Cadence CSX15 Mark II Subwoofer Review

[templemaners]

As you could imagine, its a challenge for us to keep the manufacturers sending products after they realize how in depth and critical our reviews are.

Very true. I don't envy you or your staff trying to balance the need of having a good relationship with different brands and a data driven/hard numbers approach to review. Audioholic reviews carry a lot more weight with me as a consumer because of that more objective approach, and I'm sure a lot of the readers of this website feel the same way.

I prefer getting products from everyone, not just a dozen or so really high quality brands that never fear our testing procedures b/c their products are already well fleshed out prior to us testing them.

This part I don't necessarily agree with. Why would I want to buy something from someone other the dozen or so high quality brands? I'm sure every manufacturer has tested their own products extensively and know how they perform, so when it gets to you guys, they should have a pretty good idea on the measurements even before it comes back for peer review.

Finally, if your product isn't well fleshed out by the time it's up for a review, then you shouldn't be selling it. I have no inclination to spend my money on a product that is a work in progress or needs A, B, and C fixed to be good. Fix that, then come talk to me. If that's what I'm getting (a WIP), I may as well just go DIY (the ultimate work in progress )

Nice work on the review write-up & I hope Cadence takes the feedback, both positive and negative, to improve their product.

 

[GranteedEV]

Nice work on the review write-up & I hope Cadence takes the feedback, both positive and negative, to improve their product.

+1

Us AHers want to recommend this subwoofer. There's clearly some things it does well. But we want to have confidence other people are making a choice we ourselves would be happy with!!

 

[Adam]

As you could imagine, its a challenge for us to keep the manufacturers sending products after they realize how in depth and critical our reviews are. I prefer getting products from everyone, not just a dozen or so really high quality brands that never fear our testing procedures b/c their products are already well fleshed out prior to us testing them.

I know that the industry has realities behind it, but that response concerns me. The first response to the manufacturer was that you don't disclose your ratings to them for review and that you stand by your assessement, but then you change the rating, and this response implies that you are willing to change them afterwards if they disagree because you want them to keep sending free stuff. I get that the ratings are subjective to begin with, but if they mean so little, then maybe don't even use them. Perhaps collect and report the measurements (which few of us have the means and/or motivation to do), write the review, and let others draw their own conclusions.

I'm not trying to be inflammatory. It's just that post really caught my attention.

 

[Matt34]

I agree with Adam. Since Josh started doing the subwoofer testing for AH I think the rating system could go away. Between the Cedia standard and his subjective take we can get a pretty good picture of how the sub does compared to others he has tested and you don't ruffle too many feathers that result in you not getting equipment to test, all because of a rating system. If they want to argue protocol....well that is something entirely different.

I've always been somewhat confused by the star ratings anyways. Are they based on other products in the same price bracket or is it everything that has been tested?

The star rating makes more since for loudspeakers, avr's and the such because I think they are somewhat more objective based products.

Subs are asked to do very little in the spectrum and it's pretty easy (relative to a loudspeaker) for the consumer to see how they perform.

 

[gene]

The first response to the manufacturer was that you don't disclose your ratings to them for review and that you stand by your assessement, but then you change the rating, and this response implies that you are willing to change them afterwards if they disagree because you want them to keep sending free stuff.

Let's be clear about something. We DON'T get FREE stuff. Our review samples either go back or are given away in our contests. I don't mind re-evaluating a final score 1/2pt if a manufacturer makes a good argument for it. Our subjective scorecard isn't set in stone and we are NOT that inflexible.

Clint and I have been thinking about completely eliminating the scorecard since it causes so much frustration with manufacturers and our readers. Honestly I don't understand why people can't spend more time reading the review comments to form an educated opinion and just accept the ratings as our attempt to assign a subjective impression of the product.

I've always been somewhat confused by the star ratings anyways. Are they based on other products in the same price bracket or is it everything that has been tested?

