jazzman7
I have only heard the 3BST with an ARC Ref5 SE pre-amp. This is a magical combination indeed.
Happy Listening!
I have only heard the 3BST with an ARC Ref5 SE pre-amp. This is a magical combination indeed.
Happy Listening!
Thiel Owners
Guys-
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!
Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
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!
Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
14,028 responses Add your response
service_guy Welcome! Good to see you here. We have a few 3.6 fans and owners on the Panel. Take your time and read through this thread for a plethora of Thiel information. You have a nice system. Good to learn that Tara Labs is a sonic match as well. What are your fave musical genres? Happy Listening! |
Hi all, been around for awhile, new to this discussion. This is just my 2 cents, and here is some background. I worked for 12+ yrs part time in the audio business, bread and butter stuff, good audio, real good stuff to select customers, we also did a small line of in-house speakers that I designed and manufactured for a few years, and we sold all I made, custom car audio, competition car audio which I did almost all the sales and all of the design and installation. We also did commercial sales and installation. Yes I worked lots of hours........ Ok on to my setup Thiel CS3.6 that I purchased on my birthday 8 yrs ago after waiting 20 yrs for a pair. Even back in the day when I worked in the business, I could not afford them, rasing kids and paying for a house, but a real good pair popped up just before my birthday and my wife and decided to go have a listen, and bring my amp at the time along for the demo. She agreed the price was quite good, the distance not to bad (120 miles away for all the US people) so we should hear them, she knew I always wanted a pair, and she has been my second set of ears since I have been around audio. Needless to say they came home with us. The demo was ok, not earth shattering, but I knew the good was there, just needed to be brought forward with gear tweaking. So my system has been through several changes, many different amps, pre amps and cabling. Later I make mention of a manufacture visit, he wasn't the only one I have had visit. Another manufacturer from here in Ottawa reached out to me, as he had heard I had a pair of Thiel CS3.6 (their reputation preceded them) and he asked if I would be kind enough to allow him to bring over a pair of mono tube amps to see how they faired with the big Thiels His pair of mono amps (18 watts) are priced at $12K USD, or close to $15K in todays Canadian dollars. Not enough power for daily use, sounded pretty good and he was happy with the outcome, his amps lived to tell the tale. Where I am now is: Thiel CS3.6 in Amberwood, all original as far as I am aware, on homemade spikes that I fabbed up, no feet or spikes came with them when I purchased. Yorkville Audio Pro AP1200 Power Amp, yes a pro amp DESIGNED and BUILT not far from me in Yorkville Ontario Canada. Over a kilowatt of power, and a REAL 60 amps of current. 2 ohm burst power at 1kh both channels drive is 1325 watts per channel, 100kz burst power is 1025 watts and 625 continuous into 2 ohms. The amp comes setup to drive 2 ohm loads fro the factory and has to be configured internally to drive 8 ohm loads. Yorkville says right in the manual they will drive a dead short, but please don't do it, its hard on the outputs. Toroidal transformer is almost 9" in diameter and the thickness of the case and it makes up most of the amps 33lb weight Adequate power to drive the hungry CS's They are bridgeable if I really what to have serious power, 1300 watts continuous, burst at 100kz 4 ohm mono is 2 kilowatts!! Not spec'd into 2 ohm mono, but Yorkville says it will do it no problem, as I am not driving it hard at all, it would be "just fine" they say. 90db listening levels at 8 ft in my room just lights the activity lights on the amp, so I am pretty sure I don't "need "the 2 kilowatts These amps are designed to be dragged down the road by the cord, racked, and then drive 18" pro audio sub bins all night at clipping or just under, so they will live forever in a home environment. I have been through a number of amps, some good, some not so good, some other Canadian amps, Audio Design amps actually and Howard Brown who was the driving force behind them back in the day is still very active on a well know Canadian audio forum, and I have had several conversations with him, a spectacular human being, Kudos Howard! The best I actually heard on the CS's was a short demo with a Moon W5, just sublime as far as I am concerned, but out of reach money wise, and I wasn't buying the amp, it was a favour to a person buying some cables from me. The AP is close, at 1/10 the cost, law of diminishing returns at play, me thinks so...... Stock AC cord is used, as it is captive. Dolan PM-1 Pre amp Very well designed and built like a tank Canadian