I listened to some Thiel 2.4s

[laurenc319]

driven by a pair of 500 watt ss monoblocks and some megabuck cd player playing some of my CDs at a high end dealer in Philadelphia. The Thiels have a 8" woofer, a 7x11" passive radiator a 3.5" mid which has a coaxial 1" tweeter and are phased aligned with a 6db per octive crossover to the mid/tweeter which has a mechanical crossover. 87 db sensitivity and retail for about 4400 dollars.

see here:

http://thielaudio.com/THIEL_Site05/Pages/models/Current_Models/CS2_4/cs2_4nws.html

So how did that compare to my Cary SLI-80 and Forte Is with a 12 year old Sony CD player? Clearly better with a more defined, detailed high end, tighter but now lower bass and mids about the same but with better imaging.

So now I'm thinking I sould go ss and Thiels. I go downstairs and fire up the 1979 Cornwalls with Wright Mono3.5 with a 20 y/o Kyocera CD player and except for some indistinct bass ( which may be related to the flea power of the 2a3's) they sounded as good and as real as the Thiels, a bit different in balance but overall as good. Now I'm scratching my head and putting my wallet back in my pocket. How can speakers so different and so far apart in age sound so much alike ? Don't know but kudos to PWk for getting it right the first time.

The only thing I'd like to do is tighten up the bass a bit. I know a ss amp would help. But I want to stay with the SET amps. Would putting some fiberglass or other material in the enclosures help this. Any suggestions appreciated.

good listening

Larry

[Cornwalled]

Hey Larry,

I'm using a Parasound HCA-1000A solid state amp with my Cornwalls, driven by an Audio Experience tube preamp. I also have a bit of a "round" bass problem, so solid state alone won't take care of it. That was the main reason that had me considering La Scalas, but I decided against them because of that evil K-400 that gnaws your head off.

Fiberglass might not be a bad idea, or maybe even some cabinet reinforcements. I would also consider a bass trap in your room, as you may have a resonance. That is going to be my next experiment. I know my room has a resonance around 60-80 Hz, which makes the bass sound boomy.

-Jon

[Colin]

I think the VRDs amps might give you that impression of SS control you are looking for....

[veloceleste]

.

[Parrot]

The only thing I'd like to do is tighten up the bass a bit. I know a ss amp would help. But I want to stay with the SET amps.

SET and tight bass are mutually exclusive. You choose one, you can't have the other.

[laurenc319]

The only thing I'd like to do is tighten up the bass a bit. I know a ss amp would help. But I want to stay with the SET amps.

SET and tight bass are mutually exclusive. You choose one, you can't have the other.

Yes I know, just hoping for the impossible. I do remember way back when my dad and I built a pair of Karlson enclosures with Electrovoice 12TRX speakers and we did stuff the box with some kind of padding or fiberglass.

[Deang]

Larry, you must, absolutely must upgrade your sources. A $129.99 unit from BestBuy will sound better then either of those old units. Don't forget a decent pair of interconnects.

[leok]

Larry,

I find that a parafeed output extends both high and low frequency performance of a SET amp. Also, using a 4 Ohm output will provide better low frequency control.

Compared at volumes compatible with my SET amp, my Crown D-45 produces identical bass.

Leo

[pauln]

I think putting fill in the speakers is something PWK would have done if he thought that it would have improved their sound. The CWs should aready have a little. Some have tried putting in more only too find that the tightness was diminished (a bad thing).

I don't think you can blame the SETs - I get solid, accurate, tight bass with my SETs and LaScalas.

[Parrot]

You and Leo listen at unnaturally low volume levels, if I remember correctly, which might account for the discrepancies in how we perceive bass.

[edwinr]

The Thiel CS2.4 is a remarkably fluent loudspeaker that offers even more incredible value for money. Obviously the voicing is different to some older Klipsch speakers - but don't hold that against them. The main issue with the Thiels, is that they require a more muscular amplifier than an equivalent Klipsch model. In relation to the bass, the CS2.4 offers a fairly dry tonal balance which some might prefer. The extension is very good though for the size of the cabinet.

[Coytee]

The only thing I'd like to do is tighten up the bass a bit. I know a ss amp would help. But I want to stay with the SET amps. Would putting some fiberglass or other material in the enclosures help this. Any suggestions appreciated

You DO know that if you send those amps back to Mr. Wright, for a mere $250, he will update them to current standards.....

