| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
.
Acelec Model One loudspeaker Specifications
Sidebar 1: Specifications
Description: Two-way, ported standmount loudspeaker with cabinet walls made from 0.59" (15mm)-thick bituminized aluminum panels. Drive units: 5.9" (15cm) Scan-Speak bass/mid transducer with sliced-paper cones; 0.7" Air Motion Transformer tweeter with neodymium magnet. Frequency response (–6dB): 45Hz–35kHz, max. deviation ±2.5dB. Crossover frequency: 1.8kHz. Sensitivity: 84dB/W/m. Recommended amplifier power: 25–100W. Nominal impedance: 8 ohms. Minimum impedance: 5 ohms at 375Hz.
Dimensions: 11.2" (285mm) H × 7.7" (195mm) W × 11.8" (300mm) D. Weight: 37.5lb (17kg).
Finishes: silver or black plus optional colors.
Serial numbers of units reviewed: 22-26-01, 22-26-02. Manufactured in the Netherlands.
Price: $6495/pair. Approximate number of US dealers: 1. Warranty: 2 years, transferable.
Manufacturer: Acelec is a brand name of Sonnet Digital Audio BV, Daviottenweg 9-11, 5222 BH's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands. Email: info@sonnet-audio.com. US distributor: Audio Art Cable, San Diego, CA 92115. Email: rob@audioartcable.com. Web: audioartcable.com.
NEXT: Associated Equipment »
 | |||||||||||
|
|
| |||||||||
- Log in or register to post comments
COMMENTS
Acelec's reasonably priced! Model One??
Submitted by georgehifi on July 28, 2023 - 8:28pm
Nice review, but!
$6.5K usd for an 11" two way!! You guys are tripping? drunk? or bombed? Or is everyone in the US a multi millionaire?
Cheers George
High value
Submitted by JRT on July 28, 2023 - 7:45pm
A loudspeaker with MSRP approximately 5x multiple of the low volume retail pricing of the BOM components in total usually represents fair pricing. This loudspeaker is priced well below that, just considering woofer and tweeter, not including the crossover and other misc components, and without any consideration of the nontrivial enclosure. And it does seem to perform well.
The drivers are not cheap. Madisound's mailorder retail pricing for ScanSpeak Illuminator 15WU/4741T-00 is $381/each, and for Mundorf AMT21CM2.1-C (air motion tweeter) is $534/each. While I wouldn't know if this loudspeaker uses those exact off the shelf drivers or some OEM variants better optimized for the specific application, these drivers are sufficiently representative for use in coarse estimates.
$381 + $534 = $915 for the drivers in one of these loudspeakers, x2 = $1830/pair, x5 = $10980, nearly $11k. The MSRP is only $6.5k/pair.
Whether or not one might consider it to be well engineered is another very different conversation that must include the opportunity costs of what else could be achieved within the same budget.
The drivers would be bought direct.
Submitted by georgehifi on July 28, 2023 - 8:05pm
From Mundorf and ScanSpeak, in lots of probably 100 or even more, and the costs would be around 1/8th of those retail sellers prices, $228 for drivers for the stereo pair, plus box cost etc.
Cheers George
Your observation indicates a keen sense of the obvious.
Submitted by JRT on July 29, 2023 - 9:18am
Of course the manufacturer is not buying drivers at retail prices. That coarse approximation also does not include all of the other costs.
It is just a useful heuristic coarse approximation which uses a 5x BOM to MSRP with low volume retail pricing on the BOM components (which would include not just the drivers, but also the crossover, enclosure, lining and stuffing, wire, binding posts, screws, etc., which I didn't bother to include all of that because the prices of drivers alone clearly indicate a low MSRP relative to costs). It is just a sanity check on pricing of loudspeakers of moderate production volume.
Also... That 5x multiple does not apply to the very low volume high end statement products trotted around to the audio shows for marketing purposes, where high pricing adds to the wow, and the intent is to attact customers to other less expensive product. Those can exceed 20x BOM to MSRP.
