Yes, Jim was an armchair electronics designer and enjoyed talking circuits with Nelson Pass, Dan D'Agostino, the Bryston Boys and others. He constantly pushed them for better transient performance, current delivery, etc. from their amps. Originally Thiel Audio fantasized making the whole chain: speakers (powered), preamps and turntables. We started before digital. It became quickly clear that we had more than our hands full with the passive speaker link in the chain.
Thiel Owners
Guys-
I just scored a sweet pair of CS 2.4SE loudspeakers. Anyone else currently or previously owned this model?
Owners of the CS 2.4 or CS 2.7 are free to chime in as well. Thiel are excellent w/ both tubed or solid-state gear!
Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
I just scored a sweet pair of CS 2.4SE loudspeakers. Anyone else currently or previously owned this model?
Owners of the CS 2.4 or CS 2.7 are free to chime in as well. Thiel are excellent w/ both tubed or solid-state gear!
Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
13,687 responses Add your response
Jafant - remember, I'm not an engineer; my experience is more as an observer - user. Slew rate still gets lots of attention in professional audio, especially microphones and their preamps, but it doesn't show up much in print. I have Tom Jung's original Studio Technologies Mic Pre which was reworked by Jim Williams (pro geek guru) to upgrade caps, etc. He increased the slew rate by 5x as part of his magic. The preamp improved its transparency substantially, but lots of things were done at the same time, so I can't attribute any specifics. I wonder out-loud whether slew rate gets less attention now because it is generally faster now than in the old days. Also, I can only speculate as to Power vs Pre amp importance, but I suspect SR is important everywhere equally. Some amps like Spectral place storage caps right next to the output transistors to increase slew rate substantially by purely geographical means. My observations over the years includes SR being a major factor in transient performance and therefore detail retrieval. |
tomthiel As I started my higher end education back in the early 1990's via Stereophile and TAS subscriptions, I recall, Slew Rate being discussed quite often by the reviewers. In 2020, is this factor relevant as it pertains to power amplifiers? I will concur with the CS 3.7 being very efficient, as well as, models CS 2.4, 2.4SE and 2.7. Happy Listening! |
tmsdrg - I am one of the culprits of touting the necessity to double power with halving impedance. My point was more academic than of real consequencel. If an amp doesn't double its power into half impedance, then it is by definition current limited. BUT, as has been pointed out here previously, that point of art is of no real importance as long as there is enough current to deliver to the load. So, doubling is not a technical necessity to drive Thiels, but that sense of anemic bass, slow transients, etc. is symptomatic of running out of current capacity. The 3.7 is about twice the efficiency as many previous Thiels, so the problem becomes less of an issue than before. |
The 2.8 minimum impedance are manufacturer specs. There have been independent measurements (e.g.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs37-loudspeaker-measurements) indicating it is either 2.4 or 2.3. I've had different amps on my 3.7s including a Bryston 4BSST, 14BSST, Modwright KWA 150SE and the last two have been Class D (using a Ric Schultz EVS 1200 now). When my friend worked at a hifi shop many moons ago, I helped deliver a bunch of things and often Thiel was paired with Levinson (when I had my 7.2s I had a Proceed HPA). Like anything else it is dependent one's room and listening habits (music preferences and loudness level). My main room in the old place (I started with 2.3s, then 7.2s and then 3.7s) was huge (something like 7,000 cubic feet that opened into other spaces and when I had an old Bryston 4BST (not the SST), I actually drove it into momentary clipping. The 14BSST (15 amp version) could not handle the impedance (would go into thermal shutdown during music or movies which where somewhat intense) and I ended up building a custom amp stand with fans (which solved the issue). The 3BSST wasn't as bad a load but would get the 14BSST heat sinks hot enough to burn one's hand. The Modwright amp ran a hair cooler (and the heatsinks where inside the case). The room in the new place is big but not as big as the old place and the Modwright did a bit better but not as well as either of the Class Ds I've used (which bested it in every way and it still shocks me to touch the amp case and hardly feel anything warmth. |
