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!
I just thought I would post since my current setup is sort of along the lines this thread took.
To qualify I do have some Thiel speakers, but the previous owner ran them with too weak an amp and now they only sound good at low volume, they are awaiting new tweeters.
To get to the gist of it, I am now using Von Schweikert Audio VR2 speakers, driven by Bryston PP120 amps. My Bryston preamp is currently sitting in its box with a label on it to go to Bryston for a repair, I attempted to go from my DAC, straight to amps, this was a bit, well, a lot too loud, so I bought a cheap passive pre off of ebay, It cost less than fifty dollars, so now my cd transport, and computer connect to my DAC which connects XLR to the pre, then six foot XLR to each mono block.
The sound is so to speak delicious, the best audio I have experienced in many years. Since my Ohm Walsh days anyway.
Good to see you here again. Thank You for reporting your experience with Mr. Rob Gillum at CSS. I look forward in reading more about your musical tastes and system.
Another confirmation for Rob Gillium and Coherent Source Service's job well done!
Quick turn around and quality work on some blown up CS3.6 mids. Going to have a set of tweeters redone and will install all at once. Post redo of the caps and resisters in essence I'll have new speakers, well excepting the woofers.
dsper - if you like the Thiel sound, a pair of CS.5s might work. They are a diminutive floor-standing 2-way which under your conditions might work well - Stereophile tested them at 89dB sensitivity. Thiel's flat impedance curve works to your advantage and I find them very easy to make sound quite good.
@dsper, Ah, it all makes so much more sense to me now. May I ask what your proposed layout will be, such as long or short wall, how far back or out into the room the speakers can be, how married are you to the c-j, and perhaps indelicately what’s your budget?
My wife inherited a property from her uncle so I need to stay within the boundaries of her decorating preferences. The room is 15 X 20 that WILL NOT have room treatments other than an area rug, drapes, and furniture over laminate floors.
I have a Conrad Johnson LP66S that puts out 50 WPC and am searching for appropriate speakers that will not overpower the room visually or sonically.
You make a good point about floor standers; and my wife seems to dislike the look of the stands more than the speakers that I have suggested.
@dsper, what you're asking for is really out of my wheelhouse. I don't much care for stand mounts. From my perspective they're wobbly units that take up just as much floorspace as floor standers with less bass output. I would seriously consider soffit mounted speakers with DSP, but alas my room isn't the right canvas for that. While I can fully appreciate the technical benefits of high sensitivity speakers, I've yet to hear any that I'd care to own. I prioritize system building first with budget, then room, then speakers, then amplification, etc., etc. I have hard time wrapping my head around choosing speakers for amps. As I've previously mentioned; I hear things that tube amps do well, but all in all ultimately all things considered I prefer ss.
Is this for an alternate system? I have difficulty imagining one would be satisfied with such a system if one were coming from properly set up and amplified Thiel CS 5i's in an appropriate room.
But that's me. YMMV. Good luck with your quest, I hope your find satisfaction.
If you scroll down the column on the far right, you can see the as tested voltage outputs. Keep in mind that is the as tested voltage, as you know some units offer adjustable voltage output. Also, as per the sight's lead tester the "SINAD" measurements that seem to carry so much weight become somewhat academic beyond 115 dB, as he claims that to be the threshold of human hearing in anechoic measuring, which is a much higher standard than one might hope to achieve in a typical listening room. Better measurements are not a bad thing and allow for a greater sample to sample margin of error. But at some point, it just becomes a game of specsmanship. Still one can see those good measurements don't necessarily have to be expensive, and that some more expensive units and some that have garnered good subjective reviews appear to be broken.
I don't think going balanced via XLR is likely to work for you. The outputs are typically too high. You might find that just attenuating down to the ML 23.5's overload threshold will reduce the volume setting to the point where anything lower than maximum capable volume will introduce bit stripping. While balanced certainly has its advantages, especially in pro settings where noisy environments with many overlapping long cables are at work. In a home setting, this is less critical. I think you'll find that going single ended via RCA straight to your amp will still lead to cleaner results than going balanced via XLR through an active preamp. Most users tend to use their active preamps almost as buffered brakes rather than accelerators. Nelson Pass once made an outboard passive/active pre that only engaged the active stage past a point (2:00?) on the volume knob, very few users reported ever getting to the active stage.
Thanks tomthiel, looks like XLR gives three levels of attenuation, while RCA is fixed. For my purposes, I'd be using XLR. Reading through forums, there are pros and cons for both the RME (pro version) and the DAC3. My head is thoroughly hurting from analysis paralysis, but I have to wait to get the tweeter addressed anyway, so I've got time. Good news is I think it's a can't lose decision, thanks again for the rec.
