Geeze, who is making all the posts that have to be removed? In a Thiel owner's thread??
Thiel Owners
Guys-
I just scored a sweet pair of CS 2.4SE loudspeakers. Anyone else currently or previously owned this model?
Owners of the CS 2.4 or CS 2.7 are free to chime in as well. Thiel are excellent w/ both tubed or solid-state gear!
Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
I just scored a sweet pair of CS 2.4SE loudspeakers. Anyone else currently or previously owned this model?
Owners of the CS 2.4 or CS 2.7 are free to chime in as well. Thiel are excellent w/ both tubed or solid-state gear!
Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
13,522 responses Add your response
I've tried passive pre-amps before, as well as running my Benchmark DAC with it's own volume control directly in to my amps. The results have always been the same. At first I'm captivated by sense of transparency and zero haze, grain, etc. It really does sound more like the "straight wire with gain." But every time I end up noticing it's almost "too transparent." That is, sonic images seem to be almost see-through, lacking the palbability, density, body and dynamics I get with a good pre-amp. I also find tonality a bit more believable with a good pre-amp. I certainly haven't tried every passive option out there, but it seems many other audiophiles have had similar experience trying to go passive. |
| Post removed |
Same in my system, I made the interconnects very short, 50cm from source to pre-amp and 90cm from pre-amp to amp, it works fine to me.I also own a McCormack TLC-1 passive/buffered pre-amp but after many comparison I ended preferring my crafted one with only one IN/OUT line, no source selector in the between,thus the signal path is the shorther as possible. If you wish it's visible in my Vritual System I published yesterday. |
oblgny In my attempt to advise or help another music lover Thiel owner who is thinking about using a passive pre-amp I have offended you , I truly apologize , that was defiantly not my intention . Please forgive me. Mr. Thiel Thank you for the additional information about interconnects , I have always tried to keep my interconnects as short as possible, maybe that is one reason why a passive pre-amp works in my system, and/or maybe it's because Cardas cables have a low capacitive and inductive resistances . Rob |
michael - Rob sets up PXOs for any classic Thiel back to perhaps 3.6s (mid 90s) for a reasonable fee. guys - regarding passive preamps, there is another un-named factor. The principal load being driven by the source is the connecting cables to the next device. Some cables have high capacitive and/or inductive reactances. Some sources are not capable of driving those loads well, and their outputs become distressed, much like the power amp problem. I would only attempt a passive preamp with short, electrically neutral interconnects between the source and passive pre and pre to power amp, since the passive pre does not buffer or isolate the source from the pre to poweramp run. |
Following this thread with great interest, if not always understanding,. I realized that I still have a Thiel Passive Subwoofer crossover modified for 2.4 mains and mcs1 center. I have sold my thiel speakers, so have no use for it, but maybe somebody would. I wonder if Rob modifies these at his new company. |
vairobert68... Indeed. Like you stated I assumed a passive preamp would involve the very least possible of any coloration getting in between my power source and my Thiels. My power sources, imho of course, were nothing to sneeze at. If I recall correctly my cables were all Transparent - the entry level series, I forget their exact name. Perhaps another brand of speaker would have benefited from the assumed result, but as I have, and many others here have stated as well, “Thiel reveals.” Purity in purity out - perhaps my ears could not wrap themselves around all that uncluttered, unfiltered sound? I could not imagine any other piece of equipment at the time that could be faulted for my non-appreciation of the passive. Sheesh. I picked up the Placette from a fellow member here who, prior to selling it to me had it fronting a Plinius amp. I believe he moved up the line. He was quite enthused about it, as was I. Becoming a member of this site and being able to procure interesting stuff has ruined me - damn you, Audiogon!!! I would never have discovered Thiel in the first place had I not stumbled upon this site as I searched for some vintage stereo receivers. Now I look back upon my purchase history here and cannot help but be surprised at the $$ spent and the equipment moved in and out. But I digress again. I would not suggest to anyone that a passive pre is not a good match for Thiel. In fact I’d love to be able to put such a setup together again. Time will tell... |
Thanks for the info audiojan. I've had my JL Audio subwoofers for a looong time but still haven't got around to really giving a good try to integrate them with my 2.7s, even though I also bought the JL Audio CR-1 crossover, and an anti-node processor (if I need it). This subwoofer stuff is just such an involved hassle, I never find myself with the free time to put in to doing it. Some day, hopefully. |
