Thiel Owners

All -

over on The Music Room (TMR) is a pair of CS6 loudspeakers in Oak finish.

I hope these speakers find the next good Home.

Happy Listening!

ronkent

Thanks for the link.I read the thread in its entirety last night.

After reading,  it only encourages me to want to demo the Rex 300/500 even more. The VK 90 was also on my radar as well. With the VK 90 there is the option to upgrade to the Rex 3 if one so desires. 

With the crossover changes I am making in the 7.2 I'm going to exercise restraint as there will be changes so need to keep gear the same until the testing is concluded.

Duramax:  here is a post i made last  year regarding the BAT VK80

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/that-transformational-piece-of-gear-we-all-wish-for

sdberman

Welcome!  Nice inheritance. Your ears do not deceive. Both McCormick and Sonic Frontiers are sonic matches for Thiel Audio speakers. A little Tube-Rolling and you are set.  Enjoy the Music.

Happy Listening!

velocityofhue

Good to read that you still enjoying spinning CDs on the AYRE and Luxman.

Both are excellent Players.

Happy Listening!

I have had good luck with the Coda 16

i just sent a response again and included my email and phone number but they are not letting it thru.  

ronkent,

It hasn't come through yet but when it does I'll respond. 

I'm Still awaiting any info on Rex 300. I tried call BAT but it went to voicemail.

Another candidate is Sims Audio Moon 761/861as they are at almost the same price points.

From experience an amp is challenged with the Thiel bottom end. It takes a certain amp to have the slam/speed/bass definition that the Thiel's possess, but short comings in certain amps act as a veil and prevent that from coming through.

@guy48065 Old technology now. When you think about it, it’s not much different than how the RIAA curve in vinyl tampers with the signal or crossovers slice up the frequencies in the analog domain. As bass frequencies are the least beamy and more omnidirectional it makes the most sense to use DSP there. Such use could also lend itself to the use of. “SWARM” multi sub use to even out room peaks and dips. 
I will say that to my ears bass is more directional than the theory would suggest. And the simple elegance of full range loudspeakers is most appealing.

DURAMAX

Thanks.  i received your email and did respond back.  Hope all is well in Tombstone?

DURAMAX747

I would dare to say that both are incredibly musical amplifiers. PASS X150.8  opens up a little more deeper into the details and dynamics vs BAT VK600. Love the soundstage on both amps. The MCS1 and CS2.4 are quite the different speaker as well, If I still had the CS2.4's perhaps the top frequencies would have sounded better during long listening sessions with the BAT....  I'm also a fan of heavy metal where it has that sublime midrange. I'm still wondering if that was the 300w per channel difference here ? Only been flipping between CD's on the Ayre and Luxman players so no records yet unfortunately.  matching components that compliment each  really are important and only your ears can say what is good at the end of the day. Thanks for the reply

After many years without a high end system (I sold mine years ago), I inherited my dad’s system.  He was running Thiel CS 2 2’s with a McCormick DNA-1 Deluxe, Sonic Frontiers SFL-1 pre-amp and old Cardas cables.  I never loved the Thiels.  To me they sounded cold and the system was fatiguing.  Once I got the system, I put swapped out the Cardas cables and IC’s for some Graham Slee cables and IC’s (pretty reasonably priced and very under the radar).  I also put a Gold Lion tube one the SFL-1.    BOOM!   The system became extremely musical, but still transparent.   No fatiguing at all.   Now I can really appreciate the Thiels. 

and then dealing with the spacing / time alignment with the appropriate monitors with now less intrusive DSP might be best.

Can DSP "fix" this?

Would it slice up sound into tiny frequency slices & reorient them to all arrive at our ears at the same time? Would this preserve or destroy other time & phase relationships in music--destroying imaging in the process?

@ig316b, As best as I can remember at least some of the SCS’s came with port plugs. I’m not sure if those models were optimized for use with or without. Often times used models are missing them. I don’t remember if the port plugs were offered for the PCS’s. I believe the earlier SCS’s came with 2’nd order crossover which are not as time coherent as Thiel’s models’ that featured 1st  order crossovers. Generally the lower the monitors go; the better. Keep in mind there are other parameters considered when designing between ported and sealed boxes.
 

