I am curious since we are on the subject of various support devices for the speakers. Has anyone tried comparing the sound with and without the outriggers that Thiel provided? also i found this which sure looks interesting if one has an extra 2 grand lying around. https://www.thecableco.com/seismic-speaker-bars-size-3-set-of-4.html
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!
13,726 responses Add your response
Speaking of tweaking did any of you 3.7 owners were able to order the latest crossovers that were available for the last 3.7s produced in 2013 and 2014 if i recall ?My pair is a 2010 model and when i asked my distributor if he could order the lastest crossovers in 2015 he told me Thiel didn't have them available anymore. |
@prof I would try the GAIA feet as Music Direct offers a 100% refund if not happy. i think they are very different in design from the isopucks and should work much better. I like my ears about 4" below the tweeter and here is something i copied from Stereophile: Setup was relatively simple—as simple as
manipulating a slippery, asymmetrical, 45"-tall, 91-lb object can be. I
sited the CS3.7s 5' from the front wall and 21" from the sidewalls. I
sat 91" away, with my ears about 4" below the tweeter axis. (Thiel says
the ideal position is "at least 2" below the tweeter's axis.") I then
screwed in the CS3.7's massive floor spikes. If you have small children
or a large pet, Thiel offers "stabilizer" bars that outrig the spikes,
giving the speakers a larger footprint. anyway, are you saying you use the speakers directly on the floor with no feet at all. never tried that but i would audition the GAIA feet. |
I'm a bit gun-shy about messing with the tone of my 2.7s The upgrade circuit is nearly identical to OEM. “Nearly” in that bypass caps will alter capacitance by about 1%. Otherwise all cap, inductor, and resistor values are unchanged from Jim Thiel’s circuit. The difference is a substantial upgrade in parts quality. Tom Thiel posted earlier that Jim was well aware of the benefits of higher quality parts but made his choices to optimize the performance/price curve and keep his speakers attainable for regular working folks. But there are audible improvements for those willing to open their wallets some more, especially given the increased performance with time. Many of the parts Tom is planning for the upgrades were simply not available 10-20 years ago. I consider my CS2.4s to have excellent cabinets and, especially, drivers. But there is ample opportunity to upgrade the crossovers and get notably better SQ. That said, Tom Thiel will be measuring the results of the upgrades to ensure that the balance is not upset in some unpredictable way. |
ronkent, I was quite interested in the GAIA for quite a while and intended on trying them with the Thiels. However, I ended up buying some Isoacoustic Iso-pucks which I was thinking of using under my turntable platform. I tried them under one of my Thiel speakers and didn't care for the effect - tended to make the sound a bit more flubby and less alive. (Which could all be due only to the acoustic effects of raising the speaker - I can't be sure). But it did dampen my enthusiasm for spending more money on the GAIA. My speakers tend to sound best simply sitting on the floor, no spikes or risers. I tried some other risers again - some Herbie big footers which not only add some isolation, but make them easy to shift the speaker position. Yet again, I found raising the speakers to sound a bit less preferable to simply sitting on the floor. I am intrigued quite a bit by the Townshend isolation base for speakers, a they are designed to isolate the speakers from the floor without raising them up, and I had terrific success using the Townsend spring-based pods for isolating my turntable (very big measurable difference with a vibration-measurement app when the pods were used under the turntable base) |
Prof, I agree with you. The cabinets are extraordinary in both anti-diffraction and inertness. I regard Thiel's cabinet engineering as state of the art. The approach I am taking is to investigate all areas where additional input might make improvements. Various test reports, such as John Atkinson's thorough work in Stereophile, show various resonant anomalies which I may be able to minimize with minimal cost. The drivers are fixed and excellent. The cabinets may benefit from small tweaks. The crossovers are the main focus. New improved parts quality throughout and optional outboarding are the main impetus. We are experimenting with 4-nines foil coils in the signal-path feeds and up-sized 4-nines round wire in the shunts, Mills MRA-12 audio resistors throughout and returning to point to point layouts. This undertaking is a labor of love for me and in no way meant to disparage the existing products. |
Improvements are always good. But for me I have to say the last thing on my list I'd write down as "needing improvement" is the cabinet behavior of the 3.7s. I say that because I find the 3.7s to already beat just about any other speaker I've heard in terms of sounding utterly boxless. It's one of the main things I notice every time I came home from auditioning even the latest, greatest speakers. The 3.7s disappeared as detectable sound soruces (at least in my room) more effortlessly than any of them. |
Jay, the cabinets are very quiet, but some issues are present. The 3.7 sings a little where the side meets the cap, and so forth. I'm just saying that we can make incremental improvements beyond the original performance parameters. Such on-going improvements happen regularly in many high-end product lines. We intend to keep Thiel alive in that way. |
tomthielThank You for the update. Hope you are well and having fun testing, building cross-overs, guitars and speakers. I have personally lifted and carried models CS 2.4, 2.4SE, 2.7, 3.7 during the many auditions at various dealers/retailers. In my mind, it is hard to believe that any of those cabinets are deemed "noisy"? Keep progressing forward in our hobby. Happy Listening! |
My pleasure - ronkent.I have only been in the Thiel game since 2012 (and what a sweet year it was indeed!). It is contributors like you, having been in the field since 1985 or longer, that ,makes this thread live and breathe. I think that we can all relate about having this musical love affair since our teens. Add to this fact all of the wonderful gear to make our speakers jump and shout. Last, but certainly not in the least, we have been graced with the presence of Mr. Tom Thiel and Mr. Rob Gillum to ensure the Thiel bloodline stays stronger than ever. "Music is my Mistress" -Duke Ellington Happy Listening! |
