thielrules,
I think your question was meant for 8th-note rather than for me.
I think your question was meant for 8th-note rather than for me.
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!
13,553 responses Add your response
JA - In my wire investigations I have learned that 6-9s wire is nearly extinct and even 5-9s is practically unaffordable. As the world changes toward miniaturization, highly complex component circuitry and wireless data and signal transmission, wire is less critical. It seems that some of the best sources (both audio and aerospace) are using 4-9s with careful casting, drawing, gauging and coating technologies. To your question, Thiel maintained a steadfast commitment to using the best wire available. I know that solid 18 twist isn't very sexy, and I am now comparing alternatives with coaching from wire guys, but that 4-9s x 3 twist in teflon certainly performs well. Over the years it was routinely tested / listened to against many alternatives. Remember that, unlike external speaker cable, Jim had the advantage of developing each driver's crossover as an entire system from input to driver, to include all wire effects as part of the global circuit equation. In other words, the inductance, capacitance and resistance and their subset effects were accounted for by measuring the global system. Jim was trying to make that point in the interview, but Gene wouldn't allow it to really go there as a stepping stone to further investigations. It's quite easy to pot-shot any designer's values and approach. But I can tell you that Jim milked very high performance out of complex circuits that could only be afforded by scrutinizing the cost / performance ratio of every single element. |
Sdl-4 - FWIW, Straightwire remained an active / interactive supply partner with Thiel from early 80s when they began until 2013 when Thiel was sold. SW knows quite a bit about wire, although they sometimes seem slighted in the market for lack of eber-expensive products. I would be most interested in learning how you guys consider SW and their products. I also hope for any feedback about Morrow, which is where I landed with little to no meaningful comparisons. Any thoughts? |
jafant, In response to your question about my StraightWire cables, I was using Encore speaker cables and Rhapsody II (RCA) interconnects in my system until just a few months ago. After switching to a PS Audio Stellar stack in early 2019, I decided to try several moderate-priced balanced interconnects in my system. Using XLR's from the Cable Company lending library, I decided that the Cardas Parsec XLR sounded better in my system than the Rhapsody II RCA I already owned (2nd place), Shunyata Venom XLR (third place), or Synergistic Research XLR (fourth place). I'm now using the Cardas XLR between my Gain Cell DAC/Pre and my M700 monoblocks. When I replaced the interconnect, I did not replace my StraightWire Encore speaker cable. Based on my room configuration, I have speaker cables that are 24 feet long and run under my living room floor. This arrangement makes replacement of the speaker wires quite expensive for reasonably good wire, so I'm keeping my StraightWire cables for now. Fortunately, the folks at StraightWire tell me that the Encore cable remains a very solid choice for my Thiel 2.2s and that even spending quite a bit more money would only get me small improvements in sound quality for my investment. |
The inability of certain personalities to cope with ambiguity makes the people watching aspect of audio a lot of fun. You can see with the audioholics guys that they are very emotionally invested in there being nothing audible that can't be measured. I think it would be a significant blow to their self-image if it turned out they were wrong. I get that they're annoyed by BS marketing and absurd prices but that's definitely not the whole story. Maybe it's fear that somebody might know or understand more than them in some area? Regardless, with active DSP speakers comes the possibility that slopes can be variable. I wish I could run my Thiels first order for acoustic music that doesn't have excessive bass and I don't listen to very loudly. On the other hand, when I want to rock it'd be great if I could just switch them to 4th order for increased headroom. I wonder if the new Meadlowlark has that ability. I saw that they're using mini DSP in their products. |
8th-note - gotta go soon, so you get the short answer. Do some practicing with a vacuum cleaner and then pull your dent out with vacuum. If you don't hear voice coil rubbing, you're not doing damage. When it's as smooth as you can get it, put the grilles on. The speaker was meant to have them, plus you won't see the dust-cap. |
