Thiel Owners
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. |
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. |
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. |
@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. |
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 |
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. |
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 |
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. |
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! |
Prof - at your instigation, I’ve spent a lot of time with the 02 during this past year. It is small, shipable, simple and inexpensive. It provides a good development platform and test bed for many ideas which can be inexpensively iterated multiple times. I presently have 6 units for comparison and beta use and would buy more if they came along. I don’t yet have a way to measure impedance. The woofer is 6 ohms and the tweeter is 8. The Stereo Magazine review states the bass double peak at 18 and 17.5 ohms (quite mild) with the saddle at 5.4 ohms and absolute minimum of 4.75 ohms at 170 and 10kHz - averaging 6 ohms, which is what we called it. Those loads are mild and easy to drive compared with modern Thiels. Several of us here agree that a minimum of 4 ohms would make Thiel products so much friendlier to such a wider range of users. That said, the 02 has no Zobel or other corrective networks, so it presents a less resistive load than modern Thiels. More reactivity is harder to drive. The crossover is a straight-forward second order x polarity correct design. So, the tweeter signal arrives before the woofer, but the soft diaphragms allow a sweet, seamless crosspoint transition. The Gefco woofer has a proprietary pulp cone which is quite exceptionally smooth over its entire range, gently rolling off up to fully 10kHz. The Peerless fabric dome (we called it silk, but I don’t know) was the darling of the day, used by Polk and nearly everyone else. Nice, smooth tweeter with no real misbehavior. All that said, the drivers use conventional motors, coils and materials, unlike later Thiels that reduced distortion by more than a factor of 10x. Similarly, the cabinet is unbraced albeit veneered both sides on industrial particleboard for greater stiffness than MDF. And the crossover components preceded audiophile components. We self-wound the unpotted coils from standard CDA110-ETP wire. Resistors and caps were "better" grade parts bin quality and hookup wire was standard, stranded in PVC or vinyl. In other words, nothing special except attention to simplicity and longevity. My work this year would take an essay to summarize, but let’s say that every change I made created a clearer, tighter, more Thiel-like presentation. Potting the coils in varnish - then replacing with CDA101, solid CDA101 wire in teflon, etc. etc. etc. But nonetheless, the original stock speaker has an easy, friendly presentation, like coming home to love. I hear it, I get it and I even have developed some theories about whys and wherefores. One summary thought is that the stock 02 sounds like what we (especially from our long-ago youth) expect to hear. Audio neurology is very synthetic and wired to clues, cues and expectations far more than we generally realize. As a reference, my lab mule has migrated from stock 02 to hot-rodded 02 with original drivers > time aligned at second order. (That is the SCS format.) Then I substituted CS.5 drivers which are stellar.The woofer is cellulose / wool pulp with all the Thiel motor juju. I compared first vs second order crossovers executed (eventually) with CS7 style components, and landed firmly on the first order x time-aligned configuration. The workhorse value of this hot-rodded version is far superior. It no longer has that ’old shoe’ familiarity that you appreciate, but it shines with joy. The present iteration has rounded (1.5" radius) grille edges, braced cabinet, and lots of new technologies. Since it's not coincident, its coherence varies with ear position. I made an easily adjustable stand for seated through standing tweeter height. And the fun never ends. The form-factor is an original 02, the execution incorporates some beyond-Jim elements. But no coaxes or x.7 style drivers. Presently I'm looking for new lab space while liquidating my tonewood enterprise. |
I run my Thiel CS 6 with Wadia A 340 Amps ( 500 into 4) and use the Wadai 321 Dac. I also run an ARC LS 2 MKII Pre Amp with a Cambridge CXC Transport MK II . I run Silnote Cables with MIT Speaker Cables. I have found that the more power you have the better the sound. Thiels are not forgiving with equipment so get the best you can get. Get good recordings to! |
Every time I throw the old Thiel 02s in to my system it tells me that’s the sound I’ve been chasing. Decade after decade. Something about the palpability and tonality of the sound that grabs me every time. For some reason they seem to tell me more about what something is made of - a sort of solidity so chimes sound "solid," reed instruments have a solid resonating body, the metal of a trumpet vs a string instrument etc. I just don’t know why. I wonder if part of what I like in the 02 has anything to do with it’s higher sensitivity - 90 dB/watt-meter. Tomthiel, do you happen to know anything about the impedance on the 02? Is it an easy to drive speaker impedance-wise? (Sure seems so just by ear, whenever I hook up any tube amp to those speakers). I’d love a bigger, more refined version of that speaker. I’m still fiddling with the idea of testing out the Devore O/96 speakers in my room, which have some of the 02 qualities, but bigger and more refined. The aren’t as refined as the Thiels overall though, in a "modern loudspeaker" type of way. They don’t fully disappear as sound sources, do the wall to wall soundstaging etc. |
| Post removed |
