Picked up a pair of 1.6's a few months back and have been hooked. This past weekend a pair of mint 3.6's came up at a local hifi shop. They are now in my living room and I couldn't be happier with them.
I haven't spent much time with mixing and matching.
Speakers: Thiel 3.6
Amplifier: Krell TAS (not bridged)
Preamp: B&K PT5
CD/SACD: Sony S570
Cables: Chord
|
@marqmike Thanks for those posts. I think I’ll call Rob Gillum before I proceed. But I do want to look at the crossover to see if it’s a job I’m comfortable with. At a minimum, I’d like to at least take the crossover out at home to save on shipping costs and not risk cabinet damage during shipment.
|
Thank You for the information -marqmike
I know for a fact that I do not possess the skill-level to take speakers/cross-overs apart. For those of you guys so inclined, stand up, and be counted!
We need more modders of speakers and gear in our hobby.
Happy Listening!
|
I am thinking those big professional looking solder mounds where I think six connections are on the trace board a little to intimidating for me. I can solder an individual connection extremely well. I would probably be better off in sending my crossovers in to Rob to care for that. The main reason I would use him is his quality of work is easily up there with the standard of Thiel speakers. We are in good hands with him. So I figure for a little shipping get it done as the quality would be from the factory. |
To get to my crossovers in 2.4's I unscrewed the passive radiator. Then carefully I let the top nose sit down in the cross brace behind it and that allowed the bottom nose to be free to come up out of the speaker cabinet. Because everything fits so precise you want to be careful. And it is a little counter intuitive when you look at it and then do it. Be real careful not to pull or wiggle anything very strongly it all looks kind of delicate in there. It does come apart relatively easily. Anyway when you remove the passive radiator the crossover is easily seen and reachable. |
Always good to see you here- dgarretson
Thank You for the valuable information regarding Clarity Caps. Easily, you are my "go to" guy. I hope you and Mr. Rob Gillum can acquire and stock these cross-over parts soon. Happy New Year.
Happy Listening!
|
Thanks, Mr. Thiel
I might pop one open this weekend and see what's involved as a DIY, see if I can find the values on the woofer section.
|
beetle, it is likely that my CS2.2 cabinet design persisted to the CS2.4. If so, the enclosure bottom dismounts with screws from the bottom of the base to expose the crossover mounted on the inside of the base.
|
@tmsrdg Thanks for that info. Looking again on Madisound in the Clarity Cap MR 400V (is that enough voltage?), I can get to 28 uF with a 27 and 1 uF in parallel. For 14 uF I need the 12 uF and two 1 uF caps.
But given that I already have the Clarity Cap SA version in the coax, I should start with the woofer section.
|
@dgarretson Thanks for the reply. So, are the CS2.4 values available to the public? I will contact Rob Gillum for more info.
|
@tomthiel Thanks for the clarification. This pic http://www.hifishock.org/gallery/speakers/thiel/cs2-4se-2-thiel/shows "Jim Thiel Signature" versions SA 28uF 630V and SA 14uF 630V. I cannot see a 1uF cap in parallel. The values on the woofer section are not evident. I did not see these values online at Madiscound or Partsconnexion. Maybe I didn't look closely enough? Also, is the crossover accessed thru the passive radiator or bottom panel? |
I engaged in an email exchange with Rob last week re upgrading the caps on my 3.7s. He told me "To upgrade the CS3.7, a 76uf, 151uf, and a 16uf cap would need to be installed in each cabinet." I was unable to find these values. He then suggested "The values I listed are the values for upgrading the CS3.7. It is possible that the capacitors may have to be purchased with the values described (NB: in the catalogs). For example: The 76uf CSA cap may have to be summed from a 75uf CSA and a 1uf CSA cap. The 151uf cap may have to be summed from two 75uf and a 1uf. The 16uf CSA cap may also have to be summed from a 15uf CSA and a 1uf CSA."
