Thiel Owners


Guys-

I just scored a sweet pair of CS 2.4SE loudspeakers. Anyone else currently or previously owned this model?
Owners of the CS 2.4 or CS 2.7 are free to chime in as well. Thiel are excellent w/ both tubed or solid-state gear!

Keep me posted & Happy Listening!
128x128jafant

Beetlemania - good to see you. I can clarify. All these subsequent caps are way beyond the SE and I agree that dropping ’SE’ might be appropriate for these further upgrades. Jim’s Signature Edition was his late-life offering and the SA cap was the only electronic upgrade. It was CC’s best of its day and won the auditions against other caps including Mundorf and other expensive offerings. Other SE upgrades were the cosmetic bits.

I compared CC SAs to ESA and CSA and reported that the ESA was an incremental improvement and CSA a substantive one. Clarity’s patented PUR breakthrough is replacing the ubiquitous tin/zinc end caps with a tin/copper solution-which is a game changer. Later they added a Van den Hull silver leads option for short money. The CMR is a series cap which uses the same copper end caps. CC discovered that the geometry of the end cap could be improved. In round numbers it went from industry standard (1mm?) to 10mm thick for both the CSA (PUR) and CMR (PUR+). The upcharge is about 20% and said to be a high value improvement. I haven’t tested them due to my present workspace pause, but I am excited.

Regarding your single vs bypass comment - there are trade-offs and as you say, Jim landed on single with a better main cap. The smaller bypass value has shorter discharge time and other reactive improvements, producing a cleaner onset transient than the less worthy larger primary cap. But it also introduces electronic discontinuity in the cap bundle. When the primary cap is good enough, the discontinuities outweigh the timing improvement. In my direct comparisons, one CSA (even the SA) definitely wins, a slight ’capacitor tizz’ goes away.

Jim developed that 1uF cap for the CS5 where it is not a bypass but the capacitive element in the two bucket brigade electronic delay lines that fine-tune the timing of the two midrange drivers. In its day, that was a world-class cap. It became a sonic improvement for following products around our Solens main caps. It got perhaps its best use in the tweeter of the CS3.6 where four of them are bundled as the 4uF series feed block. Today, it lacks the improvements of the new short geometry, silver wire and of course copper end caps. Also, I suspect the post-ELPAC caps may no longer be tin / styrene.

Correction: Second paragraph, second line PUR should read CSA. CC's breakthrough of copper-alloy end caps came with the CSA series.

Thank you for replying and the info👍🏼

It seems I'll have to go either for the caps Rob will be getting shortly with the correct values of 14/28, or I'll have to combine two or more caps.

Seeing as there are more combinations to get to the magical 14 and 28, what would be a good combination, and could that be explained :for instance, would it make a difference if I combine 8+4+2 uF ( each obviously half the others value; would that create an unwanted effect?), or if I combine 8+5+1?

Would it be better to combine 7+7, or would that be what you not want, because of?

Anybody a nice explanation for how to tackle this best?

Pieter

Thanks for the post, @tomthiel. Interesting history of the origin of those 1 uF and how they were later used to improve performance of the Solens in other models.

I don’t see “PUR+” on Clarity’s website. Are those the 800 V PURs? Have you heard reports of how PUR compares to CMR? I’m curious to read reports of PUR sonics. Maybe I’ll become convinced to upgrade the CSAs, at least in the coax feeds.

Can you say more about your bypass comparison? I’m imagining you compared full-value SA/CSA against SA/CSA less 1 uF + 1 uF ELPAC. Your post suggests “capacitor tizz” is the result of discontinuities among paralleled caps. That makes sense to me but I’m wondering why this seems *not* an issue when bypassing with even smaller caps. As you know, I bypassed the CSA coax feeds with Multicap RTX at just under 1%. In my comparisons, the bypasses improved transients and, *maybe*, further improved resolution. I did not hear any deleterious effects.  

To get that 14 uF on the CS2.4 coax board, I’ve been suggesting DIYers get 10 + 3.9 CSA and add a 0.1 bypass (Multicap RTX, Audyn True Copper Max, or Jupiter copper foil depending on budget). But maybe the best course is a pair of 7 uF which, apparently will be available per Clarity’s website (although I’ll be surprised if all values on that sheet are stocked by PartsConnexion and Madisound). Might still be worth adding the ~1% bypass for improved transients but your post implies paralleled main caps should be balanced as evenly as possible. And what about that 28 uF cap? Do you think cap discontinuities would be audible with 18 + 10 uF? Or would it be worthwhile to bundle 4 x 7 uF?

I've already got one potential upgrader👍🏼

One question here in the forum on the matter..

The person in in contact with at clarity caps said that the 28 uF cap would have to be in 250 VDC, as 27 uF would be their largest in 400 VDC, whereas the 14 uF could be made in 630 VDC (I don't know if the caps Rob has are also 630 for the 14 and 250 for the 28 uF cap?).

Would it be a problem, sonically, to put a 250 VDC cap in the system?

Pieter