# New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15



## Guest

*New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I recently built a sealed subwoofer using the Creative Sound Solutions SD12 and am very happy with the results (I will post more on this in a couple of days). Originally, I tried to build an LLT with this driver, but in the end was not able to pull it off.

http://www.creativesound.ca/index.html

However, it appears CSS will soon have a 15” version of this driver with XBL to boot that should be able to pull of the LLT. Below are the target parameters for the new driver. My understanding is this driver will be available next month sometime.

Re: 3.60 ohms (1.8 ohms per coil)
Le: 1.80 mH
Fs: 19.2 Hz
Qms: 3.65
Qes: 0.44
Qts: 0.39
Cms: 0.25 mm/N
Mms: 274.8 g
Vas: 218.44 l
Sd: 790 cm^2
BL: 16.5 N/A
SPL: 87.3 [email protected] 1W/1M
Xmax: 30 mm


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver*

Very good news.

Yes, and Robert is thinking of offering a Tumult/Brahma trade-in program for those who own drivers in need of repairs...etc.


----------



## WillyD

*Re: New 15” Driver*


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver*

Looks like the new driver should be ready to order next week. Introductory price is $269 http://www.creativesound.ca/ .

I am looking forward to getting this driver and comparing it to my TC2000 and Rl-p15.


----------



## WillyD

*Re: New 15” Driver*

Excellent news. This looks like it could be THE driver in this price range. :bigsmile:


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver*

I am definitely thinking about adding this driver to my list...I've Already spoken with the brain behind Creativesound.ca about the Trade-in program. Sounds like i'll be taking advantage of that


----------



## WillyD

*Re: New 15” Driver*

Do it! Do it!


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver*

Looks like the $270 introductory price includes shipping too!


----------



## WillyD

*Re: New 15” Driver*



hardman said:


> Looks like the $270 introductory price includes shipping too!


Yes, that is a wonderful deal. The driver is practically a drop in for my current TC-2000 sub. :whistling:


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver*



WillyD said:


> Yes, that is a wonderful deal. The driver is practically a drop in for my current TC-2000 sub. :whistling:


What type of box/tube do you use with the TC2000 driver? I have a 300 liter LLT, but I think that may be a little large for the SDX15.


----------



## WillyD

*Re: New 15” Driver*

I have a 336liter net sonosub. 

Nah, 300 liters isn't too large at all. Which driver do you have in there now?


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver*



WillyD said:


> Which driver do you have in there now?


TC Sounds 2000 15" subwoofer.


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I am trying to get a few of these to Finland ASAP.


----------



## WillyD

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> I am trying to get a few of these to Finland ASAP.


Excellent! :bigsmile:


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

My SDX15 shipped yesterday. I should have in sometime next week. I will post more when the driver arrives.


----------



## håkan

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> I am trying to get a few of these to Finland ASAP.


i need two to sweden


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



håkan;37509 said:


> i need two to sweden


You need to contact CSS then. 

I will put mine (2 of them) in the 5 cu ft opposing firing enclosure I have. It could be a little bit larger, but I think I can push the Q close to 0.7 with some filling (and DCX2496 will do the rest). That way we also have a direct comparison to TC-2000 drivers. Naturally GP measurements will follow.


----------



## brucek

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I'm confused.

When I look at the designs for both sealed and ported boxes on the CreativeSound web site, they show an internal magnet brace that fits snuggly around the magnet and then another brace presses against the back of the magnet and the rear of the box.

I've never seen this before? What's the purpose and does anyone do this?











brucek


----------



## håkan

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



brucek said:


> I'm confused.
> 
> When I look at the designs for both sealed and ported boxes on the CreativeSound web site, they show an internal magnet brace that fits snuggly around the magnet and then another brace presses against the back of the magnet and the rear of the box.
> 
> I've never seen this before? What's the purpose and does anyone do this?
> 
> 
> View attachment 3401
> 
> 
> 
> brucek


it is for the 12inch


----------



## brucek

> it is for the 12inch


Yeah, I realize that. I don't think the design concept would be unique to a 12" though.

My question is about the purpose and necessity of a magnet brace.

brucek


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



brucek said:


> Yeah, I realize that. I don't think the design concept would be unique to a 12" though.
> 
> My question is about the purpose and necessity of a magnet brace.
> 
> brucek


The purpose is to support the weight of the motor/magnets. A heavy motor puts a lot of stress into the frame when mounted horizontally. Though I've never done it and I haven't seen many broken frames either. 

If you're planning to do it, I would definitely put some weatherstripping etc. in between the magnet and the enclosure. Otherwise this connection may transmit pretty strong vibrations to the enclosure.


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I doubt the magnet brace sees any direct weight from the motor/magnet assembly since the front baffle holds the driver in place. It seems like a typical window brace but with a cutout for allowing it to be placed a little bit closer to the front of the enclosure and as a support for the 2nd enclosure brace.


----------



## brucek

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> I doubt the magnet brace sees any direct weight from the motor/magnet assembly


They do tell you to have it snug, but it wasn't the vertical brace with the 'snuggly' fitting hole for the magnet that I found as strange as the horizontal brace that is so tight as to connect the magnet to the back wall of the box.

What for? Do these drivers have unusually weak frames......










brucek


----------



## Geoff St. Germain

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I would have thought the reasoning for the window for the magnet to be like exocer said. I really don't know what the reasoning would be for a magnet support when it is already connected to the box via the driver's aluminum frame/basket.


----------



## canaris

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Would'nt a magnet support be a source of box noise.. ? 

I doubt it's for support.


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Exocer said:


> I doubt the magnet brace sees any direct weight from the motor/magnet assembly since the front baffle holds the driver in place. It seems like a typical window brace but with a cutout for allowing it to be placed a little bit closer to the front of the enclosure and as a support for the 2nd enclosure brace.


The purpose of the magnet brace is 2 fold. 1/ To relieve the baffle of the weight of the driver -- my 15" hasn't arrived yet, but the SD 12 is a monster, and without the magnet brace you are going to be putting a lot of torque on the baffle. Even if you don't build the rest of the box out of plywood i would recommend using plywood for the baffle piece that the driver bolts to. 2/ to distribute the mechanical energy of the driver as evenly thruout the box panels as possible, so as to reduce the total energy reaching any 1 panel. Of course the best way to reduce mechanical energy transfer to the box is to cancel most of it by building a push-push woofer.

dave

PS: just so you know i am the dld in the drawings


----------



## Sonnie

Hello Dave and welcome to the Shack... nice drawings... :T


----------



## brucek

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> PS: just so you know i am the dld in the drawings


hehehe, at least you know someone is looking close at your work Dave..... :T

So, I am correct then, that the horizontal brace in your diagram places some tension on the back of the magnet to physically couple it to the back of the box? I have to admit this is the first time I've seen this.

Many people here use two layers of 3/4" MDF for the front panel. Presumably this is quite strong and plywood would not be necessary I suppose..

brucek


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



brucek said:


> hehehe, at least you know someone is looking close at your work Dave..... :T
> So, I am correct then, that the horizontal brace in your diagram places some tension on the back of the magnet to physically couple it to the back of the box? I have to admit this is the first time I've seen this.


Yes it does. If you look at the designs on my websites you will see that i use this alot (the SD12 box is not my design but i did add a few details such as the holey brace to the back of the box. Thos originated as a way to tie together a pair of push-push drivers but it also works with only one.



> Many people here use two layers of 3/4" MDF for the front panel. Presumably this is quite strong and plywood would not be necessary I suppose..


Personally i won't use MDF to build a speaker box (even thou we get it free) -- the energy storage is too high. The SD12 box already has double thickness baffle as do the boxes for the 15 (or they will once i draw them).

dave


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Sonnie said:


> Hello Dave and welcome to the Shack... nice drawings... :T


Thanx...

dave


----------



## canaris

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



planet10 said:


> Personally i won't use MDF to build a speaker box (even thou we get it free) -- the energy storage is too high. The SD12 box already has double thickness baffle as do the boxes for the 15 (or they will once i draw them).
> 
> dave




What type of wood do you use?


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



canaris said:


> What type of wood do you use?


Almost exclusively Baltic Birch Ply. And extensive bracing.

We will use MDF spacers for the ports on a Fonken/miniOnken, or the deflectors on a set of Frugel-Horns or RonHorns.

dave


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Ah ha! I was wrong...but I guess its because i've had a 55lb Tumult mounted in my MDF box using the baffle to hold up the driver which probably was not the best idea...so I assumed the bracing didn't play the actual purpose it does.

Very good idea BTW.


