Thiel Owners

Note that I am aware that some might want to go farther afield with cost no object components and others may balk at the significant cost of my choices. My vision is to find affordable solutions that reach the next performance / cost plateau.

I will add that I think Tom Thiel’s choices are *very* sensible. The upgrades will almost certainly (can’t say for certain ‘til we listen!) yield a significant SQ improvement but without going beyond the budget of most serious listeners.

Left to my own devices, my choices would have been similar to Tom’s in some ways. I was honing in on a solution that would have added a substantial (30%) Clarity CMR bypass to CSA coax feeds. This would have been more expensive and not necessarily overall better than what Tom outlined. In his research, Tom has learned that certain bypass practices can have detrimental effects! Elsewhere, I was going to add small polypropylene bypasses to the extant caps. Tom’s solution is far better, replacing the electrolytics in the shunts with the custom 160V PPs. We are fortunate that Tom is able to work with Clarity to have this cap made to spec. An off-the-shelf solution would be very expensive and with ginormous caps that would be very difficult to fit.

These upgrades will not be inexpensive ($TBD). All XO parts are replaced - most caps are custom - except for Thiel’s custom 1 uF bypasses and the coils. As I wrote earlier, if I were to replace my CS2.4SE with something new I would start at something like a Vandy Quatro or Vivid B1; $15K speakers! After these upgrades, I suspect such a search would have to reach to something like the Vandy 5 Carbon, a $30K speaker. In other words, the CS2.4 is a seriously good speaker in stock form and optimizing its crossover should elevate its performance to the next tier (or beyond). Do I want to live with a speaker whose neutrality, transparency, and resolution exceed or rival anything up to $30K? And for the “only” cost of the upgrade? Hmmm, decisions, decisions ;^)

As Tom wrote, some owners may want to go even further. Earlier I linked to Jim Smith’s outboard XO for his Avantgardes featuring a rack of Dueland caps and resistors. Would that approach outperform what Tom Thiel has outlined? I hope so – that’s at least $20K in parts! But we’d have to listen to know for sure. To my thinking (and budget) that is not sensible for a CS2.4. Maybe you CS3.7 and 7.2 owners will choose to push the limits? But remember that Tom Thiel’s “base” upgrade is a notable upgrade even for those models.

later production 3.7s have Chinese made crossovers which seem to have some polyester caps where polypropylenes are specified. And those are built on printed circuit boards

My SEs also are on PCBs and with some MKT caps where Jim Thiel’s schematic specified PP. My pair was built in 2012 (the year Kathy Gornik sold Thiel Audio) and are among the last SEs built. @jafant I suspect your pair are similarly equipped. For us, Tom Thiel’s upgrade will probably be an even bigger jump in SQ than for owners of earlier SEs.

I’ve never heard ATC. Maybe they’re onto something? But I’m skeptical. As Tom Thiel wrote, the steep filter lets you operate a driver in the range of pistonic behavior. This is *highly* desirable (and also requires diaphragm material up to the task). But this throws off phase coherence. There is no free lunch. If there were, all designers would hone in on the same design.

Thiel Audio placed phase and time coherence as a top priority. The downside is that the slow rolloff may not sufficiently suppress the inevitable break up modes. As I’ve written in this thread, I think Jim Thiel made some of the best drivers around. The diaphragms are light and rigid and the break up modes are out of the "main" region covered by each driver. Even at that, some may consider the break up modes insufficiently suppressed by a 6dB filter. Richard Vandersteen seems to have taken this even farther with his carbon/balsa drivers but you need some serious coin to move up to those. The carbon midrange is available only in the 5 Carbon ($30+K) and 7 models ($60+K).

IMO, most of the newer Thiels get it right in terms of balancing phase alignment and pistonic behavior (I’ve heard CS2.4, 3.7 and 7.2 but not earlier models). My ears tell me so, and Soundstage’s measurements of the CS2.4 confirm "very low" distortion despite the 1st order filters. Nothing is perfect but I think Thiel gets you most of the way there and at an affordable price.

