Thiel Owners
biannuzzi22 - I have some experience with the SS1 and SS2. Repair is an issue, I haven't found schematics yet. Low-level noise is an issue; if you need black quiet, maybe not. Performance is unique; the user has no control over amplitude. Jim's gig was to play back what's recorded. Some folks want more bass, which you can get by messing with the room boundary controls. The room boundary compensation really works. With the PXO, the main speakers work as hard as if solo, so you won't gain additional output capability. I find their performance outstanding with the Passive OXs. I'm told that the active integrator is another league up. Biggest gains are with the smaller models having less extended bass. The 2.7 will get only a final bottom fundamental - surprisingly little content, but surprisingly satisfying musically. As previously discussed in this forum, I really like stereo subs. We're not supposed to have directionality at those very low frequencies, but a pair sounds somehow more real (for only twice the price!). If solo, try to get it near the center. I use the subs with dynamic, big music and turn it off for solo and small ensemble vocal which has little to no sub bass, and the quiet is nice. |
I have the 2.7s and some jl audio e110 subwoofers....but haven't really set them up yet. Been too lazy and the 2.7s sound so good on their own. I've had the 2.7s back in my system for months (sidelining my JA Perspectives for now) and just love the things. I'm sooo glad I jumped on this pair of 2.7s a couple years ago. They've become rare as the proverbial hen's teeth, and in my favored ebony finish, this was a unicorn find on the used market. |
I did see that but peter seems to be more optimistic about the David Louis tweeters. Anyhow something I noticed new on my amp is that my positive terminal spins. Is this just a tighten and you’re fine or does it need to be replaced issue? For some reason when I turn on the right channel it also pops in the left I turn on the left and it makes a pop again. The speaker connection loose issue or a different issue altogether? |
@thoft This is the unit Rob is selling at Coherent for 250.00 ea. Although still expensive at 190.00 ea, it’s what is recommended from Rob as being the closest match to original. https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-5-midrange/scan-speak-13m-midrange-replacement-speaker/ Check out the Thiel section, there is another driver they suggest, but I’m not sure how much of a difference it would make https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/speaker-replacement |
My main system is a pair of imf tls 80, the audire forte with 200,000 uf capacitance 😉 and the Pioneer SA-9100 Running as pre. Cable wise is the MIT MH750 cables in the system. second one will be a luxman pre so th an adcom gfa 5800 and these thiels once I do the midrange drop in and try out those tweeters. Will use midrange until something pops up or maybe nudge a few buttons as I managed to do for the ol dahlquist I had and get a speaker company to make an exact replacement driver but that’s $$$$$$$ |
So no one has found a proper midrange replacement? I’ll probably do some graphical comparisons. There’s gotta be something close something better is somewhere. I did find some David Louis audio reference tweeters however. http://https//www.ebay.com/itm/pair-davidlouis-audio-tweeter-reference-on-Dynaudio-replace-T330-D260-D28-110MM/322436721536?hash=item4b12b9eb80:g:Zw4AAOSwg0pZYyB7 thoughts? |
Woofers are pretty common on eBay and tweeters can be rebuilt (Brian at Holt Hill Audio http://holthill.com/
got his hands on some genuine D28 diaphragms recently). Mids are tough, the best advice I can offer is just to be patient. They do show up for sale occasionally. |
thoft - sit tight for some first-hand experience here.For my part, I tested the Madisound "drop in" and it is so different that I would never consider it. Anybody want to comment? The tweeter you want is the rebuild of that particular version of the Dynaudio D28. Regarding woofers, that was highly specialized. I think Rob Gillum at Coherent Source Service can rebuild yours. I haven't heard of anything else that works. Remember that these drivers each cover a huge range and the various contouring circuits are specifically tuned to the resonances and anomalies of a particular driver. Generic replacements just don't work. But take courage, we will eventually have a stellar solution for you. Comments please. |
Just got a pair of thiel cs 3.5 that were highly abused driver wise. All driver but the one bass driver need replacing. Any other replacements that are optimal besides the David Louis audio reference tweeter and the scanspeaker midrange replacement on madisound? What about the woofers as well? Thankfully finish and the baffles are in like new condition. |