pre amp built right here in Ottawa back in the day. Well reviewed and sought after. Amazing phono stage. I have been blessed with having Richard Dolan ( the man responsible for the PM-1) over to the house to hear my setup and have some real interesting discussion about the design and manufacture of his pre amp, from early design, testing and listening sessions to settle on which part gets used where, some real interesting stuff. A great opportunity to host a person who actually made one of the pieces in your system, does't happen often, not to me anyway. And if I remember correctly Richard met Jim a couple times at shows. The Dolan story is kinda sad in some ways, I think Richard should write a book, just my opinion, and Richard is another great human being, it was pleasure to spend time with him A spectacular pre amp, that contains 3200 parts assembled in the correct order! Stock AC cord is used, as it is captive. Digital Audio is done by an Asus HTPC in a audio component looking case, Intel i5 2.8 ghz 32GB ram and oversize CPU fan that runs very slow, for low noise, less that 30db at normal speed, 47db max, so I have never heard it actually except when I built the system and booted it with cover off, very quiet. SSD 500gb OS drive Win 10 and an 8TB storage drive that contains all my media (this is my media server for my whole house) and an Asus Xonar Essence STX dedicated sound card (Dual Burr-Brown 24 bit DAC's) that I use to feed the Dolan PM-1. Foobar is my media front end of choice, along with app on my Android phone takes care of all my hard digital media as well as any streaming service I prefer. I have some HiRez stuff and some not so high rez, but all ripped in lossless if at all possible. I use a Tara Labs Prism AC power cable to the HTPC, and I purchased the best 650 watt power supply that I could when I built the HTPC, the Zonar is also powered from the power supply via Molex connector, not from the PCI-e bus. Systemdek iiX turntable with Profile arm and a Shure M95HE cartridge for my LP collection. The Dolan has a spectacular phono stage in it, one reason they are sought after, is that vey reason, and Richard telling me about that was a small book on its own, lets just say that was was the most time spent on the pre. Cabling and speaker cable is all Tara Labs RSC Reference Gen 2 that I have owned since being in the business, best cable as far as I am concerned, I am sure YMMV I also have a couple pieces of Cardas Neutral Reference RCA and they are good, but I like the detail of the Tara, feed the Thiels the best possible signal, don't sugar coat it. So I love my CS3.6, I will alway have them, as far as I am concerned, my last pair of speakers, I may pick up something else interesting, but the 3.6's stay. They do everything I need them to do, and they play all the music I listen too, and that range is pretty wide and they play as quiet or as loud as I need, and at low volume they DO NOT lose the dynamics, and thats quite a trick to pull off. I know some say they are "hard" "bright" "brittle" and I feel for those people that haven't heard them driven correctly, but peoples tastes vary, some people like a coloured speaker, I don't. Ok, I have babbled enough. I just need to say thanks to the group, and mostly to Jim for leaving us a suburb product for all of us to enjoy. Thanks again Jim where ever you are! |
I think it’s by far a better mid hopefully I can learn some crossover stuff (just bought a few books) and learn how to bring it down a little bit so it’s more even in loudness with the rest of the drivers. Obviously consulting with thiel while I’m doing it. Anyways time for a new laptop cause my current one can’t handle the software that I’m trying to get that thiel told me about. |
@prof Love your description of 3D imaging / soundstage. Well put. @yyzsantabarbara Congrats at getting through your rebuild. A lot of work while learning new stuff along the way. Not a bad way to pass time during a pandemic. Been doing a lighter weight thing with my 3.5 mid drivers. 13m > 10f 3.5 mid follow up: They do seem to be breaking in and evening out in a good way. No new measurements taken - just subjective impressions. I am back to listening to complete songs and enjoying the music. I will try refoaming my bad 13m and at some point put the originals back in. For now I will keep enjoying the 10f's and see how they (and my ears) evolve. |
As an FYI. Here is a link to the technical details of what I described in my past post on this thread. The author of this article is the person who did my DRC work. He is a big fan of Thiel's and used to own the CS3.7. https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/bits-and-bytes/what-is-accurate-sound-r923/ |
