[Listening test] Eltax Monitor 1 - passive minimonitors

Product: Eltax Monitor 1 - 2-way bookshelf loudspeakers
Manufacturer: Eltax - Denmark/France/China
Suggested retail price: ±€130/pair, depending on offers and shipping
Reviewer: Lucio Cadeddu - TNT-Audio Italy
Reviewed: January, 2026

Foreword

This is the first time we have covered Eltax, a historic Danish loudspeaker brand founded in Herning, Denmark, in 1959 by Ingemann Marius Nielsen, initially as a retailer and later as a manufacturer. Today, the Eltax brand has been acquired by the large French group AV Industry, which also owns Elipson, Norstone, Tangent, Lumene, and Instaal, and distributes many other brands in France, including Q Acoustics, Koss, Cayin, Fiio, QED, WiiM, and Goldring. The brand now feels so “French” that even its website is available only in that language, with no trace of its Danish origins.

The Monitor series - particularly the Monitor 3 - has earned an excellent reputation among enthusiasts thanks to its outstanding price-to-performance ratio. For this reason, in our ongoing search for entry-level loudspeakers (around €100 per pair), we couldn't resist trying the smallest model in the range: the Monitor 1.

A closer look

The Monitor 1 is the smallest speaker in Eltax's Monitor series and features a slightly unconventional two-way design compared to its competitors, with the reflex port firing downward toward the base of the cabinet. To accommodate this solution, four chunky spiked feet (with pointed tips) lift the speaker a few centimetres off the supporting surface, allowing the reflex port to operate correctly - and predictably. This is by no means a new idea; similar solutions were already used over 20 years ago, for instance in some Indiana Line models, more specifically the Arbour 5.30 and 5.40 that we reviewed back in 2002.

The drivers consist of a 10 cm woofer, officially declared as magnetically shielded but clearly not (as shown in the photo below), and a classic 1" soft-dome tweeter. The woofer uses a stamped steel basket without ventilation holes for the voice coil. The crossover network is a 12 dB/octave design which, due to the internal wiring being glued to the cabinet, could not be fully removed for closer inspection. The internal cables are wrapped in foam rubber to reduce resonance. The cabinet itself is solid and well damped, generously filled with sound-absorbing material. The input binding posts, made of non - gold-plated metal, accept banana plugs, spades, and bare wire.

Several finishes are available: Calvados oak, light beech, white, and black. The dust grilles are attached via a snap-fit system using protruding metal pins on the front baffle - a solution that is neither particularly practical nor visually appealing, and not ideal from an acoustic standpoint either, as any protrusion on a speaker's baffle can cause high-frequency diffraction. Most manufacturers now prefer snap-fit systems with the pins attached to the grilles (leaving the baffle clean) or, better still, magnetic mounting.

The design is Danish, while manufacturing takes place in China - despite the prejudice some still hold against Chinese-made speakers. The actual weight of each speaker is 2.75 kg, compared to the specified 3.2 kg. The package includes a very basic user manual.

From China (and a little bit from Denmark) with some French accent

Among many enthusiasts, these Monitor 1s have inherited the reputation for good sound established by the larger Monitor 3 model, so expectations were understandably high. Comparisons were carried out both with speakers in a similar price range - such as the Lonpoo LP42MX, the Wiibo Karino 200, and the Polk Audio XT 15 - and with a reference model in a higher price bracket, the Indiana Line Tesi 2, which costs roughly twice as much as the others.

Let's address the most obvious question right away: “Do they come close to the performance of the Tesi 2?” The answer is a clear and unequivocal NO. The Monitor 1 and the Tesi 2 are worlds apart, even though the two speakers are similar in size. Admittedly, the price difference is substantial (just under €300 for the Tesi 2 at street prices, versus €100 - 120 for these Eltax's), but the sonic gap is equally unmistakable.

Sensitivity is not specified (why?), but based on comparisons with other compact speakers I've tested, it can be estimated at around 85 dB/W/m.

From a sonic standpoint, there's nothing blatantly wrong with these Monitor 1s, yet they fail to convince. The sound is generally uninvolving, at times dull and monotonous, and overall rather soft. The bass response shows several peaks and dips across the lower spectrum. It attempts to assert itself, but is immediately curtailed by noise from the reflex port, which can at times become genuinely unbearable and ends up muddying the main output. On tracks featuring strong, percussive bass lines, the chuffing noise from the reflex port quickly forces you to lower the volume. Even then, certain recordings (for example Protection by Massive Attack - see the short video below) are practically unlistenable. The only viable remedy would be to plug the reflex ports with foam cylinders, which unfortunately are not supplied. Such plugs, however, inevitably reduce the bass output.

