Thiel Owners

ish - I know those Hales speakers very well. I consulted for Hales during their development and compared 1st vs 4th order XOs. Paul is very bright and competent and pragmatic. The development time / cost / benefit and all adds up to 4th being "good enough because people can't hear the difference". Note from these impulse responses that the speaker is neither time nor phase correct. Paul didn't think it necessary. https://www.stereophile.com/content/hales-design-group-transcendence-five-loudspeaker-measurements

The sealed bass is awesome and Paul thought it embarrassed Thiel's reflex bass. OK. The sloped baffle was for the purpose of what your salesman executed in the store. The German who had resurrected Hales Design Group from the ashes of Hales Audio wanted SALES. By the way, the baffle was not concrete, but Hydrostone a fiber reinforced combination of portland and gypsum cements which I had developed for the CS6, but Jim substituted concrete after I left. Jim thought of "concrete" as the optimum enclosure material and Walter Kling who replaced me had an architectural/ builder background. Concrete lasted a very short time because it shrinks for 7 years and cracked at stress points. I doubt that Hales baffles ever cracked. Nevermind.

Hales frequency response is exceedingly flat and its component and build quality is very good. But it is a horse of a different color.

@tomthiel, my understanding is that the reduction in shrinkage is mainly due to the fiber.  Is that correct?  I've been wanting to build a madisound kit and make the baffle out of concrete.  I have the concrete, a bag of glass fiber and some plasticizer.  I went so far as to create the cutouts for the drivers.  I've got little kids so what would take a normal person a weekend will take me a year if I'm lucky.  I've been buying most of the tools I'll need slowly.  Main problem is when I have the time I don't have the energy and vice versa.  

jon - the fiber is to increase impact and stress resistance and add some damping. It does not reduce shrinkage. Concrete is Portland Cement based, which shrinks. Gypsum cements expand. USG Hydrostone is a combination of the two and can be admixed with acrylic, etc. plasticizers to increase damping at the expense of lowering resonance frequency. Paul added some plasticizer. I chose to run straight but added two different fibers which serves to suppress resonance & increase stiffness. I like grown solutions, and used hemp and rice awn fibers, but most folks would choose polypropylene or glass, etc. USG has zero, expansive and contractive products. I suggest you look there. I investigated air entrainment in the baffle core for lower mass & higher resonance frequency. These were follow-on developments after the CS5 cast marble baffle, which worked well, but cost and weighed a lot.

All, is anyone here bidding on that 3.5 EQ? If not, I'll try to snag it for the lab. (Remember the idea of fully balanced EQ with better caps and resistors?)

Wow Tom, you've been around!

I thought the bass on my Hales T5s was excellent, but thought the bass of the CD6 even better (more dense, focused, punchy) as well as the 3.7 and 2.7.

Tom,

Also...after the Hale Transcendence 8's Paul built a new interesting looking flagship speaker, the Alexandra (or Alexandria), which can be seen down the page in this old CES 99 report:

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/wces99/speakers.htm

The few people who heard it absolutely raved about it.  But since it never went in to production due to Hales folding soon afterward, it became something of a unicorn. Did you ever hear it?

I finally got around to measuring my room/speaker interactions on my Thiel 2.4s using REW and uploading a convolution filter to roon.  ITS AMAZING!  TIGHTENING UP EVERYTHING.  Imaging if far superior now to what it was before.  Frighteningly good.  Suggest you try it.

prof - I have not heard the Alexandra. I moved to New Hampshire and by the late 90s I was focused on things other than audio.

pw - The room is so often the major culprit in the mix. Thiels are point source emulation and therefore wide dispersion, so room reflections matter more. Also the coherent wavefront tends to stimulate room modes more readily than the slurred wavefronts of higher order speakers. I am a fan of physical room treatment as much as possible. Tell us about REW.

All - Are any of you proficient in patent and trademark law? If so I would like to confer about Thiel intellectual property. Send PM or email tomthiel@worldpath.net

tomthiel

Thank You for being a valuable team member, contributor, here on this thread. Fascinating information on Hales and baffle design structure.
Hope one of the men here can assist you on Patent, Trademark Law.

Happy Listening!

pwhinson

Thank You for the update on room correction. Looking forward in reading more about your Pass Labs amp.  Happy Listening!

