tomthiel
Responses from tomthiel
| Thiel Owners Jacksky - I posted a long version answer perhaps a year ago on this thread. 3 is the model 3 and .5 is the 5th generation. The CS5 is a 5-way, and has no passive radiators. The bass is sealed and all 3 woofers extend below 10Hz. | |
| Thiel Owners Jacksky - a long answer may be of interest to some on this thread. I just lost a few paragraphs and will find some time soon. Hint: the 1.6 is the sixth generation of the model 1 (with pre-history of O4 and O4a).Tom | |
| Thiel Owners Unsound - thank you for those links. I remember the Angelus; Bau was putting the tweeter into the (relative) infinite baffle domain (like Jim's desire for the CS5 to have a wide, curved baffle). And his woofer wanted a wider propagation environmen... | |
| Thiel Owners The elements of a speaker all work together as a whole - a pot of soup. Trying to separate any single element leads to confusion. | |
| Thiel Owners Prof - the 2.7 baffle is 3" thick and well-braced. I doubt that it is moving much. The baffle treatment I am developing is a 3-layer felt and fabric overlay to make the baffle surface virtually disappear. This territory is new to me, and I am maki... | |
| Thiel Owners JA - circling back to 1.6 and 1.7 sales: Rob says approximately 2500 pairs of 1.6 and 1000 pair of 1.7 were sold. The preponderance of evidence suggests the 1.7 has 4th order Butterworth XO slopes for time coincidence, but not phase coherence. | |
| Thiel Owners Prof - there is some low-hanging fruit for the 2.7 upgrade. A 400uF electrolytic midrange series feed cap (although well bypassed) is certainly limiting the clarity-directness. Other XO tweaks too. The 2.7 baffle is nicely optimized, but I bet we'... | |
| Thiel Owners Prof - thank you for your thorough comparisons and commentary.I have read Stereophile's reviews of the Joseph Perspectives and admire the outcome. I am a big fan of magnesium as a driver material - the SEAS Graphene material seems great to me. Th... | |
| Thiel Owners Unsound - wave guides might have merit in the right designer's toolkit. But I am not that guy. The famous "lobing" is caused by vertical offset between the tweeter and midrange as a function of wavelength and crossover slope mating. The 3.5 driver... | |
| Thiel Owners Unsound - in developing the CS5, I evaluated a tapered cabinet, large enough for the woofers at the bottom and as narrow as possible at the top. We never mocked up or tested it. The 3-dimensional cabinet geometry would have added considerable cost... | |
| Thiel Owners True enough, wider baffles isolate the waveform launch at the speaker, as opposed to the room. His included assumption is that the curved baffle is effectively diffusing meaningful surface anomalies and that an infinite baffle is ideal. I might ag... | |
| Thiel Owners Unsound - I think you took issue with my paradigm restatement (but I could be wrong.) I see a paradigm as a lens through which to view the territory under exploration. The values and results might not be challenged or changed. What changes is the ... | |
| Thiel Owners Unsound - I am being excruciatingly careful to avoid editorializing the sound. We called what many brands do "euphonic engineering" - to knowingly alter the sound-field for desired illusions.A look behind the curtain: I used my modified CS1.6s as ... | |
| Thiel Owners George - Nice system, nice room, and good solution. | |
| Thiel Owners Andy - No 2.7 and 2.4 are not the same woofers.Longer historic perspective answer:A new model from Thiel included new drivers, either specifically developed for the new model or trickled down from a more expensive recent product. Ex. the CS1.6 woo... |