Thiel Owners

tomthiel

Outstanding! At your age and stage in life, I will accept nothing less than having a Blast!

Happy Listening!

JA - are you suggesting that I'm approaching middle age?

tomthiel

Absolutely! Middle age is the new Fountain of Youth.

Happy Listening!

@thieliste - just wondering if you might have needed the GAIA 1’s instead of the GAIA 2’s? I messaged Isoacoustics about them for my CS3.6’s which weigh about 108 pounds and told them that I was considering putting 3 of the GAIA 1’s (which are rated for 220 pounds for 4 feet) and they said that the 1’s would be the way to go because it is best to keep well under the max rating.

Now I have not done this yet but this tweak to my Sound Anchors stands is something I am still planning on doing in the near future in order to tighten up the bass. I’m thinking that a lot of my bass power is escaping into the suspended floor anyway so by decreasing this, I’m hoping for increased bass clarity. If it turns out that the low bass is too thin, maybe then I will start looking into a sub to go with the 3.6’s.

@masi61  CS 3.7s weight is about 42kg so no problems with the GAIA 2s.

GAIA 1s are for the bigger CS 7.2s.

I did find the bass way to thin for my taste with the GAIA 2s and therefore removed them.

I don't plan on using any Subs at the moment.

Bass is hard to get right, especially as the task is to translate the producers' projections onto our playback reality with a break in psycho-acoustic continuity. In other words, our 'ear-brain' knows our playback environment, but not the performance environment nor the producers' second guesses about our playback space. Over time, bass balance in production has gravitated toward a standard - in loudspeakers less so. There exist many products with strategically underdamped bass creating a big, loose hump in the upper bass. Think British monitors. Thiel's bass balance target was flat assuming only a floor under the speaker which neither added nor subtracted bass content. Any other assumptions are bound to be wrong because playback environments vary drastically and unpredictably.

Jim's design tools utilized free-air (hanging in a tree or later from a tight-rope) with the mic either 3 meters out or on the ground at various speaker heights. These free-field measurements were integrated with ground-plane measurements where the speaker was placed in the middle of a large, heavy truck grade asphalt parking lot (empty, after hours). Ground plane mic placed at 2, 3 and 4 meters out to average boundary conditions. Anechoic (free-air) measurements exhibit a -2dB shelf below 200Hz which comes up to flat in half-space - on a floor. The further room gain added by room reflections and resonances are matters of set-up and preference. 

The SmartSubwoofers addressed those boundary effects with corrective circuitry.

There is a family of considerations for high frequency balance that I'll save for another time. Over the decades, criticism of Thiel speakers has been toward too-lean bass (rather than vice-versa), and popular opinion sometimes favors speakers with objectively heavy bass. Bass balance is a hard question because so much depends on the installation particulars and user preferences. My intent here is to say that Jim assumed nothing about structural reinforcement or subtraction of the bass in the playback space, leaving that to the end user. I haven't found a floor interface product that honors all the factors of that interaction. Jim's working assumption was to leave that set of interactions null. His speakers state his interpretation of correct on an imaginary, neutral floor.

Good Friday - All

@tomthiel 

Wow. Once again I realize that speaker design is for much larger brains than my own, and I'm very grateful that they exist! Thanks for all of the insights into the design process. It is incredibly interesting

I recently got some viewpoints for  a few hundred bucks off ebay.  I'm enjoying them way beyond what a normal person should be allowed.

The Viewpoints use the same sealed bass and Power Driver as the PowerPoints. I also fell in love with those - practically unbelievable aren't they?

tomthiel

Can you talk about the difference(s) between PowerPoints and ViewPoints ?

Happy Listening!

Easter Sunday - All

JA - I can share what little I know, and perhaps others can fill in some blanks. I’ve not seen a ViewPoint system except in reviews and photos.

There is one PowerDriver, Thiel’s 6.5" x 1" concentric/coincident driver. The woofer and tweeter systems are both shared by the CS7.2. This woofer has different motor parameters than the SCS, CS1.5, etc which are optimized for reflex bass. This PowerWoofer is optimized for sealed bass. It uses neodymimum magnets and the shallow, exponentially curved front cone optimized for its wave-guide functions for the coaxial tweeter. The backing brace is a straight-sided, deep cone of cast styrofoam without the back skin of the 7.2 upper woofer. Early versions of these drivers were made in the Lexington factory and featured a removable tweeter module to facilitate repair.

