I would like to agree with Mark and a few others that while CEA-2010 output data is important it is only one limited metric and it does not give the whole picture. While IMHO the headroom limits of a system are one of the key indicators of performance since it typically gives information about how well the system tracks large dynamic transients, how deep the useful extension is, response shape when driven to the limit, etc...There is far more to a good system design than putting up big numbers. For example CEA-2010 is supposed to be maximum clean output but in fact a lot of systems sound obviously distressed or even bad while still passing CEA-2010 due to mechanical noises, rattles, port noise etc. IOW I would not call them clean by any means. Other systems will fail a frequency band because of a slight amount of harmonic distortion in the final bandwidth amounting to only a few % and still sounding perfectly acceptable to the ear. CEA-2010 is not perfect. It is not a guarantee of acceptable sound at the levels measured. 2 units may have similar distortion levels and output but one may sound far cleaner to the ear. Also do not make the mistake of thinking that the CEA-2010 output is the maximum output. Sometimes it is sometimes it is not. Typically at 40Hz and above it will be maximum output or close but in the deep bass especially it may not be. Some systems will easily put out an additional 6dB over the CEA-2010 measurements due to the distortion profile. I typically try to list these absolute maximum output levels as well in the individual CEA-2010 chart for each system. This is just the CEA-2010 test. Each of the other measurements also have things that they can and cannot tell you about the system. There is far more to a good sub than just putting up big CEA-2010 burst numbers. Besides the other measurements there are also all of the intangibles like customer service, finishing, build quality, warranty period, price and aspects of the sound that may not show up in the typical measurements.
