Thiel Owners

Guys - I just snagged a beater pair of MCS1s for the hot rod garage.
Tom

Desper thank you for your thoughts on the cs5 and 3.6s . I have always wanted the cs5s  however after reading up on the 7.2s and reading comments, about potential part availability on the 5s and how rob virtually  has no issues on the 7.2s and them being” ‘newer”makes me wonder which direction I’m going to go. Add in a hot rod kit for the 3.6  decisions decisions!!! Tom I also have a Mcs1 that I use for a center channel that I would be interested in upgrading the crossover. 

I am late to this thread, but the last few posts got my interest as I am a Vandy owner.
I have no experience with Thiel, but would using Vandersteen subs be a way to get a more 'seamless' integration?
By handing off the low frequencies to the subs via the external crossover, it should preserve the time/phase coherence, as well as freeing up the amp from power draining low frequencies.
B

As others have mentioned, integrating the sub to the main speakers is not easy.  For time-phase coherent speakers, it's even more difficult.  I think that is why Vandersteen chose to integrate the sub into the main speakers so at least you have some control over how the sub will be integrated to the main with your own DSP algorithm.

I personally think deep bass is important.  Now I don't mean earth shattering bass that vibrates your windows, but I mean the speakers able to reproduce the low frequency portion of the recording such as capturing the recording spaces to make the listening experience more authentic.

beetlemania,

Until I win the lottery, I'm going to put my money where >99% of the musical content is. 

That makes sense in one way of course.  But it does miss some of the major reasons why people integrate subwoofers.  A sub tends to change (and if done right, enhance) the sound almost across the board on content, even when there isn't obvious deep bass content.  Having experimented with my subs, I've found that to be true.  In most content soundstaging and dimensionality increase when the subs are on.  And then there is the purported benefits of crossing over the low frequencies to a sub,.   Relieving the main speakers of doing the low frequencies is supposed to lower distortion in the main speakers, make for better performance, more dynamic, less restrained etc.

I haven't tried using a crossover yet so I can't give my own report on that, but I do have a great crossover to try, so I'll report how things sound if I ever get around to adding my subs :)

These speakers are really good and therefore have to be matched with really good electronics.   If there are flaws in the preceding components, cables, etc. they will be exposed.  Thiels can be wonderful or really annoying if great care is not observed.

hi fitter468,

I have both 3.6's and CS5's. 

Both are very good.

To my ear, the CS5's are much better in the treble and high mids.

FWIW

Thanks for listening,

Dsper

Jim to take the bass as deep as possible in each model - because subs are inherently difficult.

The CS2.4 has useful output down to ~30 Hz. The 3-series down to upper 20s. The CS7.2 down to the mid 20s. Compare those to the lowest fundamentals of all but an organ:http://acousticslab.org/psychoacoustics/PMFiles/Module05.htm
Until I win the lottery, I'm going to put my money where >99% of the musical content is.

I once heard the Wilson W/P 7. On a live recording, it produced an eery facsimile of the hall. I've never heard anything quite like it and I initially ascribed it to the Wilson's low bass. But, while that model does have some useful sub 30 energy, turns out I was hearing the Wilson mid-bass hump; a pleasing *coloration*!

The 'sub problem' is what drove Jim to take the bass as deep as possible in each model - because subs are inherently difficult. Bass is a problem in most rooms, regardless of what makes it. Many manufacturers side-step the problem by attenuating the bass and complementarily the top end for easier room integration. One of the factors for migrating from sealed to ported (and passive radiator) bass is that the ported bottom dies faster and therefore stimulates room modes less.

Thanks Tom.

My issue is that I simply couldn't use any of the Thiel subwoofers (despite that I sometimes see them for sale on audiogon!). 
My 2 channel listening shares space with my home theater set up, so the room is packed with speakers already, and the only place I have for subs is under my projection screen along the front wall - behind my Thiel 2.7 speakers.  The Thiel subs are all too large and would intrude in to the picture area, so I had to find the smallest subs I could buy, of good quality.  Fortunately the JL Audio E110 subs fit just right, and come with truly excellent reviews.

But...it is such a headache to do the whole sub thing right that I just haven't got around to it.  Some people spend frightening amounts of their time integrating subs. It's not uncommon for me to read "after several years I've finally got my subs perfectly integrated!"  Yeesh!

