thanks for the recommendation on EC unplugged.
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!
13,554 responses Add your response
thosb... Wow, it's been quite the while since I've owned the 2.3's I'll do my best to lend you some idea... When I moved up from the 2.2's to the 2.3's I perceived a richer midrange overall. The highs were also more, for lack of a better description, defined. The 2.3's also seemed to project into my listening room - my living room - further. It was an upgrade in everything that was good with the 2.2's. The last Thiels I owned before obtaining these 2.4's were the the 3.6's. At that time I was enjoying a Modwright KWI200 Integrated amp, 200 watts 8 ohms, 400 watts 4 ohms - way more power than I'd ever need. (Even though Thiels and Maggies are supposed to be "power hungry" I never had an amp or integrated that had more on tap than the Modwright did.) Thus far, I am finding that these 2.4's are sonically closer to the 3.5's than they are to the 3.6's. At modest volume level these speakers simply sing, there's really no better description I could offer. The 3.6's DID enjoy getting more juice tossed their way in order to open up the soundstage that these 2.4's provide in spades at my modest levels. I am finding that the sweet spot is tighter on these than the 2.2's, 2.3's, 3.5's & 3.6's. Right now I'm still playing around with positioning them to obtain the best results. What I've gotten with every Thiel model I've owned is a reminder how colored, and artificial sounding so many newly manufactured brands sound by comparison. A very valid point about Thiel is that they reveal everything they receive, solid amplification with ample current is more important than mere watts per channel. To my humble ears I was most pleased with Pass Labs amps, Balanced Audio Technology, Modwright. Of these three it was Pass Labs, period. The B.A.T. struck me as more reserved, more conservative, the highs didn't present as well as they did with the Pass Labs. The Modwright was in every respect a solid performer, but again, to my ears, it didn't match the Pass Labs in detail. Just before I obtained my Belles 250i integrated I was using an Audio Research DSi200 integrated - a switching amp, or class "d." This did not match at all well with the 2.4's. To my ears it sounded like the amp was straining to be heard and, true to Thiel in general, that's what I heard. When I obtained the Belles and wired it up the difference was immediate and palpable. My newly acquired Thiels became Thiels again. The ads I've been seeing for 2.3's seem to be hovering between $800 and $1100, which is a pretty low point of entry for such a good speaker system. They're truly remarkably refined loudspeakers. The only other brand of loudpeaker I have such high regard for is Magnepan - and Jim Thiel once expressed his appreciation for planars himself. One of the BIGGEST differences between the 2.4's and all the other models I've owned is where the cables get connected. ON THE BACK! Woohoo! No more laying the speakers on their side to make the connections, no more lifting 70+ pound cabinets to secure them and snaking the cable through the small tunnel. This is ALMOST the reason to consider the 2.4's. It also makes for swapping cables easier if you're into that. |
Solo, I have been using Eric Clapton, Unplugged lately. With amps, blind comparison is essential, letting my wife do the switching between amps, making sure the spl is equal. I started on the write up and it will be a lengthy document to cover everything. Be patient and your help as a proof reader would be helpful. |
thielrules for a fair amount of material w/o measuring anything I am forced to agree with you. I should be thorough in my posts as the devil is in the details! for the most part I listen to large scale works where there are large dynamic as well as textural changes. this is where the difference lies for me between the 3B and 7B amps for example right now I have on the Berlioz Sym Fantastique - Solti - CSO huge dynamic contrasts and the large ensemble is used sparingly quite often not only is there more impact and weight during the loud parts but the resolution in the softer parts is clearer while still having excellent weight what do you use as a reference recording(s)? the Berlioz isn't a reference as much as it is what I want to listen to at the moment |
