Thiel Owners

Thank You Robinbarbour
I knew I should test that to see if the pop moves to the other speaker,
but moving the 56 lbs off the shelf was a last choice, I thought I'd ask others first.

You want to hear Bass !
Try Sandy Denny's 3:10 to Yuma    or
David Crosby's Cowboy Movie.

Prof
do you sit that close with both sets ( are you moving them in and out
of position ? if so my back hurts thinking about it ) ,
how much do you angle inwards ?
I have just about the perfect 8 foot triangle ( hard to be perfect with sloped speakers ) with about a 10 degree angle inwards .

Rob

Rob,

Yes, about that close to either the 3.7 or 2.7.  I tend to listen to one pair for a couple weeks, then swap them for the other pair.

Angling varies depending on how wide I've placed them or if I desire more lively sound.  I only ever use the tiniest angling in when I do, but usually no angle - facing straight ahead.  I still get excellent center-fill, even from the wide spacing and not angled in. 

Jafant...

That's a block of maple I had left over from when my previous Salamander rack was about a foot lower. I purchased the block here on the site, they come up from time to time and they're well made - somewhere in the $100 range if I ain't mistaken. I think I still have another block somewhere in the house.  

That Salamander rack in the photo cost me $150. Just before Stereo Exchange in NYC vacated their long time location they were selling off everything, even stuff that was nailed down. (They are still searching for a new location at the moment.)  Dave will email me when they re-open.  (The REL sub I mentioned in an earlier post was bought from their eBay site which is up and running.) I picked it up at his apartment. Sheesh. 

Even though the Salamander rack isn't "gear" per sè, it has to represent one of the best purchases I've invested - that's easily a $1500 piece o' furniture.  Nary a scratch on it. While not in the photos, there are two other Salamander cabinets in the room which hold my manuals, tools, cables, etc., all of the other associated flotsam and jetsam that we accrue in the hobby. 

At 107 pounds apiece them 3.6's aren't about to be fiddled with much. It was fun unpacking them.  Not!  The boys at Saturday Audio made sure they'd arrive in good shape. Hell, they could have been dragged to my house with no worse the wear. 

Last night we was bbq'ing at my gf's house, listening to a Motown playlist on my Peachtree Audio Deepblue2 in the back yard.  (iPod through its aux jack, the Bluetooth option stinks.) I also set the bass level at its lowest position - this thing doesn't need it. 

"Ball Of Confusion" by the Temptations came on and everybody just stopped. Man, what a busy little tune. Top 40 radio in 1970. So difficult to imagine now what commercial radio was back then. It's just an amazing piece of music for any time.  It's the first thing I'm throwing at my Thiels later this afternoon when I get home. If it sounded so damn good on a portable speaker it out to be glorious through the 3.6's. 

Salamander makes excellent products- oblgny

The better racks are made of various Maple wood(s), very dense and provides support well. Keeps down vibrations too.  I just ran across a pair of CS 3.6 at $1599 in south Florida (eBay). Hopefully, the pair will find a good home via you owners who sing its praises. That is why we are all here!

Some Thiel owners use products by Sound Anchor.  I am fortunate that the CS 2.4SE automatically comes w/ outriggers. This particular model was designed specifically w/ outriggers in mind per Mr. Thiel.  Better performance, focus and imaging are delivered in spades. I have read about using marble or granite as bases as well.

I will check out "Ball of Confusion". I enjoyed Summer and ready for Fall.

Happy Listening!

jafant...

Just about anything that supports or is near something electronic in my humble abode rests atop, in, or on a Salamander rack. The piece in the virtual systems photo is the only one not from its Synergy series which I've had for years. 

I appreciate the clean lines, understated design, and the heft of their construction - one of the foremost reasons I had from the outset was in providing as much isolation as possible. The block of maple under the BAT may be somewhat superfluous at this point, but what the hell. I don't need another cutting board in my kitchen. 

I've been reading about one member's questioning a move from his 3.6's to the 6, whether or not such an investment is sonically worth it. From my experience, limited as it has been with 2.2, 2.3, 3.5, and now 3.6, I can state with some degree of accuracy that the differences between the first three models is, by comparison, modest in terms of anything relevatory. The difference in "moving up" from the 3.5 to 3.6 is remarkable. They are VERY different loudspeakers which, given my journey thus far, could have me pining for a 5 in short order. There again, I would assume that the 5 is VERY different from the 3.6. 

I hasten to to add that,  IMHO, the 3.6's are more detailed, perhaps even more focused on the mids than were/are the 3.5's - and all to an impressive degree. I don't believe I was missing anything with the 3.5's in that respect, but the 3.6's just deliver more - especially at the conservative level I listen at.  I always had the 3.5 eq employed because I had no reason to question Thiel's engineering. The sacrifice in low end hertz with the 3.6's is hardly anything to kvetch about. (3.5's 20hz-20khz, 3.6's 27hz-20khz.)  Sheesh, vot's a few hoitz between friends, anyway.   

Since we now no longer have the opportunity to audition the legacy models, I guess I'm saying that moving up yields risk to some degree, but seeing how the speaker models evolve is a gas.