There you have it. I'd like to do this, but do not have the technical acumen. If Thiel Service offered this, I'd jump. Also, there a lots of varieties of caps out there, and it's a little scary for me that I might alter the speakers in a way I did not like!
|
@beetlemania When selling to OEMs like Thiel, custom capacitor values are often supplied directly by ClarityCap. I recently gave Rob a OEM price schedule for ClarityCap legacy model SA/630V(as used in the original 2.4SE) and our new, improved models(CSA/630V, CSA/250V, CMR/400V). Given sufficient demand, perhaps Rob could offer those as upgrades, or alternatively I could coordinate a group buy. Dave
ClarityCap OEM Sales |
As always, Thank You, or the clarification Mr. Tom Thiel-
Happy Listening!
|
Thanks! for sharing- beetlemania.
Dave Garretson is very informative regarding Clarity Caps and other OEM parts.
Happy Listening!
|
As a point of clarification, the CS2.4 tweeter feed has a 13mF PP in parallel with a 1mF Styrene to total 14mF, plus a 27mF PP with a 1mF S > 28mF total. I believe those even-integer values are available on the market.
|
@dgarretson
Owners of standard CS2.4 speakers may be interested to know that the
only internal difference that makes a 2.4SE is the use of ClarityCap
SA film capacitors. DIYers can make this upgrade or better by
substituting the more recently introduced ESA range.
. I don't have a
schematic, but during that time Thiel was
purchasing 14uf and 28uf values. They may have been bypassing these
with 1uf polystyrene caps. You should be able to confirm this by
inspecting the crossover. Since then we have surpassed SA by two
generations-- ESA and now CSA. For that application I suggest CSA/250V
or, space permitting, our top CMR/400V model.
You should inspect the
board to be sure. The configuration is likely 14uf in parallel
with 1uf(=15uf) and 28uf in parallel with 1uf(=29uf). If this is the
case, then you could (1) replace the 14uf and 28uf values and leave the
stock 1uf polystryrene caps in place, or (2) replace both the high
values and the paralleled 1uf caps with 15uf and 29uf. It is advisable to look carefully at the circuit before ordering anything.
Looking at Partsconnexion and Madisound, I don't see these values from Clarity (or Mundorf), especially as a close-up of the CS2.3SE crossover indicates 630 V. Are Thiel's values a special order? |
Sorry for the sloppy writing. I meant that the problems of inferior caps cause those distortions which are mitigated and clarified by more nearly perfect capacitors.
TT
|
Thanks for the post, Tom
I'm very excited to try cap upgrades. Without further information, I'll probably try the latest Clarity caps that will fit in the 2.4 enclosure (which I have yet to open). Probably try some Cardas solder. Probably be weeks or months before I have time to do this,
|
Tom,
By
"
The improvements relate to dielectric absorption and are therefore in
the time domain and result in slight smear and sonic residue.
"
are you really saying that these improvements result in smear? Or was that just a typo?
Thanks!
|
Thank You- guys for providing this insightful information that can benefit the rest of us. I like reading about potential mods and upgrades to our speakers' cross-over networks. Very cool indeed. Happy Listening! |
Beetlemania is right that the ClarityCaps were only used in the coax feed for the 2.4SEs. Jim and Gary and others performed extensive listening tests to isolate those 2 tweeter caps as the most critical improvements, and I am not second-guessing their business decision. That driver is significant in not having an electrical crossover for the tweeter, which is the most critical driver for cap quality. So, two feed caps effectively handled the midrange and tweeter. However, I am suggesting that further although more subtle improvements will surface when feeding the woofer with higher-performance caps . I am testing that prediction with my PowerPoints and may then modify my CS2.2s as the experiment dictates.
Prof, passive parts upgrade improvements are hard to describe without sounding cliché. You will hear them in terms of naturalness, ease, fluidity, three-dimensionality and such qualitative adjectives. The improvements relate to dielectric absorption and are therefore in the time domain and result in slight smear and sonic residue. I have performed such upgrades in speakers, amps and preamps, but not yet on my own well-known speakers in my own well-known system.
