jafant,
I agree with Tom Thiel. I would not make any judgments about the source of Cardas copper based only on rumors. Angela Cardas states that their copper is mined in New Mexico. At this point, I have no reason to question that.
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
jafant - Cardas makes heavy claims for its particular American copper mine source. I would suspend judgement based on rumors. We don't know what we don't know. I have gotten more education around wire than I ever thought possible. Verifying claims is part of that education. Regarding the ongoing discussion around integrated amplification - there is plenty of reason to keep 'it' in one chassis, to avoid another set of cables and their terminations. |
tomthiel
Awesome! That your joint venture with Bill Thalmann is developing out well. His reputation as a businessman and Audio technician is impeccable. Great to have his presence on board. Yes, this newest incarnation of Cardas is not the same as previous generations. It is rumored that Cardas imports Copper from China for their designs. If true, this is an instant deal breaker for me. Too bad because my AYRE gear is voiced with Cardas wire. I simply do not believe that America has a copper shortage problem. Other than economic practices, I see no reason for these American Cable manufacturers dealing with China?
On a serious tip, We still have a few American Cable companies that continue to keep business practices “ in the family”. Rare in 2022 but true.
Happy Listening! |
@jafant No i’m into streaming only now with my Aqua LinQ and Formula DAC. Very happy with this combo. Just wanted to find a much more musical integrated than my Diablo 300 and i think i found it with the Vitus. |
jafant - I do love the R&D and do appreciate the support and interactions I get with you guys. I’m glad Rob is pleased and hope we get those Purity caps sometime soon. The new order seems to run on snail time. It is difficult and frustrating to be working against the current. But, progress is being made. The declarations here about Cardas Clear Beyond caused me to overcome my bias from earlier Cardas wire which I found to be warm and dark. I require neutrality and now have a sample of their 15.5 gauge internal hookup wire for comparison. Tests this week! In the general news department, Bill Thalmann of Music Technolgy in Virginia has finished upgrading my Classé DR6 and is working on the DR9s. He is also upgrading the CS3.5 equalizer which has been upgraded to best professional specs by Jim Williams of Audio Upgrades in California. I’m looking forward to visiting Bill to compare JT stock against JW, against BT upgrades and finalize that project. I will say that in my trials here, JW’s upgrade is a significant improvement over Jim’s (budget constrained) 1987 design. JW used a bigger transformer, regulated power supply, faster and quieter transistors and a couple more bypass caps. JT’s design had all styrene caps and metal film resistors which came through unchanged. JW’s upgrade has a more authoritative bottom end as well as a cleaner, more transparent upper midrange. The previous ’sparkle’ was an artifact. Progress, slowly but surely. |
tomthiel
Thank you for your undying passion in R&D. I realize that it must be tough to perform such duties without a dedicated Hot Rod Garage nor Studio. Bravo! We all are better off with your presence here. I enjoy reading about Thiel Audio via History lessons as well. Your mind is extremely sharp.
Happy Listening! |
CS2.7 upgrading update . A few months ago I had finished upgrading the woofer board and heard some improvement but nothing earth shattering , I am almost finished with the coaxial and the improvement is way beyond anything I would have thought possible . I kept things simple , replaced the resistors with Mills , upgraded the capacitors , bringing the electrolytic capacitors within and/or lower tolerance specs , making only one change suggested by Tom , replacing the 400uf capacitor with 4 100uf caps . What I discovered was that the electrolytic capacitors used on the shunt or negative side were out of tolerance , the 68uf cap used on both the tweeter and woofer were up to 20% over while the 330 and 220uf used on the mid was about 7% over . The 68uf caps were replaced by Mundorf caps that were about 3% over but replacing the 330 and 220uf caps was a bit of a problem . First I replaced them with ERSE " 5% " tolerance caps that turned out to be over 11% over ! I didn't even try to listen to them . Then I tried Jantzen " 5% ' caps , they were about 6% over . I listened to them for a while and was happy with hearing the improvement that the other upgrades made but it bugged me that Tom was telling me that Thiel's tolerance max was 5% and mostly within 3% , so after asking Tom's advise I went with a 300uf Jantzen cap that together with the 220 I was able to achieve a 2% over tolerance . I said almost finished because I am waiting for Clarity to release the PUR series capacitor , can it get any better ? Some say that the 1uf bypass cap is very influential so I'm hoping for a yes . Tom just mentioned that he is replacing the steel screws with brass , do it it does make a slight improvement , I also installed reinforced nylon screws on the coaxial speaker , as for the washers I had to grind down brass ones to fit using them on the woofer , I did see that McMaster Carr has some #8 washers as small as .375" OD but I think they might still be a little to large . I also discovered that the screws holding the boards inside the speaker were of ferrous metal and replaced them with brass . This project has not been easy but it is well worth it .