The ratings are all scaled to price category as indicated in each scorecard below:

The scoring below is based on each piece of equipment doing the duty it is designed for. The numbers are weighed heavily with respect to the individual cost of each unit, thus giving a rating roughly equal to:

Performance × Price Factor/Value = Rating

Audioholics.com note: The ratings indicated below are based on subjective listening and objective testing of the product in question. The rating scale is based on performance/value ratio. If you notice better performing products in future reviews that have lower numbers in certain areas, be aware that the value factor is most likely the culprit. Other Audioholics reviewers may rate products solely based on performance, and each reviewer has his/her own system for ratings.

 

[oat07]

This part I don't necessarily agree with. Why would I want to buy something from someone other the dozen or so high quality brands?

I could not disagree with this statement more. We need more reviews from alternative manufacturers. There is currently to much of a 'herd' mentality when it comes to subwoofers (just like plasma TVs). People don't just simply recommend one of the ID sub companies, they praise them like it's a religion. This is troubling because when these companies release products that may not perform well in all categories, this is simply overlooked by many because of the popularity of the brand.

Gene, I appreciate your response to this review. I agree with you raising the score. Why you may ask? Because I have been researching this sub for over a month now and all of the reviews have been positive. Almost all reviewers have been very impressed with the high output levels. Look around and you will find the reviews at your usual places. Also, Sound and Vision also performed a CEA-2010 review of this sub. They were not blown away with the results, but were generally positive because of the price point and overall impressed with the product.

Cadence was running a special for forum members at other sites. If you called and mentioned your forum membership, they would take $100 dollars of. This along with free shipping and cables is a good deal.

And for the record, I decided not to purchase this sub because I found a better deal. I just hate to see the little guys run over on some forums because they are not in the subwoofer private VIP club.

 

[jinjuku]

Honestly I don't understand why people can't spend more time reading the review comments to form an educated opinion and just accept the ratings as our attempt to assign a subjective impression of the product.

As with my customers it is laziness. They want to be spoon fed and then wiped.

I've gotten to the point (sometimes unfortunately) of researching the heck out of even $100 purchases. I have customers that call me up and want me to regurgitate our entire website for them. Folks, that is why we made a website with a ton of information (screen shots, howto videos etc) where the competition DOESN'T.

AH editorial and review content is hands down the best BY far of any audio enthusiast site out there. If you're spending a $1000 take an hour and perform due diligence. Don't be that idiot that buys a $8000 plasma TV, gets burn in, complains about Samsung and never read the user guide where in the first three pages it talks about burn in!.

People are stupid and lazy Gene.

 

[picture_shooter]

 

[CadenceSound]

lol Gene you see what i mean, how many people like to cling to the small rating, instead of actually reading the review..

As for the other poster stating "its barely a subwoofer"...im 100% sure you did not hear nor test either our 12 or 15. Real world application beats out any type of "testing" done on paper. And the CSX subs perform well, its been said time and time again.

I knew someone would chime in with "you only have to spend an extra $200 to get ___"...not everyone has, nor desires to spend the extra $200 to get better rumble for a whole 30second interval in 2hour long movie...

Most of you will have a smaller room, diff room setups, speaker placement, power etc etc etc..this will all greatly affect the output and performance of a sub. So when reading a review, please take the extra 5min to actually read the review, and not skip to the conclusion.

And btw, Gene doesn't get nothing thrown at him for free. The whole reason for us choosing this site is because I am a past member, and I have worked with these guys in the past for tons of personal HT use..

Thanks again for the review.



Also keep in mind, the reviewer

 

[CadenceSound]

As for making holes in the enclosure, all that does is add to the internal vol.

More internal space, will lower the tuning freq of the port, being that it will stay the same length, but be in a bigger enclosure. Other factors come into play, but that is the general idea.