Although I and Kathy were integrally part of the early decisions, directions and perspectives, it was Jim who took the bit in his teeth to create the electro-acoustic solutions. And he got better and better. My chief contribution was building a company and creating a manufacturing platform and capacity to support and manufacture Jim's designs. A manufacturing company defines itself by what it can actually accomplish as well as the designs it sets out to make. Our plant could make things with high precision and repeatability at low cost, which allowed fairly sophisticated designs to be translated into real world products at affordable prices. Additionally, I developed a very capable "project shop" for in-house prototyping, including hydro-spinning cones, machining motor assemblies, making production tooling and producing finished products, troubleshot and production-ready. In my travels, I've never seen anything like it, especially at such a small scale. Thiel remained under $10million / year with 50 or fewer employees. That's tiny for our high level of vertical integration. |
Hi everyone. I have been following this thread with great interest - thanks to Tom and the other very knowledgeable posters! I just brought home a beautiful pair of CS6's that I bought from a friend in Georgia (I live in Washington State) which tells you something about how much I wanted these speakers. They sound amazingly good and are in near mint condition except for one problem. One of the woofers has a dented dust cap. About 1/3 of the dust cap is dented in. I contacted Rob Gillium (what a nice guy) and he can rebuild the woofer for $600. Again, the speakers sound great but my OCD makes me want to fix the woofer because it just bugs me. Will this damage make any difference to the sound? Could it cause the woofer to fail prematurely? Is there a good reason to spring for the 600 bucks and bring these speakers back to near perfect condition? Any advice will be appreciated. Also, if there are any CS6 owners on the thread I would love to hear any advice you can share about setup or use of these speakers. |
tomthiel, All I can say is that Thiel figured out a way to make enough progress before you left the company that I'm still using Thiel 2.2s as my main speakers more than 25 years after I bought them. (And I'm also still using the original StraightWire speaker cables that I bought way back then, too.) |
Sdl4 - very well stated. There exists an arrogance of intelligence which imagines it knows everything when it can explain anything. Thiel's founding attitude and guiding principle was that we only understood a small corner of what we were dealing with and that we better remain open-minded and humble if we were to make progress - making progress on all fronts was at the core of our work ethic. |
JA - On to your question. Our first speaker wire, including the 1978 CES where we introduced the 03, was home-brew made from #0 stranded welding cable configured for lowest conventional problems. It measured well and looked impressive. Jim was also a skeptic by nature as well as we all being over-booked for time to explore elements like wire, which was a brand new arena at the time. It was probably spring CES 1978 that Ray Kimber showed us his prototype $1K / pair foot braided 6-9s silicone sealed, jacketless cable. We made a double-blind comparison, including measurements, between our welding cable and Ray's new wire. The conventional measurements were inconclusive, but certainly our welding cable didn't exhibit big problems. The listening test was not subtle. Ray's wire blew everyone away. Guests included the editor of Audio Magazine (professional journal). Details aside, we developed an ongoing relationship with Kimber. We also developed a relationship with Bill Low who later founded AudioQuest, and his products were always in our evaluation mix. Noel Lee of Monster Cable was in our mix, and Monster branded and sold Jim's patented user-selectable load low-output moving coil headamp. The Monster Cable products never made the cut for us,somehow including distortion mechanisms that masked the music. An important ally became Dave Salz and Steven Hill of StraightWire (together at the time) who became the distributor for the ultra ITT wire that we used. StraightWire developed teflon jackets, polished drawing dies and other leading edge technologies. It is possible that we got best pricing from SW because those guys claim that hearing the Thiel 03a is what made them decide to pursue high-end audio as their career. There were other wires, winners and losers in our context, but I don't clearly remember the brands. I do remember that when Bruce Brisson introduced his Music Interface Technology cables and tried to interest us, their multiple samples contained defects, either of design or execution. We didn't go there. I also remember in the mid 80s, my opinion diverged from Jim's about "best wire". I included the teenage girl contingent in my comparisons and Jim developed an attitude of himself being the arbiter of choice. (Jim had begun smoking before he was a teenager and I believe he didn't hear high frequency anomalies as problems. Just sayin'.) I left in the mid 90s and don't know much about external wire thereafter. I do know that StraightWire's best 18 gauge 3/inch twisted pair in teflon remained the internal hookup wire. The coil wire was by then sourced by Rudy at Acoustacoil who was winding all our coils by then. Ultra-best wire became unavailable after the space projects closed. But Thiel continued to use best-of-available. I remember reading some reviews where