[li] [li]

[laurenc319]

LOL, Mr Wright did just fine by my amps.

The only thing I'd like to do is tighten up the bass a bit. I know a ss amp would help. But I want to stay with the SET amps. Would putting some fiberglass or other material in the enclosures help this. Any suggestions appreciated

You DO know that if you send those amps back to Mr. Wright, for a mere $250, he will update them to current standards.....

[li] [li]

[laurenc319]

Larry, you must, absolutely must upgrade your sources. A $129.99 unit from BestBuy will sound better then either of those old units. Don't forget a decent pair of interconnects.

The Cornwalls ( with BEC crossovers ) sound about as good as the Thiels with the old Kyocera, except for the bass. The mids and highs are glorious with tremendous presence and soundstaging.

That being said I am looking for a new source and at present am considering a Rega Apollo, Music Hall 2.52 with the Underwood mods, an Ah Njoe Tjoeb 4000 with the upsampler and a Jolida JD 1000.

Anyone have any experience with these players ?

Thanks,

Larry

[pauln]

You and Leo listen at unnaturally low volume levels, if I remember correctly, which might account for the discrepancies in how we perceive bass.

Hello Parrot,

You bring up an important observation that is more incisive than one might think at first glance. This is very much about personal preferences, so maybe we could compare notes about this. How do you gauge loudness levels and what do you listen for that satisfies you that the level is full live natural loud? How loud is that level for you? For different kinds of music?

I like to cruise with the SPL generally peaking just under 90dBs on loud passages of music measured from my chair, which I think means the true peaks not caught by the meter are hitting about 100dBs. To me in my large room this is a perfectly life-like and natural volume level, and it does not load the room. This also provides more than enough headroom for the SETs on the loudest passages - I'm sure I've never passed more than 1 full watt through the LaScalas in the year that I've enjoyed them.

If I wanted to hear it louder I could get a more powerful amp, and if I wanted more bass I could get a sub for the LS, but I do almost all my listening after 10PM when the noise floor is low and the power is clean. Like dB levels, the relative dynamics in the music are, well - relative - and the vast majority of the dynamics occur within the first watt. I like the first watt and my system spends almost all its time there.

I actually classify myself as a loud listener, and I think it is funny that you call it unnaturrally low. It is true that I am conservative and have deliberately overspec'd my system to provide a potential loudness capability that exceeds my highest listening requirements: that is, I don't press near the limits of the amps, I don't even approach any limits on the LaScalas, nor my ears. Those that are familiar with the recording industry and monitoring levels know that 87dB is the level at which listeners feel completely satisfied that all the music is present (that the music is presenting itself to you rather than that you are having to expend concentration trying to listen to it).

Anything beyond that level may be entertaining for it's 'thump' value, and may be legitimate in the sense of testing and experimentation of the matching of gear and performance tuning, but not for listening; at least not for me.

Please don't be mislead to assume I don't know what 'loud' and 'bass' really mean. I've been a lead guitarist in various groups for many years and have a pretty good idea how live loud music should sound. Of course, what one hears is influenced by what one expects. I was real happy with my Heresys for 30 years. When I got the LaScalas I knew I was done. Maybe as the years go by I'll get used to the improvement, but for now, I hear them like brand new every time I listen.

Pauln

[Parrot]

I'm sure I've never passed more than 1 full watt through the LaScalas in the year that I've enjoyed them.

. . . . .

Those that are familiar with the recording industry and monitoring levels know that 87dB is the level at which listeners feel completely satisfied that all the music is present (that the music is presenting itself to you rather than that you are having to expend concentration trying to listen to it).

Anything beyond that level may be entertaining for it's 'thump' value, and may be legitimate in the sense of testing and experimentation of the matching of gear and performance tuning, but not for listening; at least not for me.

1) How are you sure?

2) I don't know exactly what you're driving at here. This is the dB vicinity of where mixing decisions are commonly made, granted.

But if you're saying anyone who listens at more than 87dB is not serious--I think that's what you're saying--the mind reels.

When a natural volume is attained, things jell. People who see you listening at this volume will comment that you must be jellin'. There is no standard one-size-fits-all volume that is right because it's dependent on the performance and the recording. If you blast out a little chick singer to superhuman levels, it just won't sound right. If you play back a loud symphonic work at 87dB, it just won't sound right.

