Thiel Owners
devinplombier - we did explore low level crossovers. Net result is that we knew our niche which was all analogue and purist. Other folks have done versions of what you suggest. We always looked at overall cost effectiveness and separate amps, cables, etc. are not cost effective solutions, in our opinion. Also, the time of the CS5 development was 1988 - early and crude digital performance.Of additional interest may be that the level of control needed for net resultant 6dB/octave slopes over approximately 7 octaves is far from trivial, even with digital modeling. We committed to minimum phase x time aligned performance with the 1978 model 03 and never looked back. Note that one would need to model, in addition to the driver roll-off slopes, the various reactive circuits to cancel resonances as well as the impedance correction shunts to maintain Thiel's resistive (non-reactive) load profiles. Most folks are very surprised how difficult that is with off-the shelf digital filters. The approach we were intrigued by is low-level, active analog circuits before the power amps. In fact one of our first, pre model 01, trial products in 1975 was just such a speaker with 3 built to order amps and custom active crossovers in a 10" 3-way in a large bookshelf format. That product was unfeasible for a new company in a farmhouse. The technical aspects were manageable and indeed prototypes were impressive. But we lacked the stuff for market education and penetration. Indeed, powered speakers never became very popular. To your question: we envisioned a lot. Line sources, spherical globes, di and bi poles. Active equalization was our first market entry and contained enough uniqueness to create more demand than we could meet for the next 30+ years. Cheers, TT
|
This is fascinating. A history lesson, a reflection on the consequences of decision-making, and a deep repository of product information all in one.
My immediate thought reading this - and please forgive me if it sounds in any way sacrilegious as this is certainly not my intent - would be to yank out the passive crossover, amplify each of the five channels individually, and control the amplifiers via a 10-way active crossover, DSP-enabled speaker management unit, which in addition to crossover duties would allow for precise delay adjustment for each driver / driver pair, and room correction of course. Was anything like this ever envisioned?
|
duramax - I'll be happy to ruminate on the CS5 baffle. The CS5 followed our 1987 CS3.5 which was a runaway hit, and our most expensive product to date at $2450/pair. Times were good, the market was hot and many manufacturers were presenting $20,000 statement speakers. Jim was extremely uncomfortable presenting anything over $5000/pair. So the CS5 actually represents quite an internal struggle. Contrary to statements that the CS5 was a 'cost no object' design, it actually carried compromises to keep its sell price well below $10K for a design with a natural price around $15K. Let's talk about the baffle as an example. The CS3.5 had a machined 2" MDF baffle with braces. We also fastened the drivers with 2" screws through the entire baffle thickness into hardened pilot holes to best distribute reactive loads. An equivalent baffle for the CS5 would have been 4" thick and still fall short on impulse integrity, and add significant size to the enclosure. To develop a relatively thin-wall baffle with significantly higher stiffness and hardness, I engaged a local marble shop (sinks and bathtubs) to make samples from shop-built molds. By using 3 marble grits we reduced the polyester binder resin to half of typical and increased the stiffness by nearly double while nearly eliminating ringing. That baffle was (I think) about 20mm (3/4+") thick providing considerable internal enclosure volume. We kept the overall size of the CS5 to no larger than an average woman. Jim invented a bass alignment that paralleled two subwoofers with a full range woofer such that all three were producing low bass at a declining impedance to draw additional power, but in a range that rarely has much musical content. It works and I hoped to apply the concept to further products, but we changed course to reflex bass due to its far lower cost and problems. Riffing on the baffle: we designed the cabinet around the shrink-factor of that 'dry' triple grit baffle pour. We also developed a dye process for the marble so we could use a clear gel-coat showing off the marble grain. A next-generation concept (we always looked well ahead) enhanced the triple-grit concept to include granite, basalt and marble for even lower resin content, higher stiffness, greater internal damping and a more stunning look. But from a more conservative viewpoint, Jim and Kathy re-budgeted the CS5 at $9300 retail, so we had to lose the dry triple-grit x clear nicesity. The 'normal' pour gave the baffle more shrinkage and the cabinet dimensions shrank a little for it to work. Somewhere around the first 50 pair of CS5s had black gelcoat polished directly off the mold. But mold maintenance had also been deleted from the budget and all the rest of the 500 pair model run were cast with a primer gelcoat and sprayed in-house with emron (aircraft epoxy). My production records showed that those 'budget' baffles cost considerably more than the original, superior baffles would have. Such things happen when non-manufacturing executives step