Thiel Owners

I have something to add about having owned Thiel CS3.5 speakers for over 30 years. I have quite a few friends that remember my system with these speakers as being the best system that they every heard anywhere, including CES and other audio shows. One of my friends finally declared that there is "no way a system 30 years old can still have sounded better than I have ever heard since. I must be building it up in my mind, like a fish story".

Well, about 2 years ago, when my wife bought an extra house for us (I mean that we didn’t move in, she just bought it for later), I decided to set-up in its living room the EXACT same system that I had dismantled about 10 years earlier.
The speakers were in storage, the Cardas Hexlink Golden 5C interconnects were here, the CAT preamp was there, and may favorite tube mono amplifiers for the Thiels were also in storage. Once all put back together, I invited a few of these old friends over to hear the "famous" Thiel system again. We all agreed, it was STILL the best system we have ever heard. Wow, with carefully chosen associated equipment, the CS3.5 speakers sound like magic. They make magic, with their immaculate imaging, impressive dynamic contrasts (both micro and macro), super low and accurate bass (with the EQ), and reproduction of the natural timbre of real acoustic instruments. My new CS3.7 speakers are not significantly better in these particular qualities. As a whole, they sound quite similar. I doubt that any 2.x speakers can beat the CS3.5, but I have two pair of 2.x now, that I have not heard yet, so I will find out soon.

I know that some of you are thinking, including Tom, "No way his 30 years old CS3.5 speakers can sound as good as 3.7 speakers with Audio Research Classic 120 amps and a $20000 Audio Note preamp." Well just don’t underestimate the benefit of 20 years working on a system, carefully comparing amplifiers and preamplifiers, using current VERY high-end cartridges (e.g. Koestu, Benz Ebony LP, ZYX, Shelter), and choosing the best sonic match for every single cable in the system. Plus experimenting with AC conditioning, room acoustic treatments, and speaker positioning (in inch increments). Also, since the 3.5s were moved to a bedroom and the 3.7s are back in the living room, I have started the intense tweeking process with them, like I did with the 3.5s.

One of the greatest pleasures for me in our Hi-Fi hobby is when you listen to something you thought you know intimately well, only to discover nuances and details you never knew where there, or in this case, never truly appreciated.  This just happened to me...

I had just noticed that Tidal has an MQA version of The Beatles’ Deluxe Anniversary Edition of Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band.  Now, without getting into the wormhole of what MQA is or isn’t, I was simply blown away by what I just heard.  Specifically, on “A Day In The Life”, I was simply floored by sheer amount of layering my 3.5’s where throwing out...Lennon’s vocals had such air, like they were suspended high above all the instruments in the studio.  Then, Ringo’s incredible drumming...such timing...pop, pop, boom...pop, pop, boom...all from the right side, with the orchestra filling in on the left. Pianos on top of strings, horns sweeping...it was engulfing.  The song had so much presence to it, so much to its construction that I never heard before. This was not only a soundstage that had width and depth, but layer upon layer from top to bottom.

I love that song and I love that album...but I never heard it like that.  And, MQA or not, I wouldn’t have had this experience were it not for the Thiel 3.5’s. It takes a speaker of outstanding capability and quality to convey a musical performance like I just heard.  The Thiels never disappoint.  They have this ability to just sound so right...so detailed and yet so musical at the same time...that no matter what I throw at them, I simply enjoy. Incredible!  

I had to take a break from working to play that track again...and replay the album from the start.  I write this posting still gobsmacked at what I’ve just heard and so look forward to the next time the 3.5’s do this to me again...

Hope you all doing well!

Arvin

beetlemania

I can guarantee I could have impressed anyone skeptical of that pairing with a demo, especially if they didn't know what amp was driving the Thiels :-)

one of my favorite pairings with the 3.7s was my little 14W Eico HF-81 tube amp!

Oh, my! I'm gonna guess you will get some responses less than supportive of this pairing. But, good for you! Always trust your own ears first (and last).