Solobone, I tested the same combination of 3b-st against the par. 7b-st, thinking that more current would be making an audible difference. At the spl that I play my music 80dB, there was no difference and the actual difference in Max spl was maybe 3dB. The 3b-st are very capable at moderate volume and the needed power is modest, 30 watt according to my measurements is plenty. On a different note, the 3.5 can be really enhanced with tri-amping. Spend this summer hundreds of hours measuring, listening and comparing, and can now comfortably say that the 3.5 are competing with the 3.7. Measurements indicate even better phase coherence with linear xo filters and the absence of any phase shift is remarkable in the clarity and definition of the sound and soundstage. Being able to dial in exactly the amount of Base that the speakers can handle without distortion is priceless. I hope to write up my journey and make it accessible to others. |
oblgny Members of the Panel, like yourself, really makes this thread fire on all 8 cylinders. I value input from you guys who have owned several different pairs of Thiel Audio loudspeakers. Especially, those late 80's - late 90's designs. This ownership, provides guidance, for me. Hopefully, further guidance is provided for the rest of our contributors, members and readers. Add further input from our DIY guys and Industry Professionals and we have all of the ingredients for Achievement. Literally, there is something here for everyone. Good to read that you are enjoying the CS 2.4 model. It is indeed a special loudspeaker that should not be overlooked. It benefits from a small degree of toe-in, IMO. Enjoy the Music. Happy Listening! |
I loved my Thiel CS1.2s. Then I loved my Thiel CS1.6s. Then I got married and, because I love my wife, I traded the CS1.6s in at Audio Consultants and bought five Thiel PowerPoint 1.2s for the home theater. I love them. I recently bought a new two channel system from Audio Consultants to supplement the home theater. It doesn't use Thiel speakers, but it is damn good too. |
oblgny - thanks for the comparison, if you wouldn't mind, what kind of differences do you hear between the 2.3s and 2.4s? Like you and prof have mentioned, I love the way these speakers sound from an adjacent room. My kitchen/dining room is adjacent to the listening room, through a 3 foot door opening near the front right speaker, and I greatly enjoy listening from the next room, lots of "wow" moments there, and like some live music venues, you get pulled into the main room bc it sounds so real from next door. |
beetlemania Though I brought up my own disgust with the cable industry to make a point about Thiel, I don't want to turn this thread in to a cable debate, as I'm sure you don't either. So I'll just say, that although I know your position on cables, I took your last response to say you are ok with people being scammed or "bilked" of their money. That's the part I took issue with, not that you personally find that cables make a difference. I'm not here to argue against your personal experience with cables in this thread. (But even granting that cables can sound different, that doesn't of course mean that some companies aren't making b.s. claims for their products, I'm sure you'll agree). |
Having begun with the CS2.2's, then CS2.3's, then CS3.5's, then CS3.6's, and now with my recently acquired pair of CS2.4's I think I can offer a little healthy opinion upon what one may encounter when "moving up" the Thiel product line. Again, I stress that all the forthcoming observations are exclusively "IMHO" based; I don't know a mosfet from a misfit, but I know what I like. For the life of me I cannot recall the associated equipment I had when I acquired the pair of CS2.2's, but I do remember how astonished I was when I first hooked them up. I would guess that the power source and playback equipment I had at the time was pretty modest - I joined Audiogon in 2013, somehow stumbling upon it as I was searching for yet another piece of vintage, circa 1970's stereo receivers. You know, the old Marantz, Pioneer, Sansui two-step. All of a sudden everything sounded better. I was hearing things in my collection that I'd never head before. The music sounded natural, clean. I didn't keep those for too long because a pair of CS2.3's appeared. A move up the line? If these "cheap" speakers sounded so good I imagined what stepping up a model would provide. So I did. And I was right. The two models struck me as being very similar, with the advantage however small or large going to the CS2.3's. The CS2.3's just..."rounded" things off for me, developed a keener sense of space and depth. It was here that I started looking into better equipment. I was still using - *gasp!