Thiel Owners

ronkent
Many Thanks! for sharing your impression and thoughts owning both CS 2.7 and CS 3.7 models. I trust others can benefit from your and prof's experienced ears.
Happy Listening!

Thanks brayeagle, sounds like you more or less confirm my suspicion. Have others noticed more significant differences after an "upgrade". Remember, I don't play music any louder than 70 DB and very happily employ a 4 watt set amp.

Nice! thielrules
not too many of you guys using a SET amp out there.
Happy Listening!

I believe that if home theater and other spectacular bass recordings (ie: 1812 Overture Canons) had not been on the rise, Thiel may have stuck with sealed enclosure bass. The CS5 was developed as a guidepost to the future; its tweeter went into the 2 2 and the 3.6 and its Kevlar drivers were precursors to the stiff aluminum diaphragms to follow. CS5 bass approached 20 Hz with 3: 10" woofers (two deep and one upper bass.) They didn't bottom on full symphonic crescendo or heavy rock. But they bottomed on some "modern" mixes. Jim wanted deep bass as the foundation of the music, so he settled on the passive radiator due in large part to its ruggedness. Without a voice coil to bottom, bend and burn out, and with proper tuning, the passive radiator can do a pretty good job.

I like what Vandersteen has done with a powered subwoofer in the enclosure. I suspect that Jim may have gravitated in that direction, having spent considerable effort developing the SmartSub.

Prof:

Your 3.7s had to be used, weren’t they? Hence if break in occurred, I presume it would already have happened long ago. It’s my suspicion that it was acclimation on your part, vs the speaker.

I would have thought so too but i found out from Rob that he had replaced a number of the drivers and that may explain it.   plus they were demos that had been taken to shows but not used a lot. the first night i put them in, i played a Sting cd that i had played earlier that day. it was terrible,  and i thought, i have really screwed up.  but i let them play as much as possible when i was not around,  and they did get better.  A friend who had bought a used pair about three years earlier that had not been played much,  made the same comment about the need for more time.

For instance, during only the period of last week I went through a "Wow are these speakers are incredible, I’m totally happy with them" to "why am I finding nothing impressive on these tonight?" to "I really think I need a more lively speaker" back to "wow these are INCREDIBLE."

Boy do i know what you mean.  sometimes the music is so compelling and other times,  it is just so so. glad it is not just me that has those issues.  

I’ve acclimated to the different 2.7 sound now and in a way they now sound "different" to me (I don’t notice, or pay attention, to things I used to in how they differed from the 3.7s). 

I have sold my 2's so no more comparisons,  but on discs that i am very familiar with,  i do think the 3's are sounding better for my taste.  But as i said earlier, i could live with either and i do like the looks and the size of the 2's better.