Good to see you - arvincastro
Happy Listening!
Happy Listening!
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!
13,500 responses Add your response
@tomthiel & @beetlemania - Please put me down as a definite "Yes"! I am concerned with the point beetle made earlier regarding how my 3.5's must be pushing 30+ years old by now. I had just recently had their Electronic Bass EQ overhauled by Rob at Coherent Source & the sound quality improvement was instantly noticeable. My feeling is that our Thiels, which have always been so revealing & resolving of the sources and material we "fed" them, will show similar improvements with the updated crossovers you guys are working on. At the very least, it will add more years of "life" to these classics. Thanks for the updates and good luck on your project! Arvin |
Thank you all (I'm from Kentucky) for your participation here and via PMs. Here is a progress overview. Indeed a high priority is to avert losses from aging electrolytic caps. New work will have ALL film caps for indefinite product life. In broad overview, all series signal path caps are ClarityCap CSA-630 volt. They have excellent technical and sonic performance at justifiable prices. I am bypassing with the custom 1uF styrene that Thiel had made from best German film, now defunct. We will salvage your old ones. I will be double-bypassing with 1% fractional value MultiCap styrenes. Thiel CS2, 3 and 3.5 used this trick with MultiCap's predecessor. Jim dropped out as of the 2.2. I'm back in for the quicker and quieter leading edge transient at what I judge as justifiable cost for this upgrade scenario. Shunts to ground in Thiels (pre 3.7 and 2.7) are electrolytics bypassed via that 1uF styrene. I am going with a custom ClarityCap polypropylene having all CSA factors but with a 160 volt film for manageable form factor and cost. As beetle has mentioned, all resistors are being replaced with Mills MRA-12, an excellent and cost-effective solution. Note that I am aware that some might want to go farther afield with cost no object components and others may balk at the significant cost of my choices. My vision is to find affordable solutions that reach the next performance / cost plateau. This project is larger than may be obvious. This relatively major redrawing of the rules will require re-voicing both via measurements and listening. Beetle's 2.4s and my PowerPoints are the first line of that work. Our custom parts will arrive early June, when we'll engage the core work and begin substantive feedback regarding our judgements to date. |
Actually, yea or nay *might* well work for everybody :) In the case of the CS2.4, Tom Thiel has worked up a one-sided layout for internal installation and a two-sided layout for outboard installation, the latter to save space and enhance the chimney effect for better cooling. As these will be DIY kits (or, I imagine, send your speaker to Coherent Source for the work) there is a good chance we can each go with our preferred installation. The XO parts list will be identical, it’s just a matter of layout and extra connections in the case of outboard. Tom wondered how the community would react to outboard as an option and I think he now has an idea. Again, the advantages of outboard are isolation from physical and microphonic resonances, improved cooling, and increased options for further cabinet bracing. The advantages of internal installation are reduced upgrade cost (no extra cabinet and connections) and no added box to reduce WAF. |
Good point! I see that as a secondary benefit. The intention of the upgrades is to notably increase the quality of the passive parts and, thereby, the SQ. As Tom Thiel wrote earlier in this thread: Thiel was always about finding the optimum point on the cost-performance slope so that real music lovers could afford our products. Speaking for myself (and not Mr. Thiel), the upgrades seek to maximize SQ beyond what was possible at the price points of the original products. IMO, a cost-no-object approach to the XOs for the CS7.2 or CS3.7 would have likely have placed those speakers on par with the best available. The upgrades intend to seek to squeeze the ultimate SQ from the designs. In my case, I recognize the drivers in my CS2.4s are really frackin’ good. IMO, I would have to move up to something like the Vandersteen carbon or TAD beryllium drivers to find something clearly better. Speakers with these drivers are an order of magnitude more expensive than my Thiels! But I think I can get really close to their level of performance by optimizing the XOs. In other words, it's a solution that gets me close to the very best but at a price I can afford. |
tomthiel Not that it gives you any more information per se on the Thiel 2.7, but maybe of interest to you is this post in another forum by Philip Bamberg who worked on the 2.7: I designed the crossover for the CS2.7 upgrade to their coax mid/tweeter driver. It was not easy. I was present at the voicing sessions in Lexington, after some listening in my own house. |
I have chosen the CS3.6 for its more sophisticated proprietary drivers and more accessible solutions.Interested in internal upgrades for my CS3.6s. Tom would like input from the larger community as he finalizes his plans. So, please respond “yea” or “nay” regarding outboard crossovers so that he can gauge interest.Not so interested at this time but might be in the future. |