Jim designed the subs with LXE controls to be used by "normal" subwoofer installers with their programs, etc. It is indeed very technical and must match the low-frequency roll off of the main speaker. That process is A: a headache rarely gotten right and B: protected turf of the knowledgeable installers.
Jim's patent was on the room boundary portion. Each Thiel passive sub XO was customized for a particular Thiel model to make the best available complementary crosspoint behavior between the main woofer and the subwoofer XO. The "Integrator" is even more sophisticated - I want one. The room boundary controls on the subwoofer tell it the distance from side and back wall to optimize and shope its output and low end roll-off, allowing room placement without concern for reflections, boundary effects and so forth.

I had tried and given up on subwoofers in general due to issues that you raise. Life is too short. However, the Thiel SmartSubs with passive XOs drop right in with no hassle. When I get my room tuning software up and running, I'll be able to fine-tune sub placement. Now they are same ear-path distance as mains, but XOs are never that kind, I'll probably have to tweak a little.

@tomthiel

I bought some JL Audio subwoofers quite a while ago - and their CR-1 crossover (and an Anti-node DSP unit to use on the subs if I want).

I haven’t gotten around to really integrating them yet. Which again will be pushed off for quite a while.

Truly integrating a subwoofer seems to be a very difficult process. It seems to me so daunting because you are essentially, as a layman, becoming a speaker designer. Whereas the skilled speaker designer carfully selected drivers, crossovers etc to integrate the low woofer frequencies, you are throwing that away and saying "I’ll take over from here" below the low pass filter, say, 80 hz.

I have fretted especially about integrating a sub with Thiel speakers given the entire speaker was designed to be time/phase coherent...but if I’m going to add a sub at, say, around 80 hz down, then the exigencies of sub placement etc means I’ll lose the time coherence for the bass frequencies. Am I not right? That is, unless one is using DSP on the whole signal which could set up a proper delay etc between the subs/Thiel speakers.

How did the Thiel subwoofers maintain time/phase coherency?

Rob Gillum at Coherent Source Service might know. And some ebay, etc. resellers sometimes salvage old gear. Also, Madisound was still supplying some parts in the mid 80s and may have a clue. It was probably made (I don't remember for certain) by Vifa. But a stock driver will not work. The motor was custom designed and everything else was specified by Thiel. Normal woofers don't have the smooth high-end rollout needed for first order slopes.

Anyone know the mfg. and model number of the 8" woofer used in the Thiel CS2?  I was told the CS2.2 woofer could be used as a replacement, but want to explore the used market first.

thielrules - yes, that makes sense.

richardyc - it may be of interest that the MCS crossover has some obvious and simply-made upgrade potential. The performance would be better than the CS2.4SE upgrade from a starting point below the regular 2.4.

Well, these are the numbers that Rob assigned to my speakers. He may be distinguishing them from the original production run as they were assembled from original parts only a few months ago.

KEF is highly regarded and Andrew Jones is a hall of fame level designer but I would stay with the Thiel. You *know* it’s beyond mid-level good, matches your stuff, and is made in US.

it looks/sounds like my MCS1 has a blown coaxial driver. Rob can rebuild it for the price of an entry to mid level center speaker from Kef or Elac. So my dilemma is that do I have Rob do the rebuild or it's time to move on? I am using CS3.7 for my L and R and all Powerplane 1.2 for all surround channels. what would be a good MCS1 replacement with CS3.7?

Tmsrdg - fishy agreed. Rob would have better information than I got from New Thiel. I sent you a PM.

Something fishy with these numbers. My Thiel 3.7s are serial 1041, 1042. This is indicated on the shipping carton. However, I talked with Rob yesterday about the issue of different crossovers being used with this model. He told me that the 3.7 run had an earlier crossover version, and a later one, for a total of two.  He thought that given my serial numbers my speakers would have the earlier version (which he prefers!). He also emailed schematics of both crossover types to me.

Thielrules - I was told by New Thiel CEO Tom Malatesta that fewer than 1000 CS3.7s were built. So there's something wrong with your numbers.

Fitter - your situation is one we hope to address with the hotrod kits, to provide a significant upgrade path for the music lover who wants better, but doesn't necessarily need bigger or more.

tomthiel - hear, hear!  