I should add that the most obvious crossover upgrade I can remember is when we identified a need and found great copper in the development of the 03 in the late 1970s. There was no going back from that discovery. All coils and internal wire have been six nines, long crystal, etc. since then. We were the industry wire pioneers as far as I know. |
Meanwhile, there is a pair of CS2.4s for sale, $1900, seller rates them 9/10. I kinda wish I had bought something like this and sent the crossovers to Rob Gillum for a full cap upgrade. This would probably result in SQ on par with anything new up to $20K or, even, $30K.
|
I just noticed those radiators too. I suppose someone actually looking to buy would have looked with a keener eye than I did, in passing.
|
Wow, those radiators are definitely beat up and one looks like the surround is probably not connected at all on one side. Not surprised nobody wants these. |
Folks, prof, I would look carefully at those Thiels listed. I think the reason they have been on the market for so long is their condition. I do not think the seller is being straight forward about it. Look carefully and zoom, it appears there is damage to the passive radiators and if he is not being honest about that, I wonder what else is wrong with them. |
Good question prof,
I don’t think the 3.7’s made as big an impact in the marketplace as it could have:
IMHO one reason is because of the untimely selling, then disolving of the business that hurt the franchise and kept it from growing outside of current devotees so soon after the 3.7’s were finally introduced.
Also pricing. I deperately tried to justify buying the 3.7’s since I had been a long time user of 3.6’s and waited impatiently, excited for them to come out. I listened extensively at 2 retailers with different systems and cables. I could not hear a big enough difference over the 3.6 to justify spending 12K. Thiel’s pricing strategy had always been more value until then.
And finally, tagging the 3.7 as the new flagship also signaled a new direction for the business. That was a strategy that turned me off a bit. As a long time user I would have invested in a new flagship under the 7 series or perhaps an 8 or 9 series. It signaled a downsizing to me.
Those are the reasons I do not have a 3.7 but instead have the 3.6 and CS6.
|
|
Folks, I'm somewhat amazed that this pair of 3.7s has been sitting so long on Audiogon (and USAudiomart): https://www.audiogon.com/listings/full-range-thiel-audio-cs-3-7-2018-01-17-speakersThey are in a beautiful finish, apparently great condition. And at a stupid low price considering past prices for the 3.7s. What gives? Do you think it's the lack of boxes for them? Or have the 3.7s finally lost a bit of luster on the used market? I'd think the scarcity would make them even more valuable. |
Thank You- Mr. Tom Thiel for continuing to provide insightful, behind-the-scenes- information for the rest of us. Keep us posted on your acoustic projects, testing caps and drivers. Happy Listening! |
Tom,
Thanks again and please feel free to keep us informed.
I've never upgraded a speaker before so I'll keep my eye on suggestions, and it may some day give a nice excuse to drive my speakers down to Kentucky to Rob for an upgrade.
What kind of sonic differences might one expect from upgrading crossover and other parts?
|
Note that the 2.4 SE only replaced two Solen mylar feed caps with
Clarity SAs. Today there are much better caps available today from
Clarity, Mundorf and other brands. My personal experience (via
consulting for other brands) is that the upper end of the woofer circuit
is sonically important, especially with Thiel's first order filters,
and that budget is the only limitation to sonic improvement in a
high-resolution system. I'll keep you informed as I finalize and test my
conversion.
This is great information, Tom! Is there a particular cap you think sounds best for the 2.4? Please keep us (and Rob Gillum) informed of your findings. My understanding of the CS2.4SE is that the Clarity caps only involved the coax feed. Care to share any details regarding the woofer feed?
I suspect that hot-rodded Thiels of many models might make beetle's list.
Yes, I think I wrote this very thing earlier in this thread.
My apology for using the "B" word regarding caps. I meant esoteric high performance, not snobbery.