----------



## tomd51

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I didn't see their plans, but my friend and I did something very similar for a brace in a box we just built for one of my TC-12 OEM subs. I don't think it'd be necessary for support, but the TC12-OEM is one heavy S.O.B, so just to be on the safe side, we did this. So far, I haven't heard any "box noise" or any unexpected sound due to it's placement.

Here's a snapshot of it... -TD


----------



## brucek

Does the magnet assembly fit snug into the hole?

brucek


----------



## tomd51

Yes, it does. Very little wiggle room, but this was intentional as the brace is smack dab in the middle of the magnet of the TC-12... -TD


----------



## ISLAND1000

IMO there WOULD be a frequency that would set up a/or many/ contact vibrations between box and magnet. That vibration would add spurious noise to the total sound reproduction. The only way it would work was if the wooden brace and speaker were made one piece with glue or epoxy. CSS, am I wrong?
I think when CSS says "snuggly" they mean close without touching.


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



ISLAND1000 said:


> IMO there WOULD be a frequency that would set up a/or many/ contact vibrations between box and magnet. That vibration would add spurious noise to the total sound reproduction. The only way it would work was if the wooden brace and speaker were made one piece with glue or epoxy. CSS, am I wrong?
> I think when CSS says "snuggly" they mean close without touching.


Indeed there are frequencies that this could happen, but in any decently built box those frequencies will be well above the passband. 

A driver can & does transmit a large amount of mechanical/newtonian energy into the box. Without a snug brace -- and by snug i mean as tight a fit as possible (with a woofer with as stout a frame as this you could get away with depressing the wood at the back and tension loading the front baffle) -- all of that energy gets transmitted directly to the weakest piece in the box (the baffle). These braces distribute that energy to as much of the box as possible so that the energy that any one panel has to dissipate/damp/deal with is dramatically lower. 

Of course even better is to actively cancel as much of that energy as possible using a push-push pair of woofers.

dave


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

.


----------



## ISLAND1000

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Ah! There's the key piece of engineering. Any vibrations would be at a frequency too high to interfere with frequencies at which this box and speaker will operate.
But the rear brace . . . . and tension loading it . . . . won't the back piece eventually assume the tensioned shape and become permanently curved? And then after assuming the shape of a permanent wave become a vibrating back board?


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



ISLAND1000 said:


> Ah! There's the key piece of engineering. Any vibrations would be at a frequency too high But the rear brace . . . . and tension loading it . . . . won't the back piece eventually assume the tensioned shape and become permanently curved? And then after assuming the shape of a permanent wave become a vibrating back board?


I don't quite get you... the box should remain tight... if what i think you are saying is what you are saying, then what happens to the baffle it that is all that "braces" the driver? You'd have to plan on regularily replacing the baffle on your sub.

Still -- and i'll keep harping on this -- if you plan on a single 15, use 2 12s instead, If you use 15s, use a pair in each box. The benefits of push-push cannot be understated. 

I'm scheming on how to get 4 of these 15s... a pair of push-push TLs (or BIBs) should fit nicely in the 9 'x 12' x 4' space at the ceiling of my workshop (which will then fire into the main listening room).

dave


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

UPS delivered my SDX15 subwoofer today. Now the question is do I build an LLT or try a sealed box (low Q – around .5)? I received another SD12 too (I love this subwoofer!).

Dave, your TL idea sounds very interesting… well in terms of finding a home for my new SD12 (I build a sealed sub a few months back with this driver and loved it). Have you modeled a single SD12 in a TL?

I also like the BIB idea, but haven’t really heard this type of a design yet (I am currently working on a Hemp BIB project for a friend, but we aren’t finished yet). I wonder how a BIB would stack up against an LLT both in terms of sound and cabinet size.

Chris


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



hardman said:


> your TL idea sounds very interesting… well in terms of finding a home for my new SD12 (I build a sealed sub a few months back with this driver and loved it). Have you modeled a single SD12 in a TL?
> 
> I also like the BIB idea, but haven’t really heard this type of a design yet (I am currently working on a Hemp BIB project for a friend, but we aren’t finished yet). I wonder how a BIB would stack up against an LLT both in terms of sound and cabinet size.


What is an LLT? Not a TLA i have run into before... (LT could be Linkwitz Transform?)

I am just working on the drawings for a TL, BIB, and an nBVR for the SD12. The TL is big, the BIB is bigger -- no baby cabinets these -- if your room isn't at least 9 ft tall, the BIB would have to be laid on the floor.

The TL -- with room gain has an estimated F3 ~15 Hz, F10 ~8 Hz. The BIB doesn't model as low but they have more gain.

dave


----------



## brucek

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> What is an LLT?


LLT = Large - Low - Tuned ported. A modification of the EBS6 design.

Then there's SLLT = Structural Large Low Tuned that is a take off of IB and that requires you to sit inside the sub itself.

brucek


----------



## ISLAND1000

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Dave,
You and I are on the same page as far as realizing the limits of wood when used for a speaker box. Our differences are that I'm looking for the simplest box design while using 1 speaker compared to you building a box using multiple speakers and reinforcing it with multiple braces. 
In an earlier post you said you won't use MDF because it's "energy storage" is too high. How does energy storage affect a speaker in a box and how much less energy storage does baltic birch have compared to MDF?
I'm designing for a speaker weighing 75lb. and had planned to have it in a down or upfiring position because of it's extreme weight.


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Dave,
I recently built a LLT subwoofer and like it for home theater use. I find the design provides very low bass with authority. I have however found I like it less with two channel listening.

So far my preference for two channel listening is a sealed subwoofer designed with a lower Q. To date the SD12 has proven to be one of the best, most musical, sealed subs I have had the pleasure listening to. However, I am always open to new designs and would like to better understand the qualities of a LT or BIB subwoofer vs. a sealed sub.

About how large would a TL SD12 be? Would a MLTL work (I think this may reduce the line a little – smaller box)?


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



brucek said:


> LLT = Large - Low - Tuned ported. A modification of the EBS6 design.
> 
> Then there's SLLT = Structural Large Low Tuned that is a take off of IB and that requires you to sit inside the sub itself.


Quite comprehensive articles there, i only had time to skim the 1st and look at the pictures in the second. How does the LLT differ from an EBS (extended bass shelf) box with a proper port?

I am very careful with any bass reflex as since the T/S parameters change with drive level, a BR can go out-of-tune with a simple twist of the volume control (or the chaning dynamics of the source material)

If LLT ~ EBS then the ShawdowSD nBVR could be classed as an LLT with even bigger posts (nBVR = nagaoka-style Big Vent Reflex)

dave

PS: does anyone else find that this BBS slows their browser to a crawl in the post edit window?


----------



## tomd51

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



planet10 said:


> PS: does anyone else find that this BBS slows their browser to a crawl in the post edit window?


Sorry Dave, haven't noticed it myself...:dunno: -TD


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



ISLAND1000 said:


> Dave,
> You and I are on the same page as far as realizing the limits of wood when used for a speaker box. Our differences are that I'm looking for the simplest box design while using 1 speaker compared to you building a box using multiple speakers and reinforcing it with multiple braces.


A single driver box, in the end, is more complicated then a push-push box, because greater measures need to be taken to deal with mechanical energy. I'll even go to a thinner material with a push-push box because dramatically less energy is being put into the box... most of the undesirable energy is actively cancelled.



> In an earlier post you said you won't use MDF because it's "energy storage" is too high. How does energy storage affect a speaker in a box and how much less energy storage does baltic birch have compared to MDF?


MDf/plywood discussions can be endless. I can point you to a diyAudio thread where the subject is discussed extensively -- more with a slant towards full-range boxes than subs, but in subs even the MDF proponents agree that plywood is the better choice in a sub.

The energy storage is more of an issue with FR boxes as the released images are more damaging to the subtler details and shorter wavelengths. At the frequencies involved in a sub, a properly built plywood box will have no energy storage issues, an MDF box will. In a sub, the greater stiffness, and that is is more airtight than MDF gives it a big advantage over MDF. 

That it is lighter dosn't hurt either. 

dave


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



tomd51 said:


> Sorry Dave, haven't noticed it myself...:dunno: -TD


I just switched browsers and the problem went away, so i've sent off mail to my primamry browser author.

dave


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



hardman said:


> So far my preference for two channel listening is a sealed subwoofer designed with a lower Q. To date the SD12 has proven to be one of the best, most musical, sealed subs I have had the pleasure listening to. However, I am always open to new designs and would like to better understand the qualities of a LT or BIB subwoofer vs. a sealed sub.
> 
> About how large would a TL SD12 be? Would a MLTL work (I think this may reduce the line a little – smaller box)?