So I had to test it right away... :-) The good news is crossed at 70Hz, I still can't locate the SS2, it's just perfectly blended without leaving a trace of it's location. Interesting unintended benefit is that the speakers opened up even more! Guess releasing the amps from the difficult load allows them to really make the CS2.4's sing. :-) Next step is to find a suitable tube amp to test out. I have a friend with a Audio Research Ref75, just need to convince him to disconnect it and bring it over (usually doesn't take much...). :-) |
Tom, thanks for your input (always appreciate your insight!). It's easy enough for me to test with the Integrator. Just raise the crossover point. Unfortunately, I only have one SS2 (which is PLENTY for the room), but it's worth experimenting. I'll let you know what I find with the current amps and then I might go ahead and try to borrow a tube amp from friends. |
Jan - I'm very interested in what you learn. You might consider a higher cut-off frequency. 50Hz is right at the impedance x phase reversal. See the Stereophile review. If you have stereo subwoofers for good signal directionality and can get to 70-80 Hz where the load becomes quite resistive, you would stress the amp less. I am speaking hypothetically, having never experimented myself. I hope some folks in this community can shed some light. |
The never ending hunt for continuous improvement goes on... I'm thinking that I may want to change my amps (currently Bel Canto REF500M, which are REALLY nice amps) and I may want to try tubes again. Can you reliably drive a pair of CS2.4's with tube amps? I'm using an Integrator and cutting at 50Hz before feeding the amps. Should make the speakers slightly easier to drive... A SS2 takes over below 50Hz. |
Just ordered a set (one tweeter, one mid and a pair of woofer) as spare drivers for my CS 3.6 from Rob Gillum at Coherent Source Service. Actually them are sounding fine and not in the need for any drivers replacement but I saw that they are becoming increasingly difficult to find and due to my intention to keep this speakers forever wanted put myself on the safe side.....just in case, to not risk to transform my Thiels in a sort of expensive paperweight :-) |
tomthiel......I am increasingly fascinated by your story around the world of Thiel Audio, keep telling please. I would have been happy to meet you in Milan and maybe to share some good glasses of italian red wine....but you know it's never too late, in case you plan tourist trip in Italy let me know, i'll be glad to take care of you as my special guest. Silvano |
dsper I'd like to thank you for your response about your experience with tubes . You got me thinking about trying older tubes , so after finding and reading about different EF86s I decided to try a pair of 1972 NOS Tesla EF806s , the performance version of the EF68 . I still will not take another chance with used tubes and can not begin to afford the $300 per tube for NOS Genalex Gold Lions . They sound FANTASTIC , I am now looking into finding 3 x 5751tubes since new production is very limited . You asked how the sound is from a passive pre-amp compares to powered ones . Pure , Clean , un-Colored Silvanik another McCormack owner with a pair of CS3.6s made his own passive pre-amp and loves it . oblgny ( page 80 ) was disappointed with a passive pre-amp . I believe ( totally a personal opinion ) that using a passive pre-amp allows the input to your amp to be the purest sound , if you don't like the sound then your input equipment should be looked at or thought about , not your amps like oblgny was thinking . Like the Thiel speakers that play the music put into them without any coloring , that is how I feel about a passive pre-amp. Happy Friday Rob |
andy2 - perhaps cable conductive stabilization is beyond the scope of this forum. But I would nonetheless like to post how such considerations entered the awareness in the development of Thiel Audio's peculiar relationship to the role of the loudspeaker as a precision playback device. Discomfort is a requirement for growth. I may have mentioned cousin Teddy awhile back, but to recap: he helped us appreciate the much larger world of science beyond armchair comfort with known basic concepts. Our cousin Ted Lyon was a senior theoretical physicist at General Electric Jet Engines in Cincinnati. Teddy was smart. Teddy also took an early interest in what we were doing with speakers. He first came to visit in the throes of prototyping the O3 to be phase coherent or not. (. . . to be, that is the question - sorry, I'm involved with a mentoring Shakespeare Company and couldn't help myself.) Our problem was that myriad sonic problems beyond our understanding invaded the sound-scape when phase coherent (first order) and vanished when not phase coherent (3rd order). We knew we had a tiger by the tail because musical nuance would also be higher as a result of such functioning when phase coherent. Teddy listened intently and nudged our conversation ever more far-fetched and speculative, far beyond what we as 20 somethings could comprehend. But Teddy was a patient teacher. After many hours and near exasperation he simply began to talk - for perhaps a half-hour. We learned that NASA had faced such exasperation in its