jafant,
How is your cable quest going? Have you made any decisions or narrowed down choices?
How is your cable quest going? Have you made any decisions or narrowed down choices?
Showing 50 responses by sdl4
@tomthiel I agree! I don't understand enough about how cables interact with speakers and specific electronics to be able to predict which ones will sound best in my system. To find cables that work well and don't have crazy-high prices requires a lot of patience and extensive trials to compare cables. As far as I know, @jafant is still on his extended cable quest, and I can't promise that I won't keep listening to new cables myself. |
vair68robert, Thanks for the suggestion about making DIY cables from the Cardas 9.5 gauge chassis wire. Your thoughts are interesting about how Cardas' "golden ratio" designs may be affecting what you hear from the cables you've tried. I'm also wondering about the audio effects of Cardas' use of "matched propagation" in their newer cables to match the speed of the conductors and dielectrics. Maybe this type of construction matters or maybe it's mainly marketing hype - I don't know enough to have an informed opinion. How is the chassis wire constructed? |
Rob, Thanks for the additional info on the Cardas cables, but I'm still a little confused. Looking at the Cardas website and a 2019 Cardas catalog I have, it looks like the Parsec speaker cable is made of 4 X 15.5 AWG conductors in a star-quad arrangement rather than 2 X 15.5 AWG. Also, the Clear Beyond is listed as 8 X 10.5 in the catalog and 8 X 9.5 on the website. Not a big deal, I guess, but still confusing. Both sources make it clear that the chassis wire is Litz wire with individual strands coated with enamel. Did you have to deal with the enamel in any special way when you terminated the wires or does the solder take care of it? |
There are several posts on the PS Audio forum stating how well the M700 monoblocks work with Thiel speakers, including the 3.7. If the M700s work well, then the more powerful M1200s should work even better. Both models are spec'd as solid down to 4 ohms and stable at 2 ohms, which still leaves a few questions about driving a 2.4 ohm speaker like the 3.7. However, one poster commented on how replacing a ML 533h amp with the M700s restored the powerful bass performance that had been present earlier when the 3.7 speakers were demo'd with mono Krell amps. Just further food for thought. |
tomthiel, I am so impressed by your thoughtful and systematic approach to listening tests. Using a combination of unblinded and blinded testing is ideal. The problems with ABX testing have never been related to the fact that ABX is blinded, but rather the fact that it ignores basic characteristics of human perception, cognitive processing, and decision making. Your linkage to primitive fight or flight reactions is interesting and not something I have considered before. |
Tomthiel, I strongly agree with your statement about ABX testing and the pressure it puts on the judgment skills of the listener. I have participated in ABX tests of auditory judgment online and am able to tolerate the ABX procedures when the discriminations are not subtle, but as you say "ABX is irrelevant to nuance." What is often overlooked by proponents of ABX is that the judgment of whether two sounds or musical passages are different requires only to find a single element of "difference" while confirmation of "sameness" requires exploring all possible elements that can be perceived and matched by the human ear/brain. This task quickly stresses my cognitive systems and makes me want to shut down completely or simply focus on one or two possible elements to evaluate for sameness or difference. Unlike many critics of ABX, though, I do see the value of blind testing in addition to extended non-blind testing. For me, blind testing should be preceded by training the listener to hear differences between components in open listening and then confirming or disconfirming the results in blind testing. I also would argue for eliminating the "sameness" judgment that requires excessive cognitive processing and instead make it clear that each sound/music sample in a blind test is being played on a different component. The paradigm would still be blinded because the listener wouldn't know which component is which and the probability of success with random responding would remain at 50%. I am still using Thiel speakers after 28 years because you, your brother, and other folks at Thiel Audio heard nuances in your speakers that still make them a joy to listen to today. |
tomthiel, Thanks for the interesting update. As an owner of a pair of 2.2s, I think this model represents a great place to start on the upgrade path. The use of an external xo makes a lot of sense, both for practical and sonic reasons. My 2.2s are on a carpeted wood floor with an unfinished basement space below them. I could easily run an umbilical cord through the floor and place a xo box in the basement underneath each speaker. That would be very cool! When you can, please continue to post upgrade updates for the xo, the cabinet bracing, and the vibration management efforts. Keep up the impressive work!!! |
