tomthiel
AudiogoN classified section is where the Player is offered.
Happy Listening!
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
After nearly 2 weeks of heavy play with the new soft dome tweeters from Rob at CSS, the brightness is totally resolved! Amazing! These are definitely an upgrade over 26-year-old aluminum dome tweeters. @vair68robert- Thank you for the advice about soldering to the speaker connection. To reduce heating up the wire going to the voice coil, I applied alligator clamps on either side of the solder as heat sinks. |
I received the soft dome tweeters, installed them in the 3.6s and listened throughout the weekend. Early on, they were fatiguing with increased sibilance, but seem to be approaching the original sound either from mechanical break-in or psychoacoustical break-in. Vocals, especially female seem to be moved a little forward. I expect with more play time, these 3.6s will continue to reside in my main system. Rob Gillum agrees they need break-in. |
jonandfamily - we look forward to your report. Here's some additional back-story about that soft dome. We developed that UltraTweeter for the CS5 in 1988. It had all of Jim's advanced techniques, and exceeded our expectations. The CS5 had woven lower Kevlar drivers, and if an appropriate soft upper midrange driver had been found, we would not have gone to aluminum. However, the MB Quart 2" aluminum dome did the job better than anything else, and we didn't have time to develop our own driver for that use. Market pressure. The aluminum tweeter had more predictable response particulars and the metal domes dissipated heat better. That's where we went. When trickling that tweeter down to the CS2.2 we reconsidered the fiber dome to mate with the pulp midrange. Jim went with the CS5 tweeter and gradually migrated to all aluminum diaphragms rather than all Kevlar / fiber / etc. So, I consider that soft dome tweeter as native - it was co-developed with the hard dome and should be very good, with possibly some advantages. The only one I've ever heard was in comparative evaluation during 2.2 development around 1989. I'll be getting a pair for comparative measurements and listening tests. As a general caution, heat dissipation is a big deal. The soft dome don't be a heat dissipator like the aluminum dome is. Don't over-drive it. Keep us posted.
|
@TomThiel The soft dome tweeter rebuilds are shipping back to me now. I asked Rob about his impressions and measurements and this is the limited reply: "I think you will find that the soft dome is compatible. I have sold around 30 of these units and have had no complaints. The soft dome does not measure as well as the aluminum dome, but close." I will give an update after installing in my CS3.6s. In the meantime, I have been quite surprised after properly placing and positioning my CS1.2s into the main system. Most of the music information above 52Hz is all there with very respectable imaging. |
It's no accident that the 1.5 hung out on Stereophile's Class A (limited bass) ranking for 5 or so years. I used it for the past 7 years at our small village live performance venue to startlingly good results and reviews. I used it with a Thiel SS1 and Thiel's Passive OX set for the 1.6 (very similar bass parameters.) I paired it with a Prima Luna, which is a nice sonic match. Plus the 1.5 is in my upgrade sites. It's quite a little honey. |
Thanks for the replies. To Unsound, I I just placed these 1.5s back in after a 6 year break. In 2016 both tweeters blew. I was using a vintage Dyneco amp and just turned it up too high. I decided to place on the side and replace with Tekton Lore. Very different sound. I was recently had the tweeters rebuilt and although there is less bass than the Lores the 1.5s have a much more pleasing midrange. I saw a pair of 2.7s for sale on Ebay for a good price but they have a 100 watt minimum amp requirement. I'm runningba Prima Luna Dialougue HP at 70 watts. So that's why I'm considering subwoofers. |
fsgattuso
Welcome! Good to see you today. REL is a Sonic match for your 1.5 speakers. A cross over point is 80Hz. Between speaker and subwoofer. As above, consider implementing 2 subs and measure the main drop off frequency. I look forward in reading more about your Musical taste and system. I enjoyed reading your CD player thread as well.
