I presume from your question that you are looking to 'improve on' what you think is a good speaker; that is certainly a reasonable question.
It would help to know what you liked most and least about the 7.2 as a speaker, to know what direction to take.
They are very linear in thier nearfield output, with a smooth frequency response in reasonably nearfield locations. The lobing created by the first order crossover causes room curves which look odd, as reflected sound. But if you have a large room with limited room reflections from certain problematic distances they could be very good. Most people would say they are fairly good speakers, despite what one writer here said.
The Sound Labs are good speakers, though different in presentation, and may be worth looking in to.
The Nearfield Acoustics Pipedreams are tall and have the large cylindrical woofs to contend with, but are better in dynamics and bass response.
Subjectively, I like them, and they are found on the used market for more than reasonable price.
Don't be discouraged that someone rains on your product, it's typical of human nature, born of a lack of information or jealousy that perhaps they couldn't afford a speaker costing $12K.
Find a dealer with a good selection of product and take your favorite music. You may just find something perfect. |
When I worked for THIEL, Jim Thiel, would almost always, set the 7.2's up as you have currently described; that is fairly far apart, as they have a large window of sound, and pointed almost straight forward--almost no inward cant to them.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, the 1st order crossover causes lobing at certain distances, which if you fall outside the window of those distances, or those reflections within the room, you can get a very good sound.
Again, it is easy to criticize someone else's body of work.
I hope that you are happy with your 7.2's they're good in so many ways. |
You don't deserve a response, with that attitude, and lack of knowledge. Keep talking. |
One other thought, for someone who has measured speakers, knows how the crossover works, AND still finds it inferior, why in God's name would you buy them twice?
F*** me once shame on you, F*** me twice shame on me, seems appropriate.
Cone breakup, fairly sophistocated equipment, unless you're just measuring distortion, which, of course they keep fairly low, as I have been in the THIEL's lab as Director of Sales, and seen the measurements at various volumes. First order crossovers don't appeal to everyone, and in my personal design I would never use them because of what I consider to be thier dynamic limitations; Jim Thiel and his 7.2 is hardly the Anti-Christ as you portray them, and him in your comments. Fairly good as I describe them, is a relative evaluation, which, without a basis for comparison, you could hardly know what that particular phrase means to me.
Only someone with a serious agenda could be this tough on what most people, who know what they are speaking of, consider this to be a good loudspeaker...perfect, hardly, but not as 'awful' as your mean spirited remarks would infer.
Please be civil, or take the venom elsewhere. This site is intended to be helpful not so negative. |
Chuck,
Another alternative thought to the 7.2 would be a used pair of CS5i's. They are a significant improvement over the 3.6. And, they are in many ways the best speaker Jim ever designed. The abundance of drivers, three 8" woofs, a 4" Kevlar, a (my memory fades here) 2.5 or 3" dome, and a 1" dome. The dome was remarkable having about 10x the typical excursion of tweeters of it's era. It had to be a dynamic tweeter to keep up with all those other drivers.
So you have a total of six drivers, giving this speaker great linearity, and what I call 'image density'. They can tend to be a but lean at about 70 Hz oddly (this is where the middle woof, which acts as a mid bass, lower mid driver) crosses over, and may have lobing issues, but nothing that judicious room placement can't help.
Even Jim, (sorry to tell people this publicly) admits privately that this (at least was)his 'favorite' speaker of his own design.
They can be had fairly cheap Chuck. I sold my pair for about $5K as I recall, and they were in beautiful Rosewood.
Remember there are two versions, the CS5 and the CS5i, the later standing for 'improved', and it was. The mid was better, and the woofs were much more hearty, with longer throw capability.
Good hunting. |
Please be kind, when evaluating others, for example, if you think I am above my limits, you obviously don't know that I put together a consortium of manufacturers for the 2004 show for Von Schweikert Audio, which included PS Audio, VAC, Acoustic Zen, et al, and we recorded Misty River every night with the help of Chris Huston, in a Live Versus Recorded show down, on Von Schweikert's $140K pair of VR 11's.
I really don't think you know me well enough to make your broad and sweeping statements as to what I am and what I know. Just more fodder for your presumptuous attitude.
The loudest clown is not the funniest you know.
I am sure you will be compelled to get the last word in, as it is your typical response.
Just remember, every time you think you know it all, something proves you wrong. |
In your comments you imply, if not assume that Jim intended to make a speaker inferior to the CS5i.
The raw truth, from the inside of the company is, that the driver of import, being the coaxial driver, set the future in stone.
Because of the radiation pattern of the coaxial, which the CS5 did not have, made it technologically inferior, at least to those who consider the coax to be better.
I know for a fact that the CS5i is a better speaker than the 7.2 in the same vein as the CS 3.6 which your wife prefers. I never liked the 3.6 as it embodies the flaws of most typical speakers of first order cross overs. Plus the midrange literally flies into pieces when over driven, ask Dreamworks in Nashville, if that isn't true.
The CS5's were meant to be the do all end all speaker that Jim Thiel could produce. And they were really, damn good.
I regret that the 7.2 came afterward. It is a regression which is obvious to any serious listener. Now, you and I are having a civil conversation, without Macho interference.