My preference tends to be toward low pressure boxes (or horns, but a bass horn would be as big as my house), so i tend towards aperiodic over sealed, and will always explore a quarter-wave design if i can afford the size. My comment about BR above has me pushing any BR deign towards aperiodic (the Fonken is a good example) or doing other strange things to the ports (ie BVRs -- attached is a particularily pretty example)










The SD12 TL is a 17.5" (432mm) square prism, 81/5" (2.07m) tall. The BIB is 13.5 x 17.75" (343 x 451mm) square prism, 96" (2.46m) tall (when made of a single 19mm layer of material -- in actual execution, i'd probably use a double layer of 15 or 18mm BB). Expect the SDX15 to be considerably larger in girth at least, and double the volume for a push-push pair.

In comparison ShadowSD is a "tiny" 11.5 x 14.5" (292 x 368 mm) and 38.25" (0.97m) tall. I'd just build it out of 18mm BB, althou i might add a decorative layer over the baffle to give the driver a "rebate"

dave


----------



## brucek

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> How does the LLT differ from an EBS (extended bass shelf) box with a proper port?


Well, I'm certainly no expert, but the basic concept is to use a box of sufficient size, which allows a low enough tune, so that it would unload below any frequencies that would demand a high pass filter - the natural electronics 1st order roll off relied on instead.. You realize lots of advantages in not using that HPF.

The large box also allows a larger port to be used to reduce audible chuffing and output compression limits. Also, the large box benefits from a lower Q and hopefully more accurate bass....

Anyway, you can read about it. A lot of people have used this technique with good results.

Here's an especially nice example (on steroids) that our leader Sonnie built. (From this thread).

I think you get the idea. Most aren't quite so big, but the box needs to be large enough to support a tune ~<15Hz.









]


brucek


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



brucek said:


> a box of sufficient size.. a low tune, so that it would unload below any frequencies that would demand a high pass filter - the natural electronics 1st order roll off relied on instead..


That is sounding like a subset of EBS then ... only applicable in situations where the Fs starts out low enuff to consider tuning that low. Since EBS started as a subwoofer alignment with exactly those properties it looks like LLT is another name for EBS (as originally conceived)....

ShadowSD is an EBS, but tuned to ~22 Hz so probably wouldn't qualify as an LLT.

Just for the record the "natural electronics 1st order roll off" is a HPF and doesn't exist in a DC-coupled amplifier, Thw objection to a HPF must refer to those often additionally built into plate amps, and implemented with a less than stellar op-amp. 

dave


----------



## brucek

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> Just for the record the "natural electronics 1st order roll off" is a HPF and doesn't exist in a DC-coupled amplifier


Most receivers will have a roll off somewhere between 5Hz and 10Hz and certainly any eq (BFD, FBQ etc) will have a 5Hz roll off......... We've done response tests on quite a few receivers, processors, eq's etc and it serves the LLT model fairly well. 



> That is sounding like a subset of EBS then


Yeah, generally you would select EBS-6 in WinISD or whatever and take its recommendation after you've entered the T/S parameters and then enlarge the box and lower the tune and test Velocity and Excursion and see what you can do. 

brucek


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



brucek said:


> Most receivers will have a roll off somewhere between 5Hz and 10Hz and certainly any eq (BFD, FBQ etc) will have a 5Hz roll off......... We've done response tests on quite a few receivers, processors, eq's etc and it serves the LLT model fairly well.


Yep... they all have a DC blocking cap somewhere in the signal path -- i'd guess more than 1 would be common... i don't run into HT receivers very often, but with a DC blocker in the sub output, and another in the plate amp, you'd have a 2nd order (or more) high pass. My system would behave like that.



> generally you would select EBS-6 in WinISD or whatever and take its recommendation after you've entered the T/S parameters and then enlarge the box and lower the tune and test Velocity and Excursion and see what you can do.


No Windows here. My modeller doesn't dictate any designs but i know what to look for in the response shape.

dave


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



planet10 said:


> My preference tends to be toward low pressure boxes (or horns, but a bass horn would be as big as my house), so i tend towards aperiodic over sealed, and will always explore a quarter-wave design if i can afford the size.


Dave, the aperiodic suggestion is of some interest, as space will most likely dictate a sealed type box again. Am I correct in assuming the vent to box volume ratio is about 10 sq. in. per cu. ft.?



planet10 said:


> The SD12 TL is a 17.5" (432mm) square prism, 81/5" (2.07m) tall.


MLTL vs. TL…? Wouldn’t the MLTL offer a smaller (height) package? The 7’ proposed TL is still a little large for my space.



planet10 said:


> In comparison ShadowSD is a "tiny" 11.5 x 14.5" (292 x 368 mm) and 38.25" (0.97m) tall. I'd just build it out of 18mm BB, althou i might add a decorative layer over the baffle to give the driver a "rebate"


I did some searching and the “ShadowSD” design you are referring to is it similar to this design http://homepage.mac.com/tlinespeakers/FH/download/shadow-plans0v9.pdf ? Will you please elaborate on the virtues of the Shadow?

Thanks - Chris


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



hardman said:


> Dave, the aperiodic suggestion is of some interest, as space will most likely dictate a sealed type box again. Am I correct in assuming the vent to box volume ratio is about 10 sq. in. per cu. ft.?


There are no hard & fast rules for designed an aperiodic box. It is still very much shoot from the hip. Akabak might well be able to model them, and Martin Kings sheets should have the capability, he just doesn't have the empirical data on the properties of highly compressed damping material.

I do have 2 different recipes i use to develop aperiodic boxes, and have been fairly successful to date.



> MLTL vs. TL…? Wouldn’t the MLTL offer a smaller (height) package? The 7’ proposed TL is still a little large for my space.


After the inquiry about an ML-TL earlier in the thread, Scott generated a box. (56in tall x 12in wide x 13in deep, internal. Zdriver 21in. Slot port at base of the cabinet, 1in tall, 12in wide, 10in long.) Scott did 2 alignments with the same box by adding changing around the stuffing a bit -- syncronisticlly demonstrating the "socks-in-the-port" approach to an aperiodic box. (modeled response attached)



> I did some searching and the “ShadowSD” design you are referring to is it similar to this design http://homepage.mac.com/tlinespeakers/FH/download/shadow-plans0v9.pdf ? Will you please elaborate on the virtues of the Shadow?


Shadow SD is a derivation of that box. We had done a request for a double-mouth 2xCSS WR125 nBVR and Shadow was a stab at getting him more bass for the 2 Extremis 6.8s he had on hand. In the end it only added an octave (20-40 Hz) to the mains so he made some sats using a pair of modded FE103A he had.

At any rate people liked the concept, and started asking if such-and-such a driver(s) would work. Increase the internal dimension to 10" and SD12 works (the drawings aren't finished yet, but i have attached the meat of them)

The advantages? You get the advantages of a BVR (Big Vent Reflex) in terms of tuning tolerant of changing driver parameters, and the construction advantage of a Nagaoka-style box (the only angle to cut is 90 degrees)

dave


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I also wanted to post pictures of the SDX15 -- i got mine Wed night

dave


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

The motor on this driver looks identical to the most recent generation of XBL^2 drivers from Adire. :holycow:


----------



## Creative Sound

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

DS-21,

No 18" is planned and even if it might be in the future there is currently no 18" basket available to me in that family.

Exocer,

The last batch of Adire motors were also built in China; our first samples also looked the same but they were not right on the inside so external similarities don't tell the whole story.

Bob


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Creative Sound said:


> Exocer,
> 
> The last batch of Adire motors were also built in China; our first samples also looked the same but they were not right on the inside so external similarities don't tell the whole story.
> 
> Bob


Sorry if you misunderstood. My intention wasn't to say that there may be a possible flaw with these new drivers...it was all a physical comparison between the two motors.

But yeah, its very good to hear that current samples are "right" inside 
I don't even recall people having issues with the latest batch of Adire drivers..


----------



## Creative Sound

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I also wasn't implying that there was anything wrong with the Adire drivers; just that looks don't always tell the whole story.


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Creative Sound said:


> I also wasn't implying that there was anything wrong with the Adire drivers; just that looks don't always tell the whole story.


Gotcha!


----------



## Creative Sound

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

The designer of the SDX15 has determined that after break-in the driver meets the targeted parameters. I will be posting some suggested alignments later today on the website.

