Thiel Owners
Out of curiosity with some of the discussions on speaker pricing, how much do you think the Thiel CS2.4 would be retailed for in today money (if they are built today?) Also I know that most speaker manufacturers use CNC machines to cut the panel into shape? But in term of gluing them today, is it still human manual labors? |
Anyd2 I would guess around $8,000. I am speaker shopping now and nothing in the $8,000-$13,000 range has stood out as better. Just different (some worse). I have owned the 2.4 for about 10 years and I feel that you need to be shopping in the $15,000 range to better the 2.4s at today’s pricing. Now I am looking to buy speakers used that new would be $20k- $30k and hope to pick them up for $10-$15k. I have given up the idea of buying new speakers for $10,000 or less. |
how much do you think the Thiel CS2.4 would be retailed for in today money (if they are built today?)Using a simple inflation calculator, the standard CS2.4 would retail for ~$5500 today. But that ignores much steeper inflation for copper and magnets, so call it $6000-8000. Adding the passive parts I put in could push retail north of $10K. |
@james63Without knowing what new sound you're looking for, I suggest upgrading the crossovers. The CS2.4 cabinet is very good and the drivers are outstanding. There are some *really* nice gains to be had with improved passive parts. This is a huge thread but it might be worth your time to look at posts from Tom Thiel starting January 2018. That said, if you're looking for more bass you need to add subwoofers or get something entirely different. For myself, the 2.4 bass is good enough for me (~30 Hz) and the modded XO otherwise puts the SQ on par with $$$ designs. |
Now I am looking to buy speakers used that new would be $20k- $30k and hope to pick them up for $10-$15k. I have given up the idea of buying new speakers for $10,000 or less.It's interesting that speakers cost so much nowaday. $20K-$30 is about what an average car would cost today! My theory is that much of high end speakers still requires manual labor such as veneering, gluing, sanding and so on ... And human labor cost has inflated so much more than the government would have liked you to believe. It will be interesting to know which speakers you end up buying and how they are compared to the CS2.4. |
quick follow up on my previous post regarding CS 3.5 midrange replacement drivers. Perusing the Madisound website, they have this https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-5-midrange/scan-speak-13m-midrange-replacement-speaker/ which is probably closer to the original Scanspeak midrange found on the 3.5s, and it has the custom mounting plate. The 12W/8524G speaker that I have in my 3.5s will fit, but its a 4 screw mount, as opposed to the 3 screw mount with the flange. From Madisound website regarding the 10F/8424G replacement...."
The specifications and response curve of the 10F/8424G is very close to the original and long discontinued Scan-Speak midranges. PBN Audio uses these as replacements for the 13M/8636 in their legacy speakers and speak glowingly of the results." There seems to be a significant difference in the curves for these speakers. I guess the thing that makes the 12W/8524G speaker attractive is a price of @$60 vs $220 for the 10F/8424G. Unfortunately what I don't have is the curve for the original midrange Scanspeak driver. |
I think I may have found something here. Maybe someone could take a look and see if this could be the original mid for the 3.5, Scanspeak 13M/8640 . Here is a link to the spec sheet, https://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/archive/13m-8640-00.pdf Or, this version, 13M/8636 with kevlar cone as opposed to paper in the 8640 linked above. http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/archive/13m-8636-00.pdf Unfortunately I’m at the beginning of my learning curve, so maybe someone could chime in with an informed perspective. Thanks |
Bluetone - Please pursue this 3.5 midrange matter. Make a chart of the # and parameters original driver and the various replacements. As ketchup says the original cone was paper. Kevlar is "better", but its resonances would be different plus it gives up 1dB of sensitivity to the 8640. For perspective, we must find something very close to the original because the whole speaker system (enclosure, xo, other drivers, etc.) works together and changing any parameter of the midrange driver requires re-engineering the xo. That is a possibility as long as most of the parameters match and the ones that don't match are friendly. This investigation would make lots of people happy. It is not on my current list because of its scope and competing priorities. Keep up the good work. - Tom |
tomic601 - one thing to check is the coax drivers, be sure your 2.3s have the upgraded drivers - sn#4567 was the first to have been converted to these at the factory per Rob. I bought my 2.3s used, lower serial number, but luckily the coax (and xover) had already been upgraded. The upgrade gets you the same coax driver and xover as 2.4s, if I understood Rob correctly. Here's Rob's full response to one of my questions re this upgrade - There were two versions of the CS2.3. New style, and old style. The new style began at serial numbers 4567. The new style consisted of having two magnets on each of the coaxial drivers. The old style had only one magnet. Both versions used ceramic magnets, and the CS2.4 incorporates Neo magnets. Much stronger magnet 10x. The CS2.4 coax cannot be used with the CS2.3 properly. The coax rebuild is $250 each, plus shipping, and can be rebuilt in either version. The new style coax had a two part change to the crossover network as well. You can remove your coax for inspection, and tell whether it is a double ceramic magnet or only one, like the old style. If you need to rebuild both coaxes, then the associated crossover parts are free. Let me know how I can help. |
