Guys any Thiel owners on the panel using an Audia Flight FLS10 integrated amp ?
I've been told it's a great match.
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!
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!
13,589 responses Add your response
Seems even (the late) Art Dudley noticed the cabinetry skill in Thiel speakers. I was just reading his review of the Volti Audio Vittoria speakers in which Art stated:
Way back in the late 90’s the CS6 were the first "real" pair of Thiels I had in the house and I never tired of looking at the quality of the build and cabinetry. It was magnificent and put lots of other speakers to shame. |
Hey prof - thanks for the Art Dudley reference. Time marches on. Even though we kept arm's length from our reviewers, I remember them all fondly. Critical review was a crucially important part of Thiel's very existence. Art Dudley, Wes Phillips and many others helped shape the industry and the companies in it via their thoughtful, informed appreciation and criticism. Thiel's cabinets were a monumental undertaking - one that could not be justified except that we wanted to produce functional objects worthy of our intended customers' livng rooms. (And I got to travel extensively establishing our veneer supply network.) No complaints. |
" Blue Printed " As a DIYer I can tell you that it is impossible for me to "blue print " my crossover boards , but I can and have been able to " balance " them . To truly blue print a board one must have a box full of each component in order to find components that are the exact values as the schematics , this is what Jim did when he personally checked, measured and approved review samples . But " balanced " is something that I believe that every Thiel speaker from Lexington is , that is that a 2 ohm resistor might measure 2.1 ohms so finding another one for the other board you'll be balanced same goes for a capacitors values , as long as all the values are within a tolerance set by Thiels quality control . I'm bring this up because after removing the resistors and capacitors I measured them and discovered resistors that were more than 5% tolerance and electrolytic capacitors that up to 30% out of tolerance ! But since My speakers came from Tennessee and had been put together or repaired there I won't say that this is typical but I was surprised to have measured such differences in the resistors that are used in all Thiel speakers and very disappointed in the electrolytic caps that I took out and then have the same issue with the new replacements ! I purchased a different manufacturer and received caps that were closer to being within tolerance at least they were the same values , So while none of the new components were exact schematic values they were almost exact match pairs thus balanced L & R crossovers . DIYing is not something that is easy but in my case it turned out to be extremely rewarding because now with upgraded components I know these sound better than stock as well as fixing the FrankenThiel lack of quality crossovers that " New Thiel Audio " sold me . |
HELP! I need advise. I'm nervous. One of the tweeters went out on my 26 year old CS3.6s (SN# 4789,4790 produced 5/22/96). Amazingly, this is the first problem with these. This is Rob Gillum's response: "Sounds like the lead wires on the tweeter moving system have failed. They will need to be rebuilt as a soft dome. It will require you to send both tweeters for rebuilding and matching. The tweeter rebuilds are $200 each, plus shipping. As well as the tweeter rebuilding the waveguide or tweeter protector has to be removed for clearance to the new soft dome." I trust Rob but I'm concerned. Following this thread since the beginning, I know how the the crossover and drivers are meticulously tuned. Does anyone here have experience with this tweeter rebuild?
|
@vair68robert - what a mess. It sounds like Nashville Thiel may not have had final product testing, because your value drifts would have failed your finished speakers. We took quality assurance very seriously. There are many approaches - our methods were always changing - with lots of thought and care. The 1980s saw the advent of ISO-9000 where manufacturers processes were certified rather than their final testing. We bought from suppliers with essentially the approaches that became codified in ISO9001. In that environment, incoming testing is not necessary. Every part can be assumed to be correct. The flip side is that if any single part flunks at any point in process, then the entire batch is quarantined, the problem is investigated, solved and re-documented. We co-developed our implementation with Vifa (and their group of co-producers) to good success. Please permit me a story, an important, meaningful story that helped form Thiel Audio's identity. Consider the CS3 woofer. It was our first real foray into partnered product development. That woofer was a big leap ahead, especially with the copper shorting rings and field-focusing top plate geometry. It also pushed the envelope of what a woofer was expected to do: perform well and consistently to 10kHz. That long, even high-end roll-off depended on tight control of many factors including viscosity of the bobbin / cone glueline. We spent more than two years working on that woofer with Vifa. Perhaps because there had been so many iterations (?10+?), and perhaps because we had developed so much mutual respect, perhaps a dash of time / annual cycle pressure . . . the first production run of woofers had an anomaly that missed all of us. Its upper range, perhaps 4-8kHz had too much energy. 'Normally' a woofer's response in that range is irrelevant; but with Thiel's first order rollout, it mattered. Good lessons were learned that paid strong dividends over the following decades. The root cause turned out to be a change of adhesive caused by the Danish government outlawing epoxies for health concerns. The replacement 'equivalent' glue acted differently at operating temperature than the prior well-understood epoxy. The new glue eventually also failed in the field for our first (possibly only) recall. That 'problem' clarified our MO for customer service. We replaced every one of the woofers at no charge and our dealers magnanimously swapped them out at no charge to us! To make lemonade from the lemons, we provided a record (yes, vinyl) to each customer as consolation for their trouble. The record was Michael Hedges 'Aerial Boundaries', which was both musically and technically masterful. That situation became legendary and performative - defining our image both internally and in the marketplace. Kathy Gornik gets much of that credit. When I first heard of your wildly out of spec components, I was dumbfounded. As the particulars came to light it made some sense. New Thiel was not the same company with the same values of product integrity and customer satisfaction. I wonder how many more 2.7s are out there from New Thiel.
|
Thank You Tom There is no need to defend Thiel , I purchased these speakers based on the extremely positive reviews and the overwhelming enthusiastic support from individual owners . I can say that when New Thiel was bankrupt and selling off stock that they put 9 CS2.7 pairs for sale on e-Bay , along with 6 or 9 CS1.7's and the one I wish I could have afforded a CS3.7 that I was told that they had it as a museum piece . Based on my experience I tend to believe that the speakers sold on e-Bay were probably thrown together from parts laying around by an non-technician since one of the resistors was the totally wrong value. I got a bargain , the only way I could have afforded a new pair of Thiel speakers ( even with all the issues I discovered ) Luckily I was able to correct and still at the same time upgrade for a lot less than even the price used speakers at that time but unfortunately there are a few pairs out there that might not live up to Thiel standards .
|
In the eventual realm, I am working with ScanSpeak (Vifa) on a 'new' tweeter in that motor frame. My target diaphragm has the potential of greater specific stiffness than aluminum without the ringing and without the high expense of carbon. Work in progress. For now, that soft dome (I don't know how soft) was engineered to fit that motor and alleged to be plug-in compatible. Jon, see if Rob can make a frequency sweep for you on both driver types so we can compare and contrast.
|
Does anyone have experience matching a subwoofer to 1.5s? They get down to 42hz but I now have them in a large room so missing some bass. I removed the grill recently and saw the 6.5 inch woofer working so hard it looked like it was going to bounce out of the cabinet so I thought crossing over above 42 would make sense to take some strain off the small woofer. I've read about the Thiel subs but they are hard to find and expensive. I've spoken to REL and they recommended the T7, a pair even. I'm concerned about timing in matching with Thiel but I've read articles that say subs can easily integrate if set up correctly and there are videos for this. All thoughts and experiences are welcome and appreciated. |
@fsgattuso, While I typically suggest going low at the cross-over point to subwoofers; with the CS 1.5’s I think you’ll need to go higher to reduce strain on the woofers. Perhaps to 65-70 Hz. BTW, I strongly suggest going with at least 2 subs rather than just 1, even if the two are both smaller than the one.… …Or, just sell the 1.5’s and move on to bigger Thiels. |
The proper place to cross over an added subwoofer (and I've owned a bunch of Rels (over 20 years) is first to measure where the mains drop off in your room. Bass frequencies sum. So if your mains and sub are playing the same frequencies you'll often end up with a bass bump. So you'll want to set the crossover just below where your mains drop off. Measuring does not have to be difficult or expensive. If you have a smartphone, Studio Six Digital has apps, both ones that cost money and free ones (including an RTA). Then you'll need pink noise and it can be downloaded (or bought). There are free downloads. Lastly, you'll need a mic for the smartphone. Parts Express sell the Dayton Audio IMM-6 mic (it used to be cheaper - think it is around $22). The mic comes with a custom calibration file that you download after you get it. If you have a lapton and prefer to use REW (Room EQ Wizard, which is free) or another program, Parts Express sell a UMM-6 USB mic. It is more money but it depends on you preferences. |
fsgattuso
Welcome! Good to see you today. REL is a Sonic match for your 1.5 speakers. A cross over point is 80Hz. Between speaker and subwoofer. As above, consider implementing 2 subs and measure the main drop off frequency. I look forward in reading more about your Musical taste and system. I enjoyed reading your CD player thread as well.
