Thiel owners

That's a tough one. The new designs are significantly new and improved, and rumor has it that the 3.6 is slated to become the 3.7 in the forseeable future. However, the 3.6 is probably a very good value, and is worth considering from that standpoint.

I have not heard the 3.6, but I had the 2.3 and now the 7.2. I would personally probably go with the newer design. If you have a large room or need the extra extension into the lower frequencies, then the 3.6 might be the ticket. It's just that if I got the 3.6, I would probably be always haunted about trading up to the newer designs.

Also, have you considered the 6, or is this out of budget? The 6 is very nice and leaves nothing to be desired for the future.

Rob

I had a chance to audition the 2.4 at the Thiel factory in Lexington KY earlier this year. I am a long time owner of Thiel 3.6. The only real unknown for me was the bass. (They had the 2.4's mated to the SW-1 subwoofer.) I will say that the 2.4 is smoother and more refined. With a soundstage that was little short of spectacular. Of course, this was the Thiel listening room, so one would expect everything to be just right. Still, I came away very impressed. A lot will depend on your own room and electronics. But if I were starting over, I would be tempted to go with the 2.4. They are well worth a listen.

I would wait till Dec/Jan before making a purchase. Thiel seems to release new models right before CES. Hopefully, there will be a 3.7 this winter.

I just auditioned the 2.4 in my system. I currently own the 2.2s, but have auditioned the 2.3s and 3.6s extensively in my system (and always prefer my 2.2s, so I keep them!) I found the 2.4s to sound more similar to the 3.6s than to the 2.2s or 2.3s. The 2.4s are far more full-bodied, with more natural warmth than the 2.3s. The 2.3s however were quite a bit more laid back and natural. It's too bad they were rather sterile and colorless and lacking in warmth. They were at least sweet. The 2.4s are more forward and brighter by quite a bit, very much like I remember the 3.6s sounding in my system. Their bass is superb - deep and tight. However, I found its bass volume limits rather sooner than I expected. I have yet to reach the bass limits with my 2.2s, and never did when auditioning the 2.3s or 3.6s. But what Thiel is calling an 8" woofer in the 2.4 sure does look like a 6 1/2" to me. Smaller than my 8" in the 2.2s. The midrange clarity, however, was to die for in the 2.4s, but it is rather forward.

Which to buy? Depends on your amplifier. If you have a truly high-end, very high quality, high-powered amp, I'd buy the 3.6s. If you've got anything less than that in an amp, I'd buy the 2.4s - they are much easier to drive. But make no mistake, the 2.4s are as ruthlessly revealing as the 3.6s. None of the forgiving nature of the 2.2s, which is probably why I always end up preferring my 2.2s over any of the others I listen to. But if you've got the right stuff, the mid range of the 2.4s is simply spectacular.

David,

Thanks for your response. I use a BAT 300x with 150 watt @ 8 ohms & 300 @ 4 ohms. I would assume that would be enough power for the 3.6's?

Bobheinatz,

I talked to BAT some time ago, and they had a Bat 300x driving 7s with no problems..

I forgot to mention in my "review" above, that I heard a pinched quality in the upper midrange, noticable in the upper range of trumpets and violins. And on higher up, the violins then became a little too thin. And not just on solo violin; full section orchestral violins also suffered. I even heard this pinched quality on upper harmonics of lower-pitched instruments (trombones for example). The 2.3s were sweeter in this range (but then lost out by being too lean in the lower mids). I remember the 3.6s sounding spectaularly full-bodied all through the range. I certainly don't hear this pinched/thinness with my 2.2s.

And for the record, I auditioned all these Thiels in my system comprising a Theta Miles cd player, Krell KRC3 preamp, Krell KAV250a amp and all Straightwire Crescendos and Serenade wires.

By the way, I think the BAT 300x amp should work pretty well with the 3.6s (but I've never tried it). But my Krell (rated as 250/500/1,000 watts into 8, 4 and 2 ohms respectively) did have a little trouble on the very biggest peaks with the 3.6s. It had the power, but lost some refinement under the load during the most demanding orchestral climaxes at realistic volumes. Those are TOUGH speakers to drive. I've not heard my Krell "clip" on any other speaker I've tried. I'd definately try to audition the 3.6s with your amp first, if at all possible. But I'm thinking your BAT amp might sound awfully nice with the 2.4s...