Happy Listening! |
The proper place to cross over an added subwoofer (and I've owned a bunch of Rels (over 20 years) is first to measure where the mains drop off in your room. Bass frequencies sum. So if your mains and sub are playing the same frequencies you'll often end up with a bass bump. So you'll want to set the crossover just below where your mains drop off. Measuring does not have to be difficult or expensive. If you have a smartphone, Studio Six Digital has apps, both ones that cost money and free ones (including an RTA). Then you'll need pink noise and it can be downloaded (or bought). There are free downloads. Lastly, you'll need a mic for the smartphone. Parts Express sell the Dayton Audio IMM-6 mic (it used to be cheaper - think it is around $22). The mic comes with a custom calibration file that you download after you get it. If you have a lapton and prefer to use REW (Room EQ Wizard, which is free) or another program, Parts Express sell a UMM-6 USB mic. It is more money but it depends on you preferences. |
@fsgattuso, While I typically suggest going low at the cross-over point to subwoofers; with the CS 1.5’s I think you’ll need to go higher to reduce strain on the woofers. Perhaps to 65-70 Hz. BTW, I strongly suggest going with at least 2 subs rather than just 1, even if the two are both smaller than the one.… …Or, just sell the 1.5’s and move on to bigger Thiels. |
Does anyone have experience matching a subwoofer to 1.5s? They get down to 42hz but I now have them in a large room so missing some bass. I removed the grill recently and saw the 6.5 inch woofer working so hard it looked like it was going to bounce out of the cabinet so I thought crossing over above 42 would make sense to take some strain off the small woofer. I've read about the Thiel subs but they are hard to find and expensive. I've spoken to REL and they recommended the T7, a pair even. I'm concerned about timing in matching with Thiel but I've read articles that say subs can easily integrate if set up correctly and there are videos for this. All thoughts and experiences are welcome and appreciated. |
In the eventual realm, I am working with ScanSpeak (Vifa) on a 'new' tweeter in that motor frame. My target diaphragm has the potential of greater specific stiffness than aluminum without the ringing and without the high expense of carbon. Work in progress. For now, that soft dome (I don't know how soft) was engineered to fit that motor and alleged to be plug-in compatible. Jon, see if Rob can make a frequency sweep for you on both driver types so we can compare and contrast.
|
Thank You Tom There is no need to defend Thiel , I purchased these speakers based on the extremely positive reviews and the overwhelming enthusiastic support from individual owners . I can say that when New Thiel was bankrupt and selling off stock that they put 9 CS2.7 pairs for sale on e-Bay , along with 6 or 9 CS1.7's and the one I wish I could have afforded a CS3.7 that I was told that they had it as a museum piece . Based on my experience I tend to believe that the speakers sold on e-Bay were probably thrown together from parts laying around by an non-technician since one of the resistors was the totally wrong value. I got a bargain , the only way I could have afforded a new pair of Thiel speakers ( even with all the issues I discovered ) Luckily I was able to correct and still at the same time upgrade for a lot less than even the price used speakers at that time but unfortunately there are a few pairs out there that might not live up to Thiel standards .
|
@vair68robert - what a mess. It sounds like Nashville Thiel may not have had final product testing, because your value drifts would have failed your finished speakers. We took quality assurance very seriously. There are many approaches - our methods were always changing - with lots of thought and care. The 1980s saw the advent of ISO-9000 where manufacturers processes were certified rather than their final testing. We bought from suppliers with essentially the approaches that became codified in ISO9001. In that environment, incoming testing is not necessary. Every part can be assumed to be correct. The flip side is that if any single part flunks at any point in process, then the entire batch is quarantined, the problem is investigated, solved and re-documented. We co-developed our implementation with Vifa (and their group of co-producers) to good success. Please permit me a story, an important, meaningful story that helped form Thiel Audio's identity. Consider the CS3 woofer. It was our first real foray into partnered product development. That woofer was a big leap ahead, especially with the copper shorting rings and field-focusing top plate geometry. It also pushed the envelope of what a woofer was expected to do: perform well and consistently to 10kHz. That long, even high-end roll-off depended on tight control of many factors including viscosity of the bobbin / cone glueline. We spent more than two years working on that woofer with Vifa. Perhaps because there had been so many iterations (?10+?), and perhaps because we had developed so much mutual respect, perhaps a dash of time / annual cycle pressure . . . the first production run of woofers had an anomaly that missed all of us. Its upper range, perhaps 4-8kHz had too much energy. 'Normally' a woofer's response in that range is irrelevant; but with Thiel's first order rollout, it mattered. Good lessons were learned that paid strong dividends over the following decades. The root cause turned out to be a change of adhesive caused by the Danish government outlawing epoxies for health concerns. The replacement 'equivalent' glue acted differently at operating temperature than the prior well-understood epoxy. The new glue eventually also failed in the field for our first (possibly only) recall. That 'problem' clarified our MO for customer service. We replaced every one of the woofers at no charge and our dealers magnanimously swapped them out at no charge to us! To make lemonade from the lemons, we provided a record (yes, vinyl) to each customer as consolation for their trouble. The record was Michael Hedges 'Aerial Boundaries', which was both musically and technically masterful. That situation became legendary and performative - defining our image both internally and in the marketplace. Kathy Gornik gets much of that credit. When I first heard of your wildly out of spec components, I was dumbfounded. As the particulars came to light it made some sense. New Thiel was not the same company with the same values of product integrity and customer satisfaction. I wonder how many more 2.7s are out there from New Thiel.
|
HELP! I need advise. I'm nervous. One of the tweeters went out on my 26 year old CS3.6s (SN# 4789,4790 produced 5/22/96). Amazingly, this is the first problem with these. This is Rob Gillum's response: "Sounds like the lead wires on the tweeter moving system have failed. They will need to be rebuilt as a soft dome. It will require you to send both tweeters for rebuilding and matching. The tweeter rebuilds are $200 each, plus shipping. As well as the tweeter rebuilding the waveguide or tweeter protector has to be removed for clearance to the new soft dome." I trust Rob but I'm concerned. Following this thread since the beginning, I know how the the crossover and drivers are meticulously tuned. Does anyone here have experience with this tweeter rebuild?
|
" Blue Printed " As a DIYer I can tell you that it is impossible for me to "blue print " my crossover boards , but I can and have been able to " balance " them . To truly blue print a board one must have a box full of each component in order to find components that are the exact values as the schematics , this is what Jim did when he personally checked, measured and approved review samples . But " balanced " is something that I believe that every Thiel speaker from Lexington is , that is that a 2 ohm resistor might measure 2.1 ohms so finding another one for the other board you'll be balanced same goes for a capacitors values , as long as all the values are within a tolerance set by Thiels quality control . I'm bring this up because after removing the resistors and capacitors I measured them and discovered resistors that were more than 5% tolerance and electrolytic capacitors that up to 30% out of tolerance ! But since My speakers came from Tennessee and had been put together or repaired there I won't say that this is typical but I was surprised to have measured such differences in the resistors that are used in all Thiel speakers and very disappointed in the electrolytic caps that I took out and then have the same issue with the new replacements ! I purchased a different manufacturer and received caps that were closer to being within tolerance at least they were the same values , So while none of the new components were exact schematic values they were almost exact match pairs thus balanced L & R crossovers . DIYing is not something that is easy but in my case it turned out to be extremely rewarding because now with upgraded components I know these sound better than stock as well as fixing the FrankenThiel lack of quality crossovers that " New Thiel Audio " sold me . |
Hey prof - thanks for the Art Dudley reference. Time marches on. Even though we kept arm's length from our reviewers, I remember them all fondly. Critical review was a crucially important part of Thiel's very existence. Art Dudley, Wes Phillips and many others helped shape the industry and the companies in it via their thoughtful, informed appreciation and criticism. Thiel's cabinets were a monumental undertaking - one that could not be justified except that we wanted to produce functional objects worthy of our intended customers' livng rooms. (And I got to travel extensively establishing our veneer supply network.) No complaints. |
Seems even (the late) Art Dudley noticed the cabinetry skill in Thiel speakers. I was just reading his review of the Volti Audio Vittoria speakers in which Art stated:
Way back in the late 90’s the CS6 were the first "real" pair of Thiels I had in the house and I never tired of looking at the quality of the build and cabinetry. It was magnificent and put lots of other speakers to shame. |
duramax747 - good score! My forensic observation reveals that crossover production for various models was taken to China/FST and that early FST crossovers had weaknesses and improved over time. However, it seems that FST XOs used MPT/polyester caps where Thiel had always used (superior) MPP/polypropylene. Additionally, we know that Jim personally checked, measured and approved review samples. So, your pair is what a hot-rodder would call 'blue printed' - exactly as intended. |
jazzman7, The review you referenced with the CS2.4SE I own that very pair used for that review. There were to few reviews pertaining to Thiel speakers. Getting a very good condition pair and performing some of the upgrades mentioned by Tom would allow them to compete with modern spekers costing you five times or more your purchase price for the Thiels. |
Tom Thiel, thanks for the reply. I wish I could locally find a stock pair the way they were intended to be… My gut was telling me to pass on these as they could be less than a shadow of what they were intended to be but I’ve been watching this particular pair for several months. Thanks again for the reply. Andrew |
dmac67 - regarding those 3.6sAs you probably know, Thiel products were engineered down to the gnat hair scale. The drivers were massaged by their crossover circuitry for physical roll-in and roll-out of 6dB/octave with the midrange controlled over 7 octaves. The drivers by the time we passed 1980 were custom designed with many innovations to reduce distortion and generally perform better than we could buy on the open market. The 3.6 midrange incorporated our patented double cone with a deep straight back cone and a shallow flared front cone for internal damping, higher stiffness to mass ratio, a top end approaching 20kHz, etc. etc. Any off the shelf driver will be at best a thin approximation. Any differences from the Thiele/Small parameters of the stock driver will miss the XO targets to some unknown degree. Regarding his ’redesigned crossover’, we don’t know the level of change and/or skill involved matching the new driver to the woofer and tweeter. Regarding the tweeter as ’better than aluminum’ Some folks prefer each; Jim chose the aluminum due to its greater consistency and higher frequency breakup mode which he could choose not to notch-filter (the high-Q filter can be heard.) Jim and Birger Jorgensen at Vifa together co-engineered that fiber dome in parallel with the aluminum one. It is a drop-in replacement (its low end rolls out same as the aluminum one.) The ’sound’ is somewhat mellower - some prefer it; but its ’sound’ is not as crisp and articulate as Jim’s products. If I were looking at that Morado pair, I would gather some power-handling information on the new midrange. Our Vifa P11-MH01-04 midrange handled around 50 watts RMS (from memory), which is a high bar. First order x 7 octaves is a tall order. Let us know how you navigate the waters. |