JA - So much to learn, so little time. Rob - Your 2.7 wire was a New Thiel addition or experiment. They hired first-rate designers and engineers, so I trust it was very well considered and chosen. Their failure was at the executive, not technical level. We here did a parallel vs twisted exploration and seemed to all prefer the parallel, including myself. I can’t go down that route because I lack the knowledge to crack the code. I know enough to know that there are many factors including radio frequency interference and capacitive coupling with stray fields that are much more problematic with parallel runs and solved by twisted runs. Note that your stranded wire quite likely has the the stranding twisted to minimize coupling. So it would be a hybrid, quite different than parallel runs of solid wire. Regarding your Cardas wire - that sounds optimum to me. All insulations, including Thiel’s teflon, introduce dielectric effects. Varnish is considered optimum. Also cotton and other cellulitic fibers are considered optimum - better than any of the plastics including teflon. AntiCables has built a respected product around varnish only. Morrow uses varnished strands in cotton. I find both those produces very satisfying. I don’t personally know Cardas’ results, but they have a very good reputation and I say he’s on an optimum path with what you describe. The Cardas wire you describe could be ganged ie single pair for tweeter (or double for star quad), and ganged as double or triple for the other drivers. Need can be predicted via crossover analysis of the relative current capacity of the network - gauge of series inductors and parallel paths to ground. I would be glad to offer an opinion via PM. |
Tom Thank you for the in depth lesson , for me this has turned into learning and experimental experience . I am considering taking Cardas 18 gauge solid wire that is enamel coated to prevent oxidation and using a cotton sleeve and twisting them with 3 turns per inch . Since these speakers came with 16 gauge stranded wire no turns ( 28 strands 30 gauge ), I've not experienced original Thiel wiring , but then again all 2.7s didn't follow Jims limit on capacitor size . Have you tried using the same solid 18 guage wire in your star configuration for speaker wires ? or using them in the parallel ? Rob |
Rob - Thiel's wire was developed in the late 70s through our contact with an aerospace avionics engineer (cousin Ted). For many reasons we settled on OFHC polished solid copper in teflon jackets with a tight 3/inch) twist. Wire carries competing parameters, but that configuration does more right and less wrong than most other options - and we landed there. In developing the CS7 / 6 (after my time) Jim reportedly revisited wire and kept the original configuration, although the 5-9s aerospace ware was no longer available. Best of form is CDA101 @ There are differing opinions, and I am looking closely at options. There is justification for not going to thicker gauges in the lower frequencies due to varying skin effects. Also, many of his networks see a series coil as the first element and it might present hundreds of feet of wire and were rarely larger than 18 gauge, sometimes smaller, which would make larger wire meaningless. My present study suggests that larger gauge coils in some of those elements would be desirable - because there is more going on in wire than plain resistance. 99.99%, etc. Ours is slow extraction, high polish, etc. Straightwire supplied that from the mid 80s to the end. I am moving toward star quad for noise suppression. Tweeter is double twisted (star quad) 18 gauge as described here before. Midrange might be the same unless I insert a 16 gauge foil coil in the first midrange element, then it will be star quad 16s. Woofer might end up being star quad 14. But that's unsettled and dependent of crossover variables. But all remain solid, not stranded, and that opinion is well corroborated in the technical field. Anyone who says that only the big three: resistance, capacitance and inductance matter just hasn't looked deeply enough. As a historical aside, I've mentioned here before that I did some work with John Dunlavy when he was moving to Colorado from Down Under. John's specialty and multiple patents were in the field of antennae, especially deep space low signal communications antennae. He played his cards pretty close to the vest, but he paid extensive attention to wire and wire routing within his speakers with knowledge of propagation interference and conjugation. I wish I knew a fraction of what that guy knew; but I am asking more questions in that realm than Jim did. And I hope to (dare I say expect to) reap some benefits. |
Fitter - I got the chance to compare CS7s with 7.2s when I visited Rob G at CSS last Thanksgiving. What a treat! I judge the 7.2 to be more concise / articulate, but he and I both liked the 7s better, as more easily listenable on more material. The main and possibly only difference is the mid drivers. The 7 has flat-front cast styrene pistons and the 7.2 has cones (of unknown to me technology). The flat launch plane eliminates whatever cavity effect the conical pistons might produce. They are both extraordinary speakers that I wouldn't mind owning with the proper room to do them justice. |
Gs5556 I owned 3.6s for 27 yrs I purchased cs7s last October my has a hairline crack by the woofer. When I contacted rob Gillum it didn’t seem like an issue. FWIW I use a Bryston 4 b which did a great job of driving the 3.6s but is now on the weak side of driving the 7s.ive never heard the 7.2s but the 7s are definitely an upgrade over the 3.6s!I can’t wait to get a bigger amp I feel they expose your equipment upstream and are going to get better as I upgrade my equipment! I agree with Tom as far contacting Rob just to make sure. |
