Thiel Owners

I know John Ellison over on audio asylum uses the parasound A21 with his 3.7s.  It's a really powerful amp for $2,500.

https://db.audioasylum.com/mhtml/m.html?forum=speakers&n=361836&highlight=thiel+3+7&r=&a...

According to audioadvisor specs the JC5 has a max of 90 amps/channel.  I tend to look at the size of the transformer and it has 1.7kva which is pretty darn huge.   

https://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=PAHAJC5

If I remember correctly voltage (v) = current(I) times resistance (r).  Watts equal volts(v) times amps(I).  That means that if an amp ever actually dumped 90 amps into a 4 ohm load it would be delivering 32,400 watts.  That's 43 horsepower.  It must be able to deliver that for a VERY short period of time or there's some other factor I don't know about.  I was a math major but I've never spent time trying to understand the numbers with this stuff and it's been a long time since I did any non-trivial math.  Is it phase angle related?

i=90
r=4

v = ir = 360

w = 360*90 = 32,400

1hp = 746 watts.

so, 90 amps into 4 ohms is 43.43 hp.

I'm listening to Bill Evans Piano Player after having listened to CD10 of the Bach Recordings box set I got last year.  There's certainly an ember alive here.  I think of high end audio as a sort of musical tourism.  We can hear an incredible variety of music reproduced fantastically well without going anywhere.  It's a luxury that most people don't appreciate.  Based on what I've read, I believe Thiel intended to give people of modest means the ability to experience this.  I appreciate it and enjoy it immensely.

@Tomthiel, I'm curious about the nature of your commune.  I spent much of my childhood in a very religious commune and my parents still live there.  From what I've read I think communes were fairly common for a while but I don't have any perspective.  Was your commune religious?  How long did it last?  

This situation is what makes people watching in audio so amusing.  There is real ambiguity in that there are differences that can be heard but not easily measured.  There are also charlatans taking advantage of this by making BS claims and trying to make money off of them.  There is no getting around the fact that in order to possibly perceive new things you risk being fooled, fooling yourself, appearing stupid, etc.  It's inherently uncomfortable.  Nobody can try everything so you have to make judgement calls based on incomplete and/or false information.  It's very messy.  

@blue222 - You're asking a lot.  I'm thinking your best bet is to buy a plain power amplifier and run your computer headphone out to it using RCA cables and an adapter.  

This and the comparable items are decent options I think.  Nuforce is supposed to be great for the money and is close to your price point.  The Dayton amp in the comparables below for 199 has been around forever so I think it must be a solid value.  For <300 I don't think you're going to find anything with fairly high power and decent sound.  Maybe if you go used.  I think you could find something that will be fine at low to moderate volume.  
https://www.amazon.com/NuForce-STA120-170watt-250watt-Stereo/dp/B010BJJ72Q

I'm with prof on cables.  In my experience they make such a small difference compared to other things that I've always considered them of negligible interest.  I don't really consider myself an audiophile and I'm at a very unaudiophile stage of life with two small children.  I find speakers make the biggest difference, having enough power makes a big difference, the room makes a big difference, the preamp makes a big difference, DAC makes a difference.  

Room treatments make huge, easily measured and easily heard differences.  I've got a digital EQ hooked up to the sub in one system and that makes a very noticeable difference.  I have a measurement mic and I found my peaks, knocked them down at most 4db and it's still a huge improvement.  I've also done this in the past with bass traps and various foam absorbers when I had my system in the basement.

I'm not someone who believes cables make no difference but I don't believe that the high end cable market is primarily about improving performance.  I think it's mostly tone controls and accessorizing, comparable to putting a bunch of decorations on a vehicle or something.  Power cords are, to me, the most egregious example of this.  You can spend thousands on a cord for a component that takes a few watts.  How can this make sense when you could just make the component battery powered and disconnect from the grid entirely?  Wouldn't high end manufacturers be offering battery powered components or, at the very least, have an option to feed the component with DC from a far better power source than AC?  There are hardly any battery powered sources or preamps out there.  

@tom, the crossover is much steeper but the ATC mid is crossed over at 380 while the CS2.4 is at 800.  Since it was created as a pro driver it was made for loud volume, reliability, temperature stability.

My ATC 110s have a 3" midrange that will play incredibly loudly.  it's the same midrange that is in the SCM 300 ASL that will do 121 db continuously.  I doubt any Wilson product can touch that.  The crossover to the woofer is 380hz.  The midrange also has extremely low distortion.  

