Thiel 2.3 vs 2.4

Distortion in CS1.6. Just another question. I looked at Soundstage's test and see only another glowing Theil review. This from their distortion measurement:

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/thiel_cs16/

"Thiel Audio CS1.6 Loudspeakers: Measurements

PLEASE NOTE: Our standard is to provide the THD+N measurement at 90dB with a measuring distance of 2 meters (within the anechoic chamber). Since this speaker produced low distortion levels under those conditions, we have added a second measurement performed at 95dB to give an indication of performance under higher-output conditions."

Where is the cone breakup? I am really curious. Thanks.

Tim

Cinematic_Systems,

Thiel 2.3s are "terrible" and "pathetic"??? You seem very much out of touch with the rest of the audio world where this speaker has gotten rave reviews. No speaker is a perfect fit for every listener but to label it so makes one suspect you ability to hear. The 2.4 is nearly the same speaker as the 2.3 and you think it is much better? Bet you hear cable sound as well. But with a handle like "cinematic_systems" I would guess that accurate audio is not really your thing.

Cinematic,

I hate to keep rehashing this but...
The consensus has backed you up? Maybe two people on this board. Let's add up shall we?

www.audioreview.com : 65 reviews, 4.5 average rating http://tinyurl.com/4vudj

Stereophile: "CS2.3 is a superb loudspeaker."

TAS: "The 2.3 is an outstanding loudspeaker."

Soundstage: "Highly recommended...you may have just found your dream speaker."

HiFi Test (Germany): "The CS2.3 is greatly enjoyable."

Home Theater: "The CS2.3 is so good, it'll remind you why you got into this hobby in the first place."

Stereo (Germany)"This is the result when accurate sound and audiophile quality feeling come together...astonishing three dimmensional character...Rated "Excellent".

So, you don't like the speaker, I can respect that. What I don't respect is your claim that it is a bad design and also bad sounding. And let's not get into the "they are only giving good reviews for the ad revenue" nonsense. Let's face it, Jim Thiel knows a bit more about speaker design than all the pundits on this board put together. I don't think they are perfect, the highs a still a bit strong for me, but they consistantly make the best overall package for my tastes, primarily classical music. I have gone to countless live concerts and use that as my speaker quality yardstick. As to the 7-9db dip in the upper mids, I have a few test CDs and a RatShack sound meter and it does not show up in my room, if anything they are a bit up in that range thus giving the slightly bright sound. Perhaps if I made the measurement a standing ear level, but they were designed to be heard much lower and no closer than 8 feet. You don't like them? Fine, but please don't keep pushing this "terrible loudspeaker" stuff. Hook them up to an amp that can't handle the load, play them too loud, sit too close or too high and they may sound bad but that is not the speaker's fault. I do think they put a fair number of restrictions on the listener so are clearly not for everyone, especially hard rock fans, but for those who favor clear sound, very low distortion and boxless sound they can't be beat.

Tim

Tim

Cinematic,

I respect your experience and do not doubt you heard what you heard. I just could not figure out why it conflicted with so much opinion in the other direction. I know popularity means little in the end, just look at the top box office movies and books. I am actually listening to new speakers at this point, not that I am unhappy with the Thiels, but just like to see what is new that may be better. The Gallo Ref 3s sounded pretty good but, as with the Thiels (and all speakers actually), you never really know how they sound until you get them home. And, few high end dealers I found allow returns. But, that is a topic for another thread. Thanks for your input on this one.

Tim

Cine,

Facts? Well, still opinion on both our sides. I have had Thiel CS2. 2.2 and 2.3 and they all seem to have a very similar sound. I have even installed the "improved" drivers in my 2.3s and the improvement was subtle. I guess I just like the Thiel sound. It just struck me as odd and out of step to hear such a strident condemnation of Thiel. Even the magazine reviewers write-ups are just opinion, and I take them with a grain of salt but when you seldom get a really negative review the quality speaks for itself. It reminds me of Honda newsgroups where someone would say the Accord was crap and unreliable. It just went against the tide of opinion. I don't want to fight either. The new Gallo Reference 3 impressed me lately. How is that for a change of topic?

Cinebuns,

Rave reviews? "Stereophile", "TAS", "Soundstage", and many more. Try reading sometime. The 2.3 and 2.4 are very similar. Check out the components and speak with Shari @ Thiel. Measurements? Measured at what distance? Where is the mike placed? 1st order crossover designs can be a bear to measure, just ask John Atkinson. Not everyone likes Thiel speakers but VERY few ever trash them as you have. Seems you have a grudge to me. I've listened to lots of speakers over the years and Thiels have consistantly displayed clean, accurate sound IMO. There are lots of other good speakers but many seem quite colored when up against Thiel. I compared Thiel 2.4s and Quad 988s in the same room a while back and they were not that far apart in sound with the Thiel being a bit more details and dynamic. A friend I brought along had the same opinion. You must follow some Thiel guidelines however. The amp must be comfortable with a 3-4 ohm load and you have to sit, not stand, no closer than 8' from the speakers.

Tim