Read deeper re output voltage. I think it has 3 levels, setable via internal jumpers. Benchmark is very attuned to gain-staging. Their power amp has 3 input levels.
Thanks unsound, reading about not just the output V ->input V principle, but also reading up on the relationship between dBu and voltage (a link in the thread) seems so fundamental, it's odd how little the subject is brought up on the mainstream consumer level. Thanks for pushing me to learn more here, I'm looking forward to playing around with this.
Tomthiel, great suggestion on the Benchmark! I appreciate the purity of the B, but the HGC I think fits my needs a little more right now. Regardless, they all seem to have great reviews, lots of functionality, and no frills. Still reading up on it (ironically, output voltage is the one spec that I don't see listed!), but it's at the #1 spot right now for me.
coop_301 - Last year I spent considerable time selecting my front end. My particular bias is toward neutrality / honesty with stellar technical specs required and extra points for ubiquity in the pro record-making world. I landed on Benchmark. I chose their stand-alone DAC-B over their Hybrid Gain Control because separating the digital DAC from the all-analog preamp fits my needs better. You might enjoy adding it to your list.
While RME offers the very nice feature of adjustable voltage output from both single ended (RCA) and balanced (XLR) outputs, none of them conform to consumer industry standards. Regrettably this is all too common, making consumer system building that more challenging. On the other hand, this common practice might allow you to find a close to perfect match. This deviation while not ideal, might not necessarily disqualify the RME from consideration, but I'd recommend keeping your options open. With a 32 bit source, you should have a generous amount of wiggle room before bit stripping occurs. As such, given the choice, I would recommend going with a slightly higher rather than slightly lower voltage output. Please bear in mind that all these recommendations are restricted to the technical considerations (albeit, perhaps more critical for what your proposing, than might otherwise be the case). There are other considerations such as what sounds best to you! There is a plethora of digital sources out there, I recommend you use these technical considerations to pare down the options to a short list, and then choose what sounds best to you.
Thanks for the clarification unsound, I'm very curious to learn more about the bit stripping as that's new to me, will definitely read up on that. I've looked at a few DACs recently, and I've been making sure they do 32 bit per your suggestion (leading choice is the RME, also checking into the voltage on it as well).
@coop_301, After re-reading my last post, I realized that I failed to mention that the recommendation to use a DAC with internal volume control vs. an out board passive pre was predicated on using a DAC with extra available bits (such as the 32-bit chip equipped DACs alluded to). If one were to use a 16 or even 20-bit DAC (as is typical with most R2R DACS), analog volume attenuation (typically though not necessarily through an outboard passive pre) would probably be better to avoid bit stripping. That how-ever adds other considerations, especially with regard to interconnects as suggested by @tomthiel.
@unsound@vair68robert
Great insight you all are offering, your patience with the noob here is greatly appreciated! I have to agree that in this case, the pre amp seems like a superfluous addition, I think the DAC pre will work great for my purposes. Unsound, thanks for the real-world example about the voltage matching, I've seen references to that concept before on youtube that left me with some head scratching, but your example drove it home nicely.
219 pages...maybe we could throw some chapter markings in here or something!
@coop-301, @vair68robertoffers good advice. This is a subject that has garnered a lot of conversation. As your building your system presently, I'll try to give you the skinny. Please realize that this is somewhat incomplete.
First of all, if you have analog sources, you're probably better off with an active pre.
Ideally you'd have a digital source with a voltage output equal to your amps input voltage sensitivity for full output. Having less voltage output will negate getting all the clean power your amp is capable of producing. Having too much voltage output will increase the chance of bit stripping through volume attenuation. Having an equal voltage output/input will allow less fussy full range of the volume control.
It would be better to have a digital source with built in volume control than using an external passive pre. Having a digital source with extra bits available (such as with the now ubiquitous 32 bit chips) to handle the volume attenuation will negate the chances of bit stripping.
It is better to use low capacitance interconnects (more likely with shorter ones) between digital source and amplification.
With the ML 23.5 with its 2.25 V input sensitivity it's more likely that with most typical 2 V (for CD) - 2.2V (for HDCD) digital sources that the lower voltage output via single RCA outputs will better avoid excessive attenuation that could lead to bit stripping, but will reduce the full clean power output potential. With the typical 4V (for CD) - 4.4V (for HDCD) balanced XLR output you'll get greater noise rejection, full power output from your amp, but with the necessary volume attenuation required you'll increase the chances of bit stripping.
FYI, if I recall correctly the ML needs somewhat unique Camac connectors on the interconnects for RCA input.
Other considerations, most external DACs unlike many all-in-one players are incapable of playing SACDs natively. While there are now many affordable DACs that can equal or outperform units from the past, currently the cost of dedicated disc transports tends to be somewhat expensive. The best value might be in an all-in-one player that has digital inputs that can serve as a hub for additional digital sources such as a streamer.
