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!
tomthiel To followup on jafant’s question regarding the hot rod updates, are you able to provide some details regarding your progress on the 3.6 upgrades? Are you planning to release “complete hot rod kits” for each model, or generic suggestions for updating the various models? Any update regarding when 3.6 designs may be ready, and when Rob G. will be able to offer them? Many thanks! rosami
tomthiel I suspect a bigger, deeper and wider soundstage driven by a higher current power amp. Now that I have two accomplished Integrated amps for comparison, Creek and Ayre. Both are musical in a pleasant presentation without criticism. Simply reach for disc after disc. The Ayre, being more powerful spec-wise, delivered more micro details and subtleties. Charles Hansen's Diamond Circuit is incredible. The Creek, being an older amp made in England, held its own for substantially less money. Carefully matching cables and power cords, this amp is a real contender without any embarrassment. Both brands offer matching CD players. Creek never built a SACD player, however, a Music Hall Maverick is a sonic match, IMO.
This lesson describes evolution of the Integrated Amp.Happy Listening!
Integrated amps have evolved indeed. What strikes me about rwmeditz's experience of "holographic image" is how the impedance difference of the 2 speakers might be operating. The 3.5 bottoms around 5 ohms from 100 to 1K Hz with rising lower impedance. It presents a rather simple / orderly load for an amplifier. The 2.2 bottoms around 3.5 ohms from 100 to 200 Hz with another dip just under 40 Hz, presenting a more difficult load. I wonder what you would hear if both speakers were driven by a big, high-current amp. Comments are very welcome.
rwmeditz 2nd Note- I am strongly considering an Integrated amp myself. These products have evolved and progressed a long way over the decades! Happy Listening!
rwmeditz - I am interested in your further comments and comparisons about 3.5s vs 2.2s. I am familiar with both, but don't have 3.5s for comparison and hope to align my analysis of pieces and parts with your sonic / musical experience. Please elaborate as you might wish.
rwmeditz Welcome! Good to see you here. The 3.5 loudspeaker is a Panel favorite.Equally, there are a few owners and fans of the CS 2.2 as well. You are correct in your assessment about an integrated amp bringing all of that Aural goodness. It only gets better as one increases power delivery. I look forward in reading more about your Audio journey and musical tastes. Happy Listening!
Many thanks to all on this site, especially Unsound. The insights and experiences posted here led me to purchase a pair of 3.5's. I very briefly considered Maggies, but I have enjoyed my 2.2's so much since 1992 that I had no choice but to move up the Thiel chain. WOW! Even with my ss integrated amp which only delivers 80 watts into 4 ohms I am blown away. I didn't think they were going to sound that much better or present such a holographic image. Nirvana!
tomthiel Excellent! Thank You for the XO project update. I know that you are having fun and re-capturing some of the Glory of previous days with Jim.You guys were quite a loudspeaker manufacturing force!
George - thank you for this post. I used the 2.4 spec in error. The germane point is that Thiel's Passive xo does not attenuate the main speaker's low end - in this case a little below 35 Hz.
J.A - Thanks for asking. Good progress re comparative listening and measuring tools. Great appreciation for Jim's component choices within his budgets. I'm presently testing various mechanical upgrades: cabinet stiffening, stiffer driver mountings, XO panel isolation, etc. Advantages of hindsight include location of cabinet resonances via reviewers and more sophisticated instrumentation. I can address some of them, others are baked in. Many electronic components are chosen, but no crossovers yet. pm to you.
George & prof - I think the low-pass 3dB down point should be @ 45Hz, the natural 3dB down point for the 2.7. There is no high pass / low cut filter in the XO, so the sub crosses to the woofer at the natural bottom rollin of the woofer.
I'm using the Thiel PX05 passive crossover to drive the SS2.2.
As I understand it, the PX05 takes the full range signal going the 2.7s and passes the low frequency signal to the 2.2 sub. There is no high frequency roll-off for the 2.7s.
The PX05 was configured specifically for the 2.7s. Input to the crossover is via four interconnects from the amplifier's output terminals.. I'd guess the low-pass point is circa 60-80 cps. The PX05 signal goes to the Sub via an XLR cable.. No LFE input from the preamp.
My PX05 came configured for the Thiel 2.7 speakers.