@jwei  Bass in rooms can be problematic. Room treatment for bass issues can be cumbersome. Reducing reliance on room treatment can be less expensive, and less intrusive. I suspect placing the subwoofers for the best room fit first, and then dealing with the spacing / time alignment with the appropriate monitors with now less intrusive DSP might be  best.

I wonder if it would make sense to locate the subwoofers closer to the listener to achieve better time coherence, similar to the sloped baffle of the speakers?

There goes Duramax747 dangling that carrot in front of us to entice us along.

Yes the thought is enticing and I can't wait for the results.

With Unsounds addendum I envision a pair of Thiel PCS or SCS 4's with Tometiel improvements positioned above a  pair of SS 2 subwoofers using the Thiel Integrator driven by a nice pair of Class A monoblocks.

Can I borrow somebodies credit card mine just started screaming and passed out.

Have a good weekend everyone.  

Addendum: The above presumes that the sealed box monitors are themselves time coherent and the use of the appropriate crossover to sealed boxes subwoofers are used

Ultimately it is the ports that are the obstacle towards true time coherence.

At the risk of appearing pedantic, If one were to mate sealed boxed subwoofers to sealed boxed monitors, and with perhaps some DSP one might achieve equal time coherence to that of a full range time coherent speaker. 

One caveat is that the subwoofers might have to work further up the frequency range (an area in which they become progessively more clumsy) to augemnt the the lessened upper bass output of the sealed box monitors (compared to typical ported monitors).

On the other hand there could be advantages in room placement and specific power requirements to such a pairing, Though not without added complexitiy. 

Getting such a system to work cohesively is not trivial endeavor

ronkent,

"I'm your huckleberry and listening to the Thiel's is just my game". I PM you sir and I'd be honored to be invited. 

I knew ig316b would stir up meaningful discussion regarding subs. 

What Tom and Unsound mentioned about that no subs, regardless of how good, can match the big Thiel's time coherence.You sure can have fun getting close though. The big Thiel's are harder to integrate into a room, most rooms they are placed in are undersized, and the amplification is $$$. Subs are much cheaper than amps to drive the CS5i.

However, that sealed bottom end is something special. It's in real time (like live music) whereas listening to a ported/passive radiator Thiel seems like your waiting at the bass stop for it to arrive in comparison. You would only become aware of this extreme if you listened to both. 

Tom and I are going to conduct separate listening test with the CS 7.2 notch filter. 

This critical test passes onto other models so excited to implement this filter Tom designed. 

When Tom advises I go outboard with the CS 7.2 crossover to expedite testing you know change is a coming. 

foamcutter

Nice score! on those CS 2.2 loudspeakers.  I hope your CS 1.5 speakers find the next good Home.

Happy Listening!

All -

Excellent discussion(s) as above.  Keep up the outstanding work!

Happy Listening!

Regarding Thiel subwoofers - when I began my 2018 assessment of Thiel Audio’s value, I spent considerable effort to locate any/all information about the sebwoofers. I concluded that New Thiel had literally thrown it all in the dumpster. I engaged a reputable design firm and learned that replication of the circuitry would require significant reverse engineering costs. Jim kept his filters proprietary and performed all service himself. The early SW subs used Jim’s own amp along with his room-equalization circuitry. Those amps had a high failure rate. They were replaced by Canadian BASH plate amps. Jim’s room circuitry seems robust enough, but is without schematics or test points.

In my shoes, I put the subwoofer project on the way back burner. I have a pair of SS1s and an SS2. Their integration is phenomenal. They are fed from the power amp output. Their crossover knows the parameters of the bass rolloff of the main speaker. Jim implemented an actual dedicated crossover between each model speaker and the subwoofer. I’ve never heard it so good. Nonetheless to expand what has been said, the main speaker rolloff progresses to 24dB/octave to match a 24dB/octave subwoofer low pass rolloff, which adds another full phase rotation. That bass alignment is well executed, but lacks the kind of time coherence that we get from the main speaker above its low-cut range.

From what I understand the the most common and most troubling service compalints regarding audio equipment is subwoofers, and in particular those that are self amplified. Often these subwoofers use propriertery and perhaps worse limited production runs of DSP modules and Class D amps that become unserviseable and irreplaceable. 

Thanks @ig316b.  I'll check this out.  The non-repairability of the SS is a problem, too be sure.