in. As was our habit, we accumulated ideas for the CS5.2, which never came to be. The home theatre market was steam-rolling much of the esoteric high-performance marketplace. Jim wanted to go where he could design / develop more products faster, which was not a CS5.2. To a similar point, the sealed bass with its natural 12dB/octave in-phase and time aligned output was jettisoned for reflex bass in future products more or less because everyone else was getting away with it. That's a discussion for a different day. Another point is that Jim wanted the CS5 baffle to follow the tilted flat plane of our other products. That necessitated electronic bucket-brigade delay on the upper and lower midrange drivers accounting for nearly half the component count in that huge crossover. Those coils and caps are all in the signal-feed path, which creates most of the sonic reticence experienced in the CS5. Now, close your eyes and imagine an arc-plane baffle that eliminates that electronic delay in favor of proper physical driver placement. Can anyone visualize a CS5.2? As it stands, the cast marble baffle of the CS5 is enormously effective and beautiful. That product is a testament to a time when people of fairly ordinary circumstance could afford a product that still holds its own 35 years on.
|
devinplombierThats a good room for the CS 5i. I'm not sure what taps they used but the salesman seemed to be knowledgeable. Jafant Well, the man himself designed the room. When Tom and company come for an extensive audition I will tell more about the room as it is very unique in it's design. I will say this, at the listening chairs you only hear the wave from the drivers and no side wall/floor/ceiling reflections. No dampening in these areas as we wanted live acoustics and notb dead harmonics. The room is so well designed we did not even need a wool rug on Pz floors between the speakers and the listener. We tried and within 10 minutes we removed it. We were amazed that no rug was needed. I will get photos up soon. Any members in the NC area are welcome to stop by and hear the big Thiels.
|
tomthiel Thank You for the information on models CS5 and CS5i loudspeakers. A nice Thiel history lesson as well. Although I have not heard big Apogee loudspeakers, I can comment on model Slant 8. The Slant 8 and Thiel CS 2.4 are very close in presentation and sound. In a shoot out, the CS 2.4 wins as the speaker has better Bass output via its passive radiator. Both speakers exhibit excellent mid and upper range frequencies.
Happy Listening! |
duramax747 My room is approx 32x16 with a 12’ listening triangle. My speakers are positioned halfway along the long walls, so about 15’ from the front wall. Re your Nashville auditions, I would hazard a guess that someone at the first shop mistakenly wired the Thiels to the 8 ohm taps of the McIntoshs. and tomthiel I agree 100% with the importance of adequate amplification. I got my Classé monoblocks to drive my Infinity RS-II, themselves interim speakers to tide me over until I get my "perfect" ones (the RS-II are great speakers btw and, despite the fact that I’ve probably spent more time so far working on them than listening to them, I’m growing quite fond of them). I am prepared to sell the Classés and get the amps to match whatever speakers I get eventually. jafant Thank you for the tip regarding the 3 CS5i in Florida. I would consider buying speakers online from a well regarded seller, though I would much prefer to buy locally here in the Pacific Northwest so that I can audition prior to purchase. I also want to say what a great source of high quality information this thread is! Thank you for creating and moderating it.
|
devinplombierI don't know much about the Apogee line across the board. There are other high-end brands and models - Wilson Watts come to mind - that are have treacherously abrupt impedance swings with sub-1 ohm bottoms . . . and advertising that claims them easily driven. Thiel speakers present extremely resistive, non-reactive loads. But since their impedance is (too) low across the board, many amps just can't deliver the juice to drive them well. Duramax's advice is spot on. Listen to demanding material at high volume and assess the enjoyment / naturalness of your response. I find it less than productive to try to analyze and describe the nature of the failure(s) because there are so many interacting factors and such academic understanding isn't the goal. Finding worthy ancillary equipment is your goal. |
devinplombierWhat size listening room do you have? Ceilings? I'll share a story with you. in 2001-2002 I went to Nashville to Nichals to audition the CS 7.2. They had them mated with McIntosh Killowatt amps. The salesman was conservative with the volume. I gave him a CD I brought and asked for the remote. Once track was playing I hit the volume so it was playing at a decent volume around 92-95db. About 30 seconds in the red light started flashing on the McIntosh amps as they were clipping. I politely thanked the saleman for his time and left. From this dealer I went straight to Thiel in Lexington. I listened to the same Cs 7.2 but this time with Krell FPB 700 CX amp.It was a completely different sounding speaker. Lesson, the amps are crucial with the big Thiels. My reason to push the speakers and get currentt through them is to know the amp is up to the task and if I have enough dynamic headroom to handle transient peaks.