@unsound Is there a technical reason that the "double down" ratio keeps popping up?For instance, the DMA_400 listed above does not do this in sequence from 8 ohms to 4 to 2, but as I run the numbers it seems more than adequate. Is that right, or does "doubling down" refer to an important harmonic ratio needed here? Also, the minimum impedence of the 3.7 is 2.8 ohms, so perhaps we need to consider that the DMA-400 does indeed double from the 8 ohm rating to the 2 ohm. Thanks again for any thoughts on this. |
@unsound,Yikes -- I pasted the specs for the DMA-300 into the DMA-400 slot. To amend:
Power Output DMA-400 (continuous) @ 8 ohms - 350 Watts RMS @ 4 ohms - 560 Watts RMS
@ 2 ohms - 705 Watts RMS Output Current 90 Amps peak Frequency Response ą0.1 dB, DC-150 KHz ą1 dB, DC-1 MHz ą3 dB, DC-1.8 MHz Thiel actually checked out worse on Stereophile specs, going down to only 26 kHZ, not 22 as stated in my manual (weird), DMA-300 is same as quoted. Alright! Sorry about the confusion. |
@tmsrdg, re: Spectral and Thiel, the specs you posted are a bit off for both brands. Both brands are a bit better than posted. From a technical standpoint though not quite absolutely ideal they should be an appropriate, adequate combination so long as one doesn’t play too loud and/or play in too large a room. When I lived in NYC my most often used dealer carried both lines. They frequently paired them with various Thiel models. Interestingly, they never seemed to be paired for long durations. I have not heard the combinations with more modern Thiel’s. I’m not quite sure but perhaps the CS 2.3’s were the last models I’ve heard them paired with. From a technical standpoint the more recent Thiel’s are a bit more challenging for the Spectral’s than the legacy Thiel’s, but still appropriate. Sonically, I can imagine models like the CS 3.7’s perhaps being a bit better fit than the legacy Thiel’s. But, that’s just speculative. FWIW, IMHO, While I have true respect for the Spectral gear, I never much cared for them. To my ears, while fast and clean and pure, they sounded somewhat white and bleached. Spectral was a long time Absolute Sound editor’s choice favorite; Stephen Hill used Thiel 3.5’s with a Spectral DMA-50 amp (Threshold pre and Straightwire Maestro cables) for mastering the "the absolute sound HEARTS of SPACE" recording. And they did work rather well in the famous Avalon, MIT "2C3D" systems that were deservedly quite famous. (FYI, I’m not a fan of MIT cabling with Thiel’s either. YMMV!) The somewhat unique technical characteristics make system matching somewhat more limiting than most, and I would recommend making inquires into parts and service availabilities before purchase. Not my first choice, but I can certainly imagine others enjoying the combinations. |
Hello jafant, Around the same time I had the Vault 2 installed (had to have my dealer run CAT5 cabling to my listening area), I inserted MIT Terminator 2 cables from my LS7 line stage to the Thiel Bass Equalizer and then to the amp. Former cables were Audioquest Golden Gate and King Cobra to the amp. While I do believe the MIT's are probably more resolving in some way, I do think the Vault's DAC is more likely the cause as it renders some of my ripped CD's with a presentation that's a bit more forward and lean than I remember. Will try Tom's suggestion on listening height this weekend as I also swapped out my old listening chair just before getting the MIT cables and Vault 2 installed. Happy listening! Arvin C |
Thanks for the kind comments, jafant and Tom...truly appreciated! Tom: Wow...your wealth of information in all things Thiel is truly a blessing! I have limitations with seating position due to my ground floor family room...basically, I’ve split it in thirds lengthwise, with a sectional facing my flat panel taking up the "front" 2/3's and my listening area taking up the last "back" third, but arranged width wise as you saw in the pictures. I am sitting a bit closer than I’d like for my taste. Where your comments on ear height ring so true is that I used to have a chair where I did sit lower, but my wife hated that it was so beat up, so we junked it but never truly replaced it. So, I’m using the spare office chair you saw in the pics. I have noticed that my 3.5’s have become more "touchy" with certain material where higher frequencies have become much more grainy and pronounced. This wasn’t always so, but I chalked it up to switching cables or the addition of the Bluesound Vault and its on-board DAC. I will try your suggestion regarding ear height...Thanks again for the suggestion and your invaluable information! Arvin C |
