Thiel Owners

i too measured the distance on my3.7's.front 14"back 9.75so it looks like thielrules was correct

CS2.4 outriggers, one set with two spikes per side, have the attachment screws about 12-3/4” apart.

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)

Does anyone else have Outriggers installed on ANY Thiel speaker? I would like to know the distance between the front 2 spikes (center to center), to know which models the pair I just bought will fit.

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.

The outriggers of my 3.7 are about 13.75" in front and 9.75" in back.

Thanks Tom I'm giving it a shot.

Ronkent

I thought I bought the Sound Anchor stands. My Paypal shows that I did. Did you receive my payment?

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.

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, although I'm only into classical music, and not the AV, heavy metal stuff, etc. 

I cannot comment on any other brand,  but i  have had great success using REL subs with my 2.7's and now 3.7's.  I just added a second sub,  and the improvement was not subtle and it is not just about more or deeper bass. 

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.

jafant -

Will definitely present my findings re the tweeter replacements.

Harry

jafant -

Yes, Rob's quote was about two months ago.

Happy Friday! All

Beetlemania 

It's about the fastest (motion feedback) subwoofer money can buy, and I will also use it for AV.

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

With dsp any xo can be linearized with zero phase at the xo area though with ringing often hidden in the noise level.

@holco 

Curious why you picked the Rhymthmic. If I ever decided to add subs I would almost certainly go with Vandersteens or used Thiels, so curious to know your rationale.

But I don’t feel the need. My old Vandersteens had some audible output into the mid 20 cycles whereas the 2.4s have nothing below 30 yet I’ve only noticed the difference on a single song (organ tones).

Prof - I noted in their website talk that they are using high-order DSP filters, which do not produce phase coherence, although all the talk implies that they do.

In my music production consulting work, I routinely picked out edits in mixes by the pre and post ringing of high-order DSP filters, while listening through (coherent) CS2.2s. The producer would invariably respond that "you can't hear that", usually because of his $7 figure equipment investment and grammy awards. But I and my client could independently spot the edits and other anomalies by separately noting time-code.

I don't claim to know what Meadowlark is doing. The review I found of the Swift shows wildly ranging impedance and phase swings - but it is time-coherent. The Shearwater qualifies as a T/P coherent design.

"Meadowlark seems to be back:’

Interesting that they are no longer touting time/phase coherency the way they did back when they were doing passive speakers. I’d guess perhaps they are still trying to achieve it via DSP, but if so it’s weird that they don’t mention the time/phase coherency results.

Rules - keep up the good work and keep us posted. Yes, the variability, especially with operating temperature, but also with elapsed time and use all require assumptions of what is average. We called that "average operating condition" as 1/2 hour into fairly vigorous playing. Note that the flat impedance curves created by the Zobel filters do a lot to minimize impedance variables.
I suggest more study on minimum vs linear phase. Minimum phase characteristic is where phase follows amplitude as each driver rolls off. The trailing phase and amplitude of one driver is inverse to and cancels the leading phase and amplitude of the other driver and nets to zero. Linear phase does not zero out and results in ringing in various ways depending on the type of filter.

GENERAL QUESTION TO EVERYONE:

I bought a pair of genuine Thiel Outrigger stands, but the Ebay seller doesn't know what model they fit. The front two spikes are 13-3/4 inches apart, from center to center . Does anyone know which model(s) speaker they were made for?

In the past several months I have done hours of listening and measuring of my 3.5 with passive and active digital xo. That Thiel originally also explored the triamping active xo makes good sense. The passive xo system still has these problems:
Each speaker has its own min phase characteristic. Minimum phase still has phase change depending on frequency range although "minimal". Only linear phase has a constant phase change independent of frequency range. Overlapping frequency range of multi-speaker systems still introduce phase changes especially with the 1st order xo that allows large overlapping ranges.
The variability of components is not negligible and when measuring each component the factory specs are only an approximation and fine tuning is essential. Taking good and reliable measures is an advanced skill but also frustrating as the components can change characteristics based on temp, load, etc. Then the issue of what differences are audible and not determined by subjective bias requires double blind comparisons. A passive xo system modification is a fair amount of work assuming that needed components are really available. My conclusion so far is that active digital xo system have the best chance to approach the ideal time phase coherent system with linear phase, time aligned, component eq, and even individual room adjusted set up. As it is stated that the speaker and room variables account for the largest part of the reproduced sound quality, it only makes sense to focus any innovations in mastering the active digital xo systems.

Beetle - Thanks for the reference products.
Jim did control out of band problems as you say. However, his major tool was to create mirror circuits for the relevant troublesome resonances - electronic anti-resonance circuits if you will, which cancel each problem in the frequency & phase /time domain. Most of the parts in those huge xo networks are series and parallel shaping circuits to tame the driver misbehaviors through many octaves. Beyond just having the chops to pull it off, a big problem is the parts cost, and the juggling act of what to spend to reach what performance plateau.