I decided I liked small midranges a while ago and I think the main reason is that they don't beam.  That means the off axis response is much closer to the on axis response.  Reflected sound will not be radically different from what comes directly from the drivers.  This means the speaker will sound good in a variety of rooms.  This is one of the first things I noticed about my Thiel 2 2s.  I got them for a living room system that was far from acoustically ideal and they were great.  The first order crossover means that if you walk right up to them they have wild response fluctuations due to the driver interactions but the overall sound in the room was immensely enjoyable.  Sit back in a good spot and get a great audiophile experience.  Turn them on while you're doing other things around the house and get a great casual listening experience.  

http://atcloudspeakers.co.uk/hi-fi/loudspeakers/tower-series/scm300aslt/

http://studio-hifi.com/images/ATC75-150S_JeffBagby.pdf
"As you can see the nonlinear distortion is extremely low, with 3rd order in the neighborhood of -70dB at my low crossover point. These levels are very close to the noise floor in my room and I would consider this to be in the state-of-the-art range for midrange distortion. "

would I be right in saying that phase coherence means that the drivers are in phase with each other but not necessarily with the source?  So if two drivers are 50 degrees out of phase with the source signal at a particular frequency we say they're phase coherent but not time coherent?

The ATC actives use some kind of active phase compensation to align the drivers at the crossover frequencies.  I don't think they go to the trouble Thiel did to keep time alignment throughout.  What big active ATCs have that little else can match is massive dynamics.  I think there is a dynamic linearity as well that makes them very revealing in a way other speakers can't match.  This ability lends a different type of realism that would probably be impossible for first order speakers to achieve.  ATC believes in making the drivers as well as possible so the crossover doesn't have to be complex.  They don't image like Thiels and they don't sound near as lively at low volumes.  I consider my Thiel/ATC systems to be quite complementary.

They describe the active crossover as "380Hz and 3.5kHz, 4th order, critically damped with phase compensation".  They discuss phase response in their literature but don't give specifics.  They're clearly in favor of linear phase response and it's a design goal.  "An ideal speaker system should have phase response linear with frequency, which in simple terms means that all frequencies produced by the driver reach the listener’s ear at the same time. "


http://www.transaudiogroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/ATC_Engineering_Goals_and_Approaches.pdf

To me the Thiel sound is the sound that makes me forget about the sound.  There's nothing about it that bothers me.  I don't understand why.  Maybe it's because of the first order phase correct crossover.  There definitely aren't any frequency response problems that bother me.  Everything I've had in the past had problems that bothered me.  Peaky tweeters, flabby bass, overly lean bass.  Other, difficult to describe things as well.  Whatever they were caused by I don't have any of it with the Thiels.  I can sit back and relax.  

The type of company it was definitely appeals to my personality as well.  I'm not a fan of conspicuous consumption or the feeling that I have something special that hardly anybody else can afford.  

It is kind of a tragedy that the 2.7/3.7 coax isn't being produced any more.  I've thought about it and it seems the theoretical ideal would be if Vandersteen would buy the Thiel name and produce a few models.  Since it's a first order company as well the expertise would be there and the different house sound would maybe take them out of direct competition with each other.  I know the Tyler Acoustics guy is in KY.  He's a box builder, he could probably replicate any of the older Thiel boxes.  Not sure about the 2.7/3.7.  I'm just dreaming.

@andy2, I've been wondering that myself.  For those of us who mostly use digital playback I think the ultimate setup will use digital/software crossovers that can be switched to whatever you want.  Heck, my 12 year old Velodyne sub has this option.  You can choose any slope from 6 to 48db/octave.  There is a built in digital equalizer, etc.  They aren't the only ones to have done this.  DEQX is still around and does everything digitally.  I don't think they provide the option for phase correct 6db crossovers right now but I'm pretty sure they could if they wanted to.  It's just software.

As I've said in the past, I use a pair of Cambridge 840s with my 3.7s and I think they're completely adequate, at least at the moderate volumes I listen at. You'd pay in the 3-4k range for a pair. I know a guy who hangs around on audioasylum uses a $2,500 parasound a21 on his 3.7s and has for a while. I tend to think that amps are a good place to make a compromise on price. As long as they have enough power the differences tend to be small compared to speakers. I think the preamp makes a significantly bigger difference overall.  The Benchmark looks like it'd probably do fine with most Thiels, although it's pretty small compared to your pair of Classe amps. I'd be interested to know how a bridged pair would do with the low impedance.

I assume going forward people building Thiel systems will be the type who are more interested in getting great sound for the money than in big names or eye candy.  I get more satisfaction from knowing I got great performance for a moderate amount of money  I've got around 16k in my system and it's so good I have no interest in messing with it.  Benchmark DAC2, Bryston BP26, Cambridge 840 x2, Thiel 3.7, Infinity Intermezzo 1.2 sub.  The electronics definitely won't win a beauty contest but they perform great.  

@prof, pre-concentric driver Thiels have that same phase cancellation effect.  If you're fairly close to them and move your head around vertically you'll notice huge shifts in sound.  I still love my 2 2s, though.  It's hard for me to imagine anybody not.  You never know what some people will think, though.  I saw a thread where some people were saying they're bright.  They're nothing of the sort.  I would say they're very close to perfectly balanced but if they're anything they're maybe just slightly warm.  

I find it interesting to explore places I used to live or used to spend time at on Google maps.  I figure that old farmhouse must've been real close to here and judging by the look of the houses there now it might still be standing.  Look familiar?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/602+S+Broadway+St,+Georgetown,+KY+40324/@38.2038309,-84.5603159,3a...

@prof, that is fun reading.  I definitely agree that the 3.7s are not exceptionally hard to drive.  They appreciate some power but I don't believe you need a megabuck amp to get a lot out of them.  Maybe a huge solid state amp would make a little difference but I'd be surprised if it was big.  My pedestrian amps sound great to me.  The punch is great, bass has great texture, they seem extremely transparent top to bottom.  The transients are so sharp that on some recordings they're jarring and exhausting.  I've been thinking about digging out my Musical Fidelity tube buffer to soften things a little bit on recordings that shouldn't be heard too clearly.

@tomthiel, my understanding is that the reduction in shrinkage is mainly due to the fiber.  Is that correct?  I've been wanting to build a madisound kit and make the baffle out of concrete.  I have the concrete, a bag of glass fiber and some plasticizer.  I went so far as to create the cutouts for the drivers.  I've got little kids so what would take a normal person a weekend will take me a year if I'm lucky.  I've been buying most of the tools I'll need slowly.  Main problem is when I have the time I don't have the energy and vice versa.  

I have an MCS-1 and 2 2s.  I believe the MCS-1 has the same mid/tweeter as the 2.3.  I used to use the MCS-1 when I had room for a 5.1 home theater in my basement.  My impression after having lived with both for a while is that I preferred the sound of the 2 2.  I never did a careful comparison or anything so don't take this too seriously.  I would guess this is due to the driver material.  I believe the MCS1 uses some kind of ceramic coat on aluminum.  I had a couple of pairs of infinity speakers in the past that used the same basic thing I think and I never thought they had low level resolution like paper does.  I'm guessing that this problem was solved on the 2.4s or they wouldn't have so many fans.  

@prof,I’d be interested in what is the best way to brace a cabinet as well. I believe Merlin embedded some metal bars in the baffle for this purpose. I’d think something that was deeper than it was wide would be more effective at combatting cabinet wall flex. I also wondered about ceramic or porcelain floor tiles. They’re incredibly stiff and strong (and cheap). Would something like that attached to the inside of an MDF cabinet be better than aluminum?

I'd guess the reason the 2.7 didn't get a Stereophile review was because Wes Phillips had stopped writing.  He reviewed the 3.7 and I think bought them.  He reviewed a lot of Thiels over the years.  I think by the time the 2.7s came out he was in poor health.  He died a couple of years ago.

The Thiel TM3 stand mount and the aurora portable speakers have been on Amazon for a long time.  Overpriced, though.  No reviews on any of them so I don't think anybody is buying.  If they really have a big inventory of all of the newer Thiel lines I'd bet those will be real bargains at some point.  Overpriced at 5k is probably great at $1,000.  It's been a while since a lot of gear ended up on the market at crazy low prices.  Maybe not since Tweeter closed.  

I'm curious about the ultimate performance speaker box.  There's no way I'd ever spend 50k or more on a pair of speakers but I wonder if there are other, far cheaper ways to build the ultimate box out of readily available materials.  There was a company that made their boxes out of layers stacked on top of each other with gaskets in between.  The material used was some sort of epoxy I think.  There were rods that ran from top to bottom that held it together and were screwed tight.  It seems like something along those lines could be made fairly easily and the pieces could be made as thick as necessary to control vibrations.  Heck, you could build the baffle and then make the rest of the box out of bricks.  Put a platform with wheels on the floor and hire a mason to build the rest to spec.  It could be curved or whatever shape you want.  There'd certainly be no low frequency vibration there and higher frequencies could be managed fairly easily I'd think.  Might end up looking really cool too.  It wouldn't be very portable but might very well achieve ultimate performance.  I have too much stuff floating around in my head and not enough time to play.