jafant The Premier 12s don’t have easily user accessible 2,4,8 Ohm taps, but they are available in the design so a local dealer can apparently switch them to whatever tap you want. They come configured for 4 Ohm taps, which makes sense because, per JA’s measurements, they seem to be essentially designed for 4 Ohm output, generating most power/least distortion at 4 Ohm. That’s no doubt why they seem to have worked so well with all sorts of lower sensitivity/harder to drive speakers I’ve owned including the Thiels. The CJs don't seem to "need" a high sensitivity or higher/even impedance load to work great. Since my Joseph speakers are closer to 8 Ohms I did some research in to whether it made sense to have the CJs configured for 8 Ohm output.But research yielded information suggesting that it’s actually generally best to go with a 4 Ohm output if you can (and not just with the CJ tube amps). Even for tube amps that increase power output at 8 Ohms, or speakers that are 8 Ohms, apparently a 4 Ohm output will tend to yield the best accuracy and bass control. So for some amp/speaker pairings you may loose a tiny bit of power headroom, for slightly better sound out of 4 Ohm taps (and since it will likely be a mostly inconsequential amount, the overall better sound from the 4 Ohm can be the better choice). Again, since the CJ outputs the most power/accuracy at 4 Ohm, I leave it there and it works great with my Joseph speakers too. |
@tomthiel, Jim’s idea of costs coming down with production would seem to make sense. Amortization sets in at some point, no? I only referenced the combinations that I did as a refence to what Jim was using. Other than for small receiver/ shelf mount little systems. Packaged setups weren’t the norm at the NYC dealers. Although Lyric used to demo Maggies with Audio Research often, and Levinson might be hooked up from time to time. But not so much at Innovative, where the set up was more often what ever the last customer requested. When one walked in you never knew what speakers were in what rooms or connected to what gear on any given day. Adcom was getting a lot of attention back then, so it wasn’t uncommon to see that set up. But Krell, Spectral, c-j, P.S. Audio, etc. would very often be hooked up too. I got to know the owner of Innovative in another environment/relationship and he claimed that the CS 3.5’s were amongst his all time favorite products. First and foremost because he sold a boatload of them, and secondly because they so easily demonstrated the virtues of moving up to better gear. More sales to a steady, returning clientele. Innovative were big Linn dealers, and Linn was all about the upgrade path. Of course this was all before personal PC’s, the internet, and HT was just emerging. People seemed to spend a lot more of their discretionary income on hi fi in those days. |
prof - I've settled on VTL tube amps versus any solid state amp I've had on the 3.5's, for the very reasons you cite. I had an ARC D90 when I first bought the 3.5's and liked it very much, except it's soundstaging was nowhere. I tried CJ solid state, and liked it .... had some "rounding" similar to tubes, but sounded "hollow" compared to the tubes. The only transistor amp I've had driving the Thiels that sounded good was the old Amber Series 70 amplifier. I agree with you, ultimate detail does not win over ultimate musicality in my book. |
I jumped the gun and decided to contact AccurateSound.ca to do the DRC from my ROON based music (not my tuner or SACD player). My speakers have 2 brand new COAX drivers with less than 10 hours burn-in, I was told 200 is needed. So far, with these new drivers, my system has sounded the best. Which makes sense after fixing all the damaged driver, wring, and air leak issues. So I decided to jump the gun and see what Mitch Barnett could do with system in it’s current form. I sent him the measurements that he needed and a few hours later he came back with the first of 6 Convolution filters. This is a computer zip file that gets loaded onto the ROON server to act as an software equalizer before my digital data hits the DAC. The goal is to create a sound curve that is optimized for my room and sitting position. I have a big speaker in a small room and I sit slightly to the left side of the sweet spot. Mitch created a filter using the Audiolense software (he also works with Accurate, but not in my case). The first filter he sent me was jaw dropingly great. I was floored how perfect the sound was. I am listening to a bunch of different music to come up with ideas for the other 5 filters, but really having a tough time figuring out what needs improvement. I suggested another filter with a bit more bass. He also suggested something that fits the Harman target curve. We will figure some new ones on Monday. I am currently listening to Santana’s Woodstock recording. I listened to it at a dealer on Wednesday. It was on a $32K Paradigm Persona 9H speaker + Mark Levinson gear. The bass was way more powerful (and incredible) than what I have with the CS3.7. However, there is no contest on the COAX vs the Be drivers on the 9H. I think the 9H was not setup well in the room, because I have heard the 3F and 5F sound better than this 9H demo, but nevertheless I love what I am hearing today with the CS3.7. This office system I have is now perfect. https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/7605 |