|
Sonic malaise, what a great phrase :) Some Apogees (Scintillas?) were basically one-ohm loads with dips down to .5 ohm if I recall. It sounds like CS-5 are difficult to drive in the low frequencies. Are they bi-ampable? What amps did the Thiel factory use? |
devinplombierIf you have the space and amps then the CS5i will be a great purchase. I only clipped the amp on certain tracks that was bass heavy. I was testing my room boundaries so I was playing at a higher db than normal but still not extreme. I was using the Pass XA 200.5 on CS 5i . With the 7.2 the XA 200.5 drives that speaker wherever they may want to go. Unfortunately your Classé monoblocks will not be sufficient. They will sound constricted like a horse blanket was draped over them. From my experience, the Big Krell FPB series is the way to go with the CS 5i. They come up now and then that have been recapped with service papers. These are the mono amps you want to grab. You will not hear what the CS5i are capable without amps with dynamic head room that push lots of current. I'm speaking from experience once you hear the bottom end of the CS5i there is no going back. It is effortless in the lower register. Not saying the mids/highs are not pleasant. I signal the bass out as there are not many speakers that can go this low and to have the definition the CS5i have. Tom told me he believed, after almost 40 years of being introduced to the marketplace, there is not a sealed speaker cabinet that goes lower than the CS5i. I've been to a few audio sows these past few months, the last was Capitalfest, and there isnt a speaker under 60k Ive heard that I think could replace the CS 5i and I could happily live with. When Tom and Thiel Renaissance are underway, and the CS5i comes up for revisions that will be a great day. I have two pair. Authentic Brazilian Rosewood which the wood cost more than what the speakers sell for, and black walnut. The front baffles are incredible. Speaker over 100k do not have the quality and performance of the CS5i baffles. Maybe Tom can jump in and share his insight. Recently I had two well seasoned members come over for a listen on separate occasions. I played the tracks they wanted to hear first so they had their baseline. Going through a selected playlist I complied of 6-7 tacks i watched them with a confused look on their faces, No words exchanged until the audition was over regarding what they heard. When the audition concluded the adjectives that were used by both listeners on different occasions were siimilar. Skipping the audiophile jargon both said it felt like they were in the crowd for a live performance. Thats a mic drop moment as anything else committed doesnt hold weight.
|
I keep keeping an eye out for a nice pair of CS5i, so maybe someday I'll have to deal with the question of what to drive them with. I have Classé monoblocks that are 200w into 8 ohms and 400w into 4 ohms. I'm hoping they might be up to the task, and I'm curious - which Pass monoblocks clipped? Also which amps worked best in your experience? Thanks! |
lars888888The CS5i take significant amps to power them and wake them up.I clip Pass Mono amps with the CS5i but not the CS7.2. The larger Thiel's need more effort to set up and the right room. I've heard people criticize Thiel's for sounding bright. This is the design of the speaker working against a poor room. They are incredibly engaging speakers when dialed in. Your 2.4 are far more forgiving than their siblings. If you can get a Pure Class A amp with plenty of current you will be rewarded. i will see if i can upload a few photos when i get back from holiday.
|
ars888888
How tall are the ceilings? What part of the country are you in as you can stop by to hear what set up I have. Im in NC |
lars888888 The top end of the CS5i needs a little more sparkle but Tom Thiel is aware of this and has a solution. Now tis is in contrast to the CS 7.2. Comparing the CS5i to CS 2.4 you will not feel your missing/giving up anything even though the coaxial driver in 2.4 is a few generations after the CS5i tweeter. I switch out Thiels as I feel. I keep the CS2.4 for smaller rooms. The current room is larger for the CS6, CS7.2, CS5i. I've since switched out the CS5i with the CS7.2. I use differnt amps as the CS5i needs more power than the CS7.2. I cannot stress this enough. I use Pass monos x600.5 for CS5i and Pass XA 200.5 for CS 7.2.
