@beetlemania you are welcome. this sure is a fun but challenging hobby. I agree with your statements about punching above their weight class. The Magicos are so well designed with one of the most rigid cabinets on the market and I think one reason they sound so clean is that there are no colorations imparted to the sound by the cabinets. The Thiels i am thinking, have more cabinet resonances and nothing will change that. Changing speakers is such a pain (selling and shipping the old ones for example) that i probably will be keeping these for many years. the crossover upgrade sounds awesome but i for one am not qualified to go in and change everything so i guess that it is not in my future. thanks.
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!
13,501 responses Add your response
@ronkent Thanks for the report. I'm not surprised. I don't consider Thiels the best available but I do consider them the best at their price points. They "punch well above their weight class". IMO, models like the CS3.7 and 7.2 just miss the ultimate tier of performance. If Tom Thiel is able to design hot rod kits for the CS3.7 (it's on his radar but he is working on older models first) I expect the performance to rise to that next tier. I suspect a 3.7 with an upgraded crossover will be sonically competitive with models costing ~$50+K (I'm thinking stuff like the Vandersteen 7 and Vivid Giya). |
hi guys, well i went and heard the Magicos (the ones that sell for right at 30K) and they were very very impressive. they were driven by VTL electronics and they were streaming using a Berkeley DAC. the sound was amazingly clear, like a set of quads but with upper and lower frequency extension. the level of detail and articulation was amazing and i had to ask if the REL subs were on (they were not), as the bass was so good. truthfully if money was not an issue, i think i would prefer them over the Thiels but not 100% sure about that. there is something about the way the 3.7's do music that is captivating in a way that these were not. But i think we get used to a certain sound and we have to retrain our ears. Kind of like driving a new car as they all feel and handle differently. The thing is, i did not come home and find my system lacking or disappointing. In fact, i enjoyed it just as much so there you have it. if i were looking for new speakers, Magico along with Joseph Audio, would be on my short list, along with the upcoming speakers from PS Audio, but for right now and for years to come, i will still be a Thiel guy. |
hi Prof, REL takes a totally different approach to subs than JL. I am no expert and am not very technically literate, but one of my takeaways today was that REL does not like the outboard crossovers that do what the JL does. they want the speaker to receive the full range of signal and for the amp to send a full signal to the sub. i agree with Jafant, that the REL is not that hard to set up. |
Funny you mention Magico, I'm going to be checking out the Magico A3 speakers soon. I tried hooking up my JL subs in the REL fashion (they allow for that type of set up) and didn't have great success - the sound got tonally darker and less dynamic for whatever reason. So I went whole hog and bought a high end JL crossover to "do subs right" and split the signal between the mains and the sub (as all the subwoofer aficionados will tell you). But it's such a friggin' hassle I can't get around to doing it. |
Prof: i think that mid bass bloom is very addictive and i can see why she likes it. but i find the articulation is better on the bigger ones and they do go deeper with less effort. either speaker is amazing. I heard a system today with a pair of Magico's that sell for about $29,000 for the pair. I did not leave the demo wishing i had them instead. The system sounded great but not really any better than mine with a much more affordable speaker. I was at a seminar on REL subs and i think you might find them easier to set up and use than the JL's |
ronkent, Yes I've commented on the mid-bass bloom of the 2.7s as well. It can really add some nice punch and warmth in many cases, and a dynamic feel. And for the most part it does it invisibly. But certain tracks can really zone in on that hump and then I hear it thrumming, getting confused. Fortunately this doesn't happen very often and so most of the time the 2.7s sound to me superbly defined and controlled. They are a dream speaker for electronic music - the imaging, palpability, punch, control, gorgeous tone. But the 3.7s do sound more linear and a touch more open in the midrange. |
hi Prof, boy it has been an interesting six weeks since i first got them. first week or so, they were not very good. they have improved enough that i prefer the sound of them over the 2.7's. for a point of reference i would assign the 2.7's a sound quality of 8. at first the 3.7's were about a six as they were bright and one dimensional. now they are at 8.5 and improving as they were essentially new speakers, and from all that i have read, they need 200 plus hours to really start sounding their best. they seem to be more extended, accurate, and less congested. that said, i could live happily with the 2.7's. and i do like the more compact size and looks better on them as well. my girlfriend likes the "warmer/sweeter" sound of them but i think she likes the bit of mid bass bloom that the bigger ones do not seem to have. overall two awesome speakers and you are right, in that whoever gets my 2.7's, is going to be very lucky. the sub is an REL S/5 and i really like what it adds. seemed to mate well after playing with room placement and the settings. Paul at PS Audio is who turned me on to them. They are his faves as well. they are very easy to hook up, just run their cable from the outputs of the amp right to the REL using their special connector. |
