Not sure the Wilson’s adjust the same way but the downward angling to point the upper module yields a similar appearance.
-
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 Audio's new flagship speaker,the Typhon.
- Thread starter JAJDACT
- Start date
Not sure the Wilson’s adjust the same way but the downward angling to point the upper module yields a similar appearance.
Sorry, I was joking. First there is a clearly avoidable problem with the crossover, then they kind of make it resovable in the mechanical domain, but leave it to the customer to be done. To the full benefit of never loosing contact with the technical origin of the sound, as not to negotiate the enjoyment of music with yourself. Wilson's appear unreal for a reason. That's what I was refering to as an 'adjustable problem'.
(language barrier, 'deepl' understands it ;-)
Last edited:
"Physical" EQ, probably the only type audiophiles would accept, even if obliviously
Ricardojoa
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2020
- Messages
- 99
- Likes
- 82
I don’t see the adjustable angle to be s problem. People set up their speaker differently, some like it pointing straight, some like it toe in . Having the ability to adjust up and down is another option .
gotcha, but even before I deep dive into the design, the speaker has to make sense from a value perspective.
For a bit more, could get Buchardt A700s (with active bass and a serious tweeter). The Typhons are overpriced imo.
Last edited:
And also different seating heights. I wish I had adjustable stands in my living room since my couch is abnormally low and it makes it hard to get my ears aligned with the tweeter.
Somehow I like you to defend the 'adjustable problem'. It's for sure a handy solution. Once set up visually, it will set the critical listener into the limelight of the auditory scene. Not the least, when the music stops talking a readjustment will urge, and it plays again.
Otherwise, I like the concept of a lower woof/mid crossover, here 250Hz or so. The latest Warfdale sported it in a retro - read: works at it is, design. Well to its benefit, only that the pair of Lintons barely costs a third.
The visual appeal of the Typhon doesn't speak to me pleasently. The woods and other material don't merge, its use is out of mutual proprtion, in short I feel a bit of repulsal. It looks like a hobbyists attempt to mimic iconic 'high end'. Maybe there is a DIY option forseen?
There's no alternative to hifi stands, nothing?
Last edited:
Just wait a week or two and Jay will have another best ever amp and speaker. The tube amp is just another showpiece.
This is the exact tweeter used in the CSS1tdx and CSS2tdx where it is crossed over at 1600 hz and 1800 hz respectively. I guess the difference is both of those speakers are ported. I really don’t understand why the 3 speakers are crossed over differently. See Amir’s review of the 1TDx which had some directional issues around the crossover. Maybe the 2400 hz crossover aids this?
I have the 2TDx and agree they sound great—-as do most reviewers but…Amir did not seem too impressed with how the 1TDx measured. All of the three top CSS speakers use identical drivers, just different in number, layout, and crossover frequency, and for the Typhon, no port for the top unit.
- Thread Starter
- #52
I read Amir's review as fairly positive considering the speakers issues. I have the 1TDX currently as surrounds but I have built and owned the 2TD-X towers and MTM's and I think the bookshelves sounded the best and most linear to me. The towers and MTM's showed an even bigger dip at the crossover range than the bookshelves did in my REW measurements at my MLP.
Ricardojoa
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2020
- Messages
- 99
- Likes
- 82
My guess is With the additional woofer there is greater sensitivity which means less padding on the tweeter which also means the tweeter will get more power. Higher crossover prevents from over driving the tweeter.
computer-audiophile
Major Contributor
I don't like the fat transmitting triodes either, although I know such amps well. It's more about decoration.
But there is also an old Dynaco ST70 (?) on the shelf. I used to have one of those.
The speakers would not appeal to me. What is their efficiency?
The claimed sensitivity is not bad at 87 dB.
computer-audiophile
Major Contributor
Not the first choice for tube amps.
Not unless you use (for example) push-pull KT88s in ultra-linear mode. Which is probably not what you consider a good tube ampNot the first choice for tube amps.
computer-audiophile
Major Contributor
You are right! But besides from that, I do not see any attractive USP regarding this expensive speaker.Not unless you use (for example) push-pull KT88s in ultra-linear mode. Which is probably not what you consider a good tube amp
Not the first choice for tube amps.
Good point, but cannot fault the speaker for a poor choice in matching an amp…
Is clearly more about show than substance. I like some bling too, but it better be able to deliver on performance for my money.
maty
Major Contributor
If you live in North America it is a reasonable price for everything they offer (speakers, crossover) and finish. Across the ocean, shipping, customs and taxes...
For example, KEF R11 (Meta: 6.500 €) costs now €4,000 in Europe. If we improve the components of the crossover, which are many, it will go up a lot more, about 1.000 € ?
Arendal 1723 Tower THX - 3.500 €. To improve the crossover quality, about 500 €. More interesting purchase.
For example, KEF R11 (Meta: 6.500 €) costs now €4,000 in Europe. If we improve the components of the crossover, which are many, it will go up a lot more, about 1.000 € ?
Arendal 1723 Tower THX - 3.500 €. To improve the crossover quality, about 500 €. More interesting purchase.
