What's wrong with Thiel?

Sugarbrie - I would definitely agree with you that matching amplifiers and speakers is important in the case of every speaker, not just Thiel's. However I would like to rephrase your next statement. I do not believe it is fair to say that a speaker which will run on a wide variety of amps cannot sound as good as a speaker which is more limited insofar as which amps will drive it properly. There are many wonderful speakers which have a relatively benign load and sound as good as Thiel's (different - but just as good) But I think perhaps what you were getting at is that a speaker which is unable to reveal the differences between two amplifiers is clearly inferior to one which is able to do so.

Incidentally as somebody pointed out - the newest Thiel speakers are starting to sound a little warmer and will not sound as bright even on brighter amplifiers. Also the impedance characteristics of these new speakers is considerably more benign than any previous Thiel. I think Jim Thiel may be making an effort to develop a speaker which is a little less picky about the amps which drive it - we may see a tube friendly Thiel yet.

I agree Hackmaster. You said it better than me.

Hackmaster, I don't think the newest Thiel's speakers impedance load is that much different than his other recent entries. They are more sensitive. Some of Thiels older models were more tube friendly, particularly the CS-2's with a 6 Ohm nominal, 5 Ohm minimal load and The 3.5's that were 4 Ohms nominal , 4 Ohms minimal load. The 3.5's did require a beefy tube amp due to the use of an active equalizer. While Thiels recommended at least 50 watts that rating was in reference to standard quality solid state ratings where the amps would double down. As such one would need a tube amp with double that rating from it's appropriate tap. These impedance loads were very steady compared to most other speakers. Unfortunately high powered tube amps usually(!) cost more that similarly powered solid state amps. Most amps enjoy the freedom from roller coaster demands that steady loads provide. The point being that it's not that all Thiels have been unwilling to work with tubes, it was just usually more expensive to do right.

I think that Thiel's are basically a very demanding speaker. At the same time, they are not very forgiving either. This can mean a LOT more work for someone interested in running them than if they chose a speaker that was "less accurate" and / or "less reactive".

As such, most of the task of getting the best from a set of Thiel's is proper placement, listening distance and finding complimentary equipment. While this is a large percentage of making any system "sing", such factors play a bigger role in specific situations. This is one of those situations.

The bottom line is that Thiel's will typically not allow you to "skimp" on any aspect of system performance i.e. components, placement or the amount of "elbow grease" that it takes to make every aspect as good as is possible. I would not call these speakers "user friendly" if one simply wants to be a "user" of a system. You will have to get actively involved in helping the system make music and figuring out what the best method to do so involves. Sean
>

I do have to take a little exception about the generalization of Thiel models becoming more benign loads as time goes by. My 2.2's are actually an easier load than the 2.3's which have succeeded them, and in a smaller room I was able to drive them very well with a (tube) 45wpc C-J MV-55, which has standard 4 ohm rated output taps. When I moved to a larger room, the C-J ran out of steam, and I now use VTL MB-185 Sig's (also tube) with excellent results.

For a room that is not very large, or for listening at moderate levels, I am sure that the choice of the Pass X-150 should be a fine one. When I was using SS amplification before on my 2.2's, I did not have good results, because Thiels demand better quality electronics than the NAD and entry-level Classe I owned at the time. With power as clean as the Pass, there will be nothing nasty to be revealed by the speakers in that department.

Tubemiser's experience with acoustic treatment is indicative of the wide dispersion Thiels feature. Keep your 2.3's well away from side walls, and set-up along the room's long wall (firing across the room) is often preferable if you can still maintain a 9' - 12' listening distance without putting your head closer than 18" from the rear wall. Toe-in is discouraged by Thiel in their literature, but most owners, myself included, have found that the speakers actually do not sound their best when aimed straight ahead, instead needing at least a little angling in, and I now point mine right at the ears in my bigger room.

Thiels sound good when set-up with wide separation, side wall clearances allowing. If your room permits (a 30" - 60" side distance is mandatory), try putting them around 9' - 10' apart and listening from 10' - 12' (again, toe-in will be required for focus). If the room is a little small for this, position the speakers as far apart as you can to still listen from the equilateral point or a little farther (however, if you can't get more than 8' minimum distance at the listening chair, then it's time to start looking for different speakers). Proper front wall distance will probably fall in the 24" - 48" range, depending on your room's bass characteristics. Also, your listening chair should be one that does not elevate your ears too much; the best listening axis is a little lower or no higher than the tweeter (if your floors are not carpeted, try getting cups to allow you to still use the spikes for their added height, as well as the stability and rigidity). And make sure you use speaker cable of a quality comensurate with the amp and speakers themselves, one that puts a lot of copper between 'em - wimpy wires here will screw up the whole thing.

(Then be prepared to start upgrading any sources not up to snuff, as they will have no place to hide! ;^)