I think having products for home theater and also some very expensive, high margin products is a good idea.  Home theater especially should be active and the crossovers should be digital.  that would allow for user selectable crossover slopes which would be cool.  You want to watch an action movie, select 4th order and crank it up.  For drama you bump it down to 1st order for maximum realism.  There would need to be preprogrammed EQ overlays of the crossover to handle driver response imperfections.  Keep the traditional Thiel line for people who prefer analog or who already have electronics and just need speakers.  I definitely agree that there were some directions the company could've been taken that would have had a far greater chance of success than trying to charge 6k for 3k worth of PSB speakers.  

I think I'm ready to dive in and attempt to build a speaker box for a kit.  I'm planning on buying the Zaph|Audio SR71 kit from Madisound.  What I want to try is make the back and sides out of strips of 3/4" mdf.  They will stack on top of each other in the corners, leaving horizontal 3/4" gaps along the flat parts of the box.  I'll drill holes in the corners through all of the boards and run 1/4" threaded rod to hold them in place.  The sides and back will connect with an effective hinge at this point so I can lay the whole thing out flat and pour concrete in the gaps.  That will result in the walls being half concrete and half mdf.  I'll hold it together by tightening bolts to the threaded rod running through the corners and also through the sides in places.  It's hard to explain and I can't find an illustrative picture.  Ultimately I hope to have no wall flex typical of mdf, minimal high frequency ringing from the concrete, reasonable weight, and low materials cost.  This is my first try so we'll see how I do.  

I'm wondering if there are cases where what sounds like an amp problem is actually a preamp problem or impedence mismatch problem.  I'm using Bryston preamps in both of my systems.  In both cases I've run the systems with only a volume controlled DAC and with the DAC feeding a Bryston pre.  In both cases adding the preamp made more of a difference in definition than I thought it should.  This is especially true if running the amps from one set of outputs and a sub from another.  I've done this twice with different amps and speakers and both times I found the bass to lack definition from just the dac.  The problem cleared right up when I added a preamp.  It had sounded pretty much the same as an underpowered amp but that wasn't the problem.  I'm guessing the preamps are providing significantly more current and that can make a big difference in some situations. 

@last_lemming I haven't found Thiels to be particularly power hungry.  I'm sure some are but some definitely aren't.  I've had my 2 2s hooked up to very moderate amps and they've sounded great.  

@anthonymoody I’ve got a couple of HT receivers that I’ve used to drive various speakers with and I thought they did fine. One is a Yamaha, one a Pioneer Elite. Both had list prices around $900. Receivers, at least some of them, have come a long way and many sound very good and do a pretty good job of delivering adequate power. I have my Thiel 2 2s hooked up to the Yamaha and I think that system sounds great. It’s in the living room and mostly used for kid’s shows these days but before kids I used it in my old living room and it was a great little system. I worry that people starting out would get the impression that you can’t get a passable system for less than 10k when I think you can do pretty darn well for a lot less. I got the Thiels used in 2010 for $1,000 and the receiver off the return/open box rack at Best Buy for $300. It’s amazing to me how well you can do for little money.

I'd guess the 2.4 is the best in some ways.  I've never heard them but it's the last Jim Thiel designed 3-way with an 8" woofer.  I don't know if there's any hard and fast rule but there are definitely advantages to not having huge jumps in driver size.  The 2 series might be an ideal design for a 3-way intended for moderate volume listening.  

@thielrules, I measured my 3.7s with a single Cambridge 840w because I felt the bass was lacking.  I did it using test tones and my Behringer ultracurve and measurement mic.  The weak bass didn't show up in the measurements as it measured fine.  I bought a second identical amp to run bridged mono and the bass improved significantly.  The power went from 350 watts/channel into 4 ohms to 800.  The difference wasn't in the volume of the bass but in transients and texture.  As far as recordings go I'd find some with sustained, textured bass and also some with deep and punchy bass.  