|
@oblgny , is the store Audio Den? I dont know any in L.I., JR Music World was my favorite when I worked in NYC. My uncle use to visit the audio shop in Smithtown, but this before 2000. There is someone selling a pair of Thiel 3.6. Just lugging those beast back at 100lbs each. NAD 375 is not a good match for them. Although go in their owm respective ways, NAD dynamics have a limited sound quality. Ive enjoyed NAD pushing bookshelf speakers.
The MX-1000 is 2ohm stable, if someome was closer in NY with Thiel 3.7 I would strongly consider. Some.say the Luxman590 works best wth soft dome tweeters.
|
@jafant Yes i did have the Audia Flight FLS10 on loan for a week but it just cannot compete against the Vitus 025 and the Audio Analogue Asbolute. The 2 latter ones are in a complete different league! |
webking185
Welcome! Good to see you today. The CS 3.7 is a wonderful loudspeaker. Both Luxman and Yamaha are Sonic matches. I believe that each amp doubles down from 8 to 4 Ohms. This is a strong indicator for performance. Keep me posted on your decision. I look forward in reading more about your a musical tastes and system plans.
Happy Listening! |
Hi guys, lately i've been auditioning 2 great integrated with my 3.7s the Audio Analogue Absolute and the Vitus SIA-025 Mk2. After several days of compare my pick is the Vitus, it is smoother and more liquid sounding than the Audio Analogue both in class A mode. My Cardas Clear Beyond cabling paired with the Vitus driving my 3.7s is spectacular and very engaging. I'm seriously considering this demo Vitus 025 unit and put my Diablo 300 on sale. |
@prof Bingo! The rings outside the driver facing towards us.
@webking185 I think it will be fine. However, I will look at other pairings that are rated 2 ohms stable as the 3.7 are quite a difficult load. |
That's an amazing setup you have! Love the Mac pairing! I would love to go in a McIntosh direction with my Thiels. Perhaps I could find older Mac gear that would work for me and be somewhat reasonable price wise. Any older - yet powerful enough - suggestions, anyone? I’m wondering if a MC-252 might be good. Down the rabbit hole I go… |
ydjames - the breakup you describe can be caused by various things. Among them could be lose voice coil turns or other non-design-related phenomena. Let’s rejoice that the new drivers fixed the problem. Last week I had a ’sound’ in a CS1.6 woofer similar to what you describe . I went looking for ’dirt’ in the voice coil gap, but instead found a steel washer resting on the ’top plate’. That little washer had fallen out of the driver mounting boss and stuck to the driver. It saturated and caused distortion in the magnetic flux field. In my case the ’fix’ was easy. Remove the washer and the distortion is gone. Follow-on is that I am replacing the steel threaded inserts in the driver basket and the steel mounting bolts with brass, and the washers with fiber. I expect to hear the cleanup of a far lower level of that same distortion. That hardware is only an inch or so distant from where that single washer caused audible distortion. Speakers can have lots of low-level anomalies and sub-optimal implementations. Some get identified and fixed or improved during development, some are worked out during future product iterations. Some still remain to be addressed. |
trickeydude See the link below for Tom’s reference on the Stereophile review. The 3.6 can perform well with a good lower powered amp but a big power amp will really open the speakers up. There are some good prices on used equipment but beware as anything substandard from the source onward toward the speakers. The 3.6 will expose any shortcomings in a system. I’ve also found poorly recorded or engineered music shows it’s lack of quality. Cabling can be an issue for some including myself. For power, interconnects, and speaker wire, silver conductor based cables can be very bright on the highs. Copper cabling helps with this and in my case using digital copper interconnects (110 Ohm resistance) softened the hard edges. I feel these are an excellent Jazz and Classical speaker that is good with rock to an extent. They will play loud yes but that isn’t this speakers forte. I have both my systems listed on the virtual page, the Anthem amp powered the 3.6s fine, but the McIntosh MC462 brought them to life. Good luck and enjoy your music!