My SS2.2 has the same room adjustments as the SS2. I'm aware of the speaker output issue; however, haven't had to worry about it, as I play classical CDs at a reasonable level. (The only comments I get are from my neighbors if I crank up the Verdi Requiem or Berloiz' Te Deom or Requiem.)
My basic reason for asking: My children will "inherit"the two-channel stereo system; but they are more into other types of music, and had asked me if the crossover and sub would be "up to it!" I believe I can tell them "Yes - - as long as you keep the volume at a civilized level."
I'm content with the present setup, but would like to add another sub - - if I could find a decent one in working order. The SS2 series apparently are scarce.
George - I use PX02 and PXO5 crossovers rigged for each model. They create an inverse of the roll-off characteristics of the speaker, therefore creating an ideal match by definition. That solution was patented. It seems to my ear to work very well. I have never heard better integrated bass, and it seemed to get high marks from reviewers. There are issues of amp noise and repairability.
Performance issues remain. One function of subwoofers is to increase the speakers' output. We run out of bass excursion first because we seek to tune the enclosure as low as possible. The PXO doesn't increase the system output limit, but only adds the missing low frequencies. Someone on this forum has an Integrator, which does increase output by allowing a higher crosspoint to be chosen. I want one.
There are also questions begging in the phase domain, since the reflex bottom rolloff approaches 4th order. (The Stereophile graphs look more like 3rd order 18dB/octave.) My admittedly shallow understanding is that the high-order crossover will create ringing, which Thiel speakers go to great lengths to avoid at the higher crosspoints. I don't hear artifacts and wonder if the ear might be less sensitive to phase anomalies in the low bass. Perhaps others might comment on that problem; ideas welcome.
I am not familiar with the SmartSub 2.2, and haven't seen any reviews of x.2 subs. I don't know much about the development history of the subs, being after my time. Might the .2 designation be New Thiel? My SS1 and SS2s have Jim's (again patented) room boundary interface, which works very well to set the proper level based on proximity to walls. I have experimented with 1 vs 2 subwoofers and found noticeable improvement with 2. The 2-series crosses over in the high forties where directionality is thought to be hard to hear. But it seems to my ear that directionality is an issue. I would choose 2 SS1s over 1 SS2.
Hello to all, great write up Tom! Well my speakers arrived on Wednesday. The piano black finish is fantastic! However my left speakers midrange is not working. I will contact Rob at coherent source service and see if there’s anything They can do. Not sure if I will keep or return if I can not get a new midrange speaker for it. Maybe look for some 1.5s.
But agree, perusing the recent arrivals on Audio Consultants Used Equipment list is a daily ritual. It is where I found my 2.4s along with a few other items. I get my hair cut at Jay's Barber Shop just around the corner on Maple, and following my hair cut it is very hard to resist popping into Audio Consultants to look around, chat or simply say hello.
Audio Consultants is down to just one store now in Evanston. From what Scott told me the value of the real estate was such that it no longer made sense to hang onto the Chicago location.
I bought most of my stuff at audio consultants. Libertyville and Hinsdale closed but Evanston and Chicago are still there. I mostly buy used and they've got a nice selection of used stuff. I've been watching their website for so many years if it ever went down I'd probably need a shrink.
Welcome! Good to have you aboard. I enjoyed reading about your Audio journey. Equally, good to read about your local dealer/retailer as well. Audio Consultants has an excellent reputation. I look forward to more contributions in reference to musical tastes.
Discovered this thread a couple of weeks ago. Great thread. Now that I've read it from beginning to end, thought that it was time to introduce myself and join this band of brothers (and maybe some sisters).
Like a number of you, I live in the Chicago area and have been a long time customer of Audio Consultants in Evanston.
