New Theil 2.4's any opinions

If you power them properly with clean source, good cables, proper positioning, etc, they a world-class bargain. If you don't system match carefully then you will wonder what is all the fuss about. This is usual case for Thiel speakers. It's not a matter of being worth the money. It's a matter of your interest in providing a LOT of very clean power and spending some time tweaking until you get it right. I am not familier with Vienna Acoustics Beethovens.
Art

I recently had a chance to audition them at the end of tour of the Thiel factory. Of course they were set up to sound their best. I did come away VERY impressed. When I realized they cost almost as much as a pair 3.6's I bought a few years ago, I was taken aback.

One question you have to ask yourself is "How long do I plan to keep these speakers?"

For me, the answer was "9 years so far."

The 2.4s are very nice, and at 3900 retail for the standard veneer finishes they are a very good value imo. I was somewhat predisposed to the CS2.4s, having downsized from Thiel CS7.2s, but I did listen to a number of other speakers in the 3 - 5 range (B&W 803N/804N, Aerial 7B/6, Totem Forest, AP Virgo III, Dynaudio Contour 3, Revel F30, ML Ascent) before I settled on the CS2.4s. What struck me most about the CS2.4 is how close the sound resembles that of the CS7.2 in a scaled down package, and the fact that it was the most coherent sounding speaker of those I listened to.

The CS2.4s are somewhat easier to drive, and not quite as bright/lean as their predecessor, although they still take care in setup and choice of ancillary components as Art... has stated.

Kensekd, when you say were taken aback when you learned the price, what do you mean? That for about the same price they are nowhere near as good as your 3.6's, or that they are far better?

Drubin,

I can't honestly say they were nowhere near as good. They actually threw up a soundstage that rivalled my Maggie's. It's more that they were nowhere near as big as the 3.6's. And, in my own mind, they occupied a rung lower than the 3.6's. It was hard to say what the bass was like because they were mated to the SW-1.

This all points to the need for Thiel to upgrade the 3.6's.

One nice thing, Thiel FINALLY put the binding posts on the back instead of the bottom. No more tipping the speakers over to wire them. Hip Hip hooray!

I'll second that Hip Hip Hooray!!!

I like the posts on the bottom. Safer with children and pets.

I agree with Unsound on the binding posts. For the same reasons, and that is why I also like the binding posts on the Bryston 4B-ST.

I listened to the Thiel 2.4's at a hifi show in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. The Thiels were hooked up to a Mark 383 integrated which worked very nicely. I thought they were very good with jazz and pop, but i was not that impressed with their performance on classical music.

Furthermore i auditioned the Thiel 2.3's several times and i thought they were one of the more difficult speakers to drive. They definetely liked lots of power. I tried to get some music out off them with my old Musical fidelity B1, which resulted in very very average sound and no bass. MF308 integrated did a better job, but not as good as the Mark 383.

So in order to get everything out off the Thiels you need lots of quality power. Just one remark about the price: the Thiels cost over 6000 US$ in Europe, so stop wining about the price!

2.4 should be easier to drive than the 2.3