Duramax,  we should get together.   I could invite my friend Bob M. who lives in Durham to join us as he too has 3.7's.  Please PM me if that works for you.  

@ig316b  I use REL 812's and they seem to work great with the Thiels but i have never even tried another brand so have no experience comparing them.  i did find that two is better than one.   

ronkent,

I'm aware of the cost and weight difference between the Rex 500 and Rex 300. I'm trying to simplify rig(s) as I use a different amp for a different set of Thiel speakers. No silver bullet that's for sure. 

I thought of the same thing then move up to mono. Cost would be higher initially if I went to mono's. Going stereo first to mono I add more shipping cost and most likely a service to switch out stereo to mono. Then will amps be sequential sn#. 

Greensboro is not far from Charlotte so would welcome the invite. Always nice to hear the 3.7 in a well configured rig. 

tmsrdg

There happens to be 3, SS2 subwoofers on US AudioMart if you are interested, two in PA and 1 in NY. I was concerned about the Thiel SS Subwoofer cause there doesn't seem to be any repair for them when they fail, same thing with the Integrator.

I have read good things about REL subwoofers, I haven't looked into these but look interesting. Vandersteen has the Sub-Three that has the 11 band Eq built into the amp and uses a feed off your amplifer to provide a signal to the subwoofer, these were designed to sit in the corner of the room and take advantage of corner loading to work their best. These are the two that come to mind for music oriented use as opposed to boom shake-allda home theater subwoofers.

It would be cool if someone could find a way to repair the Thiel SS subwoofers.

If you find something interesting let us know.

While we're on that subject, I've waited for years for an appropriate SmartSub pair to come on the market to use with my 3.7s. I even have the PXO5 Passive Crossovers for the 3.7.  Since this now seems a lost cause, can anyone recommend nice (SOTA) subs that are out there? Thanks in advance.

IMHO, ports and their ilk as a design principle, should only be considered when space and/or finances are more limited.

+1

@ig316b , That’s a bit of an open ended question?

Not all subwoofers are the same. Amongst other things, many subwoofers are ported as well.

Ported speakers have the advantage of providing more bass in a smaller box and/or more efficiently. However if one is pursuing more accurate bass, especially if time coherence is an objective ports, slots, passive radiators, etc., are a compromise. With the first order 6 dB slope used in most time coherent designs exacerbates this. With that said it’s quite remarkable that Jim was able to make ported bass speakers as well as most anyone at their price points and above, even compared to designs without time coherence objectives using more forgiving cross overs.

Still my preference is, for amongst other things: sealed boxes.  In the past blending subs with main monitors was problematic.Things have advanced, and it’s much more likely to succeed in satisfactory blending today. IMHO, ports and their ilk as a design principle, should only be considered when space and/or finances are more limited.

Unsound

Thank you for the clarification on the subwoofer interaction.

So just to satisfy my curiosity, will twin subwoofers perform as well or better than say ported base drivers in a pair of speakers. My apologies for all the questions I haven't experimented with that many speakers and come to think of it, the ones I do have or tried are all ported or passive radiated. 

Tomthiel

Thank you so much for the additional information, its exactly what Duramax was eluding too. 

Duramax747

I had no reason to doubt what you were say as a matter of fact after you mentioned about going the route of the 2.4's, I got even more excited about the looking into the them and thinking about the possibilities. While I was walking along the beach it dawned on me about using the pair of subs either the SS-2' or 2Wq's of which I have both.

I have time, the upstairs renovation won't start till after is cools down a little and I can start work in the attic, pretty sure that will be hotter than your room with no A/C lol, but oh cool it was in that hot room.

Seems the more I look into the 2.4 the information keeps pushing me in that

direction. 

Take care and Happy listening.

Duramax, Well if i had the dollars and even more, the space for it, i would get a 500 now and then go mono in about a year as i think it is pretty easy to convert them  (not sure if it can be done at home or sent back to the factory).  

guessing you like the Pass.  had their XP22 preamp a few years back and much prefer my current preamp (especially with Thiels) the BAT VK 80.   if you are ever in the Greensboro area, please let me know.,

ronkent

I sure will. Dynamic headroom is a must for me so if the first watt sounds great and I can get plenty additional watts then why not. I have Pass XA200.5 in room now. I was using Bricasti M28 before that. 

