CSS Criton 3TD-X Kit Speaker Review

[Ktacos]

Diffraction effects would by all chances change peak frequency with angle. The peaks @Beave marked are independent of radiation direction, so I would guess these are more likely resonant effects (from panels).

For higher frequency stuff sure, but not when you get down lower. Kef has some speakers that show similar issues.

 

[Kerry Armes]

For anybody who has built these or knows the internal construction, is the midrange driver in its own sealed compartment?

First, I want to thank Amir for taking the time to measure and review our product.

Yes, there is a midrange chamber and the midrange chamber connects to the top of the cabinet. I do not believe those are cabinet resonances since they look so similar but should have drastically different resonance patterns.

 

[Pareto Pragmatic]

but what would perfect directivity plots look like?

I think that is highly room/seating location dependent. Short room/tall room, narrow room/wide room, 2m triangle/4m triangle makes a difference in what you want the "ideal" speaker to do in that room.

 

[Kerry Armes]

Yeah, the woofers could do with a series notch, suppression around 1.5-1.8 kHz is decidedly less than the recommended 20 dB. (Probably a better investment than the fancy parts upgrade.) Not the most well-behaved drivers I've ever seen.

The ~2.7 ohm minimum strikes me as a bit low, too.

Overall though, pretty good.

The mid actually has a notch filter. The woofers didn't need it. Some of what Amir shows is an artifact of not being able to effectively eliminate the contribution of the other drivers even in a near field measurement. I discussed this in our 1TD-X review and added graphs to show the impact. You can see that here: https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...n-1td-x-kit-speaker-review.41923/post-1488504

Here are the responses we had taken an independent anechoic lab (ignore SPL), which were right in line with ours. Overall, they match very closely with Amir's. The lab showed a very slightly higher tweeter peak but ours measured closer to Amir's. The biggest difference I see between the 3 was Amir's shows more hash in the midrange and I'm not sure what could be causing the difference.

 

[Kerry Armes]

Link to datasheet :

https://doc.soundimports.nl/pdf/brands/CSS/Criton-3TD-X/Criton-3TD-X-datasheet.pdf

View attachment 406029

Thanks for posting this because it highlighted that we apparently have a misprint of the schematic. We actually use a 0.47 uF cap across the 0.75 mH inductor on the mid circuit.

 

[ROOSKIE]

The midrange driver isn't all that close to the top corner either.

That could be why they are lower in frequency vs if the midrange & tweeter were closer to the top they would be higher in frequency (the sides are higher in frequency). Where in the frequency response the edge diffraction effects take place is based around the distances from driver to edges.
This is also affecting the tweeter. If the tweeter had a large waveguide the sharp cabinet edge could be no or minimal issue but then the overall design would different.
Without a tweeter waveguide, there is basically no way to avoid cabinet edge diffraction with a sharper corner.
I did not do the match on the edge diffraction frequency's here but surely they exist here.
This isa trade off to have the drivers lower from the top to drastically change the area of diffraction from the side edges and spread it around vs concentrate ala SVS Evolution bookshelf. Likely is a good trade off in my humble average hobbyist opinion.

Diffraction effects would by all chances change peak frequency with angle. The peaks @Beave marked are independent of radiation direction, so I would guess these are more likely resonant effects (from panels).

Panel resonances, especially ones that actually affect affect the response notably, would surely show up in Harmonic distortion plots. Typicall a panel resonance will have many harmonic components(and non linear components) so it would show something in the HD.

The biggest difference I see between the 3 was Amir's shows more hash in the midrange and I'm not sure what could be causing the difference.

I would think the resolution of the Klippel, or do you use one? I'd guess not to audible if at all. Bummer it the graph makes it look more pronounced, I think you have done a very nice job here. Thank for submitting it. Very good work.

 

[Kerry Armes]

Good build quality - decent quality parts in the crossover except maybe for that iron-core inductor in the woofer circuit - and all the inductors would be better if the wire was heavier gauge for lower loss; good stuffing, Wavecor bass and mid drivers. The cabinets look pretty nice, too.

I'd like to see a group delay graph. Vented speakers often have ugly bass group delay.