My source on that was Siegfried Linkwitz, more than 2 decades ago in some discussions on the old Mad-board, either while or shortly after his involvement with Audio Artistry. SL's Audio Artistry Beethoven design was Stereophile's loudspeaker of the year in 1997. I have included a link to the review below. His heuristic coarse approximation still seems to hold up well enough to remain useful.
https://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/328/index.html
Scan Speak Woofer
Submitted by Dennis Murphy on August 2, 2023 - 6:18pm
This appears to me a very well engineered speaker with expensive drivers and what is probably an extremely expensive cabinet. However, the woofer is not from the Scan Speak Illuminator series. It's from the older and less expensive Revelator models--the 15W/8530K-00 It retails for $221. To the very best of my knowledge, there are no neo magnets in any of the Revelator woofers.
Yes. But aside from the price ...
Submitted by Long-time listener on July 28, 2023 - 7:53pm
One other thing I don't quite understand is why manufacturers now want to make all their bookshelf speakers SO small, when a slightly larger cabinet and woofer could bring better bass extension. Maybe they assume everyone will use a subwoofer if they want bass extension. Not me. One other example is Revel, who downsized their famous old M20, again limiting bass extension. Anyway, I just don't want to have to pay $6,500 and then have to get a subwoofer on top of that.
is everyone in the US a multi millionaire?
Submitted by Archimago on July 28, 2023 - 5:42pm
Not everyone. But apparently all Stereophile readers are.
Indeed. A wee bit pricy... At least the measurements look alright.
Not even the people at Stereophile could afford this
Submitted by teched58 on July 29, 2023 - 5:56am
The funniest thing re the closing line of the review: "Acelec's reasonably priced Model One could be the speaker you've been searching for..." isn't just that it was probably added in during the edit.
It's the no one who makes their living at Stereophile could "afford" this speaker, if we're talking about the money they make from this site. (Not talking about rich relatives or remuneration from other careers, e.g., the eminent, retired professor in Manhattan who is a contributor.)
So TO WHOM IS THIS tiny little but very expensive speaker AFFORDABLE?
It's also very funny that Stereophile thinks that the little editing tic of putting "affordable" into every review makes it so.
In fairness to the current regime, I think it was Mikey who started this practice years ago. Perhaps to convince himself that he could "afford" the $100,000+ turntable for which he took out a bank loan.
Accomodation discounts
Submitted by JRT on July 29, 2023 - 8:49am
"Not even the people at Stereophile could afford this" - teched58
If the reviewer buys the review sample, after the review, then it is no longer a new version in an unopened box. Rather the condition is that of a demo unit, because of the review.
I would hope that a reviewer could acquire it at a discounted accomodation price in the vicinity of dealer cost or maybe further down near the distributor's/importer's cost, if the condition is simply broken-in from use in the review, but otherwise as-new in all functions and cosmetics, with original box, packaging materials, paperwork, full warranty, etc. If it has suffered some minor inadvertent cosmetic damage, then it should be further discounted accordingly.
And whomever is paying the freight on the review sample saves the cost of the return shipping, an argument which the reviewer might use in further improving the discounted transaction price.
And if delivered from the distributor or manufacturer from out of state inventory, there might not be any sales tax in the transaction price. Herb lives in Brooklyn, NY, which has a sales tax rate of 8.88%.
I like this.
Submitted by Anton on July 29, 2023 - 1:50pm
If a seller/whomever offers in home demonstration of gear, then shouldn't I get 'used pricing' on it after trying it in my home? And, if I slightly damage it, I would insist on an even greater discount.
Count me in!
I'm gonna use this idea. After I take a car for a test drive, it is no longer new, and I should get used car pricing.
Worked for me. I did a test
Submitted by Kal Rubinson on July 29, 2023 - 4:45pm
Worked for me. I did a test drive in a car, came back 2 weeks later for another and negotiated a lower price based on its use/mileage.
Could you afford it?
Submitted by Anton on July 29, 2023 - 1:57pm
I could 'save up' and get one. Maybe if they had said "reasonable accessible?"