The above is in reference to "ideals". One doesn't need to match everything exactly in order to achieve satisfactory results. There is some wiggle room, particularly when using the above-mentioned DACs with extra available bits. Such a system if carefully put together to be compatible can not only offer terrific value it can also offer perhaps the purest sounding one. Some, however prefer to add a bit of flavor to the mix. FWIW, IMHO those that want to add something to the mix might be better served with a high-quality equalizer. YMMV.
The preamp or no preamp , powered preamp or passive preamp conversation has been discused more than once on Audiogons forums .
There is no right or wrong answer , unless as Tom pointed out if you have long interconnects then you need a powered preamp .
Think of it this way , if you are only using a DAC that has a volume control then go directly to the amp , why spend money on a preamp and another set of interconnects ? Spend your money on Upgrading the interconnects from your DAC to the amp , just my opinion .
Thanks for the info, I never even knew about a passive pre amp until yesterday, I'm curious about it and given your experience will look more into it. Honestly I have no issue with using a DAC as the pre amp, just that you read reviews that gush over pre amps, and it makes you feel like "whelp, I guess without one I'll never achieve true audio nirvana". I guess part of the pre amp appeal to me is based around my fear of anything with a digital display as I could have an all-analog pre amp, and a simpler DAC, no touch screens or LCDs needed.
I'll look through this thread more in depth over the weekend to read more about the topic at hand, appreciate the heads up!
I use a passive pre-amp ( attenuator and input selector ) with an all tube phone preamp and CD player powered by a McCormack DNA-250 without the need for more gain from a powered preamp .
Your Mark Levinson amp has more than enough power to forgo a powered preamp , if you go back at least 40 pages back you'll read about another Thiel / Spectal digital only owner asking the same question .
The question is do you want any other features that preamps offer ?
To kick off 2022, I placed an order with Rob for a pair of 2.7 coaxial drivers. Now, I can't wait for it to arrive!
@thieliste oh boy, that sounds like a fun shootout that I would like to experience and be part of. I do think (maybe a little bias) that the Audionet will be a good match with Thiels.
Hope everyone had a great new year. So it took a few days but I'm now the proud owner of a pair of 3.6s being fed by a Mark Levinson 23.5:) The 3.6s will need a tweeter repaired which I'm waiting on Rob to get to back to me about, but they were a deal nonetheless and even with the issue, they sound great- very natural and room filling at the same time. I'll hold off any observations till the issue is resolved, but I wanted to ask your thoughts on skipping a pre amp and just using a DAC, since my inputs will be all digital for now. I'm considering the RME ADI2 or perhaps something simpler without all the features, is anyone out there skipping the preamp altogether and using the DAC alone? Can the pre amp really give me more? As some of you have pointed out, giving tubes a try would certainly be fun. I suspect some of the hi-fi preamps with digital inputs and balanced outs, etc. could end up out of my price range.
Side note- I still have the option to pick up the CS6s which I'm seriously considering, but one thing at a time and this made sense financially for me. Decisions decisions:) Thanks all!
That rollercoaster frequency response is not what tubes typically like to see.
Personally, I don’t much care for the B&W sound, though I once heard a pair of 802’s in a very unusual room powered by ss/tube hybrid Counterpoint amp making some beautiful work of a chorale performance. The demonstrator shut down the system after about 20 minutes, because he was afraid the amp might go up in flames.
@dsper, Some of the Meadowlark’s have similar design goals as the Thiel’s and are more accommodating of tubes. With that said, some of them used now irreplaceable drivers, and IMHO the Thiel’s are just better, Then again, while I can appreciate some of the charms of tubes, ultimately I prefer ss,
My life with my CS5i's continues. I made a major improvement in my sound with a new EVO B4B DAC. Added detail and musicality.
I just added a Don Sachs DS2 preamp that is not yet fully broken in. It makes the treble more clear and increases my width/depth of soundstage. It also has improved the live like quality - presence and sparkle.
My experience is the CS5i tweeters have been more work to make sound good than the bass. The more high quality detail I feed them, the better they like it.
That said, I am still itching to try a pair of more efficient speakers so I can run a tube amp. Unfortunately, I am not aware of any such speaker that is similar in sound to the Thiels. Any suggestions?
A week ago I sold my~ 10 yo SVS powered subs. While they added weight, they weren't high quality 2 channel subs. I didn't realize how much they set my sound back until they were gone, and I moved he speakers back ~ 2ft, now ~50" from the front wall.
Tonite, I finally got around to taking my Emerald Physics 3.4s off the Harbor Freight dollys which they've been on since I got them over a year ago. Each base is resting on 4 full spring Nobsounds. Quite an improvement in weight and bass fullness
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