Yes, I was admittedly nit-picking. "Boutique" is too easily interpreted in different ways. I simply wish you and Jim had used more direct phrasing to indicate the sonic benefits of the more expensive passive parts. |
I am interested in what caps are chosen by upgraders among you. I am presently researching my cap upgrades for the two pair of PowerPoint 1.2s I use for my mixing and mastering monitors, due to space limitations. That 6"x 1" coaxial is the same as the SCS 4. And in that near-zero diffraction ceiling-mount sealed cabinet, their performance is surprising. Mine are late, Chinese-made, printed circuit, non Acousta-coil, etc. with lots of room for improvement. I have high hopes for the upgrades on outboard point-to-point boards. Note that the 2.4 SE only replaced two Solen mylar feed caps with Clarity SAs. Today there are much better caps available today from Clarity, Mundorf and other brands. My personal experience (via consulting for other brands) is that the upper end of the woofer circuit is sonically important, especially with Thiel's first order filters, and that budget is the only limitation to sonic improvement in a high-resolution system. I'll keep you informed as I finalize and test my conversion. I suspect that hot-rodded Thiels of many models might make beetle's list. My apology for using the "B" word regarding caps. I meant esoteric high performance, not snobbery.
Speaking of Esoteric. A real eye-opener for me was hearing the newly introduced CS3s at the 1983 CES, paired with Esoteric Audio Research (EAR) tube amps. Astounding 3-D performance. Jim didn't like the under-damped bass that is hard to overcome with tube designs, especially with the increased demands of the CS3 equalizer. I love big tube amps with well-damped bass, or side-stepping the issue with a powered subwoofer. Of course there is the cost to consider.
|
That "getting out of the way" quality of Thiels is
awfully addictive.
Over the last 25 years, I’ve heard speakers from Wilson (W/P
7, W/P 8, Sasha, Maxx), TAD (Reference One and CR-1), Revel (M20, Studio, Salon
Mk 2), Avalon (Eclipse, Ascent, Eidolon, Idea), Vandersteen (Seven, Treo,
Quatro, 3A Sig, 2Ce Sig II), Aerial (5 or 7?), B&W (DM12, 804), Paradigm
(100), Vaughn (Triode), Vivid (Giya G3), Vienna (Klimt), Thiel (CS1.6, 2.4,
3.7, 7.2) and probably many others I’m forgetting. My favorites are, in no
particularly order, TAD Ref 1, Vandersteen 7, Avalon Ascent, and Vivid Giya
(Thiel CS3.7 and 7.2 just miss the list). Now, these were all in different room
with different electronics and over many years of sampling. But I have a good
handle on what good sound is.
I’m here to tell you that my CS2.4SEs (driven by Ayre
electronics) deliver nearly all of the neutrality, resolution and transparency –
my sonic priorities - of the very best speakers I’ve heard. I would have to
spend an order of magnitude more money to get significantly better performance
in these areas and I suspect there are only a handful of designs at closer
price points that can approach or equal the sound I am getting. I suspect the
Thiel’s superb coherence is due to similar materials used for all diaphragms. And
the resolution and transparency is probably due to the pistonic driver behavior
over the intended range of each driver. Jim Thiel did a masterful job to ensure
that driver break-up modes were well-suppressed despite the slow roll-off
filters.
The only shortcomings I’ve noticed are the lack of low bass
(which requires much larger drivers and cabinets and $$$), image density is not
quite on par with the best I’ve heard (maybe my placement is not yet
optimized?), and the highs are, maybe, not quite as airy and pristine as the
very best. Should I be satisfied with getting “only” 90% of a Vivid Giya for
$3000?
I think I have my “last speaker” (altho’ I may upgrade the
crossovers at some point).
|
hi Tom Thiel, thanks for writing. It is great to have you on this forum. I think us Thiel owners are an especially devoted and passionate group regarding their beloved speakers. I had the CS 2s from abut 1985 to about 1991 and enjoyed them but was not totally smitten. Back then its major competition was the Vandersteen but i found them too muddy. However based on what i had read at the time, the 2.2 series was a big improvement and i went that way. after that, i really never looked at other brands as i knew that as i transitioned to a newer generation of the 2 series, the sound would get better. Loved the 2.4's and the 2.7 series are the best ever. I told my girlfriend the other night that it was sad as there will not be a next generation and i for one, do not know of anything remotely close in price that can touch the 2.7's. Heard a pair of the amazing speaker by Carver the other day driven by PS Audio mono blocks, and there is no way it was better though the system was a lot more $$$$. The cabinetry on my current speakers is gorgeous and i think i have you to thank for that, so a big thank you.