There are substantial differences applied to the coax by the two designers and/or assemblers. I have Jim's 3.7 schematic + layout, but only a designer layout for the 2.7. The 3.7 was all Thiel in-house and it seems the 2.7 was outsourced to ERSE-USA. To correlate what this community hears with the fact matrix I am assembling, I would appreciate detailed photos of the crossovers of both models to learn parts quality of the various components. The simplest method for me is via email - tomthiel@worldpath.net. Thanks for your help. |
thanks to Tom and everyone else. I agree about the two speakers. at this point of break in, my girlfriend likes the 2.7's better and wants to keep them. I am very fussy about the sound of the cd's i have and most are pretty well recorded, and i think the 3.7's will allow me to hear deeper into them and enjoy them more. they are getting better but need more time. |
Good to see you - ronkent nice score on the CS 3.7 model. I know that you will enjoy this loudspeaker. I know that you will find a good home for your CS 2.7 speakers as well. This is an excellent opportunity for another music lover to discover Thiel loudspeakers. Keep us posted as you massage the 3.7 into your system/room. Happy Listening! |
tomthiel, As I own both the 3.7s and the 2.7s, I agree. The 2.7s do sound slightly different, the 3.7s sounding more open and a bit more resolving of the finest details and "air" around voices and instruments. The 2.7s are pretty darned good, though. In a way I find the tonality of the 2.7s a little bit more beautiful and rich. But as I say, it does seem at the cost of the last bit of openness :-) |
boxes strewn on the floor?Voting options should include "It depends"? :^) No manufacturer can be all things to all people but there could be more DIY options given that these will be "kits". If Mr. Thiel does go outboard it would probably not be too onerous for a DIYer to modify these with binding posts and simply run a speaker cable from the XO on your rack to the speaker. For myself, I prefer a solution of a high-quality strap from the external to the speaker cabinet (XO cabinet on the floor directly behind the speaker) and then cabling to the amp as normal. |
Tomthiel, thank you for your prompt response. I can’t help but wonder if more traditional less high, 17” ( or 1/2 size X 2) with available rack mount wings, component style cases that could fit on a typical rack might appeal to more individuals who might prefer not to have boxes strewn on the floor? Such standard cases might be more cost effective? As I alluded to previously an outboard crossover might lend itself to the option of bi or tri- amping for many models (with allowances made for CS5’s). Something that might be of particular interest to earlier models with bass eq’s. I have neither the time, tools or expertise to be of much help, but I do have 3 3.5 eq’s. I might be willing to lend 2 of them as guinea pigs for upgrade considerations. Balanced mono’s? In sympathy with updated cross-overs? Something(s) else? |
Thanks for posting, Tom! The external XO in an ~8" cube would be unobtrusive to include in a living space. I am even more interested now that I know the dimension. Given that my goal is to optimize the SQ, adding this small cabinet behind the speakers is a no-brainer. I'll await the report of your trials. I need to correct the record. Above I wrote: no burn in time tho’ Tom thinks this is not necessary for resistorsBut here are his words to me in a PM: All components benefit from burn-in, including resistors, but ESPECIALLY solder joints. The metallurgic structure has been disturbed and somehow heals in use. I expect your job will sound better over the coming weeks.Apologies for misinterpreting an earlier message. I'll let the speakers run at least 100 hours before I do any serious comparisons. |
Hello everyone. Thanks, beetle for the update and I appreciate whatever feedback you guys can give. There are so many considerations and development requirements, and so little time. But I am making progress. Unsound, indeed our crossover cases would be quite tidy, along the lines of an 8" cube and probably as an option. Heat dissipation and electromagnetic field management are the prime motivators. I will be comparing internal vs external in my PowerPoint-as-studio monitor experiment. Making it up as we go. Regarding CS3.5s. Indeed they are worthy and among Thiel's biggest game-changers. However, redevelopment of that product should include the equalizer as either unbalanced or fully balanced and with greater sophistication applied. The bass equalization concept rocked, but its implementation could use improvement. Big project for which I am not personally qualified. Any takers? Also, the drivers were the last "modifieds" for Thiel. They had custom elements, but not Thiel's proprietary motor technologies or diaphragms - from-the-ground-up designs. I have chosen the CS3.6 for its more sophisticated proprietary drivers and more accessible solutions. The 3.5 is indeed a classic and I would consider collaboration with the right upgrade champion. Ron, I have heard the 3.7 and 2.7 the day the finished 2.7 came to the Thiel music room, September 2012 - a room I had designed and built and in which I knew all acoustics and equipment. General thoughts: Over the years since the early 80s, the model 2 was a trickle-down product with the advantage of sunk-cost technologies developed for the 3 and with lighter loads re deep bass and ultimate sound pressure levels. An easier ride with a most-bang-for-the-buck mission. This time, outside designer(s) stirred the pot. My gestalt impression, knowing the long-term history and learning about and hearing this x.7 iteration of the dance, is that the 2.7 is voiced toward forgiveness. Jim was quite single-minded in choosing his solutions toward ultimate fidelity to the signal rather than "easier to take with most recordings". I found the 2.7 to be sweeter, but less resolving, even with the identical coax driver. Natasha Crane (my secret weapon) attended that session with her bat-ears and no hi-fi experience (a great advantage.) After the lights-out, presentation she said "the 3 is way better, but the 2 is friendlier". My present path is to make a pair each of internal and external upgrade XOs for my PowerPoints and work with beetle's CS2.4s and learn what we learn. This project is front-burner, but shares priority with other demands on my time. The feedback of this group is helpful. Parts are trickling in. |
