Thiel Owners

The 1.6 was introduced in 2002 and sold approximately 3000 pair in its 10 year run, about the same as the CS1.5 from 1993 to 2002. All 1.6 cabinets, drivers, final assembly and testing was done in Lexington.  My #1611-12 pair have Lex crossovers with Axon caps on printed circuit boards. "Late-date"CS1.6s (probably after Jim's death in 2009)  had crossovers from FST.
I have done considerable investigation with the 1.6. I find it to be quite strong in all respects. My upgrade work has centered on physical elements with electronics review to come later. I am quieting the baffle for surprising increases in delecacy, harmonic detail and spatiality (as also is shown even more-so in the 2.2).I credit this forum for inspiring this exploration -specifically the questions about the Vandersteen baffle-less approach and the comments about being "harsh, aggressive, shouty". In reconstructing the product time-line, I realized that I had effectively dropped out of design evaluation by the time of mid 90s 3.6 finalization; and I would have been the person to explore non-electronic causes of subtle distortions. So, I'm playing catch-up 25 years later. And the results are enlightening on many levels of product performance and life's deeper questions.

The CS1.7 is a different story. Its development was finalized by New Thiel via Mark Mason, formerly of PSB. Shortly after the sale, Steve DeFuria was hired as national sales manager and he contacted me to arrange a consultancy for product/ philosophical/ historical backgrounding for the new owners. The new owners were not interested in the "old perspective" and I was not invited until a couple of executive generations later when I judged all had been lost.  The 1.7 was a focus of contention for Steve. The new CEO wanted to call it "Coherent Source", a moniker they had bought. Steve judged that it could not honestly be called such due to its 4th order crossovers and resulting phase distortion. I have read conflicting reports re its slopes, so I don't know where that argument landed.

The 1.7 had an upgraded tweeter and a woofer with a star diaphragm. It got some good reviews, but did not get formal reviews from Stereophile or Absolute Sound. I'm guessing it sold very poorly in the confusions of leadership transition.

Prof - The 2.7 is on my long list. I am gaining experience by taking on older designs with more room for improvement and more urgent end of capacitor life issues. I am learning a lot as I go that will all apply to more recent models such as the 2.7, which I consider at the pinnacle with the 3.7 of Jim's art. I hope to form some sort of organization to implement the design modifications I am creating. But for now, the 2.7 seems stable and respectable as it is.

Thanks Tom, makes sense.
I keep meaning to address a very interesting issue you brought up earlier about the quest for neutrality vs...I guess..."musicality?"
I'll try to get back to this.

Prof - my present work on these products strongly suggests that "neutrality vs musicality" is not necessarily a dichotomy. The assumption that we must sacrifice Articulation / Neutrality / Resolution in order to get "Musicality" is not necessarily so.

And Unsound's slippery slope is certainly slippery, but perhaps doesn't slope the way we thought.

The work I am doing seems to increase A/N/R and increase Musicality by removing some sources of propagation aberration which have plagued Thiel speakers in varying degrees over the decades. Trials in progress.