Thiel 2.4 VS 3.6


I cannot decide between the Thiel 2.4 and 3.6 and welcome opinions and suggestions. I currently own a pair of Martin Logan Odysseys which I love BUT they do not work well in my new room environment in my new home. I listened to the Thiel 2.4's at CES and though they are not planar speakers they had that "electrostatic fast reacting type sound". Do the 3.6's have that same 2.4 type sound with a more robust low end or is the 3.6 a compromise due to it's older technology? Any comments or experiences are welcomed and appreciated. I currently own a Mark Levinson No. 331 or a Theta Dreadnaught II to drive them with.

I have a decent sized listening room but is has some challenges. My AV nook forces me to place my left main speaker within 6 inches of the left side wall and my right main speaker has to sit between the right side of my nook and my fireplace (basically in the middle of the room 7 feet from the left main speaker) The room is about 20 feet wide and 25 feet deep (with my dining room sharing the same space)
sodapop

Showing 1 response by sgower

I purchased the 3.6 over the previous generation 2.3 Thiel. I have heard the 2.4 and I still prefer the 3.6's fuller sound and more neutral highs. To me, a very serious motivation to go with the 3.6 over a Logan/sub arrangement was/is the better integration of sound throughout the spectrum. After 3 years, I am still in love with the sound of the 3.6 and have no desire to upgrade. I am still working on source equipment and amps that can fully take advantage of the 3.6 quality. They are difficult to drive but it sounds like you have that well covered. But you will also need a very smooth digital source for the 3.6. I applaud Thiel for leaving this speaker alone and resisting the urge to re-package for the sake of a new model. Buy the 3.6, they are worth the extra money.