long-field (millions of miles) aerospace avionics - instrumentation / transceiver communication. The communication and especially navigation-positional protocols depended on transient waveform integrity. He said he was hearing artifacts in our phase coherent prototype similar to what he heard in his avionics prototyping work. He offered 3 avenues for our exploration. Replace steel driver baskets with non-magnetic alloys to reduce eddy currents, upgrade the copper wire, and never evaluate "young" components. It bears noting that Jon Dahlquist of DQ-10 fame came from aerospace and that he used 18ga twisted pair solid copper in teflon when the rest of the industry used ordinary stranded wire. Hmmm. My summer of 1977 revolved around identifying and sourcing wire and other components that ended up being 99.9999% pure, long crystal, low oxygen, etc. in teflon or varnish from ITT, developed for NASA. As far as I know, we introduced "wire" to the audio industry, or at least we didn't hear about "wire" from anyone else beyond noting Dahlquist's unusual choice. Let's proceed to "never evaluate young components", which included wire, caps, resistors - everything. Teddy said that the grain boundaries in metals conducted non-linearly with frequency, current, voltage, temperature and so forth. Boundary effect phase discrepancies were certainly measurable and in fact the subject of considerable engineering effort - thus the ITT wire. Furthermore, those grain boundaries could (speculatively at that time) exhibit migratory properties, since ionic flow tends to push and form metallic micro-structures, which are somewhat mobile. Our breakthrough involved learning how many things that we did not understand could have effects on what we were hearing. So I suspend my own tyranny of intellect when relating to sonic phenomena. The gig goes: hear it, label some aspects in non-value terms (never use better or worse), isolate some aspect, address that aspect from different angles, note the outcomes. Choose a couple to measure, find or develop some meaningful measurement criteria, decide which path to pursue. Nowhere in this decision tree must we prove to anyone the validity of our reasoning or selection. The decisions must lead toward improvement by our own criteria and that of our customers, including reviewers and peers. It would take lifetimes to explicate and/or prove such matters, which would not promote designing speakers or building a company. So, I claim no proof for much of anything. I am merely stating my bias toward creative intuitive action. Here is a link to an abstract chosen off the web. It represents the kind of stuff I read that summer and informed my conversations with Teddy. I doubt that we would have jumped into the deep end without Teddy's input. Jim was thoroughly committed to the scientific method with a deep dose of skepticism. Teddy was a serious PhD who encouraged and insisted on exploring beyond the limits of understanding. He gave me significant encouragement and Jim the basic permission he needed to trust his ears. https://www-pub.iaea.org/mtcd/meetings/PDFplus/fus Enjoy. Tom |
There are many things in audio that can be heard but not explained. The human ear/mind is not the same as an oscilloscope or any other measuring device. Measurements are good to have but they cannot fully inform what we experience when listening to music (and not even partially inform the emotional part of our experience).Yes, it can be measured but it's not trivial and something as subtle as cable break-in, you need really sensitive equipment and not to mention the knowledge of how to use those equipment. But the principle of cable burn in is well established (look up electro-migration) so there is no point to reinvent the wheel. As for speaker driver break-in, it has been measured. That is why speaker designers only measure the various speaker driver parameters only when the drivers already well broken-in. |
jon - Our community was not so formal as to have a name or designated ideology. The early 70s were full of societal change and we were part of that. I had been a brother in the Marianist, Catholic teaching order through college engaged in Peace through social justice, ethical war resistance, urban poor empowerment, right technology in the developing world . . . and so forth. I then married and had a child, but wanted to continue a collective enterprise, and opened my doors to a group which included my brother Jim, and a few mutual friends. We bought land on the Cumberland Plateau to form a sustainable living enterprise and needed a shared employment project, which became Thiel Audio. Of course this sketch is the bare bones synopsis. From the beginning we shared all funds, responsibilities and development of common direction. Religion or traditional belief was not a part of our commune; the experiment was social, not spiritual. Its end was more of a mutation than anything else. By the mid 90s, it was clear that my focus of creating a "good place for good people to earn a good living doing good work for the good of all" was no longer appreciated as a driving force. Rather, the survival needs of the business were what consumed everyone's around the clock attention. It took me 5 years to objectify the manufacturing systems and personnel enough that I could leave without damaging the enterprise. Its growth and development continued. I am proud of that. |
