Thiel with "Warmest" Midrange? 2.7 vs 3.7 vs Older


I know, I know, Thiels of all speakers are NOT known for a "warm" midrange, at least that's their reputation.

But I'd nonetheless be interested in how people would rate the general sense of midrange "warmth" and "fullness/richness" of the various Thiel models through the years, including the CS 3.7 and 2.7 models.

(I've noted that around the time of the CS 7.2 and CS6, I was actually seeing the descriptors like "smooth" and "warm balance" which is not something I'm seeing much in descriptions of the newer 2.7 and 3.7).

So I'd be interested in such comparisons between older to newer Thiels through the years, and for the 2.7 vs the 3.7.

Feel free to stop reading there, but for those interested below I'll share my thoughts about Thiel, why I'm asking this, and why I have "Thiel Fever" again…..

--------------------------

I'm on a quest to try Thiel speakers in my system again, and I'm particularly interested in the culmination of Jim Thiel's efforts, the CS 3.7. But it's been a long time since I've heard Thiels and unfortunately as we know, they've been discontinued, and all the product dumped by dealers. (I think I missed the boat by literally a month or two, my zeal-for-Thiel re-igniting just last month).

Like many audio-nuts, I've gone through periods of crazy extensive speaker auditioning (though I'm talking well in the past now, I've kept up minimally in the last decade or so).

I love a warm, full midrange (like many others here) and I feel that one of the defining elements of "real voices and acoustic instruments" is a sense of that organic warmth. That's after all why I also favour tube amplification (the ones that tend to reduce the mechanical elements of the sound - I happen to use Conrad Johnson amps at the moment).

So why am I after Thiels, given their reputation for leaner, cooler sound?

I'd always admired the Thiel speakers, starting with the 3.6 as I remember. They always struck me as somehow "telling me the truth" about a recording, and how those instruments sounded, in an almost Quad ESL type manner. (I don't mean the Whole Truth, neither being perfect speakers, but they gave some sort of window on the truth, a sense of accuracy within their limits, that seemed to separate them from the pack). So there was a certain rightness of tone I'd hear through the Thiels.

And one of the main characteristics I LOVED about the Thiels is one often mentioned in reviews: their amazing focus and density of sound. It's not just the concept of pin-point imagine per se, in terms of being able to point to exactly where an instrument is playing in the soundstage, but the sense of all the sonic information of that instrument coalesced into a dense whole - giving a better sense of solid objects vibrating sound in front of me, vs most other speakers. I think that was something that really connected me to their sound. I found even mediocre old recordings, though revealed as such, gained more life, drive and liveliness through the Thiels than the soggier-sound approach that can cover up harshness, but also
reduce the excitement of the presentation.

On the down side, Thiels to me sounded a bit over damped, a bit too tight, and a bit leaner than I would prefer. Instruments sounded made of the right materials, but reduced in weight. And the sound tended to be a bit on the dry, forward side. So I admired them, but couldn't love them. And my quest went on.

(I ended up, after Quad ESL 63/Gradient subwoofer, moving to Von Schwiekert VR4 Gen IIs…with stops at Shun Mook speakers, Waveform, Audio Physic virgo/Libra/Scorpio, Hales T-5s, Meadowlark, currently own some MBL 121s etc).

But way back at CES 2000, after hearing the Thiel CS6 speakers in a room or two (I'd heard and admired them in showrooms before) I happened upon the VAC amplification room, which also employed the CS6. I was about to move on when I realized I couldn't stop listening. I sat down and heard among the most beautiful reproduction I'd ever heard - this was Thiels…on TUBES! It had all the Thiel virtues I loved, the precision, truth, density of sound, tonal believability, dynamics etc, but it was no longer dry and tight, but had a liquidity and more of the body I found to be more believable and gorgeous. It was an epiphany: I'd always dismissed the combination as a no-go zone due to the Thiel rep for requiring beefy solid state amplification.