That said, if ATC or others have figured out how to maintain phase alignment while also optimizing pistonic behavior I’m happy to learn! I'm not an audio engineer, either. More of a dork with a soldering gun :)

Past the 100 hour mark on my Mills MRA-12 resistors and it was time to evaluate the sonic difference. I had to do this in mono, comparing the upgraded speaker to the OEM version. Not ideal but the only other choice was to upgrade both speakers and rely on sonic memory. I used Roon DSP to mix the signal into mono. This allowed me to use my “reference” recordings rather than rely on rarely listened-to mono originals (which I also tried). To minimize room effects, I put the speakers close together in the middle of my room, about one foot apart (ie, each speaker had the “same” room interaction). In this position, I simply shifted a couple of feet one way or the other on my couch so that I was directly on-axis. The on-axis energy shifted the balance from what I’m used to (my normal arrangement has the speakers just under 8’ apart with no toe-in) but both speakers were equally handicapped.

Anyhow, I’ve now done two comparative sessions. My impression from both sessions is that the Mills has a fuller, richer sound although my perception of this varied from song to song. I heard little, if any, difference on solo trumpet but a pronounced difference on the well-recorded 2L Mozart violin concerto. Guitars and voices were more "full-bodied" on folk-rock, blues, and bluegrass. More “tonally-rich” might be another way to describe it. On a Chesky test recording, percussions were more emotionally engaging, toe-tapping. The Mills also seems to have a bit more texture or, at least, it was easier to hear into the microdynamics. I think this is related to my initial impression of a "lower noise floor".

All-in-all a worthwhile upgrade - audible benefits and at a reasonable price. I think Tom Thiel’s upgrade path is off to a good start.

@prof My pleasure. I *am* doing this mostly for selfish reasons (I want to have killer speakers at a price I can afford). But am glad to help Tom Thiel and Rob Gillum develop an upgrade that will benefit many more.

I'm pretty excited about it and think the "final" product will be a substantial improvement for our already excellent speakers. Tom continues to refine the parts list. One of the last pieces of the puzzle regards the paired 100 uF caps that are common in many models. Jim Thiel chose electrolytics for these because film caps in this value are quite bulky and *very* expensive. Also, to his ears these were less important sonically (they are in the shunt position so do not directly carry the signal). Others disagree, however, so we're going to compare a couple of film cap choices as replacements. One is a custom cap from Clarity so it will probably be at least another month before Tom can begin his evaluation.

Prof, . . . you can keep your 3.7s and join the upgrade brigade for even more musical satisfaction.

@prof Tom Thiel is learning much about the late model Thiel crossovers as well as how to improve parts quality for all the models he is now working on. You might hold onto those CS3.7s another year or so and try his upgrade when it becomes available. 

If Rob Gillum has the kit to fabricate drivers, it wouldn’t be a huge stretch to make new, improved versions of the cs2.4 with Tom’s XO design. Jim Thiel’s last drivers (x.7) were the best but I think those had to be outsourced. But the Lexington made coax and woofer in the 2.4 aint too shabby 😀

Ayre and ARC would be on my short list. Also, Pass, Aesthetix, and Classe. Heed the power ratings per Tom Thiel. You very much want an amp with a decent 4 Ohm rating and 2 Ohm is not overkill.  Maybe take a look at Wes Phillips’ review in Stereophile. I recall he tried two or three amps (but I could be thinking of his cs2.4 review).

@ronkent Thanks for the report. I'm not surprised. I don't consider Thiels the best available but I do consider them the best at their price points. They "punch well above their weight class". IMO, models like the CS3.7 and 7.2 just miss the ultimate tier of performance. If Tom Thiel is able to design hot rod kits for the CS3.7 (it's on his radar but he is working on older models first) I expect the performance to rise to that next tier. I suspect a 3.7 with an upgraded crossover will be sonically competitive with models costing ~$50+K (I'm thinking stuff like the Vandersteen 7 and Vivid Giya).

Update on Mills MRA-12 resistors: I replaced the other channel a couple of weeks ago. I hear more bass impact, a more spacious soundstage, and, especially, an ease of presentation. The MRAs even seem to have partially mitigated a somewhat “glassy” quality in the midrange. I can’t wait to hear the full upgrade!

Tom Thiel has placed an order for the custom caps but they won’t arrive until late June or thereabouts. The parts list is nearly finalized for CS2.4s. There are a couple of caps that merit A-Bing to determine which to use in the final design. So, probably late summer or later before the CS2.4 kits are available. 

The Thiels i am thinking, have more cabinet resonances and nothing will change that. Changing speakers is such a pain (selling and shipping the old ones for example) that i probably will be keeping these for many years. the crossover upgrade sounds awesome but i for one am not qualified to go in and change everything so i guess that it is not in my future.

