Thiel Owners

Even earlier history - Steve ran the Mod Squad in the late 80s, early 90s where he kept abreast of evolving digital technologies, offering substantial performance upgrades to CD players (primarily). The Mod Squad's niche dissipated as digital filters and topologies improved. Then came McCormack Audio, etc.

jafant, just a (looong) clarification.  Steve made a name among the tweakers post McCormack, but the company in its prime throughout the '90s and early-00s was substantial, offering moderately-priced well-engineered preamps, DACs, phono stages, etc. as well as power amps.  They were brilliantly designed, but brought to an affordable price point with modest chassis build and components.  Which is what makes the SMC upgrades so significant -- the basic design can really shine with top components and clever tweakage.

C-J took over manufacturing of the power amps in the late-90s with some consulting from Steve, but he had already started SMC Audio as his next gig.  The later amps built by C-J never had the same success as the earlier California-built amps.  My top-of-my-head chronology may be a little off, but that's the gist.

No overlap in the sonics between the two companies so far as I can tell.  McCormack amps are purely solid-state with a bit of the good characteristics of tubes baked-in to the design.  C-J has kept the classic tube sound more than other modern tube gear designs, but others here could evaluate that far better than me.  A C-J preamp + McCormack power amp would be a good pairing I'm sure; I use an upgraded Sonic Frontiers tubed preamp.

Laughing harder, that you actually *are* in conflict resolution and counseling without my knowing a thing about you!  Goes to show what I pick up on when my wife's a therapist, my neighbor a professional mediator, my father a (former) college professor...

Steve has been a 2-man show running SMC Audio for years since Conrad Johnson took over McCormack production for a few years before dropping it entirely.  So Steve's 'second' career is redesigning and optimizing his 'first career' mainstream amps to demanding customers (like me), and has all the test gear from a lifetime in the business.  I can't speak directly to C-J, but not many amp manufacturers see the relevance of 1 ohm specs, especially when there's nothing flattering about the power output into it for 95% of amps, especially a company whose foundation is tube amps.  All Steve McCormack's testing does is confirm his amps (or at least *my* SMC Audio amp) will remain fully stable into 1 ohm, not oscillate, melt, or blow up.  In fact, my tiny 'signature' box in the upper left is this amp...

I’ve now twice mated an Ayre integrated with a Thiel. Been super happy both times. 
Interesting that being able to discern how an amp sounds from measurements is “objective”,  lol. 

jafant is clearly someone who works in mediation, conflict resolution, marriage counseling, or a college professor.  Or fears discord in his 150 page thread!  It's all good.

Makes me satisfied that Steve McCormack thoroughly modified his already-stable power amplifier to meet the needs of my CS2.3, now using the slightly easier load of 2.4s, and can confirm it has great specs into load in stock form, much better specs now as confirmed by the designer, and sounds great driving them to my own ears, as well as besting 5 other $5-15k modern amplifiers in a all-day shootout last year!  I wish this were so for all Thiel owners (not only those in this forum).

Prof   I don't find myself pining for more bass either with the Thiels or the Josephs.
Your experiences may be different but for me the subs really add something that I don't realize until it is not there. It is not so much more bass but clearly hearing the foundation of the song. Once dialed in, there is no going back. Now, if you switch out speakers regularly, it may be inconvenient to go through the trouble. For my large room, the subs were easily integrated, but for my smaller room, I'm still experimenting with determining the best positioning. 

prof,
My sub gets the signal from  a PX05 passive crossover for the 2.7s. I hooked it up, placed the sub between the 2.7s and haven't done anything since, except upgrade the preamp and amplifier.
Music source is an extensive classical CD collection via a Bryston BCD-3 spinner. Relatively few of my CDs have appreciable low bass. 

@beetlemania, No, I haven’t forgotten your demonstration of subjective opinion. I’ve offered an objective counter point.  As has been said; opinion’s are like a part of one’s anatomy, everyone has one . Congratulations, with your closing reply you’ve managed to demonstrate both.

@prof

My thanks, also, for your comments re: CS2.7 v. Joseph Perspective. If I were buying new in that price category, the Perspective would be on my short list. And your experience adds weight to my opinion that you need to reach even higher up the price scale to significantly better a Thiel. My guess is that I would have to spend north of $30K to notably better the sound I'm getting with my modded 2.4s.

I think that while measurements might not tell all about how an amp sounds, some aspects of sound are quite predictable from measurements.

