• 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

AudioSQ

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2021
Messages
96
Likes
121
Interesting, bright is not an adjective generally associated with these. Usually the opposite. I'd say they're pretty laid back, and I've never experienced any listening fatigue myself.

I've been hoping these would get reviewed here for some time as I'm a big fan of mine. I would buy them again without hesitation.

I wonder if they skipped using rounded edges to make them easier to veneer. I opted to paint mine because I apparently like to suffer.

20220421_113959.jpg
 

audiobasha

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2022
Messages
9
Likes
10
I built the non-X version (1TD) last spring/summer as my first ever hifi system (now paired with a powernode and a KEF KC-62 sub in a treated room). And I gotta say, I love them. actual in-room response is way different from what the Klippel measures so I wouldn’t engage too heavily in those discussions here. Once I fixed room interaction with PEQ, I was (and remain) in heaven ;-)
 

Attachments

  • F20B6978-1F92-4E86-A288-1082D23BBFC8.jpeg
    F20B6978-1F92-4E86-A288-1082D23BBFC8.jpeg
    443.1 KB · Views: 100

beagleman

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
1,156
Likes
1,576
Location
Pittsburgh Pa
I built the non-X version (1TD) last spring/summer as my first ever hifi system (now paired with a powernode and a KEF KC-62 sub in a treated room). And I gotta say, I love them. actual in-room response is way different from what the Klippel measures so I wouldn’t engage too heavily in those discussions here. Once I fixed room interaction with PEQ, I was (and remain) in heaven ;-)

I heard the Non X version a few years ago, and honestly was fairly amazed at how good they sounded, and how deep the bass went.

I wonder at times, if some get too caught up in just the frequency response graphs (which ARE important for sure) but over the importance of how something truly sounds.
 

audiobasha

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2022
Messages
9
Likes
10
Out of curiosity, what frequency range did you correct with PEQ?
In my listening room, I saw a big bump from 150 Hz to 400 Hz, so I pulled that down. interestingly, I also got a slight dip from 2K to 6K, so I pulled that up, although in another room this dip was 1K to 4K. I also had a cancellation mode at 110 Hz which I’ve pulled up a bit (Though I’m not a fan of boosting these types of modes with high Q filters ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ). I’ve since modified the room further so I’m due for a final round of measurements but have been too busy enjoying the system :)
 

audiobasha

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2022
Messages
9
Likes
10
I heard the Non X version a few years ago, and honestly was fairly amazed at how good they sounded, and how deep the bass went.

I wonder at times, if some get too caught up in just the frequency response graphs (which ARE important for sure) but over the importance of how something truly sounds.
I agree with you. I think people get caught up in these near-field and estimated room response curves when actual measurements in people‘s actual listening rooms are nothing like what is shown here. I agree these measurements can reveal some serious design flaws in some speakers, but for a fairly standard design like this, harping on the lack of a waveguide and rounded corners based solely on these measurements misses the point. the depth and quality of bass on these speakers is phenomenal. You really don’t need a sub unless you’re a sub bass head like me lol. Without a sub, I’ve measured them down to 30 Hz in room before falling off.
 

sejarzo

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
961
Likes
1,066
In my listening room, I saw a big bump from 150 Hz to 400 Hz, so I pulled that down. interestingly, I also got a slight dip from 2K to 6K, so I pulled that up, although in another room this dip was 1K to 4K. I also had a cancellation mode at 110 Hz which I’ve pulled up a bit (Though I’m not a fan of boosting these types of modes with high Q filters ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ). I’ve since modified the room further so I’m due for a final round of measurements but have been too busy enjoying the system :)


Thanks so much. I'm of the same school of thought so yeah, low Q filters for the 150-400 and 2-6k ranges would be the way to go and not worry about the more minor peaks/dips that my 15-ish year old AVR with Audyssey insists on "fixing" with any speaker in this room and just made things worse.
 
Last edited:

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
While on this topic, company got back to me and showed measurements that don't show the resonance in the woofer that I measured:

So maybe that is an issue with the sample I received.