Bob


----------



## SteveCallas

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> That is sounding like a subset of EBS then ... only applicable in situations where the Fs starts out low enuff to consider tuning that low. Since EBS started as a subwoofer alignment with exactly those properties it looks like LLT is another name for EBS (as originally conceived)....


What is an EBS but a subset of a ported design? A LLT is a ported sub that follows some minimum requirements I created to try and ensure certain driver behavior and a certain type of bass performance. The end goal is relatively flat in room FR to the low teens (or lower) with minimal to no EQ, more headroom across a broader FR as compared to other alignments using the same driver without having to run massive amounts of power through the VC, and lower distortion across a broader FR at equal output levels compared to other alignments using the same driver(s). Basically, the most balanced subwoofer design for a given driver in regards to performance that extends to the low teens or lower.


----------



## anidabi

Creative Sound said:


> The designer of the SDX15 has determined that after break-in the driver meets the targeted parameters. I will be posting some suggested alignments later today on the website.
> 
> Bob


Any news about the driver measurements and volume it takes?


----------



## steve nn

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> and volume it takes?


I'd say a 1 cube wooden crate ought to be sufficient for shipping one this way.onder:


----------



## alan monro

A SPL of 87.3 seems a tad inefficient . One would need to waste a lot of watts to get a decent output . Also , a Xmas of a little over an inch 
{30 mm} Doesn"t make it a "hitech" speaker for 2007 . Alan


----------



## anidabi

steve nn said:


> I'd say a 1 cube wooden crate ought to be sufficient for shipping one this way.onder:


Well, I meant that how much volume this driver takes when mounted onto subwoofer box?


----------



## Creative Sound

Apologies for the delay in answering this question. We're using 5.8 litres as the driver displacement volume. I have a preliminary version of the physical dimension drawing which I can send out if needed; I'm waiting for a further revision before posting it. A closed back plate amp like the LT1300 takes about 9 litres assuming a 19mm (3/4") mounting panel. One customer on diymobileaudio.com drilled out the holes to be able to use 1/4" mounting bolts but that may not be required.

Please also note that we can provide the appropriate custom length centre pieces for the 4" PSP port kits for customers in NA who would like to build one of the 3 ported designs.

Bob


----------



## Geoff St. Germain

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



alan monro said:


> A SPL of 87.3 seems a tad inefficient . One would need to waste a lot of watts to get a decent output . Also , a Xmas of a little over an inch
> {30 mm} Doesn"t make it a "hitech" speaker for 2007 . Alan


For the price it seems about as high tech as you're going to get. Similarly priced TC Sounds 15s are in the same ballpark (28mm Xmax and 88.5 dB sensitivity on the TC-2000). Also, there aren't too many drivers with > 30 mm Xmax to start with. Off the top of my head there's the LMS-5400 (38 mm), RE XXX (54 mm), JL W7 (32 mm) all of which are way more than $270 US for 15" or in the JL's case the 13.5" (probably between 3 and 5 times as much).


----------



## alan monro

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Geoff St. Germain said:


> For the price it seems about as high tech as you're going to get. Similarly priced TC Sounds 15s are in the same ballpark (28mm Xmax and 88.5 dB sensitivity on the TC-2000). Also, there aren't too many drivers with > 30 mm Xmax to start with. Off the top of my head there's the LMS-5400 (38 mm), RE XXX (54 mm), JL W7 (32 mm) all of which are way more than $270 US for 15" or in the JL's case the 13.5" (probably between 3 and 5 times as much).


Geoff . In Australia I paid $90 each for 2 Made in Tiwan 15" woofers 96dB sens. X max about 1", res f23 , 120w max , that was at "Jacar" I dont know if you have that store over there . As a matter of fact I am using them as subs in my home theatre , spl enormous even under 20cps it hits you in the stomach before you can hear it (amp 120w home made) I brought them 4 years ago . I am judgeing the TC;s on what I brought 4 years ago,and as such would have expected a great improvement in time with todays technology. As an idea , what about using car subs????????onder:onder:onder: They seem to be cheap , hitech. kind regards Geoff,Alan.


----------



## ISLAND1000

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Geoff St. Germain said:


> Also, there aren't too many drivers with > 30 mm Xmax to start with. Off the top of my head there's the LMS-5400 (38 mm), RE XXX (54 mm), JL W7 (32 mm)


Hey Geoff, have you seen anybody using the RE XXX18 in anything yet?


----------



## Geoff St. Germain

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



alan monro said:


> Geoff . In Australia I paid $90 each for 2 Made in Tiwan 15" woofers 96dB sens. X max about 1", res f23 , 120w max , that was at "Jacar" I dont know if you have that store over there . As a matter of fact I am using them as subs in my home theatre , spl enormous even under 20cps it hits you in the stomach before you can hear it (amp 120w home made) I brought them 4 years ago . I am judgeing the TC;s on what I brought 4 years ago,and as such would have expected a great improvement in time with todays technology. As an idea , what about using car subs????????onder:onder:onder: They seem to be cheap , hitech. kind regards Geoff,Alan.


Are those Xmax figures one-way linear or peak-to-peak? I've never heard of that store so I'm going to assume that there aren't any here. I haven't seen any car subs cheaper than the CSS with better specs. For instance, the JL 13W7 has 32 mm Xmax (one-way) and it's sensitivity is 86.3 dB/1w/1m and it is considered a very high tech car audio subwoofer. It also costs $900 CDN locally. The CSS is a third the cost with 2 mm less Xmax, more sensitivity and more volume displacement.


----------



## Geoff St. Germain

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



ISLAND1000 said:


> Hey Geoff, have you seen anybody using the RE XXX18 in anything yet?


No. I saw a guy talking about using one in an LLT but I think that he needed something like 1400 L of volume. It's possible he also found out how much it cost... I think the MSRP is around $1600.


----------



## ISLAND1000

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Thanks. I looked it up and it costs about $2000.00! But it DOES model extremely well in WinISD. Only drawback I could see at first glance is it needs a large box, minimum 10 cu. ft. , to be linear.


----------



## Geoff St. Germain

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

With the XXX 18" it takes about 27 cu ft to get a Qtc of ~0.7 and for any low Qtc you're going to need an IB cause the thing needs 170 cu ft to do Qtc of 0.577. I also don't have a value for Le so I can't really tell anything about the effects of inductance in this driver. I have to assume that this driver is mostly intended for SPL because for any reasonable alignment it just requires too much space unless you're putting it in a van or a bus. 

With it's price tag and space requirements, I'd be looking at using multiples of a less expensive sub. You could do four 15" TC-2000s for less money and less space.


----------



## ISLAND1000

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

My guess is you're right about the design intent, spl. But I have the room in my house for large enclosures, not giving up yet. Now if I could find one cheap around say . . . . . $250 from some one with a back injury from lifting it.


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Don't forget that this is an XBL^2 woofer. 

dave


----------



## Creative Sound

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Thanks Dave for bringing this back on track. While not everyone appreciates what XBL^2 and similar technologies bring to the table, there are some who can clearly hear the increased clarity that they target. I clearly remember the CES where visitors were given the opportunity to do a direct comparison between a stock Eminence Beta10CX and and an "identical" sample with the XBL^2 motor. The majority of listeners picked the XBL^2 version and it led to some new OEM business for Adire.

Bob


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I understand XBL^2 also put a similar smile/frown on SEAS face?

dave


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Has anyone taken any near field frequency response measurements yet? Would like to see how low inductance it really has.


----------



## alan monro

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Geoff. that is p-p. maybee our speakers are cheaper over here??????Alan


----------



## Geoff St. Germain

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Yeah, cause the SDX15 is 60 mm p-p. Most of the "high end" sub manufacturers publish Xmax as one-way as far as I've seen.


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Here's a near field frequency response for the SDX15 measured by the CSS.

"The measurement of the SDX15 was in free air (i.e. no box or baffle) at 2.83V with the microphone about .5” from the dustcap after adequate burn-in."

Looks really good to me. :T A lot less inductance than say the TC-2000 has.


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> A lot less inductance than say the TC-2000 has.


Isn't that the biggest difference between XBL^2 and LMT technology? Possibly also less voice coil heating?


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



bobgpsr said:


> Isn't that the biggest difference between XBL^2 and LMT technology? Possibly also less voice coil heating?


I'm not sure if you meant it but the TC-2000 isn't an LMS/LMT driver. It has a normal SGLC motor topology.

But yes, the XBL^2 will have the least amount of inductance of them all. The LMS has the flattest BL curve. The XBL^2 will usually have a bit more power compression and VC heating due to the shorter voice coil.


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/showpost.php?p=145295&postcount=6

First sort or review of the SDX15.