* - big box store basic cabling throughout my system. I never truly gave the notion much thought. Not much longer after this pair, a pair of CS3.5's appeared on another site. By this time I had delved into Jim Thiel's legacy as deeply as I could, reading anything I could, whenever I could. I was impressed by his philosphy, his common sense, and the technical prowess hepossessed that all came to fore with what I was hearing. It was very much like the first time I tasted a bonafide Chablis. I had a bottle, I had a rather weighty and opinionated tome to refer to as I sampled the wine for the first time. "Wow. I actually GET this.", I thought. (And thus began my career in the wine biz.) I met the gent who was selling the CS3.5's in a shopping center parking lot somewhere in lower Massachusetts. I forked over the $850 smackeroos, loaded the heavy speakers into my vehicle and sped home. Literally. I think I averaged 85 mph all the way - including my driveway. These were noticeably heavier than the CS2.3's were. 70 pounds a piece, but relatively shorter than the previous pairs, and substantially shorter than the pair of CS3.6's that I would obtain later on. Now here is where my appreciation for Thiel quite literally exploded. I wired 'em up, tossed a disc into the player, and started back to my seating position. (Which was then as it is now, approximately 10-12 feet away depending on what time of year it is and what holiday/home decor is going on.) I was literally stopped in my tracks. A true "a-ha!" moment if ever I had one. The CS3.5's simply opened up everything into another sonic dimension. For one thing there was a lot more bass, but it was natural sounding bass, as if it it wasn't being reproduced by a loudspeaker. It had bounce...pressure. It "fit" is the best way I can describe it, it didn't crowd or muffle other things. The mids and highs were indescribably defined. Wow. I put on Joni Mitchells's Don Juan's Reckless Daughter and cued up "Paprika Plains," bumping the track forward by 30 second intervals until I reached the point that Weather Report brings the tune to its end. Damn! Even at the modest volume level I was listening at, that truly amazing finish could be felt. For the record here I submit that I employed the bass EQ all of the time. Not knowing a mosfet from a misfit, I figured that Jim Thiel designed the system with that in mind and who was I to decide against using it? I cannot offer an opinion to how they sounded without it. And then I got silly. Since joining the site in 2013 I have catalogued over 100 sales and purchases combined, and this excludes the same I have catalogued via other sites and the two bricks and mortar shops I occassion here in New York metro. My soon to be married nephew was bequeathed that particular pair of 3.5's. and he still has them. The convoluted point I am trying to reach here is that the described progression up the line was organic. Each model paid tribute to the previous model while offering superior sonics. The 2.2 struck me as very similar to the 2.3, but the 3.5 just upped the ante by miles. Various pairs of relatively local CS3.6's appeared on the sites from time to time, and I let them slip away. Some had seen some rough service - which struck me as odd for a speaker as revered as Thiel - people usually take very good care of them, right? Then a pair appeared on the Saturday Audio site, or US Audio Mart - I forget which. $1300. Hmmm.A fellow member here messaged me to relate that he had only just been in their store recently and saw the speakers on display. I pounced. $300 shipping + $1300. The other pairs I had let slip away were right in that average. They still appear to be in that range currently. Also, it was the beginning of the new year and I was flush with holiday bonuses and tax refunds. Whee! Man, did the seller over-pack the shipment. I think I was swimming in cardboard dust and styrofoam peanuts for days. (I absolutely LOATHE the styrofoam peanuts.) What I was expecting was that same sort of bump, that same sort of rush I experienced with the CS3.5's. The 3.6's are physically larger than the CS3.5's so the drivers are positioned at different heights. Where the CS3.5's defined everything at my preferred listening level, the CS3.6's would not do so until I turned up the volume. This is not to imply that the CS3.6 is inferior to the CS3.5, but it is a remarkable departure from it where as the progression I described from the CS2.2 to the CS3.5 was...well, progressive? A little more this, a little more that as I moved ahead. When I played the CS3.6's at volume levels higher than usual there was absolutely no doubt it was a Thiel. I had to sell off all of my equipment last year because 2018 was very unkind to your's truly. In a word, it just sucked. I shipped off the Modwright KWI200 integrated, the Sony HAPZ1es, the Marantz TT-15 Turntable...but I wouldn't ship the CS3.6's. They arrived to me in excellent condition and I wanted to make sure that their new owner would receive them in the same condition. All of my stuff was sold off this site. The new owner of the CS3.6's picked them up. I actually apologized for not having an amplifier on hand so he could