Thiel Owners

So, it seems you may be grounding the driver frames?
Thiel drivers since CS2.2 in 1990 use Faraday networks / shorting rings in the voice coil / pole piece structure which should cancel stray fields. But, stray residual eddy currents are possibly in play.  Please report your findings.

Tomthiel,
The idea is to connect the chassis of the unit's to ground, not the coil's of the unit's, will find out how when I remove them.

Holco - I am very interested in your outcome reports. I have never experimented with such configurations, but considerable dynamic electromagnetic fields are at work in the speaker, beyond my understanding of their inner relationships.

I am unclear what elements would be grounded in the speaker, since the + and - leads are both active in the AC / signal feed. Are you envisioning some sort of additional shield in the cabinet? 

Changed my plans!! Resently I changed my van den Hul Magnum loudspeaker cable's for the Supra PLy 3.4/S cable's, this are screened loudspeaker cables and the screen needs to be connected to ground on the power-amp,  although they are relativ cheap cable's they give a great improvement on SQ in my case, so the idea is to use them also for the internal wirering and pass thru the shielding to the outside with some kind of extra connector to the Supra PLy 3.4/S cable, there is also the option to connect the unit's so everything will be connected to ground.

All - regarding upgrade pricing - there will be multiple plateaus for each model which are self-defining as the project proceeds. You know it is possible to spend more on crossover parts than the entire original speaker system parts cost. I'm not going there. In other words, I will not be putting Duelunds and Paths in a 2.4, even if an individual DIY owner might go that far.

My work is to determine the hard limits of format, cabinet and drivers, and then determine an ultimate cost-feasible implementation of that format considering traditional Thiel values. Beetlemania's CS2.4s are at or close to the highest imagined implementation tier. We must learn whether its $4 figure cost will be sonically justified.

There seems to be a middle plateau upgrade at half the parts cost of that. Brands have been chosen, but much remains to be decided.

The first tier upgrade will be a step up from stock in that sand-cast resistors will be replaced with Mills MRAs and all electrolytics will be replaced with polypropylenes. ERSE MPX caps are an outstanding bargain for that use. In this and all tiers, any questionable wire & coils will be replaced with 6-9s as in Lexington Thiels.

I would like to address design style. Many designers take many approaches to this subtle work - a high level of art is involved. I am honoring Jim's approach of reason-based, experimentally and musically verified choice. In Jim's approach, every element or change or choice must BOTH improve the sound and align more closely with the measured technical ideal. That might seem obvious, but it is far from common. Many designers mix and match various euphonic anomalies to arrive at a pleasant end result. A corollary of Jim's approach is that each component must be pure. A capacitor is a capacitor, etc. Again, that approach is far from the norm.

An example of Jim's straightforward style is wire. Wire is enormously complex in how it behaves and how it sounds. With the help of Ted and GE aerospace avionics, Jim decided on his wire configuration. That 6-9s, polished surface, teflon jacket twisted pair sounds great and acts predictably like an ideal, engineerable wire. Over the years he investigated other types and brands, but kept our wire because it does what good wire should do and doesn't introduce spurious anomalies (which some folks might prefer.)

Holco- your wire idea is fine. Its identical geometry and jacket will not alter the measured system functioning. Your diameters are similar to my calculations for upgrades. Silver is a better conductor than copper, but coming at a hefty cost. Silver also imparts a different sonic signature, which some people like. I am very interested in your feedback should you choose to make this investment.

From my perspective that departure, both in value engineering and sonic signature, rules it out of consideration. We could make a sonic contributions list, and near the top would be inductors/coils. The short silver hookup runs attach to hundreds of feet of coil conductors. My reason-based choice dictates Thiel copper, same as the coils. My further investigations for hookup wire include litzed, graduated, multi-strand high purity copper - because theoretical considerations suggest its possible superiority. It would also have to improve sonics, and fall in my affordability value plateau structure. 

Right now I have 4 wire configurations awaiting evaluation and testing. Tier One upgrade keeps traditional Thiel wire because it withstood decades of testing and comparison. Other tiers may or may not change. Further work. Input welcome.

