4th of July- All
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
igmaty, Congrats to your seat at the table. That speaker is a steal on the used market . My advice would be not to use your current amplification as they will add too much distortion and most likely clip and possibly lose a driver, or two. Amps worth considering that are within a 2-3k price point are the lower wattage Krell FPB, Pass Labs, Threshold, Classe, Mark Levinson. I would pass on Bryston as my experience has been they do not mate well together, especially after hearing the list mentioned above. I’m no expert on this matter but I have owed/own a few Thiel’s and have tried a good bit of the high current amps out there. Without the right amp the Thiel’s will never move you the way they were intended.
|
igmaty - the CS2.3 was introduced december 1997 and had a minor XO tweak November 1998. Thiel’s serial numbers always began with #1 and 1/2 were the first pair, etc. My notes say about 2750 pairs were made, so numbers would top out about 5500. The coax was updated some time in the product life which necessitated adding an 8.5 ohm resistor and 3uF cap. That change came February 2001. Try Rob Gillum about the particulars of how to identify if you have early or late 2.3s. Once you get oriented, there is substantial / qualitative sonic improvement to be had via relatively simple crossover component substitutions. First get them up to speed and have fun listening.
|
There's some info about specific (to the review pair) serial numbers in this 1999 Stereophile review around the same time frame - https://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/220/index.html
Later on, Thiel changed the tweeters to vented ones (although I'm not sure of the exact date (probably around 2004). My friend worked at a high end shop and I generally did all his set-ups with him, including changing 2.3 tweeters (I owned 2.3s many moons ago).
|
I spent the last day wading through this entire thread. Happy to say I'm a new first time Thiel owner. I found a pair of cs2.3 for $450 and after a bit of research snatched them up. One tweeter was dented with a small puncture but I was able to pop it out and "patch" the hole with a very small very thin piece of nylon film until I can foot a rebuild. Unfortunately the serial numbers are extremely faded. I can't make out much at all but they appear to start with a 1. This doesn't really jive with the rest of the serial numbers I'm seeing online which appear to all range in the 4000's. Rob with Coherent Source told me the coax drivers were mainly manufactured in '99 and '00 but I popped one out and mine has a manufacture date of October '98. I likely have one of the earliest it seems. Does anyone have any info on what the serial number range might have been for the cs2.3's? I assumed they started at 4000 based on what I've seen but perhaps I'm wrong. Anyways, they sound fantastic. I'm thrilled with their sound. |
Good seeing all the tweek talk amongst many Thiel speaker design enthusiast. I happen to be also since purchasing a pair of CS2.4 in walnut finish close to 20 years ago now. They are still living up to the task of proving a very great listening. Take a peek at my virtual system . Wondering if anyone has an interest in buying a slightly used MCS1 pair or a SCS4 pair (both in black ash finish) like new condition and have spent 8 years still in factory boxes |
Thank You jafant While it has been a lot of work I'm sure that without the guiding advice from Tom I wouldn't have made this far or near this successful . All I did was replace the old components with new and higher quality ones and made them fit into the limited space . This is definitely not for everyone but if you can and are willing you will be rewarded with the results . |
Thank you Tom , as always your knowledge and advice helps steer me in the right direction . The series feed which is now comprised of a 15uF PP and the 1uF yellow bypass is on the mid range , also the 1uf is a Clarity cap the was " Made for Thiel " and happens to be the exact same size as the ESA 630v cap ( that was used on one of my boards . Also as of now Clarity does not make a 16uf in the Purity series and the ESA , MR and CMR are very large in diameter I believe that a 15uf 400v Purity with a 1uf 800v-s Purity cap would be the perfect solution which now you've got me thinking about replacing the ERSR 15uf 400v . While the schematic says ERSE inductors , Rob and the tags that are still on them say they are from Jantzen . When researching I discovered that ERSE does not make the values for the 2.7 . How much difference would one expect by using a 0.68mH 20 awg .569 DCR verse the 18 awg .440 DCR as used , or even using a 21 awg. .700 DCR or 22 awg .870 DCR ? The 0.60mH is used on both the tweeter and the mid . I did it again , I installed the crossovers with the new Purity 800v cap before taking a picture ! But I posted pictures of the board on the virtual systems before showing the original (replacement by new Thiel) 1uf ESA cap . They show the 4 x 100uf electrolytics replacing the 1 x 400uf .