Arvin - thanks for sharing. An old-school engineering audio tech informed me, after working on my Classe DR9s, that it shared essentially the same circuit as the ARC solid state amps. Who knew. Regarding your room. Nice. This detail work I have been doing on Thiel Classics has underscored the vertical lobing problem. The problem is that phase angles and resultant amplitude irregularities get worse the farther off vertical axis one's ears are. The closer you get to the speakers, the more critical the geometry becomes. Nothing new. The target ear height is 90cm or 35-36" with the speakers flat on the floor. It seems that your ears might be high, sitting in that chair at close range. I have the same problem. I clamp a carpenter's square to the side of the cabinet with its top edge 90cm from the floor, and then tilt the cabinet until I can sight to my ear-height target in my listening chair. Sound and measurements get appreciably better. Just a thought. Enjoy. Nice rig. Tom |
Hello all! This past weekend, I finally got a chance to hook up the second ARC D240 MKII amp to my system. In bridged-mono mode, the amps effectively double their power to 480 watts/each at 8 ohms...very powerful indeed! This was immediately noticeable in the way my 3.5’s performed...low level detail and clarity was outstanding as was the overall "slam" on bass-heavy passages. Also peculiar was the effect this had on the Thiel Bass Equalizer: before, I didn’t really notice a difference between the 40Hz - 20Hz settings. Now, there was a definite change in the character of the presentation. As far as the rest of the performance, the soundstage seemed to grow deeper, with instrumentation more layered and pronounced than before. I never got the sense that the Thiels "disappeared", but they are definitely less "in your face" than before. However, the details and nuances in well recorded materials are even more noticeable, even more defined than before. The overall sense I get is that the extra control and headroom that this bridged-mono configuration has on my speakers has been well worth the wait. I had been searching for the better part of 18 months for another amp to match with my own and in this case, patience was well rewarded. Before, I had always wondered "How can I make my Thiels sing better?" Now, I am completely satisfied in knowing they are getting all the power and current they need. For reference sake, here’s what my little listening area looks like: https://www.flickr.com/photos/arvincastro/sets/72157713245305663 Going into this, I set a price limit for $1000/component to see how good of a system I could assemble on a modest budget. While I know I am decidedly on the "vintage" path in terms of ARC gear, the high-quality, fit and finish and performance remain as good as anything I could hope to get for the price. Plus, I just love the way it sounds! Thanks for letting me share...Hope everyone’s doing well! Arvin C |
tmsrdg "I realize this is getting somewhat off the forum topic, but the folks at Berkeley Audio tell me that they run the Alpha DAC directly into Spectral amps, with excellent results.So right now, I'm looking at the Spectral DMA-300. " Without being cheeky I think your making a good decision , one less interconnect cable , one less power cord leaving more $ for your amp or speaker cable upgrade . I use a passive preamp because I need an attenuator and selector . I'm one of the minimalists , less between the music and the speakers . You should look into other forums on the topic passive vs. active , in your case preamp or no preamp that is the question . And The Band Played On Rob |
My two cents and two thousand words on Spectral products. It seems the only press they get (along with the Berkeley Alpha DAC) is Robert Harley, for better or worse. Goodwins audio outside Boston carry both, and I had a thorough audition of the Alpha DAC in 2012 soon after it first came out, but more to the point here, a good taste of the Spectral DMC 30 preamp (driving non-Spectral amps in this case), after auditioning DACs through a very good ’other’ preamp. On the same material, in comparison, the front-to-rear layering of the soundstage, even on studio recordings, was unlike anything I’d heard in hifi before, combined with a near-holographic stereo image. The top octaves, despite modest digital source material (on a $22,000 dCS CD player), were pristine, precise, super-fast, but entirely natural, and actually seemed on the ’darker’ side of neutral. My initial response was certainly amazement, but that didn’t allow for a more-accurate long-term assessment. As my time in the room (after coming to hear DACs) was finishing up, I couldn’t listen to all I would have liked to, but my impressions were beyond other high-end preamps I’m familiar with, or was . The company seems pretty low-key, archaic website, and design the best product they can, and leave them alone for years. The preamps have the decent control flexibility I like. It seems the wide bandwidth can cut both ways. There’s certainly no musical information in the MHz, but it does make for perfect transients, even if the high frequency noise screws with downstream amps. My own preamp is spec’d -3dB@>0.5MHz vs Spectral’s 1.5MHz, so I don’t know what frequency the issues begin, but I’m sure there’s more to it. This engineer likes their internal layout, design approach, relevant innovations, product cycle longevity, sane pricing, application of RF instrumentation technologies, true research into semiconductor physics and other details that are taken for granted out of necessity by other high-end designers. I would sure like to audition a DMC-30 at home! A good friend had Alan Goodwin design a ground-up ultimate listening room within the foundation of his cost-no-object new construction, optimized for 2-channel, but also has 5.1. Spectral DMA-360 amps (and preamp) all around (driving large Avalons), and to my current awareness they’ve been on 24/7 for twenty years without issue. Yes, it sounds amazing, but primarily because of a perfect acoustic, perfect absorption and T60 across all frequencies, and perfect bass loading, something never heard in even a well-treated home room turned listening room. |
OK, I realize this is getting somewhat off the forum topic, but the folks at Berkeley Audio tell me that they run the Alpha DAC directly into Spectral amps, with excellent results.So right now, I'm looking at the Spectral DMA-300. Specs as follows:Power Output (continuous): @ 8 ohms - 225 Watts RMS, @ 4 ohms - 410 Watts RMS, @ 2 ohms - 615 Watts RMS Output Current: 60 Amps peak per channelFrequency Response: a0.1 dB, DC-150 KHz,a1 dB, DC-1 MHz, a3 dB, DC-1.8 MHz or the DMA 400Power Output (continuous): @ 8 ohms - 225 Watts RMS,@ 4 ohms - 410 Watts RMS,@ 2 ohms - 615 Watts RMS Output Current: 60 Amps peak per channel Frequency Response: same as DMA-300 to use with my Thiel 3.7s in my 20x20x8, one side opening into another room, listening spaceThiel 3.7 specs: Amplitude Response 33HZ-22kHz +/- 2DB; Sensitivity 90db@2.8 V-1m; Impedance 4 ohms (2.8 minimum), Recommended power 200-600 watts As far as I can tell, either of these amps would do fine, with the caveat that they do not do the coveted "doubling down." I need some help with this. Any thoughts on these amp/speaker pairings will be greatly appreciated!Todd |
@nkonor & @rascs: How does Spectral's high-bandwidth, ultra fast designs manifest themselves in the final sound that one hears from the system? Again, I have not as yet had the pleasure of listening to a Spectral system, but my intrigue grows the more I learn & read about them. Thanks for any thoughts! |
@ tmsrdg and @ nkonor Thanks for your question. It looks like Spectral is getting a lot of attention here recently. I am also a long term Spectral owner, going back to the mid 90s and as I mentioned before I have never had any reliability issues apart from a backlit logo failing 15 years out of warranty. I am only superficially familiar with your Berkley D/A, I have read their reviews. Remember the amplifiers can reproduce high frequencies much higher than the output of the D/A- which is 59KHz . The amps are rated to over a mega or million Hz. Without knowing what the analog circuits are doing at extreme frequencies you are and Spectral techs will confirm that you are running risk of damaging the amplifier. In addition, I see the the maximum energy usage of the Berkley is 25-30 Watts, which to me infers that you would likely do better to have the Spectral preamp between the D/A and the amp. Remember the D/A will have to drive not only the interconnect cables, but also the input impedance of the amp. The output of the D/A does not have a current rating but does have a maximum output voltage of 3.25V. The preamps from Spectral typically have a peak to peak voltage capability of 100V and maximum current output of 1amp (!!), fully comfortable with driving difficult loads. I have heard the phrases of "wire with gain" or "the best preamp is no preamp." I would agree that it is very counter intuitive to add something between the source and the