Not too long after that I got hold of a pair of CS6s to try with my Conrad Johnson Premier 12 140W/side amps.
And it was fantastic! I got essentially the same type of gorgeous mix of characteristics as I'd heard at CES. It wasn't just me: audio pals declared it the best sound they'd ever heard in my room. (My room is on the small side, 13' by 15,' but it's odd dimensions and large room opening has allowed all the large floor standing speakers to work well in the room, and I don't listen loud at all).

But, for various room aesthetic and ergonomic reasons, and because I was changing the room to home theatre, I couldn't keep the CS6s.

But now, after many years of using various other brands, I've got the hankering for Thiel again. I can't get out of my mind the characteristics they brought that I haven't quite found elsewhere.

And this led me to look into the "newer" CS3.7. I became excited about owning a Thiel speaker that could even surpass what I heard with the CS6, and which was also substantially smaller and lighter (important for how I will integrate this speaker into my room). The idea of owning the culmination of Jim Thiel's engineering efforts is very compelling.

But I realized I wanted the Thiels too late, only a month ago, just missing the boat after they'd been discontinued, and all the stocks dumped and snapped up.

So I have to appeal to those here with experience of these new Thiel models to help me out. I like a clean midrange, but I don't want sterile, nor do I want a speaker that will cause ear fatigue in the high frequencies (I have sensitive ears). And I guess the benchmark with which I'm most familiar is the CS6. Would you consider either the CS6 (or choose the 3.6, or CS7.2) to have a smoother, or warmer midrange relative to the newer 2.7 and 3.7 models?

Me sense in reading reviews is that the newer 2.7 and 3.7 have a "smoother" midrange insofar as being even lower in distortion than past Thiel speakers, but they could also sound brighter, being more extended in the highs (and the Thiel CS6 as I remember, was sometimes thought to be a bit lacking in the upper high frequency airiness, which perhaps even contributed to my ear comfort with that model?).

I'm hoping to strike magic again, pairing the 3.7 with my CJ Premier amps. As far as I can tell from the Stereophile measurements, the 3.7s don't look any harder to drive (re my CJ amps) than the CS6, or the killer loads of my MBL, Hales speakers etc.

I'm also possibly interested in pairing VAC with the Thiels - I see some Renaissance 70/70s on sale sometimes - given the magic I'd heard at CES with that amp and the Thiels. (And Thiel's own blog reported that amp did some magic with the 3.7).

Finally, since there are no 3.7s available (used or otherwise that I can find) at this time, I may pick up a second-hand pair of 2.7s. My sense is that I would grab them to tide me over until some 3.7s showed up, though perhaps I'd like them enough to stick with the 2.7. And on that note, for anyone who has heard the 2.7 and 3.7, is the midrange any more "full" or rich on the bigger speakers?

Any words of wisdom or experience on these matters will be gratefully received.

(And, may as well ask: does anyone have a pair of 3.7s for sale? :-) )

Thanks,

Prof
prof
Thanks for reading Jafant.

I've always liked some of the qualities of high sensitive speaker designs, like Lowther-based speakers. They have that sense of dynamic projection and aliveness that gives things like percussion instruments, piano playing, acoustic guitar, a solidity and "thereness." But of course there are the colorations, limited bass etc.

The Thiels give some of those qualities to reproduced music. (Interestingly enough from a low sensitity speaker!)

Jafant,

One thing:

"Your over-view was excellent. Very precise in terms of the things you are hearing. You will most certainly get "texture" otherwise called "timbre".

Actually, in my view at least those are two different qualities. For me timbral quality is the accuracy of tone/harmonics, where wood sounds like wood, brass like brass, plastic like plastic, etc. The Hales line of speakers were among the best I've ever heard at nailing and re-creating a convincing array of instrumental timbers. The main thing my Hales speakers have lacked is the sense of "texture," which IMO is where you sense the physical characteristics of the object being played, the bow on the cello string, fingers plucking the guitar, and the sense that each object is vibrating the air in front of you as it would if present. A sort of reach-out-and-touch it quality.