Tom Thiel has an idea for identifying cabinet resonances and, possibly, addressing them. Stay tuned. In the meantime, the CS3.7 is not too bad in that regard:https://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs37-loudspeaker-measurements
For comparison, here is a $50K Wilson (Wilson makes some of the very best cabinets in the business): https://www.stereophile.com/content/wilson-audio-specialties-alexia-loudspeaker-measurements

If you are not comfortable building new crossovers, I imagine there will be a couple of options depending your confidence level with a soldering gun: 1) Rob Gillum can build and install these, altho' that means shipping or personally transporting your speakers to Lexington; or 2) the CS3.7 boards appear easily accessible: http://www.theaudiobeat.com/visits/thiel_audio_carries_on.htm
(assuming that panel isn't glued on), so you might have Rob Gillum build the new boards, ship them to you, and you would only need to replace the boards. Alternatively, you could have someone local do this last bit (friend or technician at a local shop). But temper any excitement you might have - Tom is unlikely to have a solution for the CS3.7 until next year.

I have the CS2.4SE, now with Mills MRA-12 resistors over the OEM sandcast resistors. This was a worthwhile upgrade! I have ordered new bypass caps and will build entirely new boards later this year.

I recently purchased a pair of CS 2.7 that I am running with a peachtree nova 300 and accessing Tidal as a source. I found the highs a little bright and the lows so so.

I've not heard this amp but class D amps are reported to be generally less musical (albeit gobs of power for a low price). You might try a solid state design from ARC, Ayre, Classe', or Pass (among others). In the meantime, make sure your placement and room are optimized. Jim Smith's "Get Better Sound" is a good place to start without spending a bunch of money.

I'm a bit gun-shy about messing with the tone of my 2.7s

The upgrade circuit is nearly identical to OEM. “Nearly” in that bypass caps will alter capacitance by about 1%. Otherwise all cap, inductor, and resistor values are unchanged from Jim Thiel’s circuit. The difference is a substantial upgrade in parts quality. Tom Thiel posted earlier that Jim was well aware of the benefits of higher quality parts but made his choices to optimize the performance/price curve and keep his speakers attainable for regular working folks.

But there are audible improvements for those willing to open their wallets some more, especially given the increased performance with time. Many of the parts Tom is planning for the upgrades were simply not available 10-20 years ago. I consider my CS2.4s to have excellent cabinets and, especially, drivers. But there is ample opportunity to upgrade the crossovers and get notably better SQ.

That said, Tom Thiel will be measuring the results of the upgrades to ensure that the balance is not upset in some unpredictable way. 

 I haven't yet looked at the 3.5, but will look into it. The equalizer could indeed be ignored in an upgrade. 

Sounds good, Tom. Seems to be some demand for that model! And maybe someone will step up to address the equalizer?

Not much musical content below 35 Hz: 

http://www.sineworld.com/html/basic_knowledge/freqchart.html

I can never again live with a speaker that isn’t robust down to 40 but I’d rather have a killer speaker that stopped at 40 than a mediocre one with full output below 30.

8 v 10” woofer. Prof and ronkent can probably describe the difference.

So my dilema is do I upgrade the 2.4's to 2.4SE's as I can get the upgrade kit from Rob and be content with my current system or do I sell the 2.4's and the SS2( hopefully to someone who loves Thiel and appreciates the quality) and get a pair of 3.7's?

The sonic part of the SE "kit" simply replaces the 13 uF polypropylene + 1 uF styrene bypass with a 14 uF Clarity SA and the 27 uF PP + 1 uF bypass with a 28 uF SA. Those are the coax feed caps and SA's were chosen by Jim Thiel and Gary Dayton as the best sounding circa 2008.

But there are better caps available now (eg Clarity CSA) and other passive parts (caps in other positions as well as resistors and coils) can also be upgraded. That is what Tom Thiel is working on. If all goes well, this "super" upgrade kit will be available from Rob Gillum by the end of the year. If you decide to keep the 2.4s I advise waiting for the more robust upgrade kit. "Just" upgrading the resistors made a very nice improvement on my SEs and I suspect the full upgrade will bring the SQ to the next tier.

That said, if you have the coin I recommend the CS3.7 which has better drivers and cabinet than the 2.4. And Tom Thiel might have an upgrade kit for those boards, too, although the time line is further out. I suspect a tricked out CS3.7 would be sonically competitive with some of the very best speakers out there.