Happy Listening! |
Thanks for the replies. To Unsound, I I just placed these 1.5s back in after a 6 year break. In 2016 both tweeters blew. I was using a vintage Dyneco amp and just turned it up too high. I decided to place on the side and replace with Tekton Lore. Very different sound. I was recently had the tweeters rebuilt and although there is less bass than the Lores the 1.5s have a much more pleasing midrange. I saw a pair of 2.7s for sale on Ebay for a good price but they have a 100 watt minimum amp requirement. I'm runningba Prima Luna Dialougue HP at 70 watts. So that's why I'm considering subwoofers. |
It's no accident that the 1.5 hung out on Stereophile's Class A (limited bass) ranking for 5 or so years. I used it for the past 7 years at our small village live performance venue to startlingly good results and reviews. I used it with a Thiel SS1 and Thiel's Passive OX set for the 1.6 (very similar bass parameters.) I paired it with a Prima Luna, which is a nice sonic match. Plus the 1.5 is in my upgrade sites. It's quite a little honey. |
@TomThiel The soft dome tweeter rebuilds are shipping back to me now. I asked Rob about his impressions and measurements and this is the limited reply: "I think you will find that the soft dome is compatible. I have sold around 30 of these units and have had no complaints. The soft dome does not measure as well as the aluminum dome, but close." I will give an update after installing in my CS3.6s. In the meantime, I have been quite surprised after properly placing and positioning my CS1.2s into the main system. Most of the music information above 52Hz is all there with very respectable imaging. |
jonandfamily - we look forward to your report. Here's some additional back-story about that soft dome. We developed that UltraTweeter for the CS5 in 1988. It had all of Jim's advanced techniques, and exceeded our expectations. The CS5 had woven lower Kevlar drivers, and if an appropriate soft upper midrange driver had been found, we would not have gone to aluminum. However, the MB Quart 2" aluminum dome did the job better than anything else, and we didn't have time to develop our own driver for that use. Market pressure. The aluminum tweeter had more predictable response particulars and the metal domes dissipated heat better. That's where we went. When trickling that tweeter down to the CS2.2 we reconsidered the fiber dome to mate with the pulp midrange. Jim went with the CS5 tweeter and gradually migrated to all aluminum diaphragms rather than all Kevlar / fiber / etc. So, I consider that soft dome tweeter as native - it was co-developed with the hard dome and should be very good, with possibly some advantages. The only one I've ever heard was in comparative evaluation during 2.2 development around 1989. I'll be getting a pair for comparative measurements and listening tests. As a general caution, heat dissipation is a big deal. The soft dome don't be a heat dissipator like the aluminum dome is. Don't over-drive it. Keep us posted.
|
I received the soft dome tweeters, installed them in the 3.6s and listened throughout the weekend. Early on, they were fatiguing with increased sibilance, but seem to be approaching the original sound either from mechanical break-in or psychoacoustical break-in. Vocals, especially female seem to be moved a little forward. I expect with more play time, these 3.6s will continue to reside in my main system. Rob Gillum agrees they need break-in. |
After nearly 2 weeks of heavy play with the new soft dome tweeters from Rob at CSS, the brightness is totally resolved! Amazing! These are definitely an upgrade over 26-year-old aluminum dome tweeters. @vair68robert- Thank you for the advice about soldering to the speaker connection. To reduce heating up the wire going to the voice coil, I applied alligator clamps on either side of the solder as heat sinks. |
JA - thanks for the tip. I won't be pursuing it. Bill Thalmann tuned up the old Thiel SCD-1 which had been previously upgraded. It's quite a piece of gear. The SACD head was not salvageable, but I have very little SACD hard media. I'm beginning my investigation into software storage and playback of high resolution media, while avoiding 'normal' computer circuitry. I auditioned iFi's Zen streamer - pretty impressive for the price. |
Hello Prof, good to see you. The Original Series was indeed sequential, 01, 02, 03, 04 with advances marked in small letters. The 01(01a, 01b) was Thiel's first marketed product. There are some still out there and Rob says they have a loyal following. As a seminal product, the 01 illustrates Jim's fundamental values. They were small, inexpensive, very sensitive, flat with unbelievably effective bass. Deficiencies included refinement, delicacy, coherence - the audiophile virtues. We sold about 1000 pairs between 1975 and 1983. The breakout success of the CS3 in 1983 (actually a 4th generation 03) changed our dealer profile and overwhelmed our production capacity. The 01b was dropped for those reasons - it was still selling strongly. The 01 was a 10" x 1.5" two way with equalized bass and 3rd order slopes. Its veneered 0.85 cubic foot enclosure had a foam grille, and the woofer a foam surround, both common at the time and prone to ultraviolet deterioration. The on-axis response was flat (+/- 1.5db) from 30 to 18kHz in an enclosure only 13% larger than the 02. Its woofer was Eminence's first custom driver (model 10101). Within easy access 70 miles down the road, they supported our customization of their bomb-proof musical instrument workhorse which they built under their own name and for Peavey at a clip of thousands per day! The tweeter was by Long Engineering and sported a mylar dome mounted in a phenolic ring for minimal diffraction. The equalizer was the 01's claim to fame. Unlike Bose, which pushed small drivers way past their range of efficiency, Jim's EQ boosted 10dB (as the 03 - CS3.5) to stay below the power required for midrange peaks. The equalizer was optional, accounting for $75 of the $350 retail price. Being our inaugural start-up product, our quantities were too small for cost-effective purchase of anything except drivers which we picked up from the factories in our 1958 Edsel station wagon. We wound our coils on 'George', our shop-made spinner and etched and drilled the EQ printed circuit boards. Of course we made every aspect of our cabinets including our veneer faces - all in the original farmhouse. Our first CES was spring 1977 where we showed the 01 and 02 to an enthusiastic market including the German distributor of DCM Time Windows. Strong German reviews and market brought interest from high quality east-coast USA dealers. And the rest is history. We were naive and unexposed to any audiophile considerations or market. The 01 was designed as an all-purpose speaker that did well what Jim considered the necessary virtues. That Eminence 10101 woofer persisted through the 03, 03a, 03b sequence and is still available through Rob. I bet you'd like them if you can find a pair. Thanks for asking. |