Hi Warren, we communicated about your new 3.7s on the Steve Hoffman forum.

I've been "Thiels with tubes" for decades, myself.  I use Conrad Johnson Premier 12 140W/side monoblocks and they have driven every Thiel speaker I've had great (Thiel 06, 02, 3.7, 2.7).   And actually one of my favorite pairings with the 3.7s was my little 14W Eico HF-81 tube amp!Certainly not the last word in bass tightness (though surprisingly good), but wow what a sparkling, lush, organic yet lively presentation!

Sandy, 

Those sixteen power tubes probably can keep you warm in the winter, but your summer air conditioning bills must be something else!  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-).

George: A former very satisfied 3.5 owner - - now listening to 2.7s.

warjarrett:  too funny as i am  the same way.  " Yeah, I think I was crazy. I can tell you this: I never play background music anymore, with these tubes burning. The system either has my full attention or is off. I don’t answer the phone, my wife knows to ignore me (because I will her),

Even I suspected that I was crazy to spend as much on power tubes as on the entire purchase of the amps. Particularly since, as ARC’s only amps ever made for full triode operation, these amps make a measly 120 wpc with the 16 power tubes. All other ARC amps that have ever used 16 tubes, before or after the Classic 120s, made/make at least 200 wpc. So these are VERY special amps and VERY special tubes, and I am happy to be hearing them, despite their total cost.

To make my tubes even more interesting, these Tungsols came from a big box of military supply, in which ALL the tubes were matched (some 60+ years ago), then stored truly NOS ever since. So my set is a matched "sex-teen-tet"... well I also bought 4 spares, so a matched "twenty-tet".

Yeah, I think I was crazy. I can tell you this: I never play background music anymore, with these tubes burning. The system either has my full attention or is off. I don’t answer the phone, my wife knows to ignore me (because I will her), and even the dog won’t come in the listening room anymore when I am listening.

By the way, my preamp is a $20,000 Audio Note M6 with phono, and my cables are Cardas Clear Reflection. So the ARC amps and the Thiel speakers are hitting WAY above their current used value would suggest.

well my PS Audio BHK amp only uses to little baby input tubes,  but it is a great amp with my 3.7's.   would almost be afraid to try something like ARC mono blocks with those tubes.  that could break the bank

warjarrett

I totally agree with the ARC-Thiel synergy. My Ref5SE-Ref150 with my 3.6s are absolutely intoxicating. I'm not sure I want to risk the cost of tube rolling since the ARC-chosen Sovtek KT120s and 6H30s sound so sublime.

The ARC amps were just "quite good" with the stock Russian tubes. I really splurged, and bought 16 (8 per channel) NOS (and really new, never used) Tungsol 6550 tubes, USA made in the 1950s, for $175 each. And, WOW, they sound like different amps now, TOTALLY worth almost doubling their cost to me. Now they are indeed "killer" to my ears. Surprisingly, my CS3.5s don’t sound much different than my CS3.7s, with these amps. There is a consistency to the sound of all Thiel speakers that is truly impressive. Most speaker manufacturers have more variety in how their different speaker models have sounded. B&W is a prime example of this.

hi Warren,   great story.   i  bet the 3.7's are killer with the ARC amps.  wow what a combo. 

thannotopis321

I remember that the Aragon amps sounded very good with my Thiel speakers, too.

Tom Thiel and Harrylavo:

Hello Tom, this is my first post in this forum. I have been posting only in the SteveHoffman.tv forums for the past few years. Today, I just found out that you are here. So, here I am too.

During the decades of owning my Thiel CS3.5 speakers, I have tried hundreds of amplifiers with them, and can remember my sonic result with just about all of them. Adcom NEVER sounded good with Thiels, no matter how much power. Together they sound bland, lacking in dynamics, and electronic (not natural). The Amber Series-70 was an excellent combination in every way, one of the best I ever heard. It had actually only about 60 wpc (but it was famous for a having a VERY large power transformer and capability to deliver high current to low impedance or wildly varying impedance speakers). The other excellent matches were Classe DR series amps, all Mark Levinsons, and all Krells. But when I started hearing tube amps with Thiels, I never went back to solid state with them. Even very low power tube amps sound REALLY great with Thiel CS3.5. In fact, I never found one tube amp that didn’t sound great with them. Even a 6 wpc SET amp from AES was awesome. Now I am using Audio Research Classic 120 mono amps with my CS3.7, and it is an impressive match with the CS3.5 also. I think $3000 for a pair of these amps is a bargain. With my 3.5s, I am still using my MFA (Moore Franklyn) M-120 amps in triode mode, 60 wpc. When listeners hear this system, they cannot believe that I have been listening to such great sound for about 30 years. Newer, comparable amps would be from Bruce Moore Design, but are expensive. So my advice is that just about any stereo tube amp, with at least 60 wpc, into the CS3.5 is pure heaven. With solid state, you need to be more careful to audition in advance, and don’t go lower than 100 wpc in power.

--Warren (AKA "Sandy")

Happy Friday! All

thannotopis321
Welcome! Good to see you here. I remember the Aragon brand from the 1990's.  I look forward in reading more about your musical tastes.
Happy Listening!

Tom Thiel -

Perhaps an answer to your question re replacing with high current amps on 2.2's.  I recently pulled an Adcom 5300 away from the 2.2's and replaced it with an older Amber power amp still in good shape (this amp was noted for its current ability back in the old Absolute Sound days).  The change was pretty dramatic ..... bass firmly under control at all frequencies, making it sound much more "3.5-like".  I then substituted in Outlaw M200's, which did the same thing but a somewhat more laid-back mid-range.

I have the thiel CS6 speakers and they are fantastic to my ears. I use the Aragon 8008 (1998 vintage) and Audible Illusions Modulus 3A preamp. I also use a BSP 400 mirage subwoofer (old but very effective) I use the SL1000 MK2 for my ablum collection.(31 yrs.young) The associated equipment and my cs6 speakers are nirvana for me.

Thank you. I think doing this stepwise does make the most sense for me. Getting an appropriate high current ss amp first with using the preamp of my Linn would buy me time. I've read that the preamp is better than the amp section on my Linn, so it should be fine for a while. I wouldn't go with Linn again, although it has been trouble free, I'd much rather follow the suggestions found on this forum when the time is right. Your knowledge and experience led me to the 3.5s and I'm thrilled with them, so why mess with success? I really do appreciate all the suggestions and advice offered here. I'm not one to cycle through gear, so I'm fine with waiting for the right amp. 

I agree with jazzman7 about using a stepping stone approach. I first seriously started in this hobby about 7 years ago when I purchased my CS3.6s. At the time, I had an Exposure 2010 integrated amp. Obviously, it was very evident that I needed more 'juice', so I purchased a Bryston 4B using the Exposure as a preamp. Much better but it was just the beginning.....

rwmeditz

Another thought re your amp situation. If you are willing to consider separates, you could think about finding an appropriate power amplifier and continue to use the Linn integrated as your preamp via its preamp outputs. Using this stepping stone approach, you could then take your time with regards to potentially upgrading your preamp, at which time you might wish to consider worthy preamp/DACs for upgrading any listening you do in the digital arena. Just a thought. 

rwmeditz
I was thinking about your situation for possibly moving to an upgrade in Integrated amp.  I do not know if Linn makes a current model. A few years ago I was impressed with the Rega Saturn-R Integrated amp. I believe that it would match well w/ your Linn cd player while retaining the classic British sound.  Worth an audition.

Happy Listening!

Rules - zero phase rings before and after a transient event. Minimum phase does NOT ring. It's worth some study

Tom, if Thiel speakers keep phase changes to a minimum, would according to the same reasoning keeping the phase changes to zero as in linear phase be better then minimum phase? Creating linear phase is possible with active digital sound processing creating other problems such as ringing but would it not be another step closer to the ideal? My experimentation with the 3.5 seems promising and certainly increased my respect for the quality these speakers already have.

Tom Thiel

I will definitely let you know if I can hear them through an appropriate amp. I've just recently started reaching out to the community, but have been reading the posts for close to a year now. I've never been to any events and none of my friends have the bug, so it may be a while. 


I'm thrilled that you are continuing to pursue and offer your special talents, both in gear and instruments, to the rest of us. Keep the faith!  

Jafant

Yes, it is a great ride, with the music making an ever greater impact as the gear reveals more. Words can only approximate what the music offers, just as they fall short of describing the smell of freshly cut grass or the feel of a loved one's touch.

rwmeditz
Your descriptors of the presentation and sound from your system are perfect. It appears that your Audio journey had been fun and rewarding over the decades. This is what our hobby is all about.  The gear is the driver.The music is the passenger. One does not exist without the other.

Happy Listening!

tomthiel
Safe travels and have fun at the workshop!
Happy Listening!

On a personal note, I will be traveling and out of contact for a week. I am attending a master class in soundboard tuning from the Australian physicist Trevor Gore. My primary occupation is designing stringed instruments and Gore's pre-retirement workshop will share his lifetime of understandings, tools and methods regarding what actually happens as the string excites the soundboard of an instrument - and how to  optimize the outcomes. Many of you know that I was building guitars before we diverted to speakers - stringed instruments continues as a first-love; and there are many parallels and mutually enlightening aspects shared among the disciplines. 

Rosami - no firm news. The bankruptcy is still pending, so I am behind a curtain. I can say that I am enlisting talent to augment my limited abilities.

I can answer your question regarding hot rod kits. Some general recommendations will flow (and have already) from the work. But the nature of the beast is extremely sensitive to particulars, and all aspects interact. So the "kits" will be very specific. Since custom parts are involved, purchase from Rob will be required.

No news as to timing. But yes, news regarding progress. I am working.

RW - your story strikes the core of our inspiration to "do speakers". Thank you for sharing. That emotional connection you reference is what we identified at the core of the minimum phase presentation. I have subsequently studied aspects of auditory neurology and psychoacoustics to enrich my understandings. Most of the world and nearly all of the technologists dismiss that very element (which you feel) - or at least its connection with phase integrity. You get it.

My present task is a rather difficult one - so many technical aspects go into creating what you have experienced; some are known, some are surmised, some are mysteries approached through trial and error, and some are unavoidable or changeable. I must unmask the limiters without reducing the successes. Of special help is your comment about the added volume needed to unlock the 2.2s. I will contemplate clues around that idea . . .

Of interest to users is that a large part of the puzzle resides in amplification. The 2.2 presents a more demanding load, and your listening experience sounds a lot like signal veil from a straining amp. That load is baked in to the 2.2, and gets worse with many subsequent models. I hope that you can borrow a "great" amp and report your findings to us here.

It may help to know my gear, but … if I haven't given you a chuckle yet one will surely follow soon, unless I get kicked off Audiogon first.

Just added 3.5s

1992
1. 2.2s
2. Linn Intek integrated
3. Linn Mimik CD player
4. Magnum Dynalab FT 11 tuner

Late 1980's Sony CDP C67 ES

1980 Dokoder R2R, discarded late 1998 or so


Circa 1973
1. Dual 1228 turntable with Pickering V15/1200 cartridge, recently refurbished after lying dormant for 15 years
2. Kenwood 5400 receiver, now idle since the DCM Time Window 1a speakers a friend gave me years ago had a driver go out, the impetus to get the 3.5s although the Kenwood can't run either Thiel
3. Cerwin Vega speakers, ? model #, driver gave out in 1992, hence the upgrade then


Christmas 1967
A transistor radio from my uncle started this interest in audio equipment to listen to music, with the Beatles Hello Goodbye clip on the Ed Sullivan Show a month prior really shifting my musical journey which started with Sgt. Pepper's into high gear. 

