Thiel Owners

“Listening to a sealed speaker you hear the bass in real time and it’s difficult to go back.” I very much agree!

Happy Friday! All

In the early years, Thiel considered reflex bass as a necessary cost-compromise only for entry level products ie home theater and models 1 and 2. When it came time to replace the CS3.5 with the 3.6, I resisted going to reflex bass in the 3, which had always embodied our highest aspirations. The equalizer needed improvements which were judged too expensive for the target price. Fair enough. I lobbied (unsuccessfully) for a modified CS5 style bass with overall system impedance high enough such that the falling bass impedance could stay above 4 ohms. The prevailing argument was that ports (a performance step down from our passive radiators) were ubiquitous, even in speakers selling in $6 figures.

Nonetheless, our foundational commitment to time-alignment was compromised. Reflex puts the deepest fundamentals a full cycle behind the action. As duramax has said " the bass player is out in the parking lot". Thiel’s reflex bass is implemented as well as I’ve seen at any price, but it does unavoidably delay the deep bass.

So you know, we have prototyped an equalizer using Jim’s excellent topology but adding regulation and more beef to the power supply,  higher grade caps and metal film resistors - while still remaining affordable.

Another problem with straight bass (non-reflex) is that very large driver excursions are required, which works against our underhung, low distortion motors. My assessment is that if push comes to shove, an overhung woofer motor is far better aligned with Thiel values than is the reflex timing error.

All of the upgrade technologies we are developing in the SCS4 workhorse will be applicable to all Real Thiel speakers. The 7.2s weak link is a 400uF bank of electrolytic caps in a parallel notch filter. Although considered less audible than series-feed circuitry, shunt filters are audible. I have developed two fixes. 4x100uF film caps, which is expensive and large enough to only apply to an outboard crossover. But another fix is to replace the 4 x 100uF electrolytics with 8x50uF higher grade Els in a bundled layout concentric around a new Golden Cascade 1uF bypass with its coaxial sections decreasing to 0.015uF. That’s the minimus value we landed on and used in the CS3, 3.5, 2, 1 and 1.2. The cost and footprint of this fix is accessible for an inboard crossover. Lovely improvement.

Regarding duramax’s silver cabling. I have also found silver to be magnificent and free of any excess brightness - depending on design - many elements are in play in cables. I have some custom silver plated copper wire that plugs right into my BiFlow topology. The extra cost of silver is significant, but my geometry has cost-effective manufacturability. So a silver option is on the radar. 

Our behind-the-scenes rate of progress has been called ’glacial’. It’s really slow, but also quite large.

@tomthiel, of course you would know better than me. But, aside from being able to make the under hung motors more available across the various models , which  is somewhat negated by the lowered price point models using different woofers anyway, I think the sealed boxes were the better choice. Other manufacturers such as Dunlavy with similar performance goals were able to do it. Though to be fair the Dunlavy’s used more drivers in bigger boxes or used acoustic floor volume reinforcement. All of which created a different set of concerns. I’m not sure all would agree, but I for one think those, and the previous use of eq were worth it.

Unsound - I agree with you. The equalizer does everything right sonically. The bass extension rolls off at the bottom at 12dB/ octave like real unamplified output. The upper frequency electronic ’tizz’ is solved with the new unit.

Our problem, especially in the early days, was under-pricing what we were delivering, and therefore living under very strict budget limitations. Note Dunlavy’s price multiple vs a similarly-reviewed Thiel. I did some cabinet consultation for Dunlavy. Behind their curtain, Thiel’s component quality and overall performance / cost and was far higher. The Audio Upgrades re-design of Jim’s EQ is significantly better, but would have come in at about double the cost of Jim’s design.

As you know, our plans include reintroduction of retro-fittable midrange and tweeter to remove the obsolete product concern, and then offer this new EQ as an upgrade for your upgraded model 3 equalized models. There were 10,000 pair of model 3s with that equalizer (combined 03a, CS3 and CS3.5). Quite a few of those are still in use.

As background, I advocated for a higher performance line of our speakers which would have allowed greater budgets. Think Lexus / Toyota. That idea didn’t fly primarily because they felt it would cheapen the perception of our stock products. Marketing would have been more dimensional, but I think we would have shone brightly in that arena. I would have preferred that business model vs diving into Home Theater for survival as value-priced 2 channel faded against emergent HT.