The tweeter is shared by the 7.2, and (I think) has the silk surround and catenary dome geometry. That opinion is part speculation and part observation. My (scores of) swept measurements show the oil-can breakup to be very controlled and above 30kHz. I’ve never seen that (great) behavior from a spherical dome or rubber surround.

Before the SCS4s, my experience with this PowerDriver was in the PowerPoints. I have 4 pair at various levels of upgrade, plus two pairs of SCS4s presently in the lab. Every individual driver measures like the same driver. Clones.

Both the PowerPoint and the ViewPoint share the 45° launch geometry where one plane of the driver’s wavelaunch is supported by a 45° wall plane at the driver rim to eliminate wall-bounce as an installation problem. The propagation into the room is orderly and organized and the bass is supported without a suck-out / bounce (which must always be managed in a floor-standing or stand-mount speaker).

The PP is flat to 80Hz with a sealed box 12dB / octave roll-off below that. The viewpoint (which I have never seen or heard) claims -3dB bass to 60Hz. That extra bass probably comes from tangential 45° mounting to both the wall and the monitor screen itself for a larger (quasi infinite) baffle. The in-ceiling (HigherPlane & PowerPlane) have differing tunings, but all use the same PowerDriver and all are sealed, so all mate very well with subwoofers. Thiel supplied either an external crossover tuned to each model or the Integrator which could control multiple model mixes. That low bandpass crossover introduced two more poles (12dB/octave) to create a now-conventional 4th order in-polarity low crossover. (Some of you know that I take issue with 4th order slopes, but it does create a powerfully practical solution.) All the enclosures are aluminum and all the crossovers use Thiel’s styrene/tin film & foil ’yellow’ 1uF bypass cap.

I have seen several pairs of SCS4 and PowerPoint speakers which all exhibit the pains of transferring manufacture from Lexington with long-established Western components and point-to-point in-house construction - to later FST / Chinese executions with diminished x progressively improving components and execution (beginning with fairly shoddy and progressing to fairly fine.)

This migration to China was done to down-size the Lexington plant as Jim’s attempt for a simplified down-sized manufacturing operation to have a chance of survival after he was gone.

I am presently researching how the FST non-removable tweeter might (or might not) be adjustable in launch-plane. Its transient arrival is a few micro-seconds too soon and I hope to ’fix’ that as a point of honor to Thiel’s goal of best-of-form phase/time wavefront integrity. I know the problem's magnitude is in the dust, but still hope to clean it up if I can.

Back to the ViewPoint. All units were custom made by trimming the extrusion to match the height of the mating monitor. I suspect (but haven’t confirmed) that the actual driver enclosure volume is fixed and the extrusion length merely acts as baffle extensions. The written and verbal reviews have been consistently stellar. I look forward to learning the particulars of crossover position and feed-wire routing. I do know that the PowerPoint XO is positioned tangent to the driver magnet(s), which is the least harmful place - whereas the SCS4 XO is positioned directly behind the magnet(s), which has the highest level EMF radiation / interaction. I am once-again surprised and pleased in my SCS4 project by the improvement gained by better physical implementation of those physical aspects. (which of course are always more cumbersome and expensive to implement.)

I welcome and encourage any of you with experience of the PowerDriver, especially the ViewPoint, to chime in with your experience, further thoughts and corrections of any of my conjectures.

Cheers, Tom

tomthiel

Thank you for the comprehensive information and overview of the PowerPoints / Viewpoints speaker systems. These models have a few fans and owners on The Panel.  We can hardly await for driver and XO upgrade packages to arrive!

Happy Listening!

Correction to my previous post. The moving system of the PowerDriver tweeter is that of the CS7.2 with a spherical dome and rubber surround. The newer SCS4 tweeter moving system was co developed with the CS3.7 / CS2.7. It has the catenary dome and silk surround. Also, I had mis-remembered the SCS4 tweeter breakup frequency. It is about 27kHz with very nicely controlled behavior.

