Jim and Richard were both extremely frugal engineers and approached the work very similarly in broad strokes. The largest budgetary difference was the cabinet, which gave Van significant sonic-budget advantages. People compare and contrast sonic particulars; I find it more fruitful to contrast either or both of these product lines against all the other serious contenders such as Wilson, B&W, or the planars and hybrids that completely side-step coherence. Their task is perhaps a couple orders of magnitude simpler and solvable than the time and phase game. They out-sell and over-price Thiel-Van by large multiples, and get plenty of respect from reviewers and the marketplace.
It serves us well to remember that our perspective is peculiar; what some call a cult, what most say is unimportant and un-hearable. Those who 'get it' (appreciate the time and phase aspects of music) generally don't go back. I am pleased that you guys are out there enjoying what took blood sweat and tears to create.
|
model 2 have just now with recent price increase caught up with inflation.....
but my sense is both Jim T and Richard frugal engineers where cost and target price points are paid attention to.
The Quattro is a stunning value and with carbon tweeter outperforms the 5 a in every way except maybe the bottom 40 HZ
I know, I owned 5a for years...even the new Treo Ct has better mid and up performance than the vaunted 5a
i would LOVE to see Thiel get back in the time and phase fight..... |
@andy2 and @tomthiel. Its good to hear that Vandersteens are now voiced more similarly to Thiels. People also used to say Vandersteens had a shelved midrange which helped simulate lots of "depth" and some folks believe that has NOT changed. What is still an issue for me is how the pricing of the product has really climbed to rather crazy levels, with the 5a at the time it was discontinued, at $30K....it sure didn't start out at $30K. And the Quattro is $15K.
|
tomic601
Thank You for the historical perspective on Havens and Hardesty.Always good to read about existing Audio shops still operational in 2019.Seattle has a few as well as Portland.
Happy Listening!
|
a zoom 6 at $400 is hardy what i would call unlimited $$$$$
a great learning tool, Has been for me anyway...
have fun
|
yes Havens and Hardesty in SoCal
i met Curtis Havens in about 1988 in Tacoma where he set up shop as Advanced Audio. Curtis is an avid cold water surfer, retired. Sold Advanced to Definitive Audio of Seattle.
Advanced is a Vandersteen, ARC, Magnaplaner Ayre dealer...
|
JA - H&H was in Southern California. That's all I remember.
|
Yes, recording one's own or otherwise knowing intimately the nature of your source material is necessary to not get lost in the woods. When setting up my studio this time around, I began with my analog bias built on a vintage Ampex deck. But all things considered, I landed on archival digital. My mics are Earthworks QTC40s (3Hz to 40kHz ruler flat x <50 microseconds settling time) in a coincident stereo array to Metric Halo ULN-8 conversion and stored via ethernet on a Mac solid state drive. MH SpectraFoo is my primary analysis tool with real-time listening (live and/or playback) and visual tools. The simultaneous multi-input environment helps integrate the analysis with the auditory experience, and playback in the recording room minimizes excess variables.
|
ronkentThank You for suggesting brass footers as a substitute to outriggers or sound anchors. Happy Listening!
|
a fun journey....your results may vary....
as long as you have unlimited funds ... if you know what I mean. |
for those of you w access to live unamplified music consider your own experiments in the chain....
for analog get a Revox A-77 and a couple of decent microphones....hint check out the excellent recordings made by the late ( RIP ) Charley Hansen of Ayre....for his list of relatively inexpensive gear....all told this analog experiment will set you back about $2k....with good headphones, this will rival just about anything.....
for simple digital a Zoom H6 can be amazing...wayyyy under $1 k
otherwise get an Ayre A to D, and of course microphones....
then start comparing to what you heard....
a fun journey....your results may vary.... |
flat frequency response is just part of the work
time domian, energy storage and release are also important....
yes i am a Vandersteen fan for sure...
but as I dial them into my room the 2.3 are quite good
i will remove the bottom larger access plate.....if required, removing the passive radiator to access xover is not imo a good design tradeoff....especially mounted from backside of baffle as it appears to be......
as for no standards....true....so to learn where in the chain..things go wrong.....built a pretty good mobile recording rack.....let me tell you it is microphones.....
fun
|
Hi Tom,
It was very well said. I understand the nature of the problem completely. I guess all I can say is that in a world where we have equipment makers such as DAC, preamp, amp, and last but not least speakers, and of course recording studios, each have their own ways of doing things. All I can say is how to try to fit in given all the variables.
As for how to voice a speaker, it's interesting that we have brands such as Sonus Faber, Spendor, Vandersteen who in the past tend to have a sound that is some what warm and musical, but have since become a lot more neutral in their sound lately.
In my personal design, when I design speakers with very flat frequency response, in order to pull that off, my external components have to be of fairly high quality (such as xover cap, front end electronics, cables ...) otherwise the sound will be somewhat on the harsh sound.
I have heard stories in which people have demoed Thiel speakers at the show room which sounded fabulous, but then they were very disappointed when they took the speakers home using their less than optimal equipment.
The brands which I have mentioned above whose sound has gone a lot more neutral lately may be because the quality of the
ancillary
equipment is now so much better than before, that they feel comfortable to be much neutral now without sacrificing sound quality. |
tomthiel
Can you remember where Havens & Hardesty was located?
Brilliant! idea to move the XO to a bottom panel bypassing the driver network. You guys are doing amazing things. Keep up the outstanding work.
Happy Listening!
|
for those interested the inside dimensions of the SA stands are 11.5" by 11.5" and they have three adjustable spikes underneath
|
as i mentioned above i have a set of the Sound Anchors for earlier Thiel 2 series. i had to use them because the speakers did allow me to level them or adjust the spikes up and down. with the 2.4's they were not needed. however i never had an outrigger set for the 2.4's but found great success in sound improvement by using the big brass feet from MapleShade. I use those feet under all my electronics but the speaker feet allow for them to be physically attached to the speakers. remember that with those feet, the bigger they are, the better the sound.
|
Andy - that point of "hotter than they should be" is of great interest. It amazes me that there are no real standards regarding target speaker response - "what should be". The scientific work being done at JBL, the Canadian Research Lab, etc. centers on user preference. Think about that. Record producers second-guess end user equipment and preferences and . . . it's sometimes called "the wild west".
Jim's position was philosophical as much as anything else: that the speaker just like other components should replicate its input signal. At the time that position was quite novel, even controversial, but over elapsed time it has become fairly standard practice with the largest deviations being bass level.
I am not a Vandersteen expert, but it seems that over the years his products migrated from very full bass and steadily falling treble toward flat frequency response, along with KEF, the Canadians and many other design houses. I suggest that a Thiel compared with a modern Van would measure quite similarly, which was not true in distant years past.
The puzzle is not solvable until everybody makes recordings balanced for flat system playback, like Audioquest, Chesky, Reference Recordings and similar knowledgeable producers do. Until that time, it is far safer to balance a speaker rich and forgiving so it doesn't exacerbate recording problems. Jim actually disdained making such a compromise, citing its irrationality, and Thiel took it on the chin in many ways.
|
Tomic - You are in the driver's seat - I have not yet seen a 2.3. In my upgrades, I am moving the XOs to the bottom compartment with access via a routed bottom panel, taking the drivers out of the access path.
|
@tomthiel. Thanks so much for referral to Rob for parts...
the two access plates on bottom, I assume x-over can be accessed via the larger ?
i will stay in touch with 2.4 filter development- big fun.....
|
@jafant System is Denon DP-35 F , Nakagoka 110 cartridge into a Croft RIAA-RS ( single chassis w NOS tubes ), into a Richard Modeferi hotrodded and restored McIntosh MX-100 Z also NOS tubes, into a Mike Samra hotrodded McIntosh MC240 ( paper in oil, modern regulation, etc, running NOS... cables a haphazard mix of Chord, Blue Jeans and Audioquest.....
CD source is McIntosh MCD205
Monday will switch our table for newly rebuilt SOTA Sapphire/Sumiko FT-3/Grado Reference-Platinum....
fun
|
Tomic- Rob has all spikes and spare parts or can supply specs.
Also, if you develop such interest, your 2.3s can be readily upgraded via what we are learning with the 2.4. The 2.3 XO is much simpler with fewer critical parts. Keep us apprised of your 2.3 experience.
|
pwhinsonbrings up an excellent report. As I am finding out, Atlanta, has a strong history with Thiel Audio. I receive many emails and PM away from here that states these facts. These gentlemen still own several different models.
Happy Listening!
|
tomic601Thank You for the initial report. What gear including cabling in in the CS 2.3 system? I look forward in reading more reports as the speakers bloom.
Happy Listening!
|
We have a dealer here in Atlanta who sold both Thiels and Vandersteen but did better with Vandersteen sales wise than with Thiel. I ordered my 2.4's in beautiful ebony from said dealer and they were and are fantastic.
|
He preferred Vandersteen saying that the Vans were more musical on more recordings more often than Thiels. But he also zeroed in on what Thiel was doing, how we were approaching our work.