Great story about Nelson Pass and his "dangerous" speaker design! In terms of amps for use with Thiel speakers, I've been very happy with my PS Audio M700 Monoblocks driving Thiel 2.2 speakers. These amps put out 700w per channel into 4 ohms and can handle peaks at 2 ohms if necessary. Fortunately, the 2.2 runs mainly at 4 ohms or higher and only rarely drops into the 3-4 ohm range (per JA's Stereophile measurements). It's clear that some of the later Thiel models are harder to drive than the 2.2, but folks on the PS Audio forum report great real-world performance of 2.4's and 3.7's using the M700's or the BHK signature designs. I don't think anyone should be hesitant to at least demo Thiels with PS Audio amps. |
ronkent: I have owned my 2.2's (#991+#992) from 1992 to the present, and I haven't been seriously looking to replace them. I have had an interest in the 2.4, 2.7, and especially the 3.7, but the investment needed to make the change hasn't made sense to me given how much I like my 2.2's. Also, the 2.2's are not so big that they dominate my living room, and the natural cherry of the speakers is a perfect match for the wall of built-in cherry cabinets in the room. My home theater in a different room includes five Powerpoint 1.2's and a SS1 sub in a 5.1 configuration, so I have a very positive appreciation for the excellence of Thiel's coaxial tweeter/mid designs. I can see how having a combined tweeter/mid in a floor-stander like the 3.7 would eliminate some of the issues that can arise in the 2.2 if the vertical listening position isn't just right. |
jafant: Thanks for the warm welcome! Just last month, I became the happy owner of the PS Audio M700 amps and Gain Cell DAC/Preamp, and the Stellar gear have definitely opened up the sound of my system. They have also forced me to wade into the messy (and expensive) world of cable choices, and I'll be posting my thoughts on that issue on the PSA forum very soon. In cables, as well as in other audio components, I tend to look for gear that sounds the "best for the money" rather than the "best that unlimited money can buy." At this point, I rarely use my turntable and focus instead on CD's and streaming digital audio via Sonos (using the DAC in my Stellar preamp). I haven't explored higher resolution formats much at all. My musical tastes were shaped by the blues-rock (eg, Cream, Led Zep, Hendrix, Rolling Stones, etc.) and folk-rock and singer-songwriters of the 1960's and 1970's, including Joni Mitchell, James Taylor, Neil Young, Jackson Browne, Shawn Colvin, and others. I also listen to some classic blues and Motown. |
jafant, You asked yesterday about about any cable shoot-outs going on, and I'm still in the middle of some testing to find a balanced 1m interconnect to use between my PS Audio Stellar preamp and M700 amps. I'm using the Stellar gear to power my Thiel 2.2 speakers. After some testing last month with ICs on loan from the Cable Company, I preferred the Cardas Parsec over the Shunyata Venom or the Synergistic Level 2 Core. The Parsec had a good blend of transparency and warmth, while the Shunyata was forgiving and somewhat veiled and the Synergistic was too bright and fatiguing in my system. Unfortunately, the Parsec is out of stock right now, so I'm considering other options in the middle range of the Cardas line of ICs. Have any Thiel owners had experience with the Cardas Clear Sky, Clear Cygnus, or Clear Reflection ICs? I'm looking for a cable that has reasonable transparency without being bright, a touch of warmth without straying too far from neutral, and solid bass that has impact without being boomy. Above all, I want a cable that is musical and non-fatiguing when used in my Thiel-Stellar system. Any thoughts that might be helpful in my cable quest? |
ronkent, Thanks for the helpful info! The Clear Reflection is more expensive than I planned to spend, but I might have to expand my budget if these are really great cables. I only need one pair of them for now, so that helps things stay halfway affordable. Does the Clear Reflection have a definite sonic signature or display any specific characteristics that tend to stand out compared to other ICs you've heard in your system? |
pops, It's been several decades since I last listened to any MIT cables. It looks like there aren't a lot of inexpensive options, even in the Heritage series. I'm kind of wary of the little electronic boxes that adjust the electrical characteristics of the cables, but they must do something positive or MIT wouldn't use them. Do the EVO 2 interconnects have a particular sonic signature? |
