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
I believe that if home theater and other spectacular bass recordings (ie: 1812 Overture Canons) had not been on the rise, Thiel may have stuck with sealed enclosure bass. The CS5 was developed as a guidepost to the future; its tweeter went into the 2 2 and the 3.6 and its Kevlar drivers were precursors to the stiff aluminum diaphragms to follow. CS5 bass approached 20 Hz with 3: 10" woofers (two deep and one upper bass.) They didn't bottom on full symphonic crescendo or heavy rock. But they bottomed on some "modern" mixes. Jim wanted deep bass as the foundation of the music, so he settled on the passive radiator due in large part to its ruggedness. Without a voice coil to bottom, bend and burn out, and with proper tuning, the passive radiator can do a pretty good job.

I like what Vandersteen has done with a powered subwoofer in the enclosure. I suspect that Jim may have gravitated in that direction, having spent considerable effort developing the SmartSub.
Prof:
Your 3.7s had to be used, weren’t they? Hence if break in occurred, I presume it would already have happened long ago. It’s my suspicion that it was acclimation on your part, vs the speaker.


I would have thought so too but i found out from Rob that he had replaced a number of the drivers and that may explain it.   plus they were demos that had been taken to shows but not used a lot. the first night i put them in, i played a Sting cd that i had played earlier that day. it was terrible,  and i thought, i have really screwed up.  but i let them play as much as possible when i was not around,  and they did get better.  A friend who had bought a used pair about three years earlier that had not been played much,  made the same comment about the need for more time.

For instance, during only the period of last week I went through a "Wow are these speakers are incredible, I’m totally happy with them" to "why am I finding nothing impressive on these tonight?" to "I really think I need a more lively speaker" back to "wow these are INCREDIBLE."
Boy do i know what you mean.  sometimes the music is so compelling and other times,  it is just so so. glad it is not just me that has those issues.  


I’ve acclimated to the different 2.7 sound now and in a way they now sound "different" to me (I don’t notice, or pay attention, to things I used to in how they differed from the 3.7s). 

I have sold my 2's so no more comparisons,  but on discs that i am very familiar with,  i do think the 3's are sounding better for my taste.  But as i said earlier, i could live with either and i do like the looks and the size of the 2's better.

Tom Thiel:
  I like what Vandersteen has done with a powered subwoofer in the enclosure. I suspect that Jim may have gravitated in that direction, having spent considerable effort developing the SmartSub.

PS Audio is working on some new speakers that may be quite fantastic and they are using a powered sub built in as well.  Unlike Prof.,  I have not heard in great detail all the speakers he has.  A local dealer carries Magico but have not spent enough time listening to them (I do not want to waste his time since they are not in the budget right now),  and there is a Joseph Audio dealer also nearby. Those two brands along with the PS speakers would be on my short list to audition,  but for the next 3-5 years or so,  the 3.7's will be staying here (yes I know,   famous last words)

Ron and Prof, Ron's 3.7s are new old stock as I interpret the particulars. Rob has various cabinets and parts and I believe he assembled that pair from such service parts. So, all the parts would be unused.

Break-in is something that many engineering-oriented observers dismiss as voodoo or make-believe or user acclimation. From the very beginning, we perceived its reality beyond question, but have never developed any definitive causal narrative. Jim's official answer was "I have no idea why." Of course he had ideas, but didn't want to enter the controversy. Among the causes are physical elastomeric settling of driver suspensions: surrounds and spiders. The cabinet itself settles in via the extended vibrational patterns. All the passive parts have their micro-structures altered by electricity, magnetism and vibration. A huge deal is solder joints . . . heat distresses the molecular structure of the long-crystal copper, which the "heals" with use. I experimented with crimped (cold-welded) joints, to audible improvement, which isn't practical in crossovers.

Although subject to derision in some circles, I will be comparing cryogenically treatment to non. Prior experience with guitar strings and knowledge of what is happening biases me toward expecting improvement there. The ear-brain is capable of immense discernment. Our job is to find synergy among the myriad variables to produce cost-effective outcomes. 
thank you TT,  your continued input is so appreciated. 

here is a great video on burn in from Paul McGowan. 
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJFnlDTtsBA