ronkent
Always good to see you here. I am excited to read about your new Amp.
Those PSA BHK Mono-Block Amps are no slouch.
Happy Listening!
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!
13,494 responses Add your response
Had a pair of 2.4s. Really liked them but then moved up to 3.7s. Liked them even more. Still have them. Listened to other brands including Magico and Wilson and in my price range (under 40K) I have not found anything that makes me want to give up my 3.7s. I found that for my flooring (carpet over 1" subflooring on 2x12 joists) spikes were a better way to go than the Gaia. The spikes focused the imaging better in my set up. Also have a pair of REL S/5 SHO subs. They are a great addition to the 3.7s. |
pablohoney -As fate would have it, our original ’O’ series used Danish Oil as a first coat to seal and warm the tone. That went out with the 1983 CS3. Our sealer or shellac are clear, which in shellac land is called ’white’, unless you want some color to match your aged veneers, etc. Then there are many shellac shades available beginning with ’blond’, all the way to ’dark amber’ and ’orange’. Begin with the thinned clear wash coats like I described. Just wade in. I advise against polyurethane as that chemical family has much larger molecules and different light refractive index that I disparaged above. Try for lacquer to get a ’Thiel’ look. |
tomthiel Thank-you for taking the time to write this up. You are a wealth of knowledge on many subjects. Thanks for being such a helpful resource to us all. My take away is let the natural beauty of the wood standout and provide a finish that does not inhibit this. Some of the techniques I came across started with a coat of Boiled Linseed Oil or Danish oil, then non-waxed shellac, then top coated with polyurethane for durability. Likely Boiled Linseed Oil or Danish oil was not used on the 3.7 finish I have. With the raw Birdseye it's stark white in comparison to the finished 3.7's and wondered if any of these oils had been used to darken. Sounds as the Shellac will provide the warm amber look of the 3.7's and allow the beauty of the wood to shine through. I assume the 3.7's have darkened over time. I'll pick up the supplies you suggested and trial on scrap pieces and see how it looks! Heading out on family vacation so it will be a bit before I get back to this. Will keep you posted. Thanks again! |
Pablohoney Birdseye Maple finish Wood finishing is an art of its own. Thiel took its cabinetry and finishing quite seriously, far beyond normal utilitarian protection of the wood. In Thiel's first two decades under my direction, we built cabinets that were fully mirror images of each other. Our wood stable included dozens of species – basically everything that anyone would request. Our approach was to let the woods' natural color and grain shine through, with mild exceptions. Those included toning unusual flitches of a species toward the norm as well as producing the 'expected shade' for others such as Mahogany and Cherry which have a long history of particular darker-than-natural shades which approximate how those woods age through time when exposed to natural ultraviolet rays. But all in, let's call Thiel's finishes 'natural'. The colorants we used were dyes rather than pigments. Dyes are very small molecules of color for shifting tone without obfuscation, whereas pigments are quite large – resulting in a more opaque covering effect. I note that later finishes such as the signature Red Birdseye on the 2.4SE, and the very red Morado on my CS1.6s, as well as the 'Dark Cherry' on the SCS4s are all pigments. They obscure the underlying grain and are easier to apply more consistently than dye stains. Back to natural finishes. An important aspect of a natural finish is that it enhances the natural characteristics of the underlying wood. A good natural finish does not visually sit on the surface. Many water-based and other plastic finishes appear as a separate film over the wood. They have very large molecular structures compared to the underlying wood and their refractive index (how the incoming light is bent) is quite different from wood. Nitrocellulose lacquer and shellac, exhibit refractive indexes closest to wood. Our production finish was a pre-catalyzed nitrocellulose lacquer with its first-coat sealer having additives for ease of sanding. This finish handles and acts like lacquer, but continues to get stronger after solvent evaporation allows molecular cross-linking. In our custom shop, we often used shellac as the sealer for its subtle range of coloration and old-school visual appeal. Our industrial finishes were custom blended with safer solvents and premium working and durability qualities. But a close working approximation on the open market would be Sherwin-Williams Sherwood Catalyzed (precat) Lacquer over its branded sealer or shellac. On to the particulars of Birdseye Maple. Birdseye is an anomaly which acts and looks differently when viewed from the tree's exterior or interior. Therefore if your panels contain mirror-image bookmatches, you will have 'innie' craters on one half and 'outie' craters on the other half. To avoid large reflective differences that can make one half look darker or lighter than the other, good practice is to apply a penetrating and a wash coat to the panels to plug the tubular pores in the wood. The first penetrating coat is sealer cut to 33% viscosity and the second wash coat is cut to 66%. The third full viscosity sealer coat is sanded level to accept the topcoats. If you are darkening the maple, it is best to use clear first and second penetrating coats and add color to the third full viscosity sealer as well as early topcoats if needed. Staining bare Maple is risky due to unpredictable color striking over differing micro-grain structures. The final topcoat should best be clear. Our production finish was 1 sealer and 2 topcoats, unless more was needed for color or grain needs. Note that more thinner coats produces less orange-peel than fewer thicker coats. You don't want orange-peel. A pro tip learned from my musical instrument making is that you can level a final finish without the laborious rub-out process like you see on high-end guitars, etc. Allow your final topcoat to flash off dry to the touch (5± minutes depending on temperature). Then briskly and firmly rub the finish with a soft cotton tee-shirt, etc. The finish is soft enough to lay down under this pressure for a lovely soft, level gloss. You can soften the gloss further by using regular builders' fiberglass first, and following with the cotton knit if desired. Practice on scrap. If you are making a showpiece plinth, I suspect you might like what you get for the extra effort. Such showpieces often get a coat of carnauba wax for a soft feel and look. Thiel did not wax its finishes, but some users did. I've tried to choke the fire-hose enough to not overwhelm while supplying enough content to chew on. Let us see your results when they come.
|
vair68robert Thanks for the link, upgrading these has always been on my mind. Yes, I do have the vacuum hold down. It’s a Star III table. I’ve just installed new springs and finishing up the stand. On the lookout for a decent phono preamp, currently have a Schiit Mani to get me started. Would like a PS Audio Stellar at some point when my budget allows. |
https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/reviews/smc-audio-mccormack-dna-1-upgrade-experience-r948/ Great review for upgrading your DNA-1 , Does your Sota have the vacuum hold down ? |
Thank-you jafant! Owner of 3.5's which hooked me on Thiel. Have since acquired an SCS3 and a pair of SCS4T's for home theater use. Came across a pair 3.7's that I couldn't pass up, there went my amplifier upgrade budget :). Also running a pair of Thiel SS2's and PX05's running in stereo. Found a pair of 1.6's for my daughters room, she cherishes them. Currently running Theta Casablanca III, Bryston BDP-2, Lexicon RT-20, McCormack DNA-1, DNA-2, and DNA-HT3. Using various MIT cabling to connect it all together with Cardas and Audioquest power cabling. Enjoying the sound and am always looking to experiment with different gear. In the process of getting my Sota Sapphire turntable setup. New to turntables and will be a fun journey, I'm hoping! |
Long time reader of this forum, it is such a wealth of information. I committed to reading from the beginning and have just recently made it to current posts! I just love these speakers and reading of others experiences. Thanks to all who have shared their knowledge with this group. Have a finishing question for Tom Thiel. Have a pair of Birdseye Maple 3.7's and am ready to apply a finish to a Birdseye Maple turntable stand I've built. When you were involved, what was the finishing process for Birdseye Maple? I've been researching finishing technique's for Birdseye Maple, and thought I would reach out and learn Thiel's process. I know they will never be an exact match and would like replicate the finish as close as possible. |
JA - concerning the workspace. No room for multiple speakers, so no longer a 'hotrod garage' - more like a lab/studio. I've spent half-days working here since April with real progress. One surprise is that capacitor (and all components to a lesser degree) directionality is far more important than I thought. Thiel didn't consider this factor in production. I find directionality more efficacious than higher-cost parts. My present method of determination and optimization is very cumbersome. I'm working toward an easier method. Considerable upgrade potential with your same parts! I wholeheartedly endorse replacing your stock Thiel resistors with Mills MRA12s. Short money, real improvement. Wire is a rabbit-warren way deeper than expected. Serious work in that department for two years. I (right now) have a solution that is very satisfying. It's another matter to get it manufactured . . . another story still being written. My present sample development method may amuse you. Imagine a bracket near the ceiling to which stuff can be clamped. Imagine a miniature 'diving board' clamped to it with some array of holes in a circle to accept wires / fiber cords, at various spacings and radii. Imagine a similar set of holes in a hand-held puck. Imagine a center non-conductive cord fastened to the ceiling bracket and stretched tightly to a turnbuckle on the floor - a vertical tight-rope. That core and/or other separating cords are fixed to the diving board and through the puck which is hand-twisted to determine the cable lay and packing density. The various wire and cord components are typically cut 44" long which wind up to a meter long. Those 1 meter setups are installed between a pair of RCA plugs with screw terminations. Placed between my Benchmark DAC3 and HPA4, their attributes can be readily heard and their FuzzMeasure sweeps show differences that correlate with listening. The test method is time-consuming and tedious - making a meter of cable takes an hour or two. But in a half-day session I can make and document an idea. Rinse and repeat. Winners are long enough to cut down to woofer and tweeter runs (two different cables) in a pair of SCS4s. A significant part of my work is less-technical. Suitable wire comes from many approaches. Partners here who have upgraded their speakers have (I believe) always chosen to upgrade from the stock Thiel 18-2 solid in teflon. I have tested many/most of the wires they used. My determination is that their differences from stock gain something and lose something and change the fundamental characteristic sound signature - which I am unwilling to do. I must say that the cables out there are works of art, intellectual - technical - musical. If anyone tells you 'wire doesn't matter', be suspicious of whatever else they may say. My work has surveyed a broad range of approaches and I owe a debt of gratitude to the manufacturers who have provided samples, knowledge, and special insight. My approach has been from the perspective of Applied Physics rather than engineering and I thank my friend, neighbor and MIT operative for references and insights from beyond the usual perspectives. This has been a very long, deep journey - the deepest dive of my lifetime. It wouldn't have happened without the Thiel community, which I have accessed here on this forum. There is more work to do, but this pair of SCS4s, in the works for around a year, is about ready to head to California for Fluid Dynamics wavelaunch technologies. That rabbit-hole is another world of its own. Off to the lab/studio - |
I too had thoughts of the " speaker " being black anodized aluminum , which would have looked very cool since I do take the grills off when listening . While the bright aluminum coax's don't look so bad the bright white woofers stand out like a sore thumb , but since I'm tripping out on the music I can overlook the big white speaker |
Wow @dhoff01 , care to share a pic of those? I wonder how many of the Les Paul versions were made? |
Thanks for the info @tomthiel
I saw the photo. Ok, so it's only the surround that is painted black. I'd hoped it was the driver that was black. Not sure it's useful to me then, but I'm thankful you posted the photo. cheers. |
Guys - about those 2.7/3.7 coaxes. The black ones are the original chrome drivers that have been painted black. They are chrome under the black paint. They were painted to differentiate them from the early drivers which had erratic tweeter output levels which required trimming resistors to bring them into spec. When the tweeter level was solved, the 'finalized' drivers were painted. If your chrome driver has no trim resistor, it is the same as the black ones. If it has one, then you might consider replacing that resistor with a higher quality resistor of the same value. Of course it is possible that your old driver is not performing optimally, in which case having it rebuilt or replaced would upgrade performance. If Rob were to install a 'new' tweeter needing no trim, I bet you could get him to paint the frame black. |
Wait, what? New black coax drivers? What is that about? How did they become black? Just a few days ago I was thinking about my 2.7s that I’d like to try them with the grills off, but I would find the shiny drivers too distracting. I literally wondered if I could spray paint the co-ax black! Maybe these new coax are just what I need. I need photos! |
@dhoff01 I can put a pic in my virtual system page. My 3.7s are 12 years old, i don't know if it has to do with the fact that the old Coaxes are worn out but you can definitely hear the black ones sound much better at least in my system. The black ones cost $525 each, if you are interested reach out to Rob they are very easy to install.
|
I think they are better because they do not need the capacitor (or whatever it is called) to be added to the COAX's connector. The newer Black drivers did not need this work around. The old and the new driver sounded the same to me. |
@vair68robert The loose wire was on the crossover board, we redid a nice and clean solder under the board and the bass drive now finally works properly. Unfortunately it didn't fixe my sizzling tweeter problem so i decided to change both Coaxes, Rob told me sizzling usually comes from the tweeter. When Thiel shut down they were manufacturing the newer black Coax version, they stopped making the original metal ones so Rob only has the black ones in stock if any of you needs some. I think what i'll do onces both Coaxes are changed, i'll send him the failing one for repair.
|