Thiel used Goertz Flat Wire to develop the 3.7 (or perhaps an earlier speaker). I never remember reading of Cardas or Transparent wire although Jim had relationships with Karen @ Transparent via Kathy in industry politics as well as with George Cardas. I heard that Jim experimented with silver wire, plated and solid, but its sonic signature was so different as to necessitate a choice based on likely user selection. Thiel's price-class was always modest and silver wire is in a different league, he went with copper. That's about all I remember. We routinely evaluated new wire configurations and brands and most of them were judged as overpriced and compromised. We were dumbfounded by the margins we saw in the wire sector of the industry. Dick Olsher and Jim had a mutually respectful association. We thought our stable of commentators and reviewers to be first-rate in their approach and understandings. |
tomthiel, I love Jim's quote that "there are sonic effects that I don't know how to measure." This statement seems so simple and so obvious that it is amazing that so many audio measurement "experts" appear to believe that science has already achieved that perfect state of being able to measure all parameters that influence what humans hear. Real scientists, however, will continue to study the many factors that affect auditory perception and how best to measure those factors and how they relate to how people listen to music. Until science gets a lot closer to "measurement perfection," we will have to depend on our ears and brains to close the gap. |
sdl4 Good to see you again. Thank You for confirming that the link worked and was read. I take great pride in being the biggest proponent for Cabling among the Panel. The largest misconception is that one needs to spend big dollars on aftermarket cables / power cords. Not True! System synergy is far more important in comparison. Trust you ears above any review or white paper. Happy Listening! |
JA - thanks for the link. I'll cover some ground, perhaps repeating some stuff from previous posts. Wire was an essential element in Thiel's adoption of first order coherence. We sweated blood for a year and a half in 1977 - 1979 to decide to adopt first order slopes over the second order alternative. Second order was so much more forgiving, partially because the steeper driver rolloffs made their work more benign, but also because we came to learn that coherence required the ear-brain to assess the musical information as REAL and therefore deserving far higher scrutiny than reproduced music. With that backdrop, we were stuck. The coherent speaker showed far more unexplainable problems than the less coherent second order speaker. Beyond the statement that everything mattered, I'll point out two elements that mattered most:1: wire and 2: driver basket material. First #2: all our baskets, like most everyone else, were stamped steel. No matter how much epoxy and damping we applied, there was an audible sonic problem. Jim wondered out loud whether there might be eddy currents in the basket. We found some aluminum baskets and the problem vanished, even when the aluminum basket was demonstratably more resonant than the reinforced steel. Short version. Next #1: Wire was not in the vocabulary yet. We were using first-rate Electrolytic Tough Pitch, like everyone else, both for hookup and coils.I previously recounted a visit from our aerospace physicist cousin Ted Lyon who listened to our demonstration of the problem we couldn't solve in the coherent system and how it vanished in the non-coherent system. Ted recounted a rather elaborate program whereby GE found wire crystal margins to be causing subtle distortions which acted a lot like what we were describing and hearing. He got us a sample of ITT's 6-9s ultra wire, fixed the problem and the rest is history. Lots of interesting history, but too much to recount here. So our modus operandi going ahead was that everything mattered and our job was to determin how to proceed rather than trying to prove anything to any logician. Manufacturers are not research institutes, we willingly collaborated with anyone who wanted to understand anything, but drew a line before getting involved with anyone who tried to prove the negative. Deep in our corporate culture was that the ear-brain was far better at detecting naturalness than any scientific instrument or theory. |
Sdl4 - this discussion fits a template deeply ingrained in the mainstream engineering community: if you can't prove it, it's not real. The article is embarrassing, but beyond that it doesn't explore much of what Jim knew because Gene wouldn't admit such empirical as valid. I will add that years later, after Jim's death when Kathy had sold Thiel Audio, I saw first-hand that same template applied to Jim's lifetime work. "None of it matters because it can't be proven and is therefore definitionally untrue." I'll point out that one of Gene's arguments about aerospace engineering knowing more than audio hacks is especially rich. We were first exposed to the subtleties of wire by cousin Ted via GE Aerospace avionics having identified just such subtle wire effects as causing problems in Jupiter Space Probe signal propagation resolution. They don't recognize that their thought process and assignment of burden of proof categorically negates much of the progress made in subtle technical arts. |
