Hey @Halifax
Just curious - which Coda Amp do you have?
Thiel Owners
Guys-
I just scored a sweet pair of CS 2.4SE loudspeakers. Anyone else currently or previously owned this model?
Owners of the CS 2.4 or CS 2.7 are free to chime in as well. Thiel are excellent w/ both tubed or solid-state gear!
Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
I just scored a sweet pair of CS 2.4SE loudspeakers. Anyone else currently or previously owned this model?
Owners of the CS 2.4 or CS 2.7 are free to chime in as well. Thiel are excellent w/ both tubed or solid-state gear!
Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
13,494 responses Add your response
halifax
Thank You for initial impressions and thoughts on the CS 2.4 loudspeaker. Nice score at $1K. Mr. Rob Gillum will have those speakers singing again in full range soon.
Besides the 3.5 speaker, the CS 2.4 is (very) well annotated here in this thread. Well documented as well. Take the time to read through and you will be rewarded. B.A.T. is a good match, must be set up properly. CODA (Pass Labs) is a sonic match too. Your Ears do not deceive. The CS 2.4 is a special loudspeaker. I can still remember my 1st demo.
Happy Listening! |
Well, I got the 2.4s, it was a whole day a driving to get them. Hooked them up and one speaker had one tweeter/mid unit not functioning. I auditioned these in a odd shaped untreated room, so It wasn't obvious to me one driver was broken. Kind of disappointing, but my fault for not being more careful; I did pay $1k so even considering having to repair them I still think am happy with them, the low price should have been an indicator something was fishy. I already contacted Rob Gillum and will be having the broken driver sorted, his quote for the rebuild of the driver seemed really fair and he got back to me immediately. I will be testing with a multimeter and hopefully its just the driver. The speakers cabinets are in pretty good shape, probably would rate the cabinets at 8/10. Based on a short audition, I noticed a few things. The amp was BAT vk-300x integrated and sounded very under-powered. The 2.4 sounded exactly like my 1.6 when they under powered. The overall sound was kind of hollow. The bass was there but there was no weight to it. The soundstage is there but not locked in solid. Not a good amp for the 2.4. Listening at home, with Coda amplifier these 2.4 speakers totally sang!!! They are so much more full and weighty compared to the 1.6, even with one tweeter not working the sound stage was huge and the treble was even smoother than the 1.6, maybe not quite as sweet but there was just more information coming through that sounded purer. I will update when everything is working fully, but I am already really loving these speakers. I really wish Thiel was still in buisness, they made some very special products. |
@unsound. Oops, damn typos. Yes, I meant I will see if I can find a local dealer with the new Maggie sub. Unfortunately, my very local shop, Audio Den, is no longer carrying Magnepan, so I’ll probably have to make a trip into Manhattan. Re: your statement about my preferring the Thiel over the MMG treble wise. The Thiel was definitely “brighter” to my ears, but by no means was that a slight against the Maggies. I have to agree with your observation on recordings - everything matters in the final cut. As I was awaiting for the Aurender to complete downloading almost 1 TB of my music files, I more or less binged on Ani DiFranco on my Mac desktop. (I have my files on a portable SSD drive) I’ll have to dive into who produced/engineered these albums because they sound excellent. I really dig DiFranco as a musician. Cheers! |
@oblgny, I'm a bit surprised that you seemed to prefer the Thiel treble to the Maggie treble. The Thiel's have gotten some criticism for their treble response, where as the Maggies quasi-ribbon has recieved some cirtical acclaim. I think the Thiel's criticisim has been a bit unfair, as many of the competitiors roll off theirs, where as the Thiel's more accurately offer what it's presented with. I think most of the problem is with the recording techniques. Often times we see photographs of recordings with microphones directly above the violins or inserted into the lid of the piano. With that said, I might have a slight preference for the Maggies in that regard. But..., prefer the gestalt of the Thiel's. I think you meant to post that you'd like to audition the Maggie {sic} sub. |
@unsound. Your points regarding the existing similarities/differences between Thiel and Magnepan are, as usual, spot-on. Obviously, since Tom was buying the CS 2.4’s we had to hear them. (I’m still with the Belles 250i Hybrid Integrated) After all, I am a 100% positive feedback member here. I played an Alison Kraus live CD unencumbered, just the Musical Fidelity unit, no DAC. And the Thiels were perfect. Damn, I love treble. Just for the heck of it we then listened to the MMG’s - again, just the CD player, no DAC involved. I then involved the sub at my preferred setting. In this context I will state that the 2.4’s were more articulate in the highs than the MMG’s were, but not with a margin that could make them look bad. Tom made a particularly memorable statement regarding how we perceive the upper registers or the lower ones shortly after this, and it hit me right between the eyes. I err toward appreciating, or paying more attention to the high end. My tolerance for bass response is probably well below most people’s, meaning that unless the speaker is woefully lacking in it, I can - for the lack of a better description - forgive it. My brain makes up for it in some manner. The Thiels bottom out @ 36hz, the MMG’s @ 50hz. The REL I’m using goes down to 30hz. My employment of the sub can probably best be described as minimal. I do like, and I do appreciate bass, but Thiel taught me well about articulation in both treble and bass. I will follow your suggestion to audition the new Thiel sub. I have had a previous less than satisfactory experience with their DWM bass panel when I had the 1.7 model. It was…awful. Apart from adding too many additional cables, it added zero to the sonics in total. Meh. I am slowly rebuilding my main setup. I will not be selling the Belles 250i Integrated. I had to sell my Pass Labs X150.5 amp due to a financial need at the time, an act that I regret to this day - which IMHO - was the best amp for Thiel. Articulate amp? Meet articulate loudspeaker. The Belles could probably use a checkup, and I’m looking for a tech for that purpose as we speak. I just added a Pro-ject cheap seats turntable mated to a Pro-ject DS tube phono stage, along with an Aurender N100H 2TB music server. My next mission is to look for a DAC that will complement the Aurender since the cheap seats Jolida FX Glass DAC is dated. |
@oblgny , While the Thiel's and the Magnaplanars have an uncanny resemblance when it comes to transient response (though the Maggies are planars they are still techically dynamic speakers), and the Maggies though more coherent than most, are not quite as coherent as the Thiels, but the dispersion characteristics are very different (point source vs. dipole).. Both would make my short list. You might want consider Magnaplanar's new subwoofer with dispersion characteristics that are meant to compliment the Maggies.