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/forum/speaker-project-gallery/45255-thiel-cs3-5-cabinets-project/p... I wonder if the crossover is copying the original and new drivers or completely different... |
I use the CJ Premier 12 monoblocks (140W/side).Tube richness but with power, grip, control and nothing "slow" about the sound. Michael Fremer truly nailed the sound in this review: https://www.stereophile.com/tubepoweramps/653/index.html |
From 1996 to 2004 I had CS .5 speakers paired with an ADS A2 integrated amp. It was a decent and highly enjoyable combination. Then my ADS A2 gave up the ghost after some 20 years of faithful service. Simon, the owner of Audio Consultants suggested a used four year old Bryston 3BST as a replacement. Turns out I really didn't know what I had until the Bryston amp together with a Bryston preamp replaced the ADS A2. What I then heard from the CS .5 speakers was an absolute revelation. |
Unsound - good horses keep living and living. Your judicious explication reminds me of a general theme which our Goners might enjoy. Thiel presented a peculiar problem for many retailers, including Innovative Audio. Retailers make packages. Those packages follow guidelines or rules. In the day it went something like one third budget for source, a third for amplification and a third for speakers. Give or take a lot. Thiel comes along and the formula crumbles because Thiel rarely sounds very good with an equally priced amp, and someone with twice the amp budget is inclined to believe that a speaker at twice the price of Thiel is better for him/her. (Most often him - often her perspective permitted the Thiel, damn the formula.) Jim had no patience for what he considered such illogical behavior. His formula was that lower prices make easier sales. He also fought to lower prices, especially at product introduction, with unrealistic and ill-founded ideas of how costs would fall as production rose. In fact the opposite was true, but that’s a different story. But the fallout was that just as the retailers settled into their Thiel pricing / presentation strategy, the prices would rise significantly to the consternation of many dealers. The joys of sales rival those of manufacturing. LOL. Audio Consultants in Chicago broke the mold splendidly. They set up Thiels in multiple rooms spread over multiple stores so that customers could hear $2500 speakers driven by $10,000 amps and understand that the whole budget was well spent. AC was our top dealer year after year. |
Thielrules I did not use REW- and did not know about it until your mention. Room EQ Wizard? I’ll download and check it out. I simply used Logic’s EQ plugin and snapped a few pics while pink noise was playing. I didn’t go too crazy with it. I also recorded musical passages to compare by ear. Email is noams@comcast.net if you’d like to see what I got - imperfect as my methods where. |
@jon_5912 I don't know that the CJ is rolling off the treble. At least, it doesn't sound like it - it doesn't sound darker, in fact a bit more lower treble illumination. In comparison the Bryston actually sounds a bit darker. And of course the differences I'm describing fits in to the "picky little audiophile differences" category. But as we all know, those little differences we seize on to can have big subjective effects in how we enjoy our systems. I swear, sometimes I feel like I might not even be in this hobby if it weren't for tube amps :-) |
@tomthiel, at the risk of beating a dead horse, please note in order to have a consistent, generally available reference that I used the Audiogon Blue Book for pricing. I also used end of cycle pricing for the CS 3.5's combination, and beginning of cycle pricing for the CS 3.7's combination. The original pricing for the CS 3.5's was about $2550 and the original pricing for the Threshold S500 was about $2900. Of course that doesn't take inflation into consideration. The end of cycle Threshold S550e was priced over twice that cost, which included a nice upgrade of dual trannies and true balanced inputs, that couldn't be used with the 3.5's eq. On the other hand the $11,000 pricing quote of the 3.7's seems quite low, as the Stereophile link suggests $12,900. IMO, the CS 3.5's were and are one of the all time audio bargains. Kudos to you and the rest of the Thiel team! |
@prof, in the past I've thought that rolled off highs improved imaging. I thought that the very high sounds threw off my ability to hear spatially. I'm entirely in the listen to what you enjoy camp so I'm not at all critical of tube lovers. I just wonder if I'm the only one that has gotten this impression. |
