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!
Welcome! I am glad that you found us here. Thank You for the hot tip on replacing cap(s) in the CS 2.4 loudspeaker. Tell us more about your system and musical genre tastes. I look forward in reading more about you and your system.
For Thiels I would try a Kinki Studio EX-M1 or the new monos that they are about to release. They are neutral sounding have a good grip of the drivers. Users of Kinki rate them in same region as Pass, Nagra and Goldmund.I have a set of Mirage M7Si. On the specs an average easy speaker. But no - they demand a high quality amp. My budget is not for the mentioned amps. I have tried some of them but the Kinky did is at least as good. Happy listening. Thiel is absolutely value for money. Rgs
I loved hearing more detail on specifics of upgrades Tom and others? have been working on, very interesting, made me want to pull off one the passive radiators my self and have a look.
Wow Prof those 2.7's in birds eye maple are a fantastic deal, I have a question. what others thought of cs6 and where they may differ from the 2.7 & 3.7 that I have and plan to keep forever. I found a pair on ebay link is below. or am I better off grabbing the 2.7 and run them with tube gear which will be different than how I have my existing 2.7 set up.
Has anyone compared between these two? What would be the difference in sound between the CS2.4 and CS2.7? They seem to have similar bass driver, but the mid and tweeter are completely different.
Dan, I don't have a buy recommendation, but I might add some perspective. The 2.7 is the newest design and shares the wavy plate coax with the 3.7 - which is Jim's world-class, swan-song breakthrough. A company could be built on that driver. That said, the 2.7 will move perhaps half the air of the 6 (anyone could do the math, I have not. Calculate comparative driver areas including the passive radiators). The 2.7 also shares the curved plywood walls of the 3.7. It operates closer to the 3 more-so than previous model 2s.
The CS6 is larger and fills a larger space. I was told at the factory that Jim considered the 6 a better speaker in some ways than the 3.7. Thiel discontinued it for a leaner product line as they struggled to contain costs. The CS6 has fewer electrolytic caps and none in the signal path, and is on our upgrade radar before the 3.7 or 2.7. Rob Gillum would know if the particular serial numbers are the original 6 or the 6.1, and what changes were made. (And you could tell us those details.)
I'm a bit unclear about your post. Do you mean you already have the 3.7s and 2.7s, and yet are contemplating buying yet another pair of 2.7s...or the CS6? Do you mean you are running your current 2.7s with solid state and want to try Thiels with tubes, but in another system?
I've had the CS6 and the 2.7s (and 3.7s) so here is my perspective:
The CS6s are the larger speaker, and sound it. They go deeper and are more weighty in the bass than the 2.7s and even the 3.7s. And the bass is amazing on the CS6s - no other speaker had such weighty, dense yet controlled bass in my room, and only the 2.7s and 3.7s compared (the 3.7s being the most tonally controlled in the bass, but a bit lighter and less dense/punchy in the bass than my memory of the CS6).
The CS6 cast a very big and really well focused soundstage, with that particular image density that stuck in my mind for many years after, and it's one reason why I went back to Thiel.
Though I'd say the 3.7s cast an even more impressive soundstage, and the 2.7s somewhat comparable to the CS6. In terms of bass, the "center of gravity" moves upward somewhat in the 2.7 vs the CS6, similar to how it does compared to the 3.7s - more about mid-bass punch than low bass slam.
When certain orchestral climaxes occurred, or in songs with great bass dynamics, the CS6 could produce that "rolling bass under your feet" sensation more than the 2.7s can.
Tonally, the CS6s were ravishing on my CJ 140W/side tube amps, with excellent bass control.
My one real caveat with the CS6s is, as I've mentioned before in this thread, in ultimate terms they sounded a tad reductive, instruments sometimes not quite as big/full/rich sounding as can be had through other speakers. It would play out especially when, say, sax or oboe would play in to the higher registers. Or far-mic'd instruments in an orchestra could be a bit more tiny and thin sounding.