listen. But the buyer knew what he was getting.... Anyway...2019 has improved enough to the point where I started regrouping the necessities of my humble life. I stumbled upon a Belles 250i integrated amp. Wow. This is SUCH a Thiel champion I can't restrain myself. The biggest difference I am finding about my newly acquired CS2.4's is that they have a much narrower sweet spot than any of the other Thiel models I've owned. Almost Magnepan-like. I have been playing around with positioning, as well as with a few of the remaining cables I hadn't sold off, and all is going well. Was it Jim Thiel who mentioned the "other room" test?I was returning from my outside deck to the kitchen one afternoon and noticed how beautiful the sound was. There, some twenty feet away from the right speaker, partially blocked by two walls, I thought, "wow." And that's Thiel in a nutshell. |
under false pretensesProf, right there is where we see it differently. You seem to view high end cables as "snake oil". My position is more nuanced: yes, there are obscenely priced cables whose performance is not commensurate with price but that doesn't make it snake oil (similar examples with speakers, amps, and sources; heck, wine and watches for the matter). Again, my experience is that cables and wire *do* make audible improvements. And I have no issue whatsoever if your experience is otherwise. |
FWIW, those 2.2s at TMR were mine. I sold them to the shop a few weeks ago. An excellent outfit. The 2.2s were terrific speakers but I hadn't used them since acquiring the 3.7s a few years ago. I can vouch for the 9/10 condition. We treated them VERY nicely! Of course, I'm hoping they go to a good home. But that of course is out of my hands. Todd |
beetlemania, I’m afraid I don’t have the same cynical constitution to take the view "if someone can get away with ripping people off by taking lots of money under false pretenses...more power to them!" I actually care when people are ripped off. And I’m glad others have cared whether I’m being ripped off or not, as I’ve learned from them and saved money through more knowledgeable purchases. And generally speaking, I think the proliferation of b*llshit matters; it makes it all the harder to do and get what we really want, if we are constantly having to dodge rip off artists. To each his own... |
Try not to despair too much.I, for one, couldn't care less if Obscene Audio charges $50K per foot for a USB cable. No skin of my nose! Even if I could afford it I wouldn't bother (law of diminishing returns). And if the Obscene guys bilk the 1%ers so that they can feed their families, more power to 'em! Meanwhile, my experience is that cables and wire *do* make an audible difference. I heard really nice improvements with better speaker cables and hook-up wire. Less so but still worthwhile with interconnects but only tiny differences with power cables. To each their own. |
I bought my CS2.4SEs from TMR. The cabinets were in rougher condition than they showed in the pics and description but otherwise they were good to deal with. Those 2.2 look good in the pics but hard to believe a speaker that age is really a 9/10. For starters, there appears to be a scratch on the binding post plate. |
for what it is worth, the 2.2's were really good speakers at the time and a BIG improvement over the 2.0's that i had. the 2.0's were a bit difficult to live with but the 2.2's were much better. i personally really started to appreciate Thiel with the 2.4's but that came 15 years later as the 2.2's were my longest running speaker (1992-2007) |
TMR is asking $1099 for a pair of Amberwood CS 2.2s plus $149 for shipping. Condition is listed as 9 out of 10. https://tmraudio.com/speakers/full-range-floorstanding/thiel-cs-2-2-floorstanding-speakers-amberwood-pair/ |
prof I’ve recently felt some despair concerning the amount of snake oil in our hobby and the industry, (when audiophiles wonder why we are a source of bemusement and mockery, we need look no further than the farcical high end cable racket). >>>>>>Try not to despair too much. Look on the bright side - much has been learned about cable design from high end cable companies. One cannot ignore the “sound engineering” involved in many newer innovations implemented by Audioquest and others - e.g., highly polished solid core wire surfaces, control of directionality for not only speaker cables and interconnects but also power cords and HDMI cables, cryogenics, silver content in connectors, and others. I hate to judge too harshly but it appears there is quite a bit of misunderstanding regarding the nature of the audio signal in cables, you know, judging from the recent threads on the subject. |
