• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

CSS Criton 1TD-X Kit Speaker Review

Rate this speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 5 1.8%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 104 38.2%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 140 51.5%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 23 8.5%

  • Total voters
    272

don'ttrustauthority

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Messages
679
Likes
377
Not to add to your already high work load, but it might be nice to once or twice compare the response with a high pass filter at 60 -100 Hz to see how these perform with a sub!
 

Toni Mas

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2022
Messages
454
Likes
303
What do you mean well known? Please elaborate, based on what? Not everybody thinks that.Proacs Studio 100 have been a reference for Studio Engineers for decades, not only that, every brands in the world have some sort of variations of this simple desigm… If it’s well known from the start that it will be crap, you don’t think they would have stopped by now? plus, it’s not the first of this kind to get positive impressions on this site. Are you just throwing this blanket statements just to provoke or is there a rationale in your thinking?
Well known directivity issue, as many others have commented here!
A "better" direct radiator tweeter is not a fix, though a wider diameter one crossed lower would help.
Imo convenience is the only excuse for such common place and popular designs.
 

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,915
Likes
3,394
Location
Minneapolis
You don't need an echo effect to have "reverb", that said the reflected off axis sound is not what defines reverb neither but it's related. Sure we can talk about reverberations FX as a creative tool, but in term of what we are talking here, which is in room response, all rooms have some reverberation, just that some are very short but the only room without reverb would be an anechoic chamber, that's the idea, to kill all reverb, there is not a reverb time treshold that say ok this room is now reverberant because we clearly have an echo when a percussive sound is played back. The sound don't die instantly, it means reverb. For exemple, bathrooms are more reverberant than most living rooms because surfaces are more reflective, the sound keep bouncing for longer, but you'll never hear repeated echo, because the size is very small.
reverb is not echo.
you know this one?
or take any in room recording of speakers.
it's clearly reverb to me.
Howdy, I went back to peek in Mr. Toole's book to ensure I use the same terms if possible and hopefully use them correctly... mainly just to clarify something I said earlier. In the end the main point was about smartly applying PEQ and not about getting the terminology hammered out.

1st reflections are categorized as quite distinct from reverberation. 1st reflections are a fairly simple reflection. Reverb, being made up of many non-distinct and later arriving reflections is not the same thing. The 1st reflections are well before reverb.(and echo as mentioned by @PeteL is different from reverb, as it would be distinct vs diffuse - so I should not have said reverb is an echo effect.)

So @dasdoing the reason for calling them 1st reflections (and not 'natural reverb') is to designate them as being of particular difference from late reflections and the diffusion made up of many reflections which is 'reverb/reverberation'. 1st reflections are not diffuse nor are they perceptively distinct - they are something else.

These 1st reflections are the basis for the PIR and the actual IR, the overall tonality, sense realism, speech intelligibility and they are very involved in the Harman score calculation and the overall essence of why a good off axis response is desired to engineer a subjectively good speaker.
They arrive very quickly 2ms-15ms and are very closely merged with the directsound. Thus they are a huge factor in the overall sound quality.
Yes, indeed they are less important than the direct sound field but still so meaningful they are heavily involved in good execution of a domestic speaker design.

Early Reflections(what is being assessed in the SPIN and Klipple data)
Late Reflections (not considered in the SPIN)
Reverberation/Reverb (not considered in the SPIN)
Echo (not considered in the SPIN of course)
All are different aspects of the sound field. But not all are perceivable in all spaces.

So, for now I stand by what I essentially originally stated after-all.(except reverb is not an echo, or maybe it is true to say it is essentially a collage of echoes - but they certainly need different names as one is diffuse:reverb and one is not:echo)
Anyway, we are not talking about reverberation when talking about the data from the Spins and the Klipple.

When we look at the Spins and off axis response, we are not thinking in terms of reverb/reverberations but in terms of getting reasonably accurate & matching off axis responses in order to have high quality 1st/early reflections. What happens after that is something else.

Anyways, @dasdoing per eqing the CSS. The off axis sound, that will provide the energy of the 1st reflections, must be considered when you make your analysis. I would not think boosting 2000-4000hrz is going to be best due to the off axis situation, which is what I was trying to communicate. This is in a 'typical domestic room', if you have extensive treatments and other situational anomalies then all bets are off of course.

@dasdoing I thought this is a good definition of Reverb, which again is not really what the 1st/early reflections are.
" Reverberation, is the persistence of sound after it has been stopped due to multiple reflections from surfaces such as furniture, people, air, etc., within a closed surface. These reflections build up with each reflection and decay gradually as they are absorbed by the surfaces of objects in the enclosed space."

