Review

Gear Review - Audioengine 5

In the last two years we've come across plenty of speakers geared towards iPod owners to know that in the quest to win over your money and ears, companies have pulled out all the stops. Today's offerings span wireless speakers, battery-powered portable speakers, speakers smaller than a deck of cards, and speakers shaped like a UFO or a Cherrio—and that's only scratching the surface. Which is why the new Audioengine 5 speakers are so refreshing. Not only do they resemble a pair of traditional high-end studio monitors, they deliver audio performance to match.

The quality of the Audioengine 5 is apparent from the moment the speakers are removed from the box. Each hand-built cabinet feels incredibly solid and is finished in high-gloss white, encasing a 5-inch custom Kevlar woofer and 20mm silk dome tweeter. With a frequency response rate of 60Hz-22,000Hz, both the materials and the specifications behind the Audioengine 5 bests every other high-end iPod offering, from Bose's SoundDock to Klipsch's iGroove to Tivoli Audio's iSongBook to AltecLansing's inMotion iM7.

Audioengine5
Audioengine 5

While some might argue that stacking up a pair of monitors, each of which measures 10-inches tall and about 7-inches wide and deep while weighing more than 10 pounds, against those aforementioned all-in-one solutions isn't a fair comparison, our opinion is if you're ready to shell out as much for speakers as your iPod, your primary concern should probably be audio quality. We're also of the opinion that SuperMegaExtra XBS Bass is a cute marketing term and little else, which is why we were so thrilled at how clean and solid the bass coming from the Audioengine 5 is. Not to be outdone, highs are reproduced with equal crispness. The folks at Audioengine report that during development the speakers were tuned to make compressed audio, like MP3 and AAC files, sound better. We say anything you put through the Audioengine 5 setup, Apple Lossless files included, sounds phenomenal.

Of course, tastes and preferences differ, and whereas we completely see the logic of providing only a powered USB port on one of the speakers to charge your iPod, enabling you to use your own dock and accessories, others may feel it's simply a way to skimp on packing a universal dock into the speaker or including a remote. But other design touches confirm that Audioengine didn't just take a studio monitor, paint it white, slap on a USB port and call it an ideal iPod companion.

In fact, these speakers are much more than iPod companions, as anyone who appreciates excellent stereo sound would find a pair to be ideal on their desk or by their television. Since Audioengine 5 is self-powered you don't even need to connect them to your stereo's receiver. Having said that, one of our favorite features is the auxiliary AC outlet on the rear of the left speaker, which happens to sit right next to a second audio input, making it a perfect match for Apple's AirPort Express.

Audioengine5
Who says iPods should have all the fun?

Along with the speakers, your $349 buys you some nice matching cables, including a two meter 1/8" audio cable, two 20cm 1/8" audio cables, a 1/8" to RCA cable, one meter USB power extender, 12 feet of speaker wire, and a drawstring bag to keep all the extras together. The only thing missing is a short USB iPod cable, to match the included short audio cables.

The Bottom Line

If you're looking for the best sounding stand-alone speaker solution for your iPod, look no further: the Audioengine 5 is second to none. In an increasingly crowded marketplace, Audioengine has managed to bring a decidedly unique offering to the table, one that sees form following function for a change, and without any compromises.

Just The Facts

Audioengine5 from Audioengine

MSRP US$349

Pros: first-rate components, construction, and audio quality; convenient AirPort Express hook-up; handsome no-nonsense design

Cons: none significant

11 comments from the community.

You can post your own below.

+ show options

Your current settings, click to change: Sort Oldest First, Show Guest Posts, Hide Community Stats

A guest said: (hide)

Your link is to a post production audio company that specializes in radio and tv audio not speakers. So who makes these marvelous speakers, really?

Quote this post ↓

mrhooks said:

member since 28 Jul 2003 with 273 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

One con: it looks like it only accepts a bare wire (speaker cable) connection. 5-way binding posts, or at least jacks for banana plugs, would have been much nicer.

Quote this post ↓

LaurieF said:

member since 15 Jun 2001 with 3545 posts, TMO Forum Mod, send him a message or view his profile

It's obviously optimised for iPod/Airport Express input. The former of these is obviously almost exclusively a compressed, lossy format. The Airport Express isn't necessarily lossy, but most of the music going through it will be.

So how would 5-way binding posts and banana-plug jacks be a benefit?

And could your ears tell the difference?

Quote this post ↓

mrhooks said:

member since 28 Jul 2003 with 273 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

Bare wire 1) oxidizes, and 2) does not provide a robust connection. 5-way binding posts and good-quality speaker cable/plugs may not provide for audibly better sound in this system, but that isn't the only reason to have them. I would rather have something well-built and robust than the cheapest, lowest-quality connection type available.