I'd actually love to compare this to a vintage Infinity Intermezzo 2.6....aluminum enclosure, very easy to drive, not overtly large...
Class A sound, in it's day.
Even setting this new speaker next to a Celestion SL600Si (even though it is 30+ years on) might be fun.
Speakers this size are perfect for shoot outs. Our club has done some and they have been extremely eye opening.
Rather than a shoot-out between ...
Submitted by Ortofan on July 29, 2023 - 9:39pm
... speakers of essentially the same size or form-factor, how about a comparison with other speakers that are similarly priced?
What might be the outcome of a shoot-out between the Acelec Model One and the KEF R11 Meta, the Klipsch Cornwall IV and the Wharfedale Dovedale?
Ahem ...
Submitted by Long-time listener on July 28, 2023 - 7:57pm
I appreciate Herb Reichert's reviews, as I appreciate all Stereophile reviews. Except when they say things that have no meaning: "a slight, eerie density hovering near the musical program..." NEAR the musical program? Where would that be? And "density" ... of what? If there's a problem with this speaker, language like this isn't communicating to me what it is.
Disagree about your comment on HR's prose
Submitted by johnnythunder1 on July 29, 2023 - 6:59pm
It's good writing. I know exactly what he means and I don't want to read a dumbed down version of HR's descriptive abilities. I think he perfectly described a VERY subtle type of coloration based on the construction and materials of that speaker. And "hovering near the musical program" simply means that this subtle coloration is affecting the music coming out of the speaker.
Or at least that's what it meant to me.
It's akin to impressionsim.
Submitted by johnnythunder1 on July 29, 2023 - 7:21pm
Like a Monet painting as opposed to a detailed photograph. Herb doesn't write "white papers" thankfully. He's trying to express a "feeling."
Gross loudspeaker box colorations
Submitted by Herb Reichert on July 30, 2023 - 4:47am
infuse the recorded program like cream in your coffee.
In my reviews, I do my best to describe what I notice in terms mastering engineers would understand.
When I say “faint” and “near” I mean the Acelec's box coloration is barely noticeable, and that if you listen carefully and you do happen to notice it, it is sitting off separate from the sounds of the recording. From a listening standpoint this is ideal.
I hope that clarifies "near."
As for “density” I always mean that as a measure of the amount of information being transmitted by a system combined with the apparent intensity of sound energy coming out of the speakers.
If you ever experience 30ips tape recordings played through big Genelec Studio Monitors you’ll know exactly what I mean.
I hope that helps because I want to be as specific and choose my words as carefully as I can.
herb
The problem with this for me is...
Submitted by jimtavegia on July 30, 2023 - 7:58am
I have an album, not the only one, where there were (many) 12 engineers involved with just the recording of the album's tracks. They are all over the place sonically. I don't understand the reason an artist would do such a thing and every track sound different with varying levels of compression, EQ, and limiting. Not a good album to use as a speaker test, sadly. I am a fan of this artist, but may be most of his fans could care less about recorded quality?
I think of the sonic variances of Gould's 1955 and 1981 Bach pieces that had tremendous recording differences and pianos. I have both as many do and find the '55 recording thin and not very realistic. I think both were done to tape.
Do you define as your standard the 30 ips recordings as heard through the Genelec's? That certainly would give you a one-up on those of us who have not heard that.
I am going out this week to start the audition process for some new bookshelf speakers and my first one is going to be the small Magico's. There is a dealer not too far and I will take some music I know and begin the process of hearing what is near the best in that category. It would take a lot to "wow me" to drop this kind of money on speakers, but I am going to start there and see where it takes me.
As for the recordings, since we are not there in the room where the recording is made we have no idea if what the engineer did or the mic choices he made captured accurately what is going on in that room. I am sure something is always lost. Just a part of the process where choice determine the outcome.
I appreciate your thoughts on this. It is complicated is an understatement.
Magico A1's are super impressive...
Submitted by Glotz on August 4, 2023 - 9:59am
AXPONA had a very nice demo with Garth Leerer and ticked all of the boxes for a small mini, for me. Stunning and satisfying.