It sometimes felt I could perceive a slight suck-out in upper midrange, especially one that altered slightly with listening position, and it seems this was mentioned in John Atkinson's review and measurements as well, in Stereophile.
What I hear with the last coax design in the 3.7s/2.7s is a more refined midrange in terms of sheer coherency and richness. I don't get any of that reductive quality and they sound perfectly coherent and even top to bottom.
Still, if we are talking comparison of the 2.7 with the CS6, there are certainly things to be said in favour of the CS6. The scale, depth and power of the sound for instance.
If you already have the 2.7s and want more Thiel...it seems to me the CS6 could be a nice adventure to try something a little different.
It is kind of a tragedy that the 2.7/3.7 coax isn't being produced any more. I've thought about it and it seems the theoretical ideal would be if Vandersteen would buy the Thiel name and produce a few models. Since it's a first order company as well the expertise would be there and the different house sound would maybe take them out of direct competition with each other. I know the Tyler Acoustics guy is in KY. He's a box builder, he could probably replicate any of the older Thiel boxes. Not sure about the 2.7/3.7. I'm just dreaming.
Thanks for the welcome. I've been lurking here for a while and in fact, found out about the CS2.4 cap upgrade here, so thanks to the contributors for that. The 2.4s replaced my CS2.0s that I originally acquired in 1990. I replaced the drivers in those twice, but seeing that drivers for these were no longer available, decided to get the 2.4s, and I'm very happy I did. The cap upgrade and outriggers from Rob GIllum were icing on the cake.
The CS2.4s are the center of two interlinked systems: an 'analog' system that includes a McIntosh C26 and (2) McIntosh MC 240s which I originally purchased in 1969 (and use a 80w mono amps), and a 'digital' system (mostly for theater use) built around a Classé preamp/processor (SSP800) and Classé amplifier (CA5300). Two Thiel PowerPlane 1.2s and an SCS center channel make up the rest of the theater system, though I confess I'm on the lookout for a nice MCS.
There are a belt and direct drive turntable connected to the 'analog' system, and a CD, BluRay & laserdisc(!) player connected to 'digital' system, though I can also play the turntables through the 'digital' system. It's complicated, but what good is a hobby if it isn't expensive and take up a lot of time?
My musical taste is mostly classical music from the 18th to 20th century, especially piano and chamber music, though I also love orchestral works from Mozart to Mahler and beyond. I like serious jazz from Louis Armstrong to the Art Ensemble of Chicago, especially Coltrane, Dolphy, Davis and many others.
When I started this hobby in the 1960s, I was into what was called 'HiFi'. I never really made the transition to the 'high end', though I certainly appreciate what it has meant to sound reproduction over the last 30 years.
Thank You for the listing of your gear and musical preferences. I am a serious Jazz Hound myself. We have much in common. I believe that you will find this thread a great read from the beginning up until now. Yes, sound reproduction has increased incredibly since I started my Audio journey back in the 1980's.
andy2 prof gives a very nice over view of the CS 2.7. During my auditioning sessions I found it this model to act as a slightly scaled down version of the CS 3.7 loudspeaker for those that did not have a larger listening space. Both models do feature Jim's last design-the wavy driver concept as above. The curved plywood walls are beautiful as well. To address the 2.7 vs. the CS 2.4, I venture to report that the CS 2.7 has a little more weight authority in the Bass department. Wavy driver vs. passive radiator. Both feature that wonderful Thiel house sound that we all know and love (richest timbre, soundstage and micro details in the music). Hope this information has been helpful to you.
I am very surprised they you can't really find any commercially available coax drivers that are really that good. There are a few available but they have terrible frequency response and first order question is impossible because of their poor performance.
But...as it happens...I’m not doing terribly well, in a way pertinent to high end audio and music. And if my post count here starts to drop quite a bit, there’s a reason.
