What's wrong with Thiel?

I have a pair of Thiel CS 2.2 rosewood speakers with original double packaging boxes and all correct inserts. I am very motivated to sell these speakers at a realistic price. The fabric on the grills is loose in a couple of places and the passive radiators need to be glued back into place. I really do not have any space for such a project and have not used the speakers (in favour of my Audio Note speakers and little tube amp) in quite some time so I just want to sell them.

If you are handy with glue you can get these speakers for a Very Reasonable Price.

Let me know. By the way, all those comments about Thiels are true. I used to use a Levinson M 27.5 to drive these speakers and felt no need for a subwoofer and they sounded great and played both soft and very loud. I returned to the tube world and that is why they are available.

Regards,
Carl

Sugarbrie - I would definitely agree with you that matching amplifiers and speakers is important in the case of every speaker, not just Thiel's. However I would like to rephrase your next statement. I do not believe it is fair to say that a speaker which will run on a wide variety of amps cannot sound as good as a speaker which is more limited insofar as which amps will drive it properly. There are many wonderful speakers which have a relatively benign load and sound as good as Thiel's (different - but just as good) But I think perhaps what you were getting at is that a speaker which is unable to reveal the differences between two amplifiers is clearly inferior to one which is able to do so.

Incidentally as somebody pointed out - the newest Thiel speakers are starting to sound a little warmer and will not sound as bright even on brighter amplifiers. Also the impedance characteristics of these new speakers is considerably more benign than any previous Thiel. I think Jim Thiel may be making an effort to develop a speaker which is a little less picky about the amps which drive it - we may see a tube friendly Thiel yet.

I agree Hackmaster. You said it better than me.

Hackmaster, I don't think the newest Thiel's speakers impedance load is that much different than his other recent entries. They are more sensitive. Some of Thiels older models were more tube friendly, particularly the CS-2's with a 6 Ohm nominal, 5 Ohm minimal load and The 3.5's that were 4 Ohms nominal , 4 Ohms minimal load. The 3.5's did require a beefy tube amp due to the use of an active equalizer. While Thiels recommended at least 50 watts that rating was in reference to standard quality solid state ratings where the amps would double down. As such one would need a tube amp with double that rating from it's appropriate tap. These impedance loads were very steady compared to most other speakers. Unfortunately high powered tube amps usually(!) cost more that similarly powered solid state amps. Most amps enjoy the freedom from roller coaster demands that steady loads provide. The point being that it's not that all Thiels have been unwilling to work with tubes, it was just usually more expensive to do right.

I think that Thiel's are basically a very demanding speaker. At the same time, they are not very forgiving either. This can mean a LOT more work for someone interested in running them than if they chose a speaker that was "less accurate" and / or "less reactive".

As such, most of the task of getting the best from a set of Thiel's is proper placement, listening distance and finding complimentary equipment. While this is a large percentage of making any system "sing", such factors play a bigger role in specific situations. This is one of those situations.

The bottom line is that Thiel's will typically not allow you to "skimp" on any aspect of system performance i.e. components, placement or the amount of "elbow grease" that it takes to make every aspect as good as is possible. I would not call these speakers "user friendly" if one simply wants to be a "user" of a system. You will have to get actively involved in helping the system make music and figuring out what the best method to do so involves. Sean
>