This is Edgar Meyer playing his bass with a bow.  Lots of texture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcXQcsAOx0I&list=RDQcXQcsAOx0I&start_radio=1

Lots of sustained synth in this silly and possibly creepy eighties music video from Queen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeL25_Ee5A0

@prof, I completely agree that Thiels aren't remotely thin, bright or harsh.  My experience is mainly with the 2 2 and 3.7.  From what I've read both are on the warm side of the average Thiel.  That said, I can't imagine anyone finding either of them bright.  They're both very well balanced.  I find the 2 2 to be slightly warm and the 3.7 to be too close to call.  I think any deviation from neutral can be reversed by raising or lowering your seat a little.  I've powered the 2 2s with a Yamaha HT receiver and a B&K st202.  They aren't bright.  Anybody who says they are likes really rolled off highs or has some other axe to grind.  I haven't heard the 3.7s sound bright but I have heard them sound a little bit indistinct and soft in the bass.  That was remedied by doubling the power.  With enough power it's hard for me to imagine anyone finding significant fault with them.  They're fantastic all around performers. 

@tomthiel - happy birthday.  I'm certainly happy you're here.  There aren't a lot of places for audio enthusiasts to get knowledgeable opinions from someone who doesn't need to be biased because their livelihood is wrapped up in selling something.  

@beetle - I'm not sure if the phase coherence is the difference either.  I've wondered if the biggest difference isn't that designers who believe that everything makes a difference are forever listening for changes in sound due to small changes in materials or design.  Even if they were wrong about some factor making a difference their belief could lead to them developing a better ear and being very careful about a wider variety of factors.  I'd expect that to ultimately lead to better products.  I know Charles Hansen of Ayre was like that.  He believed that everything made a difference.  I don't really believe it's possible that everything he believed was true but I'd guess that his beliefs led him to be a more careful and open minded designer.  Regardless of the minute details of what does and doesn't make a difference in amp design, it seems everyone agrees the end products were great.

One speaker that is readily available and is most likely much more phase correct than average is Martin Logan electrostats.  I don't know if anyone has mentioned them but the panel typically only has a single crossover point to the woofers and that is at a fairly low frequency.  I doubt the crossover is first order but everything above that point would be coherent.  They're available at a lot of Best Buys, they're probably among the most available brands out there.  

Pair of 2.7s in Chicago.  I'm surprised how much they're asking.  Maybe there's more demand than supply. 

http://audioconsultants.com/equipment-Thiel-CS27-7812

My 3.7s are 41 and 42 I think.  The SNs look to have been put on with a sharpie and are almost completely worn off.  I'm guessing they were the original demo models from audio consultants here in Chicago.  I assume they were part of the first production run.  

Tom is right about the value here.  It's one of the reasons I have such a dim view of audiophiles in general.  They'll spend ridiculous amounts of money for stuff that simply doesn't perform that well.  Thiels are a bargain at MSRP and they historically haven't held value that well so you can get an obscene bargain for the performance if you buy used.  When I bought used 2 2s it really opened my eyes to this.  They replaced a pair of 3k msrp speakers from a larger company in a second system.  They were so obviously, laughably superior that I don't think there's a single person on earth that wouldn't have recognized it.  It took a while for me to accept it but I eventually concluded that the relationship between price and performance is extremely weak.  I don't know what "audiophiles" want but it's clearly not the truth.  

Does anyone know of an active, dsp, phase correct/coherent speaker?  I haven't heard of one.  From what I've seen the dsp speakers use extremely steep slopes to get near perfect frequency response and low distortion.  People still don't like them.  I watched the NHT Xd system come to market and fail miserably 10+ years ago.  I asked a sales guy about a set I saw pushed aside in a store after the hype had died down and he just said they weren't good for the money.  Maybe the complex Thiel crossover is what we should be replicating digitally.  It might still take a ton of work to get right but once optimized wouldn't have the low impedance and high parts cost problems.  

3.7s in Des Plaines.  Just minutes away.  If only I had an excuse.

I've run bridged mono and vertical biamp and I've gotten the vague impression that I prefer bridged mono.  I think the high gain contributes to dynamics.  It seems livelier.  I'm looking forward to reading how people here feel after trying both.  

