dlcockrum, I always look forward to your contributions to this thread.
IMHO, the CS 5's price aside were Thiel's absolute best performing speakers. When price is considered I have to give the nod to the 3.5's as his best total value. I agree the "I" versions without the pad damped woofers were a very nice improvement. Regrettably there was very little, if no follow up in the rags on the very nicely improved "I" version. Though I am not aware of any testing that would confirm this: I would imagine these later woofers without the attached damping pads would be much more amplifier friendly as well. I also agree that they are especially demanding of set up and associated gear. If it weren't for the expense of proper amplification, I'd probably own a pair.
While very nice amps, I always felt that the afore mentioned Krell 250's were hazy in the upper frequencies and didn't quite have the signature bass quality typical of Krells. As much as the pressed loved it, it wasn't my favorite Krell. I much preferred the earlier KMA 160's and 400's. For a while Larry Archibald was using Levinson. Never amongst my favorites. For me they lacked the crispness that is sometimes part of the music, and didn't have the micro and macro dynamics that the Krells had in spades. Some time after the formal Stereophile review there was some mention that Larry Archibald was enthusiastic that he got the CS 5's to really sing with bigger 600 Watt Krells.
I can't help but believe that the Thiels sometimes got unfairly blamed for accurately portraying what was really on the recording.
IMHO, the CS 5's price aside were Thiel's absolute best performing speakers. When price is considered I have to give the nod to the 3.5's as his best total value. I agree the "I" versions without the pad damped woofers were a very nice improvement. Regrettably there was very little, if no follow up in the rags on the very nicely improved "I" version. Though I am not aware of any testing that would confirm this: I would imagine these later woofers without the attached damping pads would be much more amplifier friendly as well. I also agree that they are especially demanding of set up and associated gear. If it weren't for the expense of proper amplification, I'd probably own a pair.
While very nice amps, I always felt that the afore mentioned Krell 250's were hazy in the upper frequencies and didn't quite have the signature bass quality typical of Krells. As much as the pressed loved it, it wasn't my favorite Krell. I much preferred the earlier KMA 160's and 400's. For a while Larry Archibald was using Levinson. Never amongst my favorites. For me they lacked the crispness that is sometimes part of the music, and didn't have the micro and macro dynamics that the Krells had in spades. Some time after the formal Stereophile review there was some mention that Larry Archibald was enthusiastic that he got the CS 5's to really sing with bigger 600 Watt Krells.
I can't help but believe that the Thiels sometimes got unfairly blamed for accurately portraying what was really on the recording.