I’ve had pretty bad tinnitus for decades (and I know I’m not alone on the forum with that issue) so have made sure to not overdo sound levels when listening. Despite the ear ringing, fortunately I have really good hearing - tests more like ears 12 years younger than I am. Plus, I’ve mostly habituated to the tinnitus (can sleep through the night, doesn’t bug me listening to music, etc).
However, way back in 2001 I had a terrible bout of what is known as "hyperacusis," which is a collapsed tolerance to sound. It was truly terrible - even turning the pages of a book took on an exaggeratedly loud, irritating, sharp quality...let alone music. Basically, music listening was just gone for me. That kind of stuff really upends your life (especially as I work in sound as well). Aside from the fact everything just hurt my ears, it really tore me up to not be able to enjoy music or audio anymore. It took some years to get over it and mostly habituate, but thankfully that happened and for many years I’ve been able to enjoy high end audio/music.
Well....it’s back.
I had the misfortune of taking my son out downtown near our lakeshore on labour day and didn’t realize the air show was happening. We were essentially right on the strip in the path that the jets took as they made their way, flying very low over us, to the lake where they did their show. It was just extraordinarily loud! Sometimes four jets in formation would fly right over us and plugging my ears did essentially nothing, every bone vibrating to the sound.
Since then my ears have been shot, and the hyperacusis (not to mention increase in tinnitus) came raging back. It makes everything painful and shrill. I had been enthralled with my new turntable and had been on a record buying binge for months just loving it. Now, the record buying has stopped cold, and I’m mostly staring at walls of useless records, and my nice Thiels sit there mostly unused :-(
I don’t need to tell anyone here how depressing that scenario is. (And of course, apropos of my other speaker auditioning thread, any reason to buy new speakers is gone for now as well. Couldn't attend the Toronto Audiofest because of this condition either, darn it!).
I’m going to start a therapy for the condition, which hopefully will be successful, though can take up to two years. I’m hoping to get better before then.
But I’d imagine I may not have occasion to post as much here for quite a while. (Though I probably won’t be able to help myself...it’s sort of like that "lost limb" phenomenon where you want the keep scratching the limb you lost).
BTW, I don’t mean to be totally woe-is-me. I’m actually starting to feel more optimistic that it will get better. I’ve been through this before and recovered, and I think I can actually perceive a tiny bit of progress already. So hopefully I won’t be out of the game too long.
Anyway, I took the excuse to get it off my chest, as it’s almost the only thing on my mind these days. Thanks. :)
Thanks for sharing. Hope this condition will improve soon. No reason to withhold your astute observations and sharing. Certainly reminded me not to take my hearing for granted and protect them from overexposure.
Prof, I spent some time writing a response about my speaker situation, what I have, where it's located and why I want more. I woke up and was going to finish my story when I read your post. My wishes are with you and believe you know you have real friends here. Your experience and gift of recall in such detail has helped me find my path through this hobby.
Yes I still have the 2.7 & 3.7 I use the 2.7 in a 26 by 18 Home Theater slash 2 channel listening space. I have started 4 listening spaces and feel this one is complete and whole. it took months to bring together but works just as i had imagined both HT/2ch. Pre amp is Lyngdorf mp 50, Classe CA5300 runs 2.7 mains, MCS1 center (great speaker and wonder why we don't hear about more of them) cs1.7 for rears 4 ps 700 mono amps run the over head power point 1.2 I listen mainly through Tidal, Spotfy+ and have Blue Sound node 2 but use the Dac in Lyngdorf. I enjoy playing multi room and main reason for Blue sound and ease of there dash board.
My second space has a challenge of speaker having to be 16 ft apart or they would sit in the middle of a view window. currently I have 3.7 there a run with Peachtree nova 300 and a Bluesound node,
Third space is my master bed room where I have Lyngdorf 3400 and Blue sound node, again Dac is amazing in Lyngdorf, i went with there matching wall speakers and 2 "border" subs. Lets say the Thiels have spoiled me and was thinking of putting the 3.7 in this space and selling the Lyngdorf speakers, the acoustics in this room are fantastic.
I am assuming the cs6 will do as good or better than 3.7 in over coming my problem with distance between speakers. I planned on using the peachtree to run a system out by pool. so I can get the correct electronics to run cs6, Another question how do the cs 7 compare to 6? there is a pair of those available.
Sorry for book, but now you have a full view of my Thiel obsession!
Dan - go for the CS7.2 if you can. Regarding your view window. Consider "Zen View" from Christopher Alexander's "A Pattern Language". The large view might be even more enjoyable as separated zen views. Put the speakers where you want them, possibly hanging a drapery behind each, or not. The view may not be harmed at all, and the overall effect might be stunningly wonderful.
Prof - bummer. I am not a doctor, but I have been paying attention and know something about the territory. I suggest addressing vitamin B, which regulates and supports neurological processes. The B complex is quite complex - a practitioner may help sort out the details. Knowing your cognitive approach, a suspension of disbelief may be in order. The down-side is practically nil. My best wishes and highest hopes for your recovery. Tom
Prof, I'm so sad hearing what happened to you and would wish you all the best for a quick solution to this inconvenience. Never stop hoping that better days can came back, never. Life is full of unespected situations for the bad and for the good, now for you is the time to redeem the best. Stay with us, don't let we alone we need to help each other and if this pass trough this community it's welcome.
Thanks for the well wishes everyone. (Tom, I'll check out vitamin B. The therapy I'll be undergoing already involves a tiny "leap of faith" ;-) )
Dan,
Wow, you are a fellow Thiel nut! Until recently I had three Thiel speakers myself - 3.7, 2.7 and 02s.
As to the 7.2 vs CS6. I only heard the 7.2s once or twice for a demo long ago. But I have to admit the sound stayed with me quite strongly (or so I think). I remember especially some miles davis on the 7.2s (and I also listened to cuts from Brubeck's Time Out, among other). What I remember is the vividness of the sound: the size and solidity of the presentation, the sense that there was a physical, metal trumpet occupying a specific spot right in front of me. Not ghostly, but "there." The solidity of the sticks on drums, the realism and solidity of the bass drum and the space it occupies in the solo on the Time Out record, etc. It was a special sound vs all the other high end speakers of my acquaintance back then.
I don't have near the experience with that speaker that Tom has, but my brief brush with it has me place it at the top of the Thiel speaker hierarchy. I have no idea how that would hold up if I were able to compare them to the 3.7s over time, but that's the impression they left me.
Is there a list of torque values for the screws that hold the drive units in place? I had to retighten mine when the speakers started buzzing and had to guess at how tight. I remember reading somewhere that all the screws were torqued during assembly but Thiel never replied with any values when I emailed them several years ago.I have CS1.6s.
yeti- I don't have torque values, but I do have some thoughts. Wood products (MDF) hold screws well against vibration; more exotic baffle materials require threaded inserts. I don't know the 1.6. Metal to metal threads are prone to vibration creep. I personally put a dab of Permatex type 2 (non-hardening) on the thread before torquing to taste. There are other brands and types of non-permanent thread goo at the auto parts store.
Of all the speaker manufacturers currently on the market, which company would you say whose products are most comparable to Thiel?
As for time-coherent, Vandersteen probably comes the closest but the sound is a bit more should I say warmer? I can't really think of any brand from the top of my head.
@andy2, I've been wondering that myself. For those of us who mostly use digital playback I think the ultimate setup will use digital/software crossovers that can be switched to whatever you want. Heck, my 12 year old Velodyne sub has this option. You can choose any slope from 6 to 48db/octave. There is a built in digital equalizer, etc. They aren't the only ones to have done this. DEQX is still around and does everything digitally. I don't think they provide the option for phase correct 6db crossovers right now but I'm pretty sure they could if they wanted to. It's just software.
jon_5912:I supposed you can use digital but it has its draw back but ultimately you need to have the drivers that can handle 6db roll off which is usually the problem in first order design. But digital has other drawbacks which I am not sure this thread is the best place to discuss.
OK Thanks Tom. I have a pair of Naim NBLs in another system and they have a specified tightening torque of 3.6Nm for the mid range drivers (but just a warning not to mess with the bass) possibly a bit tight for the Theals, which do have metal to metal threads, it feelt tight to me anyway. I didn't tighten the Theil's bolts as tight as that.
pwhinson I am looking forward in reading about your impressions, thoughts on the Pass Labs amp. I have only auditioned the XP-10 which is a very fine preamp indeed. Happy Listening!
Regarding "other similar speakers" - they are very few indeed. The rigors are far greater and the results far more perilous than ordinary solutions. A company seeking to "make it" financially would not go there - to phase and time coherence.
Vandersteen and Thiel started at the same time in different places but with synonymous goals, the truthful and complete replication of the musical experience. The details of startup were different, but both founders were self-educated, and used live and directly recorded music as well as thorough measurement as core tools. Both addressed diffraction from the beginning because diffraction and other errors are glaringly obvious in coherent systems. Thiel developed engineered curves to reduce diffraction effects whereas Vandersteen used minimum sized baffles for similar results. There were far more similarities than differences. And you may notice that there is surprisingly little direct comparison between the brands over the years. I attribute that separateness to market politics more than product vision and performance.
The invisible player is the retailer. The displaying retailer played a very significant role in presenting, selling and servicing new, upcoming brands like V and T. I call those dealers pioneers. Only an avid, informed and competent dealer could pull it off against well-funded advertising and promotion from the big brands. There weren't enough great retailers to support both brands. Thiel was sanguine about sharing turf with any competitor, but Vandersteen was not willing to share turf with Thiel, under threat of losing the line. We quickly learned to not approach V dealers. The exception I remember best was Dick Hardesty of the California retailer Havens and Hardesty. Dick was a consumate audiophile / educator who went on to extensively write and edit in the field.
In product terms, Thiel developed many more products at a faster rate than Vandersteen. In market terms, Vandersteen out-sold Thiel by some significant multiple. One huge cause was cabinetry. Vandersteen had in my opinion a brilliant solution: staple particle board into functional modules and dress it in a sock. I say brilliant because their cost of enclosure was a small fraction of Thiels, which left budgets for sonic-only aspects. Thiel's early growth was production-limited due primarily to cabinet-making process development. In many ways the V speakers of the day were musically more refined than Thiel counterparts - V had the luxury of focusing more on sonics without the cabinetmaking burden. When folks visited the Thiel factory they were blown away by the scope and finesse of Thiel's cabinetmaking. Many manufacturers would plausibly claim an order of magnitude greater cost of cabinets. They were also blown away by the internal development machine with its measurements, iterative samples and records and the listening room. Thiel was extremely vertically integrated as was Vandersteen. But V didn't have to lavish attention on furniture until much later, then in products with big prices and much simpler cabinets than entry-level Thiel.
The third horse is a little different. John Dunlavy built Duntech, a successful speaker company in Australia, largely with taxpayer support. John's inventive expertise was antenna theory and implementation. With a patent attorney for a partner, he developed much of what became wireless power transmission - the cell phone network. He moved to Colorado in the 1990s applying his funds and knowledge to building the Dunlavy brand. I saw in his work much careful attention to radiation interference and wave propagation analysis - of course. He had big computers and multiple anechoic chambers. The speaker-making was streamlined by Thiel standards: buy stuff and wire it up in a good box made elsewhere. The target is the same as T and V: cover all bases including time and phase.
The three companies didn't really pay much attention to each other. We were very busy doing out own thing.
Beyond those 3 brands, I noticed that the serious 6-figure brands, mostly in Europe, pay at least lip service to phase-time. There are some including PS and Wilson among others who give a nod to the importance of phase, but their crossovers are second order which requires each adjacent driver to be polarity reversed for smooth summersaults through the spectrum. The Thiel 02 was second order which we abandoned as "not quite real".
I hear that there were a couple of other first-order companies who came and went between 1995 and 2015 while I was away. I can see why they failed; it is very difficult. I can say without reservation that the engineering required to create a truly phase-time coherent speaker with correct tonal balance and dynamic range is a mountain of an undertaking compared to a little rough ground for higher order solutions.
@prof Sorry to read about what you are faced with and are going through. Hope you and the experts are able to get you back to your normal, normal. All the best.
Right On! Tom, Good to see you today. While we are mentioning names, Audio Video Excellence in Raleigh NC had Thiel Audio. I was impressed with Ryan Deans at the helm whom is / was adamant about his loudspeakers. This is the Audio shop where I spent several months with the CS 2.4SE, CS 2.7 and CS 3.7 models in audition. It was a fun experience and experiment sifting through those models in an attempt to find the one for me.I chose the CS 2.4SE as the best performer to my ears. My listening room is not large enough to accommodate the CS 3.7 loudspeaker properly.Ryan's fave was the CS 2.4SE as well. He would not sell his pair to me- smart on his behalf. This was back in the Fall of 2014. It would take searching weekly to find another pair of this model until January of 2016.I acted quickly and made the trek to Austin TX, without reservation, to purchase. Turned out to be a slam dunk, double reverse. Now, to decide on the rest of my gear... Happy Listening!
Good dealers are a treasure! That world is generally fading in the rear-view mirror of Crutchfield, Amazon, ebay and so forth. I bet you will love the 2.4SS (just playing-whatever it will be called).
Now, back to amps. As you know, my reference amps are old classic Classe. Fine amps, hotrodded, drive the Thiels fine, especially a pair of them. Etc. But I need a second amp for proof of upgrade work; I have special considerations beyond my own enjoyment.
Jim judged that the amp's limitations are the amp-maker's problems. Logical enough - except for the consumer who had to spend 5x his speaker price for the right amps, which bucks pretty much . . . everything. As you would expect, I have been surveying the amp world for some solution for driving Thiel speakers with even higher resolution than the originals. That's a double-edged sword . . . wonderful when the signal is great, and even more revealing of trouble when less than great.
I have appreciated your amp leads. I have also investigated the PS Audio BHK-300s, Ayre and other heavy hitters. I don't want to fall into Jim's trap of designing with the stellar amps, which leaves most listeners with less than best or even objectionable performance. What to do? I would like the group's feedback on the following possibility.
Benchmark straddles the fence between pro and audiophile. Their stuff is very clean, neutral, transparent and relatively affordable for its performance level. They now have a power amp, the AHB-2, a hybrid AB amp powered by a class H power supply and class A feed-forward error correction amp. Intriguing concept. The high end pros rave about it. Its measurements are stellar. I am inclined to try it for several reasons, one of which is that it is a marginal player facing the new world with a different vision. Flashing forward 20 years, I want the Thiel HotRods to be sonically viable without requiring Krell, Levinson or similar heavy iron.
The AHB-2 breaks my double-down rule, but only a little and on technicalities. Class H is a switching power supply (which break down when past their current limit). At 100 watts / channel - 8 ohms, it is only marginally adequate. It is precisely that marginality which attracts me. I want to explore that limit of great performance with shallow pockets. Benchmark engineering is analyzing the Thiel loads to make a technical assessment. I admire their approach and there are Thiel fans at Benchmark. Their vision reads like Thiel promotion of my dreams. (I feel that Thiel never promoted itself very effectively.) I am specifically investigating stereo-amp, monobloc-strapped, and vertical bi-amp configurations. The latter would assign one channel of a stereo amp to the bass and the other to everything else. So much to learn.
Anyhow, do any of you have experience with this amp? Or do any of you have thoughts or opinions about my ideas? I would appreciate your feedback.
@prof I too am sorry for your setback and wish you a thorough recovery.
I would add Technical Audio Devices (TAD) Reference Series as another product line whose design shares many of the same goals with Thiel but with a cost-no-object market strategy. These are crazy expensive speakers even at used prices. TAD’s concentric Coherent Source Transducers and slanted baffles should be familiar to Thiel enthusiasts. A TAS review http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/tad-reference-one-loudspeaker-tas-218-1/ describes the crossovers as "asymmetrical [with] non-classic shapes", possibly similar to Thiel crossovers which are acoustically (not electrically) first-order.
I heard a pair of Reference One floor standers http://www.technicalaudiodevices.com/reference/ at an early (first?) Axpona sourced with a master copy reel-to-reel tape of John Lennon solo. It was spooky real. I was running Thiel 2.2s at the time, and had not yet upgraded to 3.7s, treated my room, added subs and a Thiel SI-1 crossover, or upgraded most of the rest of my system. At the time, the TAD system was far and away the most convincing music reproduction I’d ever heard. It was long ago and a different room, so I can’t reliably compare it to my current system. But I can say the gap is much smaller now.
On Thiel dealers: My sales rep in one of two high-end dealers near me was a doctoral student studying voice in our Music department in the mid 1990s. He was quite knowledgeable about audio and sold me on a Classé / Thiel system. I’ve stuck with those two brands ever since with no regrets.
Ish - TAD makes great speakers, thoroughly engineered with world-class materials, at very high prices. The have a strong following in pro and audiophile worlds. I was very impressed with the ones I heard.
The verbiage surrounding tilt and assymetrical slopes is to lead one to believe that all fronts have been addressed. I do not dispute that excellent sound can be heard through non-coherent transducers. Thiel coined the Coherent Source phrase to mean "Minimum Phase - Time Coherent wavefront". TAD does not meet that definition, nor does KEF, B&W and others who suggest that they do. I would not put them on andy-2's list.
Used Krell FPB’s often times recapped, can be regularly found at near bargain prices. IMHO, great sounding amps that are truly up to the task of powering many of the Thiel’s.
https://www.hifishark.com/search?q=krell+fpb
I worry that we sometimes over generalize amps/speakers compatibility.
Don’t get caught up in the hype of the gurus. Check the specs, and better yet check the independent measurements. Doing this will save a lot of wasted time and money, making one’s short list much more manageable. Then sonic preferences will be the final arbitrar. Power amps capable of driving many Thiel’s are often big and heavy. Shipping and set up can get expensive and inconvenient.
True doubling down is really just theoretical. In actuality amps that tout this typically understate the power into higher impedances. In effect there is a window of operation into various loads that will determine appropriate application. Still with that said, I suspect that an amp with less high impedance power that can come closer to doubling down and down again (if necessary for the application) might have some advantages over a high powered amp that still outputs the comparable power into lower impedances, After all the extra power into higher impedances might be wasted. Of course as long as the amp is up to the job, the sonic qualities that are unmeasurable might sway one differently.
Another concern I have is when some say that Jim might have recommended a particular brand of amp at a time when the Thiel products had different amplification requirements than later models. What was recommended then was for then. What came later might get very different recommendations.
I strongly believe that the best course of action is to lean on the side of caution. Check the impedance of a particular Theil model and then double that down to the round impedance divisible for that particular speaker model (e.g. 2.4 Ohms to 2 Ohms) then multiply the minimum recommended power for that particular Thiel model down to that impedance (e.g. 100-400 Watts to 400-1200 Watts). This will be especially true with tube amplification. Of course different rooms and volume expectations will vary power requirements. Personally I think the old audiophile rule of thumb to double the minimum recommended power, though not hard and fast, has proven to be well time tested. As has been pointed out being stable into short term peaks is not really good enough for many Thiel models.
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.
