Thiel Owners

@thieliste, congratulations! You've had a rather interesting journey leading up to what should be a very nice system indeed. Well done. 

@thoft, the DR version is the predecessor to the slightly different, more recent "regular" non-DR designated follow up.

Well guys that's it my new system is all set up and burning in, all of the gear is new except the 3.7s obviously.Enjoy : https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/6322

thoft - I'm not an electrician, but do have experience with circuitry and ground loops. I highly recommend you fix your house grounding, not only for the amps but for safety and right functioning of all your gizmos. Electric circuits routinely bleed to ground as part of their design; a significant part of the designer's art revolves around grounding. Additionally, you may be in breach of code and insurance requirements.

So I got my classe amps. One is a dr-25 and one is a regular 25. However I recently found out that the house is not truly ground. Which makes these 3 prong outlets ground useless. Is this safe to use these amps on such things?

Tom - I would be the thermal culprit. I think thermal management is more important than generally believed. I am systematically addressing the mantra of shortcomings of Thiel speakers over four decades. Among those complaints is "they’re fine for vocal or folk or light jazz, but don’t try to rock with them" and variations thereof. It’s true, our development regime included primarily those mild forms of music. Of course we did what we could to manage heat if it didn’t cost much. When we began using aluminum cones, we went to aluminum voice coil formers. Those coupled cones could easily get hot enough to vaporize spit. The 01 and 03 were sealed boxes and we routinely got burned-out voice coils and resistors and melted caps if too close to a resistor. (Aluminum VCs introduce eddy currents and had to be abandoned.) The stories go on.

A big aha was when I got some Thiel subs. Nice subs. One solution is a thermistor on the voice coil to feed more power to overcome the higher resistance of a hot VC. Hmmm, not sustainable. And on and on. I want to dissipate, not overcome.

Now, consider the excruciating detail of Jim’s reciprocal circuits to correct driver behavior, control impedance rise and smooth out resonances. Those models are temperature critical. And those selected, ideal temperatures rarely exist in real life. A cold speaker will not sound good nor measure well. A hot speaker’s measurements are far outside of acceptability, and sound bad. In pro speakers many strategies are employed to keep the temp right. Ever see the fans blowing on the ribbed magnets of stadium drivers? Ever see one whose fan fails? You get the picture.
So, I have put thermal performance way up the list of necessary solutions. I’ve developed some techniques that stabilize temperatures while doing no harm. Regarding parallel resistors, sometimes yes. A modeling program or a thermometer or your finger can identify which resistors would benefit. Also, coils generate heat. Stand them on standoffs and consider air-flow around them. (They get hot enough to melt the varnish holding them together.)

Regarding boundary turbulence, my aha moment was hearing a particular harshness when I got some CS3.6s. We’ve addressed it here before. It turned out to be boundary layer perturbation, primarily on the flat areas of the baffle, but also on the cones and surrounds. By definition there is no motion at the fluid (air) / solid interface, and laminar flow increases as a function of distance, depending on properties of the fluid. Air isn’t linear per amplitude. Nano models built for aerospace research conclude the boundary layer to act essentially chaotic, like whitewater rapids or worse. My approach includes study of theory and extensive experimentation. My goal is to manage the propagation from the high-impedance sheer (source) wave to the uniform low-impedance transmission medium of the room air. I am using micro scale textures, some fixed and some mobile. Douglas Pauley has patented some solutions which we are jointly developing via our 02 workhorses. The resultant ease, naturalness and articulation are improved to a surprising degree.

Your paint is probably addressing the same phenomena. In early Thiel days we discovered that a particular light spatter coat on the baffle sounded better than flat-smooth. I see that these present 2008ish 2.4s still have that spatter pattern on the flat baffle, but are smooth on the curved edges. My speculation is that smooth passed marketing with higher marks, and the curved sections are far less problematic than flats. I like my results with cellulose micro flocking on those curves.

Your room treatments and active laminar flow device sound intriguing. For now my situation constrains me to concentrating on the speaker itself. Someday I hope to be apprised of what you’re doing and how I might get my mind around it.

The question always comes up whether enough listeners care enough to support these exotic tweaks. I don’t know, but it sure is fun learning about how things work. Einstein said something like "relativity is easy, fluid dynamics is hard." We’re wading in fluid dynamics.

Tom Thiel,

Glad to hear that your moving along with speaker model updates.

I have seen written the word thermal many time on these pages.
In forty plus years in audio of all types I may have seen 1 distraught resistor..What is your experience with and reasoning with the thermal in a loudspeaker. Would you advise running 2 resistors in parallel to maintain even more thermal headroom? 

