Thiel Owners

I tried throwing the Bryston 4B3 amp in to the system again today, doing some back and forth between it powering the Thiels and my CJ tube amp. I keep thinking "I’ll put it in and just live with it for a while."


But when I put on familiar tracks - e.g. Talk Talk’s Happiness Is Easy - I can’t help be taken aback by the difference.

"Where is that roundness, fullness, 3 dimensionality of the images?"


By 3 dimensionality I don’t mean that with the Bryston the Thiels don’t image/soundstage. They certainly do, with precisely placed voices and instruments. But the voices and instruments themselves sound flattened dimensionally and tonally. More like the way "3D" images look on those old viewmasters - a series of flatt images placed in 3D relief. That’s an exaggeration, but essentially the nature of the difference I perceive.

I put back in the CJ, and everything sounds bigger, more filled out, the drum kick and snare sound rich, with a present texture, the drum-set now seems more 3 dimensional like I’m peering in to the studio, voice sounds organic, acoustic guitars have that similar golden sparkle I hear from my own guitar, etc.


And with the Bryston, string/keyboard parts that usually float organically and 3D sound thinner, flatter, more icy in tone and texture.


Interestingly, this is exactly the character I perceived when my friend switched from his tube set up to the Bryston, at his house. Ever since then I’ve found a slightly off-putting coldness/hardness/icy quality to the sound - things sound clear but nothing sounds organic and real. (Though I never tell him this! I know not to excite audiophilia nervosa!)


Anyway, none of that is to say the Bryston is objectively worse than the CJ tube amps. The Bryston also brings some excellent qualities. Just not the ones I tend to value first.

I've been enjoying the comments and historical perspectives from @unsound and @tomthiel regarding the 3.5s and Thiel's efforts at creating solid and marketable bass. Although I generally like sealed boxes for producing tight bass, I have to agree with @prof that I've really enjoyed the bass performance of Thiel's passive radiators, such as those in my 2.2s.

This discussion got me thinking about my purchase of the 2.2s way back in early 1992, at which time I debated between the 2.2 and the 3.5. Although the 3.5s sounded good, there was something more natural and "together" about the 2.2s - at least to my ears. There was something about the EQ on the 3.5 that I didn't really like. Maybe the ones I heard weren't set up correctly or maybe I had just been brainwashed enough by the critiques of the 3.5 equalizer in TAS and Stereophile, but the 2.2s were a better value in my eyes (and ears). The 2.2s were sleeker, cheaper, and sweeter IMO, and I haven't regretted the choice a bit. And lately I've been finding that upgrades to my amps, preamp, DAC and cables have opened up the sound from the 2.2s further than I could ever have imagined possible. Unless my 2.2s finally succumb to the ravages of old age and can't be repaired, I have no plans to be speaker-hunting in the future.

@prof, in the past I've thought that rolled off highs improved imaging.  I thought that the very high sounds threw off my ability to hear spatially.  I'm entirely in the listen to what you enjoy camp so I'm not at all critical of tube lovers.  I just wonder if I'm the only one that has gotten this impression.  

@tomthiel, at the risk of beating a dead horse, please note in order to have a consistent, generally available reference that I used the Audiogon Blue Book for pricing. I also used end of cycle pricing for the CS 3.5's combination, and beginning of cycle pricing for the CS 3.7's combination. The original pricing for the CS 3.5's was about $2550 and the original pricing for the Threshold S500 was about $2900. Of course that doesn't take inflation into consideration. The end of cycle Threshold S550e was priced over twice that cost, which included a nice upgrade of dual trannies and true balanced inputs, that couldn't be used with the 3.5's eq. On the other hand the $11,000 pricing quote of the 3.7's seems quite low, as the Stereophile link suggests $12,900. IMO, the CS 3.5's were and are one of the all time audio bargains. Kudos to you and the rest of the Thiel team!

@jon_5912
I don't know that the CJ is rolling off the treble.  At least, it doesn't sound like it - it doesn't sound darker, in fact a bit more lower treble illumination.   In comparison the Bryston actually sounds a bit darker.
And of course the differences I'm describing fits in to the "picky little audiophile differences" category.   But as we all know, those little differences we seize on to can have big subjective effects in how we enjoy our systems.    I swear, sometimes I feel like I might not even be in this hobby if it weren't for tube amps :-)