Perhaps in a vague way. But you either forget that I have actually *heard* this combination of gear or you seek to invalidate my experience. Piss off.

brayeagle
I have briefly tried my subwoofers with my 2.7s.  It did add some bottom and depth to the sound (fairly subtly) though it didn't change the character to the way the Joseph speakers sound in the bass.
I've had my subwoofers and an expensive JL Audio crossover since 2017 and it's such a damned hassle to properly add subwoofers I still haven't got around to it. It's continually on my "to do list."
And my interest is waning.  I don't find myself pining for more bass either with the Thiels or the Josephs.

@beetlemania, The CS 2.4's measure closer to 2 Ohms than they do to 4 Ohms. As there is a direct correspondence model between static impedance figures and sensitivity, measurements are typically made at such fixed points. I don't agree with your assertion that measurements tell you "nothing" about how an amp sounds. Quite the opposite, I think that while measurements might not tell all about how an amp sounds, some aspects of sound are quite predictable from measurements. Frequency response, impedance, power output, distortion, harmonic content, etc., etc., and when and where they are applicable can give one quite a bit of insight into predictable sound. These measurements also provide manufactures an opportunity to provide consistent results to the end user from sample to sample of a given product. They also indicate in what situations a product might or might not be appropriate. Furthermore, measurements give the consumer an opportunity to discover whether a manufacturer knows and or cares about what they are doing.

The amplifiers under consideration are not inexpensive. Having such a generous budget should probably allow for consideration of more options. That the products under consideration measure as they do, suggests that they might have been intended for other different uses. In other applications they may possibly be ideal.

The quote from Thiel is most interesting.  What is the intention of the use of the words "high sonic quality". In my conversations with Jim he told me that when he referred to an amplifiers power output, he was referring to standard 8 Ohm ratings. And, that recommendations for power output was with the understanding that one would be using a quality ss amp that could double down, and that if one was for instance choosing to use a tube amp then one should double the power output recommendations accordingly. Was Jim referring to "high sonic quality" as judged purely by perception or by technical prowess and the sonic consequences? I don't know for sure, but I suspect it's the latter. An amp rated at 100 Watts that can double down to 400 Watts at 2 Ohms would qualify as an amp with more "high sonic quality" than an amp rated as 200 Watts that was heading into oscillation below 4 Ohms, when being asked to drive a sub 4 Ohm load. 

I would love the opportunity to hear any Ayre amp on any Thiel speaker, especially with coaching from you guys.
I've been told that Jim greatly appreciated Ayre's products.

As a Modus Operandi, Thiel's listening always guided our work and led the way toward solutions. Measurements were taken to make sure that the audible improvements were valid and to guard against the paths of seduction where one or some elements might be improved at the expense of other elements. That was not acceptable in Thieldom.

In my present Laminar Launch investigation, I am honoring Jim's approach and standards. I can make no change if it compromises some other measured elements. I am chasing a clearly audible improvement in inner harmonic detail and reduced harsh glare with large, complex signal. The improvements are real and verifiable with other listeners, and achievable via multiple subtly variant techniques. Presently I am using measurements to identify which combination of techniques produces the least compromise of measurable elements. A particularly interesting measurement is harmonic distortion. That envelope varies between -50dB and -100dB and the envelope is changed via different solutions. I intend to find the combination that both produces the desired sonic effects AND reduces harmonic distortion, smooths group delay, quiets the waterfall thumbprint and flattens frequency response. By ear alone, I would be lost, since 4 different solutions have produced pleasing results, all demonstratibly better than stock. I'm zeroing in on a best choice.

This MO is what we practiced at Thiel Audio, although my explorations go beyond what our budgets of time and cost would have allowed.

prof,

Thanks for the 2.7 vs Joseph comparison.
Although monaural, the SS2.2 sub reinforces the lower bass on my 2.7s.

@unsound

Um, one of us has the actual *experience* of listening to the CS2.4 driven by an Ayre AX-5.

Stereophile’s measurements help us to discern that the AX-5 is not a good match for the CS5 or Magnepan 20 and shouldn’t be mated with the CS2.4 *if* the listener demands 100 dB peaks. You might note that the CS2.4 never drops to 2 ohms (it was measured by 3 reviewers, Stereophile seems to have measured the lowest value). As for

But into 2 Ohms (green), not only is the THD higher, but the level was a *little* unstable at the lower frequencies

Not only does the CS2.4 never drop to 2 ohms but the AX-5 behavior JA is describing was observed only in the bass where the CS2.4 impedance curve greatly rises. Also, those were steady state test signals, not music!