----------



## WillyD

> A lot less inductance than say the TC-2000 has.


I'd like to see you measure one as well. Don't you have some on the way? 

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/33345-post113.html


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



WillyD said:


> I'd like to see you measure one as well. Don't you have some on the way?
> 
> http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/33345-post113.html


Two on the way as we speak. I will definitely measure them.


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> Two on the way as we speak. I will definitely measure them.


:bigsmile:

I am VERY interested in your findings of these drivers...Either way I plan to order one some time soon...

Also, what enclosures were you planning to drop these into?


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Exocer said:


> :bigsmile:
> 
> I am VERY interested in your findings of these drivers...Either way I plan to order one some time soon...
> 
> Also, what enclosures were you planning to drop these into?


Into the one where my TC-2000s are now: 5 cu ft sealed. I know it's a little bit on the small side but that's why I have 4000 watts of power and a good EQ...:R


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Could someone who already has the SDX15, measure the exact distance between the screw/installation holes? Does it have a removable rubber gasket (ala TC/SS)?


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

The official document isn't quite ready but this snapshot from it should have the info you require.... If not time to add it is now... (well bag that -- even thou it was within the size specs the board kept converting it to a jpg -- can't have it ruined like that) If anyone can't wait till early next week for the drawing mail me and i'll send it.

Bolt circle is 14 9/16" (370 mm)

dave


----------



## Creative Sound

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Dave,

Thanks, I sent it to IIkka earlier.

Bob


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

http://www.minhembio.com/x-12

A few close-up pics of the SDX15.


----------



## håkan

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> http://www.minhembio.com/x-12
> 
> A few close-up pics of the SDX15.


do you need enymore close-up pics
if so i put up moore


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



håkan;39884 said:


> do you need enymore close-up pics
> if so i put up moore


Can you remove the outer trim ring (which through the screws go) and take a picture how it looks without it?


----------



## håkan

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> Can you remove the outer trim ring (which through the screws go) and take a picture how it looks without it?


its update


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Well as I was one of the first to see the SD12 and SDX15 both are great drivers.As a fact I have a pair of the SD12 in a nice little box in my van running a RF amp and the wife said about time you got that piece of junk 12 out.(another 12" driver I had in a sub box)

The SDX15 we ( Bob and I ) will be doing some in room measurments with the designs in a week or once we get a few minutes.
Below is a few of the designs for the SD12










Below is some in room data for the SD2 (twin SD12)










Once we are done we will have some in room responses with different plate amps,boost ect.
I will get all the measurments for Bob as we get the time to do all the in room tests with the SDX15.


----------



## RAW

OK guy's 
I will cut up and build a cabinet to the size you want to see tested.

What size you all looking at.
So far I am building a 4cft sealed plus a 8.5cft ported.
Bob and I will test them on Friday?


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Both of those designs sound great. I almost suggested the 4ft^3 sealed, but you're already building that 

This is VERY exciting stuff 

Thanks for contributing to the DIY community.


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Yes i think the 4cft will be the most requested but for my HT I will build a pair of the 8.5cft


----------



## anidabi

håkan said:


> its update


Can you measure how deep is the driver?


----------



## Mike P.

The depth of the SDX15 is 9 and 5/8 inches. Here is a link to all the specs.
http://creativesound.ca/pdf/CSS-SDX15-data-180607.pdf


----------



## anidabi

Mike P. said:


> The depth of the SDX15 is 9 and 5/8 inches. Here is a link to all the specs.
> http://creativesound.ca/pdf/CSS-SDX15-data-180607.pdf


Finally the datasheet! Thank you.


----------



## planet10

The datasheet was finished on Monday. Do let me know if you see any errors.

Today i start digging into drawings of the recommended enclosures.

dave


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Here are the test cabinets for the SDX15.
Testing we will do on Friday


----------



## planet10

Hey Al,

Really nice to see you using "real" wood for these cabs 

dave


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Al,

Boxes look nice… What are the outside dimensions for the smaller box, and did you stick with the 4 cubic foot volume? How are you planning on supporting the driver (i.e. baffle only, or did you incorporate some sort of a brace similar to those found in Planet10 designs)? I have not worried too much about driver bracing/support in the past and would like to experiment this round. Dave’s logic behind coupling the driver with the back of the enclosure sounds like a good idea. I assume care must be taken to make sure the vent isn’t covered or restricted. 

For my SDX15 cabinet I think I will build a 4.5 cu. ft., down firing cabinet (18” X 18” X 36” or there about). I also have a 300 liter LLT tuned to 15 Hz. that I plan to test the driver in too.

I am looking for a lower Q alignment, and according to Unibox using about 135 liters with “heavy stuffing” gives a Qtc value of about 0.55. Heavy stuffing to me means one lbs. per cubic foot. Does this ring true with the rest of you experts?


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Very nice boxes for testing purposes only


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

These are built to the sizes of 4cft sealed 21" cube with 4 braces in that 21"cube.All using .75" Fir plywood.

The larger cabinet is 8.65cft with 6 braces side to side and then 4 braces bracing each of those side to braces.Another words VERY WELL BRACED.

I did thisas I wantedit over size a bit as well this is for my HT room once the tests are done.

Yes they have the cut out for the driver support for the motor.

Just a little heads up if no one has got it yet.

Bob from CSS ,Dave D and I work together on a lot of things as well Dave does all my documentation for my products.:bigsmile:

Bob see you Friday need the SMS1 plus the LT1300.I will set up Praxis in the HT room as well.



hardman said:


> Al,
> 
> Boxes look nice… What are the outside dimensions for the smaller box, and did you stick with the 4 cubic foot volume? How are you planning on supporting the driver (i.e. baffle only, or did you incorporate some sort of a brace similar to those found in Planet10 designs)? I have not worried too much about driver bracing/support in the past and would like to experiment this round. Dave’s logic behind coupling the driver with the back of the enclosure sounds like a good idea. I assume care must be taken to make sure the vent isn’t covered or restricted.
> 
> For my SDX15 cabinet I think I will build a 4.5 cu. ft., down firing cabinet (18” X 18” X 36” or there about). I also have a 300 liter LLT tuned to 15 Hz. that I plan to test the driver in too.
> 
> I am looking for a lower Q alignment, and according to Unibox using about 135 liters with “heavy stuffing” gives a Qtc value of about 0.55. Heavy stuffing to me means one lbs. per cubic foot. Does this ring true with the rest of you experts?


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Well would have used MDF if.
Get this labour shortage no one working in the yard at Rona to cut up afew sheet.
So this Fir ply was sitting there 2X4 sheets for $6.00

Sure made my day easy.

Dave best part did not have to wear a mask to cut it all.




planet10 said:


> Hey Al,
> 
> Really nice to see you using "real" wood for these cabs
> 
> dave


----------



## planet10

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



hardman said:


> Al,
> sort of a brace similar to those found in Planet10 designs)? \


That should probably be Planet10 drawings... Chris (driver designer) specified the boxes, i just dis the detail to get the sizes right and added the last brace from the magnet to the back of the box.

The ShadowSD, BIB & the TL are Scott & my designs. Our 1st crack at the SDX15 is a "small" push=push TL.

Al, the 2x4 sheets goes a long way to explaining the, shall we say, unusual, bracing in the big box. Watch out you might find you gt spoiled by the ply 

By the time you add in the braces, amp (Bob implied an amp), and driver volumes you are a bit shy of the recommended 3.4 ft^3 box (the 1st pass at the no-amp included version is a 20 3/8" cube)

dave


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Never go to ply 100% just can not do what MDF does.:boxer:

As far as the cabinet yes the small one you got the pictures on today I have also a plate made to cover the plate amp and change the volume of the cabinet.

The large one asyou noted has very exotic bracing all over.:neener:


----------



## planet10

> Never go to ply 100% just can not do what MDF does.


You got that right... a well done ply box won't ever achieve the boxiness & energy storage that a typical MDF box will...

dave


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

OK since Bob can not post the images I will.
Here is the sealed cabinet in room done with the SMS1 using the settings Bob showed above.
No eq nothing on the SMS1 Just used for measurments in room










Below same amp settings the ported has more SPL and out put over the sealed










OK now the Ported design with the LT1300 no boost added and the SMS1 used in Auto EQ in 1 minutes time.


----------



## håkan

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

look nice
:jump:


----------



## brucek

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> since Bob can not post the images I will


I think we know Bob isn't a spammer.  I just promoted him.......



> measurments in room


Al, have you ever used REW?

brucek


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

No I have not used it before.i am aware of it and its use.
But really design speakers,making proto types and complete speakers really takes up the days.