I would love to have Herb review them in context of the other monitor speakers he's been reviewing of late.
Herb...
Submitted by RH on July 30, 2023 - 12:13pm
Herb...
"As for “density” I always mean that as a measure of the amount of information being transmitted by a system combined with the apparent intensity of sound energy coming out of the speakers. "
Interesting.
I had interpreted your general use of the term "density" differently.
I thought you used the term the way I do: to describe when a speaker produces more of the sensation of a corporeal sound, especially in the sense that it's sonic images were "solid" and "dense," closer to the sensation you could reach out and touch the object, rather than having a ghostly, see-through, "wave your hands through it" quality.
The Devore O series speakers, for instance, for me produce more density, more "flesh and blood" presence, than I hear from your average skinny floor standing speakers, which transmit plenty of "sonic information" but produce a more spectral-like soundscape.
RH you described exactly what I mean
Submitted by Herb Reichert on July 30, 2023 - 12:31pm
"I thought you used the term the way I do: to describe when a speaker produces more of the sensation of a corporeal sound, especially in the sense that it's sonic images were "solid" and "dense," closer to the sensation you could reach out and touch the object, rather than having a ghostly, see-through, "wave your hands through it" quality."
But lately, I am noticing that the illusion of corporality can also display a force or intensity factor.
Corporality is surely the result of more low-level information getting through without being sucked
out during DA conversion or in a complex crossover.
Or maybe I've played "White Rabbit" too many times?
h
Thanks Herb
Submitted by RH on July 30, 2023 - 12:45pm
I hoped I hadn't been misreading you all this time! :-)
Btw, I wonder if your experience agrees with the following...
There seem to be different aspects of "density" and "body" portrayed in different systems.
For me, a sense of sonic density and palpability is a characteristics I'm always seeking. I ultimately prefer tube amps, and have been using CJ Premier 12 tube monos for many years. But I often grab different SS amps to try. My observations are that both the tube amps and the solid state amps provide density, but in a different way.
The solid state amp produces a sense of solidity and impact with leading edges of sound, and especially hard edged sounds. So for instance a hard edged "industrial" synth bass line in an old Depeche Mode track will appear as a very tightly controlled, narrowly delineated, solid column in between the speakers, with leading-edge force. I liken the solid state presentation to the type of solidity one hears when striking a solid object with a hammer. Very convincing in that sense.
Whereas the tube amp will slightly soften the edges and fill out the sound, but "round out" the sense of body, vs the "skinnier, more malnourished" version of the solid state presentation. Trading some hard edged convincingness and percussive power, for a more convincing, expanded, richer sense of body. More like punching a big heavy bag, vs a hammer hitting a narrower solid object.
Does that "resonate" with you? :-)
Also:
I own Joseph Audio Perspective 2 graphene speakers and have owned Harbeth Super HL5+ speakers (the Harbeth line being one of my favorites). I concur with your Joseph Pulsar review, where you described the Harbeth as having more corporeality, meat on the bones, and textural presence, vs the more detailed, razor imaging and timbral nuance of the Joseph speakers.
I was attracted to Devore O series speakers for similar reasons. But I was still besotted with the incredible grain-free timbral beauty of the Joseph speakers (and their juicy, fun bass response).
FWIW: I have found that the CJ tube amps flesh out the sound of the Joseph speakers somewhat, and I've discovered that adding a curved diffusor behind and between the speakers has a fairly startling effect of bringing focus and density to the sonic images! So I'm enjoying the incredible detail and smoothness of the JA speakers, their enormous soundstage and precise imaging, but the instruments that occur around the speakers have a very convincing texture, and reach-out-and-touch it palpability. So far, close to the best of both worlds! (Though the Harbeth still pull ahead in the sheer human quality of vocals).
Cheers.
One reply per customer, I
Submitted by RH on August 1, 2023 - 5:19pm
One reply per customer, I guess :-)
Curious analogy.
Submitted by Ortofan on July 30, 2023 - 3:28pm
So, how does HR prefer his "coffee" - with or without "cream"?