 

[CadenceSound]

I know that the industry has realities behind it, but that response concerns me. The first response to the manufacturer was that you don't disclose your ratings to them for review and that you stand by your assessement, but then you change the rating, and this response implies that you are willing to change them afterwards if they disagree because you want them to keep sending free stuff. I get that the ratings are subjective to begin with, but if they mean so little, then maybe don't even use them. Perhaps collect and report the measurements (which few of us have the means and/or motivation to do), write the review, and let others draw their own conclusions.

I'm not trying to be inflammatory. It's just that post really caught my attention.

We never sent them anything for free.

We never hit their inbox up complaining about the rating.

Gene could have left it and we would have continued to promote and talk about our sub on his site. I have known Gene for a while now, and personally have nothing against, or feel any sort of way because of the rating.

Its just a Subwoofer, we have been in the audio business for over 20 years for home, mobile along with commercial applications. We know a thing or 2 about designing audio equipment and we will continue to do so.

 

[Adam]

We never sent them anything for free.

We never hit their inbox up complaining about the rating.

Gene could have left it and we would have continued to promote and talk about our sub on his site. I have known Gene for a while now, and personally have nothing against, or feel any sort of way because of the rating.

Its just a Subwoofer, we have been in the audio business for over 20 years for home, mobile along with commercial applications. We know a thing or 2 about designing audio equipment and we will continue to do so.

Hi. My post was not intended as an insult to either Gene or to you, so I apologize if either took it that way. Gene's post last night did concern me, though, as it seemed to show a shift due to you disagreeing (and I'm not saying complaining - I'm saying disagreeing). If he's willing to change a score because you make a good point, which I think is reasonable and fair, then the earlier post about intentionally not letting you know the score before it's posted doesn't make much sense to me. I think either keep the scores unrelated the manufacturer's opinion or work it out before it's posted. I don't care either way. I'm not going to buy or not buy your product based upon the stars on AH.

As for the "free" part, I didn't say that he gets to keep it - but I am assuming that AH wasn't paying to receive the gear. Do they paying shipping, usage fee, restocking, or pay for the product when it's part of a giveaway? If not, then they get to evaluate a product for free, post data on their website which generates site traffic, which creates rationale for collecting fees from advertisers, and which brings people into the forum for discussion.

I'm not judging or bashing this - I'm not willing to go spend thousands of dollars on product and staff, spend time evaluating something, put up my own funds for a website, and post things hoping that it's useful. However, "pursuing the truth" loses traction when it's perceived as being influenced by manufacturers trying to sell gear (like other sites are accused of doing). I pointed out a post that could be taken that way because I really like this site and I do care about how it's perceived.

 

[CadenceSound]

However, "pursuing the truth" loses traction when it's perceived as being influenced by manufacturers trying to sell gear (like other sites are accused of doing). I pointed out a post that could be taken that way because I really like this site and I do care about how it's perceived.

Gene can tell you, we really do not "push" our products on this site. His choice to bump our rating had nothing to do with our sales, his wallet or the site.

And truth in the audio world? thats funny lol...Audio is all personal preference and half the time most people can not tell speaker A from B.

 

[gene]

As for the "free" part, I didn't say that he gets to keep it - but I am assuming that AH wasn't paying to receive the gear. Do they paying shipping, usage fee, restocking, or pay for the product when it's part of a giveaway? If not, then they get to evaluate a product for free, post data on their website which generates site traffic, which creates rationale for collecting fees from advertisers, and which brings people into the forum for discussion.

I'm not judging or bashing this - I'm not willing to go spend thousands of dollars on product and staff, spend time evaluating something, put up my own funds for a website, and post things hoping that it's useful. However, "pursuing the truth" loses traction when it's perceived as being influenced by manufacturers trying to sell gear (like other sites are accused of doing). I pointed out a post that could be taken that way because I really like this site and I do care about how it's perceived.

