Thiel 3.7

Are the 3.7s bright or piercing in the upper mids which I remember the Absolute Sound review mentioned?

The 3.7s seemed to much more highly regarded around here in the forums than the reviews (which I find interesting).

I also remember a Stereophile reviewer saying he very much preferred the Wilson Sophias (2s I think) to the 3.7s.

The 3.7s seem to fit my space & budget but aggressive highs are the kiss of death for me (with speakers or headphones).

(Yeah, I know I should find some place to hear them, so please don't flame me for that. I heard previous Thiels, 2.4s I think, and thought they sounded a little thin. But I have seen so much praise here for the 3.7s I am curious.)

Anthony Cordesman said this in his Nov. 2008 3.7 TAS review that was otherwise a rave:
"You will hear the hardness & excessive upper-octave energy that is actually present in far too many classical recordings of piano, flute, clarinet, violin. You will hear the bad moments on recordings of tenor and, particularly, soprano voice....Accuracy has its costs..."

Whenever I see the word "accuracy," I think it's a code word for fatiguing.

Thiel actually has this review on it's site (a tribute to their honesty, I guess).

Any comments? Are these the anti-Harbeth?

(note: above I said that Stereophile compared them to the Sophias, but I can't find that right now so I may be mistaken about that. Sorry. I will keep looking. A Stereophile review actually said the 3.7s had more "grace" than the Wilson WP8s -- by Wes Phillips posted Dec.15,2008)

Good stuff James! I really appreciate all that research you did for me. The dynaudio idea is also good. I think my most memorable experience was the Evidences about 10 years ago
(at the late Soundex in Willow Grove PA). Best to you.