Thiel 2.4 VS 3.6

My 3.6 speakers went very well with a Plinius SA250.

I just had an opportunity to audition my 3.6's with both a Theta Intrepid and Theta Enterprise monoblocks. Unfortunately, they didn't have a Dreadnaught II for me to compare to, but both Theta amps sounded great with the 3.6's. The Enterprises made my 3.6's do things that I never heard them do. The degree of instrument separation, depth and width of soundstage, and overall detail was incredible. And the "little" Intrepid really amazed me as well. I cannot fathom how a 5-channel, 100 watt amp could make the 3.6's sound so good. Sure, it didn't have the detail, control, or polish of the much costlier Enterprise monos, but it certainly captured the "Theta sound" and seemed to drive them just fine, even at somewhat higher volumes. I think that Theta amps match up very well with Thiel, so as mentioned, you should be good to go amp-wise with either a pair of 2.4's or 3.6's.

Tom.

Thiel may or may not have 'left alone' the 3.6 for so long because they 'got it right' in the beginning. Personally, I suspect it is mostly because they were too busy addressing (successfully) the evolving demands of the HT segment and bringing out new flagship and entry-level products. Not that there's anything 'wrong' with the 3.6 that 'needed upgrading' either, but remember that Thiel, for all their influence and longevity, is still a pretty small company for the level of volume at which they operate and the number of products they offer. I just think there was a limit to how much they could do all at the same time. I also suspect that a potential engineering-vs.-marketing sticking point has more to do with the price range a new 3-series would have to occupy - as opposed to simply the challenge of achieving substantial enough improvement to justify a new model - and whether a new 3.7 would effectively kill the CS6.

Anyway, production of new 3.6's has for all practical purposes ground to a virtual halt nowadays. Thiel is no longer continuing to buy the Vifa drivers it uses due to very large price increases - presumably ones dictated by ever-smaller demand, and as models that once shared its tweeter were replaced in the lineup. Plus there are plenty of 3.6's available on the second-hand market. I think we can assume that the next 3-series will incorporate some kind of coincident driver array, since it is the only remaining Thiel not to do so (aside from the small 1.6, a near-full-range 2-way which does not as easily lend itself to such a design approach). Bringing this speaker out ASAP would seem like a no-brainer, since it likely stands to become their fastest seller ever. But I guess a lower-priced subwoofer and maybe a new 'statement'-level flagship model could still be competing for R&D time, though this is just speculation on my part, based mostly on reports of the options they were considering pursuing back before the latest round of new model introductions had taken place...

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.

I prefer the 2.4 over the 3.6, but there is no doubt that in an appropriate room the 3.6 has weight and scale that the 2.4 cannot match. The 3.6 is also certainly harder to partner and will suit fewer rooms. The key issue for me with the 3.6 is it is hard to get away from the fact it is a little bright even when partnered with the right kind of amp. The 2.4 is also difficult to partner, much more so than the 1.6, but much less so than the 3.6. If I could wait and wanted the weight and scale that the 2.4 lacks, then the 3.6 is likely to be more refined and easier to drive, if the improvements in the 1.6 and 2.4 are anything to go by.

I auditioned 2.4's, and subsequently picked up a pair of 3.6's used (I had auditioned them new, but many years before). FWIW, the 3.7 has been rumored to be "right around the corner" for some time, but in my correspondence with Thiel, they intimated that they would not offer a new model unless and until they felt that they had a significant improvement to offer over and above the existing model. The implication was that they still haven't come up with a speaker that fits the 3.6 mold, but offers a significant improvement. They also indicated that the 3.6 has had one of the longest production runs without being replaced by another model. To me, this means two things. Yes, it is older technology, but it also means that they got a number of things right when they designed the 3.6.

The first thing that hits you is that the 2.4's (36Hz to 25kHz +/-2 dB) have no where near the low end extension of the 3.6's (29Hz to 20kHz, +/- 1.5 db). Personally, I would not consider the 2.4's without a quality subwoofer (unless you have a very bass-enhancing room), while the 3.6's in the right room with the right amp(s) can get by quite well without a subwoofer. Others will be more than happy, though, with the low end output of the 2.4's, but I'm a bass player, so my tastes may be a bit different. Also of note, the 2.4's are more efficient (87, versus 86 db). I felt that the 2.4's had better midrange focus and were more airy on the high end, but they were not as convincing on the dynamics, and did not carry the same weight and authority of the 3.6's. The 3.6's, by contrast, did sound a bit veiled by comparison, but I found that I enjoyed their more full sound, and to me, they were a bit more musical and involving, while the 2.4's were precise almost to a fault.

As noted, though, the 2.4's are likely to sound "faster" and are probably a closer match to your Odysseys than the 3.6's. Their upper-mid and high end detail really is amazing, and the imaging is excellent. Still, when I listen to large orchestral pieces, or loudish rock music, I like to sound like I am "there", and to the 3.6's convey a more "real world" experience, while the 2.4's are like a surgical analysis of the real world, if that makes any sense. Please also note that the 3.6's are notoriously difficult to drive. I have heard that the 331 is borderline when it comes to driving the 3.6's, but the Dreadnaught II in 2-channel mode probably has the juice. In fact, the Dread II is one of the amps that I am considering as an upgrade for my 3.6's.

Hope this helps, Tom.

I recently heard the 2.4s at a Thiel dealer, well set up in a large treated room w/top notch Audio Research gear. To me, it was a major disappointment. To my ears, it honked in the mids, and was limited in dynamics. I don't remember the 2.3 striking me that way when I heard them.
The dealer asserted that it does outperform the 3.6 in the mids/highs, but that the 3.6 will still give deeper, lower bass, given the larger cabinet, & different drivers. He implied that the 3.6 should be replaced by a 3.7 somewhere in the next year or two, which makes sense given the history of their other model changes.
When I owned 3.6s, a number of years ago, I didn't think that they conveyed the speed of electrostatics. Nor do I think the 2.4s do that.
If you loved the Odysseys in your old room, I'd first try to play with placement and room treatment before throwing in the towel. At a minimum try toeing in the left speaker to minimize side wall reflections. If you didn't love the Odysseys in the old room, I'd vote for 2.4s over 3.6s, but would really recommend auditioning other speakers that better provide the "speedy sound" you're after. Keep us posted...
Spencer