Toole in his book defines it as
"(reverberation)consists of sounds... that are reflected many times from many surfaces, penetrating to all parts of the room, gradually decaying in amplitude with time
 

Timcognito

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 28, 2021
Messages
3,349
Likes
12,554
Location
NorCal

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,915
Likes
3,394
Location
Minneapolis
Not to add to your already high work load, but it might be nice to once or twice compare the response with a high pass filter at 60 -100 Hz to see how these perform with a sub!
You can simulate the driver is a free program like WinISD.

Plug in the specs and the box size used here along with the port size. That will give you a very great basic model.
Really though, the CSS/Wavecore woofer used has a generous x-max.
If you don't ask it to play deep bass it should absolutely rip with a 60-100hrz High Pass.
Just use a powerful amp for high SPL with the low sensitivity.

Since it is DIY you also could negate the port and build a smaller sealed box(with the same sized face) to use with a sub(s) or retune the box and port a bit to better pair with certain set-ups.

Folks complaining about the port quality can also buy a Percision Port or make one from HomeDepot PVC, it is DIY afterall. Everything adds costs for the kit so I see why the basic ports are there. It really doesn't matter as long chuffing is minimal. The potential pipe resonaces are another thing to deal with but a flared port doesn't do anything for those.

Agree. And once you factor in finishing the cabinet and the time it takes to complete the project, I think there are better values.

View attachment 264108Totally biased opinion here (as I own a pair) but I think this is a pretty good deal.

While there are speakers that measure better, this seems to be a very reasonable result (ie better than many speakers we have seen here). Subjectively I very much enjoy my pair.

As to the value, I think that this kit is great.

First, you have to understand that to do DIY correctly takes time, but that time should bring enjoyment. I don’t count the time cost of my hobbies, because they bring me happiness and that has significant value. If you dislike the idea of building a speaker, skip it, use that time to work and then buy something pre-made using the proceeds. If you enjoy working with your hands and need a distraction from work, then maybe you DIY. Second, this kit is exceptionally friendly for the casual DIYer. Excellent instructions, very cool 3d printed crossover board, and a flat pack that is hard to mess up. I’ve built kits from several other sources and I would absolutely recommend this kit (or another from the same company) to a beginner as a great way to get started in the hobby. Third, with DIY you have the opportunity to make something unique and that has value. When I see my speakers I feel pride. They are frequently praised by people who see them (before they know I made them). This would not happen if they were the generic black or white boxes that most manufacturers put out.
@mtmpenn Your's look great!

I think you nailed the main reasons to DIY.
DIY is a great value in terms of fullfilment for me.

Costs are hard to assess. Retail vs DIY is not apples to apples.
A person has some free time to play. If that someone went out for a round of golf, lunch and a couple beers or something similar on two weekends vs staying home and making their speakers -well one can see how the value proposition becomes interesting.
Now if you skip a concert or two and maybe a sporting event to build 'em, at some point the speakers are in some ways free.

The CSS seems to respond well to a bit of PEQ for speaker 'correction'. Do you have the ability to try the version @pierre made?
 

mtmpenn

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 26, 2020
Messages
134
Likes
218
You can simulate the driver is a free program like WinISD.

Plug in the specs and the box size used here along with the port size. That will give you a very great basic model.
Really though, the CSS/Wavecore woofer used has a generous x-max.
If you don't ask it to play deep bass it should absolutely rip with a 60-100hrz High Pass.
Just use a powerful amp for high SPL with the low sensitivity.

Since it is DIY you also could negate the port and build a smaller sealed box(with the same sized face) to use with a sub(s) or retune the box and port a bit to better pair with certain set-ups.

Folks complaining about the port quality can also buy a Percision Port or make one from HomeDepot PVC, it is DIY afterall. Everything adds costs for the kit so I see why the basic ports are there. It really doesn't matter as long chuffing is minimal. The potential pipe resonaces are another thing to deal with but a flared port doesn't do anything for those.




@mtmpenn Your's look great!

I think you nailed the main reasons to DIY.
DIY is a great value in terms of fullfilment for me.

Costs are hard to assess. Retail vs DIY is not apples to apples.
A person has some free time to play. If that someone went out for a round of golf, lunch and a couple beers or something similar on two weekends vs staying home and making their speakers -well one can see how the value proposition becomes interesting.
Now if you skip a concert or two and maybe a sporting event to build 'em, at some point the speakers are in some ways free.