So a little history. My journey to Thiel began with Magnepans. Had a pair of SMGa's and I was quite happy with them. I had picked them up from Audio Consultants back in my bachelor days in 1984 together with a Braun/ADS A2 Atelier Integrated Amp (80 watts per side into 8 Ohms). But in 1996 my wife and I were very concerned that our young toddler (he's now 26 and in grad school) was more than capable of toppling over those baby Maggies and injuring himself. So it was into Audio Consultants my wife and I went to find a solution. Simon at Audio Consultants said he had just the speaker for us, the Thiel CS .5, so we traded in our baby Maggies for a pair of baby Thiels. Then flash forward to 2004, and my trusty ADS A2 after twenty some years of faithful service gives up the ghost. Back into Audio Consultants I go, this time with my 11 year old son in tow. Once again Simon has the answer. He suggests a used Bryston 3B ST with 16 years remaining on its 20 year warranty. But where am I going to put it? I explain that I have my stack of gear sitting atop an old fashioned ice chest. At which point my 11 year old speaks up and says, "Dad, what about putting it underneath the ice chest". And that is where the 3B ST has been ever since, with a used Bryston preamp taking the place of the ADS A2 in the stack atop the chest. Once I had it all set up, boy did that Bryston rig make those baby Thiels sing. Then at some point Simon in his very understated gentlemanly way puts the bug in my ear "you know, with the amp you have you can think about better speakers". So fast forward again, this time to 2011, and with a home renovation and family room addition now behind me, I target buying a pair of used CS 2.4s which I locate at Audio Consultants Libertyville store. And the .5s. Instead of trading them in, I have them bubble wrapped sitting in my crawl space, awaiting the day that my son has the place to put them.
CS .5s serial#s 0439 and 0440 in Black
CS 2.4s serial#s 2951 and 2952 in Black Ash (as to provenance, I am the third owner ... all owners purchased the speakers from Audio Consultants; speakers were approximately 5 years old at time of purchase in April of 2011, and was told that owner direclty previous to me had traded them in for a pair of 3.7s ... so there is the possiblity that a previous owner is a participant of this thread)
Good to see you here. Yes- REL subwoofer(s) are a sonic match for the CS 2.4 loudspeaker. There are a few members of the Panel here that uses this combo. Also, there are a few owners over on Audio Asylum as well. At your leisure, read through this thread for pertinent information regarding REL / Thiel matching. Keep us posted on your progress.
CS2 guys - welcome to a remembrance. The CS2 is among the most successful and most formative in Thiel's history. The 3-series launched from near the beginning; the CS3 was 4th generation thinking in 1983. The CS2 was a fresh start in 1985. It was devised as the little sister to its big brother CS3 - smaller, less expensive, less bold for smaller rooms and music, delicate and refined. It was the largest count and longest running speaker in the history of the company. Rojacob's fall at the end of the cycle. Some dealers encouraged us to delay the introduction of the 2.2 because sales were strong for the 2. In fact, the two products over-lapped their production cycle in 1990.
I want to tribute Tim Tipton as part of the CS2s success. Tim had succeeded in his own enterprise and came to us as a seasoned manager - he ran our purchasing department for 20 years until his retirement. Tim brought concepts such as progressive forecasting and commitments. The CS2 concept required parts cost to be 1/3 lower than the CS3, in addition to cabinet materials and labor 40% lower. Let's look at drivers and crossover components. The Dynaudio D28 tweeter was an expensive unit, used in many of the leading brands at that time. The Vifa midrange and Seas woofer were substantially customized and therefore priced at premium. Tim negotiated prices based on our forecast of 10,000 drivers with annual commitments a year ahead of need on prenegotiated monthly releases. In a volatile marketplace filled with small, transient, unstable startups, Tim positioned Thiel as an anchor around which driver suppliers could plan. The importing distributors could bring in thousands of units for us on a predictable schedule. He negotiated every ounce of cost reduction from the situation, and with price-freeze protection 2 years out. Tim's local reputation was that he could squeeze and dime out of a nickel.
The crossovers were expensive - including 6-9s aerospace coil wire which I had sourced from ITT for the 03. Tim applied the same long-range forecasting to that wire for substantial cost reductions. And caps and so forth. He also introduced more sophisticated accountancy, such as the CS3 drivers, caps and so forth continued to bear their previous cost burdens and the negotiated reductions were applied to the CS2 bill of materials instead of averaging the shared parts costs.
In my cabinet planning, Tim served as an intelligent participant. He helped isolate the profound cost savings of concentrating the wave-shaping mechanism into the grille board rather than the 3-D baffle augmented with a complementary grille of the CS3. Remember, this jujitsu machining all preceeded CNC technology and required serious dedicated methods with high-skill workers. The grille-boards became an independent operation, untied from cabinets, wood finish prediction, run sizes and so forth. CS2 cabinets had all flat panels with only the single angled baffle.