It is listed here on audigon https://www.audiogon.com/listings/lis94gj4-conrad-johnson-premier-350sa-solid-state |
Hi all been enjoying your conversation of the larger Thiels and have been eye balling a pair of cs7 available. In great shape from a notable source but certainly not a deal. I have already decided the 2.7 and 3.7 will never leave my home. What are the top sonic diffrences between cs7 and the 3.7? Prof i know love your CJ amps do you know anything about the Conrad Johnson Premier 350 - 350 Watt (8 Ohms) Reference SS AMP? Any one else have any experience, would be for possible cs7 or my 3.7 Thank you for the guidance, Dan |
Tomthiel, That is exciting about the 7’s and the possible upgrade path. If I hadn’t needed to downsize I would have stopped at the cs6’s. I will take a serious look at the 7’s now on sale. Assuming they are legit, my peculiar room might just be fine for them. Remember the cathedral ceilings of the 80’s? That’s my room. |
I remember my first encounters with the Thiel 3.6 at a local high end store, in the 90's, where I got to play a bunch of my CDs. I had the distinct impression of "that's exactly what it sounded like" when the music was recorded, both in terms of the character and liveness of the instruments, and exact character of the recording itself, and no obvious character/resonance etc from the speaker. I think it was one of my first encounters with a really neutral, accurate sounding speaker. I'd had a similar impression listening to Quad ESL 63s, but it was the first time I heard that from a "box" speaker. |
silvanik - in a twist of serendipity, I heard the 3.6's at that show in Milan, visiting Enrico Tricarico, Thiel's Italian distributor and prior football star. I think my visit was in 1992, when the 3.6 was first introduced. I spoke some Italian then, not much now, but I can read it a little from knowing Latin, which I do remember fairly well and has served me well in my travels in Latin language countries: Italy, Spain, France, Bolivia and Brazil, although Brazilian Portuguese is a pretty far stretch from the other languages. My understanding was good enough to save my life when lost in backwoods Brazil without my companion. That's another story, related to how I established Pau Ferro as our standard veneer in 1990 / CS2 2. There's no end to fun with wood. Cheers. |
| Post removed |
tomthiel......yes, I'm a tree hugger too! :-) ...on the other hand I come and live in a peaceful place here in Tuscany, in the center of Italy and close to the sea, so could I not be? I try to encourage you a bit more telling here how I ended getting, only few months ago, my since long time wanted pair of CS 3.6. It was around 1995, I was young (now fifty five) already in love with the Hi-Fi but with much less money in my pocket, I already had a modest system in my room but was permanently on the search for better sound, so my main hobby was going around to attend to all the best hi-fi show that I could (obviously in Italy), my enjoyment was to listen to the best that the glorious brands had to offer, not depending by the cost, I clearly remember when jumping from so many rooms (it was in Milan) I remained shocked by a performance that sounded to me like a live execution more than any other, not so loud but so true: they were a pair of loudspeaker of which I didn't know the brand: the Thiel CS 3.6s. I fixed that sound in my mind and never forgot it and I started to say to myself, maybe one day I will be able to own a pair. Many years have passed since, with some terrible things occurred to my life in the between but few months ago, after a long and deep search, I succeeded finding a pair in perfect cosmetically and sounding condition, this is unbelievable being them twenty years old but it is. Now I'm happy like a child and I'm sure that never and for any reason I'll let them go. I'm well aware that Thiel speakers mean more, much more of a nice box, good drivers, well working XO and great manifacture, I mean, the Invaluable value behind them as the Coherent Source concept, the custom drivers, the extreme high level in assembling and finishing...and the soul of all Thiel's workers. All this is Thiel to me and I think that no other speaker manufacturer did or is doing the same. Tom, are these reasons enough good to you to seriously think to a book? PS I want apologize with all of you for my not perfect english and hope my words are understandable at least! Silvano |
CS7.2 (and 3.7) is just behind the very best speakers I’ve heard, and at a fraction of the price. I suspect Tom Thiel’s XO mods will narrow that gap. I’m itching to finish my 2.4 upgrade. I suspect I’d have to get something like a Vandy 5 carbon to demonstratively beat it, and that’s a speaker well out of my financial wherewithal. Geoff Kait is on the bleeding edge of tweakery but I don’t think he’s trolling or bilking anyone. There are many things in audio that can be heard but not explained. The human ear/mind is not the same as an oscilloscope or any other measuring device. Measurements are good to have but they cannot fully inform what we experience when listening to music (and not even partially inform the emotional part of our experience). Mr. Kait’s tweaks may be controversial but I would not dismiss them out of hand. |