|
Here's a thought from the archives about "bright Thiels". RonKent's observation re same system, different speakers . . . Within very close limits, the models represent nearly identical frequency response performance. But Ron's experience of increasing "smoothness" is correct. All sorts of hash accumulates in the high frequencies and coherent speakers permit the ear-brain to perceive that hash considerably more audibly than other speakers. I perviously alluded to this phenomenon . . . it is a deep and interesting arena where future psychoacoustic research will validate Thiel's approach (IMHO). Anyhow, the original CS2 is the last model that used fundamentally off-the-shelf drivers which we tweeked in-house to suit our purposes. That Audax soft-dome tweeter was highly regarded, but had far less sophistication and produced more "sonic edge" than than any future Thiel-designed driver. Similarly, many audiophiles removed the CS2 grille (just because.) That grille frame contained the anti-diffraction machining and the fabric tamed the resonant peak of the dome. Furthermore I might venture a guess that Ron may have upgraded cables and/or other equipment as he upgraded his series 2 speakers.
From the beginning Thiel chose to produce the most authentic reproducer of the signal supplied to the inputs. Most companies pull some punches to make the listening experience more palatable. I find it instructive that in all the years of exhibiting around the world with all manner of associated equipment, I never experienced these artifacts of "brightness, hardness", etc. We and our various associates vetted ancillary equipment against both technical and listening tests.
|
ish_mail,
Makes me wonder if I'll get along with just my CR-1 analog crossover to dial in the subwoofers, and not use the DSP units I bought for the subs (I have both the Dspeaker Anti-Node and the older Velodyne sms-1, which I bought second hand "just in case" I need them).
|
Jonandfamily.....go Vols!
Could not have done any better than Jeremy Pruitt to pull us out of a decade of quicksand. SEC!
|
@tomthiel I’m a little late, but welcome and t hanks for your valuable and insightful comments. I like Thiel's augment mode where the crossover to the woofer is first order and only the subwoofer is higher order. … I use a stereo pair of Thiel SmartSubs and place them at the proper ear distance for best integration and use the room-boundary controls to adjust for early wall reflections.
My first sub was a single Thiel SW1 and PXO5 in augment mode. True enough, it integrated seamlessly right off the bat. As I gradually added acoustic treatments to improve my room, I generated numerous bass response plots that clearly showed the SmartSub's ability to eliminate front and side-wall cancellation. Very neat! There's no other product I know of that can do that. I bought my SW1, serial no. -4, from Dave C., a Shaolin martial arts master who used to do graphic arts work for Thiel. Did you knew him? According to Dave, my sub is a pre-release SW1 that Jim used to demo the first-generation SmartSubs at audio events. He'd give it a tune-up before every show ... can't say if that improves the sound today. Keep in mind that when conventional subwoofer integration is employed, the frequency response at the listener position is optimized at the expense of all other positions in the room. Therefore the average power response in the room is wrong and the resultant sound is artificial. Bottom line: I think that bass-generation position is very important and I position my subwoofers where they are distance-correct and let any room problems be addressed via Thiel's sophisticated distance controls or room treatment.
Based on these comments, I tried killing the room EQ on my current subs, and I think you’re onto something. Cutting out the EQ seemed, at times, to remove something not quite right in the bass. Anyway, I'll keep this 'back to analogue' option on the front burner as I continue to tweak. PS: The Classé DR amps in your system; very cool! I’ve been driving my Thiels with Classé amps since the mid 90s, but I jumped in too late to sample any Dave Reich designs. After being shut down by B&W, Classé was recently acquired by Sound United. It’s another conglomerate, but I think it's a good sign that Dave Nauber is reassembling his design team in Montreal. They had just announced a new generation of amps when B&W cut them off, so they should have a running start getting back on their feet. Together with the good news about Rob Gillum’s new business — Yea! — there’s hope for continued enjoyment from both brands. |
|
Thanks for the invite Jon! As long as you are not a Tide fan! :>) I'll bet those 3.6's sound awesome with ARC!