I've been enjoying the comments and historical perspectives from @unsound and @tomthiel regarding the 3.5s and Thiel's efforts at creating solid and marketable bass. Although I generally like sealed boxes for producing tight bass, I have to agree with @prof that I've really enjoyed the bass performance of Thiel's passive radiators, such as those in my 2.2s. This discussion got me thinking about my purchase of the 2.2s way back in early 1992, at which time I debated between the 2.2 and the 3.5. Although the 3.5s sounded good, there was something more natural and "together" about the 2.2s - at least to my ears. There was something about the EQ on the 3.5 that I didn't really like. Maybe the ones I heard weren't set up correctly or maybe I had just been brainwashed enough by the critiques of the 3.5 equalizer in TAS and Stereophile, but the 2.2s were a better value in my eyes (and ears). The 2.2s were sleeker, cheaper, and sweeter IMO, and I haven't regretted the choice a bit. And lately I've been finding that upgrades to my amps, preamp, DAC and cables have opened up the sound from the 2.2s further than I could ever have imagined possible. Unless my 2.2s finally succumb to the ravages of old age and can't be repaired, I have no plans to be speaker-hunting in the future. |
I tried throwing the Bryston 4B3 amp in to the system again today, doing some back and forth between it powering the Thiels and my CJ tube amp. I keep thinking "I’ll put it in and just live with it for a while." But when I put on familiar tracks - e.g. Talk Talk’s Happiness Is Easy - I can’t help be taken aback by the difference. "Where is that roundness, fullness, 3 dimensionality of the images?" By 3 dimensionality I don’t mean that with the Bryston the Thiels don’t image/soundstage. They certainly do, with precisely placed voices and instruments. But the voices and instruments themselves sound flattened dimensionally and tonally. More like the way "3D" images look on those old viewmasters - a series of flatt images placed in 3D relief. That’s an exaggeration, but essentially the nature of the difference I perceive. I put back in the CJ, and everything sounds bigger, more filled out, the drum kick and snare sound rich, with a present texture, the drum-set now seems more 3 dimensional like I’m peering in to the studio, voice sounds organic, acoustic guitars have that similar golden sparkle I hear from my own guitar, etc. And with the Bryston, string/keyboard parts that usually float organically and 3D sound thinner, flatter, more icy in tone and texture. Interestingly, this is exactly the character I perceived when my friend switched from his tube set up to the Bryston, at his house. Ever since then I’ve found a slightly off-putting coldness/hardness/icy quality to the sound - things sound clear but nothing sounds organic and real. (Though I never tell him this! I know not to excite audiophilia nervosa!) Anyway, none of that is to say the Bryston is objectively worse than the CJ tube amps. The Bryston also brings some excellent qualities. Just not the ones I tend to value first. |
What little I know about Adcom. In the day, Adcom may have out-sold everything else put together - solid entry into high value high performance. I knew Nelson Pass at the time and he designed a few of their mark I products. The updates and mark II versions were not designed by him. In his (paraphrased) words: "I would design a simple, clean, straight-forward unit, it would have its market life and then they (Adcom) would hand it off to someone else to pile on the parts." He said he had nothing to do with the GFA555mkII. It was designed by a well regarded French designer with considerably more complex circuitry and feedback schemes. Fast forward: I contacted Jim Williams regarding upgrading my 555mkII. Jim rebuilds and upgrades professional studio gear out west, considered about the best it gets. He upgraded my Studio Technologies mic preamp that I got from Tom Jung. Jim picks only gear with solid upgrade potential into the big leagues. The improvement in the mic pre was stunning in every audiophile respect as well as textbook measurements. This is all to say that Jim told me he doesn't work on 555mkIIs - he doesn't really like them. BUT if I sent him an original 555, I would like what he sent back. Two points: 1: don't assume a later amp in the line is the same. 2: If you stumble on a good deal on an original 555, snag it, for yourself or me. I would have it delivered to Jim Williams and eagerly await its arrival in my hotrod garage. |
Also bonedog someone on the adcom group over on Facebook made an little unit to go in between the speakers and the amp that is a protection block. Something I will be investing into despite that the adcom 5800 has no signs of anything bad in it now or anytime soon. It does not mess with the signal in any way shape or form. The guy is a genius. |