Would you choose this Acelec speaker over the Harbeth Monitor 30.2 XD?
Thank you, Herb, for clarifying ...
Submitted by Long-time listener on July 31, 2023 - 3:10am
I appreciate that.
I realize it takes a few more words, but "a barely noticeable box coloration, which in any case remains separate from the program material" would have been far more understandable to me than what you originally wrote.
But again, thanks for your reviews and for Stereophile as a whole, which I've been reading for decades.
"mastering engineers"?
Submitted by Long-time listener on July 31, 2023 - 4:50am
Are they the primary target audience for this magazine?
Resonance of the cabinet.
Submitted by jimtavegia on July 29, 2023 - 9:32am
This must be one of the least resonant speaker cabinets that JA1 has ever measured. I would guess that this IS a desirable thing in speaker cabinet design?
It would be the opposite of most string instruments where there must be wide range of resonances inside a violin, viola, or cello where there are posts that can me moved around to obtain the desired sound the instrument owner wants and they do move from playing, vibration, and humidity over time.
As for the price, I am over the higher prices as I get it as the builder does get to set that based on his costs and work. It is less than the bookshelf Magico model and that would be a good comparison in a side by side test.
It is clear that this is much different than the engineering of the newest versions of the BBC monitors of today. This is where the potential customers will have to audition and decide for themselves. Most of those customer can afford either one. The improved clarity of the vocals is not to be missed or ignored.
A good review and testing.
"This must be one of the
Submitted by georgehifi on July 29, 2023 - 1:13pm
"This must be one of the least resonant speaker cabinets that JA1 has ever measured."
So is a "Besser" building block
https://tinyurl.com/2a84976u
And both around the same size.
Cheers George
And if you bought the double cavity block...
Submitted by jimtavegia on July 30, 2023 - 7:31am
You could have separate chambers for the tweeter and the woofer.
Would have the Magneplanar .7
Submitted by Glotz on July 29, 2023 - 5:30pm
Been a good comparison in the resonance discussion / comparison sections of the review?
I think transparency is simultaneously obvious and obscure when speakers are compared, but perhaps the lack of a cabinet could have drawn a useful comparison.
But perhaps not, in the realm of planar vs dynamic definitions of transparency to source. I do believe they are a moving target.
??
Submitted by jgossman on July 30, 2023 - 6:45pm
At some point we have to just roll our eyes. I have been sort of out of it since getting married and having a kid, but I don't want to hear a review of these against another 6k tiny speaker. I want to hear a review (honest to goodness review) of this against a Focal Aria 906, a Kanta at a still pricy for most people 3k+, and then a 6k floorstanding. The truth is, as I read the review all I could think is pull back the treble, then is there still all that "detail". I've heard a pair of Spendor BC-1's and I own a pair of vintage BW Matrix (before those awful kevlar cones). I know what REAL midrange detail sounds like. I'm guessing we aren't talking about the same thing with these modern tiny little monitors. I'm sure they sound fine. At some point we need to say "Really? I mean, really?".
Unless I Didn't Read Carefully Enough...
Submitted by MBMax on July 31, 2023 - 8:12am
Herb, you made no mention of comparison with the beloved Falcon LS3/5a's. Yes, half the price, but similar form factor and application methinks.
I just purchased a pair of Falcon Gold Badges to replace my beautiful pair of DeVore O/93's that I just couldn't get to work in my small space (HUGE 40-80hz resonance that I could not dial out). My placement options are very limited and the O/93 rear ports fed the nightmare bass hump, even when stuffed.
The Falcons have solved that issue (even on the rare occasion when I turn on my REL sub) and they are glorious. Every glowing word written is true in my estimation and the DeVores will have to find a new home.
That said, I wish I had heard of these before buying the Falcons, though the rear port and the 2x price probably would have killed the idea. Oh, and by the way, my 15W Shindo Montille drives the Falcons just fine.
Just for kicks and grins, how do the two speakers compare?
COMPARISON REVIEW
Submitted by bilguana on August 9, 2023 - 2:40pm
Please review the new ELAC Vela 404s.
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