Unsound - thanks for the links. Indeed direct drive could be awesome with today's technologies. As I've mentioned, active was our starting point in the mid 70s. Wish I could find that first crude research speaker: 10" 3-way with 3 home-brew amps and low-level active XOs. We thought we could create a technical success, but judged the market to be unreceptive to the idea, especially from an unknown start-up.  

Jafant

The CS 2.4 are still sounding great, at this moment enjoying holidays in Portugal 🌞🌞🌞

Btw, ordered a Rhythmic F18 subwoofer to extend the lows on the CS2.4

Beetlemania, 

Yes I here good things about the Dutch&Dutch loudspeaker, for sure I will listen to them one day, after all they are designed in my country 😉

Dunlavy and Meadowlark were true time/phase correct speakers (although, in a Stereophile review of a Dunlavy speaker, the designer hedged whether the crossover is truly a first-order filter). Vandersteen is pretty much the last one standing and RV has really achieved something special with his carbon drivers. If he can ever bring that technology to a real world price point . . .

Avalon is not time/phase coherent. A top priority was avoiding distortion from out of band break up. The original Avalons (designed by Charles Hansen, Neil Patel, and Jeff Rowland) did this by using steep filters, low XO points, and small midrange drivers. The 3-way Ascent had a 2" titanium midrange. IMO, Jim Thiel was able to control, if not eliminate, out of band ringing by using small midrange (3.5" in my CS2.4 coax) or the wavy diaphragms of the X.7 models despite the slow roll-off filters.

None of the megabuck speakers I know of are time/phase aligned (certainly not Magico). That said, some of the best systems I’ve heard had speakers with steep filters. The TAD Ref 1 and Vivid Giya are standouts in my experience. I hope to soon have another listen to some megabuck speakers and compare their sound to my modded 2.4s.

The new Stereophile reviewed Dutch and Dutch active speakers that pretty much have time, if not phase, alignment. In fact, all of JA’s measurements were eye-popping. I can’t imagine I’ll ever own active speakers but I would love to hear those!

Avalon has never been T/P, as I recall.
Neither Magico.  They don't claim to, and Stereophile measurements show they aren't trying.

The difficulties of T/P are substantial and the prevailing wisdom from Canadian Research Council, Harmon, etc. is that the ear-brain doesn't care. We here lean toward the opposing opinion. And I am personally convinced that T/P as executed with first order slopes is worth its considerable effort.

Andy pointed out that the coincident driver eliminates the upper frequency lobing, plus Jim managed that inherent dispersion problem quite well via very low cross points. A seated listener at 8' or more distance gets a properly integrated wavefront, although the summed energy into the room has some potential unevenness. But I suspect that Thiel's polar patterns would hold their own against Von Schweikert and others who manage T/P via high order slopes.

I can't decipher whether Magico and other high-rollers are really dealing with T/P. It seems that such measurements aren't often included in reviews, or such products don't submit to reviews which do consider T/P. Lots of folks are using 4th (24db/octave) slopes to produce zero phase, non time-aligned hand offs. Zero phase means 360° (one cycle) revolution, so the signal harmonics are separated from the fundamental, but not completely scrambled. 4th order, whether active, DSP or passive does introduce pre-and post ringing and time smear at the XO point. Minimum phase is a term of art to describe phase and time in natural alignment considering deviations from flat amplitude response, as in crossover slopes. The lead and lag components add and cancel, producing no ringing or time smear, producing an added output with flat amplitude and phase with no ringing - allowing time alignment via physical offset.
Vandersteen and Thiel were chasing the same goal. Meadowlark seemed similarly aligned, but the only product review I saw was an early model, which didn't quite do what it claimed. Does anyone here know whether Avalon or other highly regarded speakers worked in the T/P domain?  

prof,

Bryston is well into active speaker development. I wonder if they might be persuaded to go the T/P route for future speakers.

Just a thought

George

Sad news that Roy Johnson, speaker designer/proprietor of Green Mountain Audio, has passed away.

Aside from the loss to those who knew him, that's one less Time/Phase coherent speaker on the market.  Not many passive T/P speaker brands left (Vandersteen...and?...)

Apparently, like Jim Thiel, he took a fair amount of the knowledge of the designs with him.

It looks like the slack will have to be picked up by active speaker designs, more of which are doing time/phase coherence via incorporating DSP.

Duelund:corrected.

@jserio If I didn't have a pair of 2.7's I'd be all over those!

Cable Update:

Krell TAS --> DH Labs Q10 --> Thiel 3.6

Bryston 7B-ST (Parallel Mode) --> ELF Custom Silver Surfers --> Thiel 2.7

This is the best results that I have gotten so far. 

While messing with some custom cables (Belden 8473 in a Kimber-esqe configuration) that used tinned-copper in another setup I set out looking for other tinned or coated copper cables.  Found the DH Lab and ELF cables for a reasonable price locally.

Looking at making some cables from Dueland wire in the near future.

A beautiful pair of 2.7's available in the Vancouver, BC area.
https://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649541037-thiel-cs27-black-with-outrigger-base/

I contacted ronkent to buy the stands, since I own a pair of 2.0 and a pair of 2.2. I am really looking forward to using them.