Does your baffle laminar treatment 
Increase laminar surface flow or disperse laminar flow? 
I treat many surfaces in my system and room with a paint that has no added metals but I do add my own so as to reduce air boundary adhesion when playing music.
I use the same treatment for an active laminar flow device I engage when the music is on.

Can you invision an application for you and your friend to make a freestanding device that offers an enhancement for laminar flow?

Tom

Hi guys - an update from the hotrod garage. Recently I was lent a pair of CS2.4s for experimentation. Initial auditioning was disappointing, but it turned out that one coax was dead and the other rubbing. Rob rebuilt them, and yesterday I reinstalled and listened with John Pries in his fairly good room with fairly modest equipment. The room is decently proportioned, but has full glass on both short walls. Speakers are centered on the long wall with listening position about 8’ back and 3’ from the back wall, with an open door to the attic stair. Not bad. The source is Tidal hi-def to a Prima Luna 100 integrated @ 40w/channel and bluejeansish cable.

John had started with Klipsch (copper skinned) monitors, then 1.6s, which is what we compared with the 2.4s. The 2.4s are stock @3729-30, mid run with unmarked caps, decently wound coils on glass boards. Tidy work and better looking than Beetlemania’s later Chinese units. All the caps with design and early implementation as PolyPropylenes (Solen) were here executed as PolyEster (MKT), and the coils were not as tight as original, both a step down.

Impressions included lack of bass control and considerable bloom (small tube amp) and a slight upper midrange scoop. Otherwise, the detail, harmonic structure and resolution skunked the 1.6s. The treble was delightful. From out in the garden two stories down his wife Barbara announced "that’s a lot better, more realistic". I was surprised at the improvement over the 1.6s, which I had thought held their own pretty well.
We know from Beetlemania’s and a couple others’ work that there is room for improvement. First pass will be some physical things like my (for now) proprietary wire, thermal management, laminar launch baffle treatment and non-ferrous fasteners. These changes can be made without my listening lab, which has not yet re-materialized. I'll wait for XO work until I have some measuring capability around me.

I am pleased and grateful to have these gems for an extended time, to develop and refine some upgrade mechanisms.

Enjoy the music.

4th of July weekend- All

Happy Friday! All

bworks

I like your approach- a simple system works for me as well.

Some of those Panamax models does steal current from One's system.
Remove the conditioner for an A/B comparison. Then, you can tell if the product is a benefit. Not all line/power conditioners work as advertised.

Happy Listening!

Thanks @jafant. I've been enjoying paging through all the threads. It's especially fun to see notes from @tomthiel, right from the source. My system is pretty simple. A Bryston BP-20 preamp to match the 4B amp. A Marantz 6004 for CDs. Straightwire interconnects. A Panamax line conditioner for power, running through a dedicated circuit to the panel. I'm not too convinced that the power stuff does much, but I was able to get the circuit added when we rewired our house. With a basic system like this, my feeling is that it's about at a plateau of quality vs. cost tradeoffs. I bought everything used. And I would need to spend a pretty significant chunk of money to get a marked improvement in sound. The things I'd do some time is a better turntable than the $200 job my wife bought, and a second Bryston amp so I could run them bridged and better feed those Thiel beasts. 

Thiel migrated away from direct wood fastening to inserts sometime after I left. There are advantages of reliability over multiple uses. However, metal on metal under vibration will (reliably?) vibrate loose. Breakaway Locktite helps as does Mortite onto the threads. But over the years, inserted fasteners seem to come loose and direct to wood fasteners seem to remain tight. I'm going with plan A and use direct fastening. Of course castings need inserts. Brass is a good solution, or other non-magnetic substances - non-conductive is even better, since electrical fields are affected by any conductive material, magnetic or not.

On my mids or woofers I use brass inserts into the wood or in my case cast granite. I then seat the drivers with mortite/rope caulk and thread in the brass fasteners. Tom

Tom - your missive runs parallel to my experience. In the case of my outboard crossovers, and mounting my internal crossovers and back-plates - I am using all nylon. Drivers need more strength so I use brass.

naimfan - stripping is an issue with screws directly into MDF. I use "Wood Hardener" from Minwax available at the hardware store, or you can use thin super glue dribbled into the hole since the internal threads are already formed via previous screws.
Take care with brass screws; they're not as strong as steel.

@tomthiel - 

I emailed Rob and he was kind enough to put screws in the mail to me.  I'd be interested in trying brass - just want to be wary of stripping the material the screws go into.