I love music; I cried openly when I watched DeLovely, which was a tribute, supposedly done by archangel Gabriel, who interpreted Porter's life and actions. It is a shame that people of similar likes meet and cross swords as we did in the beginning, when, in effect, we agree, more than disagree.
You should hear my cheap little LSA2's at $1800. per pair.
Actually, if you will send me your private email address, I will send you a pair for your appraisal, with no regard to what you write. How's that for fair, and friendly Chuck?
You will be stunned at what I have done for that price, my gentleman's word on it.
Let me know by email if you accept. |
The company who actually manufactures the LSA to my design and specs, is a company located in the East, China.
They actually make MANY of the products that are in the high end arena today, and most people would be shocked to know just how many are made there, and the companies who use this labor force.
I remember a hue and cry that went up when people found out that Von Schweikert was made in China. What a red herring that was. I was reminded of the angest over autos being made in Japan, in the late sixties, early seventies.
A collective "Oh my God" went up from many Americans.
Now forty, almost years later we can all see that we live in a world community which will always chase the cheapest labor force, wherever it is. After Japan came Malaysia. I also remember the comments about NAD and Adcom being made in Malaysia, and how that was a 'bad thing'. Actually, it keeps costs in check for many people. In looking ahead, as soon as the standard of living in China becomes high enough that labor there is no longer inexpensive, the force may be found in the continent of Africa, who really knows.
I chose this company to manufacture because of their stellar reputation, and the people they supply now. I know that I can depend, even though my QC will be stringent, on them to replicate the prototypes to the letter.
We will have our official roll out soon, but we are off topic here, and should probably do this privately.
By the way, you mention being a designer, what do you design, and am I, or would any of the people who haunt these sites, be familiar with your designs? |
Chuck,
There were rumours of a replacement for the 3.6 when I worked there, back in 1998, so don't wait. (Of course now that I say that, they'll probably release its replacement tomorrow)LOL!
The probem we (it was we back then) had, was that the damn thing just kept selling, or as Kathy Gornik, President of THIEL said, "They still have legs."
I personally never liked them because they had way too much of their own personality for ME. As someone said 'Vive la difference'.(I did not study French, as you can see.
Plus the sub woofer, in walls, and the final embracing of the Home Theater market, 10 years too late, came along for THIEL.
The other issue, is how to make a product which will 'fit' into the mix, not outperform others in your line, and cost less, killing some of your other products--the worst possible outcome. |
David,
That has been the official story for at least three years now. That is what I was alluding to earlier.
As early as 1998, we (I was still there) were talking about a 3.7, which could employ the coaxial array, and therefore be more in keeping with their current technology.
Unless you have an unimpeachable source, and even then, things change quickly, as demands are so inconsistent at various times. So today's ideas can change.
I hope for their sake, that they can bring out a 3.7. That is a good price point for them to be in, and their technology in that arena is very old. |
|
I personally was trying to give a helpful response, when it seemed to me that I was blind sided, with what appeared to be a nasty comment questioning my honesty. One doesn't have to be sensitive to think that someone is being smug, suggesting that I am lying about something that may have been misunderstood, or mispoken seven years ago.
My perspective came from watching the speaker, every day, inside the factory, seeing measurements, hearing them develop into something, (whether some on the thread here like it or not, being irrelevant). It was, at least an insider's viewpoint, having had discussions with the actual designer, his goals, and his tribulations in trying to make a great speaker etc.
So mine was not just a random view, based entirely on speculation. I went south when I said they are 'fairly good', which was vague.
I know that I have heard them sound pretty damn good, when driven with Grypon electronics. At Nicholson's HiFi in Nashville, TN, even people who had never particularly like the THIEL's were pretty amazed at the sound achieved with a simple, albiet expensive integrated from Denmark.
The principal complaint I have is their dynamic compression in the middle range. But every speaker out there has an Achilles heel.
MANY people LOVE the 3.6, and as I mentioned, Kevin Hayes, President of VAC, and a friend, finds them terrific, and likes them for what he considers to be their accuracy.
The guy I referenced at Dreamworks likes them, but was frustrated at their propensity to blow in the midrange.
If you like 'em that's great, and I can't disagree, "spinich, sour kraut". Love it or not. All THIEL's sound similar to a degree that for me they are easily identifiable. I also do not like the Tweeter, overlay, which, again, to me, IMHO, gives them a 'bright' sound. The CS 5i which I owned had more 'midrange offset', and, as I refer to it, 'image density'-- and to me they sounded fuller in the mids, so I liked them better.
On the most positive side, THIEL comprises an honest, hard working group of people which will never please every musical taste, but I can tell you this--they cut 'seconds', that is what most people would call 'B' stock, in half and put them in the dumpster, so they will never appear on the market, 'out the back door' so to speak.
That takes strength of conviction, and dedication.
I was very proud to travel all over the United States, to represent them, as they were, and are honorable people. Again, is everyone going to like their stuff, no,that would be impossible. But they do the industry proud with their work ethic, and commitment to improving each new product they present.
One of the toughest things about this business is the ease, with which someone can rain on your product parade. They can slice and dice virtually anything apart, and since this is opinion based to such a large degree, who can say that they are wrong?
I am happy that you like your 3.6's. Know this they were hand crafted by a real dedicated group of hard workers. That counts for something. |