One should always be somewhat cautious when interpreting near field measurements.

As a very rough approximation one can say that up to 200-400Hz (depending on the LS dimensions, mic distance from woofer dust cap,...) the agreement of near field measurement (BR port + woofer) and NFS on-axis measurement should still be quite good.

Then baffle step and edge diffraction have more and more influence on the frequency response of the loudspeaker - which the near field measurement does not capture. In addition, possible Eigenmodes/resonances of the cone, surround and dust cap of the woofer, can have a stronger or weaker effect in the near field measurement than in the anechoic measurement of the NFS.

Above 1000Hz one should be very careful with the interpretation. If the NFS measurement (e.g. CSD) shows no abnormalities, one should ignore the frequency response of the woofer near field measurement above 1kHz.

For example here is a comparison of a near field measurement (red plot) of a 8'' woofer with the "quasi anechoic" (gated, ignore FR below 200Hz) measurement (blue plot) of the speaker woofer.
You can see the influence of the baffle step above about 300Hz. Above roughly 1 kHz there are resonances in the near field measurement that have hardly any influence in the far field measurement (e.g. see 1), others occur in both measurements (e.g. see 2) and there are resonances that do not occur at all in the near field measurement (e.g. see 3).
1676570652607.png

The resonance around 5 kHz in the CSS Criton 1TD-X woofer near-field measurement can therefore be a measurement artifact, a disproportionately severe reproduction of an existing resonance or a driver manufacturing error.
1676570775597.png

The manufacturer's measurement, seems to be the measurement of the woofer in infinite baffle, but not a near field measurement of the built-in driver in the cabinet. If you look closely, however, the break-up resonances in this measurement also starts in the 4-6 kHz range.
1676571062332.png

The CSD of the CSS Criton 1TD-X also shows a slight resonance around 5kHz. Unfortunately, the scaling is only 20dB instead of the usual 30dB, but you can still just see the 5kHz resonance and it is attenuated by about -15dB (if we exclude the tweeter as the cause)
1676571496592.png

For example, it could be a dust cap resonance that appears more powerful than it is in the near-field measurement due to the missing baffle step.

The manufacturer could simply perform a near-field measurement on another finished CSS Criton 1TD-X speaker, then we would have a comparison.

If the 5kHz resonance is not due to damage to the woofer, one would have to take a closer look at the decay behavior of the resonance - but even now, the 5kHz doesn't seem to be too much of a problem (CSD with 30dB scaling would provide information about this).
 
Last edited:

Kerry Armes

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2021
Messages
5
Likes
25
I wanted to chime in here on a few items. Overall our measurements match Amir's very closely. There were a few items called out by some of the forum members that we wanted to add our thought process behind.

  1. The peaking in the woofer response: There is a mild resonant peak in the woofer. Amir shared in one of his responses the IB response we sent him already. The interesting thing about this woofer is that there is no significant impact on the CSD or distortion due to this like most other woofers. However, we don't measure as strong a peak as we saw here. After conversing with Amir some, and re-checking a few measurement on our end, I do believe we are seeing some anomalies as the result of the near-field measurements and the tweeter being connected. There are some limitations into how high in frequency you can get reliable data when doing near-field measurements due to the fact that at higher frequencies sound will arrive from different areas of the cone out of phase and create cancellation nulls and peaks that you won’t see in the far-field. I took these measurements today on a pair we have in our listening room using our Earthworks M30. There also does appear to be some interference with the tweeter, even at roughly 1/4" from the dust cap. You can see our measurement with the tweeter matches his pretty well (our setups are not 100% identical). Unfortunately, there isn't really much Amir can do here since most companies or people who lend him their speakers to measure aren't willing to let him tear them apart and disconnect drivers to get individual measurements.
    1. LDW7 Nearfield - Tweeter On.jpg
      LDW7 Nearfield - Tweeter Off.jpg
      LDW7 20 Inches - Tweeter Off.jpg
    2. Why don't we round our corners on the baffle? As someone already correctly identified, this makes finishing much more difficult, especially if you are going to veneer, which we feel is the easiest way to achieve a reasonably high quality finish. Most of our customers have limited experience wood working so we are trying to make this as easy as possible. We always encourage customers to round the edges if they want to and point out the benefits in the measurements. With that said though, I'm not sure I would be able to identify a 3/4" round over vs a flat baffle in a blind listening test.
    3. Ports - The resonance of the port is due to the length, not the straight exit. Putting a port on the rear minimizes any potential audibility issues and you can see it does not impact them on-axis measured response. A straight exit does not mean it will chuff either. This is base on port velocity which can be controlled by a flare, but can also be controlled by properly sizing the port. Will a flared exit have more output? Yes, it will play louder before chuffing to a small degree but we have sized the port so that the woofer is starting to distort before the port becomes the limiting factor.
    4. Driver selection: I personally believe we use much better quality drivers than anyone at this price point. I think that can be seen in the distortion plots that are almost completely absent of any harmonic higher than second order. While less than 1% THD is fairly meaningless, a higher 3rd, 4th, or 5th order can drastically color the sound in our opinion. Typically, much lower higher order distortion in an HD test also implies much lower IMD, which is even more offensive. I think this also points to why Amir stated that these can play much louder than other speakers this size.
In the end, these speakers are not perfect and we don't claim to measure the best, but we feel we presented a great set of benefits to compromises and our customers generally do as well.

