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!
jafant

I don't know if this is of help in tracking down what is going on in your system, but I do not hear the same "flutter/buzz/vibration" sound you hear when I play a Qobuz FLAC file of the Boz Skaggs track on my Thiel 2.2s at moderate volume levels. Perhaps I would hear something if I stressed my speakers at a higher volume level, but I'd rather not push them too hard. 

Yeah that's an interesting data point, thank you.
I only get it on my right speaker so far. The only way I can explain how loud I'm playing is roughly 60db spl as reported by the free decibel x iphone app from 1 meter in front of the speaker. It's louder than I normally play them, but not intolerably loud, even when sitting 1 meter from it.

When I go quieter than that by even a little, the noise doesn't happen. 

unsound - we’re actively working on the 3.5. It is perhaps my favorite Thiel speaker in that it captures Jim’s primary insights. It’s the only place I’ve ever heard honest 20Hz, in-time bass; and with a footprint of a square foot and waist high.

Jim Williams of Audio Upgrades in Carlsbad has re-worked the EQ for substantially better performance. Bill Thalmann of Music Technology is mapping a fully balanced unit with a few more audiophile touches. Balanced will require an EQ unit per channel.

Low-level crossovers incorporated with the EQ is an excellent idea, but beyond my present scope. With the new (Purifi, etc.) switching amps, multi-amp drive could be heart-stopping.

As a historical note - Thiel’s first product that never made it to market was just such a configuration - small 3-way with built-in driver-dedicated equalized amplification. In the mythical revival department I think such a speaker could rock given today’s technical resources. Not for me, though.

Another note, the CS5 (1989) followed the 3.5 and could have been equalized, but Jim had become discouraged by the reactionary response, especially from sophisticated reviewers, and chose to get sub 20Hz sealed bass without EQ at the cost of 2ohm impedance at the bottom end. The subsequent CS3.6 in the early 90s became the watershed. Rather than developing an upgraded EQ to continue the model 3 tradition, Jim opted for reflex bass. It was properly implemented, etc. etc. but nonetheless diluted the commitment to phase / time coherence that had built the company’s market niche and reputation. I considered that a market-capitulation at the expense of root principles.

Imagine a CS3.5a using the 3.5 woofer and upgraded EQ, an updated version of the double-cone 3.6 midrange and an updated (CS5, 3.6, 2.2) UltraTweeter using the 3.7 / SCS4 moving system. I bet you’ll like it.