The serials for my nos Thiel 3.7 are 6001 and 6002.

I have owned my 3.6s for almost 27 yrs  I paid $3900 for them the  build quality is second to none imho I use a Bryston amp which I feel is good not great my speakers still sound fantastic!! One day I hoping to get a pair of cs5is or 7.2s (still hesitant because I love my 3.6s) which I know will require a high end amp  when people listen to my stereo who aren’t into hifi they ask what are those sounds ie a guitar string vibrating or a vocalist taking a breath other sounds people on this forum clearly are aware of because  they have never heard anything so clear and detailed !!! Call me ignorant but I have no desire to hear / own any other speakers ! I feel they are so good they exploit everything in front of them ! What’s the saying Tom Thiel? FOR THE LOVE OF MUSIC!!

last_lemming
There are a few Parasound/Thiel owners over on the other Audio forums. This combo has proven to become a sonic match. I must say that you one of the very few to incorporate B.A.T. into the mix. Very interesting combo indeed. 

Happy Listening!

beetlemaniaI know that your XO project / rebuild is going to become quite successful.
Happy Listening!

last_lemmingGood to see you again. Thank You for the update. My understanding about owning B.A.T. gear is to obtain that Six-Pack Modification. You own a very nice system. How do you like the Parasound/B.A.T. combo?
Happy Listening

!

The Parasound is better than ever now, but I think the reason has to do with the output/input matching of impedance of the preamp and amp.  I think the Six-Pak helped that relationship somehow.

I thought when I paired the BAT with the Parasound amp I was good, the stats as I understand them are:

The output impedance of the BAT is 1k ohm  (the manual says the amp must have a min. of 10k ohm input.

The Input for balanced connection on the Parasound is 66k ohm

Do you really want to hear the crap from these dealers?

I wonder how much of this is a genuine expression versus sales pitch designed to sow seeds of audiophile doubt in hopes of getting you to buy new speakers. High-end audio is hurting. These brick and mortar stores are disappearing; manufacturers are struggling, too (compare numbers of ads in Stereophile now versus 15 years ago). The middle class is crushed, reducing the pool of potential buyers.

What do your ears tell you about your 3.6s?

I have no interest in active speakers. I’m confident my amp is far more capable than that in any active speaker. There have been *some* improvements in speakers over the past 10-20 years, namely carbon and beryllium diaphragms. But Thiel drivers are excellent even now, all the more so considering the price of speakers with exotic diaphragm material. My CS2.4s are probably my last speaker, almost certainly if my XO rebuild is successful.

When a coherence claim is made I suggest getting the panel of test plots. Generally there will be some aspect that is compromised such as B&Ws progressive 180° phase shifts handed off through the range (second order slopes.) The smooth transition is called "coherent", etc., so you have to sort it out. Fourth order L-W slopes can be time corrected, but all the drivers end up with latency relative to the input, which causes its own form of digital ringing.

There are many successful design topologies. Phase-time coherence is something that we at Thiel along with Richard Vandersteen (independently) and a few others for short times, decided to pursue. It's a very difficult pursuit, and much ink has been spilled "proving" that it doesn't matter. If the others admitted it mattered, they would have to apologize for their product. But to those who 'get it', it does matter. I couldn't go back, no matter how sweet or luscious some $6 figure speaker sounds.

Thank You Andy and Tom for the follow -on comments regarding Active/DSP speakers.  Happy Listening!

Rosami - your dealer feedback is helpful. I am working on understanding the marketplace having been away for 20+ years.

I know you know, but I'll say:
There is no faking, but there is elucidation. There is lots of residue on a recording that the producer doesn't hear. Thiel illuminates, which is both blessing and bane.

The complex crossover is a burden. Indeed, all those parts introduce a veil and must be very high quality to produce the result. Thus our current work.

Thiel drivers have always been very expensive. I vividly remember when the big W hit the scene and their woofer was half the cost of one we had rejected for our smallest 6.5" two way. Their product retailed for 10X as much. We outgrew commercial drivers because the best Danish custom houses were unwilling to do the extra work and precision for our demands.