For my CS-2.4 I am also thinking of replacing the internal cabling with the HGC 99.999% pure silver wire (Teflon sheathed and twisted +/-), 1mm diameter for the coax and 2mm diameter for the woofer, what do you guys think?

beetlemania
Thank You for a little cost-analysis of the upgraded Cardas binding posts/wiring. I am interesting in learning the prices that you and Tom have discovered on the Clarity SA caps or better, Dueland caps and Path resistors. Take your time developing those beta-boards. A delay or two along the way is to be continued, expected. All of this is a process that has to work through on your timetable.

Happy Listening!

esprits4s
Thank You for your assessment of the XP-10. Which ARC pre-amp did you purchase?   Happy Listening!

My Cardas wire is, maybe, 5% of my total costs. For me, that’s not a dealbreaker when I’m trying to maximize SQ (short of $$$ Dueland caps and Path resistors). Now, the Cardas binding posts are more expensive and I’ll compare those in conjunction with the wire. If/when Tom brings kits to market he’ll have to decide on what to include.

With the 2.4 there are at least 3 iterations of XOs. IMO, the FST boards have no parts worth salvaging (the Clarity SA caps are good but are now surpassed by two generations of Clarity caps and the resistors, coils and other caps are plainly subpar) but Lexington boards have good coils that can be reused, probably a cap or three as well. I imagine Tom will need to accommodate these differences, perhaps also accounting for each owners preferences (which might include budget?). My beta-boards will probably be the only ones with this combo of parts, still under test.

That said, note Tom’s caution that additional delays are probable, even beyond the ongoing testing.

I used a XP-10 for several years and really enjoyed it.  I only sold it because I got a deal on an Audio Research preamp that I had been eyeing for some time.  The ARC pre is different, but not universally better than the XP-10. I used the the XP-10 with Rogue Audio, Levinson, and Audio Alchemy class a (om.90) monos.  It sounded great with all of them:)  It is a great audio value at current used prices in my opinion.  Unfortunately, none of this listening was with a Pass amp or my newly acquired Thiel speakers.

A few descriptors of the X-150.8 sound. Excellent bass, clarity, detail and midrange from bottom to top, top to bottom. This amp delivered effortless power and current- no clipping appreciated. A touch to the warm side of neutral ( a very nice characteristic). Pass Labs is not anemic, dry nor thin in presentation/sound. 

Happy Listening!

All-
I wanted to take a moment and give my gratitude and shout-out to one of our contributors. This gentleman took time out of his schedule to offer  an audition with a very sweet Pass Labs X-150.8 power amp.
As you guys know, this is one brand on my short-list to demo. Last year I spent some time trying to procure and purchase my long standing Reference amp (Conrad Johnson Premier 350). Over the years this is the one amp that I spent a considerable amount of listening time. Yes it has a little age on its design and topology. In contrast, the Pass Labs is a current design and topology. Fantastic power and current delivery to the CS 2.4 loudspeaker. I detected zero congestion nor distortion during the session. Now comes the next piece of the puzzle. Which pre-amp to complement this power amp? Tubed or Solid state for best outcome?
I am familiar with Aesthetix, ARC and Conrad Johnson on the tubey side.
I have auditioned the Pass Labs XP-10 model only with a Threshold amp.
I know we have a few Pass Labs experts here- the floor is yours for suggestions. Thank You- pwhinson for your hospitality and very fine system. 

Happy Listening!

esprits4s

Thinking outside of the box- I like it.  Perhaps wire upgrade could become an option once Beetle and Tom have an implemented and tested XO available for purchase.  These guys are the experts.

Happy Listening!

beetlemania

Right On!  Putting a smile on one's face perfectly describes our hobby.
Keep up the excellent work.  Staying tuned.

Happy Listening!