|
Rob - good to see you making steady progress, and eagerly await your report on that parallel tweeter cap. Regarding coils - bigger is not better (despite conventional opinion.) A significant consideration is the saturation frequency rf wire size. 18 gauge saturates at 17kHz above which turbulence results in distortion, heat and related instability. I consider 18 gauge the best compromise for woofers and OK for midrange with smaller being better and more so for the tweeter. That 20 gauge midrange feed coil is not an accident or compromise. Note the trimming resistors that follow it, so less coil resistance would not be an advantage. Au contraire. The dissipation factor of a coil is far greater than a resistor. The 20 gauge tweeter feed coil was probably the best compromise between its required inductance and a resistance value that matches an available resistor value. I know that Jim would have preferred a 22 or higher gauge there if practical. Also note that Thiel inductors were best-of-form from 1978’s model 03 onward. The 2.7 ERSE inductors directly trace their lineage all the way back to 1978 when Thiel introduced ’good wire’ to Acousta-Coil for the 03. At that time what is now CDA101 (highest grade) wire was an aerospace-only product developed for the Jupiter Deep Space Probe by ITT. The rest is history which I recounted in these pages years ago. I don’t think you’ll find better wire or winding, and thicker gauge would degrade performance - and make Jim squirm. |
Biannuzzi22 27june23 "I am seeing a lot of chatter about upgrading the CS2.7 speakers. Can anyone send me instructions on how to do this? In particular, it looks like using the Clarity Purity 1uf 800v capacitors is a good upgrade? Where are these located and how would I replace what is currently on the crossover?" Crossover upgrades are, at this time, conversational rather than commercial. I hope to eventually have plans and kits, but not yet. The CS2.7 is the final Jim Thiel-esque product, developed after his death, but by the original in-house team with outsourced engineering help, and built in Lexington with traditional classic methods. It qualifies in my thinking as genuine and worthy of upgrade. Clarity’s Purity800-S is their hands-down winner. Its internal circuitry is more sophisticated than the other PUR caps, plus the thick copper end caps and silver wire refinements. All that said, I find that replacing the stock Thiel styrene/tin - film/foil 1uF ’yellow’ cap with the PUR800 1uF is a lot of money spent on marginal improvement. I suggest you rather might consider unifying the split/bypass cap into a single PUR800-S where most appropriate (eliminating the bypass.) Your best prospect is the tweeter series feed which is now comprised of a 15uF PP and the 1uF yellow bypass. Replace them both with a single 16uF PUR800-S. (That leaves potential for a more sophisticated bypass, in the works, at a later time.) The weakest link in the 2.7XO is the 400uF electrolytic cap in the midrange feed. I am working on an all-film solution which is not yet ready. My first focus is on early products to keep them up and running. New midranges and tweeters will bring later Thiel driver technologies and longevity all the way to the early designs. As various caps are finalized I’ll announce here. Stay tuned – a lot is presently coming together - I anticipate real progress this year. |
I have installed the Clarity Purity 800v - S 1uf cap in the mid range circuit and am very impressed , this leaves me with wanting to upgrade a 1.5uf cap on the negative side of the tweeter circuit to a Clarity Purity 250v , one that I already upgraded from an ERSE 250v to an Clarity ESA 250v . While I don't think this will make much of a difference this will be the last cap upgrade . Question does anybody have knowledge or experience with replacing an inductor of a small gauge with one of a larger gauge with the same resistance ? The inductors are the only components that I have not changed . |
@duramax747 The Mundorf 100uf caps are electrolytics , I should have the Purity caps by the end of week and installed by the weekend , I'll post pictures on the virtual system page . @anzen Purity caps are available at Parts Connexion in limited values , they are less expensive than Madisound but right now Madisound has more values available right now . I understand your dilemma , Years ago before I started I considered going external but the workload would have been daunting and expensive, not being sure of the value added I went with staying internal . It's taking me over 3 years between thinking about it and ( almost ) completing the internal upgrades , if I went external I might be hearing anything yet ! What duramax747 is going to do would be my dream now that I've experienced the improvements that upgrading components produce .