Hello All, 

These popped up a couple days ago and they could be a good deal for someone on the West coast.  Good price for a nice pair of 2.2's in what looks to be Amberwood. 

https://www.facebook.com/marketplace/item/631390145471672/?ref=browse_tab&referral_code=marketplace_general&referral_story_type=general&tracking=%7B%22qid%22%3A%22-4362587191113802196%22%2C%22mf_story_key%22%3A%22991360587871958245%22%2C%22commerce_rank_obj%22%3A%22%7B%5C%22target_id%5C%22%3A991360587871958245%2C%5C%22target_type%5C%22%3A6%2C%5C%22primary_position%5C%22%3A71%2C%5C%22ranking_signature%5C%22%3A7627313420307529728%2C%5C%22commerce_channel%5C%22%3A501%2C%5C%22value%5C%22%3A4.0470017232406e-5%2C%5C%22upsell_type%5C%22%3A3522%2C%5C%22candidate_retrieval_source_map%5C%22%3A%7B%5C%226082078865238781%5C%22%3A3502%2C%5C%225986196298132389%5C%22%3A3002%2C%5C%227049058601776088%5C%22%3A3502%7D%2C%5C%22grouping_info%5C%22%3Anull%7D%22%2C%22lightning_feed_qid%22%3A%22-4362600454022853647%22%2C%22lightning_feed_ranking_signature%22%3A%227627313420307529728%22%2C%22ftmd_400706%22%3A%22111112l%22%7D                           

I just noticed that It looks like one of the woofers has been replaced, someone here with more experience may have a different take. 

zkga

Nice catch! I hope those 2.2 speakers find the next good home.

Happy Listening!

Amberwood they are. And what a nice-looking pair. The two woofers look different. A prospective buyer would do well to ask questions and get Rob Gillum involved. FWIW Rob has deep backup for the 2.2 woofer.

Hi Everyone - I'm new here, but writing to get this group’s thoughts on whether my cs2.2s will benefit from one or more subwoofers. Bought new in 97, they’ve moved with me from one from one sub-par listening space to another, from apartments and other rentals to a starter home and then vacation home, and now they finally have the room they deserve in a renovated space designed for listening. They have never sounded better, but I’m sure this room can handle more bass.

Pretty wide range of music: classical ensembles to large orchestras, soundtracks, jazz, jam bands, rock. post rock, bluegrass, folk/world music, electronic, some pop and a large collection of live recordings, including about 1,000 bootlegs.

About a year ago, I demoed the Mangepan 3.7s for a week in this room, swapping back and forth with the cs2.2s. The Maggies presented a large image, kind of like sitting in the front row of a movie theater. But I ultimately preferred my Thiels, I liked the pinpoint precision of the Thiel image and while it wasn't as dense or tall as the Maggies, to me the Thiels presented more depth and sounded more natural. 

On Eurythmics "I love you like a ball and chain", the 360 sound effect was more precise and obvious on the Thiels, but in general, I find that track to be kind of harsh sounding and I actually thought it was tonally more pleasing on the Magnepans. But overall I gave them back and kept the Thiels.

OK back to the subwoofer question, this room is treated with a combination of absorption and diffusion, including bass absorbers in rear corners. Overall it's designed to be a bit more lively than a 100% listening room because my family also uses the space for playing various instruments. But I think we can handle more bass without adjusting any of the treatment. My sons like a lot of tracks with some serious bass and I'd like to try to deliver more without giving up the perfect imaging we have now. 
Thanks!
Barnett

I have been considering adding a dedicated amp to my Denon AVR for the front main Thiel CS 2 2 speakers.  Tom had suggested an older ADCOM GFA 555 which I owned way back as a good match. My concerns are older parts and would like to avoid the extra cost and hassle of recapping. I found 2 older Adcom 545, a series 1 and 2 which have been recapped, but have lower power 100 w 8 ohms and 200 w 4 ohms. Thiels are 4 ohms so would receive the 200 watts. I would like the newer on -off trigger feature, but wasn't available for these amps. I researched a new Parasound 2125 V2 on sale now which is 140 w 8 and 235w 4 ohms. They advertise high amps delivery of 35 Amos per channel. I read some reviews where they compared this amp to the older Adcom 555.  Anyone have any experience with smaller Parasound amp and smaller 2 series Thiel speakers. Tom, interested in your opinion on this since you have been very helpful to me and I can't thank you enough. Richard 

Barnett - that room has tons of potential. Can you tell us the dimensions?

Richard - can you please tell us (or repeat) the dimensions of your room? That matters a lot for power requirements. 

barnett

Welcome! a beautiful room and System. What gear and cabling do I see in the photo? Stay tuned until one of The Panel members chimes in to address your 2.2 query. We have a few fans and owners of CS 2.2 loudspeakers.

Happy Listening!

Happy Friday! All

It's been a while since I measured it, but I think it's 17' x 23' but the treatment takes up 6" on all sides, so the floor measures 16' by 22'. The speakers are on a short wall and behind the camera is a small grand piano & music stands, guitar amps, & chair.

