@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 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.
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 vouch for both the CS3.7 and 2.7 speakers having a 2dB/decade downsloping response from 200 to 2kHz, transitioning back to level in the treble. This is a tonal balance curve similar to many high-end speaker brands. However such a speaker still does not sound dark (there are other more technically involved reasons for this).
One shining performance feature that I can vouch for with the CS2.7 -- the bass is spectacular. Their 10" woofer RULES, and the cabinet alignment is excellent. Play acoustic bass or drums on this speaker to believe me.
Also, the coax unit is impressive in its own right. The midrange is actually flat to 20kHz (without crossover). I think the time-coherent acoustic alignment and fast response drivers may lead to the listeners’ reaction of bright or forward.
Thiel also spends for PP and polystyrene bypass caps for additional transparency. For these reasons, system matching is a bit more critical with the upper Thiel models. Also, all 3 drive units have aluminum diaphragms. I promise you that I addressed the woofer ring, and achieved excellent time and phase coherency - Thiel was quite demanding of this as you can imagine.
While I performed some reverse engineering of a few of their models (part of a technical familiarization of Jim’s work) I am not intimately familiar with the design and history of all their models. I suspect that their models over the past dozen year vary in tonal balance, and that it is a mistake to conclude that the company voices speakers to be bright/lean/forward overall. IOW, I think the time for audiophiles to conclude that Thiel = Bright should come to an end.
I am no longer under contract for Thiel, and I gain no benefit from their sales. These are just my own objective and subjective observations.
Philip Bamberg
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.