I'd like to thank Amir for taking the time to do these reviews. While the Klippel setup definitely makes things faster, there is still a considerable amount of work that goes into setting up and taking these measurements, cataloging everything, and writing out these reviews.
 

ctrl

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,616
Likes
6,086
Location
.de, DE, DEU
The interesting thing about this woofer is that there is no significant impact on the CSD or distortion due to this like most other woofers. However, we don't measure as strong a peak as we saw here.

5kHz peak comparison

If we compare the near-field woofer measurements of CSS (woofer nearfield with tweeter on from post#172) and Amir with identical scaling, there is hardly any difference.
There might be a little smoothing in the measurement of CSS. Amir's measurements, as far as I know, have no smoothing, which could account for 0.5-2dB difference in resonance peaks.

But even so, the curves are very likely to be within the manufacturing tolerances of the woofer.

1676581022985.png




impact on the CSD

Now we know for sure that the 5kHz resonance is not just a measurement artifact. How disturbing the resonance is from a measurement point of view (whether it is audible, everyone must decide for themselves), is not yet clarified, since we do not have a CSD that gives information about it.

As a very rough rule of thumb, it is assumed that resonances with -30dB and more attenuation are no longer a problem.

We only know that the resonance occurs approximately with -15dB attenuation after signal end. The question is now how many oscillation periods the resonance needs until -30dB damping is reached.

1676581919654.png
 

fineMen

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 31, 2021
Messages
1,504
Likes
679
... near-field measurements due to the fact that at higher frequencies sound will arrive from different areas of the cone out of phase and create cancellation nulls and peaks that you won’t see in the far-field. ..
Exactly.
...Putting a port on the rear ... controlled by a flare, but can also be controlled by properly sizing the port. Will a flared exit have more output? Yes, it will play louder before chuffing to a small degree but we have sized the port so that the woofer is starting to distort before the port becomes the limiting factor.
I'm experimenting with ports right now. Especially with small speakers I personally doubt the benefit of a port. At least, for my ears the higher distortion doesn't distract me as much as port noise, chuffing and such--with a three way.
In the end, these speakers are not perfect ...
Really?! :) I think your audience is well deserved, thank you!
 

martytoo

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2021
Messages
25
Likes
23
Ports - The resonance of the port is due to the length, not the straight exit. Putting a port on the rear minimizes any potential audibility issues and you can see it does not impact them on-axis measured response. A straight exit does not mean it will chuff either. This is base on port velocity which can be controlled by a flare, but can also be controlled by properly sizing the port. Will a flared exit have more output? Yes, it will play louder before chuffing to a small degree but we have sized the port so that the woofer is starting to distort before the port becomes the limiting factor.
Kerry,

One thing that is mentioned in the assembly instructions is that the length of the port can be controlled by the owner during the assembly process. The issue I have with such a deviation from the standard length is the time it will take to remove the woofer and then replace it for each port length experiment.