If you look at the lid off the Rex 500 and Rex 300 it appears the Rex 500 has a very different layout. The paper in oil caps in 500 are not seen in 300 for instance. 

Tom

Thanks for chiming in and providing reliable intel.

I do not have intimate knowledge of the upgrade progression of the coaxes; they came after my time at Thiel. I do know how the path worked. Jim constantly isolated the weakest link of the products at large and worked on a solution to implement in the candidate model which surfaced via that process. So every newer product had advancements over its older forebear. And every new model had multiple driver advancements in its recipe.

The model progression (excluding the SCS series) of the coax is:

1995 CS7 - 1996 CS6 - 1998 CS2.3 - 1999 CS7.2 - 2003 CS2.4 - 2007 CS3.7

 The SCS and its permutations also added knowledge and solutions in a parallel timeline. So, the CS6 is near the beginning and the 2.4 near the end with 7 intervening years. The advancements affect all areas: materials, geometry, motor performance, etc. which all serve to simplify distortion modes, which allow simpler crossover circuits to correct those misbehaviors. Jim consolidated driver and crossover behavior, working toward a goal of more ideal system behavior. I directly experienced such improvements through the first 20 years of innovation. They are significant in every model development.

Part of the elegance of the 2.4 is the mechanical crossover between the midrange and tweeter. That idea percolated since the 1990 SCS, our first unitized driver. The pipe dream of a non-electronic crossover gradually took form as we developed the chops to jump from imagination to reality. The 2.3 - 2.4 small coax still had to be controlled. That took 15 XO parts. The CS6 coax took 40.

Regarding the notch filter upgrade which Duramax mentions. Thiel's need to control drivers through 7 octaves vs most speakers' 3-4, necessitates some big caps. We used PP film caps where feasible. And we developed that yellow1uF styrene/tin bypass cap for the 1989 CS5 which spread to all models, to good effect. We also limited our largest cap value to 100uF and ganged them for values up to 400+uF. The CS7.2 has such a 400uF bank in an upper midrange notch filter. Experience shows it to affect performance in its operating range. I have replaced that bank of 4x100uF electrolytixs+1x1uFs/t with two versions now under test and trials. A is 8x50uF el+1x1uF cascading multi-section PP (details proprietary.) That is what Duramax is trying. Next version is the same new 1uF core bypass plus 6x40uF els + 6x10uF PP film caps. He and I will test those next. Note that these solutions would be too expensive for classic Thiel's cost/performance plateau. But they do serve in learning new directions. Today I am working with such an upgrade in the 300uF SCS4 woofer series feed cap. I'll post outcomes when I have something to share.

 @duramax747

I too am thinking about the BAT amps you mentioned.  I would prefer the 300 in mono as they are less expensive for sure and also much lighter in weight versus the 500.  However at this point,  i do not think the 300's are available.  I currently use a really good amp,  the Coda 16, and until i can audition the 300's,  i will just wait.  Please keep us updated on your amp trajectory.  

velocityofhue,

I realize the BAT VK600 amp is much older than the Pass 150.8 and understand the power difference. From your assessment what are the sonic differences between the two as I've found BAT to be a viable amp to mate with Thiel's.

I'm considering their REX 500 in mono or even their newly released REX 300 in mono. From my experience with Thiel, amp selection is as important as Thiel model selection. 

ig316b,

Maybe Tom can jump in as to the evolution of the coax from CS2.3, CS6, CS7.2, and finally CS2.4. 

To clarify to members engaged in this thread ig316b already has the Thiel SS2 subs. Since he already made this investment the discussion went in the direction of easiest upgrade path for him. He noticed the improvement with the CS 7.2 coax over his CS6. That being the case then getting a pair of 2.4 with the SS2 would be his best choice. 

Yes subs will not integrate as smoothly but will have better bottom end. The coax is better also. 

The other variable we discussed was the upgrade path. The CS 2.4 crossover is simpler than the CS6 so cost would be less and with less parts dynamics improve as well. 

Throw in Tom's bag of full upgrades and you've scratched that itch you've had for some time. 

As jafant mentioned the " CS 2.4 is a Honey of a loudspeaker". 

The room I have the CS 7.2's in is a joy to go in. Not a typical room to say the least. I'll see if I can upload some images to share. 

I have in my possession the upper midrange notch filter upgrade Tom designed. I will get it installed soon and report back. This targeted upgrade is for the 100uf electrolytic back in CS7.2 upper midrange. This notch filter, to a lesser degree, is implemented in other models as well.

Just dropping by to say that the Thiel MCS1 Speaker is a really fine cabinet loudspeaker sound wise for stereo. Not sure how it didn't make more of a splash and was so heavily advertised for Home Theatre but hey, That was the times I guess!. Since 6 months of having it play all of my music the top end treble doesn't extend like CS2.4 and maybe a smidgen less bass.    

I've also traded out the VK600 amp and have a PASS x150.8 in its place. I figured the MCS1 being a little more sensitive things would sound good enough would less wattage. Truly sublime component combination going here and couldn't be happier with the results.

Happy summer all! 

ig316b

Good to see you here today. Thank You for taking the time to write up your recent journey to visit with duramax747.  A meeting of the minds can be a wonderful thing, as some of The Panel members, have a truly Reference system. A long-winded dissertation is always welcome. Glad you were able to compare the CS6 vs. CS 7.2 loudspeakers. Even better that you are considering the CS 2.4 model!

I will say it again and again, I attest that  CS 2.4 is a Honey of a loudspeaker. 

You will not be disappointed. Keep me posted as you attempt to find a pair. They are readily available on the secondary marketplace. Be patient and it will happen.

Happy Listening!

@ig316b, A pair of subs that are well implemented would certainly help those speakers particularly in the bass region, but it will be nearly impossible to totally eliminate  a delay in a portion of the frequency response. No, you will not get the ultimate cohesive sound that sealed boxes like the CS 5’s provide.

Sorry for the long delay in replying after my visit with Duramaxa747 but I took some time to exfoliate my soles and search for the ever elusive scaphella junonia and manufacture some cholecalciferol. You should try this some time, it's very relaxing.

mchan888 - Gary Dayton at Coherent Source Service would have the definitive answer.

More generally, I doubt that a black-centered driver is original. The CS7 had a black woofer with a donut-like center. The 7.2 had a white driver with white dustcap. The 7.2's drivers were new, built in-house and not merely upgrades of the 7s, so mix-match of parts is unlikely.

Let us know what you find out.

mchan888

Stay tuned until one of our CS 7.2 experts chimes in to address your query.

Happy Listening!

ronkent

Have fun attending the Live Audio Advice show today.

Happy Listening!

All

there is a beautiful pair of CS6 speakers offered by Decibel Audio- Chicago.

Ad here on the 'Gon.

Happy Listening!

Hi 

quick question. I have seen a picture of CS7.2 with black dustcap on its 12” woofer (versus white on mine).  Was it an original variation or it has been replaced? Thanks. Just curious.  

Hi All,   by any chance is anyone reading this today going to the Live Audio Advice show in Raleigh?

Happy Friday! All

Thiel CS1.6 loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com

Thiel CS1.6 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com

Thiel CS2.4 loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com

Thiel CS2.4 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com

THIEL CS2.4SE Floorstanding Loudspeakers With only 150 sets made, those who buy a pair are very lucky. Review By Tom Lyle

Specifications - Thiel Coherent Source CS2.7 Owner’s Information [Page 10] | ManualsLib

Thiel CS3.7 loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com

Thiel CS3.7 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com

FWIW, except for some of the PS Audio gear which aren’t pure tube products and as evidenced in the footnote during independent testing struggled with sub 4 Ohm loads, none of the forementioned tube products are actually spec’d to deal with the forementioned Thiel loudspeakers actual impedance load. We could do this again with also previously attested to ss amp, but as ss amps are much more likely to be able to produce the current needed to double power output with halving  of impedance (which also decreases the spec’d speaker sensisitvity by 3 dB for each halving) unlike most typical tube amps which do not.

Aesthetix : Products : Saturn and Jupiter Series

Audio Research | Product Range – Audio Research

Balanced Audio Technology *1

Products | Cary Audio

current conrad-johnson products - conrad-johnson

All Products – PS Audio

Rogue Home Page

*1 PS Audio BHK Signature 300 monoblock power amplifier Measurements | Stereophile.com

3rd Note;

Anthem ( I believe that is Class D).  I can attest to this brand for Integrated, Pre and Power Amps.

Happy Listening!