amplifier and not lose information in the process. But, I have heard in my system, in friend's systems, adding a preamplifier can dramatically improve the sound of the system because it is more comfortable driving the cables + amplifier. By dramatic, I mean in every way- quieter background, deeper bass and drive, complex harmonic textures revealed, wider and deeper soundstage, holographic imaging, more engaging dynamics. Spectral did make an amplifier called the DMA 150 Universal in the early 2000s that had an extra, small internal circuit board that allowed you to switch the amp to work with a non-Spectral preamplifier. But engaging the circuit that limited the bandwidth of the amp at its input and was detrimental. I would recommend a preamp. I would gladly trade you one of mine for your CS3.7s :) Hope this is helpful and I am happy to have discovered this thread. Happy listening! |
arvincastro & rascs4 & tmsrdg, vair68rober'ts post on 02/18/2020 @ 10:07 is Not quite right, actually, not right at all. I do asume that I was the friend who had Sectral's amp and preamp for 10 years. I was a Spectral owner for 20 years, not 10 years. I also, never had an issue with my Spectral gear in that entire 20 years. Rob should know better, since I met him and have known him since October of 1971. He has become a wannabe, that gets his info from the web, reviews of others and apparently faulty memory. In 2016, I decided to totally revamp my entire system. 2 new TTs, new Pass lab electronics, New speakers, which I just got at Christmas 2019, ( Wilson Yvettes.) My Avalon Opus were 14 years old. My Spectral gear, held its value very well. I bought most of it used and bargained hard for the prices that I paid for it and though it took me 2+ years to sell the entire system to one (1) guy, I only lost $1800.00 on the entire Spectral / MIT system. My Avalon Opus went with the Wilson Yvettes that I just bought. So, arvincastro, rascs4, tmsrdg; If you really want accurate info from a longtime Spectral owner / user; you can feel free to PM me. If we need to exchange phone numbers and talk, we can do that too. |
@rasc Thanks for the detailed and timely response. There are many reasons I'd like to try Spectral, but I've gone without a preamp for quite a while now (only way to go at least for me) and don't know if I could keep that up with only a Spectral amp in the line. The line, FYI, is Aurender N10 > Berkeley Alpha DAC > Classe 300 >Thiel 3.7. Any comments on whether I would really need the Spectral preamp are greatly appreciated! |
@
tmsrdg
Hello sir, Yes, I have a full Spectral ensemble with all the appropriate interconnects and speaker cables. I lived overseas for a number of years and have just recently gotten back into this hobby. The house is starting to look like an audio museum. I have 2 preamps from Spectral, both of them older- a DMC20 II and DMC 30s. I also have 3 amps- the DMA 180 II and the compact amps- DMA 90 and DMA100s. I am sure they DMA180 would drive your CS3.7s- it sounds great on my 2.3s and even the CS5is. I have a Classe CA2300 and I prefer the Spectral. I keep the the DMC20 II for its phono section. My current cartridge is .18mv output and the 202 phono board for the preamp is quiet enough to thoroughly enjoy. Spectral strongly recommends using a Spectral amplifier with their preamplifiers but you can safely use their preamplifier with any amp. The amps are very wide-bandwidth (the DMA 180 is -3dB at 1.8 megahertz) and are said to be unstable with preamps not as wide-band and cables that do not provide a soft rolloff at extreme frequencies (MIT). This and that they are designed and voiced with MIT cables is the reason for the mandate. Unlike @ vair68robert's friend's experience, Spectral components, new or used, seem to me to be a particularly good value considering their build and parts quality. They tend to hold their value reasonably well and in my experience they are very reliable. I have never had to send back any of my equipment for service. I did replace the bulbs in the logo of my DMA180, but I did this at my own risk. I am not sure what issues your friend had if he had appropriate Spectral branded MIT or better, upgrading cables should not be to fix problems but to improve an already stable system. Thanks, regards and happy listening :) |
I, too, am interested to hear more about the Spectral-Thiel experience...really, more about Spectral period! Have to admit, Spectral was a brand I knew nothing about until I jumped back into the hobby full force about 4 years ago. Since then, I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a brand with such reverence from both owners and non-owners. Definitely a brand I hope to audition some day... |