Starting with a pair of Dunlavy SC4s back in the 90's I have replaced all the steel fasteners with brass in all my electronics and speakers. Steel will bend the flux field of the electronic path. Easily heard on a circuit board stand off and its fastener.
Back plates that hold speaker lugs should also be non ferrous and their perimeter steel mounting screws should go away. Steel screws that hold down crossover boards should be gone. All the drivers will improve sonically with brass and not steel. Finding and then mounting with brass is somewhat difficult and time consuming..Start with the crossover and then move on to the tweeter. McMaster Carr is a great place to shop for brass fasteners including metric sizes mostly used around tweeters. Brass reduces interfering energy compared to steel in any audio part I have encountered. Tom

Since namifan asked about screws, I'll peek into the rabbit hole with you.My EMI scans show that the steel screws are active in the driver fields. Early hypothesis is that they matter. I have replaced all screws in my working prototypes with brass. Fiberglas would be better, but unavailable in small quantities at affordable prices. I invite any of you to swap your screws for brass and post what you learn.

bworks

Welcome! Good to see you here. Reading through this thread, you will find several owners of 3.6 loudspeakers. We have a few fans of Bryston gear as well. What other gear rounds out your system?
I look forward in reading more about musical tastes.

Happy Listening!

Hi guys. New to this forum. I have a nice pair of 3.6s that I got many years ago, and they still sound lovely. Driven by a Bryston 4B (250w/ch), which is not as much punch as they want probably, but it's a great combination that sounds clear and precise. I do need to replace some drivers some time, so I'm poking around for solutions there. The damage to the originals is minor, so I'll probably just order stock from Rob at Coherent, just to have around. I'm unlikely to ever purchase a better pair of speakers than the 3.6. They make me happy every time I listen to them, and it's a thrill to have people listen to their own music on the system. Fresh ears to music they thought they knew.

@tomthiel - 

Thank you!  I'll get in touch with Rob - I'd prefer to use the intended parts, even if it is a screw.  It does have, after all, a rather important job - securing the woofer to prevent it from moving relative to the (very high quality and expensive) baffle/cabinet.  

naimfan - ordinary screws will work. Those Thiel screws are plated with black phosphate. Rob at Coherent Source Service should have them.

naimfan

I am looking forward in reading more about your Meridian/Thiel combination. I believe that you are the 1st member here using Meridian gear.  What brand of Cabling?

Happy Listening!

All - 

Brief update on my new-to-me CS 2.2s: Moved to basement with a Meridian 551 integrated amp and a 596 DVD player.  They sound pretty good, though I noted a buzzing sound from the right speaker's woofer.  Turns out to be missing half of the mounting screws.  

Can those screws be sourced, or are they something I can actually find locally?  

Thanks all in advance!

Oh - and if anyone knows anyone who wants to sell a pair of 3.6s in Colorado, please point them my way.  

tomthiel

Right On! We all can learn from modified Audio gear.
Specifically, CD/SACD/Universal players.

Happy Listening!

JA - my interest is academic. I want to know who made what changes for what purposes with what outcomes and what seems "better" for what reasons.

tomthiel

Agreed- it would be pretty cool to hear those modified CS 3.6 loudspeakers. There is something to be said about modified Audio gear, in general.

Happy Listening!

@dmac67 Consider the resale value of modified gear can often be compromised.
As for the compatibility of your Krell 400xi integrated with Thiel 3.6’s:

Thiel CS3.6 loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com
Thiel CS3.6 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
Krell KAV-400xi integrated amplifier Specifications | Stereophile.com
Krell KAV-400xi integrated amplifier Measurements | Stereophile.com

We can see from the above links that the Thiel CS 3.6’s impedance stays well below 4 Ohms most of the time. We can also see from the above links, that unlike some, but not all (!) of the rightfully famous, for their ability to keep on doubling down power into lower impedances, Krell separate power amplifiers, that the Krell 400xi integrated is not rated for sub 4 Ohm loads, nor could it withstand the rigors of measurement testing into such loads. If your interested in Thiel CS 3.6’s, you would do well to consider different amplification. There are only a few, usually expensive, integrateds that are up to the task; some of the Gryphons and the DanDagastino Momentum amongst them.

tomthiel

Thank You for the reply to dmac67's query. Very detailed and informative, as always.  I hope that you are well this Summer evening.
Have you found a new space for R&D plus Studio?

Happy Listening!

First, thanks for the-replies to my post.  
Second, I had some knowledge of the research and painstaking effort that was put into the original speakers but this really expanded my knowledge.  I was leaning towards passing on auditioning these and looking for a non modified pair and that is what I will do.   Thanks again.

