Thiel 2.3 vs 2.4

The 2.4 is not "nearly the same speaker" as the 2.3. It's way, way better.

McTeague,

You pay the price of assuming. If you think a speaker with a 7-9dB dip in the upper midrange on axis, audible breakup noise in the mids, double digit distortion at 90dB at 1 meter and several other malladies as "accurate" well I can see why you disagree with my assessment.

But when a speaker designer tells you that the side reflection will "fill in" the huge dip in the midrange...i'm drawing the line there.

Rave reviews? you're kidding me right? LOL!

As for my name, I'll put 7 channels against any BS 2 channel system an avid reader like yourslef can dream up.

Later.

Cinebuns,

Rave reviews? "Stereophile", "TAS", "Soundstage", and many more. Try reading sometime. The 2.3 and 2.4 are very similar. Check out the components and speak with Shari @ Thiel. Measurements? Measured at what distance? Where is the mike placed? 1st order crossover designs can be a bear to measure, just ask John Atkinson. Not everyone likes Thiel speakers but VERY few ever trash them as you have. Seems you have a grudge to me. I've listened to lots of speakers over the years and Thiels have consistantly displayed clean, accurate sound IMO. There are lots of other good speakers but many seem quite colored when up against Thiel. I compared Thiel 2.4s and Quad 988s in the same room a while back and they were not that far apart in sound with the Thiel being a bit more details and dynamic. A friend I brought along had the same opinion. You must follow some Thiel guidelines however. The amp must be comfortable with a 3-4 ohm load and you have to sit, not stand, no closer than 8' from the speakers.

Tim

Tim,

Everyday at work for three years my job was to present the Thiel 2.3's to the public. I know more about that speaker than you will ever know. I have fixed them, upgraded them, tweaked them heard them in more rooms than I can remember. Got feedback from 100's of people. I have tested the drivers.What more can I tell you, what do you want me to do? conform to popular beliefs so you're comfortable? I'm not into "popularity" the fact that most people agree is a great reason to disagree.

You can't possibly know this but I build speakers and they are very well received. My measurement techniques are not flawed and I understand the topology of the Thiel system better than most. It's not magic. I owned 1.2 and 2.2's which may fuel the great dissappointment in the quality of sound available from Thiel since then. That is until the 2.4's which to me represents a rebirth for Thiel.

How you doubt my credibility because I'm going against the (objective?) press. You're acting the same as the person I inform that Consumer Reports has to place Bose in the top 5 because of a lawsuit in the 1980's. They are skeptical but its still true. Do you think Stereophile wants to lose Thiel ad money?

At the last store I worked we declined the offer to carry thiel because the 1.6 has such a terrible distortion problem, that it is just awful and not competitive with any of the speakers we had at half the price.

If you don't believe me look at the Soundstage measurements which show the cone break up modes in the 1.6 in the distortion measurement. Is this the kind of speaker you think should be considered world class? Look at any speaker in its price point and their distortion figures notice how all the subjective reviews understate this problem. I told the Thiel dudes this is unacceptable. And it is, but maybe you can accept it and call it clean and accurate?

Look I don't want to fight with you, but the problems with the 2.3 are not opinion or perception they are facts.

If you like the way the 2.3 sounds then you have to accept these facts. The flaws do not change with ones opinion. Your "awful" and "pathetic" may differ from mine in degree but the 2.3 is a great example of why you shouldn't listen to the press' Rave reviews. It never deserved it.

So there it is. buy the CS2.4, that's my opinion based on the facts.

Cine,

Facts? Well, still opinion on both our sides. I have had Thiel CS2. 2.2 and 2.3 and they all seem to have a very similar sound. I have even installed the "improved" drivers in my 2.3s and the improvement was subtle. I guess I just like the Thiel sound. It just struck me as odd and out of step to hear such a strident condemnation of Thiel. Even the magazine reviewers write-ups are just opinion, and I take them with a grain of salt but when you seldom get a really negative review the quality speaks for itself. It reminds me of Honda newsgroups where someone would say the Accord was crap and unreliable. It just went against the tide of opinion. I don't want to fight either. The new Gallo Reference 3 impressed me lately. How is that for a change of topic?