The test for time coherence is a square wave or impulse over the entire range. If the wave-form keeps its integrity, then the job is being done. The same information is in impedance or phase plots, but you have to know more to read those.

Active speakers have a lot going for them. DSP wears multiple hats. It is inexpensive and versatile. But great digital conversion is rare. Most DSP results in some form of digititis, and actually can't solve the fundamental filter issues without compromises.

All the way back to the beginning - our greatest work before launching the Model O1, was Jim's development of an internally amplified, actively controlled speaker. That prototype was crude, and who knows, may have been surreptitiously rescued from the New Thiel Dumpster Frenzie. Given larger company scope and budgets, active speakers is where Thiel wanted to go.

Jon - I know of no active / DSP, etc. speaker that is minimum phase / time aligned. The big problem is drivers that can handle the band-width. Jim Thiel spent a lifetime incrementally developing such drivers. And remember, the scientific community broadly agrees that coherence is irrelevant because the human ear-brain is good enough at reconstituting the compromised timing information. Steep slopes sequester the scramble to narrow bands which therefore have less information and can be more readily ignored. The present darling is 4th order Linkwitz-Riley filters because the undisciplined mind can pretend that 360° phase shift, (one full cycle of phase delay) is somehow equal to 0°, unless you think about it. Our approach is a purist one: faithfully capture all aspects of all the forms of information presented at the input terminals.

Anyhow, the matter of authentic signal reproduction is a matter of extreme esoterica. Most people aren't wired to notice or care.

Also besides the complex architecture of DSP, you can’t do the following:
1. Use vinyl as your source
2. Use your favorite tube amplifier
3. Use your favorite DAC as your source
4. If you have a set of favorite speakers cable such as Crystal Cable Absolute Dream, you can’t use it either because the DSP setup has its own dedicate built-in cables to the drivers. So if the DSP design uses low end cable, you’re more or less stuck with it.

andy2
Excellent points on DSP and its complex architecture. I can remember the Meridian system being quite expensive, involved and several pieces of gear to perform dedicated functions.  Happy Listening!

Does anyone know of an active, dsp, phase correct/coherent speaker?

I have seen one claim from the DIY community that was able to produce a perfect step response but I can't personally vouch for it.  He claims that he uses DSP to delay the tweeter so that it matches with the mid range (the equivalent of tilting the cabinet as in Thiel design), but other than that, I don't know anything else.

I think using active DSP has its own drawback.  It's not all that it claims to be.  In someway, it's even more complicated than passive cross over.  For example, for a three way, you need six different amplifiers and six different DAC's.  I mean one amplifier is expensive enough.  In order to have six, you have to use inexpensive amplifier such as digital amplifier, so the quality of the sound is heavily compromised.  Likewise, with six DAC, you have to compromise as well.  So everything considered, using active DSP is a compromise approach.

It's amazing the amount of b.s. you encounter from high end salesmen (well...they *are* salesmen).   Guys who work decades in a high end store can just ossify in their own ignorance and it's a shame how many people they may miseducate.


Fortunately I've always been able to find a very few salesmen who are low-key, no b.s., no sales pressure and know when to just leave someone alone to listen to a system they are auditioning.  Those are the shops I go back to and often purchase equipment.

rosami
Thank You for citing your speakers' Serial Numbers.  Happy Listening!

jon_5912
In all of my years in this hobby, I can only think of Meridian. At one time these guys were into Active, DSP, speakers. Not sure if their technology pushed time/phase coherence?   Happy Listening!

rosamiThank You for sharing your dealer/retailer stories. Ruthless? No.Flakes in the Audio business and Industry? Yes, absolutely!
Happy Listening!

last_lemmingGood to see you again. Thank You for the update. My understanding about owning B.A.T. gear is to obtain that Six-Pack Modification.  You own a very nice system. How do you like the Parasound/B.A.T. combo?
Happy Listening!

jonandfamily
Thanks for the kind words about my system in virtual systems!
My serial numbers are 5457/58 - Amberwood - still look immaculate but need some TLC (tweeters and maybe mids need rebuild). Next step is with CSS.