hi Guys, I just acquired a beautiful set of demo 3.7's in maple. They are breaking in and so it is too early to comment on the sound. they can be pretty ragged at first but after a week they have improved a bunch. I am going to eventually sell my 2.7's as i cannot keep both (lucky you Prof.). Joseph Audio was also on my list but could not pass these up. would be curious to see if anyone ever gets to compare the two. If anyone on the east coast is interested in the 2.7's, please feel free to write me at kent@thehubltd.com. I do have all boxes and everything, but shipping is so expensive. |
Yeah, I'm not sure Thiel's would typically need such large cases for cross-overs, except perhaps for the CS5's. Perhaps something that resembled typical components might be found more acceptable to some? If external cross-overs were to be considered perhaps both pre and post cross-over amplification could be considered too? I am most curious about upgrades for the 3.5's! There are a few different things that could be done with that model. |
those outboard crossovers are HUGE on the Avalons!Those were arguably the best speaker on the planet when new, certainly on the short list. A three-way with high-order filters takes a lot of parts. For my CS2.4s, I imagine a XO cabinet would be speaker width, maybe 10" deep and about 1' tall. The cabinet would be vented/screened top and bottom for maximal air flow. |
I would be interested in upgrading the newer speaker.Mr. Thiel is targeting the older models first partly because he thinks the X.7s are starting with better technology. Just guessing here but it will probably be late summer or fall before the first round of kits are available from Coherent Source. Anything for the X.7s will be beyond that timeline. posts are on the backSame with my SEs. Not an issue as the external cabinet is attached via cable or umbilical cord. Probably an inch or three between the cabinets. Actually, that brings up another disadvantage of the outboard solution: cost. In addition to the extra cabinet, cabling between the two is needed. Thiels rule!I’m optimistic that the new boards will elevate them to the next tier. As I wrote elsewhere, probably my last speaker. |
jafant, I haven't tried to sell them yet. But I just got a nice trade-in offer to put towards some Devore speakers if I go that route. (Alternatively I'm still looking at possibly buying Joseph Audio speakers). I wouldn't sell my Thiel 2.7s - they are too rare a find, I got too good a deal, and it's a sound I don't want to give up. But...I like speakers and don't mind having more than one sound to go to. |
Beetlemania, That's great to hear. I would be happy with the option that provides the best sound fidelity. I have 3.7s (my old 2.2s are in the closet) so I would be interested in upgrading the newer speaker. Personally, the rear placement of the outboard crossover would work much better. But that might be a problem with the 3.7 since the posts are on the back, as opposed to underneath with the 2.2 model. Thiels rule! |
Here’s an update on my CS2.4SE crossover upgrade project, including an update on Tom Thiel’s hot-rodding intentions. I’ve been PMing Tom for the past several weeks. He is directing most of my decisions and I’m providing him feedback as a beta-tester. So far, I have ordered and received Mills MRA-12 resistors from Sonic Craft (the only vendor that had all the correct values). Mills should be a step up from the ERSE resistors used in many Thiel models. All but one of the resistors on my SE boards were not labeled with manufacturer but they are probably ERSE (or Xicon). I considered every resistor I could find that met Thiel’s spec. Dueland and Path Audio are widely regarded as the best resistors available but these are crazy expensive (~$30 each compared to ~$5 for Mills) and subjective reviews suggest their sonic performance is not commensurate with their price (hey, that sounds like a LOT of things in audio!). Mills MRA, I think, represents a clear upgrade over Thiel’s OEM resistors while also representing good value. Tom agrees and these will probably be included in the forthcoming kits. I have these installed only on one channel so far. It took me about 3 hours and a second pair of hands but the second speaker should go faster with my experience other than there’s no help for my soldering gun which is less than professional grade (Tom Thiel recommended at least 140 W for the lead-free solder on Thiel boards; my gun is 180 W). I did this just yesterday, so no burn in time tho’ Tom thinks this is not necessary for resistors. My initial impression is that lower-level “grunge” has been removed, ie, the noise floor seems lowered. This is subtle but is quite worthwhile for the sound I seek! I will listen/compare more before I upgrade the other speaker, including in mono one speaker at a time. Look for further updates in the coming days and weeks. Tom has been researching the many options among capacitors, including bypasses. He