At first listen, the bass of these Monitor 1s can be somewhat misleading, but over time it becomes clear that much of the perceived “weight” is the result of added resonances and port noise. It's easy to imagine that inexperienced listeners - especially those lacking solid reference points - might mistake this for a powerful and extended low end. In reality, it's more a matter of a dirty and poorly controlled bass. With laid-back musical material and moderate low-frequency content, the reflex port issue is less obvious, but the impression remains that the designer tried to push this design to its absolute limits in order to suggest greater bass depth and power than it can truly deliver. The result is not convincing: the blanket is simply too short, and one's feet are left exposed far too often for my taste.

This is the loud noise of air expelled from the reflex port (track: "Protection" - Massive Attack) - SPL: about 75-80 dB at the listening position, 3 meters away)

The mid - high range fares better and, while not particularly rich in harmonics, is generally smooth and reasonably detailed. Some listeners might describe these speakers as warm, but in reality they sound more smooth and rounded, even when the music calls for greater mid - high bite and articulation. The strings of acoustic guitars, for instance, are less metallic than they should be, as are cymbals. Snare drum hits, rather than being crisp and controlled, come across as polite and inoffensive. There appears to be a dip in the mid-high region, which cannot be corrected through placement changes or toe-in toward the listening position. The overall presentation has a soft, rubbery character that - especially with certain musical genres or aggressive recordings - can be pleasant, but is ultimately unfaithful.

Dynamics are limited in the bass region by the small woofer, likely further constrained by suboptimal tuning and a magnet that is the smallest among the competitors in this comparison. It quickly becomes apparent that the speaker struggles with demanding material featuring deep, powerful bass. With limited headroom and little room to increase the volume, bass impact suffers, and its sluggish dynamic response is clearly noticeable. The low end - port noise and chuffing aside - can sound slow and out of sync with the rest of the spectrum. Dynamics improve somewhat in the mid - high range, but the overall sound remains lethargic and largely unresponsive to dynamic contrasts. Over time, this makes listening essentially… boring. Even energetic and engaging tracks lose much of their punch. In the end, these speakers are best suited to easy-listening music at moderate volume levels.

Soundstage and imaging, within the limits of such an inexpensive design, remain essentially two-dimensional; the sound never truly expands into a convincing three-dimensional space and stays confined between the two speakers.

In the context of this shootout, the Eltax Monitor 1s rank second to last, clearly outperforming only the Wiibo Karino 200, while falling well short of the other competitors. The complete ranking will be published after the review of the Polk Audio XT15.

Remarks & Complaints

Manufacturing & Finish.
The appearance is very good for the price, and the downward-firing reflex port helps somewhat when placement is less than ideal. On the negative side, the dust grille uses fixing pins that protrude from the front baffle, and the drivers are not magnetically shielded, despite the specifications claiming that the woofer is. Furthermore, the stated frequency response is given within ±4 dB rather than the more common ±3 dB. This accounting trick may lead potential buyers to believe that the low-frequency extension is greater than that of competitors using the standard ±3 dB specification (such as the Polk Audio XT15). Not very serious, one might say but such a degree of carelessness and superficiality from a historic brand is quite disappointing.
As for placement, the usual recommendations apply: the tweeter should be at ear level when seated, and the rear wall should not be too close, otherwise bass frequencies may become overemphasized. Our tests were carried out with the speakers positioned about 50 cm from the rear wall. Every room is different, so feel free to experiment with various distances to achieve the balance you prefer. Since the reflex port fires downward, you can even try placing them farther from the wall than 50 cm.
Sound.
The Eltax Monitor 1s carry out their task with reasonable competence for the price, but they do not excel in any particular area. The sound remains rather uninspiring, tending toward softness and showing clear signs of compression and muddiness even at low listening levels. There are evident issues in the bass range, partly due to the reflex port, which becomes very noisy with strong low-frequency transients, rendering some tracks virtually unlistenable even at modest volumes, as already noted.

Conclusions

The Monitor 1s enjoy a reputation - primarily on-line, and perhaps inherited from the better-regarded Monitor 3 - that unfortunately proves largely undeserved. I always encourage enthusiasts not to extrapolate opinions, whether positive or negative, from other models: just because one component from a given brand or series performs well, it does not mean that all its stable-mates will do the same. In an ideal world it should, but reality often proves otherwise. These Monitor 1s play music without ever being truly convincing, and there is no sense in which their performance rises above what their price would suggest. They are inexpensive and good-looking, but they should sound better - especially considering that the competition is not standing still.

DISCLAIMER. TNT-Audio is neither a shop, nor a HiFi company or a repair laboratory for HiFi components. We don't sell anything. It is a 100% independent magazine that neither accepts advertising from companies nor requires readers to register or pay for subscriptions. If you wish, you can support our independent reviews via a PayPal donation. After publication of reviews, the authors do not retain samples other than on long-term loan for further evaluation or comparison with later-received gear. Hence, all contents are written free of any “editorial” or “advertising” influence, and all reviews in this publication, positive or negative, reflect the independent opinions of their respective authors. TNT-Audio will publish all manufacturer responses, subject to the reviewer's right to reply in turn.