Thiel Owners

@beetlemania Wow 6 feet that's far from the back wall, don't you lose bass ? right now i'm working between 2.5 and 3 feet more than 3 feet doesn't work for my room
@jafant  You are rignt i also find pointing straight is the best position for good imaging.

My 2.4 are 6' from the back wall and either side wall, 8' apart, 9' to the ideal listening position, and have a smidge of toe, <10 degrees.  While they're 6' to the 'real' back wall, they're 3' to 'interruptions' like an open stairwell and my stereo rack.  The room is an open floor plan to other 'attached' rooms, 8' ceiling, thick pile rug.  So overall very good acoustics for Thiels, with no reflective boundaries anywhere nearby. 

But it does create a lumpy low bass room response below about 80Hz.  Indeed, 25Hz is the same 0dB reference level as 1kHz.  This was 'reinforced' when I recently bought KEF LS50 Metas, whose output drops steeply below 80Hz.  So in many ways their bass is smoother in my room as the low bass is MIA and not exciting the room nodes.  Luckily, a lot of music has little or no bass below 100Hz.

@thieliste  yes, I am likely missing out on bass reinforcement but with a tradeoff of optimized imaging. My system is in the living room, so am constrained to keep it usable as such. I do get some energy down to the 30 Hz rating and it drops off steeply from there and did my CS1.6 at 50 Hz. With the 1.6s I played around more with placements closer to the front wall but it didn’t appreciably help bass impact while clearly hurting imaging. Lots of tradeoffs in this hobby and few “best” solutions. 
But I remain *super* happy with my Ayre + Thiel system and do not foresee any further upgrades.

I also have problems with a not ideal living room right now with lack of width.My speakers are 7 feet apart instead of the ideal 8 feet.Soundstage is not bad at all if speakers are firering straight out.In a couple of months i'm moving in a new home and should have a bigger living room but will have to do long wall placement this time around because the width is only 13,6 feet.

I was following with interest the thread a couple weeks ago about how Thiel's moving from sealed to radiator/ported woofers threw off the low-frequency phase coherency by 360 degrees. How does this make for a "coherent phase" loudspeaker if so much of the frequency range isn't aligned at all?

Stereopile always makes frequency response measurements of port vs woofer. My 2.4 shows that above 100Hz, the radiator's output is 15-20dB below the woofer. So if I'm playing music with no bass content below 100Hz, do I have a reasonably coherent phase speaker?

And as all Thiels were no longer sealed after the late-90s, why do their spec sheets state "Phase Response: +-10 degrees"?? (or 5 deg with 2.3 & 2.4)   Given Thiel's comprehensive tech data, why is this so vague?   As it states no frequency, is it unspoken that this is only valid above the woofer's passband? The clean-decay step response plots suggest at least the 'time' coherency to be true.

My 2.4 brochure states "Completely Time and Phase Coherent." Then it states the 'time' portion is from the slanted baffle and the 'phase' portion is the first-order slopes *between the drivers* -- is this to suggest that what happens outside the XO, ie the bass loading, is 'outside' a driver rather than 'between' drivers??  And therefore low frequencies are inapplicable to the "complete" phase coherence and +-5* spec?  That seems very un-Thiel-like, and I'm sure someone long before me would ask that question!

I'm sure someone on this thread has the necessary acoustics (or marketing-speak) background to offer insight here. All my pre-Thiel speakers were sealed so I'm finding this, uh, interesting...