ronkent, Beautiful looking speakers! Someone will be lucky to get them.What does your your girlfriend like better about the 2.7s? Is it just a size, design thing? Or does she actually prefer the way they sound? For me the 2.7s is a nicer looking design than the 3.7s and I figured my wife would agree. But I was surprised that she actually liked the looks of the 3.7 a bit better. Not me though. I think my 2.7s are just about the nicest looking speaker I've ever seen and finding them in ebony was such a rare occurrence, and I got them for such a great price, I don't think I'll ever let these go. Even if I bring in another speaker to play with. I've had the 3.7s out of my system for so long it's helped me "forget" to some degree the ways in which they are obviously better. I don't want to do any more comparisons, and my 3.7s are ready to sell. I'm just trying to decide if I'm going to sell them myself or take a trade in from a local dealer for another pair of speakers (Devore Fidelity). BTW, I see a subwoofer in your set up. Did you have any trouble mating it with the 2.7s? And how did you go about doing so? I've had my JL 110E subwoofers for a long time and STILL haven't got around to giving another try to mate them with the 2.7s. It just seems such a damned complex undertaking once it involves cross-overs etc.Feels like I'm trying to re-design a speaker. |
Update on Mills MRA-12 resistors: I replaced the other channel a couple of weeks ago. I hear more bass impact, a more spacious soundstage, and, especially, an ease of presentation. The MRAs even seem to have partially mitigated a somewhat “glassy” quality in the midrange. I can’t wait to hear the full upgrade! Tom Thiel has placed an order for the custom caps but they won’t arrive until late June or thereabouts. The parts list is nearly finalized for CS2.4s. There are a couple of caps that merit A-Bing to determine which to use in the final design. So, probably late summer or later before the CS2.4 kits are available. |
Hi Prof, yes i have followed your post with great interest because i also have both. my 3.7's are new from Rob and they have been breaking in. at first, not so good, but now they are really coming alive. your comment about them doing everything really easily seems to be coming true with mine: "Despite
auditioning the newest-thing speakers out there, the 3.7s have been sooooo hard
to replace because they just seem to effortlessly "do it all."
I too have issues with traffic but not too bad. Keep us posted |
hi Jafant, my entire system is PS and i could not be happier. they have great customer service, made in the USA, and all the higher end stuff is fantastic (no experience with Stellar). my system consists of their BHK preamp and amp, the DSD DAC, the DMP transport, and the P10 power regenerator. They offer (except for speakers which they are working on) a complete line up of audio gear. |
Thieliste, No, what’s important is that the amp is capable of delivering the power into the actual impedance load. Note how some amps will blow a fuse with just 1 channel running into such a load, never mind both. Or that sometimes an amp is not even tested into 2 Ohms. Guess why? Some so called Class A amps decrease the percentage of Class A bias output as the power increases into lower impedances. With most typical speakers (like the 3.7’s), as the impedance drops so does the sensitivity. 400 Watts into 2 Ohms might seem excessive, but consider that is comperable to 100 Watts into 8 Ohms. I’m not suggesting that you need a 600 Watt high current amp (advantages aside); your room and desired listening levels will determine that. Just that Thiel’s minimum recommendation calls for close to 400 Watts into close to 2 (!) Ohms. I recommend getting an amp that is not regularly on the verge of it’s limits. Given that an amp is capable delivering it’s power into a given impedance, it depends on the circumstances as to whether or not more power or more refinement is better. A more refined amp regularly driven into clipping would sound less desirable and potentially be more likely to damage a speaker than a smooth running less refined higher powered amp. While unto itself Class A can be desirable, it’s just one consideration amongst many in determining the the overall quality of an amp. I’ve heard Class AB amps that sounded preferable to some Class A amps regardless of power output. And visa versa.. |
ronkent, Wow, another person with both the 2.7s and 3.7s! Looks like we are in a similar scenario. Though I've decided to sell the 3.7s. I'm just trying to decide whether to sell them myself, or accept a nice trade in price from a local dealer for another pair of speakers (Devore). I wouldn't be giving up my 2.7s which I intend to keep. And the Devores are almost hilariously at odds with the Thiels in terms of design. But there's many ways to skin a cat as they say, and I enjoy having access to more than one speaker sound. |
The number of watts doesn't mean everything for Thiel speakers, what is much more important is the current capability of the amp therefore it is better to have 75 watt of pure class A into 4 Ohm than 600 in class AB. I'm sure a modest Sugden SPA-4 would do better compared to a big 600 watt Krell on the CS 3.7 Refinement is what you have to look for more than the amount of watt with Thiel speakers. I'm not saying big amps are bad because many of them can sing very well but there are some alternatives. |
