Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Electrodynamic" data-source="post: 4736699" data-attributes="member: 548723">Why would you assume that both drivers would sound very similar?&nbsp; Because they&#039;re both XBL^2?&nbsp; The two drivers couldn&#039;t be more different from one another besides the fact that they use a BL optimized motor.&nbsp; One uses a coil that&#039;s over twice as tall (with higher measured and inherent inductance), a compliance that&#039;s considerably stiffer, a different cone, different surround, and completely different set of end goals and parameters.&nbsp; The two drivers can and/or will sound different from one another.The CSS drivers are nice units and I&#039;ll be happy to put the new Mag up against them in the SQ realm.&nbsp; When production hits I&#039;m sure someone will buy a Mag that already has a CSS driver and they&#039;ll do a comparisson.&nbsp; If not, I&#039;m sure Jim will be willing to do a listening test on a CSS and give his feedback.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Electrodynamic, post: 4736699, member: 548723"] Why would you assume that both drivers would sound very similar? Because they're both XBL^2? The two drivers couldn't be more different from one another besides the fact that they use a BL optimized motor. One uses a coil that's over twice as tall (with higher measured and inherent inductance), a compliance that's considerably stiffer, a different cone, different surround, and completely different set of end goals and parameters. The two drivers can and/or will sound different from one another. The CSS drivers are nice units and I'll be happy to put the new Mag up against them in the SQ realm. When production hits I'm sure someone will buy a Mag that already has a CSS driver and they'll do a comparisson. If not, I'm sure Jim will be willing to do a listening test on a CSS and give his feedback. [/QUOTE]

Verification