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
@tomthiel Wow, that CS .5 decay plot is super clean! I would not expect a paper cone to do that!
Just FYI - Looks like Madisound has started carrying replacement drivers from Seas.

Only saw two there, but worth checking out. A titanium tweeter and a mid-woofer.
Beetle - I agree, one would not expect a paper cone to act that way. But it isn't truly a paper cone, but a multi-fiber cone with cellulose as one of the fibers. Jim developed that driver for the CS1.5 in parallel with another more expensive solution, which was chosen. I understand that the CS.5 was created to make use of that woofer.
And that decay plot also speaks to the solidity of the cabinet. Small is beautiful.
Dspr- regarding the CS5 vs CS5i. The late 80s was when Jim was exploring electro-magnetic field effects for higher resolution driver motors. Thiel developed new magnet and pole piece geometries which were applied to the CS5 midranges, woofers and sub-woofers. Also, the mass loading of the subs was changed from rubber mats to a central plug. The global result of the new motor geometries was greater definition and articulation through the lower and mid ranges. Unchanged were the upper midrange and tweeter, and no crossover changes were required.

Rob has driver rebuild parts, which are universal for 5 and 5i.ScanSpeak no longer makes those Thiel drivers.
I remember a marked improvement in articulation / resolution in the CS5i, but the impedance requirements and resulting amplification requirements remained unchanged.



Kenazfilan - regarding back to back CS5s. Jim made that comment at the press conference introducing the CS5 in response to a question as to why he didn't provide a second set of inputs. It was not a thought-out position, but rather offhand: "if you want to spend an additional $10K for a second run of expensive cable, you'd get better results with a second set of speakers". The response begs the question of the cost of amplifying the second set of speakers, their cable, etc.
Anyhow, back in the listening room after the show, we tested the idea, and it has merit. The 2 speakers per channel act as bi-polar radiators which comes close to omni-directional radiation into the room. The polar response becomes extremely uniform and the sound-field becomes immersive. One caveat is that the room must be well damped, especially at the launch-speaker end so that the additional reflected sound-power does not overwhelm the direct radiation from the front speakers. We had perhaps 8' to the front wall and perhaps 6-7' to each side wall. The front and back speakers need not be the same model. For demonstration-testing I used a Yamaha P2200 professional power amp with adjustable gain for the back speakers so that the direct vs reflected sound could be blended on the fly. Each speaker is producing half the sound while coupling better to the room for a very big, impressive presentation.

It would be hard to imagine incorporating this idea into a normal residential-sized room, and also the extra amps and cables would have to be found. But . . . I still have that Yamaha amp and a bunch of speakers in the hot-rod garage. I'll try to find time to try it out.