Thiel Owners

There are multiple brace shelves stacked in the speaker. I will find resonant areas such as between woofer and passive on the 2.2 and devise a brace. I am also getting promising results soaking the driver mount areas with a wood hardener. My super charged idea is to add a hard spine up the back of the cabinet and connect all magnet assemblies to the spine with rods for combined cooling and anti-recoil effects. An aluminum plate seems unfeasible, or at least I haven't gotten any ideas.

@prof,I’d be interested in what is the best way to brace a cabinet as well. I believe Merlin embedded some metal bars in the baffle for this purpose. I’d think something that was deeper than it was wide would be more effective at combatting cabinet wall flex. I also wondered about ceramic or porcelain floor tiles. They’re incredibly stiff and strong (and cheap). Would something like that attached to the inside of an MDF cabinet be better than aluminum?

Among the materials I have developed / tested are: fired ceramic panels, fiber reinforced hydrostone panels and/or corner braces, aluminum bars or channels, solid wood struts and, of course, the pierced MDF shelves in all Thiel cabinets. One thing that might not be readily apparent is that driving resonances higher in frequency is of great benefit. Heavy materials may be very stiff, but their mass pulls the cabinet modes lower where there is far more energy to activate them and the results are more harmfully audible. Also, damping materials spread resonances over broader ranges and make them last longer in time, becoming more audible. Each method carries its baggage.

Note that extremely expensive speakers spend lots of money on vibration control.

Yes, front baffle of the CS2.4 is 3” MDF. Don’t know about the 2.7, but imagine it is the same. Was that model ever reviewed? 

This subject reminds me of my turntable base.

I did a loooong thread detailing my flailing layman attempts to create an isolation base for my 55lb aluminum transrotor turntable.  It was fascinating investigating, to the extent I could, the vibration behaviour of various materials, footers etc.  I used a seismometer app on my ipad and iphone so that I could at least measure and see, objectively, the relative differences I could detect in damping vibrations.   It turned out a spring system under the bass had by far the most dramatic effect in de-coupling the base from any vibrations occurring beneath those springs.
If I stomped on the floor around my turntable rack without the springs/base, I could measure huge, ringing spikes of vibration.  But with the spring system under the base, I could stomp around and measure almost nothing.

Anyway, more apropos of the baffle tweak I was thinking of:  In constructing my turntable base I used a 2 1/2" thick mapble block, then under it two boards of thick MDF (different thicknesses) with sound damping lining in between as a sort of constrained layer effect.  At the last minute I went out and bought some 1/8" thick sheets of stainless steel cut to size.  I was amazed at the effect merely placing one of those sheets had underneath the MDF boards.   Rapping or knocking on the shelf produced a much more dead "thonk" than just the boards themselves.  This was true even when the 2 1/2" maple block was put on top of everything. So it was: Maple block/MDF layer/Steel sheet.  With the steel sheet at the bottom of that stack, knocking on the top of the Maple block felt more solid, and sounded more solid, than when the steel sheet way below was removed.

I gained an appreciation for just how darned solid steel is vs wood.
(Which was in the back of my mind, thinking of that baffle tweak).