I’m worried you guys might be chasing something that doesn’t exist (a replacement 3.5 mid). Thiel told me that those drivers were no longer available years ago, so I had to have mine rebuilt by them. You might be better off looking into rebuilding the original drivers and forgetting about finding a replacement. Even if you find something close, it won’t be right. Even better would be to move to a different model. The 3.5, in my experience, did not sound good in the mids and highs anyway. The 3.5 is very old, and I would like to think that the later Thiel models have surpassed the 3.5 (that’s just a guess as I have only heard the 3.5s.). |
The original 3.5’s mids had paper surrounds.That is very interesting. I remember my 3.5 mids having a really thin, flimsy surround that definitely did not appear to be rubber. They seemed to have permanent krinkles in them. That does not seem like a very good material for a surround, but what do I know. |
@thosb thanks - I greatly enjoy this thread and the joyful spirit of music lovers helping each other get the most of of the various systems w Thiel speakers often as the centerpiece. the most excellent and forthcoming person u got the 2.3 from assured me they had the upgraded double magnet drivers and crossover changes - he knew all about it. that will be one thing I check IF I break them open.... having fun ... |
@thosb. I will add some updated pictures of the vintage room... like most speakers that reside there, some tweaks and changes required to get best of them... so far the Thiel require more toe in than the Apogee Stage, Vandersteen 1ci or the Quad ESL. The Nakagoka 110 can be a bit tipped up so I swapped in a Grado Ref Platinum last eve... that fixed that... finally my heavily modified Audionics CC2 solid state amp does a better job on the low end.... all fun more photos later... |
Ketchup makes a very good point. When I reviewed upgradible status for all the models, we nixed the 3.5 due to unavailability of drivers. As long as Rob can rebuild them, that is a safe and effective method of keeping your 3.5s on the air. A further point of history is that the 3.5 was near the end of Thiel's "normal" driver use. The 3.5 used modified, European, best of form drivers of the day. We had adopted Finite Element Analysis and were developing more sophisticated driver motors, cone geometries and surrounds for greater dynamic range and transient precision. By the following 3.6 generation, the drivers were completely engineered in-house and custom built to our specs by Vifa. Every driver is qualitatively more sophisticated in every way than those in the 3.5. So, as Ketchup warns, a lot of effort could be wasted trying to find replacement drivers that Thiel was not able to find. The 3.5 has a following. I vote to work with Rob for rebuilds. I will not be hot-rodding the 3.5, but can recommend upgrade parts for anyone to install themselves. |
Beetle - the amount of toe-in is highly dependent on the room. How wide is your room? With enough side space and absorption or diffraction at the first side reflection point, Thiel speakers are designed for straight-ahead positioning. Dropping off the direct tweeter axis smooths out the measured and heard tweeter response. In Thiel's 20' wide showroom, straight ahead sounded best for any and all models. |
Unfortunately a rebuild of 3.5 drivers isn't always an option. Mine came with replacement mids (mentioned above) and the originals are nowhere to be found. So I would like to find a replacement that is close in spec to the original (which mine may be, hence the effort to confirm). Simply waiting for a newer model to surface at a good price seems short-sighted to me as long as a suitable replacement can be sourced. As they say, "it ain't love, but it ain't bad..." |
ok, guess I should just relegate the 3.5s with non-original drivers to my garage. Seriously? I'm looking to find the best replacement drivers (if the Scanspeak pair I have are not the closest). Will I find the exact replacement I need that will bring harmony to the existing crossover? Not likely, but chances are good that I'll find something 'good enough'. And that's good enough for me. How many other factors (room dynamics, amplifier, individual hearing) actually have more of an impact than nuances of a midrange curve compared to another? Maybe, maybe not, but I'm not going to throw the 3.5s out, so why shouldn't I find the closest replacement mid I can? And again, having the originals rebuilt is not an option as the original mids were long gone when I bought these. |
My room is not quite 19.5’ wide. But setup is not centered. Left channel only 3’ from wall, right wall has a wood stove and walkway to an exit. Kinda funky, and FR measuremnts during my XO build did reveal some room mode issues worse than I imagined. Conditions ameliorated by vertical houseplants, wall coverings, a bookcase, and especially, two large openings on rear wall. I have experimented with speaker position, including toe-in, several times but keep coming back to pretty much where they now sit. |