You still seem to imply "free". Nothing is FREE. Publishing reviews is very costly for me. Not only do I have to pay our reviewers a FEE to review a product but I also have to pay other staff members to post the product review. There are no guarantees we will generate advertising revenue from the companies whose products we review or the readers clicking our banners. It also costs me money to pay staff to post and maintain our contests. It costs money to host this site.

We really need to move this thread forward discussing the product at hand as this topic is starting to really vex me. We put forth great effort and expense to produce the highest quality content possible. I could have taken the easy route years ago by posting purely positive subjective reviewers or just hosting a forum with no content and sit back collecting ad revenue. The type of reporting we do isn't making any of us rich but we are able to make a decent enough living to pursue our Audioholic passion.

 

[its phillip]

Back to the product - I have to say this review really turned me off from the sub. I'd definitely go with a PA-150 over the CSX-15 Mk.2 for the money (or maybe the Klipsch RW-12d considering how frequently it goes on sale at newegg, although there is not an equally detailed review available for it).

If they make some improvements and come out with a Mark III, I'd be interested in seeing a review of that

 

[CadenceSound]

Lets all end this with a brew..

If the review makes you want to look else where, then by all means go right ahead. We know for a fact if you gave our sub a try, you will enjoy it.

To each his own.​

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

After reading the review I don't agree that the original 2.5 rating should be raised to 3.0 just because the manufacturer didn't like it. Sorry but that's how I feel. This sub barely even classifies as a "subwoofer". I would like to see it paired up against my HSU MBM-12 though. Shoot, at the same price it might be a good choice if the rumble filter was set to prevent all that nasty distortion below 50hz!!!

Inwas really hoping to see better results!!! Maybe the MKIII will have some merit!

I agree 100%. Stick by your guns and say what you think, regardless of what the manufacturer says. If they don't like it, put out a better product, plain and simple.

Also, what has to happen for a sub to get a 1 in Bass Extension? It has to do worse than that? Give me a break.

To have that level of performance from a ported 15" sub is beyond weak. I hope they have a MKIII version coming sooner rather than later.

But, guys, guys, we're all only humans. And humans do make mistakes. Perhaps the grader meant to say "3.0", but it came out as "2.5".

I recall debating with my professors about my exams scores back in my days at my University. And I deserved every point back damn it!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Audio is all personal preference and half the time most people can not tell speaker A from B.

I agree with that.

Even if they can tell the difference, a lot of times it's pretty tough. But, perhaps some folks are more observant than others.

 

[Adam]

Lets all end this with a brew..

Agreed!

Dang, now I'm thirsty.

 

[j_garcia]

After reading the review I don't agree that the original 2.5 rating should be raised to 3.0 just because the manufacturer didn't like it. Sorry but that's how I feel. This sub barely even classifies as a "subwoofer". I would like to see it paired up against my HSU MBM-12 though. Shoot, at the same price it might be a good choice if the rumble filter was set to prevent all that nasty distortion below 50hz!!!

Inwas really hoping to see better results!!! Maybe the MKIII will have some merit!

Nobody ever said these subs dug deep. It has been clearly stated in previous reviews that the Cadence subs sound good, have good output, but NEITHER the 12 or the 15 will get you below 25Hz. Compared to other subs in the CSX-12 MkII's price range though, not many that I've heard is comparable and pretty much standard fare for the $400 and under market is 25Hz. I haven't heard the CSX-15 MkII, but looking at the specs compared to the 12, it is going to sound similar with more output but not extend lower. I have heard the MkI in my own setup and felt it was good, not great. The improvements on the 12 were considerable from the MkI version, which is why I don't doubt that the 15 is a good sub. It isn't a $1500 sub, so nobody should be expecting it to shake the house to the foundation or vibrate teeth out of your skull. I felt the 12 was a good product at a reasonable price; if I didn't think so, I would say I didn't think it was.

As for the whole "free/there is no free" review thing, I don't really see anyone mentioning this about ANY other product reviewed by AH, so there's really no reason to start now.