jafant, I've been reading some great comments about the Clear Beyond interconnects, but the price of a pair of 1m ICs is well beyond my budget ($3,750 retail). I've also heard positives about the Clear Cygnus, which uses some of the Clear Beyond's design principles in a more economical version ($790 retail for 1m pair). Between the Cygnus and and the Beyond is the Clear ($2,020 per 1m pair) and the Clear Reflection ($1,150 per 1m pair). The least expensive IC in the Clear series is the Clear Sky ($490 per 1m pair). I'm trying the Sky in my system right now, and it's pretty transparent so I'm noticing more detail than I'm used to. However, it does sound a bit bright and harsh on some recordings, and it also seems a little thin sounding because there seems to be greater emphasis on the high frequencies than the lower frequencies. I'm liking the shimmer on cymbals, but not the sibilance on some vocals. I may have to spend more money to get a little more fullness and naturalness on voices. The Clear Reflection may be my best option, but the Clear Cygnus may be a possibility if it has the musicality that Cardas claims. |
pops, Thanks for the additional info on the MIT EVO's! Your description sounds great, though they are somewhat expensive - at least in terms of what I'm used to. Finding the balance between musical and resolving seems to be the holy grail of cable design, and the EVO's seem to achieve that in your system. |
tomthiel, Thanks for the suggestion about Morrow interconnects. I'll definitely look into them. I'm pretty far down the Cardas path at this point, but options are always a good thing. I've also been interested in the Iconoclast cables that are manufactured by Belkin and marketed as an audiophile product through Blue Jeans Cables. I've never heard them, but I've read very positive comments about them. |
Congrats to all you 3.7 owners! I'm still hanging in there with my 2.2's, which have become more expressive and "alive" since I started powering them with PS Audio M700 monoblocks. My search for new interconnects has also shown me that the 2.2's can take on several different personalities depending on the cables being used with them. I had been considering trying a REL or Thiel subwoofer with my speakers, but I'm now leaning against that option after appreciating the positive effects of my recent amp upgrade. I already have a Thiel SS1 sub that is blended to five Powerpoint 1.2's via a Thiel 5-channel crossover in my HT system, so I know how well that sub can blend with other speakers. However, I also really value the naturalness of having the 2.2's cover the low frequencies without adding crossovers and dividing up the bass among more drivers. If I did add a sub or two, I would definitely do it via high-level connections (like the REL or Thiel approach). The fact that my 2.2's already have decent bass and I don't listen to music with a lot of content below 30Hz makes a sub less of a necessity for me. |
rosami, I don't have any experience with Naim cables, but you could be right about the Thiels needing different speaker cables to perform their best. I'm still using Straight Wire Encore cables from the 1990's because I know they're a good match for my 2.2's. Several weeks back, I spoke to Jerry Willsie at Straight Wire about my Encore cables, and he said they were still a great match for my Thiels. In fact, he said he had just recommended a version of the Encore to Kathy Gornik (one of the original Thiel founders) for her Thiels. In your situation, you may want to use the lending library at the Cable Company to try a few different speaker cables. Or you could try a cable maker that has a 30 or 60-day free return policy. Tom Thiel has recommended Morrow cables. Ronkent has recommended Cardas Clear Reflection with his system. Unfortunately, speaker cables can't be selected based on the performance of interconnects of the same brand since cables typically require a different design to function well with speakers. Good luck in your search! |
beetlemania, Thanks for the cable info! With regard to Cardas cables, it looks like a number of Thiel owners are using the somewhat "warmer" cables such as Golden Reference among the legacy cables or Clear Reflection among the newer "Clear" series cables. In terms of interconnects specifically, the only IC I've tried from the Clear series is Clear Sky, which is too bright in my system. For my ears, the less expensive Parsec is a better match than Clear Sky, and I would expect Clear Reflection to be even better based on ronkent's comments above. |
I found the following link that provides a bit of info from Bryston about the Rolling Stone "test": https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=91778.0 |