is very close to a final parts list for his Power Points and CS2.2 as well as my CS2.4, and has the layouts worked out (apparently, the CS3.6 will also be among his first “hot-rods”). He is planning point-to-point connections. My SEs, built in 2012 around the time Kathy Gornik sold Thiel, have printed circuit boards so Tom thinks I will hear an improvement just from that simple change. Only the coils and styrene bypass caps will be salvaged from the original boards. Most of the new caps will be sourced from Clarity and are custom sizes so it will be a few more weeks before he has these (and another delay before the kits become available). Mr. Thiel’s goal is to maintain Thiel Audio’s adherence to neutrality, high resolution and fidelity to the input signal while improving the overall sonics via superior passive parts. But he also is balancing value, so e$$$oteric parts may not be on his list. Instead, I expect to see/hear a well-considered crossover upgrade that should be a readily audible sonic improvement - even compared to my SEs - yet in line with Thiel Audio’s value-oriented approach. Tom is still in the “hot-rod kit” development process but I want to get this out now because he is wondering about the demand for taking the new crossovers outboard, ie, the new boards would be in their own cabinet just behind each speaker. The advantage of outboard is maximized sonic performance via isolation from physical and microphonic resonances. This would also allow substantially better cooling which is important for those who listen loudly! I think this would also be easier to install for DIYers (I’m guessing the eventual kits will be DIY or send your speakers to Coherent Source for Rob Gillum to do the work). Tom has the shop to potentially match our cabinets (altho’ black would be easier and matches the front baffle of most Thiels). I imagine a XO cabinet would be the same width as our main cabinets, maybe a foot or so tall. Finally, an outboard solution would increase the options for new bracing to further reduce main cabinet resonances. The main (only?) downside of an outboard crossover is reduced WAF. Tom would like input from the larger community as he finalizes his plans. So, please respond “yea” or “nay” regarding outboard crossovers so that he can gauge interest. Here is an example of an outboard crossover (Avalon Ascent): https://usato.audiograffiti.com/annunci/diffusori-acustici/167157/ and: http://www.hifido.co.jp/KWB/G0201/E/400-10/C15-87521-47650-00/ Put me down for “yea”. |
Excellent! drrsutliff Audience is an even better choice. Good to read about this brand mating well w/ the CS 2.4 loudspeaker. I have been trying to get an updated audition w/ Audience. I t has been over 10 years and several generations back (Au24) since my last demo. Audience's power conditioner is highly regarded as well. Happy Listening! |
My system is wired with Audience cables (AU24 SE and SX) for interconnects, power, and speakers. I demoed the Audience USB vs the Wireworld and chose the Wireworld. (I thought there would be a different outcome). Wireworld really has some excellent USB cables. Demoed both the Silver and Platinum 7 series. Each was excellent but slightly different. Also using Audience Power Conditioning. |
drrsutliff Much Thanks! for the update. Good to read that VAC and Thiel are sonic matches. Keep us posted as you massage the Renaissance V into your system and room. I have often thought about the VAC integrated amp and its impact w/ Thiel speakers. Are you using all Wireworld cabling? Happy Listening! |
Another step on the Audio journey... Two new pieces going into the chain driving my CS2.4 pair this week. Friday I will be exchanging my VAC Renaissance III for a VAC Renaissance V. In addition I will be adding back the Wolf Audio Server and Wireworld 7 Platinum USB I auditioned before it travelled to Axpona. A server should not make a real differenc... is what I believed... I was astounded and thrilled at what the Wolf Alpha brought to my system and that the Thiels revealed all the positive changes. It was as good (sometimes better) than my analog source which has been my focus for years. I have traveled the VAC preamp route for many years and love their performance. Again the 2.4s were present when I upgraded from the VAC Standard LE I had for many years to the Renaissance III and allowed all the improvements to be heard. I am excited about this next change. I occasionally think about a different brand speakers but I’m not sure any would have allowed me the window into my system upgrades that Jim Thiel’s design has allowed me to enjoy. Rick |
Keep me posted on your Audio journey - boilers1 The CS 2.4 should not exhibit any congestion of any kind? My demo of the Rega included the Rega Saturn-R player and a Macbook Pro (to show off the internal DAC/Computer Audio capability). Double check all connections on all gear. Yes, agreed that the Rega is very capable. The Creek that I demo'ed was half powered and still sounded very fine with a NAD 565BEE player. Happy Listening! |
I’m glad to have this thread! I just ordered a pair of class D, Red Dragon m500 mkiis as an experiment of sorts. The Rega is a capable amplifier indeed, but I find vocals at lower volume (particularly male, live vocals) completely unintelligible....things get congested quickly in the midrange. If I really crank the Rega, it clears up nicely but at the expense of to many decibels. Mainly listening to digital these days through a Metrum DAC which honestly could be part of the problem. I hope the new amps will help sort it out. Looking forward to sharing results if anyone is interested! |