As a Mac user, you of all people should understand that "good enough" isn't good enough.

Quote this post ↓

LaurieF said:

member since 15 Jun 2001 with 3545 posts, TMO Forum Mod, send him a message or view his profile

Fair enough, if it provides for a less-breakable and more consistent connection. I withdraw and apologise.

On the other hand, those people who insist on having the best hifi gear because they [think they] want the highest fidelity are just fooling themselves. I could never understand, for example, why anyone would insist on speaker cables that had to be connected so that the signal ran in a particular direction, and wasn't as good if the cable was connected the other way around. That's just stupid.

Even if one can truly tell the difference, the brain compensates very quickly, within minutes, so that the apparent lack of quality dissipates within minutes.

I shall continue to run domestic single-core copper cable on my stereo - at $1 a metre from memory. It sounds fine.

Quote this post ↓

mrhooks said:

member since 28 Jul 2003 with 273 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

I don't understand directional cables either, but it isn't just audiophiles who make that claim; I've heard it from recording studio pros as well.

I've demo'd lots of high-end gear over the years, and found that, with the exception of a system that probably cost over $70,000 US (but was the only system that almost fooled me into thinking I was listening to live music when I closed my eyes), differences in sound quality are pretty slight - my Adcom and PS Audio components sounded almost as good as the Krell components somebody else owned, for example. With the obvious exception of speakers, IMHO the main reason to buy expensive gear is because it's made to last a lifetime, not because the sound is remarkably better.

Quote this post ↓

LaurieF said:

member since 15 Jun 2001 with 3545 posts, TMO Forum Mod, send him a message or view his profile

One stereo b(l)uff to another at a classical concert:

"Great sound quality, but I don't think much of the stereo separation."

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

The best way to compare audio gear is to do blind tests. That is, have a friend switch back and forth between the two components you are comparing. Tell her not to let you know which is which. And don't even look at her--she might give you an unconscious hint.

I have read well-designed double-blind (not even the person doing the switching knows which component is which) testing of power amplifiers and high-end phono cartridges. Once all amplifiers were properly grounded (which took some doing), there were no detectable differences between the amplifiers. I'm talking Bryston, Crown, Dynaco, etc. The listeners were true audiophiles.

Differences between phono cartridges could not be heard either--once their frequency curves were flattened using an equalizer.

Differences between speaker cables were also not detectable. Expensive cables such as Monster Cable sounded the same as regular 16-guage lamp cord.

It's amazing the tricks our minds play on is. We expect the expensive component to sound better than the cheap one. So, the expensive one sounds better--but it might just be because we think it should sound better. That's why drug trials use a placebo group and a double-blind design.

I certainy admit that speakers truly sound very different from one another. But we should probably use blind testing for them as well.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

The Guest above has it right, and his sort of commentary, together with references, should be posted widely. I have a PhD in EE, and have done lots of audio band signal processing for physics research. For the parameters, cable lengths, etc. involved in audio, the expensive add-ons like Monster Cable peddled to the credulous high end are nothing but a commercial bonanza. Grounding matters, speakers matter, and bad phone cartridges can matter sometimes. I am even skeptical of some of what is being peddled about compression---for smaling rates > 128-160 kbps AAC, I suspect most audiophiles would not be able to tell the difference. I'd love to see some tests on this point. JHH

Quote this post ↓

Misha said:

member since 04 Apr 2005 with 9 posts, unranked, send him a message or view his profile

I agree with the above couple comments, but it's also important to keep in mind the subjectivity of peoples' ears. What sounds best to me may not sound best to you. Similarly, what a computer says sounds best (based on the accuracy of the reproduction) may not be in accordance with what my brain expects and enjoys. That's why Bose is able to be so popular even "with no highs, no lows" -- they have come up with a formula that sounds very pleasing to a very large number of people, accuracy be damned.

Quote this post ↓

A guest said: (hide)

Well, I am not quite an audiophile, but I do know this: These speakers rock. I bought them because they were the only mp3 speakers with a pair. It made sense to me that the best sound can come from two speakers, not one that has all the speakers in one box. I have not been disappointed. I got really lucky buying these speakers (I bought them on a whim), but I wouldn't trade them for the others. What is funny is that I actually own Bose speakers and a Yamaha receiver. If it wasn't for my entertainment center (movies, games, etc.) I would get rid of both. In fact, I purposely seeked out reviews because I wanted to share my opinion and experience with these speakers.

Quote this post ↓

Post Your Comments

  Remember Me

Not a member? Register now. You can post comments without logging in, but they'll show up as a "guest" post.


Please enter the word exactly as you see it in the image above. Registered users aren't prompted for this. Having trouble reading the image get a new one.