|
Rather removed from the typical subject matter discussed here, I feel compelled to boast about the all too brief meeting I had earlier today with Tom Thiel - who is the new owner of the pair of CS 2.4’s we transacted for. Such is what we do, isn’t it?
While I am currently astray from having Thiel in my setup, the Maggie MMG’s and REL sub I replaced the CS2.4’s for are more than a merely decent substitute. I have decided that I will continue with these until such a time arises that I may be able to buy yet ANOTHER pair of my absolute favorite model, the CS 3.5. This isn’t 20/20 hindsight as much as it is 20/20 regret for ever having sold off the three pairs that I once had. The CS 3.5 just does everything right for my humble ears. I am prepared, and fully aware of the fact that such a prospect will be of the upgraded version Tom has been hinting at - and I will be more than willing to pay the price. I believe I’ve uttered a couple of noteworthy opinions in this forum over the years, and either, and both still hold true - that Thiel is an investment, not merely a purchase, and that Thiel is essentially Magneplanar with BASS.
Carry on folks! |
FWIW - room size is a many-faceted thing. When we purpose built Thiel’s listening room, Jim specified a maximum size of 11,000 cubic feet. A larger room requires greater woofer excursion, which is difficult and expensive to achieve. That room works nicely with non-subwoofered models from CS2 upward. The larger Thiels didn’t over-drive that room unless really cranked. The room had 4 doors that could be opened to vent the bass if needed. I suspect a room much larger than that one might require subwoofer support to pressureize the room and keep the woofers from flapping. I’m off early tomorrow morning to see Bill Thalmann, pick up a pair of 2.4s and 7.2s under the guise of my niece’s wedding. I’ll report when I return next week. |
halifax, A consideration worth noting is the volume of your listening room. If it's on the smaller side then by default you will rule out the CS6 as they need a little elbow room to hear their potential. Another consideration are amps. You mentioned bass. To drive the CS6 or even the CS 2.4 you will need amps that can push some current and Class A being at the top of that list. Another consideration is the upgrade path you can take on xovers with the CS2.4 which Tom Thiel has been very generous with his time to help members. You will no doubt extract more performance from this upgrade. I'm holding out for the upgrade xovers for the big Thiel's.
|
CS 2.4's : ..."Easy to drive as well". ? Thiel CS2.4 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com I have to disagree with JA; better to go with an amp that is spec'd to deliver appropriate power into 2 Ohms not 4 Ohms. |
jafant,
I am using a Coda amplifier with an Ayre preamplifier and for sources I have a Meridian CD Player and Pro-ject Turntable, most of my music is on CD. Together it all sounds very nice, with tons of detail and sound-stage. I have a dynaudio active studio system that is very different and I like having the less forward presentation from the Thiels for listening. The only thing that seems like it would be a significant upgrade is going from the cs 1.6 to a larger speaker where I am looking for more "presence" in the mids and low end. I have decided on the 2.4 and will post some comments in the near future, hopefully the amp matching will be successful and I don't feel the need to go back down that road again.
