2. speakers
  3. 1069785686

Thiel 3.6's - Stereophile measurements

I have not had the benefit of an audition with these speakers. There are few dealers still selling them. My question is regarding the measurements which accompany the Stereophile review from 1993. The frequency response measurements show a big suckout in the midrange at 45" distance. At 10-15 feet is this suckout apparent? Are there any coherency issues with this speaker that I should be aware of? My listening position is 14 feet from where the speakers will probably be setup in my room.
jazzdude

Showing 3 responses by gnobber

gnobber
46 posts
 
Tombowlus,

I was trying to understand better what you meant by the 2.4's having greater focus- do you mean better soundstaging and imaging than the 3.6?

I own the 3.6's, but I wouldn't have called them laid back (full, yes). My system also tends towards the bright side (just barely on the good edge of 'lots of detail' vs. 'too much sibilance'). Were you suggesting that the 2.4's were brighter and less laid-back than the 3.6's? I was considering moving to the 2.4's if they would offer smoother treble (but I'm not sure if you are indicating that). I am aware that I would be giving up some bass in the trade.

thanks, Bill
gnobber
46 posts
 
Tombowlus,

thanks very much for your reply- your distinctions are very clear, and I have a much better idea what to listen for when I get to audition the 2.4's.
gnobber
46 posts
 
Hi Jerry (Pops),

you have a great memory! You're right, I think that cabling can be used to adjust a system wrt brightness. I had moved up from the 750 to the Oracle V4's, where I began hearing more bass weight and pitch, and more depth, so I would be hesitant to go back in the MIT line.

My interest in the 2.4 was to hear the latest in Thiel technology with the coaxial tweeter/midrange, and to see how they are handling the detail/brightness dilemma. Do you still have your 3.6's, or have you moved up to CS6's?
take care, Bill
More to discover