Regardless, those measurements tell you *nothing* about how the amp sounds. You need ears for that part!

From the Thiel owner’s manual for my product:

Keep in mind that sound quality is usually much more important than sound quantity. There can be large differences in the sonic performance of two amplifiers of equal power, and this is more important than large differences in power. Most everyone will be happier with a 100 watt amplifier of high sonic quality than a 200 watt amplifier of mediocre sonic quality. For this reason, we feel there is no substitute for listening in making your amplifier decision.

Apparently, I’m in the "most everyone" camp. Good day, sir.

Unsound - I can shed some historical light on your query of "what would Jim Thiel do?" Jim's thinking was decidedly compartmentalized. He considered his business that of designing loudspeakers and the other elements to get right were the business of other entities - designers, technologies, etc.

We started with the Phase Linear 400 and then Nelson Pass' Threshold, then Classé, and gradually developed trade relationships whereby we swapped speakers for the best of form from Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, Mark Levinson, and Krell. (There were undoubtedly others after I left in the mid 90s.) I know that the xx.7 series were developed primarily with Krell's 600fpb.

I remember vividly a visit from Larry Archibald (then incoming publisher of Stereophile magazine) where we demonstrated, among other models, our new CS1.2, with underhung, shunted motor, aluminum tweeter and other advanced-for-the-time technologies. All were quite impressed. The speakers sold for (approximately) $1500 / pair and the amps driving them were (prox) $15K. Larry argued the "marketplace absurdity" of such a pairing. Jim argued that good amplification was his assumption for his designs.
I would classify Jim as unassailable or incorrigible in the realm of his assessments, his assumptions and beliefs regarding such matters. And that was problematic within the company. Company politics demanded that Jim was always right, so all products were developed with relatively "great" amplification. (An inexpensive product might be developed with a $10K amp and an expensive on with a $20K amp, etc.) The same thinking applied to cables. And as you might know, our listening room was purpose built at 14' high x 22.5 wide x 35' long with low-key but very effective acoustic treatment. So, let's say that the working environment of our speakers under development and test was somewhere between great and rarely reproducible in our customers' real-life situations.

Both Larry Archibald and Harry Pearson in his original 03 review took Jim to task for his compartmentalized position, as have numerous later critics either directly or indirectly. Most of you as fans have carefully and painstakingly worked around these interface problems. Congratulations to you. Jim would be pleased for you and proud of your ingenuity. But it wouldn't have altered his position of "that's not my job". 
Note that there were other amps after my time. Dave Gordon, Thiel's national sales manager from the late 80s to late 90s would know them all, both at Thiel and in the field.

In my present work I am considering real life application environments. My amps and cables and room are quite modest and quite likely bettered by many of your environments. Among the lessons I have heeded is that there are problems attributable to the speakers which can be ameliorated in the speakers rather than shifting responsibility to source or chain. There is always more to learn, and I am immensely enjoying this learning experience.

@beetlemania, @jafant,

https://www.manualslib.com/manual/170241/Thiel-Cs2-4.html?page=5#manual

The CS 2.4's are spec'd at :

87 dB@2.87 V -1m

and suggests a minimum of 100 Watts per channel


I would offer that even accounting for gain from room lift and the doubling of speakers, the sensitivity drop off from standard 8 ohm rating to actual load by 3dB for each halving of impedance and similar loss to actual recommended listening distance of 3 meters would preclude a 90 dB sensitivity with CS 2.4's . 
 With an admittedly crude phone app I reach peaks in excess of 100 dB's at my listening position, sometimes up to a few times per day, though only averaging dB's in the mid 60's. Many amplifier manufacturers suggest that amplifiers are in their most linear state somewhere between 10 and 20 % of rated full power, and further recommend that one have 8 to 10 or more times that of clean head room power available beyond that.
 As far as the ability to "vomit" power into 2 Ohms; I would suggest that ability to do so is suggestive of a healthy response for the speaker load at hand. Not being able to do so is often suggestive of a weak power supply and/or poor heat dissipation capabilities. If an amp manufacturer's amp is capable of doubling down into 2 Ohms or come reasonably close to doing so, they are likely to brag about it. If an amp manufacturer fails to list their amps specs into 2 Ohms, it's likely because they are not proud of those measurements.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/ayre-acoustics-ax-5-integrated-amplifier-measurements
  When Stereophile measured of the AX-5 into 2 Ohms it clipped at 220 Watts with only one channel driven with a higher level of distortion at lower powers. …"That the AX-5 was not as comfortable driving 2 ohms as it was higher impedances can be seen if fig.6.".."But into 2 Ohms (green), not only is the THD higher, but the level was a little unstable at the lower frequencies."
https://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs24-loudspeaker-measurements
 With the 2.4's measured sub 3 Ohm load and difficult phase angle, that might be good enough, but I think one could do better.
 When driving Thiel's, it might be prudent to ask; what would Jim Thiel do?

Happy Friday! All

@prof 

I love the RUSH references!

I mentioned earlier I was putting my Thiel 2.7s back in my system after having spent quite a while with my new Joseph Audio Perspectives.


I keep several speakers around because I always like some things about one speaker, others about another, and switching them around helps keep the experience feeling fresh.


I never know for sure if I get used to one sound whether it will end up making me appreciate the previous speaker more, or less.


With the Thiel 2.7s back in for the last couple days, if anything I appreciate them more having had a break from them. As usual..wow!..what a speaker!


The Joseph speakers have an airier, more brilliant, more pure sounding high end and a lighter tonal shade. The Joseph speakers also have a rounder, juicier, more punchy bass. They can really create a beautiful combo of "punchy fun sound" in the bottom and gorgeous rainbows of tone from the mids up.


What I’m loving about the Thiel again is that extra thickness and density to the sound, and the tidiness and precision. They just sound more confident and in control top to bottom, making other speakers even the Joseph speakers sound a bit more see-through and diffuse.


The Thiels are darker and richer and more full in my system vs the Josephs. The highs are "very good" and superbly integrated, though the Josephs are more beautiful - strings sound a bit more silky and refined on the Josephs, that kind of thing. On the other hand, the Thiels will give a string section more solidity and presence. In fact over all the Thiels have a more consistent dynamic presence top to bottom and density.This really helps for rock music (I’ve been playing a lot of Rush lately).


The Joseph speakers can be a bit on the "wispy" side in the upper mids when called upon to do crunching, thick electric guitar. The Thiels give electric guitar that grunt and solidity. The Thiels also do that fabulously controlled, yet dense and present bass - so Geddy Lee’s bass sounds tremendous.


On the other hand, the Joseph speakers have, as I said, a bigger, rounder bass - very tight! - but there is a punchy reach-out-to-my-sofa bass effect that makes kick drums, bass guitar etc feel palpable.


So with the Thiels, Neil Peart’s bass drum and Geddy’s bass will be locked right in between and behind the speakers, dense solid objects, but "over there between the speakers." Where on the Joseph speakers each note on the bass or hit of the bass drum punches air out so I feel it, which feels a bit more "real in the room" and is quite involving.


And, where the Thiels are more consistently dynamically enthusiastic from top to bottom - there is something about the bass foundation of the Joseph speakers that feels like they "breath" a bit more realistically, insofar as I hear and feel the emphasis and dynamics a drummer is producing. It feels a bit more real. But then I go back to how the Thiels seem to do more justice to Alex LIfeson’s guitar, and it’s the old 6 or one-half-a-dozen thing between the speakers.


In any case, I’m absolutely loving the Thiels, wallowing in their smooth organic tone, realism of imaging, the way they seem to do so well with any kind of music, etc. Just a great speaker!

@jafant 

With my particular combination of gear and assuming a typical CD, clipping will onset at an indicated “40” on the AX-5. I usually listen at about 30 for rock, maybe 35 if I’m extra rowdy. But most of my listening is 20-28 indicated, even less when I’m sharing the house.

The MX-R is far more powerful . . . and expensive. 

@jafant 
unsound is steering you away from Ayre because it doesn’t vomit 2 ohm watts like a moon rocket on the Stereophile test bench.

The CS2.4 presents a ~3 ohm load from 400-20k cycles. Two speakers need ~ 50 Watts to produce 90 dB at the listening position 9’ away (and that’s with a steady test signal, not music). Your DX-5 gain is a bit different than my QB-9 but not hugely so. In my system, clipping onsets around 97 dB with a typical CD. But I rarely ask for peaks north of 90 dB and most of my listening is 75-85 dB depending on genre and my mood. I’m probably only asking for 2-25 W for 90+% of my listening. The AX-5 is rated at 250 W into a 4 ohm load, Ayre doesn’t give a 2 ohm rating. That said, if you *do* listen at very high SPLs, the AX-5 probably won’t get you there. 
But before you believe me or unsound, listen for yourself, not via Stereophile measurements. 

jafant
I'd like to add my name to the list of folks who've expressed their thanks for this thread. This is probably the most knowledgeable and committed group of Thiel owners anywhere-and the fact that there have been no trolls or troublemakers in this group is some kind of magic.
Happy Anniversary!