Your recollections and future considerations of the CS 5's is most interesting. Perhaps my favorite Thiel model. If it weren't for the associated amplifier demands, I'd probably own a pair.

IMO, the ultimate Thiel would have the 5's sealed bass, the 3.7 coax, and Tom Thiel's optimized passive parts . . . and more amplifier friendly impedance. *That* could be a crazy good speaker!

I prefer the sound *with* the outriggers. Not sure how much is due to better floor coupling versus the added 2” higher axis.

Has anyone tried comparing the sound with and without the outriggers that Thiel provided?

i asked my distributor if he could order the lastest crossovers in 2015 he told me Thiel didn't have them available anymore.

Well, the only person to ask now is Rob Gillum at Coherent Source Service. He has an easy inquiry form on his website and he has replied to my multiple queries within a few hours if it’s a business day.

@prof I should add that the layouts will be different, especially for the outboard solution. This, more than the change in parts quality, is why Tom wants to ensure that the new orientation is not deleterious.

I forgot that the new crossovers would be outboard. That would almost certainly rule them out for me.

Tom Thiel is planning both as options. The outboard versions are likely to be more tricked out. Internal mounting is space limited and reduces the options for big capacitors and so forth. From the pics I’ve seen, the CS3.7 has one or two 100 uF electrolytic caps and something like four 75 uF ’lytic caps. Upgrading all of these to film caps (probably Clarity CSA) will need a lot more space and it seems unlikely that you could simply replace the ELs with film without also changing the layout . . . and taking a bite out of the cabinet space. Still, Tom is planning an upgrade path for those who don’t want to go outboard.

I really think these will be the speakers they bury me with

Yes! I was already happy with my CS2.4SEs and the resistor upgrade has been *very* satisfying (I think the new resistors are still breaking in, they keep sounding better and better). Other than the physical limitations of an 8" woofer and passive radiator, I think Tom Thiel's crossover upgrade will make my 2.4s sonically competitive with all but the very be$t design$. And I imagine these could be my last speakers.

you should buy my 2.7's :)

LOL! Actually, there was a pair of white CS2.7s on A'gon just after I bought my SEs and for <$500 more. That had me second guessing. The 2.7 coax is almost certainly better than that on my SEs. But I'm committed to these SEs now as I've modded the XOs. That probably damaged the resale value even while notably improving the SQ. I need to see this project thru' to the end. And when I get there, they will almost certainly sound better than stock 2.7s (tbh, never auditioned the 2.7).

upgrade the equalizer, which would be required for system synergy

I might not even be able to *spell* "equalizer" . . . Is there potential harm to the balance by simply upgrading the caps and resistors on the XOs, keeping the layout as is? Keeping the same layout might preclude replacing the electrolytics with film caps but I imagine 30 year old 'lytics should be replaced if only with another 'lytic. I guess I'm wondering if there is a "partial" upgrade route for 3.5 owners that would replace aging caps and increase SQ at least a bit but without risking the balance with the bass equalizer.

Turns out...I like my Thiels better :-)

Hmmm, what will you say should you upgrade your crossovers? 

I will do soldering soon by myself, but kind of worrying about my soldering skill will mess up the 7.2 or not. Although Rob told me that's straight forward. 

Then you will have the confidence to upgrade your caps and resistors or build a full “hot rod” kit if/when it becomes available.  :)

Magico Q7 Mk II. They are $223 K

I’d like to think these would outperform a $15k speaker! But the SQ gap, if any, is not anywhere near the $$$ gap. All the more so if the crossovers are upgraded to premium parts. Maybe some of you CS3.7 or 7.2 owners will try Dueland or Path resistors. Anyone wanting to explore the outer limits with Dueland caps, however, will certainly need to go outboard (see Jim Smith’s outboard 

http://jeffsplace.me/wordpress/?p=5464). In the meantime, Tom Thiel’s parts choices will be significant quality upgrades while still in line with Thiel Audio’s performance/price sensibility.

what was your trade/occupation prior to joining Thiel Audio in th mid-90's ?

You've misunderstood. Tom Thiel *founded* Thiel Audio with brother Jim and Kathy Gornik. Tom left in the mid-90s.

In a holding pattern for now. Tom Thiel should get the custom Clarity caps by the end of the month. I do have my Multicaps now but don’t plan to use them until I build the new boards. In the meantime, I hope to identify any substantial cabinet resonances. And I’m enjoying the SEs with the Mills resistors. Probably the most cost-effective tweak I’ve done.