Does anyone know of an active, dsp, phase correct/coherent speaker?  I haven't heard of one.  From what I've seen the dsp speakers use extremely steep slopes to get near perfect frequency response and low distortion.  People still don't like them.  I watched the NHT Xd system come to market and fail miserably 10+ years ago.  I asked a sales guy about a set I saw pushed aside in a store after the hype had died down and he just said they weren't good for the money.  Maybe the complex Thiel crossover is what we should be replicating digitally.  It might still take a ton of work to get right but once optimized wouldn't have the low impedance and high parts cost problems.  

tomthiel
Do you really want to hear the crap from these dealers? It'll be painful listing their comments, but I'll try to be accurate. 
Dealer 1) Imaging and focus are not real, but created. Thiel speakers basically do sound effects and sound big and flashy but are not accurate. That dealer also criticized me for mentioning imaging and focus, stating  they're not real speaker attributes but rather sound effects created by Thiel speakers. This dealer stresses that imaging doesn't occur in concerts or real music. He also actually said that I was partially responsible for the failure of Naim's Ovator speakers because imaging wasn't a priority for them but "people like you" value those kinds fake qualities in a speaker. When I asked him what speakers he liked, he stated that he likes to listen in mono, prefers speakers that do not image and that are "in-you-face" since he likes to listen really loud. (not much comment necessary.) 
Dealer 2) Thiel speakers are very poorly designed, especially the newer models with the coax mid/tweeter which were a "disaster." The old ones were a little better. Thiels use cheap drivers made overseas, are not accurate and are not time coherent - that's all just marketing. Their sound is a mess because Jim Thiel used very complex crossovers which had no way of being phase correct and they were not really first-order crossovers anyway. 
Dealer 3) Thiel's crossovers have to be extremely complex to compensate for the poor drivers. If a speaker is so hard to drive correctly and so amp dependent, then it is a very poor design. Why would you design a speaker to go down under 2 ohms and drive amps into distortion? You're crazy wasting your money by having them repaired; there have been so many improvements in drivers and crossovers in 21 years that its time to get rid of them.
(None of those dealers were talking active or DSP.)
Interestingly I spoke to a couple previous Thiel dealers who praised the speakers and stated their regret regarding what happened to the company. I also found them to be superior dealers overall. (One of those did talk active and DSP and his setups did sound excellent IMO.) 
All of the negative dealers made their comments after I'd stated to them that I've owned various Thiel speakers for the last 32 years. I guess they feel it's OK to spread this nonsense. High-end audio is a ruthless business!  

About 7 1/2 feet apart I sit it 8 feet away and the speakers are  3 feet from the front wall

Just curious how do you position your CS2.4?

Mine are 7ft apart center to center.
I sit about 9ft measured from the front facial.  
The back of the speakers are about 19in from the front wall.

Hey guys. Have had my CS 2.4’s for many years now and have always felt they needed a bit more midbass. Well, I sent my BAT VK-3ix Preamp out for the Six-Pak modification from the factory. 

Just hooked it up, and WOW it’s like a new set of speakers. Midrange is “here” and midbass is clean and correct. Lower bass is more pronounced.  Dynamics are way better too. In fact this is the best thing I’ve done to get these speakers sounding the way I wanted. I almost don’t need the REL subwoofer!

rosami, I'll bet your serial numbers are close to my CS3.6s- 4789, 4790. Your setup on virtual systems looks terrific. I'm with you....trust your ears and not the claims! I, also visit dealers when I travel and have not found any speakers I prefer. I'm also curious at what dealers you talked to are claiming. Jon

Rosami - I would be interested in their claims. Are they talking active and DSP?

Tom

rosami
Thank You for chiming in. Agreed, trust your ears. As some of you guys are discovering, newer loudspeakers,  are not always better.
Happy Listening!

I've been listening to speakers recently to compare to my 21 year old CS3.6s -- it's a journey that I'll continue for awhile. Visiting a number of dealers, I've been amazed at all the Thiel bashing by some of these dealers - crazy claims - outright lies - claims that technology has come so far and that my speakers are obsolete - even personal criticism that I consider imaging and focus important. It's easy to see why high-end audio gets such a bad rap! Trust your ears and if you find a good dealer, support him! 

Excellent points Andy and Tom.I can remember reading about the WANG600. Whatever happened to that computer maker?  IBM was quite a force until Apple and Microsoft came onto the scene.  What a time capsule...?
Happy Listening!