On the flip side, Vandersteen's were always been criticized for being dark and slow :-). He ended up having to defend his design saying that other speakers tend to have the tweeter running a bit too hot at 2-3db more than they should be. |
I might be interested in the sound anchors
so I am 3 sides into Hypnotic Eye on Vinyl ( if you want to know what’s in the system look at my Vintage virtual system )
big fun, took two sides for the tube pre and power amp to smooth out..,,
nice sound overrall , at this point glad I have the MX-110 Z tone controls....
my ears are 8’6” from coaxial driver
as an aside
get yourselves a Leica Disto 2 or Bosch, makes setup so much easier,,,,
ymmv
|
jacksky
Thank You for the link. I will check it out. Happy Listening!
|
tomic601
Excellent news! Good to read the speakers arrived in pristine condition. Thank You for citing the serial numbers as well. Keep us posted as you massage these loudspeakers into your room/system.
Happy Listening!
|
marqmike
Precisely! I found many things were missing during sessions with Revel.Balanced but could not engage my ears. Happy Listening!
|
ronkentThank You for posting as Sound Anchors are very much accommodating to those that cannot find Thiel Outriggers. Happy Listening!
|
I have a set of Sound Anchors that i have not used for years once i got the 2.4 series in 2007. however they will work with most of the earlier 2 series such as 2.0 and 2.2. might work with 2.3 but i never had those so not positive. anyone interested can leave a message here or email me at kent@thehubltd.com
|
I have heard the Revel F208’s in a Listen Up show room. Not a bad showroom, actually a good one. I have the 2.4’s at home. The Revels seemed kind of dull or uninspiring. Now when I have listened to speakers at a dealers showroom, the ones I liked best in the long run are the ones that didn’t stand out to me, but were balanced and slightly dull compared to so many others. |
@tomthiel. I took delivery today of a nearly pristine pair of 2.3 in natural Cherry veneer today from a great local Audiogon member.
serial numbers 4341 and 4342
They were original sold by Thiel to Fred’s Sound of Music in Portland, OR ( I have been a customer there every now and then.. ) even the shipping boxes are fresh
hope to listen to them this eve
missing the carpet spikes, what are dimensions? Or can I get those thru Rob ?
|
Yes another great lost way early... more reason to enjoy our passion of music and good sound NOW !!!! |
Jack - I second Dick Hardesty. When Havens & Hardesty was a hi fi dealer, he did justice to both Thiel and Vandersteen - we were both pleased. He visited Thiel's factory a couple of times and we got along very nicely. He preferred Vandersteen saying that the Vans were more musical on more recordings more often than Thiels. But he also zeroed in on what Thiel was doing, how we were approaching our work. Gone too soon.
|
|
I agree. i purchased two of the coaxes for the 3.7. never have needed the lower drivers because in all my 30 plus years of ThIel ownership, I have never damaged one.
|
jackskyThank You for the audio perfectionist tip. Happy Listening!
|
laserjock1963
Welcome! $1300 for a pair of CS 2.4 is an excellent value. Go For It!Revel is not even close to a Thiel Audio loudspeaker as above. Keep us posted should you decide to purchase. I look forward in reading more about you and your system. Happy Listening!
|
|
I took a look at Crutchfield website and the Revel F208's are retailed at $5K for a pair. The CS2.4 was about $4.5K but taken into account for inflation, it would cost quite a bit more than $5K in today money so in that sense, the CS2.4 is a bit more high end compared to the F208. The F208 uses SB Acoustic aluminum drivers for the 8in. bass and 5.25in. midrange. The SB Acoustic drivers are more or less quality budget drivers. As for the tweeter, although I don't have information on it, judging by the price of the mid and bass drivers, the tweeter probably is of budget type as well. Although I have not listened to the F208, I have used similar SB Acoustic drivers in my own design. For the price they are decent, but the drivers are not in the same league as the drivers in CS2.4. Also the aluminum drivers used in the F208 have very large break up so it's almost likely that a 4th order filter must be used to suppress the break up. And as I have said before, if you're into first order design, you probably won't like 4th order filter. In my experience, the quality of the drivers are very important and will establish the limit of the final sound quality. Some of these drivers will have decent sound, but they don't quite have the inner beauty of the more exotic, more expensive drivers even with well design xovers. I have used high end drivers from Seas and ScanSpeak and some budget drivers, and after judging the sound quality vs. price, I have decided it's not worth it to use budget drivers. Here are the links for the F208 drivers if interested: https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-5-woofers/sb-acoustics-sb15nbac30-4-5-black-aluminum-co...https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-8-woofers/sb23nbacs45-8-8-black-aluminum-cone/ |
Jafant,
if you are interested you may want to read the audio perfectionist journals written by Richard Hardesty. The 16 issues are available at vandersteen.com.
|
$1300 for CS2.4 is a great deal if they’re in good shape (clean drivers and decent cabinets). Pairs in good condition (eg, 8/10) more typically fetch about $2000.
