Thiel Owners

@tomthiel, I have little doubt that I would enthusiastically like it.

barnett

I had a similar issue , noticeable only at high volume when playing the Cardas/Ayers CD " Irrational But Efficacious! " before the woofers low range of 35hz the passive radiator started what sounded like a flapping noise that when away when the glide tone exceeded 35-40hz,   The rubber surround had become unattached in places so  I glued it both inside and outside to the passive radiator , while my other speaker didn't make a noise I still found loose rubber surround .  If this is your problem then Per Rob  used a water based fabric adhesive .

Hello, all.

I am hoping to get some sage advice from fellow Thiel owners. Are Thiels more like an old Toyota Corolla or an air cooled Porsche? Are they outdated or classics?

I have a pair of CS 2.3s that I bought new from Ovation in Louisville, KY back in, I believe, 1997. I have enjoyed these speakers through the years but just recently got back into serious 2-channel listening. I moved my Denon AVR that was powering the Thiels to my home theater and acquired an entirely new front end over the past 2-3 years. My question is whether my speakers are now the weak link in my system, and I wonder if getting a modern speaker would be of benefit.

I would be comfortable getting speakers in the sub-$10k range. My room is 30' x 20' x 9'. I listen to 1960s-2000s rock (Beatles, Stones, Doors, Joe Walsh, etc)at 65-73 dB. No jazz. No classical. I like hearing detail, and I feel as though I am missing detail with my Thiels compared to my Apple Airpods when I listen to the same song using Qobuz. Vocals also seem thinly veiled compared to my earbuds coming through the Thiels.

My system consists of the following:

CAT 8 ethernet -> English Electric 8 switch -> CAT 6 -> NODE -> Denafrips Terminator II DAC -> Decware coaxial cable -> Schiit Freya+ -> Pangea XLR -> PS Audio M1200 monoblocks -> Audioquest William Tell -> Thiels

I have moved the Thiels all around and feel they are in their optimal locations. They are 5 or 6 feet from the back wall, 4-5 feet from the side walls, slightly toed in such that they cross a foot or so behind my head in the listening position. I also believe I have optimized the locations and settings on my dual SVS Ultra 16 subs.

Is the technology in new speakers likely to improve the sound quality from my system, or should I stay with my tried and true Thiels? Thoughts?

last night re-listened to my noise with the grill off and confirmed it's vibration coming from the passive radiator. I can stop it with my finger. Nothing seems loose on the outside though, so I took off the woofer and tried to feel around on the inside.

First let me say these screws have not been touched since I bought the speakers new and the heads were partially deformed from installation, I guess. Also it appears one was never installed - just an empty hole. They came out OK, but one ended up so mangled it's now unusable. Fortunately I have a few screws lying around that work. 

OK so as vair68robert described, the flat rubber ring was not attached to the main foam cover. It's held in place at the outer edge all around though and it does seem to lay flat. I think it could be glued down (with this?), but I'm sure I will make a mess of this project because it's on the inside where I can't see anything.

But I can cram my phone in there and take pics, resulting in this mosaic. Not as beautiful on the inside! But unless anyone has a better idea, I might be able to attempt the surgery this weekend.

cowhorn

Welcome! There are a few fans and owners of Model CS 2.3 speakers. Good move by replacing the Denon AvR. Your room is quite large. It could be a case of the front end not providing enough head-room? A pair of CS 3.7 loudspeakers would flourish in a room that size. Something to consider if you continue to enjoy Thiel Audio sound. I look forward in reading more developments.

Happy Listening!

barnett 

contact Rob at Coherent for instructions on how to remove the radiator.  It doesn't take much of a gap in the rubber surround to cause the flutter noise .  The glue I used is from SpeakerWorks.com .  Also make sure that the screw(s) that you use are non-magnetic . 

Good Luck

Rob 

cowhorn

2nd Note;

A Thiel speaker is dependable like a Toyota, exhilarating like a Porsche. 
 

Happy Listening!

^^^Thank you!

@cowhorn 

Not a knock on your Bluesound Node (I have 4 pieces of Bluesound kit strewn about the house), but relative to your other kit, I would pick it as the weak link in your system, not your speakers. I think upgrading your source into your Denafrips Terminator II DAC could work wonders. Just my opinion.  