We didn't need to go with heavier gauge inductors where they were at. We use a 14 awg air core on the bass in the more expensive crossovers but for the mid and tweeter the additional resistance either didn't matter because we were already padding down the mid and tweeter, or was used in the place of adding an extra resistor that would have been needed.

 

[staticV3]

A listening test between these and the Sierra Titan Tower would be interesting.

Would people prefer the better linearity and bass extension of the Ascend, or the (likely) better dynamic capability of the CSS (2x7" vs 2x5.25")?

 

[Kerry Armes]

I would think the resolution of the Klippel, or do you use one? I'd guess not to audible if at all. Bummer it the graph makes it look more pronounced, I think you have done a very nice job here. Thank for submitting it. Very good work.

Thank you! It's possible it is purely a resolution issue. We don't have a Klippel so we use gated measurements here at our facility so that does apply some smoothing even above the gate time. I believe the anechoic chamber told us they use no smoothing or gating but I don't know how many data points they collect per octave.

 

[GWolfman]

Hey, not bad for a kit speaker!

Thanks!

 

[DearSX]

Thank you @amirm and @Maiky76 for the review and EQ!

 

[Ktacos]

I think it's clear that increasing the top end to counteract narrowing dispersion doesn't really work. I would expect just better overall tweeter performance for the cost, the hard edges of the cabinet are certainly not doing anything to help out. Why not round over the baffle in the kit or offer a waveguided tweeter?

 

[Dennis_FL]

Do you mean CSS Criton 3TD-X or Cerwin Vega in my post above yours?

I wasn't responding to your post. At least I didn't think I was........did I push the wrong button?

 

[Fledermaus]

I think it's clear that increasing the top end to counteract narrowing dispersion doesn't really work. I would expect just better overall tweeter performance for the cost, the hard edges of the cabinet are certainly not doing anything to help out. Why not round over the baffle in the kit or offer a waveguided tweeter?

Given the choice for similar money, I'd probably take an optional baffle roundover over optional esoteric capacitors - even though it limits veneering possibilities.

 

[GXAlan]

$2500/pair is basically what the Meyer Sound MM-4XPs cost at Sweetwater, not including the 48V power supply!

 

[Kerry Armes]

Given the choice for similar money, I'd probably take an optional baffle roundover over optional esoteric capacitors - even though it limits veneering possibilities.

Part of the reason we left the tweeter offset low was because we have been trying to figure out how to make a faceted baffle that will ship easily without damage and be easy to finish. It reduces diffraction as is but would be improved quite a bit with facets, which generally show more impact in the polars than just straight round overs.

 

[617]

@Kerry Armes are the woofers custom from Wavecor or Rival? Either way very very nice units.

 

[Rick Sykora]

Part of the reason we left the tweeter offset low was because we have been trying to figure out how to make a faceted baffle that will ship easily without damage and be easy to finish. It reduces diffraction as is but would be improved quite a bit with facets, which generally show more impact in the polars than just straight round overs.

For a contemporary BiY (Build it Yourself), agree a fancier cabinet option would be better. Maybe another tweeter option too (or a waveguide if staying with the squarish cabinet)? How about an option to use an active crossover?

Really like to see you guys stay in business as comparable options have thinned in recent years, but even GR has more than one tweeter.

 

[brunes]

I made the Criton 1TDX and the p215x and now you're telling me I need to make this!

I have to say, veneering is doable but not easy. What would be amazing would be a ready to assemble nice/real wood cabinet that just needs oiling, but I guess this would be expensive... (also understand that MDF is pretty good as cabinet material and other woods might change this)...

 

[Doenerkunde]

The midrange disturbances of the CSS Criton strongly remind me of another 3 way speaker that was reviewed earlier this year: The Nubert Nuvero 60.

Take a look and compare:

Nubert NuVero 60 Speaker Review

This is a review, listening tests, EQ and detailed measurements of the Nubert NuVero 60 3-way stand-mount speaker. It was kindly sent by a member from Germany and costs €1,650 (US $1780) a pair. I had to take my diffuser out of the lightbox to fit the speaker in there so please pardon the...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I find them baffling in both cases and have no real explanation for why they are there. Maybe you guys can sense some connection that I don't see.