Thiel Owners
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. |
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-speakers They 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. |
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. |
@tomthiel I’m a little late, but welcome and thanks 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! |
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! |
Thiels I think have a true to life tonality in general, but their neutrality is really nice blank slate that you can push in the direction you'd like. I use tube amps to push them in the direction I like. Tube Amp Owner Rejoice! http://thielaudio.blogspot.ca/2006/10/tube-amp-owners-rejoice.html ;-) |
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. |
If I got this correct I think what I appreciated most from Tom Thiel was the speakers Jim made needed to make music sound real and not at the expense of accuracy. 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. Makes them easy for me to season to taste. Better than most speakers I have had or heard. I think about it their tall order of mimicking a point source, phase and time coherence, a real live music presentation, well balanced tonally they kind of combine the best aspects of different types of speakers to a point it is not hard to get excited listening to music on them. Actually it is harder to control your excitement about these speakers. Thanks Tom for the suggestion for upgrading the tweeter/mid range caps. I am going to do that. |
ronkent
To check for the leak, you can gently push in on the woofer and Passive diaphragms at the same time.beetlemani I'm very reluctant to try this. Supposedly, dimpled drivers have no measurable or audible effects but . ..To check for the leak, you press on the diaphragm, not the dustcap. |
In my limited experience with repairing Thiel 3.5 midranges a couple of years back the performance of Thiel in general warrants what is truly an “investment” as opposed to a mere “repair”. Even with the $600 + dollars invested into a pair of speakers that cost me approximately the same, (methinks) where could one spend $1200 on a pair of new speakers and get the performance/Sonics of Thiel? We all know the answer to that question. I just sold off my pair of 3.6 to a fellow member who drove 250 miles to pick them up - amazing how Thiel fans are willing to spend the time and effort to get ‘em, ain’t it? I drove an equivalent distance to pick up my first pair of 3.5’s. |
a response from Rob Gillum to a question i had asked him The CS3.7 cabinet is pressurized from the woofer and it is true that if there is an air leak between the main cabinet and the coax chamber, it will cause unwanted pressure to the coax midrange. This can cause the midrange driver excursion to be greater, which in turn will cause the midrange to fail. To check for the leak, you can gently push in on the woofer and Passive diaphragms at the same time. This will pressurize the cabinet, and no movement should come from the coax midrange. The midrange diaphragm is connected to the coil former via 25 points of a special adhesive. If the CS3.7 is driven hard, then it is possible for the glue joints to break. If only a few break, then the end result is distortion. If many of the glue joints break, then the excursion will become great enough for the lead wires to the mid to break. This will render a dead mid. When sealing the coax chamber, use a caulk containing silicone. Door and window. There are two pieces of tubing which carry the wires into the chamber. Make sure that the wire tubing is not leaking as well. At the factory, we injected some hotmelt into the tubes to seal the wires. Also make sure that the tubing is not leaking around the holes in the divider. |
Yes, I’m just nit-picking. Merriam-Webster: 1 a : a small shop dealing in fashionable clothing or accessories b : a small shop within a large department storeIMO, different word choice would have made it clear that Thiel thought the Clarity Caps improved SQ rather than imply a mere esoteric nod to neurotic audiophiles. Jim Thiel’s words in the UltraAudio interview were plenty clear regarding improved SQ but "boutique capacitor" as a bullet in a promotional brochure? Not so much. YMMV. Regardless, I’m thoroughly enjoying my CS2.4SEs, boutique or not! I will contact Rob Gillum or Dave Garretson at some point and see about boutiquing them even more ;^) |
I'm thrilled to hear that their will be service for current Thiel owners. The idea of getting upgraded crossovers also sounds great. It would be a real upgrade for a reasonable price. A pair of speakers that would be significantly better than my 3.7s would probably cost 30k or more and I might ultimately decide it wasn't an upgrade at all. The question rolling around in the back of my head is whether there is anyone out there who might carry the brand forward? Any possible successors? Anybody interested in acquiring the name in order to continue Jim's work in any way? |
Guys, the past few days have been an emotional roller coaster for us Thiel owners, but recent postings by Tom Thiel and reports from Rob Gillum are quite reassuring, to say the least. I would definitely be interested in hearing from anyone who has done any upgrading, especially with my models - CS3.6s or CS1.2s. |
this is from Rob in response to an email i sent him. he has been great to work with. Thank you very much Kent!