bluetone it may be worth considering to watch the web daily to score any/all remaining pairs of CS 3.5 loudspeakers. The other 3.5 owners of the Panel could form a pool of stock for this model. Besides Audiogon, Audio Asylum, eBay and U.S. Audiomart, do not overlook Craigslist, Estate sales, Goodwill, Salvation Army/Salvage shops, Thrift stores, Yard sales. Just a thought to help you guys procure drivers/parts. Happy Listening! |
Re: 3.5’s I have a complete pair of CS 3.5 drivers and crossovers available for FREE to anyone here living close enough to zip 11755 to pick them up. I can’t/won’t ship them. I’ve put this offer up in this thread before. Sequential serials on the crossovers. The mids are non-functioning but the tweeters and woofers are 100% functional. I yanked them from the last pair I purchased from a fellow member a while back. They’ve been stored in my garage in a vacuum bag since. The cabinets were shot, so I decided to pull the guts out. Sorry, but the EQ went to a fellow member here who needed it. I ain’t kidding - free for pickup! |
Bluestone, I concur. Last time I talked to Rob, he showed me how many more mid-range he could rebuild and it was the last batch of cones. So, we will need to find a suitable replacement even if we have to compromise. I don't agree with the criticism of the 3.5 and I still have 2 pairs in daily use and the bass is fantastic. The mid-range is an essential part in this. Will be happy to do some measurements and see what could be a good replacement. Is the dayton audio dats v2 adequate to measure the specs of my current 3.5 midrange? Would a digital xo filter with 3 amps per channel (still have some decent ht amps I could use) be an alternative?? |
Will I find the exact replacement I need that will bring harmony to the existing crossover? Not likely, but chances are good that I'll find something 'good enough'. The thing is it's not like replacing a Mazda 6 with a Toyota Camry. If you have a different midrange driver, the sound balance may be too off that it would make the sound unlistenable and since our hearing is most sensitive to the midrange, the problem is exacerbated. For example, if the new midrange driver causes the midrange level to about 2-3db higher than it should be, then sound may actually hurt your hearing. Or if the new midrange driver ends up to have the region around 6-8khz to be elevated, you'll have excessive sibilance ... well I think you understand my reasons. |
Andy2, I understand that. My point is how close is close enough? Do we know there is absolutely nothing out there that will be close to the original mid, so much so that using the closest aftermarket driver will be obnoxious? I know it won't be exact. But I don't know if a replacement driver will be 1) totally wrong for the speaker, impacting the sound in a harsh or muted way, or 2) close enough that certain nuances are noticeable, but acceptable. That's all I'm saying here. Short of finding an original mid and having it rebuilt, what is the next best option? I currently enjoy my 3.5s with a Scanspeak aftermarket mid, I just want to know how close I can come to the factory mid, that's all (because I am likely missing out on the full capability of the speaker). Chances are good that any direction I go towards the original specs will be an improvement that I'm willing to live with, or without. |
Bluetone, Unless you really really really really love the 3.5s, like a lot, the smartest thing to do is to get something else, keep an eye out for some drivers that will work in the 3.5s, put them in, and sell them. They're a finicky speaker that's what, 30 years old? The EQs need constant attention (at least mine did) and the mids are asked to reproduce too much bandwidth and blow frequently. They are simply overworked. On top of that, they're shouty and harsh. I've been there! There's a pair of 2.3s on usaudiomart for $625 right now. |
after 35 years of having Thiel, I agree with Tom that the best sound is pretty much straight ahead, or maybe a tiny bit of toe in. i have my 3.7's set up with a distance of 9' between the coaxes and 8' from my ears to the coaxes. i got a lot of good info from MapleShade plus i really like their Sampson rack and brass feet. http://www.mapleshadestore.com/freeupgrades.php |
Bluetone - I would like to add some perspective for your 3.5s. As Ketchup alludes, the design is dated in the sense that each product builds on and improves the groundwork laid be its predecessor. Add the problems of replacement drivers, and there is a pretty big pickle. For this conversation I am going to assume that the 3.5s are your speakers which you would like to keep. One of these days I will get access to a 3.5 midrange or two, perhaps I might borrow Oblgny's or similar to take measurements. Perhaps Thielrules and I with guidance from this community can zoom in on a best replacement. Rob needs one for just such circumstances. Perhaps between our resident DIYs and myself, we can tweak the XO well enough. If such a team were working on the problem, I suspect we could find a solution better than abandoning your 3.5s. There are probably still over 3000 pair out there which could benefit. I also want to address Ketchup's assessment of "shouty and harsh". My experience with 3.5s in scores of rooms and shows and studios is that those adjectives do not apply when the system is right. Large excursions of the midrange do come with the first order territory; indeed Thiel midranges have always carried that load - still do in all models. Indeed they eventually fatigue. But within the past year, I have heard stories of people still 'blown away' by 3.5s even when compared with some highly regarded current speakers. Perhaps you guys on this forum could take on various parts of the task and we might develop a pretty good 3.5 solution. |