After many years my Proceed Amp2 died and I replaced with a NAD M23. Preamp is a Pass Labs X1 that I bought used many yrs ago. Until a couple weeks ago, I was playing everything through a Mark Levinson 360S DAC, but something changed on the digital stream coming from the Sonos Port and the DAC started applying de-emphasis on everything. So I added a Lumin T3 streamer/DAC. I can still play CDs through the 360S & even send spdif from the Lumin to the 360S if I want to A/B the various D/A conversion options, which is kind of fun. The pic was taken before I added the Lumin T3.

Cables are Music Metre Canto (balanced from 360S > X1 and X1 > M23. The Lumin > X1 is using balanced Audioquest I forget what it was called and I'm out of town today.

barnett - nice system. What is the ceiling height to the actual, hard ceiling?

Thanks! Ceiling is 11 feet and I forgot to add the cables to speakers are Audioquest that I bought with the speakers. I forget what they called it, but they are gray color about 1" thick.

Tom, my listening room is nowhere as magnificent as the other room you are commenting on. My listening room is a family room off the kitchen and unfortunately has an open doorway a few feet in front of speaker and 8 ft to the side going to the living room with the rear remainder being open to the kitchen with a 3 ft high wood cabinet granite top seating area. The other walls are enclosed. Room is 20 ft wide with speakers 1 ft from back wall and centered on wall 6 ft apart. The depth of the room is 18 ft and I am sitting 11 ft from the speakers. I know I am violating the equilateral triangle rule. I need to rearrange wall and  move speakers a little further apart 8 ft and move closer to speakers 9 ft. Typical ceiling height of 7.5 ft and is a popcorn finish. The walls are wood paneling over studs with no drywall or plasterboard underneath. Flooring is ceramic tile and there are NO acoustic treatments. I thought my tweeters went bad, not the case, I tried different speakers and amplifier.  Thiels are not the problem.  I think I have the worst listening room parameters. Maybe an area rug in front of speakers to begin.  The kitchen is 14 x 12 ft. Does this space also get counted in overall area since the sound energy is mostly unobstructed to this area. You may have to read this more than once, but I wanted to paint a complete picture, without actually sending a picture. I'm also interested in comments from anyone about Parasound 2125 V 2 since I like on off trigger and would rather buy new. Thanks for your comments.

barnett - a couple of thoughts about CS2.2s in your room.

The room is wonderfully designed. Congratulations on however you got there. The dimensions are right in the middle of the Bolt Pattern which allows for leeway regarding the contribution of your diffusion panels on the side walls. Also the Bonello Modes stack up very nicely with increasing density per third-octave frequency rise. All good for a musical-sounding space from most anywhere in it.

The picture gets murkier when considering bass, and especially adding a subwoofer. Many of your bass modes fall on whole-notes and intervals which will be accentuated and long-lasting when stimulated. Specifically you have reinforcement modes at 24, 33, 41, 49 Hz (rounded) which fall on notes at A=440Hz. By the way, they fall off-note as the room width acts smaller than 17’. It’s hard to predict exactly how your diffusers affect the functional width of the room.

These modes will definitely be made more troublesome by adding subwoofer(s) bass extension. Those will not be very responsive to equalization. So consider tunable absorption devices to address those issues.

A word about the CS2.2. Bass runs out of steam with a hard ’splat’ when driven hard with bass content. John Atkinson proclaimed in his initial review that the passive radiator and/or woofer was bottoming. He bought and used CS2.2s personally for a few years until the bass problem got the better of him. He is a bass guitarist after all. That speculation turns out to be false. The problem is real, but it fixed itself when I took the crossovers outboard for redevelopment. That ’splat’ is part of an overall veil-shimmer-overload that is part of the CS2.2. It goes away (quite gloriously) with EMF management. If outboarding crossovers is too much, I’m also working on a set of inboard solutions centering on moving the crossover(s) from behind the woofer to the bottom of the cabinet (where they should have been all along.)

Plenty to chew on here. Have fun.

Tom

audio1326 - we live with what rooms we have.

Complex geometry with openings into other rooms are challenging. My previous studio (shown on my virtual system photos) was such a room. L-shaped in the corner of a 30x48' second floor with bleed to both the 54x48' area below and attic space above. I don't have Finite Element Analysis in my toolbox, so I worked it throughout a year (or more) to excellent results. I can answer specific questions from that experience among others. You will be the best judge going forward - it would be daunting for anyone else to offer opinions on such a complex space.

