|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
209.97.232.110
In Reply to: Charles Hanson - Can you please comment on Theil posted by Mark Hoepfl on February 28, 2007 at 06:48:33:
<< Just wondering what your thoughts are on the Theil 1.6, 2.4 and the new 3.7s? >>Really, it doesn't matter too much what I think of them. Instead it matters what you think of them. You need to get to your local Thiel dealer and listen for yourself.
Each of the speakers you mentioned costs roughly twice as much as the next less expensive model. And the more expensive ones are clearly better than the less expensive ones. It's not like he got lucky with the cheap one and then blew it with the expensive one. So if you can afford the CS-3.7, I am sure that you will be very happy with it.
Follow Ups:
However Charles I always felt that the overall best balanced, best sounding Thiel was the new ones predecessor the Thiel CS3.6. I think there was good reason it was the longest running model of all Thiels (like 13 years unchanged). I heard the CS6 and CS7 and 7.2 and felt the CS3.6 was clearly better than the CS6 and while the CS7.2 was more impressive sounding I feel it is not as well balanced. I haven't heard the new CS3.7 but I am curious given its radical design departure.
The best Thiel was the 2 2, saith Mr. Gentle Ears up here in Massachusetts. The 3.6 was scarey sounding to me but it sure as hell did separate the Thiel fans from everybody else. And there were clearly a not of Thiel fans, beginning with Cordesman, if I remember rightly. He wrote one hellova review of the 3.6. I think the 3.6 was probably the purist Thiel. And, of course, the 2 2 was the least pure!
...still uses the Thiel 7.2 as one of his references as do I.20 years ago I owned thiel 1.2s and didn't like their balance for my TV speakers - they didn't have enough bass. So I traded them for Vandersteen 2Ci's. In that era I also owned Thiel 3.5s.
One of my best friends has Thiel 2.4s driven by a Mac MC275 and loves them.
Like any loudspeaker, they have to be mated with the right amp to sound their best.
I am not sure I agree with you about the 2.2. If I remember correctly it used exactly the same midrange and tweeter as the 3.6. The only difference was in the cabinet size and bass driver from what I could see. Even the internal construction was nearly identical. I never heard the 2.2 though so I can't say that it sounded similar or not.
IMO, the biggest problem with the 3.6 is not the speaker, it was the kind of amps generally strapped up to it. It was not forgiving of the typical SS amp but the best sound I heard from it was with a pair of BAT VK120 monoblocks and the Theta Dreadnaught (a no global feedback design and a darn good SS amp). People assumed you need a big bruiser because it has a somwhat low impedance. However; it has a very uniform impedance (for a box speaker) and low phase shift so many more amps work well than people suppose. When the electronics are right the 3.6 is amazingly coherent and well balanced. I think the mid used in the 2.2 and 3.6 is the best driver Thiel ever made.
Well it sounded a lot more benign than its big brother, for sure.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: