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!
128x128jafant
GS - you might call Rob Gillum at Coherent Source Service about this matter. Tinsel leads do eventually fatigue, and Rob has replacement moving systems on hand. The little I know about ferrofluid is that there are many types and quantity is critical. I don't see advantage to preemptive repair. I'm still using mine from 1989 CS2.2 prototypes with thousands of hours on their odometer.

Let us know what  you might find out from Rob about FF replacement and other issues. 

I am presently working on that tweeter via faceplate surface and diffuser  modifications. That tweeter was Thiel's first ground-up design which was for the 1988 CS5 (with trickle-down to 2.2 and 3.6).
Gs I owned a pair of 3.6s that I purchased new  in dec 92 I loved them!! last month I bought a pair of cs 7s (not the 7.2s) all I can tell you is if you can get a pair you won't be disappointed!!! They are like the 3.6s but  even better more detail more bass I hear things I never heard Before!!! They do exploit my equipment  upfront!! Just a thought FWI  
Andy2, glad to see that more people are getting familiar with options to have linear phase. The steepness of the slope had an impact on the pre ringing, as has the frequency of the filter.
Although I've always believed in first order filters, I was somewhat skeptical of the "time-phase coherence" part and was not sure if it does make a difference.  After converting two of my speakers xovers and making them "time-phase coherence", I am starting to become a firm believer in the advantage of "coherence".  I am not sure what my mind is saying, but my ears definitely are hearing a difference.

There is something in the sound that just more "natural".  I guess that's the best adjective I could use.  I would hesitate to use the word "better" though because people will have their own "belief", but I am comfortable with the word "natural".  

In my previous speaker design, although they also sound "natural", with "time-phase coherence", there is an extra "ease" as if the music "flows" better.  Since I work on my own speakers, I was able to compare two identical speakers (same cabinets, same drivers ...), one with and one is without "coherence", and I prefer the "coherence" version.    


gs5556

Good to see you again. Follow Tom's advice and consult Mr. Rob Gillum at Coherent Source Service (CSS).  Keep us posted on your situation regarding the 3.6 loudspeakers.

Happy Listening!
Andy, what you call more natural maybe related to the lack of frequency dependent phase shift. Your mind will need measurements to make sense of this. Simulations are no substitute. Don't under estimate the skill of making accurate measurements, I'm still improving in that area.