|
@TomThiel Thanks Tom for your in depth reply. The more I look into this the clearer it becomes. I’m learning! 🤣 I was literally handed these speakers for nothing; a gift from the universe so to speak. I’ve read so many wonderful things about them so I guess I owe it to myself to figure out how best to utilize them. I’ll check back to report on my progress. Cheers! - Dave |
Hi @prof , I replaced the coaxes because one side exhibited break-up mode on the tweeter. Much later, I realised the break-up mode also affected the mid-range cone (male vocalists sounded like their voices broke up and sounded grainy).
The "new" version or Rob's version uses a black-coloured basket instead of a silver-coloured one. I checked in with Rob to see if he did some tweak or improvement over the previous coax. After all, I hear significant improvements over the previous coaxes.
He answered, "No updates or improvements to the coaxes".
Even today, I am hearing improvements as I clock more hours on the coaxial. I am enjoying the running-in process thoroughly. |
trickydude - I’m not apprised of brands and models, but can paint a basic picture that might be helpful. Bluntly stated, Jim Thiel’s designs had impedances that were too low, making them suitable for only robust amps rated to deliver power into a 2 ohm load. Big discussion as to pros and cons, etc. but that more thorough investigation requires study beyond this answer. There are two major aspects of speaker loads germane to your question: impedance magnitude and impedance reactivity. A: The 3.6 would properly be rated as a 3 ohm load. B: to its credit, it is an extremely resistive (non reactive) load. Amps love resistive loads, so if an amp can deliver the requisite power into 3 ohms, then it should work. See Stereophile’s measurements in its 3.6 review for reference. There is another set of issues. Mainstream mid-fi amps rarely delivered such power, at least not gracefully. Japanese designers invariably chose to enhance specifications (TIM, etc.) at the expense of sound quality. In today’s market, you would probably be best served by an American design rated or reputed for operation into low impedance loads. On the used market, there are suitable amps that sell for a fraction of their new prices. I’ll share some quite limited amp thoughts. At Thiel Audio we used Classé, Mark Levinson, Krell, and Conrad Johnson. Audio Research came and went, as did Classé, but they have models that work well. I still use my 1990 Classe DR6 preamp and a pair of DR9 power amps. I also have an Adcom GFA555 II which is adequate, but less than best of form. A friend has a PrimaLuna integrated which is an excellent sonic match, and an inexpensive candidate. The new Benchmark gear is magnificent at its price. There are lots of folks here with lots of relevant experience; but it’s all been covered and kicked around. I suggest you might skim this thread to see what surfaces. I recommend that you try what you have, making sure you keep the gain below audible distortion. Distortion melts drivers. Assuming the speakers have been tested and are running without problems, the key to progress is to assume the amp, rather than the speakers, are limiting your sound quality. This world has many interacting variables which are not easy to learn, teach or understand. With an open mind and some patience you have a speaker that can be very, very good. Happy Trails |
I'm glad to hear it went well. I have the 2.7s and a spare coax/bass/passive driver "just in case" that I purchased from Rob years ago. But I'm curious: Did you replace the coax because there was a problem with the old one? Or is there some sort of "new" version of the coax drivers for the 2.7s?