I am looking to improve highs which sometimes lack crystal clear clarity, I think the technical term is "tizzyness?" Also would like to improve the vocal/midranges, make these warmer and deeper. What should my next upgrade be?

Upgrade the crossovers!

Seriously, this will be your best bang-for-the-buck move and I imagine you will be very happy with the result. Tom Thiel has an idea regarding “tizzyness” and Thiel’s reputation, among some, for being bright despite the ruler flat measurements. Unfortunately for you, Tom is not currently planning an upgrade kit for CS2.3, partly because of lack of demand for that model (as measured by responses in this thread). But maybe your need will spur him?

If you can’t wait for a kit that may or may not ever come, you can start your own upgrade. I have replaced the OEM resistors in my CS2.4 SEs to notable improvement with Mills MRA-12s. Highly recommended. I will build entirely new boards later this summer/early fall, replacing all parts. My SEs are something of a test mule for Tom’s kit development.

Tom may chime in with some ideas for you but feel free to PM me if you want more details about capacitor choices. The CS2.3 boards are roughly similar to those in my 2.4s, a bit simpler, even. The main unknown, for me, is how much room you have to replace the 100uF electrolytics with film caps. You can probably otherwise directly replace the extant caps and resistors with higher quality parts.

The result should be amelioration, if not complete removal, of the "tizzyness" and notably enhanced clarity and transparency. Jim Thiel engineered some superb drivers - these merit higher quality passive parts!

@thosb Did you receive my reply to your PM re: caps for CS2.3?

@jafant  Have you ever compared your CS2.4SE to Vandersteen 2Ce Sig II, 3A Sig or Treo?

I used to own CS1.6 and loved them except there was no low bass (essentially nothing below 50 cycles in my room) and an occasional distortion in the upper mid-range most plainly revealed on some recordings of female vocalists. I wanted more bass and considered CS2.4 at the time but opted for the 2Ce Sig II which was much more affordable. The 2Ce is clearly a much better speaker than the CS1.6 except it doesn't have that last bit of Thiel transparency and resolution (I found that bi-wiring with high-quality cables helped a LOT but still a hint of veiled midrange).

I have since upgraded my amp and the 2Ce - which I still consider the best speaker available for <$5K - is clearly the weak link in my system. Specifically, I would like the midrange transparency and resolution I heard with the CS1.6 but with the overall fullness I get with the 2Ce. The CS2.4 is back on my radar . . . please share your thoughts on the relative strengths and weaknesses of the Thiel and Vanderstreen (assuming you have heard Vandy).

Stevecham: CS6 could be interesting; i don't doubt you're happy. I rank the CS7.2 just a notch below the very best speakers I've heard (Vandersteen 7, TAD Ref 1, Vivid Giya, and Avalon Ascent) but better than Wilson W/P 7 and 8, Revel Studio and others. Of course, it's always tough to say for sure when the room and electronics are always different, not to mention the intervals between my auditioning.

IMO, Thiel made some of the very best drivers but he failed to tweak the crossovers and wiring as much as he could have. There is a pair of CS2.4 on ebay for a reasonable price but it is missing the speaker cable nuts. I half-tempted to buy that and trick it our with Cardas binding posts, upgrade the crossover (per posts earlier in this thread), and make it bi-wireable.

Thanks for the reply, jafant

If you enjoy the Vandy sound

I do except they have a somewhat veiled midrange, IMO, probably because of the plastic driver. The latest versions use a "tri-woven" driver which is said to be better but I haven't heard it for myself. The Treo CT with the carbon tweeter is well-reviewed. I've only heard the regular version. I quite liked it but it is a bit more than I'm willing to spend. I actually have heard the standard CS2.4 but it has been 10+ years ago. I recall very much liking it but went with the 2Ce Sig IIs because it was much more affordable and mimicked the sound of the 3A Sig (except for bass) in a much less imposing package (as you know the 3A is a 48" monolith, the 2Ce is 40"). IMO, Vandersteen's low-end models are easily the best value in high-end speakers. But they do have their weaknesses, as should be expected at these price points.

As I wrote above, I want the fullness of the Vandersteens but with as much transparency and resolution as I can afford.

the problem here is because Vandersteen is affordable it gets treated with entry-level Band-aid wires and gear and suffers the consequences.

