Thiel Owners

The stock caps is like a handbrake for the CS 2.4 ;)

We working on upgrading the whole crossovers with better parts.

We working on upgrading the whole crossovers with better parts.

Are you also planning to upgrade the xover wiring?  Based on what you've seen, is it easy to replace the wires?  

Yes thinking about the wiring also,  but at first I like to know what the stock wiring is, they can be silver wires as far as I know, maybe Tom can share some info about the wiring. 

I'd like to add a few comments re: the discussions just a bit earlier in this thread.

Tom Thiel was asked what he found so fascinating as to make the 3.5's a special speaker to him.  Beyond his personal involvement, he mentioned the seamless deep bass.   I have never listened especially to the higher members of the Thiel line (due to economic reality) but of the three and two series, the 3.5's simply are the only ones to have a smooth, fully fleshed out frequency response throughout the upper bass and lower midrange.  As this is where most voices exist, voices through these speakers simply sound fuller and "real-er" than any of the others.  It doesn't matter whether you are listening to Louis Armstrong, Eric Clapton, Judy Collins, Ella Fitzgerald, the Eagles, the Carpenters, or  Allison Krauss.  As good as the 2.2's sound which I also own, the 3.5's sound "real", the 2.2's and others in the line I've heard sound "light".  (I attend a lot of live concerts of both jazz and classical music which also provides an excellent frame of reference for instrumental sounds.).  Also perhaps because of the care Tom describes, the 3.5's have a coherence top-to-bottom that excels even the other members of the line.  This exhibits itself most forcefully with full orchestral music where the entire orchestra sounds "just right" and "of a piece" whether playing loudly or softly, whether strings, brass, or percussion, etc.  It is also easy to forget how much an underlying bass line is part of the classical orchestral repetoire.  Except, when you hear the 3.5's you realize what is missing from many, many speakers including the 2.2's.

The 2.2's have extraordinary transparency, and as part of my second system I listen to them a lot.  If I didn't have the 3.5s I wouldn't know what I was missing.  But I do, which is why they are in my second system.

I'd also like to comment on the home theatre discussion.  For about a dozen years I had a 5.0 system in a near-exact ITU setup.  It was all analog, consisting of three 3.5's (front, rears) and two 2.2s (L,R).  It sounded excellent except for the midrange discrepancy front middle-left/right.  More recently I've moved and have a smaller listening room.  In this room I've set up a more traditional stereo front (with 3.5s) using bridged left-right channels, as well as rear 3.5s.  

These surround setups have taught me two things. 

For one, placed alongside and touching a side wall, angled about 30-40 deg forward, full range Thiels make excellent surround speakers.

And second, three or four (or five?) 3.5's in anything approximating an ITU placement will neutralize room standing waves, and if they are 3.5's, also eliminate any need for a subwoofer.  Everything is there, even on the loudest explosions on film.  (Of course, it helps that I am using five Outlaw M200 monoblocks.)

Just for what it is worth for fellow Thiel lovers.

harry - regarding 2 vs 3. The target frequency response is identical, including the upper bass x midrange. I suspect the difference you hear is based on power response in the room. The 3s go deeper and move more air. The 3s have a larger diameter midrange with a lower crosspoint, so room fill can sometimes benefit. Also, the top end of the 10" woofer breaks up more than the 8" in the 2 - that breakup adding more "meat" in the lower midrange. Some folks like that even though Jim considered it a flaw - less than accurate. Both the 2 and 3 have a first-order hand-off from woofer to midrange.

The bass rightness I was referencing is the deep bass. The sealed bottom end of the 3.5 and 5 allow a 12dB/octave bottom end which makes a gradual phase shift as it rolls off, supplying a natural sounding foundation.

The ported / reflex models (1, 2s and news) add a pole for 18dB, and much steeper below the port tuning for significant phase shift at the bottom. (Remember that the industry judges this phase shift as of no consequence. Most modern products and subwoofer crossovers produce 4th order / 24dB/octave slopes.) Nonetheless, real acoustic instruments played in live spaces and recorded carefully do benefit, in my experience and opinion, from more shallow rolloff with greater phase integrity. There's something less hi-fi and more real.