@thoft. FWIW I used an Adcom 555II on the 3.5's for years. I installed a high quality passive stepped attenuator in it and ran my DAC directly into the amp. I now use an old Superphon preamp into a Classe C300. I'd say the Adcom set up gave me about 70% of what I'm hearing now. Unfortunately I never did run the Superphon with the Adcom, but if experience with the Classe is any indication, the Superfon makes for a big improvement over going directly in. I had bought into the 'less is more' philosophy on line level inputs and now believe that was a mistake. All my non audiophile buddies where always very impressed with the old set up and I enjoyed it, but knew the Thiel's where cable of reaching another level. A word of warning -I've owned a bunch of 555II's and destroyed the woofers on a pair of Infinity Kappa's when one amp went bad. After that I had that I had the amp driving the 3.5's check and serviced - but was always a bit nervous. With current used prices on 3.5's being as cheap as they are, the irony is that to really hear what they can do, you need to spend a lot more on what you feed them than you did on the speakers themselves to really hear their potential. |
I took some measurements with the miniDSP mic and REW software to see if the new COAXs I installed (plus other wiring fixes) have resolved the SPL issues. I now see a beautiful LEF and RIGHT measurement chart with everything overlapping, just like my KEF LS50’s. Halleluiah! So my take away from all of this for any one looking to get a CS3.7. Even a massively screwed up one like mine. The speaker can be made perfect using Rob Gillum as a resource. All this work was done at home by me who is a novice on electronics. |
Unsound - good presentation! I would like to start by saying that I love the 3.5 and barely know the 3.6. My comments address the arc of development of ideas into products at Thiel. Regarding measurements, JA’s rig at Stereophile has value for non-coherent products, but like Rich V and John Dunlavy, Jim called out JA on how his ’nearfield’ rig did a disservice to our products. Jim did his calling out in private. My comments about product maturity and accuracy are more from a perspective of problems addressed and solved behind the curtain. Each product was a closer approximation to Jim’s stated goal of the four faces of accuracy. We invested heavily in building a new measurement lab and equipment with each of our moves and expansions. By the early 90s Jim had his final lab setup which generated measurements that track with the Canadian National Lab and other heavyweights. They told the story. Those measurements coupled with a pretty deep dive into Finite Element Analysis revealed layers and forms of distortions that were each formulated and solved, as well as practical, within the framework of the next product being developed. My lightweight measurements here show the 3.6 to be technically better than the 3.5 in all ways except the bass. But that leaves much important ground unturned. The CS3/3.5 was developed with less robust lab resources and before FEA. I think of it as Jim’s masterpiece because it showcased his resourcefulness and resilience. I’ve mentioned measuring speakers in the tree and the rooftop and buried in the sandbox with his self-designed and home-built sweeper and bleeper and hundreds of hours of critical listening. And on and on. The 3/3.5 stood on the shoulders of our previous more homespun efforts. And it shone brightly and made us proud. I have not previously addressed the heart-wrenching difficulty of abandoning the sealed bass and how that came to be. Our first marketed product was the 01 in 3 generations, with a sealed, equalized bass hitting 30 Hz in a bookshelf format at 92dB sensitivity. That bass system was his pride and joy, resulting from more than a year of experimentation with sealed, vented, transmission line, plus some flights of fancy. We expected that bass system to continue forever. But the market pushed back pretty hard, considering the equalizer as a Bose copy or like waving a red flag in front of an audiophile (Larry Archibald in Stereophile), Harry Pearson spending half of our virgin 03 review in the Absolute Sound picking apart the negative sonic impact of the EQ. Etc.Short story is that the 02 with its ported bass, which we considered less than best, was conceived in that push-back. I’m with you regarding the vented bass of later Thiel speakers not fitting the philosophical construct of coherence. But notice that the reviews and marketplace at large rarely if ever denigrate the 4th order time lag of Thiel vented bass. They mostly praise its ’punch & solidity’. So you and I and a few others can appreciate the ’rightness’ of the sealed/ eq’s bass, but that doesn’t build a company. I’m not surprised that you appreciate and enjoy the CS5 and its sealed bass. That was JIm’s attempt to execute correct bass down to 20Hz without the maligned equalizer. And it works extremely well with the big IF surrounding amplification requirements. These days I take some flights of fancy regarding other roads not taken. I believe that those roads, closer to Jim’s and all of our hearts of our specific, eccentric interpretation of how to best reproduce music, could have led to a more satisfying and ultimately meaningful life’s work as a designer and a company. Consider that the later drivers are far more efficient than the CS5’s and how that would have permitted higher impedance configurations to allow far more kindness to amplification. Jim’s dedication to developing the CS5 was monumental. His and all of our disappointment in its tepid market reception was close to devastating. Now we have two seminal ideas of equalized and unequalized sealed bass which both met more resistance than acceptance. I absolutely wanted to improve those platforms. Jim was discouraged. Kathy as marketing director surveyed the landscape and decided (she was the decider) that ’it didn’t make much difference’ to the dealers as long as it sounded good. We could spend a chapter parsing that out; but bottom line is that Jim abandoned his signature bass approaches and focused on executing vented bass the best he could. I’m glad that you are addressing these issues. They were huge issues for me personally. My gig as a founding partner was to incubate the company to sustainability while keeping our vision clear. I deemed the bass alignment thing to be a core issue. Kathy did not. Jim and Kathy, by that time, marched in lock step. There is another significant issue around company building. I’ve mentioned before that we bootstrapped our growth, which is an understatement. By CS5 time (1988) we took on a seasoned business manager who worked the numbers hard and well. His assessment indicated that we were underselling our products by a LOT and couldn’t continue. A fledgling company can do the near impossible at a small scale for a limited time. We were ten years in and technically not profitable. Another chapter there. Suffice it to say that getting great bass can represent over half the cost of an entire product (bigger cabinet, serious drivers and crossovers, etc.). So your price comparisons should consider that the CS3 and CS5 iterations were selling at unsustainably low prices. The watershed product that distilled these conflicts was the CS3.6 with its vented bass, executed very well, but nonetheless a compromise. You may appreciate that I never bothered to listen to a CS3.6 after its production development rigors. Isn’t life something? Some issues and developments only come into focus through a very long lens. That’s been more than 25 years ago. Thanks again, John. |
I used an Adcom SLC 505, a B&K CS115 and a c-j PF 2L with the Adcom 555 II. At least one of the Adcom pres was highly rated, and considered something of a giant killer. I never heard a Musical Fidelity product that I would consider buying. Isn't the MF Tri Vista an integrated? Are you planning on running one integrated into another integrated? Most high end pre's use separate power supplies, and the same holds true for ultra deluxe power amps. Having all that circuitry so close to each other allows for the transference of RF, EMI and ground issues. Does the Tri Vista use those canned tube nuvista devices. I remember reading many years ago that MF claimed that they had big surplus of them, but that was a long time ago. I don't know of anyone else that might stock those rather unique devices. I'd check, you might be SOOL should you need replacements. Would you need to send the unit back to England for repairs? I have to admit I have a bit of prejudice against MF. Shortly after Stereophile was sold to a major holder, for a few months the magazine looked nothing short of a monthly catalogue for Musical Fidelity, pages and pages of MF ads with intermittent reviews of many MF products. Suspicious to say the least! |
What adcom did you have and what was the pre amp? I currently use the 5800 with 18 mosfets per channel and a huge toroidal. Runs incredibly hot and with the luxman at least it sounds excellent with great dimensionality. I feel like adcom pre’s are the adcom amps downfall despite the adcom pre amps literally made to be paired with them. Also what would your input be on me getting a used musical fidelity tri vista 300 for thiels? Saw someone on YouTube using it with their cs7’s |
@thoft, I assume your addressing me? IMHO, the CS 6’s were something of a poor value. Similar to the CS 3.6’s in range, though with much greater ease and dynamics, but at nearly twice the cost, again IMHO, a poor value. YMMV! The CS 7’s were one of Thiel’s best. But, and I might be in the minority here, I preferred the CS 5i’s. But the CS 5’s amplifier requirements are, let’s put this politely; demanding. I had an Adcom on long term loan (a couple of months), and heard them on a lot of gear. While I admired them for allowing those on a budget to use speakers that might otherwise be out of reach due to amplification budget requirements. They were up to the job that was previously only available from more expensive (and sometimes much more expensive) amps. Ultimately the Adcom was amongst my least favorite amps. I found them to be dry, grainy, flat. and lacking dimensionality. I noticed that as long as it was in my system, the less time I spent listening to it. |