Rob - I’ll get some measurements on my various wires. However, the resistance is not the whole story. In fact, audibility is a result of many factors and many of those are phase related. Two parallel tracks. A: lower resistance will change the frequency balance where it is operative, and B: all the other reflectances, skin effect, eddy currents, differential dialectic absorption, etc. will change many subtle things that audiophiles hear, but the engineering field ignores as insignificant. I suspect that more of interest is going on in B than in A. But changes in A must be corrected to maintain proper frequency balance. As a historic note, Jim’s working rule was that focused listeners can hear 1/10 dB at an octave bandwidth. Lots of effort went into determining 1/10dB octave to octave frequency balance - anechoic flat. So he was bothered when "people" judged his speakers as having too much or too little of whatever frequency range. The intent was to be flat. Our fans tended to agree. Our detractors often criticized too little mid-bass and too much mid-treble. My present experiments with wire and components and layout and baffle launch, etc. tend to rectify those criticisms without changing the measured frequency response. In other words, the criticisms may be caused by factors other than actual measured output. Of course, I don’t have a way to reliably measure differences of 1/10dB, so I’m flying far more blind than Jim was. Nonetheless progress is being made. |
Good Morning Tom Thiel and All Thiel owners Update on the wiring of my 2.7 , I replaced the 15.5 with 17.5 awg wiring on the mid range of the coaxial speaker to equalize the resistance , it sounded like the mid / treble was louder or more pronounced . It seems like without modifying the crossovers that whatever wiring one upgrades to the resistance should be the same for both , at the same time it can't be to low . Measurement on the 15.5 was .2 ohms for 3 feet , on the 17.5 it was .3 ohms for 3 feet , the JSC 16 that was removed was .5 ohms for the 3 feet to the coaxial speaker . I've contacted Cardas about their measurements for the 15.5 , 17.7 and 18.5 sizes , I'm sure they have more accurate readings than my SnapOn multi-meter . I might consider trying the 18.5 but as of now I couldn't be happier with everything I'm hearing . Tom what is the resistance measurement of the 18 guage Straight wire ? Rob |
As a Thiel 3.6 owner for over 25 years, I'm considering replacing them with either the 3.7 or 7.2. Found a pair of CS7's that were converted to the 7.2 but the cement baffle has a horizontal crack from each side of the midrange to the edge. Is this a serious problem with respect to transporting them? Assuming they remain unchanged after transport, is the sound affected? Any input appreciated. Thanks. |
In case anyone is interested, Saturday Audio Exchange in Chicago has listed a pair of Thiel PCS stand mount speakers for $529 http://www.saturdayaudio.com/gear/thiel-pcs |
Hey Thiel Gonners! Just finished my last round of updates for my 3.6 XOs. My midranges came back from Rob a week ago: he replaced the voice coils and surrounds. He was even so thoughtful to included solder samples for me to ensure the proper termination. They sound fantastic by the way with more transparency and balance; just a slight forwardness to the upper midband which I feel is more settled now with this present round of XO updates. For this round I changed out the remaining Solens Caps and started replacing the ERSE 1uf bypass caps with ClarityCap CSAs: the quadruple treble bypass feed stage. Rob also send along some original 18 AWG twisted pair harness wire to extend my leads to the drivers which I was thankful to have. Before, I had to splice my runs (cringe). As an aside: what intersting discussions we're having about different wire runs Rob and Tom. Star quad runs sound like fun some day and always glad to have further insights and history. Anyway, I ran my summed mono A/B comparison tests yesterday and confirmed the results this afternoon In stereo. Over all the sound now has less forward upper midband and more controlled lower/mid bass than before. Threre is also more treble extention and presence. Vocals and solo instrument are more pronounced with greater clarity without being forward or unbalanced in the presentation. Kind of reminds me of a well implimented horn setup rig. Klipsch la Scalas come to mind but with all the attributes of well executed bass authority as well! It's also fun to hear new details, 3d imaging, and air now present. On the down side: the lack of lower and center midband is creating a just the slightest sense of sterility without as much warmth as before. Perhaps further break-in time will reveal more in time. I am to understand that more mid bass will show itself in a day or so hopefully warming things up a bit. I do feel that sound is more balanced and refined than with the original Solens/ERSE caps as I'm sure they must be showing there age with technology advances and such. It's well worth the effort and I'm learning so much along the journey! Many thanks again to all who have supported me thus far! Next up will be to replace the remaining "Thiel" resistors with more Mills MRA-12s and the final round will be replacing the remaining ERSE 1uf caps with CSAs as well. Afterward, I look forward to further tweeking as there'll certainly be voiceing down the line as well. What fun!! |