3.6 is perhaps my all time favorite speaker even though I am using CS6 right now. I switch my 3.6 in from time to time.
Prof - nice, you sound like me. Always have a backup. I know you have some other nice speakers in your rotation also!
|
pops, if you are ever in Birmingham, Alabama then give me a call. I love my CS3.6s with my tube preamp and amp (ARC Ref 5SE, Ref 150). |
pops,
My little Thiel 02s have been my "back up" speaker since the early 90's.
Though not a CS design, they have taught me so much about what I like in a speaker. As a reference and a source of pleasure, I could never get rid of them.
|
Exactly Prof and that is why I don't believe I could be happy with another speaker long term. I would always have to a Thiel backup!
|
I just dropped in to a new high end audio store near me that sells some wonderful products. I sat down to listen to some music that was playing on a set of speakers and it re-enforced yet again to me how much I value the lack of boxiness, precision of imaging and the openness of the Thiel speakers. For background listening I don't mind a speaker "sounding like a speaker." And this speaker did have some nice tone. But if I'm going to actually devote time sitting down in front of a pair of speakers, I have little time for that type of coloration that tells me "you are hearing the SPEAKER" rather than the artist. That "getting out of the way" quality of Thiels is awfully addictive.
|
I would love to hear Thiels with tubes, that is something I have not had the pleasure of experiencing!
I have never had "bright" in my room with 3.6 or CS6. I even had my 3.6’s at one point hooked up with KCAG and KCTG IC’s, cables that are plenty generous in the upper octaves and it was not a bright presentation, clean yes, bright no....clean and transparent with outstanding dynamics.
I have always had tubes in the preamp stage and room treatments. A tube pre is a match made in heaven, but will always be curious about a tube amp. I wonder if one would push out Led Zepp II the way I like it!
|
|
as a 35 year, four generation owner of the 2 series, i would like to weigh in on the "Thiel is bright" issue. my first pair, the cs 2's were bright but not offensive. once i got the 2.2's that issue really became moot, and by the time i got 2.4's, no tipped up sound at all. i do agree with the fact that these speakers will not be real forgiving with a bright sounding amp. I have had my best results with the PS Audio BHK 250 amp and the 2.7'. a match made in audio heaven.
|
Beetlemania,
I totally agree with amps and sources making a big difference!I like heavy metal bands and most of my favorites are not mixed well! My 3.7s do the best they can with what I feed them.Once in a while I’ll play a well recorded song and it’s a totally different speaker! I wish they would always sound like that!Somebody said that the 2.4’s are more punchy than the 3.7s and I agreed until I heard my 3.7’s with a class d amp with a high dampening factor(wow)!Blew me away!Thats the bass I wanted from day one!
|
Accuracy certainly is in the mix because these speakers sound about as
real as a speaker can reasonably get. Because of that I think they walk a
fine line and when people get an unfavorable impression of them i think
they have not be set up well. I have never found them to be bright,
lean, fat, tubby, warm, cold. They are about as spot on in the middle
for me as a speaker can get.
I completely agree. None of the Thiels I've heard (CS7.2, 3.7, 2.4, 1.6) sounded overly bright or cool to my ears (altho' the CS1.6 could be strident at high SPLs with certain female vocalists, I think this is related to the distortion at 1 KHz seen in soundstage's measurements). Shane Buettner's review of the CS2.4 opined that the midrange had a
"slightly-on-the-cool-side-of-neutral sound" compared his reference Vandersteens.
But I've also heard the Vandersteen 7 (which is a SOTA-level speaker, IMO), 3A Sig, Treo, Quattro, and I lived with the 2Ce Sig II for 10 years. I have no idea what he meant. To my ears, the Thiel CS2.4SE sounds very neutral, resolved, open, and transparent through the midband. In fact, it sounds superbly balanced at all frequencies. When I listen to performers that I've seen live, I have no trouble whatsoever imagining that they are in front of me. My conclusion is that people complaining about poor SQ from Thiels have only heard them poorly set-up or with poor-performing amps and/or sources. |
