Thiel Owners

Great discussion group!! Thanks @thieliste @ronkent for the information!
I have 2_2 first, then 7.2, now 3.7 all together, and find them different in personalities. I had once audition with 5i with Jeff Roland 7f mono but was not very impressed because the music was somehow "heavy" not "vivid" to my taste. I don't know if I misunderstood 5i's potential or not. But I like 7.2 more than 5i based on that experience.
I am very glad to hear the progress of upgrade kit of 3.7. I just had my mid-range drivers of 7.2 rebuilt by Rob. There were some materials degraded as time went by. The rebuilt was done. I will do soldering soon by myself, but kind of worrying about my soldering skill will mess up the 7.2 or not. Although Rob told me that's straight forward. And I use WBT solder, I don't know if it's ok.
One more interesting thing, I was told that Jim Thiel once said it would be better if someone got 2 pair of 7.2s to sit back to back (one face front  and one face wall). To eliminate reflex? Any idea?
Happy Weekend!

Harry, the CS3.5 was introduced in 1988, but its lineage goes straight back to the O3 in 1978, updated to the O3a (equalized) in 1979, O3b and then CS3 in 1983 and the 3.5 in 1988, numbered such as the 5th incarnation of the fundamental "3" design. They all share the same design goal of full-range, accurate in all spheres 10"x 3-way reference monitors. One core value, early on, was sensitivity / efficiency. The O1 and O2 came in at 93+dB @1w/1m. The hard facts of physics relegated efficiency to a lower rung on the survival ladder, which haunted the brand furthermore.

A simple passive part update for the stereo 3.5 EQ might be feasible, depending on how much space is available in the chassis.

Wayne, from the beginning, before the O1 in 1976, we experimented with many wave-form paradigms before settling on the wide-dispersion point source that became synonymous with Thiel. A highly intriguing form was the sound-field created by two back-to-back speakers forming a bi-pole radiator. I have run a pair of CS1.5s backed against my CS2 2s with wonderful results. The back-firing pair can get by with less evolved amplification.

I have a friend/dealer (the only one in NC that sells Magico) and heard the A3 speakers recently. I think they retail for about 10K and not $223 but glad the 3.7's can hold their own.   Recently heard some bigger ones (about $28K) and they were very impressive. however i did not come home and get that sick feeling when i know my speakers suck by comparison.   In fact was very happy with the 3.7's.

The designer's job becomes extremely easier by using 4th order Linkwitz Reilly crossovers which give you everything except phase coherence at the XO point. They introduce 360° / 1 full cycle, which is considered by some, including someone recently posting on this forum, to be zero. The full-cycle time error can be corrected with digital signal processing, if one is in the digital domain. The "new Thiel" pulled a AD-correction-DA jujitsu. It works except for that last truth of ultimate rightness of doing it right in the analog domain. I suspect the Magico to be doing in some fashion what I described, but I don't know anything about it.

oops. mixed up the A3 with the Magico Q7 Mk II. They are $223 K.Harrylavo, if your equalizers have problems, get them fixed by Rob. I had mine damage the low voltage circuit of my power amp.