jafant, Thanks for the link to the Absolute Sound article. A very interesting history lesson. My first experience with anything better than zip cord was Monster Cable. I "graduated" to Straightwire in the 1990's, flirted with Audioquest and several Blue Jeans Cable offerings over the years, and recently settled on a Cardas Parsec interconnect after trying out several other options in my home system. I have heard differences between wires when I had been hoping not to hear any so that I could be happy with less expensive options, but I have never ventured into the ultra-high-end world of wire - and I'm reluctant to invest the time and money required to do so. This discussion reminded me of an interview with Jim Thiel (mostly completed online, I think) published on the Audioholics website in 2004. Gene DellaSalla seemed more inclined to argue with Jim about the sonic effects of wire (or lack of them) rather than to learn from Jim's knowledge and experience. The interaction left me with a very negative impression of Gene, both in terms of his lack of openness to any ideas that questioned his beliefs and his inability to be a gracious host to a guest on his website. The link to the interview is here: https://www.audioholics.com/audio-video-cables/thiel-audio-interview-on-cables |
tomthiel, I love Jim's quote that "there are sonic effects that I don't know how to measure." This statement seems so simple and so obvious that it is amazing that so many audio measurement "experts" appear to believe that science has already achieved that perfect state of being able to measure all parameters that influence what humans hear. Real scientists, however, will continue to study the many factors that affect auditory perception and how best to measure those factors and how they relate to how people listen to music. Until science gets a lot closer to "measurement perfection," we will have to depend on our ears and brains to close the gap. |
tomthiel, All I can say is that Thiel figured out a way to make enough progress before you left the company that I'm still using Thiel 2.2s as my main speakers more than 25 years after I bought them. (And I'm also still using the original StraightWire speaker cables that I bought way back then, too.) |
jafant, In response to your question about my StraightWire cables, I was using Encore speaker cables and Rhapsody II (RCA) interconnects in my system until just a few months ago. After switching to a PS Audio Stellar stack in early 2019, I decided to try several moderate-priced balanced interconnects in my system. Using XLR's from the Cable Company lending library, I decided that the Cardas Parsec XLR sounded better in my system than the Rhapsody II RCA I already owned (2nd place), Shunyata Venom XLR (third place), or Synergistic Research XLR (fourth place). I'm now using the Cardas XLR between my Gain Cell DAC/Pre and my M700 monoblocks. When I replaced the interconnect, I did not replace my StraightWire Encore speaker cable. Based on my room configuration, I have speaker cables that are 24 feet long and run under my living room floor. This arrangement makes replacement of the speaker wires quite expensive for reasonably good wire, so I'm keeping my StraightWire cables for now. Fortunately, the folks at StraightWire tell me that the Encore cable remains a very solid choice for my Thiel 2.2s and that even spending quite a bit more money would only get me small improvements in sound quality for my investment. |
tomthiel, I don't have direct experience with Straight Wire's current products, but I did have a very helpful conversation with Jerry Willsie at Straight Wire about using Thiel speakers with my PS Audio amps and pre-amp. Jerry seemed very knowledgeable about which wire to use with Thiels, and he didn't try to push more expensive wire on me if I was happy with my current Straight Wire speaker cables. I agree with you that Straight Wire doesn't seem to get a lot of attention as a high-end wire company these days, but there's so much cable competition that it may be hard to stand out. The sales rep I worked with at the Cable Company did tell me that they sell a lot of Straight Wire products, so Straight Wire may still be considered a solid value in the crazy world of wire. |
arvincastro, I have been very pleased with how the PS Audio Stellar M700 Monoblocks match up with my Thiel 2.2 speakers. Bass control and impact are excellent, and the mids and highs are dynamic and highly musical. Of course, the overall sound is also influenced by the Stellar Gain Cell DAC/Pre that feeds my M700s. At the same time, I have heard nothing but positive comments about how well a tube preamp can work with the M700s and with Thiels in general, so I'm sure your tube gear would mate well with class D monoblocks. |
tomthiel, I can't say that I have done extensive preamp comparisons, but I have had a PS Audio Stellar Gain Cell DAC in my system for the last 6 months, and I like it a lot. The Gain Cell DAC/Pre replaced a Bryston .5B preamp I had used for many decades. At the same time I replaced the preamp, I also replaced my Adcom 555-II power amp with the Stellar M700 monoblocks. Most of my listening has been with both the Stellar DAC/Pre and the M700s in the system, but I did briefly listen to the DAC/Pre feeding the Adcom amp and driving my Thiel 2.2 speakers. Replacing the Bryston preamp with the Stellar gave me sound that was much more open and dynamic than what the Bryston had been providing. Some of this effect may have been due to the DAC in the Stellar unit since I had been previously using a Parasound Z-DAC to feed the Bryston pre for either streaming or CDs. Ignoring my unsystematic attempt to judge the effect of the Stellar DAC/Pre on its own, I can say that the "Stellar stack" as a system provides a much more alive and real sonic picture than my old gear. I have read some reviews that have described some "tube-like" characteristics coming from the Stellar gear. I don't have much experience with modern tube gear, but the Stellar components do not have a colored tube sound that some listeners enjoy. To me, the Stellar gear sounds neutral and musical. It provides good detail and transparency without being overly bright or fatiguing. I've also enjoyed the enhancement in bass impact and control, although I can't really separate out the effects of the preamp from the monoblocks. In listening to several different interconnects (both single-ended and balanced) between the Stellar DAC/Pre and M700 amps, I've found the Stellar gear to be very revealing of differences between interconnects. As an older guy who has grown tired of walking across the room just to adjust the preamp volume, I absolutely love having a remote control unit with the Stellar DAC/Pre. As far as the issue of the Gain Cell DAC/Pre being an affordable choice, I purchased the DAC/Pre directly from PS Audio as part of a system that also included the M700 monoblocks. The system price from the factory is $3999 as listed on the PS Audio website, but they allow a discount of up to $1200 for any gear traded in on that package. They actually credit you with the original new retail price of the gear you are trading in - not just the current used price of the gear. So I was able to trade in an old Denon CD player and get the "Stellar stack" of DAC/Pre and M700s for under $2799, which is an incredible bargain IMO. Buying the DAC/Pre alone is listed as $1699 at regular price, with a trade-in allowance of up to $510, so you can get the DAC/Pre for under $1200 from PS if you have something you want to trade in. As ronkent indicated, though, some current dealers may offer even lower prices given the upcoming elimination of the PS dealer network. |
tomthiel, Hope the Stellar Gain Cell DAC/Pre sounds great in your system. If you decide you want to try a low-cost power cord upgrade for the DAC/Pre, the Audience Forte F3 has worked out well for me. This cord is a relative bargain that was highly recommended by the guy who helped me at the Cable Company. They are offering B-stock at $149, and this cord is also available for $125 through Parts Connexion. In my system, the Forte F3 made the sound smoother, with a lower noise floor and deeper, tighter bass. I noticed more effect when using the cord on the DAC/Pre than on my amps. It might be a worthwhile investment if you decide you want to try an inexpensive power cord upgrade. |
tomthiel, I completely understand your perspective on power cables. I've been a cable skeptic until recently and have mostly avoided diving down that deep black hole myself. And I don't want to get a big cable discussion going in this thread. But since you brought up the shielding issue in power cords, I'll just mention the limited info I've been told by cable advocates. What I've been told is that a shielded power cord is a good idea for DACs and other components that generate a lot of digital noise, but that shielding is not always necessary (and possibly not even desirable) for cords on power amps. The Forte F3 cords have some shielding, but Audience says it's designed to work well even on high-power amps. That claim may just be marketing, of course. Maybe sometime, when your mind is calm and not overburdened with thoughts of too many other more important things, you'll borrow a low-cost high-value power cord like the Forte and give it a try on your DAC/Pre. For a guy who can hear differences between caps in a speaker crossover, a quality power cord may offer you a few interesting sonic surprises. On a more important issue, I'm really looking forward to the point when your upgrade kit for the 2.2 is ready for distribution. Best of luck with that effort! |
@thielrules, What an impressive undertaking and write-up! I must confess that I lack the knowledge required to judge the success of many of your choices in making mods on the original 3.5 design. My negative experience with equalizers in the past makes me hesitant to depend on EQ to fix problems in replacement drivers or make decisions on a "house sound," but I have absolutely no experience with modern digital EQ so I am not in any position to offer an informed critique. Above all, I will be very interested in what the speakers now sound like. Please let us know your listening impressions as you log some serious listening time with your "renewed" speakers. Thanks for sharing all this great information! |