prof Oh yeah, I've visited it before! The ongoing mystery has always been if the site is one big troll (not implausible given that seems to be Kait's modus operandi), vs anything serious. I think the site is mostly a troll, like many of Kait's comments here, though I think he's sometimes serious in his comments on this forum. He says enough wacky things though, with apparent sincerity, that the line between fiction and honesty with him is hard to discern. More fake news from the professor. He’s just mad because I see through his so called philosophical jibber jabber. 😛 |
jon - you hit it on the head. As an enterprise that grew out of an intentional community (commune) in the 1970s, we all felt in our core being that music showed the way to growth in uncharted territory. Everything was changing, youth (yes, we were young once) hoped to invent a new world grounded in peace, love and music as everyman's key. Thiel Audio was how we chose to spread the joy. Our first motto was "For the Love of Music". We thought that through ingenuity and hard work, we could create something more true to the heart and soul of music and make it affordable for the many. Our enterprise succeeded in some small ways . . . It gives me great pleasure that you appreciate that core truth of the undertaking. Plenty of sacrifice went into doing what little we were able to do. |
silvanik - in Slovenian your name means forest dweller. Are you a tree hugger? I am. Anyhow, yes a book . . . This forum is the first try I have made to unleash some of these thoughts. I am rearranging my life for the possibility of writing such a book along with the related audio work. The story offers considerable fascination as something based in a particular time and place in history, with considerable detail that is obscure and far richer and potentially meaningful than the standard story you have read. These forum posts are sketches for that book. Thank you for your encouragement. |
michael - regarding the CS7, which was the flagship model with plenty of greatness; and sell cheaply on the used market. 1995 was the time of rapid development of fully in-house drivers. Between the CS6, 7, 3.6 and especially the CS2.3 coax, so much was learned to improve the drivers, that Jim redesigned the 7 with all new in-house drivers and, of course, redesigned crossovers to support the changes. Broad opinion says the upgrade 7.2 was spectacular. 7s are fully retrofittable to 7.2s - the cabinets are identical and the crossovers are modifiable. If you buy 7s inexpensively, you may have the option to fully upgrade, if Rob at Coherent Source Service still has 7.2 drivers. My wish-list includes hot-rodding the 7.2 - there is room for improvement. I have mentioned here before that just because the 3.7 obsoleted the 6 and 7.2, that was for logistics of simplified manufacture pending Jim's death, and not because the 3.7 is superior to the 6 and 7.2. Sorry to bear the sad news, but the 7 is a qualitatively better speaker than the 3.5, especially in a large room. In many ways the 7.2 is the pinnacle of Jim's life work and a 7.3 was in development when his health failed. If you can afford them, I suspect you will never regret getting them. Consider the amplifier caveats, the 7 is far harder to drive. We can circumvent a big part of the amp problem via dividing the inputs into bass and upper ranges for separate amplification, which would require 2 amps. Jim's objection to bi-amping / bi-wiring revolved around various mis-use issues, not fundamental principles. But we can keep that straight with amp and cable choices that consider those signal integration problems carefully. |
tomthiel..... I would spend so long time reading and knowing more and more about Thiel Audio history, you , Jim and all others actors of this fascinating monument to the music that you was/are, all this being said I try to launch a rock in the water: Tom, why do not write down a book on Thiel Audio..... I would pay any amount for it right now. I firmly think that you are the best candidate to do this and pretty sure many other fellows here are agree with me. |
I'm listening to Bill Evans Piano Player after having listened to CD10 of the Bach Recordings box set I got last year. There's certainly an ember alive here. I think of high end audio as a sort of musical tourism. We can hear an incredible variety of music reproduced fantastically well without going anywhere. It's a luxury that most people don't appreciate. Based on what I've read, I believe Thiel intended to give people of modest means the ability to experience this. I appreciate it and enjoy it immensely. |
Oh yeah, I've visited it before! The ongoing mystery has always been if the site is one big troll (not implausible given that seems to be Kait's modus operandi), vs anything serious. I think the site is mostly a troll, like many of Kait's comments here, though I think he's sometimes serious in his comments on this forum. He says enough wacky things though, with apparent sincerity, that the line between fiction and honesty with him is hard to discern. |