Thiel Owners

I cannot play with the placement other than these minor movements. I bought the CS3.7 on the assumption that if it did not work in the office. I could eventually move them downstairs to the much larger living room. The living room is my sons play room at the moment.

However, the placement that I just did is great. Given the circumstances of this room I am extremely happy about the sound, except for that harshness. which will be resolved on Tuesday.

I will say to prospective CS3.7 buyers that the speaker will play in a acoustically treated room small room, see my Virtual System on A'gon. I understand that I am not getting the very best sound out of the CS3.7 but, what I am getting is very good. 

Reading everything on the web on this room size issue made me think it would not work. I am shocked actually that this is working so well and I am not getting overwhelmed with bass. I still have the DRC implementation that I can bring to the table to potentially make things even better.

unsound & thielrules - about individual amps. I’ve been comparing configurations these past few days and conclude that it’s very murky water. I have matched pairs of Adcom GFA-555 mkII, Classe DR9 and Benchmark AFB-2s. The power is similar, but the clipping characteristics are different. Even with using same source, preamp, cables and speakers, the amps’ characters change when stereo or bridged and how hard they are pushed. All things considered, it would be hard to make any ’best recommendation’. I agree with unsound’s thought about ’same amp’ for bass and treble. Gain matching is very important as well as overload characteristics.

At this point what I can say for sure is that among my amp stable, the AHB-2 is the cleanest, clearest, most harmonically convincing. To my previous comment about its possible bass ’deficiency’: I suspect it is outputting most accurately, even though other amps might be more appealing. After speaking with John Siau of Benchmark and poring over test results of all the amps, I’m convinced that the AHB-2 stays extremely clean (until it clips), whereas other amps delay bass frequencies which is experienced as hanging longer in time, and produce harmonic (distortion) addenda which is experienced as more amplitude. Combining time delay and more harmonics produce bigger bass. But, the AHB-2 bass is so clean and articulate with considerably more inner harmonic detail. The problem still remains that it admittedly produces "less" apparent bass than other amps, so the producers’ intent may have more bass than the listeners’ experience with the AHB-2.

My preferred setup is running a pair of AHB-2s in bridged mono, each driving a full-range speaker with 3 separate, identical cable runs (or two runs that combine midrange and tweeter feeds. I rigged some 6’ and 12’ runs and cutting the runs to half length increases damping factor by 2 and tightens up the bass that was loosened by bridging. If I could afford to splurge, I would use 4 AHB-2s, all bridged. One for each channel’s woofer and the other for the mid-tweeter. But, I don’t feel the need, a bridged pair doesn’t clip in my situation, and unlike normal amps, the AHB-2 distortion stays near zero into any drivable impedance until it clips. JS says that impedance limit is around 2 ohms, so some Thiel models are in jeopardy. But I haven’t experienced it with my 2.2 and 3.5 testing. I wish Jim had kept his loads above 4 ohms nominal, 3 ohms minimum to stay out of trouble.

 I have no doubt that identical individual amps for each driver would be ideal, especially when one considers the potential of DSP when so configured.  I would  have preferred 4 Ohm minimum loads. The difference is not as insignificant as might first appear, particularly for those that might prefer tube amplification (which doesn’t include myself). That would also allow consumers to use standard ratings and measurements without prevailing doubts.

Unsound - I agree to wanting 4 ohms minimum which would roughly double the impedance of many Thiel models, making them far easier loads to drive with lower amplifier distortion and fewer cable interactions. Jim committed to underhung voicecoils as a way to reduce motor distortion by an order of magnitude. Walter Kling developed the methods and machines to make those drivers. He shared that industry driver manufacturers considered them nearly impossible to make and therefore expensive and ill-advised. Jim and Walter took that as a challenge and took it on and never looked back. One of the downsides includes the coils being only a few winds long (short?) x 4 layers thick, which is precarious geometry indeed. More turns would raise impedance, but also add mass and mechanical reactance in a system short on gap flux due to the thick coil. The feasible balance point seems to have been where he landed. He wasn't really out to make our lives difficult driving them, it just worked out that way.

@yyzsantabarbara1  I bought 3.7s in 2012 and had kids in 2013 and 2014.  Audio dropped way down on my priority list and I had them in several far from ideal spots.  I had them right next to each other for a while and they sounded great.  You don't get much in the way of imaging but otherwise great.  I had them nearfield for a while on each side of my desk with my head a couple of feet in front of them but way off axis.  Still great.  I worked from home for a few years and I was always amazed at how good they sounded in this far from ideal situation.  I couldn't believe how well the image held together.  From a placement standpoint the coax is magic.