The CSS seems to respond well to a bit of PEQ for speaker 'correction'. Do you have the ability to try the version @pierre made?
Thanks!

I have mine placed in a very suboptimal place (bookshelf speakers ON a bookshelf - the outrage!), so I’m not sure I could really evaluate Pierre’s suggestion.

I am powering them with a NAD m10 with dirac and dual subs to good effect. Dirac seems to do a good job cleaning up the effects of their placement.

Mike
 

PeteL

Major Contributor
Joined
Jun 1, 2020
Messages
3,303
Likes
3,838
Costs are hard to assess. Retail vs DIY is not apples to apples.
A person has some free time to play. If that someone went out for a round of golf, lunch and a couple beers or something similar on two weekends vs staying home and making their speakers -well one can see how the value proposition becomes interesting.
Now if you skip a concert or two and maybe a sporting event to build 'em, at some point the speakers are in some ways free.
Very interesting way to look at that. Valid in some way but so not me. If I skip leisure time to work for free I certainly don't see this as getting the speakers for free, instead I am paying them twice. In cash for the material, and in time on top of that if the cash part is not significantly reduced. That said I did my own share of DIY and I don't regret one bit. But also in my mind I grossly overpaid these speakers and amps. It is worth it for the learning, for the satisfaction, all that but it is clear in my mind that it's a venture that is not anywhere near making sense financially. In my book I paid my speakers and amps at least twice what they are worth, but again I don't regret it.
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,751
Likes
4,633
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
Nothing realy to care about its not even 5db up at 15 khz and only if they point direct on you. Toe them 5 degree in or out its gone, at least for them that realy can hear it. From my point of view there is maybe a littel more air, depending on room this can be nice. No need for eq.
You have a point there.:)

A little "hot" tweeter can be nice at a lower volume, together with a little increased bass then. Loudness functionality, roughly. But it's probably not the volume you normally listen to, or so it is? We may listen in slightly different ways.:)

OT
By the way a traditional loudness function on an amplifier is something I like. Loudness or not is discussed in this thread:

 

Ninjastar

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2021
Messages
47
Likes
70
I own the 1-TD (non-X) version and it is my favorite speaker I've owned over the past 4 years, which includes the ELAC DBR-62, Polk R200, KEF LS50, JBL Studio 530, Quad S2, Wharfedale Diamond 12.2, among others).

Subjectively, it is one of the least bright sounding speakers I've owned. It does have a different tweeter and crossover parts than this 1-TDX so perhaps that is the reason my experience is different (?). Also it seems a bit harder to drive than the other speakers I've had. I picked it up second hand, but it was built and finished by CSS so I am fairly certain there are no issues with the build/assembly.
 

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,915
Likes
3,394
Location
Minneapolis
I own the 1-TD (non-X) version and it is my favorite speaker I've owned over the past 4 years, which includes the ELAC DBR-62, Polk R200, KEF LS50, JBL Studio 530, Quad S2, Wharfedale Diamond 12.2, among others).

Subjectively, it is one of the least bright sounding speakers I've owned. It does have a different tweeter and crossover parts than this 1-TDX so perhaps that is the reason my experience is different (?).
Well, ultimately personal preference is always in play, plus your room acoustics and listening distance and habits such as content and playback SPL can shape those preferences a bit.

Sounds like you like a darker, less energetic treble tone. Several speakers you listed are far from bright IMO.

Of course maybe the hearty bass response is also a factor for you as that can shift tonal perception.

What else is it you like about your CSS vs the others?

P.s. if you haven't seen it, this review has to measurements of your speaker
 

RMW_NJ

Active Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2020
Messages
148
Likes
322
Very interesting way to look at that. Valid in some way but so not me. If I skip leisure time to work for free I certainly don't see this as getting the speakers for free, instead I am paying them twice. In cash for the material, and in time on top of that if the cash part is not significantly reduced. That said I did my own share of DIY and I don't regret one bit. But also in my mind I grossly overpaid these speakers and amps. It is worth it for the learning, for the satisfaction, all that but it is clear in my mind that it's a venture that is not anywhere near making sense financially. In my book I paid my speakers and amps at least twice what they are worth, but again I don't regret it.
I also dabbled in DIY for awhile. It always took more time than expected, cost more than budgeted, and the final result was never as perfect as I wanted. Though I’m sure those who are more handy have better luck. :)
 