|
hollowaudio - congratulations on your CS2s. First off, have you contacted Rob Gillum at Coherent Source Service? He knows everything about maintaining Thiel speakers. He may have moving systems for your speakers and/or help you test the viability of what you have. Try that first and come back for more. |
Hey guys, I just was gifted a set of CS3.6 speakers from a neighbor who was cleaning out their garage and didn’t want them. But now I’m finding out I’ll probably have to pay thousands to get the proper power amp and pre-amp. I’ve been reading up on amps the past few days and I’m overwhelmed by the options. My current modest sound setup is a Sansui G7500, Boston Acoustic A70s and B&O Beogram 1700 turntable. All are hardly audiophile. Any friendly, cost-effective advice? Obviously I could sell the Thiels but I’ve heard such great things about them. Hmmm… |
Hi fellow Thiel owners,
Finally, with a help of a very good and close friend (who is the previous owner of the Thiel CS 2.7), we managed to replace the previous pair of coaxial drivers with the newer pair of coaxial drivers from Rob, Coherent Source.
At this point of posting, I had them running in with my music playlist for about 8 hours continuously now and at approximately -6 dB from my usual listening volume.
I am happy to share with you all that these newer pairs of coaxial drivers sing more lively, more unveiling, transparent, yet almost laser-focused imaging in a 3-dimensional soundstage. I cannot wait to hear how it sounds after clocking in more hours on these. |
Tom, I'm glad you've experiened Barkhausen noise - it is baffling on first encounter. Actually hearing effects from change of state electron spin is mind-boggling, until you grasp that the audio cortex can hear practically everything. My first exposure was in developing an electric pickup for acoustic instruments which sense geo-location of the string rather than acceleration or electromagnetic changes. We worked it out and the insights gained have remained, as yours have with you. Isn't audio a trip? |
Thanks, Tom Thiel, for your experienced and insightful response. I have heard the sounds of Barkhausen noise generated by the rapid change in magnetic fields. I know this firsthand in my use and experiments with magnetic materials, varying field strength and geometric shapes within prototypes of my products for acoustic instruments. I will take what I learned in close quarters about my devices for acoustic instruments and expand into this speaker project. Hope it is no deeper than a rabbit hole and less than a Minute Man Silo. Still learning after all these years. TomD
|
Tom D - welcome to the rabbit hole. Electrical and electromagnetic fields are a huge issue. In my opinion this issue deserved more attention than Jim gave it. As time went on, Jim's XO position moved farther from the drivers. Note the 3.7's location in a separate chamber in the bottom of the cabinet. In the development of 1978's 03, we mounted the XO on the cabinet bottom, as far from the woofer field as possible. The interactions are significant. My clearest memory was noting the difference between the breadboarded 3 dimensional rat's nest crossover hanging in space / compared against the conglomerated XO on a board in relative proximity to the woofer (and other drivers) as well as closer to each other. The aural congestion was significant. I had an aha similar to yours in my work on the CS2.2 a couple years ago using an EMF field meter which showed strong fields extending about 2' behind the woofer. I'm staying outboard when possible, and if not (such as a minimalist upgrade) it's going under or on the outside of the cabinet, in free air, far away from drivers. Among the issues are vibration, which can be controlled via shock mounting. Also, heat build-up changes circuit performance. And there are proximity effects, both between components and in relation to the drivers. Those aspects interact because the coils (especially) must be positioned not only in relation to each other, but in relation to the flux lines of the driver fields, which can be a bigger deal than between the XO parts themselves. MuMetal, etc. is quite technical and frequency and density related, generally requiring complete cages around components, which can exacerbate thermal considerations and reluctance interactions between the propagation fields in the coil wire. It's a jungle. I have found that physical distance and positioning geometry are more fertile avenues toward global solutions. Regarding your preference for the sound of unbound coils - be very careful. Motion can induce various interactions with all other elements. Stillness is the goal (IMHO). As a generalization, many kinds of 'distortion' can be seductively appealing; sorting it out is a hard, complex problem. Where I've settled is that coils on rubber feet are strapped to the board. The feet increase and equalize thermal radiation , while mechanical motion is minimized as well as audio vibration frequency decreased to where the coils seem to not be stimulated into motion. The position of coils can be optimized via listening to noise. The puzzle is hard because virtually all coils affect all others, and there are too many permutations to test (in a complex Jim Thiel crossover.) There is another aspect that is real, but beyond my understanding, but here goes. Wire, at least new wire, has directional sonic properties. But I've found no reliable way (except Cardas wire) to track the directionality of wire. However, these effects seem to diminish with play-in time. I have chosen to ignore wire direction because I'm using played-in wire, and I can't do anything about it when re-using Thiel coils. In addition to spatial attitude, that leaves feed vs load of the coil. I have demonstrated to my own satisfaction (but contrary to common opinion) that coils are best fed from their circumference and tapped at their core with attention paid to lead wire dressing. I also note that as time passed, Thiel's crossovers tended to migrate toward this (outer to inner) feed direction. Tom T.