I used the SMS1 as Bob has the SMS1 and would like tests done with it.

I use Praxis for everything else or MLSSA


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



brucek said:


> I think we know Bob isn't a spammer.  I just promoted him.......
> 
> 
> Al, have you ever used REW?
> 
> brucek


I was not saying Bob was a spammer but rather Bob is not familar with posing pictures on forum.So I loaded the tests and put them on mine for him.


----------



## brucek

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> I was not saying Bob was a spammer


hehehe, just joking. We have a new member post limit that has to be past before you can post urls etc. I just advanced his status to regular member.....

brucek


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Looks awesome!


----------



## håkan

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



DS-21 said:


> Have you guys thought about offering a matching PR? The woofer seems to lend itself well to a couple different alignments that would have serious disadvantages if executed via ports.


 i build whit pr and it looks god
but it hard to find a good pr i find 4 adire pr 15 in australia
http://www.minhembio.com/x-12/123347/
have a look on my simulaton on ccs sdx- 15 and 2 adire pr15
the box is 8cu ft and have to added mass of 650g on every pr


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

As far as a PR not sure if Bob will get them or not.

Now the Adire 15" PR's.HAve been out of stock for well over a year and will not be coming back.

So a PR that will work with these SDX15 drivers has a limited selection.


----------



## Geoff St. Germain

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Well, I bit the bullet and ordered two of these drivers. I'm very much looking forward to getting them. So far I'm undecided between ported and sealed.


----------



## Guest

These drivers look very interesting. Does anyone know how long the introductory price is going to last?

Thanks,
Topp


----------



## SteveCallas

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



geoff said:


> So far I'm undecided between ported and sealed.


Come on


----------



## Geoff St. Germain

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Well, I'm trying to get the enclosure size down from the two RL-p15 sonosubs that I have now. The only ported setup I would consider is an LLT and I need a lot more volume for that that I'm willing to tolerate at this time, which is why I'm contemplating a sealed alignment.


----------



## håkan

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

have test the setup today and i have onlyone thing
to say awesom


----------



## Creative Sound

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Hakan,

Looks good even though I don't read Swedish.

http://www.minhembio.com/x-12/123347/

Bob


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I replaced my blown (by my misuse) Tumult with a SDX15. Got a $100 credit due to sending in my broken Tumult for credit -- thanks Robert! The replacement went smooth once I got out my drill and with a routing bit slotted the speaker's mounting holes to compensate for the slight hole location diffs from the Tumult's. Also modified one channel of my ART Cleanbox going from 0.047 uf to 5.0 uf (overkill I know -- but that is what I had handy, a 50V "Dimie"). This time I am only using one channel of my Mackie M1400i pro amp and have engaged its limiter circuits. Did a quickie calibration with the AVR test tones and a RS SPL meter. The sub sounds fine and "disappears" like it should. Have not yet stretched its capabilities with a HD DVD movie yet -- just a little bit of 300 to verify it is doing its job.

So one of these days I need to fire up TrueRTA & REW and do some measurements. Need to measure the mod'ed chan of the Cleanbox versus the unmodified one. Also do some close mic measurements with my calibration mic to check out the SDX15 esp the tuning point. Very nice looking quality build for the sub driver. 

My DIY sub uses a 200L internal volume baltic birch box with two 18" passive radiators (Acoustic Elegance PR18-2500)


----------



## steve nn

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I have been very happy with the SDX. I loaded it in a empty 300 (260 liter effective) sono I had in the spare and it pounds! I was surprised at the MV level I could get away with in my new temporary living arrangement using my stand-by sub, but get nothing but complaints with the SDX loaded in the LLT:R


----------



## Guest

Raw - how did the 4cft measure out after EQ'ing?

Also, is 8.65cft the recomended volume of a ported cabinet for the SDX15? What about the port dimensions...or did I miss that?

Thanks-


----------



## Mike P.

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



dave7 said:


> Raw - how did the 4cft measure out after EQ'ing?
> 
> Also, is 8.65cft the recomended volume of a ported cabinet for the SDX15? What about the port dimensions...or did I miss that?
> 
> Thanks-


All the recommended box sizes and port lengths are posted on Creative Sound Solutions home page.
http://creativesound.ca/


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Oops - I did miss that. Sorry.


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I have my twins...










...ready to go into this box. :bigsmile: I'll post how they compare to the TC Sounds TC-2000 drivers.


----------



## Geoff St. Germain

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> I have my twins...
> 
> ...ready to go into this box. :bigsmile: I'll post how they compare to the TC Sounds TC-2000 drivers.


Oooh, I'm looking forward to see how this turns out.


----------



## andersonbc

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> I have my twins...
> 
> ...ready to go into this box. :bigsmile: I'll post how they compare to the TC Sounds TC-2000 drivers.


Fantastic Ilkka, this is what I have been waiting for.


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Ilkka, will you also be using the same amp?


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Exocer said:


> Ilkka, will you also be using the same amp?


At first I will be using my old trusty t.amp TA2400, but after my Crown CE 4000s arrive (that's 3600W per woofer), I'll see what kind of difference I can get with them.


----------



## steve nn

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> ready to go into this box. I'll post how they compare to the TC Sounds TC-2000 drivers.


I don't think it gets any better than this does it? This is going to be fun along with VERY interesting.


> At first I will be using my old trusty t.amp TA2400, but after my Crown CE 4000s arrive (that's 3600W per woofer), I'll see what kind of difference I can get with them.


Great! I want to know what this thing can take?:dunno:


----------



## WillyD

Ilkka - I assume you'll try the TC-2Ks with the CE4000s as well, correct?


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



WillyD said:


> Ilkka - I assume you'll try the TC-2Ks with the CE4000s as well, correct?


Yes, naturally. :bigsmile: I'm actually very interested to find out if there are any audible differences between low-cost and more expensive pro amps. I will report my findings after the Crowns have arrived.


----------



## WillyD

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> Yes, naturally. :bigsmile: I'm actually very interested to find out if there are any audible differences between low-cost and more expensive pro amps. I will report my findings after the Crowns have arrived.


:bigsmile: It is also wonderful that you'll have a CE-4000 to use with the LMS-5400 (whenever you get it). I don't think Jai has ever clipped it with his LMS-5400 setup...what a beast.


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



WillyD said:


> :bigsmile: It is also wonderful that you'll have a CE-4000 to use with the LMS-5400 (whenever you get it). I don't think Jai has ever clipped it with his LMS-5400 setup...what a beast.


Yes, that was one reason more to for the Crowns. Though if one isn't enough, I can always use one for each VC. That's something like 8000 watts?! :raped: Hey wait, isn't that the LMS-5400 peak power handling spec... :bigsmile:


----------



## WillyD

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> Yes, that was one reason more to for the Crowns. Though if one isn't enough,* I can always use one for each VC*. That's something like 8000 watts?! :raped: Hey wait, isn't that the LMS-5400 peak power handling spec... :bigsmile:


You're reading my mind. I thought of that exact same configuration. Madness! :mooooh:


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

What does CSS specify for max watts into the SDX15? Just do not exceed xmax when modeled? Or use the 40 mm Xmech spec?


----------



## Guest

The CSS site mentions a Q of .577 for a 6.5 cft sealed and stuffed cabinet, but it does not mention a Q for an 8.5 cft EBS cabinet. As I am sure you all can tell, I am new and naive...sorry. Could someone enlighten me to the Q characteristics of the EBS vs the large sealed cabinet? All I can dig up searching so far is general opinions and comments, nothing too concrete.

Also, has anyone built a 6.5 cft sealed cabinet for one of these yet? The sealed cabinet mentioned earlier in this thread was a “meager” 4cft.

My priority is music...but I hate to compromise too much for HT.


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

dave7,
When it comes to ported alignments Q is not usually something that is generally considered to impact the system. Also, im sure it is way more complicated to calculate the Q of a ported system since both the driver and port are damped. 

One can only assume that the Q of the EBS alignment would be much lower (higher damped) than that of the 6.5ft^3 alignment before the port comes into play, thanks to a larger enclosure.

Use a driver modeling program like unibox or winisd to get a general understanding of how enclosure size and tuning point effect the linearity of a given subwoofer's output. This is somethign worth paying more attention to than "Q" in ported alignments.


----------



## Guest

I wouldn't be surprising myself by oversimplifying these things.

I like to build a cabinet to match my main speakers which are quite large (Legacy Whispers) because I like to work and finish rich grained woods to look really nice. However, I'd hate to spend all that time and money on something that underperforms.