All - this might be an opportunity for me to expand on unsound’s response to dmac67 regarding the ’improved’ CS3.6s. Indeed Jim’s approach to design was to specifically control any system misbehavior in pursuit of absolute fidelity to the input signal. In the case of drivers and their crossovers, all those parallel XO circuits serve to correct and control any anomalies and resonances so the drivers can span their 7 to 8 octaves in net 6dB/octave atentuation as required for true phase-coherent response. Additionally he sought for an absolutely neutral tonal balance (as he interpreted the term). So, any change in any driver would require reciprocal crossover changes to keep the outputs loyal to his design intentions.

Let’s unpack the "Rosewood 3.6 offering".
"Rosewood" as used by Thiel is the wood of commerce in the Dalbergia genus, specifically Dalbergia nigra, Brazilian Rosewood, considered the most classic and valuable of the lot. The offered speakers are what Thiel called Morado, which is the lowland Bolivian variety of the genus Machaereum (Amberwood being the upland variety.) It’s a beautiful wood, many people refer to it as a ’near Rosewood’, etc. but it is not the upcharged wood that Thiel calls Rosewood.
The "rebuilt crossovers" is of interest to me. It would be of great interest to learn what was done to those crossovers to compensate for the different midrange and modified tweeter. Seriously, if a schematic could be gotten, I’d love to see it. In Thiel-land the final months of critical listening would be spent fine-tuning the XO to prune performance of the specific drivers in their cabinet toward the design goals. These drivers are different. 

The ’original tweeter, but with soft domes’ are "better sounding" than Thiel’s aluminum domes.That is a matter of opinion and will be true for some listeners. However, the differences in the soft diaphragm will include mass, compliance, breakup and resonance behaviors. If the seller compensated for those differences, I’d love to hear and study that work. If not, the output will vary from the design intent. A historical note re that tweeter. It was developed for the CS5 and trickled down to the 2.2 and 3.6. It was a massive joint undertaking between Thiel and Berger, the lead development engineer at Vifa. It incorporates the underhung motor and copper shunts that became Thiel trademarks. Copper shunts for the voice coil and pole piece were not in use in the late 80s when Jim discovered their efficacy through Finite Element Analysis. We investigated patenting the solution to learn that Faraday had discovered it, and it was in the public domain, although not in use for loudspeakers at that time. Note that other manufacturers call their rings "Faraday Rings", but Jim is who introduced them to audio.

Let’s look at the soft vs aluminum dome issue in terms of our relationship with Vifa, our long-term development partner until we outgrew their tolerance for our eccentric requirements. We co-developed many drivers with them from about 1980 to the late 1990s when we gradually took driver manufacture in house; not because we wanted the extra work of making drivers, but because our solutions were too difficult, expensive and niche for them. With this UltraTweeter as an example, we co-developed drivers with Vifa who retained rights to sell them (and all our joint drivers) to any and all their customers; how they amortized their tooling and development costs. Berger implemented and sampled Jim’s aluminum dome and simultaneously the soft dome for a broader customer base. Both are in the same structure so that the Thiele/Small parameters will be very similar. But the soft dome will have individual variation far exceeding the aluminum. That’s the principal reason Jim chose aluminum, so that his optimized crossover could apply to all drivers, rather than some lesser percentage using any soft diaphragm with their greater divergence from the norm. That story goes on and on, but I’ll take pity in this late hour. Either UltraTweeter will sound "good", but the aluminum one will consistently produce the designer’s intention.

The midrange gets far sticker because the chosen replacement uses a different motor and cone. It may very well be an excellent driver, but the 10mm voice coil length suggests a normal overhung motor, plus most all the Thiele/Small parameters also change. So an XO redesign would be required to achieve Jim’s level of accuracy. Again, I’d love to see the XO schematic to see what this designer has done.

The woofer remains stock.They are bullet-proof and rarely fail. I wonder what XO upgrades, if any, the seller applied there.

None of what I have written here is to disparage the seller or the potential care and expertise applied. However, I do point out the large undertaking, fraught with pitfalls in arriving at a speaker similar to Jim’s product. I suspect that every person on this thread would pick it blind as being a different speaker from the original CS3.6.

Mac - thanks for this opportunity to expound on what makes a Thiel a Thiel. If you choose to get this pair, I would love to work with you to document their particulars as they relate to my growing stable of upgrade ideas and directions for classic Thiel models.
Cheers,Tom

ydjames

My pleasure to assist. Keep me posted on the new driver plus outriggers.

Happy Listening!

@dmac67 for about the same price one can often find less risky originals. Jim Thiel modeled his crossovers to compensate for the specific drivers he chose.

Thanks cascadesphil, Tom and @jafant for the help and advice.