@jafant greetings, i am not sure of the cables but i know he likes Clarus. the Magico guy was there to make sure it was done right. they are probably the most accurate speaker i have ever heard, but again, they are in another price league from used 3.7's (mine came from Rob G). i think at this level, i could be happy for many a year, and i have used Thiel exclusively since 1985. thanks for starting this thread way back. |
I recently purchased a pair of CS 2.7 that I am running with a peachtree nova 300 and accessing Tidal as a source. I found the highs a little bright and the lows so so.I've not heard this amp but class D amps are reported to be generally less musical (albeit gobs of power for a low price). You might try a solid state design from ARC, Ayre, Classe', or Pass (among others). In the meantime, make sure your placement and room are optimized. Jim Smith's "Get Better Sound" is a good place to start without spending a bunch of money. |
Hi Guys, As Beetle mentioned, I have a system for identifying cabinet misbehavior that permits real-time experimentation and amelioration. I use Chladni Patterns in my acoustic guitar design, I love the method, and will summarize here as applied to enclosures. On each panel in sequence, sprinkle glitter (etc), drive the cabinet with variable sine wave, stop when glitter bounces. The physical resonance patterns are mapped via glitter bouncing off the moving anti-nodal areas and accumulating in the still nodes. A seismic map! Take a photo. Increase signal frequency and repeat. Do all the panels. One neat part is that correlations are easy to make on all panels, allowing a 3-D visualization and suggesting direct intervention strategies. This method is low-tech and enormously informative. I have identified some modes on my CS2 2s, which are easily addressed. We can quiet down all the cabinets. On other fronts, good progress is being made. Parts are on order for Beetle's 2.4SEs and my PowerPoint 1.2s. |
Thank You - ronkentfor speaking about your demo with the Magico system. I have often spoke about rising to that kind of level (Magico, Verity Audio or Joseph Audio Pearl)to possibly better the CS 3.7 loudspeaker. And yes, that is the $20-30K neighborhood for speakers alone. Good to read that you enjoyed yourself.Do you recall the cabling used?Happy Listening! |
Welcome! dancastagna there is a plethora of good information in this thread. The CS 2.7 is an excellent loudspeaker. Feed it with the best sources and you will be musically rewarded. The highs are highly resolving, very clean and clear.Most will describe this attribute with acting bright and/or forward. Careful cable -matching is a must as well. Thiel speakers respond to both solid state and tubed gear, something for every Audiophile. Buying used or demo is the way to go! This is a great and fun hobby. You are well on your way.Happy Listening! |
thanks Beetle: i will wait and see what TT comes up with. I am guessing i could swap out the entire crossover easier than changing parts but not sure. truthfully it sounds great right now but i am going to keep my eyes and ears open for the TT updates. thanks for the links regarding cabinet resonances. will check them out. i bet your 2.4's sound great. i had a pair and they were terrific but sold them when i got the 2.7's. |
@dancastagna. greetings. i have been using the 2.7's for the last three plus years, and just now am replacing with 3.7's. they are not bright speakers but also are not going to whitewash a bright source. I think you will love the speakers and it is easier to audition new electronics than to be constantly changing speakers. i have great luck with the PS audio BHK line and you might want to check out their Stellar line, though i have not heard it myself. But the fact that the lows are so so tells me that you have issues that are not in the speaker as that speaker has excellent bottom end. I asked Rob at Coherent about that $85 crossover and he told me to stay away. Just remember that this speaker likes a powerful and balanced amp. anything less and you will not get the sound it is capable of |
Hi All, I recently purchased a pair of CS 2.7 that I am running with a peachtree nova 300 and accessing Tidal as a source. I found the highs a little bright and the lows so so. I purchased these pieces used because I was tired of reading and not listening and learning hands on. I should first tell you i'm 52 and just 3 months ago heard for the very first time a legit Audiophile system. What rock have I been under!! I cant believe I haven't done this sooner rang through my head. So from that day I have been trying to educate myself so I do this once and do it right! After a couple months of this dance I decided to just buy a used system that I could at least play with and learn hands on, Will Thiels SS-2 Smart Sub work with the 2.7's? Also I found an available "Filter" for high mids on Ebay for $85 is that a scam? Didn't know rules on dropping a link here. If it could take a little bit of the edge of the high end it would be worth it. Thank you, Dan |
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.Tom Thiel has an idea for identifying cabinet resonances and, possibly, addressing them. Stay tuned. In the meantime, the CS3.7 is not too bad in that regard:https://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs37-loudspeaker-measurements For comparison, here is a $50K Wilson (Wilson makes some of the very best cabinets in the business): https://www.stereophile.com/content/wilson-audio-specialties-alexia-loudspeaker-measurements If you are not comfortable building new crossovers, I imagine there will be a couple of options depending your confidence level with a soldering gun: 1) Rob Gillum can build and install these, altho' that means shipping or personally transporting your speakers to Lexington; or 2) the CS3.7 boards appear easily accessible: http://www.theaudiobeat.com/visits/thiel_audio_carries_on.htm (assuming that panel isn't glued on), so you might have Rob Gillum build the new boards, ship them to you, and you would only need to replace the boards. Alternatively, you could have someone local do this last bit (friend or technician at a local shop). But temper any excitement you might have - Tom is unlikely to have a solution for the CS3.7 until next year. I have the CS2.4SE, now with Mills MRA-12 resistors over the OEM sandcast resistors. This was a worthwhile upgrade! I have ordered new bypass caps and will build entirely new boards later this year. |
@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. |
@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. |