CSX-12 Mark II...better than PL-200 and a couple more

Discussion in 'Subwoofers' started by espanarules, Sep 9, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. espanarules Audioholic Intern

    espanarules
    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    3
    It's funny how so many people on hear claim you can't find a musical sub under $500-600...without trying to perform sub-sonic, for HT enthusiasts, this sub is great...hits everything from dub to jazz...to rock...metal so on...for $279 delivered...and yes...I like good sound quality...
    The PL 200 kicks *** for the extreme low-subsonic...but this sub does it all
  2. fuzz092888 Audioholic Warlord

    fuzz092888
    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    7,840
    Likes Received:
    3,833
    Location:
    42.3464° N, 71.0975° W
    I'm guessing you mean infrasonic, not subsonic. The PL200 gets down to about 20hz with half decent CEA output, but the measured FR won't blow anyone away with a pretty steep roll off starting at about 45hz. Needless to say it won't be delivering a lot of infrasonic content.

    I'm sure the Cadence CSX-12 delivers a pleasant midbass experience, especially for the money, but based on the measured response of the CSX-15, I highly doubt the 12 is doing much below 30-40hz and with a roll off starting at almost 80hz dropping 15 db an octave down and then another 21db an octave after that and you've got another midbass module. Based on the reviews I've read it seems that this pretty much aligns. Within its working frequency response it does well for a budget sub, but it won't dig deep.

    Both are great for the money, but aren't what I would really call subwoofers. More midbass thumpers.
  3. espanarules Audioholic Intern

    espanarules
    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    3
    No, lol, I meant sub sonic....below human hearing...I don't know what music you listen to that produces 20-30 Hz 99% of the time. Sorry you feel that way...98% of what I like is played just fine...and this thumper, as you say, plays bass guitar, and double bass drums with ease...So, is it worth it to spend the big bucks...NO, is there ANY difference from, say SVS and so on, for what I listen to...NO...I'm not trying to have a HT studio...lol...and I don't go by just gimmick stats...I need to listen first.

    As I have come to grips that my teaching salary won't get me hi-end items...I realize that having audiophile Bass is only to show off...not just enjoy...
  4. fuzz092888 Audioholic Warlord

    fuzz092888
    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    7,840
    Likes Received:
    3,833
    Location:
    42.3464° N, 71.0975° W
    Subsonic: relating to or flying at a speed or speeds less than that of sound.

    Infrasonic: relating to or denoting sound waves with a frequency below the lower limit of human audibility.

    Who says that the music or content you play needs to reproduce those frequencies 99% of the time? Furthermore, it is your opinion that you don't need to spend more and get better quality gear, which is fine since it's you that has to live with the gear and the sound. Would there be a difference between an accurate sub that plays smoothly and with low distortion down to 20hz and up to 200hz over the two subs you mentioned? There definitely would be, but if that doesn't matter to you that's fine. Subwoofers do far more than HT and to think that spending more money on a higher quality sub wouldn't get you better quality sound either shows that you've never heard a properly calibrated, high performing system, or that you prefer what you're getting out of those subs.

    Gimmick stats......clearly you're not a science teacher. You can get "audiophile" sound at many different budgets. You may think $1500 is too much, but you can easily get an "audiophile" 2.1 for that money. Well within a teachers budget because.......well I'm a teacher too. "Audiophile" bass means accurate and able to reproduce the source signal with finesse and ease (which could also be called accurate FR and low distortion if you believe in that sort of thing).
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 19, 2014
    • Like Like x 2
  5. Pyrrho Audioholic Ninja

    Pyrrho
    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    3,699
    Likes Received:
    979
    You might want to read a review of its bigger and, presumably, better, brethren:

    Cadence CSX15 Mark II Subwoofer Review | Audioholics

    If you enjoy a cheap subwoofer, that is fine, but please don't pretend that it is something that it isn't.

    At your budget, I would be looking at used gear. I picked up one of these in beautiful condition for less than what you paid for your subwoofer:

    SVS 25-31PC+ 20 Hz tune (dB12.2) - Home Theater Forum and Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com

    A flatter frequency response, and lower distortion, makes everything sound better. The fact that it also goes deeper is just another bonus. And it can really shake the walls, if I want it to.

    Of course, it takes time, and patience, to wait for a good deal. But they happen, and you can get quality equipment on a tight budget.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. TheStalker Banned

    TheStalker
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2013
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    21
  7. j_garcia Audioholic Jedi

    j_garcia
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    25,211
    Likes Received:
    5,288
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca.
    I've spent plenty of time with the CSX-12 MkII. It IS a solid budget sub, but it is NOT getting to infrasonic levels. Very little is going on below 25Hz with that sub, but above that it has plenty of good output and sounds very respectable doing it. Maybe not a giant slayer, but I have no problem recommending it.

