# CSS Trio8 8" midbass/subwoofer review



## SteveLPfreak (Sep 26, 2005)

I haven't installed these drivers in my car but I got one of the guys I work with to install them for listening/measurement tests. He had the Peerless SLS8's installed. Powering them with 100wrms each @ 8 ohms. Since I run the SLS as well, many of my remarks will be compared with the Peerless SLS8's.

Pros:
-Very good build quality
- Fairly shallow
- Good low-end

Cons:
- Poor sensitivity
- Heavy
- Response not very good above 250Hz

Very similar in sound to the SLS (from 60Hz to 200Hz). If you are looking for a 8" driver in the doors to use without subs, these might fit your needs. Good sounding driver but I couldn't tell any difference in sq between the Trio8's and the SLS (from 60Hz - 200Hz). Low end is much better with the Trio8's. The Trio8's (like the SLS8's, IMO) start to sound a little muddy above 200Hz or so. Just not enough definition and clarity above 200 -250Hz. Sensitivity, however, was noticeably worse with the Trio8's. It takes more power to reach a suitably loud level with the Trio8's. Sensitivity is rated at 84dB/w/m. That seems a little high. I haven't tried more than 150wrms on the drivers so I'm still curious to see just how loud they might get with more power.

Bottom line (after a few hours of listening) - if you are looking for a midbass driver (60Hz - 200Hz), it is still tough to beat the SLS @ ~$50/driver. If you are looking for 8" subwoofer (below 60Hz) in the door, the Trio8 may be the driver for you.

DISCLAIMER: I will spend more time with these drivers in the future. Opinions may change. Maybe with more power applied?

I forgot to add that these will rattle the crap outta your doors in subwoofer mode (below 60Hz) so you'll have to really shore up your doors if you plan on using these for low freq. reproduction.


----------



## Electrodynamic (Nov 27, 2007)

Thanks for the review. I was curious as to how they performed.


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

Great comments!
Good to get some input on these. I think you just saved me some money.


----------



## SteveLPfreak (Sep 26, 2005)

shinjohn said:


> Great comments!
> Good to get some input on these. I think you just saved me some money.


Like most drivers, this one seems application dependent. I like the Trio8's but the low sensitivity and the price of the SLS8's just make the SLS8's more attractive as a midbass.

Again, for those wanting to use 8's in the door and go subless, this is may be your ticket.


----------



## fredridge (Jan 17, 2007)

How low were you able to cross them and get them to play clean? or was the door not sealed well enough?


----------



## SteveLPfreak (Sep 26, 2005)

Door was sealed pretty well. Ask my buddy (whose car we were using) and he'll tell you the doors are 100% sealed with ensolite and Brown Bread.

We crossed them as low as 50Hz and they played clean, just not very loud but we never tested with more than 100wrms We ALWAYS had a subsonic filter ON during testing, set at 20Hz with a 18dB/oct. rolloff.


----------



## Electrodynamic (Nov 27, 2007)

I think you hit the nail on the head when it comes to the applications and performance objectives. For midbass the Peerless is going to be hard to beat when it comes to $/performance. But for the guys who are running 250 watts+ on their mids and are running them down to 30 Hz or lower the CSS driver would be the more applicable driver.


----------



## shinjohn (Feb 8, 2006)

SteveLPfreak said:


> Like most drivers, this one seems application dependent. I like the Trio8's but the low sensitivity and the price of the SLS8's just make the SLS8's more attractive as a midbass.
> 
> Again, for those wanting to use 8's in the door and go subless, this is may be your ticket.


My only caution is that getting a door prepped well enough to work for an SLS is hard enough as it is. I want to see someone do a really solid install with a pair of these Trios!


----------



## DS-21 (Apr 16, 2005)

Thanks for the review. Interesting about the comparative sensitivity (though expected) and HF response. The graphs for the Trio8 show a good bit more HF extension than the SLS8. I wonder if that is in fact so. Guess I will find out soon enough...


----------



## SteveLPfreak (Sep 26, 2005)

I had expected better high freq. response and better sensitivity. It is spec'd at 84 but I'm guessing it may be closer to 80 dB/w/m than 84. 

Don't get me wrong, the Trio8's are very nice drivers.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

I've talked to Dan Wiggins (the XBL guy) quite a bit in the past. I know he's had issues with people blowing up his drivers, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the power ratings on these are conservative. It looks very well built.

The XBL drivers are often optimized to play lower, but require more power. For example, an XBL ten can often play as low as a conventional 12, but will require more power to get there.

So keep that in mind when you compare this with the Peerless. The Peerless might have higher sensitivity, but the Trio8 is going to trump it at high power, because the trio8 has dramatically higher excursion.

This is a really interesting woofer. It's probably the most exciting 8" subwoofer to come along since TC Sounds blew up.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

SteveLPfreak said:


> I had expected better high freq. response and better sensitivity. It is spec'd at 84 but I'm guessing it may be closer to 80 dB/w/m than 84.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, the Trio8's are very nice drivers.


Low efficiency woofers generally have limited bandwidth, and high efficiency drivers typically have greater bandwidth. It's a trade off.

Imagine that you start with an eight inch woofer, with a tiny motor. Because the motor is tiny, there's not a lot of copper in the voice coil windings. Unfortunately the QES is too high (because the motor is too small) and the woofer is boomy.

So you make the woofer bigger, and now the QES is where you want it. But now there's a ton of copper in the voice coil, and your high end is rolled off because of it.

It's all a series of trade offs.


----------



## SteveLPfreak (Sep 26, 2005)

Patrick Bateman said:


> Low efficiency woofers generally have limited bandwidth, and high efficiency drivers typically have greater bandwidth. It's a trade off.
> 
> Imagine that you start with an eight inch woofer, with a tiny motor. Because the motor is tiny, there's not a lot of copper in the voice coil windings. Unfortunately the QES is too high (because the motor is too small) and the woofer is boomy.
> 
> ...



You are correct and I agree. I would like to add that the Trio does indeed seem capable above 200Hz. My initial tests sounded muddy above 200Hz but that seems to be due to a EQ setting. Once flattened out, the Trios sounded smooth till 500Hz, the hightest freq. we tested to.

Good drivers.


----------



## squeak9798 (Apr 20, 2005)

SteveLPfreak said:


> You are correct and I agree. I would like to add that the Trio does indeed seem capable above 200Hz. My initial tests sounded muddy above 200Hz but that seems to be due to a EQ setting. Once flattened out, the Trios sounded smooth till 500Hz, the hightest freq. we tested to.
> 
> Good drivers.


That's great to hear.

I've been debating on trying these out 2-way with horns. 500hz would get 'em in the ballpark 

Also FWIW CSS recommended a 500hz and lower for these drivers (until they receive more user feedback).


----------