How were the improvements measured? Jim Thiel again: "The improved resolution is not the kind of thing that shows up well in measurements; the magnitude of the difference between the CS2.4 and the CS2.4SE is more easily heard than discerned from graphs. The new capacitors allow more nuance, air, detail, and decay to be reproduced by the coaxial drive unit. This was especially evident to us when listening to recordings that contained realistic reverberation, as well as recordings where the instruments were not processed heavily." https://www.soundstageultra.com/equipment/thiel_cs24se.htm |
I've recently felt some despair concerning the amount of snake oil in our hobby and the industry, (when audiophiles wonder why we are a source of bemusement and mockery, we need look no further than the farcical high end cable racket). I found revisiting some old interviews with Jim Thiel, print and video, uplifting in that regard. It is just so nice to see a real engineer speaking with humility, in sensible terms about real world phenomena, non-magical engineering goals, and making sense of the clever engineering steps he took to solve them. It's also confidence-inspiring thatsuccess of some of Jim's central goals were verifiable by independent measurements - e.g. those stereophile measurements showing the time/phase coherence had been achieved. Aside from the wonderful sonic qualities of the Thiel speakers, it's rewarding to own a piece audio gear that is the result of, and emblematic of, both great engineering and the integrity of the designer and his company. Jim sure was one of the good guys. (Same goes for Tom, and other Thiel employees). |
Kenazfilan - regarding back to back CS5s. Jim made that comment at the press conference introducing the CS5 in response to a question as to why he didn't provide a second set of inputs. It was not a thought-out position, but rather offhand: "if you want to spend an additional $10K for a second run of expensive cable, you'd get better results with a second set of speakers". The response begs the question of the cost of amplifying the second set of speakers, their cable, etc. Anyhow, back in the listening room after the show, we tested the idea, and it has merit. The 2 speakers per channel act as bi-polar radiators which comes close to omni-directional radiation into the room. The polar response becomes extremely uniform and the sound-field becomes immersive. One caveat is that the room must be well damped, especially at the launch-speaker end so that the additional reflected sound-power does not overwhelm the direct radiation from the front speakers. We had perhaps 8' to the front wall and perhaps 6-7' to each side wall. The front and back speakers need not be the same model. For demonstration-testing I used a Yamaha P2200 professional power amp with adjustable gain for the back speakers so that the direct vs reflected sound could be blended on the fly. Each speaker is producing half the sound while coupling better to the room for a very big, impressive presentation. It would be hard to imagine incorporating this idea into a normal residential-sized room, and also the extra amps and cables would have to be found. But . . . I still have that Yamaha amp and a bunch of speakers in the hot-rod garage. I'll try to find time to try it out. |
Dspr- regarding the CS5 vs CS5i. The late 80s was when Jim was exploring electro-magnetic field effects for higher resolution driver motors. Thiel developed new magnet and pole piece geometries which were applied to the CS5 midranges, woofers and sub-woofers. Also, the mass loading of the subs was changed from rubber mats to a central plug. The global result of the new motor geometries was greater definition and articulation through the lower and mid ranges. Unchanged were the upper midrange and tweeter, and no crossover changes were required. Rob has driver rebuild parts, which are universal for 5 and 5i.ScanSpeak no longer makes those Thiel drivers. I remember a marked improvement in articulation / resolution in the CS5i, but the impedance requirements and resulting amplification requirements remained unchanged. |
Beetle - I agree, one would not expect a paper cone to act that way. But it isn't truly a paper cone, but a multi-fiber cone with cellulose as one of the fibers. Jim developed that driver for the CS1.5 in parallel with another more expensive solution, which was chosen. I understand that the CS.5 was created to make use of that woofer. And that decay plot also speaks to the solidity of the cabinet. Small is beautiful. |