    That's great, except that the CSX-12 doesn't cost $500.
  8. TheStalker Banned

    TheStalker
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2013
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    21
    OP said "under $500-$600."
  9. j_garcia Audioholic Jedi

    j_garcia
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    25,211
    Likes Received:
    5,288
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca.
    Even though it is horribly written in TXT SPEAK by someone who clearly had pop rocks with their coke today, that comment was more random than actual since neither of the subs mentioned are even in that price range. The CSX-12 MkII actually does go for more than the sale price normally, but I still wouldn't put it up against some of the more serious $600 subs.
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2013
  10. kini Junior Audioholic

    kini
    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2011
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    14
    The CSX 12 actually measures better than the 15. Sound and Vision has a review of the 12. The problem with the 15 is they put that larger driver in essentially the same size box as the 12 so it has less volume to work with. At least that's what I got out of the review on the 15.
    kini,
  11. fuzz092888 Audioholic Warlord

    fuzz092888
    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    7,840
    Likes Received:
    3,833
    Location:
    42.3464° N, 71.0975° W
    You can't really compare measurements from different sources unless they have similar testing methodology and at least smooth at the same rate (sub measurements shouldn't be smoothed). For whatever reason, the S&V measurement looks smoothed to me. The other issue is that there are no distortion plots to go along with the measurements or CEA results, which is kind of (really really) important. Below 60hz the 15 has crazy high distortion and I can't see the 12 doing a ton better. Less volume isn't necessarily a problem, it depends on the driver parameters and how it models.
  12. j_garcia Audioholic Jedi

    j_garcia
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    25,211
    Likes Received:
    5,288
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca.
    The AH review did say they believe the cabinet is too small for that driver on the 15. It is only slightly larger than the cabinet the 12 uses.
  13. fuzz092888 Audioholic Warlord

    fuzz092888
    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    7,840
    Likes Received:
    3,833
    Location:
    42.3464° N, 71.0975° W
    When I go to the AH Cadence review I only get the intro and don't see a link to the other pages. Just me?

    I read that on data-bass as well, that Josh thought it was in a bit too tight cabinet.
  14. j_garcia Audioholic Jedi

    j_garcia
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    25,211
    Likes Received:
    5,288
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca.
    No, I just looked at it and saw the same thing.
  15. theJman Audioholic Chief

    theJman
    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    Messages:
    798
    Likes Received:
    250
    Location:
    New Joisey
    +1

    I've spent a lot of time with one as well, and under the right circumstances it's a very good bargain.
    • Like Like x 1
  16. espanarules Audioholic Intern

    espanarules
    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    3
    thought so...I get it, that some people want to speak over others because they know more, but I posted my opinion...I could care less if my sub hits 20 Hz...like my former PL-200..."woopie doo"....lol Does the sub perform like I want it too? I understand audiophiles might want to say that they spend more money on a superior product...I get it. We all get it... Would I spend $40K on a Jaguar vs. VW GTI Turbo $26K...NO!...lol...
    • Like Like x 1
  17. fuzz092888 Audioholic Warlord

    fuzz092888
    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    7,840
    Likes Received:
    3,833
    Location:
    42.3464° N, 71.0975° W
    Your opinion is your opinion, but I don't think anyone spoke over you and yes some do know "more".

    That's fine and we already established the PL-200 won't hit 20hz or below with much oomph.

    I'm sure it does.

    Actually spending more, up to a point, isn't about bragging how much anyone spends, it's what's required if you are chasing a realistic reproduction of the music or sound effects in movies/TV, depending on what you're aiming for. If you don't have the budget for it or if you don't care to chase realistic reproduction and enjoy the sound of these subs, it's all good.

    The issue I took with your original statement was that you stated something that was false on different levels and were slightly overblowing the performance of the subs in question. Are they excellent budget subs? Yes. Are they the be all, end all where spending $500-600 is totally not worth it? No. At that price range the performance can get significantly better.

    Well that all depends, do you want a luxury car or a small sportier car? I would choose neither. GMC Yukon Denali 2500HD Diesel for me.
    • Like Like x 1
  18. j_garcia Audioholic Jedi

    j_garcia
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    25,211
    Likes Received:
    5,288
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca.
    Guessing you get the same reaction a lot and still haven't figured out why. The tone of your response just proves that you don't get it. Nobody is talking over you, just calling out incorrect information based on zero fact that you are providing. It is one thing to say you like a product and an entirely different one to make false claims.
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2013
  19. espanarules Audioholic Intern

    espanarules
    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    3
    True...and only an audiophile would know...I was comparing it to the $500-$600 range because it only costs $279. Now, subsonic....you're saying that it's not below the range of human hearing? I had never heard of the other word before...I have a lot to learn...but I don't think my incorrect statement will convince someone to make a bad decision.
    • Like Like x 1
  20. fuzz092888 Audioholic Warlord

    fuzz092888
    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    7,840
    Likes Received:
    3,833
    Location:
    42.3464° N, 71.0975° W
    Some studies have shown that both trained and untrained listeners prefer accurate sound over inaccurate sound. So you don't need to be an "audiophile" to appreciate better quality. I already gave the definition of subsonic and the correct term, infrasonic. Reread post 4 if you're still confused about the two.

    The black part is somewhat inaccurate. Being able to hit the lower frequencies is only part of the equation. Even for a music only subwoofer (that isn't a budget sub) you generally want a pretty flat response down to 30hz depending on what type of music you listen to. A flat frequency response and low distortion would come before plumbing the depths, but it usually goes hand in hand with a higher quality driver and enclosure. The other issue is that, there are no distortion plots on the sub, so you really don't know what it's doing at what frequencies. I'm willing to concede that the CSX15 probably measures worse than the 12, but I'd still like to see some distortion measurements on the 12 since the CSX15 skyrockets below 50-60hz distortion wise.

    The red part is false. You stated something that the sub is not capable of doing, or at least with much competency.

    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 19, 2014
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  • rbhsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • Emotiva.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
  • CEDIA