Do you have any guidance regarding how much movement would be needed to boost or lower the bass response. Ideally a graph of movement of the port versus speaker response of the finished speaker would be instructive.

I plan to do some fudging with the port if room placement doesn't tame issues with bass (I have a dedicated room for my listening) but the first step I think is to buy a decent microphone to make some bass measurements. As per my prior posts in this thread, I have a lot of things going on in any given day and I find enjoying these speakers more fun than looking for a more perfect sound. I really really like my 1TD-X speakers.
 

Kerry Armes

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2021
Messages
5
Likes
25
Kerry,

One thing that is mentioned in the assembly instructions is that the length of the port can be controlled by the owner during the assembly process. The issue I have with such a deviation from the standard length is the time it will take to remove the woofer and then replace it for each port length experiment.

Do you have any guidance regarding how much movement would be needed to boost or lower the bass response. Ideally a graph of movement of the port versus speaker response of the finished speaker would be instructive.

I plan to do some fudging with the port if room placement doesn't tame issues with bass (I have a dedicated room for my listening) but the first step I think is to buy a decent microphone to make some bass measurements. As per my prior posts in this thread, I have a lot of things going on in any given day and I find enjoying these speakers more fun than looking for a more perfect sound. I really really like my 1TD-X speakers.
We don't recommend removing the woofer to do this. You should remove the port instead. Shorter will decrease the depth of the bass but will also cause more of a hump centered around 60-70 Hz to form in the response. Longer will create a shallower roll off with a bit deeper extension. However, you won't be able to get more than about 1/2" longer before the port starts to get too close to the back of the tweeter and impact the port output.
 

martytoo

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2021
Messages
25
Likes
23
We don't recommend removing the woofer to do this. You should remove the port instead. Shorter will decrease the depth of the bass but will also cause more of a hump centered around 60-70 Hz to form in the response. Longer will create a shallower roll off with a bit deeper extension. However, you won't be able to get more than about 1/2" longer before the port starts to get too close to the back of the tweeter and impact the port output.
Good point. That's what I get for posting without looking at the speaker. I need to buy a microphone and do some measurements.
 

maty

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Messages
4,596
Likes
3,160
Location
Tarragona (Spain)
index.php


CSS Criton 1TD-X Kit (Pair)

873825925_jpg.jpg


If they were mine, I would put a layer(s) of viscoelastic material between the wood and the Eggcrate foam.
 
Last edited:

Kerry Armes

Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2021
Messages
5
Likes
25
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.
Beautiful job on the finish on these! Glad you are enjoying them.
 

beagleman

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
1,156
Likes
1,576
Location
Pittsburgh Pa
Kerry,

One thing that is mentioned in the assembly instructions is that the length of the port can be controlled by the owner during the assembly process. The issue I have with such a deviation from the standard length is the time it will take to remove the woofer and then replace it for each port length experiment.

Do you have any guidance regarding how much movement would be needed to boost or lower the bass response. Ideally a graph of movement of the port versus speaker response of the finished speaker would be instructive.

I plan to do some fudging with the port if room placement doesn't tame issues with bass (I have a dedicated room for my listening) but the first step I think is to buy a decent microphone to make some bass measurements. As per my prior posts in this thread, I have a lot of things going on in any given day and I find enjoying these speakers more fun than looking for a more perfect sound. I really really like my 1TD-X speakers.
I believe that room issues and placement within the room will actually outweigh most port options that are not drastically different.

I mean bit of port length change can alter the bass for sure, with a longer port smoothing out the bass and extending it deeper to "some" degree, and a shorter port creating a more boosted boomier bass higher up in the bass range.

as little as a 1/2" or less can alter the bass a good bit, and impedance sweeps are essential to figuring this out.

Again, I think the room and placement dominate to a good degree assuming you are in the ballpark port size and length wise.
 
Top Bottom