Driving Thiels

Matt, IMO the 3.5 does not compare sonically with the later-generation 2's or the 3.6. The 3.6 and 2.2 are of the same generation, begin here with Thiels if you ask me. You can use a good 100w amp if you're not attempting to bang your head in a large room, and that could actually work quite well for moderate levels in a medium-size room, but still, expect certain improvements if you ever give them more quality power. To answer your question, the 2.2 is easier to drive than the 3.6 or the 2.3, while the older 3.5 is probably easiest of the bunch if you don't use the bass equalizer. However, I'd choose between the 3.6 and 2.2/3 based more on room size, knowing that a 100w amp won't control the bass with a larger woofer and cabinet quite as well, and the combo could overwhelm a smaller room. In fact, if your room is mid-sized or under I wouldn't overlook spending the same money on a used pair of current-generation 1.6's instead, which can sound even better in some ways than the older, bigger models (more coherent and listenable, the tradeoff being extension top and bottom, and some detail), and would probably match wonderfully with your amp.

I kind of hate to post this, though it's nothing I haven't said elsewhere. My friend Unsound and I have had this divergence of opinion before (as he knows :-) I believe he is a fan of sealed-box bass, and if you are, all Thiels past the 3.5 could be out of the picture. I certainly do not make the case that the 2.2 is an ideal speaker, there's lots of areas in which you could do better (typically for more money), but to my ears it has fewer weaknesses. In any case, try to listen the speakers in question yourself and make up your own mind...

Well, just to let you know where I'm coming from, I haven't heard the 3.5 in about 9 years. But at the time I bought my 2.2's (from the dealer, when they were still a current model and the 3.5's were already discontinued), I auditioned them both at length, at the same time in the same room with the same system (Classe amps, with and without the bass EQ, and the room size should have favored the 3.5). Despite my expectations for the bigger speaker going in (not to mention the encouragement of the dealer, who must have had his own preferences, or perhaps motives), I was somewhat surprised to find it really wasn't any contest regarding which model simply sounded higher in fidelity and more like real life, more compelling, convincing and stimulating.

Yes, the 3.5 is probably easier to drive (although the 2.2 in particular is not the beast some other Thiels can be, with nicely flat impedance and phase curves, the former not dipping below the upper 3's ohms, and average sensitivity of about 86-87dB). But across the range, especially in the mids and highs but including the bass, the 2.2 was more transparent, dynamic, neutral, open, and 'all of a piece' than the 3.5, which sounded opaque, colored, closed-in, and mechanical by comparison. Sure, the bass of the 3.5 reached a little lower with the EQ engaged, but its quality wasn't as defined or coherent IMO. I like Thiel's passive-radiator bass. And although it's certainly voiced 'richer' and isn't as extended on top, which might lead some to label the 2.2 as being 'bright' in comparison (I think it's actually more naturally-balanced), I found the 3.5 had a somewhat 'hard' quality to the treble which made listening less pleasant.

I don't know how Unsound came to his conclusion about the 3.5 having superior phase response across the spectrum, since all Thiels seem to have been spec'ed at +/-10 degrees in their passband, and other than the compensated bass alignment I don't see any technical reason for this assertion. The sonic evidence is that the 2.2 images and 'stages better, so its phase behavior's got to be just fine. It's my feeling that starting with the 3.6 and 2.2, Thiel's drivers got better in these series, and the cabinet designs took a step forward in terms of lowered diffraction and increased rigidity. Maybe the crossovers improved as well, I don't know, but Theils as a rule get a little better with every new generation that I've heard (although, with the exception of high-level dynamics, I don't think the leap from the 2.2 to the 2.3 was as great as from the 2 to the 2.2).

Who knows -- by year's end Unsound and I might both end up with 3.7's and we can put this thing to bed ;^)