I've swapped the channels and found that the distortion persists on my left channel, hence I think we can confirm that the issue lies with the voice coil.

Previously, I've contacted Rob for a set of outriggers for the CS2.7. I'll drop him an email soon to arrange for a rebuild or buying a new coaxial driver.

Once again, I truly appreciate the help I'm getting here. You guys are amazing.

Happy Friday! ALL

dmac67

Welcome! Good to see you here. On the Panel are several fans and owners of the 3.6 loudspeaker. Take your time reading through this thread. Stay tuned until one of the members chimes in regarding your query.  
Nice Virtual Systems page. How do you like Wireworld cabling in your system? I look forward in reading more about your musical tastes.

Happy Listening!

https://www.soundsgoodtomehouston.com/thiel36.html

Is there any chance these modified 3.6’s are worth auditioning or should I steer clear?

Does my Krell 400xi integrated have what it takes to properly drive a pair of 3.6’s?

Thanks

"Renaissance 02s"

Love it!

Thiel Renaissance -Rising.

Happy Listening!

Like the sound of Renaissance and all of the science and art contained.
Like the idea and the visual of a Phoenix once again.

Best for everyone.

Tom

Prof - I get it. One of my pairs ended up in the living room of the house I'm sharing, driven by PS Audio's Sprout II from a decent CD player. They consistently delight and make me wonder at times if and why most folks would need more to enjoy music. They were retired in 1984 by the SCS and its successors. For all the technical improvements, new solutions, advanced materials of the SCS4 - the 02 really holds its own.

One of these days I'll get you a pair of Renaissance 02s for your critique.

tom,

Your modded 02s certainly intrigue me.  And your Audio neurology hypothesis sounds plausible.  Especially in my case the 02s were my gateway drug in to high end audio, so I'm sure they made an impression on me.  It's like the Quad ESL 57 phenomenon - many people who start with Quad 57s eventually give them up to chase a speaker that does what they love in the Quads, but without the limitations.   "Quads but better."   That's very much how I feel about the 02s.

Admittedly they are still a great place to visit, not to live (for me).  Every time I put them in they show me something missing from whatever speaker I have at the moment.  For instance the Joseph Perspective speakers are insanely high resolution, clear, grain-free - thoroughly modern sound without being anti-septic.     When I put the 02s in I hear a slightly greater palpability and texture and density which I love.  And the 02s stay in the system for quite a while, a week, two, three.  But eventually the lack of refinement, the slight courteousness, compared to what I'm generally used to starts to show and back in go the more modern speakers. 

Dan - use the 14-4. There is some disagreement around best configuration for star quad. Conventional configuration is opposites as plus and other opposites as minus. Also try adjacents as plus and other adjacents as minus. Please report back what you hear.

I hope you jest re 1.7s. Just reporting back-story.

Wow, that's enough praise for the cs 2.2 to make me want a pair! 

thieliste  look forward to hearing what you are building,  I know you do a ton of homework and have really expensive taste!
I know this isn't everyone's favorite topic. Wiring, I am building an all Thiel home theater. I ordered a big spool of audioquest in the wall two wire 12 gauge it wasn't cheap but didn't break the bank was using just for atmos power point, a pair of high points and as the group decide the terrible 1.7 for rears, all other speaker will have much better wires. They sent me a role of 4 wire 14 gauge and supposedly better quality copper or what ever. Am i better off using two wires to each terminal or just use the one? They told me because of shipping costs i could have it at no charge. suggestions?"

Thanks,

Dan.

@tomthiel - 

Thank you - we'll try that.  I grew up a Linnie, so prefer to have a single pair of speakers in a room.  The prior owner is sending me the pins so I can experiment with and without them.  Just a brief listen was positive - airy and relaxed sounding (in the best sense of relaxed).  

I'd try one of the biwire sets I have, but they are bananas all the way around.  

Naimfan - you can use double wires (star quad, etc.) and connect both runs to the same terminals. 4' from wall to tweeter is a good distance if you can listen at least 8' away from the speakers.

naimfan:corrected.

naiimfan

I am looking forward in reading your initial impressions and thoughts on CS 2.2 speakers.

Happy Listening!

vair68robert

I Thank all of you guys- The Panel- for making it happen.

Happy Listening!

I have now picked up the aforementioned CS2.2s.  

Heavy, look very nice if wider than my normal Monitor Audio GX300s. I only have one set of cables that are single-wired; these being a set of Naim NAC A5s with bananas at one end and bare wire at the other.  

Even not sited well (4' from the back walls, in front of the MAs) and with poor connectivity, they sound quite good.  I'm looking forward to having my son help me move the MAs out so we can try the 2.2s.  

More to follow!