[pauln]

My one watt estimate is based on the idea that I've never seen the SPL meter go past 100dBs but for perhaps just an instant or two on some classical music in which the full orchestra comes on real strong accompanied by hard kettle drum pounding - and I think its the tympani that is pressing the most of the wattage. I'm estimating that this is the chair level SLP of what may be approaching 104dB at the speaker which would be about one watt. No certain measurements, so I'm not sure. Are you thinking that maybe I'm actually getting up to 2 or 3 watts? My room does have three large wide floor to ceiling windows totaling about 80 sq ft on the long back wall which may be contributing to a pretty lively room (slab, carpet, lots of glass).

On the 87db level, or slightly higher, that is the 'jell' level for me for most of my listening in this room; I'm sure this level varies among rooms and listeners - especially audiophiles, all of whom I think are serious listeners. In fact, as I get used to my LS through time, my jell level is drifting up, so in a way I am gradually agreeing with you. Someday I may be the one who thinks others listen at too low a level for realism. That day may come in a few months when I relocate my system to the large back room with the real high ceiling, (I think I recall a picture of your room with a real high ceiling?) and then I may discover my current jell level is inadequate in there...

Pauln

[Parrot]

I'm happy with anyone attaining his own personal jell level (PJL), just so long as he doesn't force me to listen at that level. There is a tremendous range of PJL as was drilled home to me again at the AKFest, with some stereos just begging to be turned up, and others so loud they drove me from the room.

When I listen to a solo piano recording, for instance, I want the volume to sound like the piano is being played live in the room, something I've heard while growing up, by benefit of my pianist brother, many thousands of hours. It gets trickier when it's a rock band. I certainly don't want to achieve the same dB levels out of my speakers in my room as one would get out of the speakers in a coliseum. But I might want the perceived volume to be the same as if I were at the coliseum a normal distance from the speakers. But then it also depends on how loud it was mixed by the mixing engineer, and how loud it was mastered.

It's very easy for me to dial in the volume to what sounds right to me for each individual recording and I imagine it is for others too.

As for the one watt = 104dB thing. This is way oversimplified, non-real world. We have to factor in speaker efficiency, the listening room, and the levels and frequencies of a wildly changing-all-the-time recording. These dB ratings are useful only relative to other speakers. It lets us know a 104db/W/m speaker is going to play louder than one rated 89dB. But there's no way in the world a one-watt amp has the stuff to reproduce music properly at 104dB.

[pauln]

Ahh, but I have 3.5 (maybe 4!) mighty watts somewhere hiding in my SET arsenal. I hope that's enough for the big room in back.

I like the PJL (personal jell level) - it is something that folks here have been trying to express without a concise term that so well captures the concept. Excellent!

[NMR Guy]

You and Leo listen at unnaturally low volume levels, if I remember correctly, which might account for the discrepancies in how we perceive bass.

Hello Parrot,

You bring up an important observation that is more incisive than one might think at first glance. This is very much about personal preferences, so maybe we could compare notes about this. How do you gauge loudness levels and what do you listen for that satisfies you that the level is full live natural loud? How loud is that level for you? For different kinds of music?

I like to cruise with the SPL generally peaking just under 90dBs on loud passages of music measured from my chair, which I think means the true peaks not caught by the meter are hitting about 100dBs. To me in my large room this is a perfectly life-like and natural volume level, and it does not load the room. This also provides more than enough headroom for the SETs on the loudest passages - I'm sure I've never passed more than 1 full watt through the LaScalas in the year that I've enjoyed them.

Pauln

I've always thought of myself as someone who didn't like my music too loud, but I am SURE that I pass more than one watt throgh my LaScalas,...quite often.

That being said this first time I ever REALLY noticed a big difference in my LaScalas performance was when I went from a completely redone ST70, (no mods) to a pair of completely redone MKIII mono blocks. From what I've been told what I noticed was "Head room." The difference wasn't slight, it was large! (This includes when I replaced the stock old AL crossovers and went with a new pair of BEC AA crossovers)

It isn't just loud, but they do sound better with more gain, (60WPC) than with fewer. (35WPC) Even at low volumes the music was "Richer," "Fuller,"....a bit more bass. Even the highs of a woman's voice like Carol King's "So Far Away" sounded more precise. (Jeeze, horn loaded speakers make voices almost surreal!)

I know so little about the being a music reviewer and how to describe slight differences in the sound I notice that I hesitate to say exactly why such sensitive speakers like LaScalas can sound so much better with more wattage than with fewer, but mine do and all my neophite HiFi buddys think so too.

Just my two centavos,