Thanks @tomthiel, I appreciate your words. I do want to keep the 3.5s, and I would hate to see them fall out of favor because of lack of replacement components. I have the curves of the common replacements, and maybe the original (see my post above). I'll publish them on my website at some point. I'm also working with Oblgny to retrieve the components he so graciously offered, and I have an email out to Rob to inquire as to if he can rebuild them (assume he can). Maybe what I could also offer is that once the original mids from Oblgny are rebuilt, I could divert them to either you or whoever could analyze them for a week or two. That might be a start, no? |
Damn! I've been switching up my speakers with some others I own, like the Waveform Mach MC monitors and then my old Thiel 02s. Sometimes I think I shouldn't do this, because every time I throw on the Thiel 02s I'm bewitched. I think "THAT'S what I'm looking for!" They have a magic tone, actually a sort of rainbow of tones, where cymbals and horns pop from the mix in shiny metallic, warm hues, guitar strings sparkle and sound EXACTLY like an acoustic guitar, with a woody body, voices sound beautiful, and drum snares sound so organic and have that papery "drum snare" pop and texture, bongos the same thing. They have this magic ability to give electric keyboards, and electric guitars (no distortion) a beautiful shimmering quality like I hear in real life. Strings have such beauty and texture. And they image wonderfully. Though they do have a slight upper midrange peak that helps give that glow and palpability. They aren't as coherent as the bigger Thiels. But when I hear them I can't help but think "have we really come that far?" in terms of speaker design. My 2.7s are wonderful and produce a far larger, richer sound. But in terms of sheer tonal beauty, and in terms of the palpability and sense of life, I find myself leaning towards the 02s! Then again, leave anything in the system long enough, the flaws come out and it's time to switch. But...jeeze...there's a reason I just can't sell these things. "Thiel 02s...girl!...I can't quit you!" :) |
Prof - your interest has inspired me to resurrect and study my 02s which are in transit from Virginia. the o2 is second order like Wilson, ps etc. stock peerless tweeter and normal coils caps resistors woofer and port. Unbraced cabinet, no anti diffraction tricks. A thesis could written on why you like them. |
I’m glad to report that bluestone is local enough and/or intrepid enough to arrange pickup of the 3.5 drivers and crossovers next week. Seems as though he is as fond of these old speakers as I had been. And I’ve had a few. They are most definitely worth sustaining for as long as feasibly possible. 30 year old speakers that sound this good? Yeah! The pair of 3.5’s that I gifted to my nephew - with the mids repaired by Rob a while ago - still sound excellent. At low to moderate listening levels I don’t think I’ve had a speaker that put out such impeccable sonics - which may very well be the strongest suit of this model. Yeah, it’s an old design, replacement parts are scarce and growing even scarcer, but they’re still an absolute bargain on the used market. There’s a pair in California asking $800, and there’s been a pair in New York for well over a year asking $1000. That would be my personal ceiling given all the drawbacks aforementioned. It has been a LOT of fun watching the discourse continue here; the conversations regarding upgrades and tweaking these speakers is interesting as all hell even though I wouldn’t know a first order network from a short order cook. That so many others also find Thiel to be something very special is - forgive the very weak pun - music to my ears. Thiel was responsible for me getting back into “hifi” around six years ago with my first pair of 3.5’s. Hard to let that kind of influence just go away. Rock on, thread! Best there is ... |
jon_5912 , jafant -- To me it is fairly simple --- when you go to a jazz club or classical concert you hear the music. If well performed, there is absolutely nothing to create tension, stress, or even untoward focused attention. You tend to let the music and performance wash over you. You are immersed in it. To me, the Thiel and Vandersteen speakers (as well as some planars) do that. Other speakers do not, except perhaps a few planars. Interestingly I grew up in a household with a very large JBL C-30 front loaded corner horn (two 15" woofers and a D175 horn mid-tweeter that dispersed widely via baffles and covered everything from 175hz on up.. It was mono, but music was produced that was effortless and low distortion, with pretty coherent phase given it was handled mostly by a single driver. It had much of that same "effortless" , relaxing quality you feel. |
tomthiel, Ha...yeah I feel a bit strange lauding them so highly. They just happen to hit my buttons. As I said, at least my pair has an upper mid/lower treble peak of some sort that unfortunately can make them shouty or piercing with the wrong material. And they won't turn up terribly loud before straining. But they have such an in-the-room palpability. And they seem to be a match made in heaven with my Conrad Johnson tube gear and especially with vinyl playback, which I think plays to their strengths and mitigates some of their weaknesses. I'll have to try pairing them with my subs at some point for fun. |