TonyJZX

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 20, 2021
Messages
1,891
Likes
1,821
these were always going to be a hard sell

i think you all know 'boutique' and kit type speakers are gonna have hard time competeing with a Harman company

i would imagine these would compare well with even the stalwarts like the old R162

the bullet in the head is the 82dB sensitivity which would not pose a problem here as we all own mega powered battleship class power amps but i keep saying... is 82dB worth the effort when there are 88dB speakers that do just as well?
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
Not to add to your already high work load, but it might be nice to once or twice compare the response with a high pass filter at 60 -100 Hz to see how these perform with a sub!
Room modes will play havoc with such a configuration. It would take optimizing the response with measurements which then creates a specific test case, not a general one.
 

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,915
Likes
3,394
Location
Minneapolis
these were always going to be a hard sell

i think you all know 'boutique' and kit type speakers are gonna have hard time competeing with a Harman company

i would imagine these would compare well with even the stalwarts like the old R162

the bullet in the head is the 82dB sensitivity which would not pose a problem here as we all own mega powered battleship class power amps but i keep saying... is 82dB worth the effort when there are 88dB speakers that do just as well?
It is the only way to get true deep bass in reasonably high output levels from a relatively small driver.
(6.5-7" is small compared with an 15")
There are no 88db sensitive monitor sized 2-way speakers that I am aware of that have great sub 50hrz bass.

To make the driver capable of the high Xmax and low fs required for sub 50hrz bass the trade off is sensitivity. The plus side is usually you can also increasing power handling.

As you said high power is readily available.

But really this is for someone who doesn't use subs and will be going 2.0 and at the same time doesn't need high SPL in large space. For that person the extra bass is likley worth the extra powerful amp requirement.

The R162 was definetly great for the $$ on sale. I kind of want to hear this CSS, prolly never will though.
It sort of measures like the Focal SoloBe (the old version) with some of the same issues. A lot of people really like that speaker.
The focal is active but was about $3k a pair full retail.
I'd prefer a metal tweeter like the Focal to the CSS soft dome but very similar otherwise with the CSS having better bass potential if you use PEQ.
 

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,915
Likes
3,394
Location
Minneapolis
For anyone looking to DIY but finds this priced higher that the risk factor (can't return or easily sell DIY if it is not quite your jam when done)

@HiVi there is the 2.2a for $239 a pair and you can finsih it with a nice veneer.
No ASR test though
The HiVi 3.1a 3-way monitor is $330 a pair& was tested here and did pretty well with several X-over mods made available via that test page.



I really think those on the fence who like making things for fun should try at least one DIY kit, even if you don't end up liking the speaker.
The CSS is indeed cost prohibitive for a trial by fire *but does support a small buisness*

Another option for similar money(actually a bit more) to the CSS with a FINISHED cabinet is the SB Acoustics Ara 2-way $1525 at Maddy
 

sejarzo

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
961
Likes
1,066
I kind of expected the relatively worse objective performance from these versus other finished speakers that sell in the $2000-2500 range, given how the rave reviews on YouTube for these have come from those who are, let's say...not at all objective???...in their evaluations.

I recently swapped messages with a seller on another site who'd bought the kit with the baltic birch flat pack, which he said was a PITA to assemble and didn't turn out very well versus other DIYs he'd assembled, which was quite frustrating to him given the premium for that over MDF.
 

TheBatsEar

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
3,084
Likes
4,962
Location
Germany
Thanks to the manufacturer for stepping into the light to get scrutinized. Hope they enjoy getting ripped to shreds by us nerds.:D

I voted fine and wait for the MK2 now.:cool:
 

ROOSKIE

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 27, 2020
Messages
1,915
Likes
3,394
Location
Minneapolis
I recently swapped messages with a seller on another site who'd bought the kit with the baltic birch flat pack, which he said was a PITA to assemble and didn't turn out very well versus other DIYs he'd assembled, which was quite frustrating to him given the premium for that over MDF.
Yah, they should be clear about that.

Baltic Birch is much harder to work with vs MDF.
The premium price is due to Baltic Birch simply costing much more than MDF.

The reason to upgrade is sustainablity, somewhat safer to work with and some people feel it is a sonic improvement due to added rigidity.

One should still plan to veneer over it or have high levels of skill in massing the plywood into a well finished surface.
It is without a doubt a more difficult material.

It is like how 'Walnut burl' is an upgrade in veneer but is much harder to apply well vs some iron on cherry.
 
Top Bottom