|
Prof - I ran the painted driver experiment; and I’ll call it a success. I used Krylon ’Fusion’ because it claims ’5X the adhesion’ (of whatever?). Its solvent cocktail includes acetone, which makes a good scrub agent.Careful. I chose dark oiled bronze because it’s nearly black and so much more visually engaging than 'plain black'. I cut a cardboard mask, laid the speaker on its back and misted just enough paint to knock the aluminum down by perhaps 85%. First measurements were 1 hour later, which showed significant harm, especially in the mid bass and lower midrange with frequency erratica and time domain throbbing. After 4 hours it was much better and after 24 hours is hardly visible. The paint cure cycle is 48 hours. At 24 hours, the top octave rolls off perhaps an additional 1dB at 20k and there are some harmonic differences. Generally, the 3rd to 7th harmonics are smoothed out and 3 to 5dB lower. On balance I would say the lightly painted cone is superior to the bare aluminum one. It is plausible that a crossover tweak might get that top octave air back, since the CS1.6 has a notch filter at its oil-can resonance. Note: there is none of the typical resonant peak at 28k (etc.) When using my Earthworks QTC40 into a 96kHz interface. The high end of the 1.6 just keeps rolling off around 12dB / octave out to 50k. That’s very nice. I will experiment with a midrange driver when I get the 2.4s into the studio. I suggest leaving tweaters alone, at least until we do some real homework. If you paint cones, go easy. I certainly like the look better and it opens a door to using nylon window screen for a protective grille with far less resistance than Thiel’s polyester - plus a peek-a-boo allure. By the way, the 1.6 grille shows differences in two areas. In the deep bass from 20 to 50 the grille introduces time domain throbbing, although I can't hear it. The FuzzMeasure sweep goes full power from 1Hz to 48kHz. This grille seems quite transparent up to about 7500Hz where it gradually rolls off the top to about 1-2 Hz at 20k. I like the sound better with the grille. |
Tom Thiel, I have a new speaker rebuild and elected to place the crossover out board for final tuning. It will always be outboard. Components are mounted on a solid 1/2 inch poplar board and grounded to the floor via threaded 1.5 inch Audio Points.. Originally the 2 8gauge inductors were tied down to the board each with several zip ties. After listening for a couple of weeks I felt the sound was dynamically restrained and cut away the straps, so now the inductors only rest on the board under their own mass and physical size. Immediate improvement was heard in soundstage size, everything was much more dynamic and with much more acoustic air. These 2 small inductor values are physically large with a space of about 2.5 inches between them. They are placed 90 degrees to each other. I decided to move 1 another 2 inches from the other. Way different again in performance. I thought that placing the inductors apart and with 90 degrees of separation would eliminate any magnetic field inner play but that is not the case...So my thoughts and observations leads me to question. What are the magnetic actions and reactions when a crossover is placed inside a cabinet in proximity to a woofer magnet or powerful neo tweeter magnet and or the variable fields under power of confined inductors? Today I will be receiving 4 sections of mu metal to place around all of the inductors or a large portion of the facing circumference of each. If this case study of the magnetic field, external to the confines of a cabinet makes for an improvement then why wouldn't the same hold true for crossovers inside the box but even much more than those outboard? TomD |