Point of caution (information) regarding the GFA amps. The original 535, 545, 555 are Nelson Pass, high current, etc. etc. The next generation (series II) are not. They only share the case and name. They are well-considered and sometimes preferred, but note they are similar in name only. One reason I chose the original 555 is because Jim Williams / Audio Upgrades does such great upgrade(s) for very reasonable cost.

I found a 555 and a 545 already updated that I am looking at. I prefer to not hassle with shipping such a heavy amp for the mods. Do you feel that the 545 is enough, I checked my db meter and 75 to 85 with 95 db peaks is what I measured. I like the trigger on-off of newer amps. I found the Parasound 2125 v2 with 235 watts into 4 ohms and 35 amps current delivery on-sale for $829 which buyers compared to the older Adcom, but said they preferred the Parasound. Only problem is no one was using them with Thiel speakers. Any thoughts on getting new Parasound instead of 35 year old Adcom? I will check with my electrician about a dedicated line or 2 since I think my utility room, porch outlets and part of kitchen share same breaker. Thanks for looking at this on a late Saturday night and getting back to me.

I can't comment on which amp would best fit your circumstances and orientation. And I don't know the Parasound. I would always go for the larger Adcom. I will have two 555s, they bridge nicely. You do want a dedicated Audio circuit, and upsize the feed wire while you're at it.

tomthiel

Sound advice as always. Thank you for fielding these queries.

Happy Listening!

Thank you for the info Tom! I measured the room and have corrected values: 15' 10.5" wide by 19' 8" long plus another 6.25" on all sides above the treatment. Ceiling is 10' 8" and the treatment on the walls stops 30" below the ceiling.

I typically listen at low levels, have not detected the bass splat, but I can't speak for the room's more youthful customers. I'm not sure what's required to setup the outboard crossover or what benefits I could expect besides better behaved speakers at high levels.

As for the subwoofer question, it sounds like the biggest issue will be room modes requiring tunable treatment to address? I might try it since I can either return the subs or locate them to other places if it's not an improvement here.

These dimensions are actually better. Your Bonello modes / third ascendency is now full (rather than missing one step) and now most of your bass modes fall squarely between notes with fewer needing attention.

Outboard crossovers will be available as plans or kits or finished products - in due time. Not yet. We'll also be offering an internal (significant) upgrade where the XO remains inboard but moves from behind the woofer to the cabinet bottom. Not yet ready for prime time.

Yes, tunable traps will address your bass mode issues. But I have a bigger problem with subwoofers, which was shared by Jim, but practically unavoidable in the Home Theater milieu. Short rant:

The ear-brain does a fine job of providing phantom fundamentals. When the harmonic structure suggests missing lower partials, we just make them up. Of course it's better to get them actually heard. However, when a subwoofer supplies the fundamentals, they are typically a full cycle behind the upper partials of the sound package. Depending on the cross-point, let's say it's like the lowest portion of the sound emanates from 20 to 50' behind the sonic image. I surmise that a larger than average segment of the Thiel population is tuned into the time element of music. As such, we, and I speak for myself, can find this delayed bass less than satisfying. The 2.2 is reflex bass, which does that bass delay crossover at 45Hz. Subwoofer crosspoint might be tried there for no further time-domain harm.  A sealed sub (such as Thiel's own) reproduces all the way down with no additional phase rotation in the deep bass. 

tomthiel

Thank You for addressing fundamental Subwoofer elements. Upon release, there is no doubt that your XO Packages will be a Hit among Thiel owners.

Happy Listening!

Happy Friday! All

thank you Tom for the expert info!
Barnett

Hi again! While setting up a pair of SVS SB2000 subs in the listening room, of course I made a little playlist to examine the low end. This is how I found what might be the bass splat Tom described on 4/15 above. Somewhere I saw Boz Scaggs "Thanks to You" suggested and this audio example (recorded with my iphone) documents the noise coming from my right CS2.2 - no subwoofers, no left channel, from about 10 inches away. You can hear it at 8-11 seconds and again 22-24 seconds.

For reference, the Decibel X iphone app reported 60dB spl as measured 1 meter from the speaker during the splat. If I play it any softer, then the noise goes away and I never heard it on the left speaker. 