Some of you might enjoy a marketplace anecdote. Tony Cordesman was writing for Stereophile at that time and gave the CS2 an astoundingly positive review, taking the Quad ESL-63 as his comparison against which the CS2 stacked up quite respectably. Tony specifically cited the elegant success of the CS2 grille for dispersion control and diffraction mitigation. Stereophile's new publisher Larry Archibald took on the CS2 as his extensive long-term reference and always niggled an upper midrange edge . . . It turned out that Larry "never used grilles" and therefore had negated the carefully engineered tweeter wave guide and rounded edge boundary. He later claimed that Thiel had solved the edginess problem via crossover changes. Tony was an extremely astute listener, migrated to The Absolute Sound, and all these gyrations stay behind the curtain.
Back to Rojacob's CS2s. That historic model doesn't turn up much these days. But considering its inherent strengths I suggest they are well worth reviving. At nearly 30 years old, the electrolytic caps are near expiration. Storage is especially hard on Ecaps and failure of series feeds would endanger the midrange and tweeter, which are out of production. Your coils and wire are state of the art. Your schematic is tweaked and final behond #4900. If you want to delve, I can recommend caps and resistors as well as some cabinet tweaks. The CS2 began life at $1250/ pair in 1985 and were always compared to products costing some multiple. You could make them better than new with very little investment.
GasMan: i have 3.7's and use one SHO-5 REL. If i had it to do over i would probably try to get two of the SHO-3 subs. two is better than one if it works for your budget
The recent mention of the CS2 piqued my interest and perhaps the Thiel hive-mind can help me. I have a pair that I bought in 1990 (sn 11263, 11264) that I retired last year with used 2.4s, which I then upgraded using Rob GIllum's caps & outriggers. The new setup is great but I'd like to find a use for the 2.0s, but don't really have the space in my house for them. The mid-range & tweeters were replaced in about 2010, and the woofer was rebuilt by Thiel at the factory. Are these worth keeping (assuming I can find a use), and if so, should I replace the caps or do other work on them? The cabinets are in decent condition and I have them stored in their factory cartons.
cabinlife - I offer my assistance in documenting your CS2s for the purpose of educating us all in their particulars. There was a XO refinement in May '87 and original electrolytic caps are up to 35 years old. And so forth. If you like, you can post your serial numbers and whatever else you wish and various folks here might help guide you toward optimizing their performance.
hi Cabinlife, congrats as well. they were how i started my journey with Thiel back in 1985. they can be a bit bright so pay attention to amp, cables etc. Also i have a pair of Sound Anchors that i used to use with them as they needed them for stability and leveling. Let me know if you would be interested in them.
solobobe22, congratulations on your new purchase, if Jim was a Bryston user for his research and development, more than good reason there will have been.
Fellow Thiel’s enthusiasts, I would suggest here a conservative treatment that I already did for the woofers suspension of my CS 3.6 that are made of rubber (butyl). It’s well known that the rubber suspension last much more of foam one but our loved speakers start to be a bit old in some case (like mine) thus I was wondering how to preserve them from the aging and found a Parker product called Super O-Lube specially made for O-ring installation and general use with rubber stuff. It’s totally compatible with butyl rubber as reported in the data sheet and it’s also very effective against UV rays. I suggest to apply it on the rubber by finger with a very delicate touch and in very thin layer. ...you know, nothing is forever but we try get the most!
I tried to get the TM3, stopped bidding at $ 550 , ouctionended at $650 700 for most of them now there a guy on the bay asking for $1850, just wondering if he is ever getting that much. They had to give voice to my pre and power amp Phase Linear 400 and 4000 series 2, my very old second room audio set....
Thanks for the input imhififan and tomthiel. I'm thinking I can probably get good results from any of the bookshelf, in-wall, on-wall, tv or other possible models that were produced in the early to mid 2000s. The viewpoints come up pretty regularly and I've wondered if they'd be comparable to the powerpoints.
The stuff from the auction is hitting ebay. It's amusing to see what some people expect to be able to get for it. Some silly person is asking $750 for the raw subwoofer driver. Bids on Aurora Home start at $500.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
