mm) C3 mid/bass driver, 1” (25mm) tweeter |
| Frequency Response | 53Hz - 30kHz (-6dB, manufacturer specified) |
| Impedance | 6 ohms nominal, 3.3 ohms minimum (manufacturer specified) |
| Recommended Power | 25W - 100W (manufacturer specified) |
| Sensitivity | 87.1dB (2.83V/1m, measured, Erin’s Audio Corner; 87.9dB manufacturer specified) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 3.63 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 6.55 |
| Weight | 15.4 lbs (7.0 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | rear-ported |
- Links
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs Verdant Audio Bambusa AL-1
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs Micca RB42
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs JBL Stage A130
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs Fluance Signature HFS
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs JBL Control 1 Pro
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs Polk T15
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs Q Acoustics 3020i
- Q Acoustics 5020 vs KEF Q100
- See all 46 comparisons
Boston Acoustics A25: $299.98 per pair Discontinued eBay
Pros: CEA2034 spinorama is decent once you ignore a peak around 900Hz and a dip around 3kHz: directivity is good enough that the response can be EQed and won’t be too room-dependent. Cabinet fit and finish is well above its price class, and dynamics were strong with no distortion audible even at high volume on well-recorded material. Discontinued, but the reviewer suggests hunting for clearance pricing on remaining stock. Measured bass extension of 90Hz (-3dB), with a measured sensitivity of 85dB.
Cons: A crazy port resonance and a tweeter with a steeper rolloff than the woofer both show up in the near-field driver measurements, creating the 900Hz peak and the crossover-region dip. The rear port itself measured audibly distorted up close, though it wasn’t noticeable from normal listening distance in the reviewer’s room. Discontinued.
Full Boston Acoustics A25 review and specifications →
| Bass Extension (-10dB) | 55Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
|---|---|
| Bass Extension (-3dB) | 90Hz (measured, Audio Science Review) |
| DIY Kit | No |
| Dimensions | 10.7H x 7.25W x 8.9D in |
| Drivers | 1” Kortec soft dome tweeter, 5.25” ceramic/glass-fiber polymer mid/woofer |
| Frequency Response | 55Hz - 25kHz (Manufacturer specified) |
| Impedance | 8 ohms nominal |
| Power Handling | 10-150W recommended |
| Sensitivity | 85dB (2.83V/1m, measured, Audio Science Review) |
| Spinorama Preference Score | 3.53 |
| Spinorama Preference Score with Perfect Sub | 6.19 |
| Weight | 10.1 lbs (4.58 kg) each |
| Woofer Cabinet | ported, rear |
- Reviews, Comparisons and Sound Samples
- Head-to-Head Comparisons
- Boston Acoustics A25 vs Polk Audio XT15
- Boston Acoustics A25 vs Wharfedale Diamond 220
- Boston Acoustics A25 vs KEF Q150
- Boston Acoustics A25 vs JBL Studio 530
- Boston Acoustics A25 vs ELAC Debut 2.0 B5.2
- Boston Acoustics A25 vs Wharfedale Diamond 12.1
- Boston Acoustics A25 vs Sony SS-CS5 M2
- Boston Acoustics A25 vs Paradigm Monitor SE Atom
- See all 30 comparisons