@jafant , For your reconsideration:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs2-2-loudspeaker-specifications
https://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs2-2-loudspeaker-measurements
https://www.ayre.com/products/amplification/ax-5-twenty/#FEATURES-SPECIFICATIONS
https://www.stereophile.com/content/ayre-acoustics-ax-5-integrated-amplifier-measurements
https://www.ayre.com/products/amplification/ex-8/#FEATURES-SPECIFICATIONS
https://www.stereophile.com/content/ayre-acoustics-ex-8-integrated-hub-integrated-amplifier-measurem...
https://www.stereophile.com/content/ayre-ax-7-integrated-amplifier-specifications
https://www.stereophile.com/content/ayre-ax-7-integrated-amplifier-measurements

Anyone own the 1.7  ?

Much Thanks- All

Like you guys, I am simply a fan of the brand and music lover.
I am still leaning towards an Integrated amp with AYRE at the pole position. I am attempting to find an audition w/ Transparent Gen5 cabling as soon as possible.

Happy Listening!

Jafant,

Concur that this thread is a great resource for the Thiel community.

Happy Anniversary!

Jafant this is a great thread! Glad you started it!! So happy Tom Thiel is actively involved and posting!! I’m going to post a follow up to my cs7s I bought in early November after having 3.6s that I bought new in dec of 92 I haven’t changed any equipment or cables the cs 7s are better to my ears than the 3.6s in every way (And I’m a big 3.6 fan!!) the bass is deeper  and more realistic, the mids and highs are very detailed the imaging is superb.This is with a cheap pioneer CD player through a proceed avp1 dac I can’t imagine what they will sound like when I get better equipment.The one thing I did notice is my bryston 4 nrb although sounds good and plays at a decent volume level isn’t able to make them play as loud as it did when I had my 3.6s you definitely need a big amp! Anyone contemplating the cs 7s don’t hesitate getting a pair, especially at the prices they are going for! David 

Hello all...it’s been a while since I last posted, but I have finally caught up with the 9 (!) pages of forum posts since I last visited. 
Kudos to JAfant for starting such a wonderfully informative, collaborative & civil discussion on our amazing speakers...4 years strong!

My system remains unchanged: ARC LS-7 line stage, PH 3 phono pre amp & D-240 MKII ss amp. Main source these days is a Blue Sound Vault 2 with Tidal streaming. 
I continue to look forward to going to mono block amplification in effort to drive my CS 3.5s with greater authority & control. To that end, while we have many thoughts & feedback on tubes & solid state, I find myself wondering about the possibility of Class-D digital amplification. Anyone here have any thoughts on the usual suspect audiophile models from Bel Canto, Theta Digital, Wadia, etc? I had a chance to try ARC’s 450M Class-D amps, but they were bought before I could schedule a listen. 
Thanks for the knowledge & experience you’ve all shared here...it’s truly an exceptional forum!  And, like so many others here, I really look forward to Tom Thiel’s & other’s efforts to hot rodding/extending our Thiels for the foreseeable future.

Happy 2020!

Arvin C

Indeed, this has been a fantastic thread. Thanks for kicking it off, @jafant

We are very fortunate to have Tom Thiel participating. When I bought my 2.4SEs, I had an inkling to upgrade the crossovers. But I had nowhere near in mind to take it as far as Tom coached me. I would have been nibbling around the edges and not making near the difference compared to the informed decisions from Tom's mind.

I remain *super* happy with my upgrade and haven't budged from my position that these are my last speakers. In fact, with my DAC upgraded I doubt I'll make any further changes to my system other than to try the baffle treatments Tom is experimenting with. 

Rosami - your detailed comparison of the 2.4 vs 3.6 reads like the design brief for the two products.