I'l check into unibox and hopefully my question will begin to have more meat to them.

Thanks for your comments so far. This is interesting to me.


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



bobgpsr said:


> What does CSS specify for max watts into the SDX15? Just do not exceed xmax when modeled? Or use the 40 mm Xmech spec?


There are two things: electrical and mechanical power handling. The latter is much more important. Electrical power handling is rarely a problem, unless one listens to straight sine waves 24/7. The crest factor of normal music/movies is just too large. Mechanical power handling depends of the alignment and box sized used. Take a very small sealed box, and one could probably pump several kilowatts into SDX15 without any sign of bottoming out. But if one uses a very large box (like IB), only a few hundred watts is enough to make it bottom out. Ported, horn etc. all behave little bit differently when it comes to mechanical power handling.

IMO amp limiting one's sub isn't necessarily. One should have _enough_ amp power (that means _all_ is never used). One should be able to hear when the driver is closing to its limits. If that level isn't high enough, you need more subwoofers.


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> There are two things: electrical and mechanical power handling. The latter is much more important.


Yep, Xmech it will be, when modeling for me. I just do not want to repeat the experience of blowing out a 15" driver like I did to a Tumult MKII with too many watts (1400 into 4 ohms) while playing a HD DVD:










:gah: opssign:


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



bobgpsr said:


> Yep, Xmech it will be, when modeling for me. I just do not want to repeat the experience of blowing out a 15" driver like I did to a Tumult MKII with too many watts (1400 into 4 ohms) while playing a HD DVD:


So what exactly happened? Have you checked that the VC is really burned?


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> So what exactly happened? Have you checked that the VC is really burned?


It looked like a major exceed Xmech excursion. The VC tinsel leads were ripped off the voice coil. No smell -- doubt the VC was burned -- just too much during some sound transient (explosion or gunshot). It must of happened some time during playing the Children of Men HD DVD. Robert of CSS accepted the broken Tumult for trade-in credit on my purchase of a SDX15.

I had previously convinced myself that I wanted to avoid subwoofer amplifier clipping -- but since the incident and driver replacement I am now only using one-half of my Mackie pro amp. No more bridged mode for me. The pro amp has soft limiting protection circuitry which I have now enabled. Too bad that I now see the red leds sometimes light up on the amp's input level readout.


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Sorry about the Tumult Bob. There isn't much headroom after Xmax with only 36mm of xmech  My Tumult looks exactly like yours...and i've abused my Avalanche 15 exponentially more than the Tumult, but unlike the tumult it hasn't shown a single sign of damage. It used a similar sized basket...Ah I just think there was a build quality issue with the Tumults..


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



bobgpsr said:


> It looked like a major exceed Xmech excursion. The VC tinsel leads were ripped off the voice coil. No smell -- doubt the VC was burned -- just too much during some sound transient (explosion or gunshot).


Ok, that's what I thought. Did the dust cap came off during the incident or did you remove it afterwords? What kind of enclosure was it in?


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> Ok, that's what I thought. Did the dust cap came off during the incident or did you remove it afterwords? What kind of enclosure was it in?


Both the outer and inner dustcaps were laying on the floor after the incident. The enclosure is a 200 liter internal volume, 3/4" baltic birch box, heavily braced, with two Acoustic Elegance PR18-2500 passive radiators (18" with 2500 grams Mms). External dimensions: 23"w x 31.5"d x 24"h (58.42cm x 80cm x 60.96cm)


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



bobgpsr said:


> Both the outer and inner dustcaps were laying on the floor after the incident. The enclosure is a 200 liter internal volume, 3/4" baltic birch box, heavily braced, with two Acoustic Elegance PR18-2500 passive radiators (18" with 2500 grams Mms). External dimensions: 23"w x 31.5"d x 24"h (58.42cm x 80cm x 60.96cm)


I see, have you measured the PR tuning frequency?


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> I see, have you measured the PR tuning frequency?


They model very low ( 3.36 Hz) per UniBox. See: http://hometown.aol.com/bobgpsr/myhomepage/profile.html


----------



## Guest

Bob - That just looks scary!!!!!!:yikes:

As per Exocer's suggestion, I have been playing around with some of the simulation software available online. I am a total newbie at this so I am looking for you guys to correct me where I am wrong and over simplifying again.

I can see using WinISD that the CSS SDX15 likes quite a large vented cabinet. Even though 8.5cft @ 15 Hz is suggested, something even larger (about 9cft @ 15Hz) looks even smoother.

However - Unfortunately I am limited in my cabinet size. With this consideration, Am I correct in thinking I should consider the SD12 instead of the SDX15? 

I plugged in numbers for the SD12 and came up with:
Cabinet size = 5.6cft (6cft is even better)
15 Hz tune
Port size of 5.5" diameter x ~46" length
Rough cabinet dimensions would be 17"w (or 18"w) x 12"d x 65"h. After calculating the volume of the internal bracing and thickness of the .75” BB plywood, I get a corrected internal volume of 5.644cft (or 6.019cft for the 18"width)

I would use two of these cabinets for my room and an EQ. The response I see using WinISD looks pretty good with a roll-off of about -5dB which I should be able to adjust out with the EQ...right?

I do understand there are room influences too, but am I on the right track? Is the SDX15 just the wrong fit for my application (i.e., cabinet size)? And, is the SD12 the more correct choice?

Thanks for your input, and again – sorry if my line of questioning is too basic. - And, I promise not to highjack the thread...I just want to know if the SDX15 could work somehow, or if in my case, smaller is better (did I just say that!!??).:scratchhead:


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



dave7 said:


> Unfortunately I am limited in my cabinet size. With this consideration, Am I correct in thinking I should consider the SD12 instead of the SDX15?


You are up against "*Hoffman's Iron Law*" for factoring cost, size, low end performance:

Optimized cost and size - hit on performance --- sealed SDX15
Optimized cost and performance - hit on size --- ported (esp LLT) SDX15
Optimized size and performance - hit on cost --- two passive radiators with SDX15

I took the hit on cost by using passive radiators for my DIY sub project. The size was the the most I could get using a single sheet of 4'x8' 3/4" baltic birch plywood for the the exterior walls. I had to use some 3/4" MDF and cheap plywood for interior window braces.


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



bobgpsr said:


> They model very low ( 3.36 Hz) per UniBox. See: http://hometown.aol.com/bobgpsr/myhomepage/profile.html


The simulation says 14.3 Hz, but have you actually measured the tuning frequency?


----------



## SteveCallas

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



bob said:


> Optimized size and performance - hit on cost --- two passive radiators with SDX15


Passive radiators allow you to use lower tunings in smaller enclosures than porting (properly), but the performance of a small enclosure with low tuning won't be as optimized as that from a large enclosure. Radiators and ports are essentially interchangable, small and large enclosures aren't.


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Ilkka said:


> The simulation says 14.3 Hz, but have you actually measured the tuning frequency?


I have not yet measured my sub with the SDX15 in it yet. This (14.98 Hz close mic measurement) was for the previous Tumult MKII 15D2 driver in the same sub:


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

I got my SDX15s installed last evening. There was some extra work due to screw holes being quite a lot narrower than on the TC-2000. I had to drill them a little bit wider in order to fit in the same holes.


----------



## SteveCallas

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Say Ilkka, how's the weather over there? :cunning::bigsmile:


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



SteveCallas said:


> Say Ilkka, how's the weather over there? :cunning::bigsmile:


Good, but I'm not going to arrange a measurement session just for one sub. If we get enough subs, there might be a session around late September or so.

I will take some in-room measurements before that though.


----------



## ISLAND1000

This is an interesting scenario you have ILKKA, same enclosure, different drivers, both with an excellent reputation. Please share your testing and listening results with us ASAP. In-room measurements in this case will be very informative.


----------



## Exocer

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Ilkka, a few subjective observations on the SDX-15's performance wouldn't hurt either...coming from you.


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Dave7,

I have both CSS subwoofers and prefer the 12” sub sealed (.55 Q) for two channel music and the 15” in a 280 liter LLT for home theater. If I could only have one of my two subwoofers I would chose the 12” sub. I prefer two channel music over home theater.

The 15” LLT sub is great for movies and delivers amazing bass, but lacks the transient response of the sealed sub. The LLT doesn’t blend as well as the sealed sub does with my speakers either (it is obvious a sub is running when listening to music). Again, these comments apply to two channel music playback, movies are a different story.

To sum things up… I prefer a sealed sub for music and LLT for home theater. Note: I have not had the chance to build a sealed box for the 15” driver yet so I don’t know if it performs as well with two channel music as the 12”. There is something about the 12” driver in the upper bass frequencies thats really is appealing. I hope the same holds true for the larger 15”.