The transition period for the changes are difficult and many. I definitely have a good stock of CS2.7/CS3.7 coaxial drivers if needed. My goals at THIEL are to continue providing excellent customer service for all THIEL Owners. I really do thank all Audiogon forums and customers for their continued support. Without you guys, I would not exist. Many Thanks!
Rob Gillum THIEL Service 615-866-2290 763 Newtown Pike, #130, Lexington KY 40511 |
I apologize in advance for what might be spotty participation. I travel and am highly involved in multiple projects. But on the other hand, I do appreciate this forum and the enthusiastic involvement you folks have in the sport. Regarding phase / time integration: An optimum axis exists where the drivers' acoustic centers are equidistant from the ear. Thiel designs for a 38" ear height as a seated average. Since the objective is a point source, the coaxial / coincident upper range driver obviates time arrival problems there. But the woofer is distant in order to place it on the sloped baffle at the proper distance from the average-height ear. The closer you get, distance error becomes more likely, but not necessarily so. (a three or more element system would have only one solution, but this 3-way with the coincident mid-tweeter makes it a 2-element system with multiple solutions.) A measurement from your ear to the tweeter and the dust-cap of the woofer should be identical. If not, adjust your ear height or speaker tilt accordingly. Pink noise is also a helpful tool in finding the sweet spot. Subwoofer placement presents many problems; room mode minimization competes with other listening factors. A previous question about the "below 80Hz" crossover frequency is germane. The lower the frequency, the less the ear-brain specifies position. Bass waves are long, so bass is everywhere. However, the real-world crossover slope allows the subwoofer to contribute into the mid and upper bass where the ear-brain does specify position. I like Thiel's augment mode where the crossover to the woofer is first order and only the subwoofer is higher order. By the way, that is tuned as a 4th order Linkwitz-Riley. (Note: this stuff is from long-ago memory and I am not fact-checking as I write.) 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. I find the system amazingly accurate and effective and the result surpasses any other system of which I am aware. 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. Remember that the ear-brain is synthetic, we create or fabricate the sound we are hearing and when the sound doesn't match the room, that is unsettling. Bass is especially subject to needing "psychoacoustic rightness" in order to be emotionally gratifying. Note, I realize I am skating into my personal research and conclusions with insufficient contextualization, but I want to get the concepts on the table for your edification. 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. Remember the magic of corner-positioned bass dumps. Pressure develops at the (normal) 8 corners of the room. Make holes / dumps there and room problems are drastically reduced. (Open a door or window, install a vent, and so forth.) Regarding music: I was a singer-songwriter and recordist, which partially led to the formation of Thiel Audio. I prefer acoustic, authentic, ethnic-folk music with stellar production values. I appreciate all forms of music. I like live or live in the studio recordings and find the current multi-miced and processed amalgums to be generally uninvolving and unsatisfactory, no matter how well done. Our early research that led to our phase coherent products was validated by the high level of emotional connection to the music when played via a coherent solution as opposed to the normal, hi-fi, higher-order crossover solutions. Long story, short answer: Coherent Sources are perceived as real. I presently design and build acoustic guitars with related research, teaching and mentoring. Tonewood creation and sales are also part of my offering. I am presently creating a high-resolution record-playback system to record and store sound samples of guitars under development for direct A-B comparison via selective playback exactly where recorded. Earthworks mics and preamps, yet unchosen ADA conversion, REAPER DAW on Mac, Classé DR-6 pre and pair of DR-9 power amps (hot-rodded) with Sennheiser HD800S open and Beyerdynamic 770 closed headphones, all six 9s solid wire configured in house. The recording rig will be used mobile and in this multi-purpose studio. We build guitars in the recording-listening space. That's about all for now. Back to work. |
Thanks for joining this thread, Tom! My apologies for my role in incorrect speculation. Thiel was always about finding the optimum point on the cost-performance slope so that real music lovers could afford our products.I certainly appreciate this attitude. Thiel's top models were out of my budget, so I was glad to afford CS1.6 and, now, a used pair of CS2.4SE. Still, and I intend no offense, I've never had the impression that the CS3.7 and CS7.2 were a full-out attempt to deliver the ultimate in SQ. And, IMO, the area where these came up just a bit short was in the passive parts. As I've written elsewhere, it's also my opinion that your brother engineered some of the best drivers around. I suspect a tweaked CS3.7 or CS7,2 would sound pretty much as good as anything available. I am stoked to read that Rob is planning upgrade service! Please make him aware of this thread. Thanks for taking the time to post. |