I bought a pair of CR 3.6 speakers so long ago I can't even remember when I got them. I run them through JRDG model 6 SS monoblocks and a Krell KRC-3 pre-amp. Its a pretty sweet sounding combination. I know Theil is no longer in business so grab it while you can

I bought a pair of CR 3.6 speakers so long ago I can't even remember when I got them. I run them through JRDG model 6 SS monoblocks and a Krell KRC-3 pre-amp. Its a pretty sweet sounding combination. 
the s/n for the speakers are 1786 and I can only assume 1785 or 1787 for the other( I cant read it anymore)
I am by no means an ""audiophile" so I wont pretend

jasx - your other speaker is 1785, always odd low as in 1,2. They were made approximately late 90s, model was introduced in 1992.

I just bought a pair of 3.6s for our upgrade project. Soon I will document the XO revision status / serial numbers for our benchmark timeline. 

Well done Tom buying the 3.6s!....can't wait for your XO upgrade/revision project.

I am looking forward to the 3.6 XO upgrade/revision too. Please keep us CS3.6 owners updated.

jasx67...I don't consider myself having audiophile knowledge, but I do consider myself having audiophile ears. I am acquiring quite a bit of knowledge on this forum, though.

Jon

I own a pair of 2 2's as well as four 3.5's.  I am wondering, from those who have had 2.2's, 2.3's, and 2.4's what the sonic differences were as you go up the line.  But even more importantly, what the problem is with the 2.3's that keeps their used value closer to the 2.2's than to 2.4's.  Is it reliability, and if so, what?   Thank you in advance for your help.

harry - I can address part of your query. The 2.2s were very well developed / mature and had a long run. Lots of fans. The 2.3s were the first application of the mechanical / crossover-less coax concept. I hear that there were improvements on the table pretty early, and not many 2.3s were sold, perhaps the shortest run ever. The 2.4 was a big uptick in performance and sales and has been an audiophile darling, possibly more so than any other Thiel product. That's some market mechanics.

Some folks here can address the sonic differences. I have and love my 2.2s and am working on a hotrod kit for them.

PS: I am calling the 2.2s by their proper name. The decimal was dropped under threat of lawsuit by Bose. But the product has been out of manufacture for way long, Mr. Bose is no longer with us, his legal staff was embarrassed . . . so let's pretend they don't care anymore.

Guys - Ted Green / strata-gee.com has published his article on Thiel,LLC recent bankruptcy filing. https://www.strata-gee.com/

I have an MCS-1 and 2 2s.  I believe the MCS-1 has the same mid/tweeter as the 2.3.  I used to use the MCS-1 when I had room for a 5.1 home theater in my basement.  My impression after having lived with both for a while is that I preferred the sound of the 2 2.  I never did a careful comparison or anything so don't take this too seriously.  I would guess this is due to the driver material.  I believe the MCS1 uses some kind of ceramic coat on aluminum.  I had a couple of pairs of infinity speakers in the past that used the same basic thing I think and I never thought they had low level resolution like paper does.  I'm guessing that this problem was solved on the 2.4s or they wouldn't have so many fans.  

jon - all the Thiel aluminum drivers are annodized which deposits a coating which is often marketed as "ceramic". Your 2.3 driver is an early example of Thiel aluminum diaphragms. When gotten right, those metal drivers have far better resolution than paper, but paper can be pretty good and is very forgiving. I think the 2.2 midrange was Thiel's last paper cone, which was actually augmented with polypropylene fibers for greater stiffness and consistency than plain paper.

Tom,

Thanks for the link to that strata-gee article.

Your previous post is now making some sense ;-)

I'd followed all those strata-gee articles documenting the decline of Thiel as it happened.   It was great that there was a writer interested in following the story.  The strata-gee writer seemed to have quite an interest in the Thiel company.  Any particular reason?  Was he a high end audo fan? 

Those articles always make me want to give my Thiel speakers a hug :)

prof - Ted Green runs a technology consulting company. His interest in Thiel is as a former performing musician / bandleader with an inherent interest in David rather than Goliath. He seems to know brands and nuances very well, but has never said he was an audiophile or Thiel owner. He does admire what we did.

I am in direct contact with the bankruptcy court as well as some recommendations from this forum. It seems there is a streamlined process whereby an "affinity group" can form an expedited company to purchase assets such as the intellectual property of the bankrupted Thiel LLC. Hmmm

jasx67

Welcome! Glad you found us. Thank You for posting your SN on the 3.6 loudspeakers.  Looking forward in reading more about your system and musical tastes.  Happy Listening!

harrylavo

That is quite a collection of speakers- you are certainly a Thiel Man at heart.  Several of the guys here own the CS 2.2 as well as the 3.5 model.
If you have not done so, read this thread from post #1 to the present. There is a plethora of good, solid information in this thread.

Happy Listening!

tomthiel

Nice! score on the 3.6 loudspeakers.  There are a few owners here that will benefit from your XO project. Across other Audio forums the 3.6 model is quite popular as well.  Hope you are well and enjoying Fall.

Happy Listening!

Ah, Bose! *Now* we know the rest of the story.

The CS2 2 is dead. Long live the CS2.2!

I'll be happy to consider supporting an affinity group that might obtain the property and other rights of Thiel llc. Anyone else?

I've been quiet on this forum but had started to follow this thread lately. I got to say that I am very happy to see people like tomethiel here sharing lots information about the brand history and products. My experience with CS3.5 ( back in 2001? ) turned me into a Thiel believer, and had since added pair of CS 3.6, and moved 3.5 into bedroom :) They are just fabulous :) So just greetings to all, i think we are a group of happy people here.

TomThiel,
 it's very clear that you are the most reputable source here concerning Thiel's history and secrets. I've to confess that I fell in love with Thiel's thinking and soul before I became a owner of this amazing speakers. I found in your company, in you all very first founders a blend of uncommon passion, top technical competence and quality in construction second to none, I perceived all this years ago reading severals interviews to Jim, listening to all those ultra positive assessments from worldwide owners and eventually through my personal listening experiences attending to several audio show. After some time I wanted learn more on the Coherent Source concept and its really meaning and I ended with the thinking that it appeared to me to be the most serious and credible attempt to come as close as possible to the truth, musically speaking.
Now I'm a proud Thiel's speakers owner with no intention to get rid of them... maybe a pair more.
Thank you Tom , you all really did a memorable job, a milestone in the audio history.

beetle - I moved to New Hampshire in 1996 and have been active in the New England Luthiers Group - serious guitar-makers. A few of them have worked for Bose, with stories to tell! One story of interest is that their lab/listening reference monitor was the Thiel CS3.5. Now, isn't that special?

^Oh, the irony!

Tom,

". . . their lab/listening reference monitor was the Thiel CS3.5. Now, isn't that special? "

At least some one had good taste!

(Former 3.5 owner)   

audiojessl

Welcome! Good to read that you found us here. As you will read, the 3.5 and 3.6 models are quite popular. Looking forward in reading more about you and your system.  Happy Listening!

Happy Friday - All.

I’m excited to report that I recently scored a very nice pair of 3.5s at a vintage resale shop for $275.  I love them and while I know they have been well surpassed they now sit in my living room making great music!

bcupari

Welcome!  Good to read that you found us here. Nice score on the 3.5 loudspeaker. It has quite a following here and is a favorite of oblgny.

Take your time and read through this thread for valuable information regarding all things Thiel Audio. We have an outstanding panel of contributors and fans of this brand. I look forward in reading more about you and your system.

Happy Listening!

Well guys, I have been doing homework on the (new) Thiel, LLC bankruptcy as well as making slow progress on classic hot-rods. First project will be beetlemania's CS2.4s - pretty full-blown in scope.

What has been getting clearer is that the low-impedance problem rests at the root of much of the system limit. We can't change the low impedance load. I also want to avoid dodging the issue by requiring heavy iron amplifiers, which are few and expensive and, of course, can work very well, but the matching problem persists. I am exploring a different way to address the issues while avoiding the pitfalls of bi-amping with different amps and different cables. Here goes.

Most amps behave better into low impedance (heavy) loads in their normal 8-ohm / stereo (or 4 ohm if tubes) configuration rather than strapped to mono. I will be testing amps in a vertical bi-amp configuration, where one channel drives the woofer and the other the uppers, however that breaks out depending on model. We sequester various load and performance problems into the respective ranges. We can also internally hard-jumper for single input operation. We specify short runs of specialty cables - same lengths, same configuration, preferably 4 runs in same loom for even-handed capacitance and inductive cable reactances. I have ordered Morrow SP-4 bi-amp in this configuration. We will need special splitter interconnects with single source and double load (at power amp end) terminations. We add potential solutions without limiting our operating options.

I will be using my workhorse Classé DR-6 pre and DR-9 poweramps. Old, but decent and well known to me. I also hope to gain use of an older Ayre amp of suitable capability. Again, not the giant super studs, but something more affordable which many users could obtain. I have ruled out many amps as very good, but . . . somehow not neutral or transparent. For my learning and proving the designs, I need neutral, uncolored signal. I have about decided on the Benchmark AHB-2. It is a new hybrid configuration and loved in pro circles as a very great truth-teller (that I can afford). Two of them will allow trials in single amp stereo, strapped mono and vertical bi-amp as described above. John Siau (its designer) has endorsed its ability to support our heavy loads.

I am accustomed to working in mono with one speaker. So I will keep an original reference for comparison as I iterate the mate. Things are coming together to actually get to work. I am both excited and apprehensive. The apprehension centers on the nature of proposed improvements. Resolution / detail / articulation is the strong suit of Thiel designs. Most of our projected improvements will be in that same arena. We will be lavishing costs on an area of performance which is already first-rate and therefore not functionally a system limit. But, I for one and possibly some of you might find meaningful improvement in what we are undertaking. May it be so. That's the exciting part.

bcupari - and all - keep your radar out for spare 3.5 drivers. They are no longer made and in short supply. If enough interest develops, I hope to address the 3.5 upgrade in a subsequent round.

Great to hear that you are reconsidering creating an upgrade for the 3.5 I'll be curious.

Doesn’t the guy who runs the old thiel service rebuild them albeit at a hefty price?

Tom,You wrote: "I have ruled out many amps as very good, but . . . somehow not neutral or transparent. "

Could you please list these for our enlightenment?
Todd

I was able to obtain the CS2.4 oxver upgrade information from the other thread.  Doesn't seem that difficult and I can't see why there would be any problem.  I think I'll give it a try next week.

@andy2 lots of upgrade info this this thread also. In particular, look for posts by Tom Thiel starting about March 2018. Quite a lot to read and there probably isn’t any one post with the latest info but worth your time if you’re serious about an upgrade. Tom still hopes to offer kits but timeline is unknown (he originally hoped to have 2.4 kits by the end of the year - the best laid plans . . .). 

Hi Thiel lover's,

Sorry for my crooked English.

I am a new proud owner of a set CS 2.4 loudspeakers,  running them with Audio-GD pre/DAC/amp and a Mano Ultra streamer.

Really love the CS 2.4 and in my experience the best sounding loudspeakers I ever had, but knowing the crossovers are always a compromise to keep loudspeakers affordable I upgraded the crossovers of the tweeter/mid unit with Jantzen caps, see also,
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/thiel-cs2-4-upgrade-to-cs-2-4-se

Because off the great!! improvement I like tho do the whole crossover but I am not sure what to upgrade, only thing I can think of is to replace the woofer coil for a nice Jantzen  wax coil, but what about the resistors in series on the tweeter/mid crossovers?
They are not part of the 6db crossover but the signal is going true them, confused!!??

Greetings from Holland, 

Mario

but what about the resistors in series on the tweeter/mid crossovers?
They are not part of the 6db crossover but the signal is going true them, confused!!??

There are two possibilities:

1. The resistor is in series with cap that eventual leads to the mid/tweeter.
    In this case, it is worth upgrading them to better spec resistors.

2. The resistor is in shunt to the mid/tweeter network then it is not in the critical path which means it is not critical so upgrading will not yield any meaningful improvement.  But resistors are mostly less expensive so since you're already in there, might as well upgrading then as well.

I have not seen the xover network in person yet so I am not sure if the resistor is either #1 or #2.

Also, in my experience, caps make a lot more differences vs. inductors so upgrading the inductors may not yield a lot of improvement.  That said, there is sonic difference between foil and wire type inductor.  Having seen the xover in picture, the inductor coil in the bass xover is of wire wound coil inductor so it may be better to replace it with another wire wound type inductor.  The original inductor looks like having a 16 AWG, so upgrading to something like 12AWG inductor may give you slightly more bass.

Also looking at some of the xover pictures, the wiring may deserve some upgrading as well.  I guess it won't be much work to upgrade to something like Supra wire from Madisound.com.

Thanks for your input andy2, much appreciated :-)  

I have the xover network,
https://www1.picturepush.com/photo/a/16061554/1024/Thiel-CS-2.4/CS-2.4%3ESE.png

I have a Audio-GD Master 3 power amp (250W 8ohm / 500W 4ohm / 1000W 2ohm), it drives my CS 2.4 perfectly.