Yeah, the consequence of building to a price is that you can't have everything. The 2Ce and 3A are remarkable at their prices - they do everything competently or better (and one or two things at near SOTA levels). There are no glaring weaknesses, IMO. If I were to rank the SQ parameters of the 2Ce Sig IIs I would give most things an 8 or 9. It is supremely well-balanced, I am unaware of any other speaker that gets so much right at it's price (or, even, 2X its price). Unfailingly musical and a flat-out bargain.

I'm just at the stage where I'm ready for more performance. Specifically, I want more transparency and resolution, especially in the midrange, and better defined bass would be nice, too. I don't doubt the woven midrange is better than the plastic one and I'm confident the Treo CT is a great speaker. I guess I'm trying to cheat the system by getting something more affordable than the Treo CT but still a step up from the 2Ce. Used CS2.4 seems like a good bet to achieve that.

There are well respected amplifiers that don't double. Ayre, for example.

Ayre doesn't give a 2 Ohm spec but not sure why you wrote this. Ayre specs *all* of their amps as doubling into 4 Ohms. The AX-5 JA measured did show signs of stress at 2 Ohms but otherwise reacted well as the current demand increased on his test bench. I have the Twenty version of the AX-5 which is said to have slightly improved power over the original version and I will attest that it sounds really effing good driving my CS2.4SEs  :)

@jafant I don’t have an SPL meter. I can tell you that I don’t listen at ear-piercing levels. I used to use an AX-7 to drive Vandy 2s and I could get that combo to clip but only at levels too loud for me. My room is ~18x19 with a vaulted ceiling 8-12’ (plus two large openings on the rear wall). I have yet to hear the AX-5 clip with the 2.4s. If you like the Ayre sound and want more power you can move up to the VX-5 separate or a used V-1. The MX-Rs have even more power and should drive pretty much anything but you better come with deep pockets!

Jim Thiel made some fantastic designs. In particular, some of his drivers were and still are among the best ever, IMO. I think his main shortcoming was relying almost exclusively on measurements and not so much on listening. The CS2.4SE seems to be an acknowledgement that SQ can be improved by tweaking the crossover, if not the wiring. Jim Thiel in the UltraAudio review of the CS2.4SE:

The improved resolution is not the kind of thing that shows up well in measurements; the magnitude of the difference between the CS2.4 and the CS2.4SE is more easily heard than discerned from graphs. The new capacitors allow more nuance, air, detail, and decay to be reproduced by the coaxial drive unit. This was especially evident to us when listening to recordings that contained realistic reverberation, as well as recordings where the instruments were not processed heavily.

Jim Thiel passed too soon, at the height of his abilities. It a shame to see what has become of his company. If only he had groomed an engineer to carry his legacy . . .

The only speakers I've heard that I think are better than the CS3.7 or CS7.2 are far costlier - designs from TAD, Vivid, Avalon and the Vandersteen 7 (I'm curious to hear the 5A Carbon). In the meantime, you'll be seeing me post more often here . . . I've bought a pair of Thiels, should be in my living room this time next week.

Seems inevitable that they will fold. Why did they ever bring on a new designer that threw out pretty much every one of Jim Thiel's principles? Crazy! I hope that one of the employees will buy out the legacy parts and continue to offer service and repairs (altho' this may make that person a target for people demanding warranty repairs).

Looking forward to your review on Thiel speakers- beetlemania

Well, you've already read my opinion on the CS1.6 . . . Today, I received my CS2.4SE. They're a bit rougher cosmetically than the seller disclosed but the drivers are flawless.  I've listened to a couple of dozen songs - I would still be listening instead of typing if my wife had not gone to bed early due to illness.

I've heard many really good speakers over the years, in different rooms with different electronics. It's tough to directly compare under such circumstance. So, most of my comments will be relative to the speaker I've lived (and loved) with for the past 10 years, the Vandersteen 2Ce Signature II. First off, I doff my hat to the Vandy's. I still think they are the best speaker under $5K, a flat out bargain at $2750. I suspect I can only notice it's slight deficiencies because my electronics are now close to top-shelf (Ayre AX-5 Twenty, Ayre QB-9 DSD, and Cardas cabling).

I wanted to upgrade because I remembered, going from the CS1.6 to the 2Ce, that the Vandies had a veiled quality in the midrange. This was almost completely cured by getting high-quality cables and utilizing its bi-wiring capacity. Still, with my recently obtained AX-5 I wondered what the Vandies might be obscuring. Well, not much. The CS2.4s are more transparent but not by as much as I had guessed. I stand by earlier opinions that the 2Ce gives you a fat helping of high-end sound at not much more than mid-fi pricing.