I hope that wire choices don't significantly drive up the cost of these upgrades that the team is working on.  I won't weigh in on the overall audio cable debate, but transmission line effects are generally not relevant in audio equipment, at least the analog audio frequency sections (pcb design for digital portions are another matter altogether).  There is a reason audio equipment output impedences are so much lower than input impedences, and it isn't to control reflections.  Maybe you could go a bit a la carte and offer the crossover update with or without the wire upgrades?

@jafant not a garage like Tom’s who has 2.2, PP, 3.6 with 1.6 on the way. I only have my SEs, which are no longer SEs. I am giving Tom subjective impressions of a couple of caps and bypasses among other XO possibilities. Already did the Mills resistor subjective comparison. I’ll just say that the improvement put a smile on my face. 

beetlemania
Thank You for your diligent hard work on the XO project. Good to read that Mr. Rob Gillum is of service to you as you guys figure out a working prototype. Do you have a Hot Rod garage like Tom?

Happy Listening!

tomthiel
I concur with sgmlaw. This is outstanding information. Thank You, for the continued history lessons and unique insight into the vaults of Thiel Audio. Hope you are well today and enjoying working in your Hot Rod garage.

Happy Listening!

andy2
Thank You for sharing your perspectives and thoughts on internal wiring as it pertains to loudspeaker building. Cabling, industrial internal or OEM, is imperative to an excellent sounding system. This is my second passion, music being the first. Any cable discussion is warranted and welcomed.  Happy Listening!

internal wire is definitely a factor. It carries a slightly different set of requirements from external cable, which must cope with many unknowns of run length, electromagnetic environment, speaker impedance fluctuation, and more. The internal wire is engineerable to the known requirements of the speaker where it is installed.

I agree.  For most cases, the internal wirings are much shorter than the external speaker cables, therefore I think it is less likely to modify the signal phase and amplitude vs. the external cables.  Some of the expensive speaker cables nowaday I have seen have rather sophisticated geometry and dielectric core material and grounding that together act like a transmission line to deliver the signal as uniformly as possible across all frequencies.  Some people think that audio frequencies are too low to be affected by transmission line but I do not think so.  Some lesser cables may have resonance issues and the effect is exacerbated as the length increased. 

Some believe that the only difference between cables is the resistance.  I think it's more than that.  You also have the effect of inductance and capacitance - the longer the cable the worse the effect.  A perfect cable should deliver the signal from the amp to the speaker input with a constant phase and constant amplitude losses across all frequencies, but since there is no perfect cable (or is there?) by the time the signal arrives at the speaker inputs, the phase and amplitude will be affected differently vs. frequencies.  This affect materializes itself as a form of jitter (although there is more than just jitter)  A good cable has better phase and amplitude uniformity compared to a bad cable.  Some speaker cables are engineered to intentionally have a transmission line affect so the signal phase and amplitude can be better controlled by the designer.  With twisted pair, the number of variables  is somewhat limited by the wire gauge size and number of winding per in. therefore it may not be able to optimize signal transmission. 

In some speakers, the xover boards are located at the bottom so the wire to the tweeter could be as long as 3ft.  At that length, there could a transmission line like effect that may modify the signal phase and amplitude non-uniformly vs. frequencies therefore the quality of the cable is more important.  But I have personally seen that something as short as 1.5ft length could make significant difference with quality cables.

Anyway, I don't mean to make this into a cable thread (I don't want prof to loose his sleep :-).

Sgmlaw - indeed electrolytics are an issue; they fail over time, drastically and sometimes catastrophically at the end, but also by decrease of value over time, as you say. ELs show up in 6 figure speakers, it's expensive to avoid them.

So, a 30 year old speaker XO has almost surely drifted out of spec, as well as in some level of danger of failure. Rob says he has never seen a failed Thiel cap so far. Thiel used VersaTronix and ERSE, both in their long-life versions with a predicted life of 30 to 50 years. All are bypassed in some way, which extends main cap life more so.

All that said, I am replacing ALL electrolytics to create an effectively "permanent" XO, comparing cost / performance at this time. The likely first-tier upgrade will use ERSE metalized polypropylenes @ highest voltage that will fit, bypassed or not depending on function. Next-tier upgrades will be to a custom ClarityCap CSA - expensive, but stunningly high performing - again, bypassed or not with Cornell Dubilier PPs or RTX styrene film and tin foil, depending.