|
These comparative observations are quite interesting to me. As you know, Jim developed new technologies throughout his inventive career. Each new product incorporated something, or multiple things that were brand new. So the timeline becomes a parallel consideration to the model capability. Bigger, more expensive models bring greater dynamic range and deeper bass. More drivers can deliver better signal integrity spread more evenly across the musical range. The time factor / when the model came out, brings subtlety and sophistication due to new solutions, primarily in driver subtleties, especially after Thiel began making its own drivers in the mid 1990s. |
I would love to get the 2.7 or 3.7 model in the future. The other Theils I have demoed are the 3.5 and 3.6, which were nice in their own ways, the 3.5 was maybe too flat sounding, not in a bad way but more like gigantic studio monitors. I liked the 1.6 a lot in the store, when i got it home it sounded Musical Fidelity amp the sound was really not even close. Many amps later I ended up with a coda amp which was like lifting a veil form the 1.6 where the is tons of clean bass and mids . I think the 2.4 should work well with this amp which is part of why I want to upgrade. I have been wanting to see what the next step up in the lineup would be like. I find the 1.6 to be very amazing on the highs, but the mids and lows seem to be slightly less full sounding in comparison to how the treble range feels so palpable. |
It depends on the level of committment you are willing to invest. CS 2.4 are easier to set up and less finicky with electronics. Not that they dont benefit from demoing numerous amps and front end, just not as critical as CS6. Top to bottom it's a well balanced speaker and at its price point it's a steal. CS6 takes more effort to properly set up. Getting the correct balance with electronics can be laborious if you dont enjoy the journey of doing so. Once dialed in with the right electronics the CS 2.4 are outclassed. The CS6 produce a bass punch much larger than their weight class. It will take a considerable investment compared to the CS 2.4 to glean the best out of them. Thats my .02 whatever weight that may have. |
Many moons ago, I owned the 2.3s. My friend also worked at the high end shop and for about a 6 year period, I did virtually all of his deliveries and set-ups with him, including many pairs of Thiels. I had decided to upgrade the 2.3s. The store where my friend worked had limited floor space and they just had the 7.2s. So on an out-of-town business trip to Northern California, I stopped at a Thiel dealer who carried all the models and they were very gracious and let me listen to all of them. I spent most of the time with the 6s and 7.2s (I had set-up and delivered many pairs of 2.3s). I decided on the 7.2s. When th 2.4s cames out, I delivered a bunch of those. Personally (and much of course depends on your room, listening preferences and electronics), I'd go for the 2.4s vs. the 6s. Yes it (the 6s) is older technology. If someone listened almost exclusively to classical, depending on the other factors, it might be something to consider.
|
halifax
i can attest to the CS 2.4 model. This loudspeaker will give you the same attributes as the 1.6 plus Bass extension desired without a subwoofer. The CS 2.4 provides the listener accurate, taut, Bass via the Passive Radiator. You can enjoy every genre of Music. It is a Honey of a speaker. Easy to drive as well.
What other gear is in your system? Happy Listening! |
Does anyone have a comment on the CS6 vs the CS 2.4, both available nearish to me, the CS6 seems older and much larger, but from the comments goes much deeper. I am just curious what some other members think of the upper range I have the cs 1.6 and want to get more bottom end without using a sub but dont want to loose the non-fatiguing presentation of the 1.6
Thanks |
jafant, I sold a pair of CS 2.7 but I have the exact same pair in a house in Florida. I've deided to invest in CS 7.2 as my listening room here in NC is 35'x60'x12' ceilings so the big Thiels will work better in that space. Tom, I woulkd be on board with going forward with xover upgrade. The drivers are in perfect shape as are the cabinets. I'm thinking of refinishing them in a high quality automotive paint and making them look more current. Currently I'm designing a Panzerholz base for it. You'd have tp spend a considerable amount of scratch to better these.
|
duegi - you're on it. I would not consider upgrading the 2.3 to 2.4 drivers. The crossover tunings take the cabinet particulars into consideration. Keep what you have. Note that outboard crossovers can benefit from a different layout because the driver EMFs are no longer in consideration. Plus airflow can be utilized. If you are interested in considering my OXO cabinet and/or layout, send me a PM. |
jafant, I’m in Columbia MO and did a day trip down to Nashville and back. Tom, I’ve already been in touch in Rob about the coax status and updating them. I wouldn’t mind upgrading to the 2.4 equivalent. I asked about the woofers but Rob mention they are really robust and typically not an issue. Rob has already rebuilt the 3.6 mids and I’m ready to have the tweeters rebuilt in the near future. In the meantime I’ve picked up some extra XCs for the 3.6s and will replace and upgrade all the caps and resistors. I also plan to externalize the XCs in some older shelf speaker boxes and keep them separate from the goings on inside the CS3.6s, Winter project coming up. |
duegi - your 2.3 serial numbers place them before the upgrade at 4567 which added a bucking magnet to the back of the midrange coax. That magnet has two principal effects: 1-greatly reduces stray magnetic fields to decrease interference with a TV, cables, etc. 2- the magnetic field is more effectively focused in the motor gap. It sounds cleaner. Rob at Coherent Source Service could tell you if and/or how to upgrade if needed or wanted. Historical note: The CS2.3 sported the first iteration of the passively coupled coax driver which was then applied to the PCS. A few years later it wad further advanced along with advancements to the woofer which became the drivers for the CS2.4. |
Folks, there are a couple of sets of CS1.5s listed on FB in MD and NY. Also a set of white CS2.4s in VA priced at $1200... I recently picked up a set of CS2.3s in Nashville for 1/3 of what they should have sold at for the shape they are in off FB. Numbers 3625 & 3626, I'd call them more of a younger brother to my CS3.6s. |