The first thing that struck me about the CS2.4 was the tight and well-defined bass. This might be the parameter wherein the Thiel most clearly separates itself from the 2Ce. I was hearing bass detail that I've only heard on speakers many multiple times the price of the 2Ce. That said, the 2Ce does reach a bit lower. The deep organ tone on Tracy Chapman's "3000 miles" was notably truncated by the CS2.4. On the other hand, this was the  only song I played wherein I noticed the Thiels limits. It had plenty of bass for the other songs I sampled including some Peter Gabriel, typically replete with bass and percussion.

The CS2.4SE is also more resolved than the 2Ce. Decay of chimes, bells, and triangles is superb via the Thiels. Subtle vocal inflections of backing singers are more apparent. On at least a couple of songs I sampled, I became aware of subtle percussions from shakers and the like that had previously gone unnoticed. *This* is what I wanted in an upgrade! I'm quite happy after the first evening.

Still, I very much doubt that the Thiel's advantages over the 2Ce would be notable without top-notch electronics. For those whose budget cannot fit a killer amp and source, get yourself a pair of the latest 2Ce Sig IIs and don't look back. For me? I think these Thiels might be my last speaker. 

@bcarr38 The best single place to check is hifishark. Type in the model you want and it will show you a compilation of listings from Audiogon, eBay, Audiomart, and many others. Plus, you can review previous listings and get an idea of the market value of the speaker you want.

You might consider the CS2.7s that are for sale here.

@jafant I got them from The Music Room near Denver. 163 and 164. What do you use to clean and treat the veneers?

@prof How often do you swap connections? Spade connection is tough to beat for a solid transmission of the signal. Set it and forget it. 

Looks like there was a Les Paul - Gibson sunburst pair of CS3.7 for sale last fall. What a great looking speaker!

OTOH, I've read that the CS3.7 (and by extension 2.7?) were made in China, both the cabinets and drivers. I recall the delays Thiel had going from prototype to production with the CS3.7 . . . I'm super glad my Thiels, including the drivers, were made in Lexington.

you and me share one of the last pairs built.

Did they not make the full 150 pair production?

Wow! Well, I'll consider myself lucky despite the less than ideal condition of my pair's cabinets. I seriously thought about just getting a standard pair and modding them but really wanted the outriggers and I dig the "vermilion maple".

Yes, please let us know about driver availability. Cross-overs can be repaired/upgraded, even by a dummy like me, but not so much the drivers!

Also: are the drivers easy enough to replace once you receive the part?

I replaced a tweeter in my CS1.6s. If you can work a screwdriver and soldering iron, you're in business.

Another fine evening with the CS2.4SE. They sound even better tonight, maybe because everything is warmed up after the ride in the FedEx truck. I played a bit with location and toe-in, found a spot I like and put the outriggers on.

Other than zero audible output below 30-32 cycles, I don't hear any notable shortcomings from this speaker! Near SOTA neutrality, resolution, transparency, and soundstaging. Can't ask for more at this price point.

Thiel Audio used to suggest only using "Endust" for keeping cabinets clean.

The veneers have a bit of a perfumy smell, presumably from the previous owner's home and I have a sensitive nose. I might start with just a damp microfiber cloth. I'll look at Endust and some other options, thanks.

the outriggers are very sweet and very heavy. I have heard the 2.4, 2.4SE and 2.7 models with and without outriggers. To my ears, there is a slightly improved sound and presentation using the outriggers. I venture to report that the difference is not day vs. night.

I hear a small but worthwhile improvement with the outriggers (plus, they look bitchin' and improve stability). It could be because they better couple the speaker to floor, reducing resonances. Or it could be because they bring the tweeters up a couple of inches. You definitely want your ears no more that tweeter axis, maybe a scotch lower depending on how close you sit, your height and the height of your seat.

I tried some Iso Acoustic Iso-Pucks under one of my Thiel 2.7s tonight.

I'm not familiar with this product but, as a rule, isolation footers should be used only for electronics and, maybe, cables but never speakers. I'm not surprised you didn't have good results.

I am using small wood blocks under the spikes of my CS2.4s but only because I am protecting the rug they sit on . . . I'm not willing to damage the rug. At some point, I will take the rug out and listen for how much, if at all, the wood blocks are degrading the SQ.