You can start to loose this quality when, for instance, really underpowering speakers, where you may get a beautiful tone, but a limpid sound in which threadbare sonic images aren't really moving much sound.
Thanks! for sharing- Prof.

I knew I had witnessed something special during my 1st demo w/ the CS 2.4 loudspeaker. It was connected to a Creek integrated and NAD 565 BEE cd player. The texture & timbre were both present in spades.

Now, if Creek would only build a more robust integrated amp, say 200wpc. This could be quite the sonic match for a CS 2.4 or CS 2.7 loudspeaker.

Keep me posted as you massage your new speakers into your listening room!

Another small update:

I've moved the Thiel 3.7s even closer, now approximately 7 feet away, and spacing them out further. It's closer to ah Audio-Physic-type set up, which I've often favored. This makes for a larger soundstage, greater instrument "size," more immersive sound, yet it retains excellent image focus and density. The speakers truly "disappear" producing very life-sized images when it's on the recording.

The bass pitch and control, again using my Conrad Johnson Premier 12 tube monoblocks, is just amazing. It's like the bass has it's own servo-control it just stops and starts on a dime, is holographic (e.g. never bloated, always focused in the soundstage coherently with the instrument). It's the most tonally controlled bass I've heard in my room, and among the best I've ever heard in that respect.

A musician friend heard them and literally found the realism spooky. In fact, that was what my other pal (who writes audio reviews) said when he heard some vocal recordings through the Thiels - that it was almost unsettlingly real. My pal has somewhat similar tastes to mine, we like a rich sound, but as close to neutral as possible, but both hate over bright sound. He said he'd practically run screaming from a Thiel 3.7 demo at one of the audio shows due to what he felt was an over-bright sound. So he was dubious this was going to work out.
But once he heard the 3.7s at my place he did a 180 degree turn around on them, found the sound open, realistic, but utterly relaxing, organic and easy to listen to. (I think this is a particular attribute of Thiels paired with nice tube amps, in my experience). He said "I have to admit, you always know what you are doing when you buy speakers" ;-)

And, the final kicker: I just recently got around to trying the 3.7s with my beloved old Eico HF-81 17W/side tube integrated amp. Given the Thiel's notorious current demands I figured this was more for try-for-the-hell-of-it and didn't expect much. Hot damn the Thiels sound AMAZING driven by the Eico! The Thiels just semed to reproduce the sonic virtues I've always loved about the Eico amp - the sound just generally became bigger, more lush, bass seemed to extend significantly lower (which I attribute to the Eico likely not controlling the woofers quite as well), yet the sound was sparklingly clear, believable, and had that buttery organic tonal richness that makes acoustic sources sound so....acoustic...and gorgeous.

The bass isn't as controlled as with the CJ amp, but the Thiel's bass character still seems "in grip" and in control, even as the bass sounds a bit more prominent. So it's still for most tracks great bass performance, and sometimes even better in ways than the CJ amps (sometimes the added richness is nice, especially with classical music).

At the moment I think the 3.7/Eico amp pairing is my favorite.

So, to sum up again: the old "put big floor-standers in a big room" and "The Thiels demand big power" and "place the Thiels at a greater distance than other speakers" are useful generalities, perhaps most likely to get the best out of them. But they aren't rules written in stone.
I'm thwarting all 3 of those rules, and hearing some of the best sound I've ever heard at home, and indeed more enjoyable than most of the systems I've heard elsewhere over many years.

Thanks! for the update -Prof.
Good to read that you are enjoying the CS 3.7 loudspeakers.
They are truly special and I am thankful that I discovered
these wonderful speakers a few years back.

Now, if I could only decide which brand of gear to build my system around them...

Happy Listening!