The Renaissance Project work has illuminated ways to make qualitative improvements for all Thiel models. I especially thank members of this forum for raising questions and perspectives that I, nor probably Jim, had considered. Remember the Vandersteen baffleless question? I responded with the company line of "one baffle, like one instrument". Then I scratched my head and went to work finding holes in my incomplete thinking. All in, I am addressing forms of distortion that contribute to that "upper frequency harsh glare" which I attribute to the speaker in some degree. Most of you have ameliorated it with careful and expensive system engineering. Thiel audio also used that particular equipment and sources that made it sound good. I believe we'll find ways to allow Thiel speakers to shine with most equipment and sources rather than a small subset as is presently necessary. 

I also thank those of you who are running parallel experiments and sharing outcomes with me. Even though progress is slow, progress is being made.

Hello all - I join in thanking JAFant for running this forum. I doubt that I would have taken up the challenge of trying to stabilize the future for Thiel owners without this forum. It's been a wonderful undertaking and I make some progress nearly every day.

@jafant,  Wow, 4 years! Did you ever get amplification for those Thiel’s?

jafant,

Thanks to you for continuing to nurture this thread and to help maintain the positive, supportive attitude that makes this the best thread on Audiogon! 

All

Today marks this thread's 4th Anniversary here on Audiogon. Since inception, we are acquiring and attracting new contributors and members of the Panel. I continue to become impressed with each passing year as Thiel Audio is finding its audience via the secondary market. Support continues to fortify and strengthen from several avenues including other Audio -based forums. The word is out indeed. 
Thank You-  for everyone's Dedication and Passion towards the betterment of our Hobby.

Happy Listening!

mr_bill

Good to see you again.  Rosami offers an excellent summation of the CS 2.4 model.  Keep me posted on your purchase decision.

Happy Listening!

mr_bill
While this is only my personal opinion-listening in my room with my gear-it's obvious that the 3.6s and 2.4s have many of the same positive attributes-of which we're all aware. 
I think the 2.4s are somewhat higher resolution speakers than the 3.6s; they have the ability to uncover somewhat greater detail in recordings and perhaps (i'm not sure of this) slightly better imaging and space cues. The larger 3.6s are more at ease with dynamic material and have a more extended bottom end. The mid-bass is somewhat "slower" than the 2.4's (obvious on "fast" electronics such as my Naim system) and improving this area would be one of my main "wants." Also, the 3.6s seem to have an upper-mid glare, and this has been made more evident after I had my amp updated. But overall, in my room, the greater dynamic ease, separate midrange driver, and more extended bottom-end of the 3.6s were the main reasons i decided to keep those speakers. I'm hoping that-with Tom T.'s hot-rodding, there may be potential for greater improvement compared to the 2.4s. It was a tough decision though because the 2.4s do just about everything right. 

@rosami 
Thank you for your post.
Could you comment on the difference between the 2.4 and 3.6 and why you are sticking with the 3.6 over the 2.4?  I’d love to hear that as I’m considering those two models. Thanks!

rosami

Good to see you again. I hope your CS 2.4 speakers find the next home soon. Absolutely, a change in cable/power cord can make a significant difference. This fact cannot become discounted. There are quite a few here who enjoy the 3.6 model. Tom is working diligently on the upgrade path. Stay tuned.

Happy Listening!

Hi Guys.
I haven't posted here very often and for quite some time, but remain a loyal Thiel fan and come back to read this thread often when i have time. 
For some background info...I own both CS3.6s (about 23 years!) and a much newer pair of CS2.4s which i purchased in March of 2019. The reason I purchased the 2.4s was to try to ascertain if an issue I began hearing after I had the "DR" update to my Naim 300 amp was speaker or electronics related. Turns out I heard the same issues on both the 2.4s and 3.6s. So for the last almost-2-years, I've been listening-making changes-listening...and have made significant progress. The most significant change was probably "time" - I think my amp needed many hundreds of hours of burn-in before an upper-midrange glare and harshness became more acceptable. Also, changing my speaker cables from Naim NACA5 to Townshend Isolda cables was significant. 
I've now decided to keep my 3.6s, sell my 2.4s (hope it's OK to plug my new ad on the "other" audio marketplace-in case anyone is interested in a really nice pair of 2.4s) and continue anxiously looking forward to Tom's upgrades on the 3.6s, especially given the recent posts discussing an upper-midrange glare present on the 3.6s that Tom will address. 
I've listened to quite a few speakers in the last 20-odd months and sat through quite a bit of BS from dealers criticizing Thiels, but after it all, I'm pretty confident that my 3.6s are still the real deal, and are worth the wait for Tom's magic. 
Thanks for all the good info - this thread continues to be a great place to read about and share our love of Thiel speakers!