jafant, Thanks for the link to the Absolute Sound article. A very interesting history lesson. My first experience with anything better than zip cord was Monster Cable. I "graduated" to Straightwire in the 1990's, flirted with Audioquest and several Blue Jeans Cable offerings over the years, and recently settled on a Cardas Parsec interconnect after trying out several other options in my home system. I have heard differences between wires when I had been hoping not to hear any so that I could be happy with less expensive options, but I have never ventured into the ultra-high-end world of wire - and I'm reluctant to invest the time and money required to do so. This discussion reminded me of an interview with Jim Thiel (mostly completed online, I think) published on the Audioholics website in 2004. Gene DellaSalla seemed more inclined to argue with Jim about the sonic effects of wire (or lack of them) rather than to learn from Jim's knowledge and experience. The interaction left me with a very negative impression of Gene, both in terms of his lack of openness to any ideas that questioned his beliefs and his inability to be a gracious host to a guest on his website. The link to the interview is here: https://www.audioholics.com/audio-video-cables/thiel-audio-interview-on-cables |
Let's see if this link works http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/a-short-history-of-high-end-cables/ |
tomthiel as you have the time to read the above article, I wonder if you would not mind chiming in on meeting these Cable pioneers. I imagine the circle was quite close in those early days of Thiel Audio. Was Jim fond of any of these guys? Were you or Gary consulting for internal wiring of Jim's designs? Jim's lab equipment? I need another history lesson, perspective. Happy Listening! |
All for those of us who are "Cable" guys- check out a well written article by Dick Olsher over on theabsolutesound.com site. I really enjoy reading these historical-based timelines as it pertains to our wonderful Hobby. You guys can also read this article via dailyaudiophile.com site as well. Happy Reading! |
| Post removed |
warjarrett, There's a slight difference in the low freq spec for the two speakers: 3.7: 33 +/- 2 db sensitivity 90 2.7: 35 +/- 2.5 db sensitivity 87 I notice differences in the lower notes on double bass viols, pianos, organ pipes, and in the impact of a near-instanteneous change in dynamic range (soft to ear-splitting.) ( Redbook classical CDs > BCD-3 > BP17c > 4Bc > Thiel 2.7s with SS2.2) |
Breyeagle and TomThiel "I have a Thiel SS2.2 sub for the 2.7s, using a PX05 passive crossover, specifically tweaked for the 2.7s. It really helps..." I use a Thiel SS2.2 sub for my CS3.7s, and a PX05. I can barely tell the difference with or without it. I am thinking it is supposed to work that way, because the 3.7 have fine bass without any subwoofer, so adding it just provides a little of what the 3.7 cannot do on their own. |
Ronkent ______ I just looked at my Paypal history, and, yes indeed, I did pay you for the Sound Anchor stands on the 29th. But, I probably misled you by telling you about the Outriggers I bought on Ebay (without knowing which speakers they fit). And, I may not have advised you, after I paid, to look at your Paypal account to confirm. So, when convenient, please send them. My CS2.0 and CS2.2 are waiting for them. Thielrules ________ Wow, I had hoped these Outriggers would fit my CS3.7. 13.75" seemed so small, and the CS3.7 look so big. |
Rules - you may be interested to know that Jim's 2nd choice was 2nd order. The 01 had been 3rd order, the 02 was second order, but not inverted polarity like Wilson, but rather both drivers in positive polarity with the X points fudged to lower the amplitude hump. It's pretty convincing; there are others here who agree. The phase transition is not abrupt and I believe you could massage a second order slope via DSP for a pleasing result with less strain on drivers and an easier time to find off-the-shelf units that would work. |
| Post removed |
Tom, i fully concur. I have at least for now abandoned the 4th order xo and returned to the 1st and 2nd order and trying to linearize the overlapping area of the xo and keeping the ringing in the inaudible range. The blend of the different drivers is also more pleasing then having them more separated. |
Rules - my comment addresses the presumption among many that zero or linear phase response is without problems. I admit that its problems are indeed minor and in the real world may be a best choice solution. For your enjoyment here's a very brief synopsis of the elements including the psychoacoustic reference to pre-ringing being more disturbing than post. I will add that today's DSP execution of all filter types with optimization is far better than my experience a decade and more ago. Enjoy. https://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/filters/Linear_Phase_Really_Ideal.html |