So now I'm interested in the XO solution when it becomes available, even though my normal listening never revealed this noise before. I guess now I'm suspicious. 

barnett, do you get the same sound if you switch the speaker wires so that you are now using the right speaker in place of the left speaker?

barnett - the sound in your recording is not the overload 'splat'. Your noise sounds like wire buzz or similar mechanical vibration. Something may be hitting the back of the woofer or passive radiator, or alternately, the surround of the passive radiator may have come loose. There is an interior surround identical to the external one. You can feel it by taking out the woofer or see it with a mirror.

Cheers.

Regarding the ’splat’ in general. The splat is the audible effect of a larger problem. Interaction of fields in the speaker system cause negative sonic effects at all volume levels - becoming worse as volume increases. Some have described the 2.2 as ’veiled’ and/or ’squishy’. Sorting out the internal field and propagation geometric issues lifts that veil and tightens up the squish, and the bass.

I observe two ’types’ of Thiel speakers: those with crossovers distant from the drivers (mainly woofers) and those with XOs in proximity. Those with distant XOs (think CS2.4 or 1.5 & 1.6 or 3.7 & 2.7) share a clean effortlessness that the close XO models don’t manage to attain.

I am developing various solutions short of outboarding the crossovers. Later passive radiators such as the 1.5 were removable, allowing the XO to be moved from behind the woofer to behind the PR. A new CS2.2 removable PR could address this issue. A removable cabinet bottom for repositioning an inboard XO may be feasible. Half the battle is identifying the problem. No end to the fun.

@tomthiel, I’d consider using outboard cross-overs with my CS 3.5’s, especially if they could be optimized for use with upgraded eq’s. Perhaps even an eq > cross-over > amplification progression?

I will try switching the wires but I like the mechanical explanation because this does only happen during moments of extreme bass like that where the driver is moving an extreme amount.

To diagnose the vibration issue, I should remove the woofer and just look for something loose or would you suggest trying to play that clip while the woofer is unscrewed??

Incidentally, when I turned off the amp and cranked the subwoofers by themselves, I also found vibration noise coming from one of the hanging ceiling panels. I was able to resolve it, but there's no way I would have noticed it if the main speakers had been playing too. 

I don't know if this is of help in tracking down what is going on in your system, but I do not hear the same "flutter/buzz/vibration" sound you hear when I play a Qobuz FLAC file of the Boz Skaggs track on my Thiel 2.2s at moderate volume levels. Perhaps I would hear something if I stressed my speakers at a higher volume level, but I'd rather not push them too hard. 

Yeah that's an interesting data point, thank you.
I only get it on my right speaker so far. The only way I can explain how loud I'm playing is roughly 60db spl as reported by the free decibel x iphone app from 1 meter in front of the speaker. It's louder than I normally play them, but not intolerably loud, even when sitting 1 meter from it.

When I go quieter than that by even a little, the noise doesn't happen. 

I am suggesting that you pull the woofer and snoop around.

will do, thanks!

unsound - we’re actively working on the 3.5. It is perhaps my favorite Thiel speaker in that it captures Jim’s primary insights. It’s the only place I’ve ever heard honest 20Hz, in-time bass; and with a footprint of a square foot and waist high.

Jim Williams of Audio Upgrades in Carlsbad has re-worked the EQ for substantially better performance. Bill Thalmann of Music Technology is mapping a fully balanced unit with a few more audiophile touches. Balanced will require an EQ unit per channel.

Low-level crossovers incorporated with the EQ is an excellent idea, but beyond my present scope. With the new (Purifi, etc.) switching amps, multi-amp drive could be heart-stopping.

As a historical note - Thiel’s first product that never made it to market was just such a configuration - small 3-way with built-in driver-dedicated equalized amplification. In the mythical revival department I think such a speaker could rock given today’s technical resources. Not for me, though.

Another note, the CS5 (1989) followed the 3.5 and could have been equalized, but Jim had become discouraged by the reactionary response, especially from sophisticated reviewers, and chose to get sub 20Hz sealed bass without EQ at the cost of 2ohm impedance at the bottom end. The subsequent CS3.6 in the early 90s became the watershed. Rather than developing an upgraded EQ to continue the model 3 tradition, Jim opted for reflex bass. It was properly implemented, etc. etc. but nonetheless diluted the commitment to phase / time coherence that had built the company’s market niche and reputation. I considered that a market-capitulation at the expense of root principles.

Imagine a CS3.5a using the 3.5 woofer and upgraded EQ, an updated version of the double-cone 3.6 midrange and an updated (CS5, 3.6, 2.2) UltraTweeter using the 3.7 / SCS4 moving system. I bet you’ll like it.