I got the CS1.5s a few months after they were introduced. It has more bass than it has a right to have, it is small and easy relatively to set up. They seem to forgive not having exotic electronics/cables but will resolve any upgrade you make. The replacement CS1.6 did transients better and were more dramatic to listen to (new woofer design and increased sensitivity maybe) but I think the 1.5s are exceptional with both male and female voices. In my rooms and systems the soundstage with the 1.5 always starts just behind the speaker which tends to draw me into the recordings. |
Hello fellow Thiel owners! Just wanted to give you all an update on my system: today, I was finally able to secure a second ARC D240 MKII ss amp to go with my current one. As an added plus, I bought it locally from a fellow Thiel owner (he has mint CS 5i's in one of his systems...gorgeous speakers that sounded even better) and was able to spend time with him listening to some jazz and talking about our great hobby. Running these amps in bridged mode will give each of my CS 3.5's 480 watts @ 8 ohms. Mated to my tube ARC LS7 line-stage and tube ARC PH3 phono preamp, I'm feeling that I have a system that I can finally be satisfied with from both power and sonic standpoints. Unfortunately, will have to wait for the weekend before I can listen to my system in "monoblock" configuration as business travel calls, but will definitely let you guys know how it goes once it's all setup and running. Finally, to contribute to the cable discussion, I'm using Audioquest Golden Gate RCA for all my source interconnects, MIT Terminator 2 RCA interconnects from my LS7 to the Thiel 3.5 Bass Equalizer and to the amps. Speaker wires are MIT AVT-3. Thanks and hope you are all doing well! Arvin C |
Thanks for your welcome jafant, I currently have 3 Thiel systems, my main 2 channel system, a home theater system and a small home recording system. I have had a lot of things pass through the systems here. From Thiel- 1.5, 2.3, SCS3, 3.6. I have had Adcom, McCormack, Ayre, Krell, Classe, Sonic Frontiers, ARC and Spectral. As a source I use primarily a ClearAudio turntable with Lyra cartridge. I haven't heard anything more transparent, dynamic, resolving and ultimately musical than Spectral. It just sounds harmonically correct. Every recording sounds different and the imaging and soundstaging are spectacular. Having Spectral mandates a use of MIT cables (my amps came with warning stickers sealing the bag.) I take some comfort in knowing which cables were used in the design of the electronics. I have a number of ASC tubetraps in my listening room and I listen on the short dimension of the room to maximize the distance from the speakers to sidewalls. In my opinion, Thiels have a/n (unfair) reputation of being lively (kindly) in the upper octaves or bright. When I have heard systems that sound bright, the speakers are usually too close to untreated side walls, too close together or toed-in too far. I find that ideally they need at least 5 feet from the outside of the cabinet to the nearest wall, slightly wider placement than an equilateral triangle with minimal toe-in. This, in my system, allows for the tonality of instruments to be same whether they are panned left or right or in the center of the soundstage. It also seems to help with eliminate the soundstage curving in or out in the center as the sound passes from left to right (etc.) Some distance from the listening position to the speakers is needed for the drivers to sound cohesive- with the 2.3s over 9' seems to work well. I am sure all of you have as much or more experience setting up your speakers, this is just a personal observation. During my recent downtime with my 2.3 coaxes off to Rob, I pulled a pair of 1.5s into the main system. I had forgotten how good those can be. After leaving my desk at Thiel, I wanted to show them some appreciation to the folks on Nandino Blvd for my time there. I ordered my 2.3s with the specification that they were to be in birdseye maple and stained a "fun" color. They sent some samples and I chose a bright red finish. I will never sell them. Thanks again for your welcome to the forum :) |
Prof's comment above got me thinking about another "wings" related quote from "It's a Wonderful Life." Clarence's note to George in the final scene in the movie went something like this: Dear George: Remember no man is a failure who has friends and expensive speaker cables. Thanks for the wings. Love, Clarence |