|
duramax747 - are you going outboard with the 2.4s? I have a feeling that is the route that will be taken but the stubbornness in me wants to explore the internal crossover further. There have been recent posts sending me down rabbit holes. Similar to what Rob posted above, it seemed beneficial to create a schematic and studying the crossovers design. Been toying with an internal 2.4 coax board layout with electrical components on both sides. Tom Thiel mentioned "signal chaos", point-to-point and two-sided layouts so it seemed worth jogging that path to learn more. The design considers a short path with input/output separation, component orientation, star ground (simple) and hopefully sufficient thermal management. Another rabbit hole was the mechanical and electrical vibration discussion then how to edge mount a two-sided layout. Since using simulation software is not likely in the cards, perhaps an accelerometer will work. Not sure how to avoid custom brackets and can print TPU to see how that measures. TomD mentioned a mechanical approach to vibration but couldn't figure what it was or how it could be modified for this design. Those rabbit holes certainly reaffirms previous "it's complex" comments. Good grief it is and it must have been an exceptional team to create Thiel products for so long. Think a few of you are on the Facebook page and might reach out there if interested in seeing the layout. Never fails I post photo watermarked "Do not use, designed by a 5 year old Lego expert" and creates confusion. Still can't direct message here. |
Rob - kudos on the update and great info! Kinda wonder about getting 4x100uf on there. Wonder if standoffs to another board could have top and bottom mounted 100uf caps. Likely a bad idea with vibration, extending the path, etc... Think you mentioned PartsConnexion will have PUR in July. Going to get the 1uf caps for existing coax board and other parts needed for a VTL project.
|
vair68robert Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. I would think any film cap would be better than the 400uf electrolytic cap that was in there. The large values 220uf and 330uf are tough to find replacements that would fit in the confines of the cabinet. Was going outboard not an option for you? |
This was from Tom 5/25/2018 "The 2.7 midrange is fed through a 400uF electrolytic cap, albeit with a PP and styrene bypass in parallel. The 3.7 uses a bank of 75uF polypropylene caps with a styrene bypass. Multiple smaller PP caps provide faster reactions and less distortion than a large electrolytic. " "I believe this could be the main reason for the improvement in detail and smoothness in the sound " Rob From me 7/3/2022 A few months ago I had finished upgrading the woofer board and heard some improvement but nothing earth shattering , I am almost finished with the coaxial and the improvement is way beyond anything I would have thought possible . I kept things simple , replaced the resistors with Mills , upgraded the capacitors , bringing the electrolytic capacitors within and/or lower tolerance specs , making only one change suggested by Tom , replacing the 400uf capacitor with 4 100uf caps . What I discovered was that the electrolytic capacitors used on the shunt or negative side were out of tolerance , the 68uf cap used on both the tweeter and woofer were up to 20% over while the 330 and 220uf used on the mid was about 7% over . The 68uf caps were replaced by Mundorf caps that were about 3% over but replacing the 330 and 220uf caps was a bit of a problem . First I replaced them with ERSE " 5% " tolerance caps that turned out to be over 11% over ! I didn't even try to listen to them . Then I tried Jantzen " 5% ' caps , they were about 6% over . I listened to them for a while and was happy with hearing the improvement that the other upgrades made but it bugged me that Tom was telling me that Thiel's tolerance max was 5% and mostly within 3% , so after asking Tom's advise I went with a 300uf Jantzen cap that together with the 220 I was able to achieve a 2% over tolerance . Since I replaced/upgraded the resistors and capacitors ( except the 1uf's ) on coaxial boards at the same time I can't say how much the replacing of a 400uf cap is improved by using 4 X 100uf caps would be , I used Jim Thiels philosophy and Tom Thiels suggestion , if I had the room I would have replaced the 330 and 220 caps with 100uf max caps . Also I can't say how much better the 100uf Mundorf caps are than Solen or Jantzen caps would have been , the same for the Jantzen used on the negative side . I will say that the 1uf Purity cap on the tweeter made a large improvement in the sound stage and definition so I'm hoping/exception that replacing the 1uf " Made For Thiel " cap on the mid with the new 800v Purity cap will take the sound to a whole new level .