Certainly running demanding speakers can cause amps to run hotter and that may shorten the life of the amp. Just another reason to run two amps bridged mono or vertical biamp. You double the available power and you also double the heat sinking. If you play at the same volume you would with a single amp you should ameliorate the heat problem significantly. My moderate current, fairly inexpensive amps will put out 200/400/800 into 8/4/2 ohms when run bridged mono. They’ll put a whole lot more than 200 into 8 ohms but I’m not looking to play loudly enough for the inability to double from 500 to 1000 watts to become a problem. They’ve been operating flawlessly for around 7 years now.

pair of 3.5s with the EQ in Chicago suburb $550.

https://chicago.craigslist.org/chc/ele/d/skokie-thiel-cs35-coherent-source/6786015093.html

I'm feeling extra lucky to have what I believe are an early pair of 3.7s.  I bought them used in 2012 and the SNs on the boxes were 41 and 42.  Whatever was on the speakers themselves is completely gone.  I just shone a flashlight directly on them and couldn't see anything.  I'm no golden ear but these have cured my desire to upgrade.  The only things they don't do are the deepest bass and crazy loud.  My other system with ATC110s and Velodyne DD18 does that and then some so I want for nothing.  

I've got both the 3.7 and 2.2s and I've definitely noticed that the 2.2s have more prominent bass.  I'm not surprised to hear that they have a little more than is completely flat.  It's good quality and very enjoyable.  They were my first Thiels and I consider them to be pretty much perfect living room speakers.  They are so enjoyable, don't do anything wrong really.  I bought them used for a second system and they turned me into a Thiel guy.  They are an obscene bargain used.  For just sitting and listening to music at moderate volume and solely for enjoyment I don't think it gets that much better.  

I don't know if I get the time/phase coherence thing or not.  I don't think I could describe it but maybe it's why I find Thiels so relaxing.  When I changed from B&W to Thiel there were some obvious differences that I could describe but also a sense of being able to sit back and relax without being tempted to lean forward or put other effort into listening that I hadn't experienced before.  Maybe that was me getting it without realizing what was going on.  

A room that is 30' will have a resonance at 37.5 hz I think.  (speed of sound is 1,125 ft/sec, 1,125ft/37.5 = 30 so a 37.5hz wave has length 30')  It might be that by extending your response just a little bit below that of the main speakers you're exciting that node a whole lot more.  I have a similar situation in a big open family room/dining room area.  I've found that by equalizing the peaks down 3-4db the problem becomes much less audible.  Too large of a cut and the frequency response is technically better but sounds worse to me.  

My 2.2s are used almost exclusively for kids tv shows these days and they're hooked up to a ~$900 Yamaha HT receiver.  I'm surprised at how deep and forceful the bass is even from this very modest power source.  I'm sure there'd be some improvement with a big power amp but it's pretty darn good the way it is.  They most definitely don't require a massive amount of power.  My 3.7s are hooked up to a pair of Cambridge 840s running bridged mono, have been for the last 7 years, and work great this way.  I was somewhat afraid that the low impedance combined with bridging would be a problem but it hasn't been.  

I'm sure some Thiel models require monster amplifiers but the ones I have definitely do fine with more moderate amps.  I don't listen especially loud so I'm sure that's a factor.  Maybe the 3.7s with their well-behaved drivers and relatively simple crossover don't present as difficult of a load as some other Thiels do.  I did notice a significant improvement in bass definition when changing from one amp to 2.  

bumpin around on youtube, thought this might be of interest. Rob Gillum being interviewed. You don’t have to wonder if he's a believer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55tQUNsE7GA

@harrylavo, 1000x yes.  I have a similar setup with 2.2s and a Yamaha HT receiver that had a list price around $900 but that I got for about $300.  It is a great little system.  Ridiculously, obscenely good for the money.  If I had found that combination when I was 25 I may have stopped there because I don't think I would've seen any need for improvement.  The thing that kept me upgrading was that there was always something that seemed a little off.  There's nothing about that system that seems off.  It won't go really loud and won't do the deepest bass but it is thoroughly enjoyable and that is what matters.

The auction of all of the Thiel inventory is going on now.  It's rare for this many high quality speakers to all be for sale at once.  I expect prices will be in deal of a lifetime territory.


https://www.mclemoreauction.com/auction/complete-liquidation-of-thiel-audio-products-co-llc-includin...

The auction is over.  As far as I know this is the only auction of its type in the last 20 years.  The TT1 prototypes went for $3,800.  That surprises me.  The raw drivers went for really cheap.  The big Krell went for $2,700.  I thought about bidding on a couple of things but I don't need anything so I didn't.  As far as I know nobody ever found Jim Thiel's decades of notes and that's probably the biggest bummer of the whole situation.

Anybody have any experience with the PowerPlane 1.2?  I want to set up some rear channels and I'm probably never going to have the space for rear floorstanders.  I know the powerpoints got more press but I'm wondering if the in-walls are sonically comparable.   They seem to be available more often and for better prices.