I haven’t heard the Revel 208. Years ago the M20 was on my short list and I auditioned it but ended up with Thiel CS1.6. I heard the top of the line Salon IIs at RMAF and was underwhelmed. Maybe it was the Levinson electronics but I thought their performance was pedestrian compared to the rave reviews. The 208 probably has deeper bass than the 2.4 but I’ll take the Thiel all day every day, all the more so with the possibility of Tom Thiel’s crossover upgrades. |
Pair of CS2.4 for $1300 good deal?
How would they sound compared to Revel Performa3 F208? |
silvanikThank You for sharing your experience and support with Rob Gillum.It never is a poor decision to have a spare set of back-up drivers. Salute.
Happy Listening!
|
jackskyexcellent points of view on the whole Thiel/Vandy conversation.I thought that a Vandy 3A Signature was closest, not better than, the CS 2.4 model. Never heard the 5/5A. I did demo the Quattro and Treo but could not get into thier presentation/sound? Happy Listening!
|
Regarding differences between Thiels and Vandys, I only had brief demos of vandy 3’s, 5’s and my newly acquired CS5’s.
my impression was the vandys offered a wider sweet spot but the Thiels have greater clarity. Granted I only have theThiels a short time so I am still moving them around getting to know how they react in my room.
from a design perspective, I read Richard Hardesty’s journals and it seems both Thiel and Vandy pursue the most measurably flat responses. So in short showroom listening sessions some people may opt for other manufacturers non flat responses because they may simply sound exciting ( read: as if the loudness button was pushed on an old 70’s receiver).
other differences I noticed between Thiel/Vandy is that on some models Thiels went the coax route to get single point Source while Vandy went open air mid/tweeter to give some openness (if that’s a word).
i don’t see that Thiel ever applied a rear firing tweeter nor incorporated any of the adjustment mechanisms Vandy used ( settings for rear firing tweeter, multi step equalizer for bass on the Quatros, 5’s). Whoops, just noticed thiel 3.5 have Bass equalizers.
on the note of rear firing tweeter, I don’t get it. Here I am taping blankets to the wall behind the speakers trying to eliminate everything other than what is coming from the front of the speakers To tighten the imaging. So why throw the highest notes ( shortest wave that dies most easily) against the back wall ?
I remember the 70’s Bose speakers that were meant to fire most of their output against a wall to give a wall of sound, hated the way those sounded, like listening to music coming from a neighbors apartment. |
replacement parts are pretty much nonexistent Not quite that bad. Some parts yes, some no. In the case of my CS2.4, Rob Gillum said replacement drivers are not available but he can rebuild broken ones. And he does have some drivers for a few models. He did supply some of the coils used in my new crossover build. Sounds like that 3.5 midrange, however, is a conundrum. |
I agree, Thiel end is a real crime against the meaning that Tom Thiel expressed and summarized so well two posts above mine. I became a Thiel owner (cs 3.6) only around one year ago and love so much what I can hear, the whole Thiel's history, the unbelievable professional approach to every single detail of the project that to me doesn't matter if Thiel company is no more, doesn't matter if the genuine spare drivers start to be hard to find. Hard but not impossible, recently I bought a complete new set from Rob Gillum and due to the fact that I live in Italy it costed me also a big amount for the shipping and customs, but my aim is to preserve the soul of this wonderful loudspeaker as Jim and all his staff intended to be. It's a piece of artwork, not easy to replicate, who nowadys is able to offer this kind of knowledge? Which company do invest so much to develop custom drivers as Thiel did?(for this reason I bought a genuine full set as spare, because similar are not the same , specially with first order XO design). So, thank you America, americans, doing this. I also appreciate some our good italian loudspeakers maker, for sure ,excellence has no boundaries.
|
It has been said many times that a Thiel speaker is an Apogee or Magnepan with Bass.
Having owned both Thiel and Magnepan, I could not disagree more! I'm sure the later speakers were much better than the 3.5s, though. I would love to hear some better models at some point, but because the company doesn't exist anymore and replacement parts are pretty much nonexistent, I'll never own them again. What happened at Thiel is a crime. |