Jazzman - I know a little which I'll be glad to remember. You might read Stereophile's 1995 review when it was introduced, https://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/223/index.htmlI find it nearly incredible that this little, inexpensive speaker performed so very well - compare that review with products costing high multiples of its $1k+ / pair. The .5 was my last production engineering product before leaving Thiel for New Hampshire. It got the same 1" MDF walls and interior cabinet bracing, which resulted in the deadest of any Thiel product ever. The Vifa drivers were entirely Thiel-designed with the fancy magnet structures, and the "paper" woofer cone actually had multiple-fiber reinforcement and damped coating, which made it behave extremely well. The crossover, although quite simple, has the same high-purity copper coils, polypropylene caps and low-induction resistors as the rest of the family. The .5 got a full technical paper, and its attributes, performance and measurements could easily be read as applying to a $10K speaker with the exception of its bass extension. The CS.5 was an exercise is how inexpensively we could produce an full-bore Thiel speaker. On a personal note, in 1997 I introduced a pair to the resident musical theatre producer of my new-home rural New Hampshire village, which led to more pairs, and the founding of a small local Performing Arts Foundation. I am on the board and produce musical events at our Arts Center, using Thiel speakers, which were originally borrowed .5s, then my 2.2s and now 1.6s since my 2.2s are in the redevelopment studio. Your son is very fortunate to ge those .5s. There are plenty of spare drivers and parts to last his lifetime. I have .5 drivers here for comparative analysis and they are really exceptional. Do note that electrolytic caps can deteriorate in storage and might best be replaced before putting them back into service if more than 30 years has elapsed. I'm glad you asked. |
i sold the Bose 901 between 1979 and 1981. we also had Dahlquist, Maggies, and Infinity among others. they were horrible sounding in all respects. we used to say that the more you spent on bose, the worst they sounded. we actually liked their little 301 for what it was. when a guy came into our store with a Molly Hatchet or AC/DC album under their arm, we would immediately show them the 901 as we knew they were pretty much indestructible. If he came in with classical then it was either Maggies or DQ-10's. they were wretched speakers in my opinion |
tomthiel Might you be able to provide any history of the cs .5. This speaker, which I like to think of as the baby Thiel was my entry into the world of Thiel. I had a pair in my main rig from 1996 to 2011 before graduating to a pair of 2.4s. My cs .5s are now in bubble wrap in my crawl space, to be turned over to my son when he is ready for them. |
Kenazfilan - the Bose 901 was a huge marketplace success at the time we were developing our initial ideas and prototypes. Audiophiles and specialty stores nearly universally rejected them as gimmicks, but there were some valid ideas in there. The crossoverless multiple driver does preserve phase relationships, which are only partially obscured by the small differences in distance to the reflecting walls. The short distance between the speaker and wall minimizes the distance difference between the reflected wavefront and front-firing direct radiator. The equalizer does not introduce phase shift and the sealed bass rolls off at 12dB / octave, which is quite benign. I concur with your speculation that the design might sound like hash with higher order crossovers introducing baked in phase shifts. I would love to see impulse response and other "normal" tests on the 901.It might fare fairly well at low levels in a highly damped room. But, those CTS drivers were driven far beyond their linear excursion and the dust-cap "tweeter" was very ragged, and the room perimeter drive is inherently problematic and so forth and so on. I am amazed at their success. Bose spent more on advertising than on product. And it worked for them. The 901 was, I believe, the only speaker that Jim dissected to see how other designs coped with the intrinsic constraints and trade-offs of the art. It definitely served as encouragement that we could do better. |
This is a little late regarding the preamp discussion a few days ago, but I just wanted to chime in: I'm very happy with no preamp whatsoever. I run a Berkeley Alpha DAC directly into the amplifier, which goes directly to my 3.7s. Sounds fabulous! I wonder why more people who have this capability don't seem to do this. |
+1 on audio solutions in indy, my experiences there have been good, lots of used gear, some of which gets listed here from time to time. They had a pair of 2.3s and were happy to hook up several different tube amps to them which convinced i could enjoy the sound of mid power tubes with the Thiels. Ovation is ok too, seemed for focused on HT although they carry some good brands. Nice to know AS lends equipment out! |
