Thiel Owners

@tomthiel, In reply to your 11/25/2020 post:

Thiel Owners | Audiogon Discussion Forum

Let me say that your measurements are better than mine, as I have none. Though I think Stereophile's component measurements have real value, I am hesitant to use Stereophile's speaker measurements, especially with speakers like Thiel's. I have heard the 3.5's next to the 3.6's very often at my preferred dealer at the time, Innovative Audio in Brooklyn, with various gear such as Adcom , B&K, conrad-johnson, Exposure, Levinson, Krell, PS Audio, Rowland, Spectral, etc., And as they had a policy of only (except for the small budget lines) having one set of speakers in a room at a time, they were regularly moving speakers in and out of their various sized rooms. So there was that too. It's hard for me to imagine a speaker with a port and less bass output as being "more accurate" by "adhering to a more flat frequency and phase response curve" than a sealed box with extended bass response. 
Thiel CS3.5 loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com
Thiel CS3.6 loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com
It might appear as though the 3.6's were .5 dB more linear above sub bass frequency but, when including sub bass frequency they were 1dB less linear, and only to 27Hz as opposed to the 3.5's 20 Hz. I can only wonder what the 3.5's frequency response above 27 Hz might have measured as. It seems incongruous that, all else being equal, a port would be more phase linear than a sealed box.

 I was aware of the significance of numerology in eastern culture. But, it seems as though Thiel's nomenclature only had value within Thiel. The difference between the CS3's and the CS 3.5's to the consumer seemed less than than that between the CS 3.5's and CS 3.6's. The CS 2's were 3 ways. The CS 5's had 6 drivers. The CS 6's had 3 drivers. The CS 7's had 4 drivers. Thiel could have used any number of alternative names to avoid using the #4, such as 3+1, or 2+2, etc.. The baffle was covered by a grill. With apologies to Bill; : "A speaker by any other name would sound just as sweet". 

 Perhaps "rushing to market" was overstated, But meeting market demands still seemed to be the objective. The refinement of the 3.6's was welcome, but expected. The loss of bass response and the let down in time and phase coherence (a Thiel hallmark!) was not, then the extra demands on amplification and concurrent costs was also not. The jaded might suspect it was an attempt to give dealers an excuse to sell their more of their new home theatre sub woofers.

Oh well, time moves on, and so must we.:-)

@thieliste, re: your 11/24/2020 post:
Thiel Owners | Audiogon Discussion Forum
IMHO, what improvements the Thiel CS 3.6’s had over the Thiel CS 3.5’s amounted to 2 steps forward / 3 steps back. Where as the flat co-axial drivers in the CS 3.7’s were a major(!) improvement forward. Still when all (!) is considered; I think Thiel’s CS 3.5’s were Thiel’s best product. When I say all, I’m including ROI or more plainly value. Lets compare:

Thiel CS 3.5’s last sold for $2850 up until 1992
Thiel CS3.5 loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com

Thiel CS 3.7’s first sold for $11,000 in 2006
Thiel CS3.7 loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com

Considering inflation between 1992 and 2006 would make the
Thiel CS 3.5’s cost in 2006 = $ 4,067.03

USD Inflation Calculator - US Dollar (1956-2020) (inflationtool.com)

Now, if one wanted to retrieve all the musical information available on one’s recordings, unlike the Thiel CS 3.5’s the Thiel 3.7’s would need to be supplemented with subwoofers. Let’s use a pair of Thiel’s own bottom of the line Thiel SS1’s, original 2003 cost of $2800 each adjusted for inflation in 2006 = $3046.10

USD Inflation Calculator - US Dollar (1956-2020) (inflationtool.com)

Thiel SS1’s X 2 = $6092.20

That alone costs more than the 2006 inflationary cost of the Thiel CS 3.5’s

When added to the original cost of the Thiel 3.7’s:

Thiel CS 3.7’s: $11,000
+
Thiel SS! X 2 : $6,092.20
____________________________

Total: $ 17,092.20

Or more than $13,025.17 than the 2006 inflationary cost of the Thiel CS 3.5’s

And that doesn’t include the cost of amplification:

Jim Thiel mostly used the Threshold S 500 amplifier for the Thiel CS 3.5’s. Lets use the last version sold; the Threshold S550e which sold in 1989 for $6300 adjusted for 2006 inflation for a cost of $10,289.13

USD Inflation Calculator - US Dollar (1956-2020) (inflationtool.com)

Jim Thiel mostly used the Krell FPB - 600 amplifier for the Thiel CS 3.7’s. Lets
use the Krell FPB - 600 C which sold in 2000 for $13,500
adjusted for 2006 inflation for a cost of $15,867.10

USD Inflation Calculator - US Dollar (1956-2020) (inflationtool.com)

Which would be an additional $5,555.97 in amplification cost,
which when added to the extra costs of the CS 3.7’s with 2 Thiel SS1’s over the 2006 inflation adjusted Thiel CS 3.5’s = $18,603.14

Thiel CS 3.7’s = $11,000
Thiel CS SS1 X 2 =$ 6,092.20
Krell FPB-600C =$15,867.10
________________________________

Total $32,959.30

Thiel CS 3.5’s =$ 4,067.03 -
Threshold S550e =$10,289.13
________________________________
$14,356.16
___________

$18,603.14

Now the Thiel CS 3.7’s combination will outperform the
Thiel CS 3.5 combination in most every way; ease of placement, freedom
from lobing, ultimate loudness, (and with the subs especially
in the bass region), and much, much more,... except time and
phase coherence, and foot print where the Theil CS 3.5’s despite their 20 year age disadvantage still have the edge. Still, the CS 3.5’s wouldn’t be too embarrassed by the comparison. If one wanted to do something similar with the current state of used prices, I think the advantage would be probably proportionately even greater for the Thiel CS 3.5’s.
Considering everything; I think the CS 3.5’s were Thiel’s best product.

Interesting I’m curious what about the cs6 or cs7? I’ll probably keep the cs 3.5 and get the 3.7 for the other system. What were your impressions on the cs3.5 on adcom amps vs the others?

@thoft, I assume your addressing me? IMHO, the CS 6’s were something of a poor value. Similar to the CS 3.6’s in range, though with much greater ease and dynamics, but at nearly twice the cost, again IMHO, a poor value. YMMV! The CS 7’s were one of Thiel’s best. But, and I might be in the minority here, I preferred the CS 5i’s. But the CS 5’s amplifier requirements are, let’s put this politely; demanding.
I had an Adcom on long term loan (a couple of months), and heard them on a lot of gear. While I admired them for allowing those on a budget to use speakers that might otherwise be out of reach due to amplification budget requirements. They were up to the job that was previously only available from more expensive (and sometimes much more expensive) amps. Ultimately the Adcom was amongst my least favorite amps. I found them to be dry, grainy, flat. and lacking dimensionality. I noticed that as long as it was in my system, the less time I spent listening to it.

What adcom did you have and what was the pre amp? I currently use the 5800 with 18 mosfets per channel and a huge toroidal. Runs incredibly hot and with the luxman at least it sounds excellent with great dimensionality. I feel like adcom pre’s are the adcom amps downfall despite the adcom pre amps literally made to be paired with them. Also what would your input be on me getting a used musical fidelity tri vista 300 for thiels? Saw someone on YouTube using it with their cs7’s