|
Thanks for your insights! How does the top end compare? I’ve been trying out different amps lately. Currently I’m using Bel Canto ref1000 monoblocks, but I’m considering replacing them as they sound just a tad thin when it comes to vocals. Beautiful instrument separation though. My 2.4s are black, the 5is have a wood finish, the ad doesn’t say what wood. Also, if you don’t mind me asking: what made you keep both speakers? |
lars888888
What finish are your CS 2.4 and what amps are you using? What finish are the CS5i near you that you can purchase? |
lars888888The CS 2.4 is easier to drive by far and easier to set up and impliment into your room. They are the sweet spot of the Thiel line up. The CS5i need more attentiion to set up and require big power to drive with authority. They are big speakers. The bass is effortless regardless of how low you go. I have both and do not remember the last time I listened to the CS2.4. |
guy48065 Welcome! Good to see you here as well. Nice score on those CS7 loudspeakers. We have a few fans/owners of models CS7/CS 7.2 on The Panel. Stay tuned until one of our experts chimes in to address your query. I look forward in reading more about your Musical tastes and System.
Happy Listening! |
Does anyone have any insights on how the 2.4 compares to the 5i? I am currently using the 2.4, but a pair of 5i popped up close to me and the opportunity to own a top-of-the-line-model is hard to resist. They are a bit older than the 2.4 though and the 2.4 gets very high praise, which makes me wonder how their performance compares. |
May I join the club? I recently brought home a pair of CS7 speakers and have been soaking in audio nirvana since. Big imposing speakers much too large for my room (temporary), yet they completely disappear when the music starts. And the bass...OMG. Just one thing... Does a manual exist for this speaker? The Internet is saturated with literature on the 7.2, but I'm finding nothing on the 7. |
I'll vouch for the 1.2 as being the first second-generation Thiel speaker. It preceded the CS5 and as such was the working trial for our first copper motor shunts, and aluminum dome tweeter. This was the first product to benefit from our investment in Finite Element Analysis. And it shows. The CS1.2 is one sweet speaker as is, plus it lends itself very well to XO component upgrades. |
@pablohoney - north east florida |
Yep - those 48 strands work out to 25awg good to 85kHz saturation / 2 for layup loss. All good except. My quibble is that a tweeter works around 5 watts for negligible current demand. Meanwhile that entire conductive mass must be charged and discharged at every cycle. A single pair of 25awg per leg would allow simple helical layup, carry the required current and produce greater, audible immediacy. You could read that immediacy as a shorter up-ramp of the onset transient with a cleaner initial onset and peak reversal. You're 'one great voice' is a good visual. My mantra is 'vivid solidity'. You know it when you hear it. The dozens of cables I've tested all sacrificed that vivid solidity enough that I felt compelled to take Thiel's original solution to the next level. Obviously that's a different place than the vast majority of brands have gone. Indeed some Thiel upgraders have gone to various stranded solutions and liked the outcome. I prefer and am perpetuating Thiel's pursuit. |
Tom Based on what I vision a solid core wire would be more coherent than a stranded cable. A solid core will have 1 single path vs a multitude of paths of many fine wires as a group..resulting in group delay? I sold and owned Dunlavy speakers. He had his own wire that he used and appeared to be multi strand like and offset like twin lead antenna wire. Of course Dunlavy had patents on antenna design that were used in the military. Again you make me think of the 48 strand 8 gauge Litz.inductors used on my ribbon Tweeter. Said to have a bandwidth of nearly 40k. Other styles are said to have much lower bandwidth which may be fine for the frequency range of any given woofer or midrange. But the counter of that is any wire touching another insulated wire wound or twisted in any geometry has to interact with the intimate wire next to it I try to use the same group type of everything thing to maintain symmetry of sound and coherence..such as wire caps and inductors. Nice to hear a choir to speak with one great voice. That's the goal for me and most others who visit here. TomD
|
