In my opinion, you are not going to get the most out of your speakers trying to use the amps you list. They just cannot supply the current and control these speakers need. If you want to go tubes, IMO you'll need to stay with more powerful models that use larger power supplies and output transformers, and with at least four or more higher-power variety output tubes per channel (probably twice that if using lower-power variety output tubes). To me, this pretty much rules out tubed integrateds, and I think these results will obtain even when listening at low-to-moderate volumes. I say this as a CS2.2 owner who has tried both moderate- and higher-powered tubed power amps (C-J MV-55, VTL MB-185 Sigs.) - and those Thiels aren't even as demanding (impedance-wise and in woofer size, though their sensitivity is similarly moderate) as yours, and my room where I used the smaller amp was also much smaller than yours. Even my newer, larger room, in which I was really forced to move to the higher-powered amps, is not as large as yours is. Also, keep in mind that your speakers are very revealing of amplifier quality, not just quantity, and the lower-priced models you mention will not be shown to their best advantage by speakers which really want top-notch amplification, not just plenty of it. |
Hey, anything will produce a sound, but I don't expect that sound would be for me. You're honestly the first person I've heard of running these speakers with a low-powered SET - what else have you used? (Unless you're having us on, that is... ;^) |
Well, that was just the ad, not the literature. And since this bass driver is smaller and seems to be the one from the 1.6, I wouldn't doubt that it presents a kinder load. But the fact that it is being called upon to extend lower in frequency range in the 2.4 would help explain why the speaker's sensitivity is rated at 87dB rather than 90dB as in the 1.6. Even though the cone diameter drops from 8" to 6.5", the 3" voice coil might well be bigger than was the case in the 2.3. Still, the smaller driven area might imply less dynamic range. I wonder if the 3-series replacement will go from the current model's 10" woofer down to an 8", leaving the 6-series with the 10". |
Gs5556, I didn't really doubt you, I was just ribbing you. I don't dismiss low power - I've just never been set up to exploit it, as I like to listen to all kinds of material, and at higher levels than your amps would drive my Thiels. You are an explorer, and diverse too - hope your SET's and homemades work out well.
Bryhifi, despite Elevick's misgivings, you will not be in danger of damaging a tube amp by presenting it with a lower-than-optimal-impedance load, due to the self-limiting nature of the beast, but you won't get the power you paid for either. So I wouldn't worry about "failures", just sound that might not be up to what you've been used to in certain respects. But since you say you just want to get your feet wet before jumping in, who am I to say that you're risking not being persuaded by the results? When I ran my 2.2's from the MV-55, the combo did sound better than my previous SS amps, but those weren't even in the same county as what you normally use. Best of luck! |
Turnaround, maybe you've noticed that Thiel lately seems to be paying more attention to making their speakers a bit easier to drive than sometimes in the past. I do not think this is specifically in response to demand by tube amp users, but more for the home theater market, where one multi-channel amp may be called upon to drive several speakers and do it well. So it may be interesting to wait for the introduction of the long-anticipated replacement 3-series model, which could well improve on the 3.6's sonics while not being quite as much of a pig to drive. Mere speculation, but it does seem to be the trend around there. |
Unsound, as Drubin emailed me today, Thiel is listing the 2.4 on their website as being 87dB sensitive (the correct term for almost any measurement like this you'll encounter, though since almost all the measurements tend to be fudged a bit anyway, it doesn't really matter!), but they're also advertising it as being a stable resistive load, implying the impedance doesn't dip as low or the phase angle swing quite so much as on the 2.3, I suppose. My 2.2's are pretty decent in these regards, but I think we'll have to wait for some outside tests to know if anything's changed for sure, and I'm not sure Stereophile for instance will be reviewing a design that looks a lot more like an intermediate holding action than a completely new exercise. |
Unsound, the precise ad copy reads "Uniform, resistive load works well with lower power amplifiers". I think Thiel's trying to tell us something - namely, that the 2.4 won't suck current like a Shop-Vac. So I will assume for the time being that they present a load not dipping much below 4 ohms and not having any high capacitive phase angle magnitudes. Like I said, we shall see. |
Unsound: Strike that sentence about the 2.4 redesign seeming to be merely an "intermediate holding action"! I just realized something I had missed before in the ad - the woofer is listed as only being 6.5" instead of 8" as in the 2.3 (and 2.2), so I can only assume based on its looks and size that this is in fact the exact same driver used in the 1.6. That would seem to be a step in the wrong direction for the 2-series, leading me to wonder even more how the new 3-series model - whenever it appears - will follow in the established progression. For the time being though, I'd have to guess that the new speaker will not possess the bass prowess of the model it replaces... |
Thanks Tom for setting it straight - that's good news for 2.-series aficianados. Thiel's ads (unlike some others' I won't mention) are so carefully worded, it's hard to believe a boner like that could slip through the cracks... |
That's interesting to know, Tmoran. I just got back from the Thiel factory where I took the tour, and it turns out that Thiel has, in the past, set up various models of their speakers in their own listening room with the same tube amps I use with my 2.2's, the VTL MB-185 Signatures. Shari (a 2.2 owner herself) thought the combination of this amp and their speakers was particularly outstanding among the many amps they've tried there (though she also thought the more expensive and powerful MB-450's did even better), a comforting report for me. She also plans to get herself a pair of 2.4's as soon as the factory can catch up with dealer demand, something she managed to resist doing with the 2.3's FWIW... |
About the 2.4 woofer, I did learn that is does not feature the oversized 3" voice coil introduced on the 1.6, although the cone is still larger than the net cone size of the nominal 6 1/2" driver used in the smaller model. (A measured cone size smaller than the nominal quoted driver size is typical of most manufacturers' drivers, with woofers usually being the most divergent due to their thicker suspension surrounds.) When I saw a 2.4 being tested for final assembly QC, they hit it with high-level low frequency signals that produced prodigous visible woofer excursion, I would guess on the order of about 3/4" foward-travel projection. Unfortunately for me, heavy demand resulting in back-orders kept me from being able to audition a pair of 2.4's in Thiel's listening room when I was there - they had to ship out the last set they'd had in there a couple of days before I arrived, and this despite the fact that almost all the current production at that juncture was devoted to that one model. |