My musical choices have also developed some over the years, although they still tend to be more instrumental, improvisational, and even more eclectic now. 

Continued,
The 3.5s immediately revealed themselves. Obviously they played louder and deeper, I use the EQ. They are not as position dependent, and I'm somewhat limited in placing them, so it will never be ideal. But positioned where the 2.2s were I was center orchestra at Carnegie Hall with the 3.5s, with the 2.2s I was rear balcony. 3.5 - much wider and deeper soundstage, deep bass rising up from the earth, tympani reverb palpable. Nonsibilant crystal clear highs, the notes of the triangles sparkling and shimmering. Every instrument where it should be and its sound coming at you and expanding like a cone as it should. The flow of the rhythm comes at you like the waves of the ocean. The notes fading into the absolute void of space, utter darkness. Tones as sweet as Jerry Garcias notes, real organic maple syrup, not sterile sugar or sickly sweet saccharine. The Beatles Let it Be was like hearing it for the first time again, and I was a fan ever since Sgt. Pepper and Magical Mystery. The voices on Beethoven's 9th and Mahler's 2nd are ethereal, sublime and poetic.

I still love the 2.2s, but with my integrated they have a little less of all the above, especially imaging and sweetness. They are still wonderful, but less vivid, color rather than technicolor, cotton rather than silk. It almost seems that you have to invest more of yourself to get the emotional connection to the music while the 3.5s offer it up immediately if you are open for it. Perhaps the 2.2 is more technically proficient or analytical and the 3.5 more visceral or impressionistic. As I said when I started, it is the way I experience the music that I can share, the technical aspects I know nothing about other than what I learned from you here, and for that I am very grateful. For me the gear is a means to the end - MUSIC! 

I'm honored to be asked for my thoughts, especially from the master artisan and craftsman himself and the very knowledgeable Jafant, but I'm afraid the tech eludes me and I know nothing other than what I hear and feel. It explains why I'm still running them on an underpowered integrated. I knew I had to get my 2.2s when I got chills listening to exerpts of each of 3 pieces of music I knew very well, 1 rock, 1 classical, 1 jazz. Same for the 3.5's. The music made not just an artistic impression, but a much rarer visceral emotional one also through the Thiels. The music spoke to my soul, which is what Jim Thiel was likely hoping to accomplish for himself with his ultimate God speaker. Neither of mine will ever be sold, but one day they will find their way to my kids. 
Although I never play that loud, my wife begs to differ but our musical tastes rarely intersect, rarely a max of 85 db at peak, the 2.2s needed to be played fairly loud to realize the bass and soundstage, either because of lower sensitivity or lower resistance levels or weak integrated. In addition, the tone and separation are not as sweet, 3D, or separated. 

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!

Happy Listening!

Tomthiel

When I first saw those specs, I noticed the Impedance of 2.4 ohms @ 160 Hz. Thankfully, the 4BSST2 was up to the task. 

george

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.

Tom and Prof

From my 2.7 Owners info:

          CS2.7 SPECIFICATIONS

Bandwidth (–3dB)          35 Hz-20 kHz

Amplitude Response   35Hz-20 kHz ±2.5 dB

Phase Response           Minimum ±10°

Sensitivity                    87 dB@2.8 V-1m

Impedance                  4 Ω (2.4 Ω minimum@160Hz)

Recommended Power  100-400 watts

george

@tomthiel
Thanks for that info re 2.7 and subwoofers.  I've saved it!
Cheers!

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. 

tomthiel
Hope you enjoyed the holiday weekend in full. How are developments going in your Hot Rod garage?  Happy Listening!