I love this thread! Whenever contrasting opinions are expressed (such as on the issue of cables), there is no name-calling or attempts to shout down disagreements. For guys like Prof and Brayeagle, who have tried a wide range of cables in their systems and ultimately decided not to invest a lot of time and money in expensive cabling, I respect their opinions on what works or doesn't work in their systems. However, for people who have never tried different cables with their gear, it may be worth a listen. I have never spent more than $400 on any single interconnect or speaker cable so I can't say that I have explored the cable "high end," but I have heard significant differences between the cables I have tried. Some cables were a great match for my system, while some were a bad match. If you have never had a chance to demo several cables through Thiel speakers in your home system, you might consider borrowing a few cables from a friend or audio dealer - or checking out cables from the lending library at the Cable Company. If you find specific cables that make your system sound more natural and musical, you will be able to move a little closer to audio perfection. On the other hand, if using different cables doesn't positively affect the sound of your system - for your own ears - then you can be happy with what you already have and save yourself a lot of time and money. This certainly is a fun and interesting hobby! |
Thosb & Tomthiel, I've read the "Class D and 2 ohm load" thread, and there's lots of interesting discussion - but quite a bit of rude argument as well. I don't know if I agree with the poster who claims that Class D amps are a bad match for low impedance speakers because they typically don't double the power output at 2 ohms compared to 4 ohms. There appear to be a number of Class D amps that can provide reasonable wattage at under 4 ohms, but I don't have enough personal experience with those amps to know if they really have the low-ohm current to power hard-to-drive speakers like several of the Thiels. What I do know, however, is that my PS Audio M700 monoblocks do a great job with my Thiel CS 2.2 speakers. I don't know, though, if the M700s would do as well with some of the Thiels that are harder to drive than the 2.2s. The M700s (Class D) took over for an Adcom 555-II (Class AB) I've had for many years, and the new amps really made the 2.2s come alive, improving both bass control and naturalness/openness across the spectrum. I don't have any experience with the Benchmark AHB-2, but I would assume that it would power the 2.2s well even if it might have more trouble with some of the Thiels that present lower impedance loads to the amp. |
tomthiel, Your mention of your work on modifications on the faceplate surface for the CS 2.2 tweeter reminded me that the tweeters on my 1992 2.2 speakers have an anomaly that I've always wondered about. Many years ago, I noticed that the black metal frame protecting the face of the tweeter has a small gap where the top prong (of the 3 prongs) looks like it should attach to the round center piece of the structure. The tweeters are identical on both of my speakers, with only the top prong not connected to the center disc. The tweeters themselves have no dents or creases and they seem to work well. What is the purpose of the black metal frame in front of the tweeters (protection, waveguide, something else?) and are all 3 prongs supposed to attach firmly to the center disc? I obviously haven't been too concerned about this issue since I've ignored it for years, but your explorations into reflections off the surface of the speaker got me thinking about other issues that might affect tweeter performance/vibration in some way. Thanks for any insights you can provide. |
tomthiel, Very interesting comments! Thanks for taking the time to explain some of the issues involved with the structures in front of the 2.2 tweeters. I didn't even notice that the center plate was actually a hex shape until you mentioned it. I'm fascinated by your work on the sharp edges on the back of the structure, and I hope your mods will have sonic benefits. I think I will hold off on attempting to epoxy the detached legs/prongs until you figure out what sort of contouring or edge-coating may be helpful on the structure. I also want to consult Rob before I do anything. Thanks again for the great info! |
This discussion, especially the inside history lesson from Tom, have me thinking about why I bought my 2.2s in the early 1990's. I was aware of the "rightness" of the sound from speakers designed using 1st order crossovers so my decision came down to a choice between Thiels and Vandersteens. I have several friends who were (and still are) very happy with their Vandersteens, but I liked the clarity of the Thiels - as well as the stunning cabinet work on the Thiels (thanks Tom!). It is a testament to the quality of the 2.2 as a package that it is still my primary set of speakers 28 years later. |