hi guys, regarding amps, i have had great success with the PS Audio BHK stereo amp. would love the mono blocks but they are not in the budget. I am using it with both the 2.7's and 3.7's and it is really good with them. Will be selling one pair, most likely the 2.7's, but still comparing them at this juncture. Kent Tager |
https://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs37-loudspeaker-specifications https://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs37-loudspeaker-measurements Note that the sensitivity is spec'd as: 90 dB / 2.83 V/m (not 1 Watt) the sensitivity is measured as: 90.7 dB 2.83 V/m (not 1 watt) Note that the minimum impedance is spec'd as: 2.8 Ohms the minimum impedance is measured as: 2.4 Ohms This means that the equivalent "efficiency" as when using 1 Watt will probably closer to <86 dB. Note that the only times the impedance rises above 4 Ohms (and then only in the deep bass region) it's met with rather challenging phase angles. Note that through much of the bass and lower midrange that the impedance is below 3 Ohms. Note that between 60 Hz through 20 KHz the impedance is always below 4 Ohms. Note that Thiel recommended between 100 and 600 Watts per channel. That recommendation is based upon the standard 8 Ohm amplifier rating, with the understanding that the amp would double down as needed. If one wanted to do this comfortably without amplifier strain, being able to double down to 2 Ohms would mean between 400 and 2400 Watts into 2 Ohms. Why do you think Jim Thiel used 600 Watt Krell's with the 3.7's? See Pages 16 &17 in the link below: http://www.krellonline.com/assets/support/FPB_ORIGINAL_SERIES_MANUAL_V982.pdf The more recent Thiel's are a bear to drive, limiting appropriate amplification to those well engineered products that are up to the task. The job of the amplifier is to power the speakers. Limit the search to those amplifiers that are capable of the work required, and then choose your preferred sonic signature. Anything less is compromising the work that went into developing these speakers, and the potential to fully deliver what they're capable of. Something else to consider; underpowering speakers, and especially those with 1st order cross-overs might lead to damage. |
Ok guys i probably found the best amps for Thiel speakers and not so expensive : https://www.sugdenaudio.com/sapphire-series |
thieliste... While I cannot offer an opinion on a MODWRIGHT KWI-200 SE with Thiel, I can offer one on the Modwright KWI-200 non-SE which I purchased used here from a fellow member a couple of months ago. 200 watts @ 8ohms, 400 watts @ 4ohms. 100% solid state BUT, it does have a home theatre by-pass which would permit employing a tube preamp if you so desire. Fortunately for me the unit arrived in pristine condition - indiscernible from new. Mine came with a very flimsy factory plastic remote, but after researching a little further I discovered that the factory still offers a rather hefty metal remote as a $200 option. I called them directly and purchased it immediately. It worked flawlessly right out of the box. During this his call I inquired about using the home theatre bypass to employ a tube preamp and within a minute or so Dan Wright was speaking with me. Impressed? Hell yes - and I related that I had purchased the unit used. It didn't matter. Mr. Wright treated me with the utmost courtesy, as though I was a lifelong customer. As as this is the first all solid state system I've had in quite a while my initial impressions find it a tad more forward than any hybrid setup I've used - various solid state amps with tube preamps. Sonically speaking I have to say it strikes me as being rather similar to a Pass X150.5 in terms of delivering accurate, uncolored, "musicality" - terms I've used to describe my impressions of Thiel as well. The nod would have to go to the Pass for perhaps being "too" clean - if THAT'S possible. The Modwright strikes me as being a touch less aggressive in the treble, but this is a hindsight opinion culled from memory, not a direct a/b comparison. Given the the reviews I researched before purchasing the Modwright and my post-purchase experience speaking with the brand owner, I have to relate that the model you're considering is most definitely a worthy contender. Also, it is considerably larger than it appears in the web photos - my virtual systems page shows it. It's about the same size as a Pass X150.5, but it weighs a little less. Power-wise it offers 50 more watts at 8ohms and 100 more watts at 4ohms than my Pass did which, methinks, is both ample enough to power the legendarily "power hungry" Thiels, if not more than sufficient. I hasten to add that what I look for, seek in my amplifier choices is resolution at moderate listening levels. In my humble experiences since joining this site the Pass and the Modwright deliver this exceedingly well - especially with speakers like Thiel that impressed me from the get-go with the exact same qualities. |
Thieliste, I have used many previous Pass amps and think very highly of them. (I don't know the INT-250). Nelson is a superb designer with values commensurate with driving a Thiel. The simple fact that it is doubling down to 2 ohms speaks clearly to the factors involved in driving a Thiel elegantly. |
Ayre and ARC would be on my short list. Also, Pass, Aesthetix, and Classe. Heed the power ratings per Tom Thiel. You very much want an amp with a decent 4 Ohm rating and 2 Ohm is not overkill. Maybe take a look at Wes Phillips’ review in Stereophile. I recall he tried two or three amps (but I could be thinking of his cs2.4 review). |