Early indications sound like we'll be playing a league or two up from original Thiel. The view is getting clearer. 

This is outstanding information, Tom.  Many thanks.

I was aware of the Solens that the crossovers were often fitted with.  Can you add anything as to the electrolytics Thiel has used over the years? 

I say this because typically electrolytics do have a serviceable time window before capacitance starts to shift, and techs tend to focus on them when addressing older instruments.

Beetle - that is correct, the twisted pair wire I sent you was sourced from StraightWire, which is an industrial as well as OEM and consumer source. As you mentioned, we will be comparing that wire in various gauges against other contenders when that time comes.

Andy - internal wire is definitely a factor. It carries a slightly different set of requirements from external cable, which must cope with many unknowns of run length, electromagnetic environment, speaker impedance fluctuation, and more. The internal wire is engineerable to the known requirements of the speaker where it is installed.

Thiel wire is very good. In fact, Thiel "found" wire as a design variable in the development of the O3 in 1978 and introduced aerospace wire to the industry. All models of Thiel wire is, and has always been since that time, 99.9999% pure, low oxygen, long crystal copper developed originally by ITT for the space project, and since then cloned by many makers around the world and now improved by continuous casting and other advanced technologies. I'm guessing that Thiel wire trumps all but some of the highest cost and/or DIY speakers out there. 

Although various configurations are appropriate for hookup wire, Jim chose 18 gauge solid in teflon @ 2.5 twists per inch as a well considered judgement of maximum versatility. Economy of scale was a major concern - good wire is very expensive and big order quantities reduced cost, so all hookup wire is the same, and therefore might stand upgrading via specific-use engineering. More on that in a minute. Beyond hookup wire, the same quality criteria apply to coils. The signal meets hundreds of feet of series and shunt coils inside the speaker. Thiel uses 6-9s copper coils, tightly wound and oven baked. Great coils. In Thiel's and  third party testing, our wire and coils are best-in-world performers.

However, it's never that simple. In the present XO upgrade project I have learned that later speakers including 2.4's were supplied with Chinese-made crossovers. The copper (and other parts) is supposedly a clone of Thiel Copper, but it is not certified and my research causes me to doubt the claim. The coils are obviously lower grade manufacture as learned from Beetlemania's work on his 2.4 upgrade project. The resistances and topologies of the wire and coils are all good, in fact the coil values have been tweaked to account for inductive changes with Printed Circuit Board mounting. The XO performs properly, but sound quality probably suffers a little, as ascertained by Thiel insiders.

My plan is to evaluate the source of each XO encountered to decide whether to keep or replace particular parts. Beetle's late 2.4s have every element replaced. My 2.2s keep all coils and French-film PolyPropylene caps and German Styrene x Tin foil bypasses. My PowerPoints include a Lex and a China pair. Lex are better and will retain some parts. No China parts are being reused. It's a riddle which I am systematically solving.

Another element is wire gauge. Lower resistance is the primary reason for larger wire. However, the overall circuit resistance from input terminal to driver lug is measured and accounted for in the XO, so resistance considerations become nearly insignificant. Our upgrades are increasing some (woofer) hookup wire diameters for greater ion flow optimization. Coil gauge is only changed where required for foil cap upgrade availability. Contrary to some opinions, the small gauge shaping coils are superior to larger gauges, because they can be tuned to their parallel resistor for balanced resonant circuit performance.

I am accounting for wire and coil resistance changes, which may sometimes require a resistor value tweak for proper system performance. Project process is being made. We'll have more to report when the Thiel Audio bankruptcy settles.

I don't have any information on the cables used, something tells me the CS2.4 could use some improvement on the cables used in the xover wiring.