|
Next week i’ll investigate with a friend who has some soldering gear. There is a wire on the crossover board that that went off several months ago. At the time i used super glue to stick the wire back on the board, it worked for the past 3 months but perhaps today the contact between the wires and the soldering is not good anymore. We will redo a nice new soldering on the board and see if my problem comes from that. Keep you guys posted. |
Rob - I have likewise not heard of any high 2.7 serial numbers. Rob gave me the 1500 pair figure and I take it on his word. I do know that by that time Thiel’s export markets were stronger than domestic. We’ll see what surfaces as time goes on. Yes, that 400uF electrolytic cap in the midrange feed is not Jim Thiel - never done. As a fly on the wall, I gathered that there were ongoing struggles between Home Team Thiel and Warkwyn who ’knew best’. New ’finalized’ samples would come from Toronto with persisting failures to honor such requests. When their tab hit $250K, Kathy pulled the plug and began production. New Thiel didn’t deem it worth the trouble to make future changes. Regarding 3.7 vs 2.7, I see almost every value changed for the 2.7. Circuitry layouts are similar in that the same basic resonances are being compensated. But there are significant differences and no shared component values between the three models' crossovers. I’ve heard the models 3.7 and 2.7 only once at Thiel’s music room September 2012. I was overjoyed by the performance of both, especially the 3.7. What a Swan Song. |
1500 pairs of 2.7s ! My serial #s are 329 & 330 , If I remember correctly prof have #'s slightly higher and those have been the highest #s I've seen on this forum . I wonder where the rest of the owners are ? One major thing I've discovered about the 2.7s is the the crossovers deviated from Jim's philosophy of keeping the capacitors maximum at 100uf . I keep wondering why this was allowed , why the 3.7 coax board was not modified and the 2.4's woofer board was not modified for the 2.7 cabinet ? PartsConnexion should be offering the Purity line of caps by July . |
Yes, Rob definitely had a role. Home Team Thiel managed the executive design and manufacturing engineering and execution. Principal players were Kathy Gornik, Dawn, Rob, Gary Dayton and probably some others. Thiel in 2012 was a skeleton crew and all hands believed that bringing this post-Jim product to market was essential to any kind of future. The drivers already existed in the 3.7 coax and 2.4 woofer. Technical crossover engineering was done by Warkwyn in Toronto, which resembled pulling teeth to get an authentic ’Thiel’ product from an outside firm with ideas of their own. Indeed the CS2.7 was part of what attracted a new buyer . . . which could have carried on the company, but was not a good fit and things went south. But the product exists as a testament to Home Team Thiel’s dogged determination. (Also, there is some low-hanging fruit for improvement.) |
Rob says 1500 pair. The first brigade of New Thiel had some good talent. And the new owners were trying out building on Jim's legacy. In particular Steve DeFuria had been an early Thiel retailer and long-time inner circle supporter. Steve became the first national sales manager and was able to re-populate the dealer base by decommissioning Crutchfield and other sincere promises. Those 1500 pairs were made entirely at Thiel Lexington with PtoP boards and best historic practices. They even got the (new at that time) Klippel Quality Control system, but I don't think they learned its ropes before changing horses with the next management team. Five new teams in five years to try to please a very difficult principal owner. $ten million spent to scuttle Jim's legacy. |