^^^I've considered that. Good point.

Cowhorn,  

I may have sold you those Thiels at Ovation where I managed the main store here in Louisville.  I have experience with audio  over 5 decades. I can offer you my ears if you need a second opinion.  Tom

You did, Tom! How are you? 

I may take you up on that. What's the best way to get in touch with you?

Try these lottery numbers 5024189752

jazzman7

Excellent advice as always.  I hope that you are well and enjoying Spring.

Happy Listening!

Cowhorn, if we get together I have an extra pair of Sistrum/Live platforms I can bring along. They work wonders under everything that has motion, electrical or mechanical. Not many of us locals involved in quality audio ..darn shame. Tom

Hi Everyone,

Micah Sheveloff here, long time PR rep for THIEL and part of the "THIEL team" for many years. A few folks have suggested that I alert you to a Facebook Group I have started called the THIEL Audio Legacy purely to celebrate this amazing company, products, and people. I have many former THIEL employees lurking in there and ancient photos, stories, etc. all focused on happy memories from the THIEL journey. Please join us: https://www.facebook.com/groups/256679030156298 

detoured

Welcome! Good to see you here today. Micah, how far back does your relationship with Thiel Audio? Thank You for the FB post.

Happy Listening!

Happy Friday! All

Here's my latest addition to my system.

I replaced 2 Audioquest Firebird high current PCs by 2 Furutech DSP 4.1 PCs.

One of them powers my Vitus amp and the other one my Audioquest Niagara 3000.

The difference in sound is absolutely jaw dropping, you cannot imagine.

As if my Vitus has doubled it's power output, insane!

These cables are very organic and on the warm side, great with my Thiels.

Hi Jafant,

I sold THIEL speakers at a store in Vermont beginning either in 1984 or 1985 and met the team around that time. We developed a professional relationship and I would see them at shows, including the famous summer CES event in Chicago, and while visiting the factory over the course of the two decades. In 2003, I opened my PR agency and added THIEL to my client roster shortly after. We worked side by side on several projects together including the launch of numerous products such as the the CS3.7 and the Subwoofer Integrator, the SCS4, the architectural speakers, and more. I have photos of the press corps jammed into a Las Vegas suite for the unveiling of the 3.7. Very fun and exciting times! I have a tremendous affinity for the people and the products….all starting with how wonderful they sound. 

detoured

Thank You for the follow up to my query. Good to learn that you are carrying the Thiel Audio torch on other platform(s). I believe that we can all agree on affinity for our beloved loudspeakers. Wonderful sound as well.

Do you have a favorite Model? What gear is in your Stereo system?

Happy Listening!

Purity Capacitors

 " greater clarity in reproduction of sound as well as improved spatial separation of individual instruments and vocals. "

I copied this from the CC web site as I have been trying to think of how to describe the addition of a 1uf 400v  Purity capacitor on the tweeter positive output .

The clarity ( no pun intended ) and definition created a 3D sound that is beyond what I would have thought a single capacitor could create .  I feel that high notes that used to sound edgy , sharp and higher volume now sounds clear and same in volume levels .

I can't wait ( but have to because they haven't been released yet ) for the 1uf 630v cap for the midrange positive output .  I am also thinking about replacing the 1.5uf cap ( that I already upgraded from an ERSE to a CC ESA ) on the tweeter negative side with a Purity 250v .

I am having so much fun with my Thiel CS.5 but sometimes I feel the need for a bit more bass.

My room is rectangular shape (speakers on the short wall) with 2,42cm ceilings and a total area of 18sq meters.

The amp that I currently use is the Vincent SV237MK (250w/4ohms), famous for a well extended quality bass deliver. Although I have a REL Stampede 5 subwoofer, I never use it because I have always found that it mess the speakers natural voicing / balance.

Following general Thiel instructions I use the CS.5:

- resting on the 3 plastic cups (without spikes) on hard concrete floor

- grilles on

- straight, without toe-in

- distant from the boundaries, more or less where all my other speakers work well in my room (90cm from front wall, 76cm from side wall, 185cm between them, 278cm from speakers to listening position).

- good neutral to warm speaker cables, VanDamme LC-OFC 4mm or Straightwire Encore.

The imaging and tonality is better away from the front wall, and moving my chair closer to the speakers mess up the balance between the drivers... any suggestions?

vair68robert - Great to hear. Motivates me to replace the 1uf stock coax capacitors. The 250v would fit but not sure about the 800v on these CS2.4 crossovers. Figure that part would be reusable when doing the big crossover upgrade.

(Right now it’s stock PCB, SE kit, Mills Resistors)

audiiofilio123 - two thoughts come to mind. A: you like more bass than the CS.5 delivers or B: something is wrong.

Your room is appropriately sized and I'll presume your equipment is up to the task, with the caveat that the CS.5 has a low impedance requiring an amp that is comfortable driving 4 ohms. Insufficient current delivery can manifest as bass-starved. 

Thiel speakers are often considered bass-lean. Their tuning has a Quality Factor of .707 which we think provides the 'best' compromise between bass quantity and quality. However, the CS.5's target market was Home Theater and its Q target was '1' - providing a 3dB hump before roll-off. So, it has more apparent bass than Thiel's music models.

You might play the same-channel or combined mono into each speaker separately to ascertain they both have the same bass output. Let us know what you learn. That speaker punches way over its weight!

anzen

I looked at images of the 2.4 crossovers and it looks like they used Jantzen Superior Z caps which measure 17 x 43 mm for the 1uf 100v cap ,  The Clarity Purity measures 18 x 45 mm for the 1uf 250v . Maybe the 400v will fit but it doesn't look like the 630v or 800v will fit  .

Happy Friday! All

agburns

Good to see you here.  Stay tuned for Tom's upgrade packages.

Happy Listening!

Theaudiotweak,  I believe that you sold me my first real audio gear back in early 90s, unless there was another Tom that worked there.  Later on, I picked up a pair of used Thiel 3.5.  Still have the 3.5s, I keep lurking around this thread to see what Tom Thiel comes up with relative to his 3.5 project. 

Anthony

Anthony - please keep lurking. Sorry the going has been so slow. We're close to an upgraded equalizer and working in other areas. First we need a tweeter based on the UltraTweeter used in the CS5,3.6, and 2.2, now obsolete and unsupportable. Next we need a midrange built on the CS3.6 dual-cone. Upgraded XO is taking shape with considerable research on this and other products. Currently using the SCS4 as my workhorse. It will be worth the wait.

-Tom

tomthiel

Thank You for the Driver and XO updates.

Happy Listening!

Open question to the group, tomthiel and duramax who I believe have been working on a 2.4 crossover design.  Tom, you mentioned point-to-point wiring is suboptimal and looking at a new layout scheme with edge mounting (comment link).  I have been toying with the idea of purchasing a laser engraver for the purpose of creating PCBs and other items to work on with the kid this summer.  In general for all these crossover projects, is Masonite, PCB or another material preferred?  Was edge mounting due to some limitation or was more optimal?

anzen - it’s a complex, multi-dimensional puzzle. In terms of pure signal propagation, PCBs outdo most PtoP layouts, especially if one-sided. PCBs shorter leads create smaller antenna effects. A new insight (to me) is how signal chaos is created when P to P has inputs and outputs entering the same solder-lug from the same direction. Two-sided layouts allow that distortion mechanism to be eliminated - with care and extra hassle. A requirement in this Renaissance project is the variety of quality levels supported in the same package. I want my layouts to accommodate various sizes of components. And on and on.

Placing the boards vertically facilitates thermal management via convection air over all component surfaces. Heat dissipation is a big deal for circuit stability under load. Edge mounting is more difficult and more optimal - but worth the effort since I’m aiming for a higher performance plateau(s) than original Thiel products. I’m pleasantly surprised how much room for improvement exists in the same platform with the same drivers, circuitry and cabinet.

Best material for XO panel is Panzerholz, German compressed and heat treated wood product that is extremely strong and internally very well damped - and very expensive. Next best is 1/4" masonite which comes pretty close at 5% cost. Outboarding significantly reduces need for vibration control. For inboard panels I’m suspending the panel in rubber grommets to decouple from cabinet panel resonance modes. Again, I’m pleasantly surprised how these various aspects accumulate into cleaner performance.

To answer more directly: I will be using wood-based point-to-point panels exclusively for their strength, superior electro-magnetic performance and layout flexibility.

tomthiel

Thank You for your Dedication and Passion for Thiel Renaissance project. Upon release, the Audiophile community and press will take notice.

Happy Listening!

Happy Friday! All

Happy Friday! All

Tom  Thiel, 

Are you stating you would mount the crossover board up right on edge? If that is correct this would expose the circuit board direct in line to the most significant mechanical impact from any open back driver in the cabinet. Visual would be a basketball hitting the back board. Damping would reduce but will also increase  the resonace retention time of any aquired energy which can become part of the orginal intended signal. My methods are much different  1 of which allows for external adjustemt of the resonance point of the internally loaded circuit board. Resonace will be drained thru the bottom mounting method and coupled internally to cabinet bottom and externally  to the mass of the floor. This feature benefit can also be done on a preferred external mounting method. I think we have discussed  these methods in the past. I know your project is to be simple and of a high value. You may want to offer up these significant options for users who want to max out resonance control. There is also an option to externally resonance tune the woofer to the backside of the cabinet. This entails a brass connecting rod and a special tuning bolt turned by hand .Like you would tune a stand up bass. Significant audible upgrade. I know your trying to increase open surface area to benefit heat dissapation..Resonance tuning also reduces thermal runaway as the heat has a method to transfer as does resonance.. TomD

Hello Agburns, 

There were 2 Toms working at the main Louisville store at the same time. I was and still am the shorter 1. The other Tom was tall with very curly hair. He had a very animated style while mine was considered more laid back  TomD

Tom D. Indeed we avoid aligning the geometric plane of the XO panel normal to the velocity propagation wave. The vertical boards are aligned to present minimal area to the velocity wave. Adjustable resonance control is an attractive mechanism, both for the XO and the drivers. My approach tries to control the forces without the complication of user adjustability. I have prototyped tunable control and the future could lead there. The combination of bronze and Panzerholz works very well to dissipate energy while providing considerable strength. Progress is being made.

Seems to me that an outboard crossover might make the most sense.

I agree. Outboard has lots of advantages. But I also want a significant upgrade that doesn't require the outboard box. I'm able to get a considerable inboard advance over stock. Outboard is better.

Agreed upon. When going outboard with a Dunlavy modified crossover there was a gain in performance even more so when placed on a resonance grounding platform. Not a so called isolation platform as those trap and slow burn the exit of resonance. You want a nice quiet exit thru reactive materials with the proper conductive geometry as a tour guide to the exit. TomD

The floor interface is a complex problem, especially considering that each floor is unique and sometimes substantially different from other floors.

There is a method of material coupling where the collection of resonant energy is transferred to a large disc of the same material effectively increasing the surface area many times. And if you have 3 or 4 these devices then you effectively have the same shelf or floor surface under each and every component set up this way including the speakers. It works. TomD

FWIW, I would place outboard crossovers on shelves in the rack.

Unsound - that's a complication I hadn't anticipated. Wire is highly reactive and susceptible to noise from multiple causes. Having long runs between the XO and speaker would require specific engineering to maintain target performance.

I've become a big fan of shortest practical speaker cable runs via a pair of amps part-way between the centered source rack and speakers, with XOs part-way again. I've been presuming 1/2 meter umbilicals. Could be a meter.

@tomthiel, your point is well taken. In my case I could possibly accommodate 1 meter runs, but something like 1.5 meters would probably be preferable. 

unsound - thanks for the input. What may not be self-evident is that changes such as these wire lengths require system tweaking. I had presumed that the system would be optimized around some fairly short umbilical length, but am open to reconsidering: perhaps a short and long version such as 1/2 and 1-1/2 meters.

Of general interest may be how Thiel approached this tweaking problem. We assumed user preference for amps and cables. Voicing and final adjustments consumed months of iterative listening tests. The (sometimes maddeningly) long delays between projected new product introductions and actual roll-out included this micro-voicing to levels considerably beyond measurement. Add to that the unannounced XO revisions during a product's life for further refinements. These micro-voicings take internal wire lengths into consideration along with the myriad other variables and interactions.Outboard XOs extend the complex cable contributions from a few feet to many feet. An additional system variable.

I'm glad you brought up this issue - I'll add it to the list of considerations.

@tomthiel, thanks for your consideration.