Rob Gillum informed me that my 2012 built SEs have wire sourced from FST. Supposedly it’s equivalent to what was on Lexington sourced boards but, judging from the caps and coils, I’m doubtful. Tom Thiel supplied me with, I think, Straightwire for the onboard jumpers. I plan to replace the input and output wire with Cardas. The coax out looks to be challenging, however, as the wire is in a tube so that the coax chamber is isolated from woofer movement.

Regardless, this will be the last thing I change. I’ve been making some of the changes one channel at a time so that I can control the variables in subjective mono listening tests. I hope to know sometime next month whether replacing that wire makes an audible improvement. But my test may not have inference for non-FST 2.4s?

I have been through tons of speaker cables and I can tell you that you do not need expensive cables to enhance characteristics of the 3.6.  There are several sub 1K cables that have worked better for me than many low to mid 5 figure cables.  All depends on your tastes and your amp.  Enjoy those great speakers!

I am thinking whether it is a good thing or a bad thing.  It could mean the bottleneck could be in the internal cables used for the particular speakers.  So the overall improvement by the external cables is held back by the quality of internal speaker cables.

I have used various cables in my speaker designs.  I have used some cheap cables from Fry's electronics and Supra cables from Madisound and the Supra cables significantly improve the sound.

I have seen various pictures of the CS2.4 xovers and although I don't have any information on the cables used, something tells me the CS2.4 could use some improvement on the cables used in the xover wiring.

Happy Friday- All.

Excellent discussion -All.
5000 posts and going stronger than ever. Way to Go Panel!

Happy Listening!

I vote for cables as short as you can make them. And then however they're made doesn't matter as much.

Erh....I meant 4 figure cables.  

rosami they are great speakers indeed, my favorite all-time.  My pair are in backup mode right now, I am using my CS6's which do deliver a little more bass and dynamics.  I have a rather large room.  However, the CS6 is not quite as transparent throughout the frequency range, but just by a smidgen.

I have been through tons of speaker cables and I can tell you that you do not need expensive cables to enhance characteristics of the 3.6.  There are several sub 1K cables that have worked better for me than many low to mid 5 figure cables.  All depends on your tastes and your amp.  Enjoy those great speakers!

pair of 3.5s with the EQ in Chicago suburb $550.

https://chicago.craigslist.org/chc/ele/d/skokie-thiel-cs35-coherent-source/6786015093.html

Yes - it’s kind of amazing given the age of these speakers. My only “want” with the 3.6s would be a tighter bottom end. I’ve had the 3.7s in my room and they had way better base-to-mid-base definition and control, however the vocal range sounded somewhat thin and lacked body. I’d guess the electronics/speaker combination was a big reason for what I heard with the 3.7s but I’m not willing to start changing my electronics. That was the main reason I stuck with my 3.6s rather than getting the 3.7s. I still think the 3.6s are terrific speakers and may do a little experimenting with speaker cables going forward. 

rosami, I feel the exact same about my 3.6s. I have visited numerous dealers when I travel, and I have not heard a newer model that I had rather have in my home.

It's anecdotal but FWIW:  I've run the Thiel CS6, 2.7 and 3.7 on my CJ 140W tube amps, playing soft and loud (I crank them especially when I'm listening from another room in the house, make it sound like a live band).My amps have yet to be eaten by a Thiel speaker :-) 

Fan - Very helpful in deconstructing some performance differences between the round and slot reflex system. When we're finished with the 1.6, I believe we'll have something quite worth auditioning.

imhififan
Good to see you again. Thank You for citing those slot dimensions and measurements. I do not believe that we have many CS 1.6 nor CS 1.7 owners on the Panel.

Happy Listening!

tomthiel
Thank You for the follow up and clarification on Don's engineering discipline.  Nice score! on those CS 1.6 loudspeakers. You do indeed have a Hot Rod garage. Have fun!

