@prof Now that Thiel is gone I suppose it is fair to mention that Phil Bamberg was doing outsource design work for Thiel during the early transition to the new owners. Thiel later brought in an ex-PSB designer full time who transitioned to the non-Jim Thiel models. Phil is a talented designer who understands the importance of phase coherence. You might take a look at the Bamberg Audio site. If leveraged by the Thiel branding, his ideas might have made a positive difference. |
I'm with you guys - I have had Thiels in my rig for 18+ years and currently using a CS6 which I love. I have a 3.6 also that I might love more! Like prof I have researched other speakers and owned others that just don't cut it. What worries me is whats next if my/our speakers crap out? Usually companies that opt out turn everything to dust and sell anything not bolted down. Not to mention I am working on original capacitors and resistors in my speakers.... I tried desperately to like Eggleston Andra II's having owned them for a couple of years and thought I would transition out of Thiel and into another speaker, higher end. That was fruitless and I sold the Andra's. I have an MBL dealer in my backyard and have spent alot of time listening and almost sprung for the 121's a few years back. But my amps and preamps are built for Thiels and I was not willing to fork out the money for an entire system change. Hopefully some positive news will be forthcoming for legacy parts and services.....sigh.... |
@dgarretson Yes, I remember Phi posting about his experience helping design the 2.7 but I’d forgotten his name. He posted in this thread: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=122636.0 Here’s his post: I designed the crossover for the CS2.7 upgrade to their coax mid/tweeter driver. It was not easy. I was present at the voicing sessions in Lexington, after some listening in my own house. I can certainly attest to his comment about the bass of the 2.7s. As I’ve written in the owner’s thread, one of the areas the 2.7s excel over even the 3.7s, at least in my set up, is in the punch of the bass, and the general "drive" to the music. It adds a foundation for everything from kickdrums, bass on up to the midrange, giving a particular density to instruments - especially woodwinds in their lower registers! - that is uncanny. You just feel the instruments are right there in front of you, vibrating the air, vs the wispier version of most speakers. Most speaker will image a voice between the speakers, but with the 2.7s it's like someone has run in and set up a center channel just for that central image, because the sound is so dense and "there." There’s also a bit more dynamic life to the 2.7s I find (even though they are lower sensitivity), giving drum solos etc a bit more realism in that sense. The 3.7s have the overall smoother and more controlled bass though. They do use the updated slightly ribbed bass drivers created for the 3.7s and perhaps that’s part of the equation. If I want to hear the last word in detail, air, fingertips plucking the strings of a stand up bass, and a purely holographic presentation of a stand up bass - that goes to the 3.7s. If I want to have the sense of the instrument being "there" in the room, vibrating the air, and feel the efforts of the musician playing it, the scales tip a bit more to the 2.7s. |
Also, the coax unit is impressive in its own right. The midrange is actually flat to 20kHz (without crossover).Thanks for sharing @prof That is super impressive and suggests that true pistonic behavior occurs over the intended range despite the slow roll-off filters. Jim Thiel really knew how to make superb drivers! And I did not know the CS2.7 has 10" woofers. That is contrary to other reports. Example here. It looks like Thiel specified the frequency response down to 35 Hz, which is the same as the CS2.3 but a scotch higher than the CS2.4. |
beetlemania, Yes, Phil's reference to a 10" woofer had confused me. Thiel's own literature on the 2.7 state an 8" woofer. (I would open up my 2.7 grills and confirm, except that I've got them fitted so perfectly they are a bit hard to take off). So I've always wondered if perhaps Phil miswrote either "2.7" when he meant to refer to the 3.7, or miswrote "10" when he meant to talk about the 2.7's 8 inch woofer. |
