Thiel Owners

   As soon as the 2.4SE came out advertising its improved crossover.  Thiel supplied me with the XO schematic and that their auditioning chose the Clarity Cap SA.  I went to PartsConnexion and went up one step to the ESA model, matched pairs, with paralleled bypass caps.  Had to use a 10+3 uF paralleled from their stock rather than a custom-made 13uF cap Thiel custom-sourced.  No other changes to XO (yet?).  

   It was a quick one-man DIY.  Decades as a working EE made this straightforward, if tight quarters.

   Despite the break-in time, it was clear the tightly-matched cap tolerances improved the image focus, and a smidge more transparency throughout the upper frequencies.  At this level of hifi, this was great bang for the $135 buck. 

   I'll add that having both coaxes rebuilt from the ground up at the same time by Rob Gillum post-Thiel collapse was similar to the upgraded, matched-pair Clarity caps, and also improved image focus and transparency a smidge.  But probably moreso because I have so many zillion hours listening to these speakers in the same good acoustic with mostly the same components and cables...

  Do you "share my sentiments" because you've *heard* with your own ears that the 2.4 doesn't soundstage quite as well as the 2.3?

For those 2.7 fans or owners here’s an old, obscure review of the Thiel 2.7s in a Chinese audio magazine:

https://review.u-audio.com.tw/reviewdetail.asp?reviewid=628

Will require googletranslate. Though I found using the Chrome browser, which offers automatic translation, worked very well. There were very few reviews of the 2.7 (TAS, Secrets Of Home Theater, and an italian one), so finding another is fun.


I love the finish on that pair in the review!  Looks like the same pair, possibly, as the one sent to Secrets.

brayeagle - thanks for the links to the iconclast cables.  I went and spent some time there.  The thing I found most interesting was their claim that "time of arrival" was the missing critical factor, and the main driver behind their decision on how to construct. Way back in the 80's-90's Monster Cable introduced their M1000 series (and later similarly constructed M400's) using three layers of differing wire and construction, with the claim that this equalized "time of arrival". 

I tested the early M1000's against a few other cables (can't remember which ones) in the same price range and the M1000's beat them hands down.  I loaded up on used M1000's and M400's over the next decade and have used them ever since, with results that reveal every iota of change in gear behind them.  Before you rush out to buy any, however, let me add that their cable construction was shoddy and by now probably 50% of the RCA plugs have had to be replaced.  And since the cables are thick this is not always easy.

dsper - you are ahead of me as well on your Thiel/digital journey.  Have you thought about a DAC with tube based output?  Also, if you haven't, check out the "taming digital glare" thread and think about all the possible ancillary improvements like power supplies, conditioners, cabling, etc, many believe this all makes a difference with digital and although I have a ways to go, so far I agree.  Also agree with prof's comments above re continuing to recheck speaker placement, including tilt.  Finally, and there are many on this thread who have better more experienced ears than me, but from what I have heard in my journey so far, "live" comes from tube based amplification.  

Not to turn this into a ss vs tube discussion, just sharing my opinion.