Happy Listening!

jab
Thanks for the offer ;) but I'll stick with my Thiels - unless I decide to look for a pair of 2.4s/2.7s/3.7s. I still haven't made a decision because I haven't been able to get past the uncertainty of knowing how the newer models will sound with my current setup - which I see no reason for changing. 
I hadn't listened to speakers for many years but have recently been visiting some dealers to listen to newer models and hear for myself how speakers have changed in 21 years. Turns out I think my 3.6s are better (in what I look for in a speaker anyway) than just about all of the new speakers I've listened to -- and that's in spite of all the sales gimmicks and "creative marketing" which unfortunately is still very much alive and well among too many high-end dealers. 
What I've learned in my travels: there are tons of speakers out there, but very few that are really worthy of serious consideration, and-after price is factored in-Thiels were and still are unique in combining value and excellent performance. Other speakers just "don't sound right." 
Who would've known that I'd have made such a good purchase decision over 30 years ago when I bought my first pair of  03a's.
  

How wide is the slot and how deep from the inside / back to the start of the flare? Is the inside edge eased / rounded in any way?

The slot is about 1/2" wide x 12" long, inside the speaker there’s a about 1" thick x 2.5" height wooden wall around the slot (as port tube?), and yes it is rounded on the slot side.
Hope it help.

From memory, the 1.6 front facing port is about 1.5” wide and maybe a foot tall. Probably about 2” thick and I’m going to guess the inside edge is square. Doesn’t seem like many 1.6 owners post here.

Guys, can any of you help me with some basic information re the CS1.6?  I just bought a pair for the hot rod garage, but won't see them for a couple of weeks - I've never seen a pair. I need to know the dimensions of the slot / port. How wide is the slot and how deep from the inside / back to the start of the flare? Is the inside edge eased / rounded in any way? 

Any information would be helpful in developing some ideas around upgrading port performance. Thank you in advance.

Don was an electrical engineer as is his son Dave, Michael's father.

jafant


When I ought my 3.5s from Don, I was using a HH Scott preamp and a Scott power amplifier I had built from kits in 1961. I’d been using a series of bookshelf speakers - - ending up with my wife’s pair of AR3a speakers. We had recently moved into our new home with large living and family rooms, and now we could enjoy some floor-standing speakers.

Someone suggested the Listening Room., so my wife and I went there on a Saturday. We both fell in love with the Thiel 3.5s. She said: "Get Them," to which I responded "Yes, Dear!"

Don strongly suggested I acquire a better amplifier; however, finances were strained at that time. I finally had to admit the Scott wasn’t up to the job of filling the living room in our new home. I contacted Thiel, and Jim Thiel recommended Bryston amplifiers.

BTW: Tom’s description of Don’s aversion to esoteric cables is apt. Don ended up steering me to The Audio Critic, and I’ve been a Belden guy since.

tomthiel
Good to see you today. I am sad that Mr. Hoatson passed. He was a unique character that believed in entry level cables/power cords only. During my visits we discussed this matter at length. Still, his rooms did sound great- no question about it. Equally important, he has a family member to carry his Audio business forward. Here is to Michael becoming successful on the Eastern Shore. Thank You for the update.

Happy Listening!

I have some thoughts on The Listening Room. Don Hoatson was an early Thiel adopter, a pioneer from his opening in 1978. He was going strong with Thiel when I left in 1995 when I lost touch. His rooms were indeed great sounding due to their dimensions, construction, and that he used commercial horse-hair pad under the wool carpets to take the bottom octave absorption about an octave below any of the foam underpadding  products. Don died in 2016. 

This morning I spoke with his grandson, Michael, who grew up in Don's business and listening rooms. Mike has taken over and moved the business to Chestertown on Maryland's Eastern Shore where he has been open one year, is growing and expects to honor everything his grandfather taught him. He is staking his future on customers like you guys.

jon_5912
Thank You for chiming in on rosami 's query. For you guys that are running tubed gear, are you noticing a shorter life span of those tubes?

Happy Listening!

brayeagle
I had no idea that Don was a Thiel dealer/retailer at one time. Can you recall his electronics that drove those 3.5 loudspeakers? Very cool story and small world indeed.  I was there around 5 years ago and at that time he had Maggies and Sonus Faber.

Happy Listening!

jab
Good to see you today.   Happy Listening!