2. speakers
  3. 119616-87

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
jon_5912
603 posts
 
It seems to me that the eventual future is all digital crossovers and active speakers.  The idea of active crossovers doing the basic separation and then passive components being added to perfect the signal is interesting.  You could have time/phase correct active crossovers that have higher than first-order slopes and then fix driver anomalies passively.  If that's ever been done I've not heard of it.  

I've got some big active ATC 110 ASLs in another system and they use simple active crossovers.  The designer's philosophy (I've read) is that if you make the drivers well enough, you don't need to have complex crossovers.  I imagine if you combined the two types you could drastically reduce passive component count and complexity, have the benefit of higher order slopes, and maybe not lose anything. 
unsound
7,329 posts
 

^jimthiel, you hit exactly upon what I thought would be the main concern: driver/total loudspeaker correction. I would have guessed that with the co-axial drivers it might not have been too much of a concern with their mechanical cross-overs. The obvious advantage for those models with bass eq's is appealing of course. Perhaps a fusion of active and passive, or just going digital (which could probably reduce developmental labor hours) might be an option. Of course such an option could provide adjustable bass eq for one's actual room rather than perhaps an otherwise unused anechoic standard.

unsound
7,329 posts
 
Jon_5912, you beat me too it as I was keying. LOL.
tomthiel's avatar
tomthiel
1,670 posts
 
With very broadband response with steep slopes, a driver could operate in its sweet-flat-pistonic zone. I would need convincing that higher order slopes could be "corrected" to actually produce minimum phase additions through the crossover. I've seen failed attempts, but never a success to my standards. It must pass a square wave right through the crossover, to be phase coherent. If not, then not.

A complicating factor is that unbelievably small anomalies of resonance, less-than-accurate transient behavior and so forth, are readily apparent in a minimum phase system, whereas they aren't even noticeable with higher order crossovers. There's the two-edge sword that Thiel lived with during its entire run. I believe that acuity of perception is caused by the ear-brain interpreting the sound-source as "real" rather than an electronic reconstitution. 

Remember, I am not an engineer. I would appreciate being educated as to how the hybrid might alleviate the need for 6dB roll-offs.
unsound
7,329 posts
 

tomthiel, I’m in complete agreement with your criterion, demonstration of proper square wave and step response would be required.

I could imagine a tri-amped Thiel with a 3.7’s mid/tweeter and 2 3.7’s 10" woofers above and below as in the MCS except in an hourglass shaped floor standing cabinet with separately adjusted/amplified
woofers to correct for floor reinforcement differences, designed to be placed directly against the back wall, or if particular room dimensions permitted in the corners then massaged with individual driver DSP room correction. Oh and it might be nice if the minimal impedance was kept to a minimum of 4 Ohms. The tube guys would like that! Heck, with the prospect of paying for six channels of amplification so would the ss guys.

The DEQX and Lyngdorf products look interesting.


More to discover