Chris


----------



## bobgpsr

^^^ Do your mains go down to below 40 Hz letting you try a 60 Hz crossover with the 15" LLT? 

Is the LLT time aligned (with the DSP in an AVR setting the speaker distances - a tape measure does not get all the delays)?


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Bob,

I have a few different pairs of speakers and seem to be always be in the process of building something (My Northcreek Rhythms easily hit 40 Hz when left ported), but my previous comments were more general regarding a sealed sub vs. LLT and not specific to one pair of speakers. My experience has shown that a lower Qtc sealed sub has a better transient response, at the expense of output (SPL) vs. an LLT. For music playback I prefer the quick, tight, sound of a sealed sub.

I use an active crossover with my two channel setup and have tried a number of different settings. My HT pre amp is an older Rotel that offers some bass management, but is not as fancy as some of the newer offerings. I am sure room placement plays into my preference somewhat too. The LLT is in the corner of my room due to size whereas the sealed sub sits between the speakers. Corner placement of a sub is always going to have the potential for boomer bass. 

Dave7 originally mentioned his goal for a new sub was for two channel as well as home theater and this is why I suggested a sealed design. His last post looks like he is looking for something smaller too.

It is my opinion (thanks for the education Steve) that the SD12 is too small to work in an LLT (not enough SD) and impossible to get the desired roll-off. I don’t like ported subs, so I tried a sealed design.

My sealed SD12 is rather small in comparison to the LLT. I settled for about 2 ft’3 or a Qtc of about .57 (less internal volume for bracing, driver, etc.). For reference, a Qtc of .6 requires a 1.5 ft’3 where as a .5 pushes the volume to 3.5 ft’3. I usually design for as large of a box as space will limit, but the space ratio to Q really starts to add up as you approach .5. 

Either way (sealed or LLT), using one of the new CSS drivers will make a great sub!


----------



## Guest

Yes I do prefer musicality over SPL. If I get desperate for SPL, maybe I'd add a 3rd ported sub for HT. Since I have an ICBM, I do have some hook-up flexibility.

And I am space limited, or at least I'd prefer a smallish package.

Has anyone tried designs like the Thiel SS2 or the Zu Method? Do I have it right that these sealed two driver units use a baffle in front of the driver to dampen the excursion (did I say that correctly?)? I wonder how they sound and how low they go...

Hardman - is that a typo above for the .6Q...should it be 2.5 cft?


----------



## Guest

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



dave7 said:


> Yes I do prefer musicality over SPL. If I get desperate for SPL, maybe I'd add a 3rd ported sub for HT. Since I have an ICBM, I do have some hook-up flexibility.


Dave, how big is your room? Depending on the size, you may be fine with just one sub. What size driver are you looking to get 12" or 15"? Earlier in this post Dave (Planet10) suggested two SD12s in a push-push sealed design most likely would be better than one 15”.

What is an ICBM?



> Has anyone tried designs like the Thiel SS2 or the Zu Method? Do I have it right that these sealed two driver units use a baffle in front of the driver to dampen the excursion (did I say that correctly?)? I wonder how they sound and how low they go...


I personally don't have any experience with these two designs, but if it is any consolation, I like prefer a front firing sub to a down firing one. Down firing sounds similar to what you are describing above? 



> Hardman - is that a typo above for the .6Q...should it be 2.5 cft?


Did you factor the effects of fill and leakage when finding your cabinet volume? Stuffing a box with some sort of fill will lower the Qtc for the enclosure. Using Unibox for the SD12 I get a Qtc of .6 = 42.2 liters or 1.49 ft'3 with the setting the fill to heavy (heavy fill to me means 1 lbs of stuffing per 1ft'3) and leakage to minor.


----------



## SteveCallas

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> The 15” LLT sub is great for movies and delivers amazing bass, but lacks the transient response of the sealed sub.


That actually can and has been proven wrong, but whatever. Let stereotypes be stereotypes :sarcastic:


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



SteveCallas said:


> That actually can and has been proven wrong, but whatever. Let stereotypes be stereotypes :sarcastic:


I agree. One of the biggest problems is the actual frequency response when coupled with the room. If you move the sub around, use bass traps, use parametric equalization (BFD), etc to get a non-peaky and non-rising at the low end (_*REW is your friend*_), then physics tells you won't get bad "bass" transient response. 

This assumes of course any port that is used in a vented sub uses a tuning frequency below the normal human hearing response of 20 Hz. Hence one of the "rules" for a LLT is a Low Tune around 15 Hz or lower. You also have to worry about the phase delay response of any high pass filter used to prevent the subwoofer driver unloading. This high pass filter is also normally set to limit the response below the tuning point. You don't really "hear" sub 20 Hz freqs as much as feel them. Should be possible to have a proper LLT to not have any noticable phase (transient) delay effects for frequencies of 25 Hz or higher. :yes:


----------



## brucek

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



> You also have to worry about the phase delay response of any high pass filter used to prevent the subwoofer driver unloading


I thought that LLT's are tuned so low, the theory (as I understand it), is that the electronics will roll off the power to the driver by the nature of their own low end response. This relieves any worry of phase problems caused by HPF's.

brucek


----------



## bobgpsr

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



brucek said:


> I thought that LLT's are tuned so low, the theory (as I understand it), is that the electronics will roll off the power to the driver by the nature of their own low end response. This relieves any worry of phase problems caused by HPF's.


Good point. Some will have them and others will not. Dolby Digital can have very low freqs in some movie sound tracks (even accidental). I have heard concert hall air conditioning units in some DVD-A music recordings. So the need for a HPF would depend on one's own electronics -- player, pre-pro, amp, etc. In some cases a person can have equipment flat to 10 Hz. Other cases no -- so HPF unnecessary. IMHO YMMV


----------



## raimak

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*









hello this is about 300l. LLT with css sdx15
I have two of these monsters :hush:


----------



## raimak

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

No problems at all


----------



## arttu

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



raimak said:


> View attachment 4661
> 
> 
> hello this is about 300l. LLT with css sdx15
> I have two of these monsters :hush:


I gotta come down someday and have a taste of those :flex::boxer: :dizzy:

I actually have a plan doing something similar in my HT (with the help of Ilkka):shh:.


----------



## raimak

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*









more photo i hope:whistling:

Arttu, just call me:foottap:


----------



## håkan

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

what are you thinking about this


----------



## Warpdrv

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Im thinking "Why is there no rolloff under 20hz...."

That and those are some serious +6 bumps there...


----------



## vinculum

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Rolloff above 60Hz with the EQ maxed out? I thought these low inductance XBL drivers would roll off a little higher?


----------



## Ricci

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

Looks like it's crossed over around 60hz, but why the boosts then?:scratch:


----------



## Mike P.

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



vinculum said:


> Rolloff above 60Hz with the EQ maxed out? I thought these low inductance XBL drivers would roll off a little higher?


I believe that's a screen shot of a Velodyne Digital Drive sub and not a CSS SDX15.


----------



## Ilkka

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Mike P. said:


> I believe that's a screen shot of a Velodyne Digital Drive sub and not a CSS SDX15.


I think he is just using the SMS-1 with a DIY sub.


----------



## håkan

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



Mike P. said:


> I believe that's a screen shot of a Velodyne Digital Drive sub and not a CSS SDX15.


yes it is 2 css sdx-15 and velo sms-1


----------



## Mike P.

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*



håkan said:


> yes it is 2 css sdx-15 and velo sms-1


Live and learn!:innocent:


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*










For those interested these test cabinets are available and I would like to see them gone .


----------



## Mike P.

What is the net volume of them?


----------



## RAW

*Re: New 15” Driver - CSS SDX15*

These are built to the sizes of 4cft sealed 21" cube with 4 braces in that 21"cube.All using .75" Fir plywood.

The larger cabinet is 8.65cft with 6 braces side to side and then 4 braces bracing each of those side to braces.Another words VERY WELL BRACED.

I did this as I wanted it over size a bit as well this is for my HT room once the tests are done.

Yes they have the cut out for the driver support for the motor.


----------



## baubau

hello every one , sorry for my english , i have a few questions about this driver.

what is the shiping weight ?
what volume does it work best for a car aplication whith two 18" passive radiators also from css.


----------



## Creative Sound

Hi,

We recommend 5 cu ft (142 litres) with the 2 passive radiators. The driver weighs 22 KGs as packed.

Bob


----------



## rodsprit

-- i posted in the wrong thread >_>


----------

