Thiel Owners

Owned 2.3s and helped deliver a bunch of 2.4s.  At one point, they changed the tweeter in the 2.3 (helped replace a blown one in one speaker and had to replace the other to match).  From memory (long time), the new one might have been vented in the back of the driver.  The 2.4s are clearly much smoother and not as harsh when driven a bit hard.

For some reasons, Tom reminds me of this. Oh well maybe I’ll use the stereo illusions ... But I’ll take my gloves off at the challenge.
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BNjhiMjk1YWYtMjgyYy00YTFhLTk0NTMtN2Q5MDZjMWEyYWI1XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTQxNzMzNDI@._V1_.jpg

It may have to do with the filtering affect of the grille. In a linear system, every frequency passes through the system will only be affected by a constant value, either a gain or an attenuation, which will be applied to all frequencies all equally. This would be ideal or at least preferable.

My System Theory 101 is a bit rusty, and I am not sure if a filter can be called a "Linear Time Invariant" (I am pretty sure about the Time Invariant but not sure about the Linear part), but I am pretty sure any filter will affect the phase of a signal and not just the amplitude. In this sense, a grille will act as a filter, a high pass filter albeit a mechanical one, because it will attenuate the high frequencies more than the low frequencies, and just like any filter, therefore introducing a phase shift at the high frequencies. Therefore the attenuation affect of the grille is not a "constant", and probably therefore one cannot be compensated by a "fix" amount on the treble to counteract the variable attenuation of the grille. And I suppose the phase shift introduced by the grille at high frequencies is what affects the "openess" of the sound that I notice.

I suppose one could match the treble response to counteract perfectly to the frequencies response of the grille, but that’s probably very difficult and probably not worth the trouble. It’s probably a lot easier to listen just with the grille off :-)

Gloves put back.

solobone, I’d really like to put the 2.7 next to my 2.4. I’ve heard 2.4 side-by-side with 3.7, and obviously way too much of 2.3 vs 2.4...


cascadesphil, mine are late-production 2.3s, but my understanding of the changes to the coax wouldn’t affect the soundstaging I’m noticing as a baffle change between 2.3 and 2.4.


Andy2, I’m assuming you mistyped, because a high-pass filter will attenuate the *low* frequencies more than the highs!

I’ve seen a number of frequency plots over the years of grilles on vs off for a variety of speakers, and my memory is they nearly always show some degree of attenuation, ideally just the top octave, but sometimes they have funky and likely unintentional irregularities at much lower frequencies. As the grille rolloff seems < a 1st-order XO I don’t see why some modest XO tweaks couldn’t flatten out the response by a dB or less in the tweeter’s passband. If you know your XO topology to begin with.

But the more ’open’ sound without grilles IMO is as much the lack of an acoustic obstruction between you and the tweeter as it is a slight (relative) exaggeration of the highs.

Andy2, I’m assuming you mistyped, because a high-pass filter will attenuate the *low* frequencies more than the highs!

OK, I was high on weeds :-)  

But the more ’open’ sound without grilles IMO is as much the lack of an acoustic obstruction between you and the tweeter as it is a slight (relative) exaggeration of the highs.

I suppose that is a valid point.  I'll let others "bring it on" as Tom will probably have some say to that :-)

sdecker

Good to see you again. I, too, share your sentiments w/ the CS 2.4 model.
Pretty cool aspect regarding upgrading via SE Clarity Cap.  Did you incorporate any other change(s) to the cross-over (XO)?
Was this a DIY project? Or, did another speaker tech assist?

Happy Listening!