Thiel 2.3 vs 2.4

Artmaltman,

I respect your opinion and agree with everything you say except Your assessment of the Meridian. The Meridian equipment not only has tone controls but it will wipe the floor with any tube pre/CD player you can come up with near its price range. The Meridian wasn't the problem let me reassure you, infact the 2.3 sounded their best on that system by far.

Just so you know. Let me add, that I did everything I knew to sell Thiels....everything. best cables best spot in the room, tilted them towed them, measured them,,,etc. A good sounding Thiel would make me a hero, my life would have been simplified exponentially.

No the reason the thiels are the way they is two fold,

1. Thiel is still maturing as a speaker manufacturer the leap in the 2.4's quality has more to do with the drivers than any changes in design philosophy, on the surface the 2.3's and 2.4's are very similar as mcTeague stated.

2. Dynamically almost all the Thiel speakers have an issue because the drivers are pushed to do too much over to wide a range, so they always have this characteristic at which the seem to just snap and get bright. Using tubes with slower rise times of course will add a layer of resistence towards this tendency.

This tendency to be super "revealing" is an instablility in the speaker and that is enhanced by a purposeful accentuation of the High frequencies.

People in audio have been conditioned to believe that a components ability to "reveal" changes in the system as a high quality mark, but like anything else too much of a good thing can turn bad.

See how that logic makes you react, think about it. Excellence should not be so fragile, it is not a fine line. This is a tactic to keep you chasing your tail, Dynaudios and ATC's sound great on a $300 NAD receiver and $25,000 Mark Levinson equipment. Yes you can tell the difference, but neither system makes you run for cover because the speakers are great with a margin.

I have not heard the Meridian piece in question so please don't take my comments as disparaging of the Meridian. I was referring in general to my experience that solid state amps don't fare as well with Thiels as powerful tube amps do. Also I was assuming that the Meridian was the amp, not cd/preamp.
Art

My fault Art, we used a number of amplifiers with the 568 and Thiels in an effort to stimulate sales.

BAT
Classe
Bryston
Rowland
probably everything but a Meridian amplifier :)

I realized that we weren't talking about the same thing after I hit submit

have a good holiday

In '98, I auditioned well over 10 speakers in the 3-4k range, and did some traveling to accomplish this. This included Avalon and Dunlavy, which were a bit more expensive than the Thiel 2.3. At the end of the experience, the Thiel was the obvious choice for me. No other speaker could handle complex and congested music as well.

Yes, the bass doesn't go down very far, but what bass it did have was very clean and articulate. Sure, the double basses, kettle drums, and gongs were not as full, but everything else was there. Also, there is also an inherent brightness that needs proper cable and component matching.

Is the Thiel 2.3 for everyone? Hell no. But there are very few speakers that can play to the Thiel's strengths at their price range. All speakers have inherent downfalls. I suspect David99 understands these things because he has decided to stay with the same brand.

As far as getting a used 2.3, I think the prices on audiogon are too much. This is a speaker that sold in '98 for $3000 and has essentially been upgraded twice. If you heard the 2.4 and really like it, then get this one. Better yet, look for a demo pair 2.4 from a dealer. Also, try to have a listen to the 6, because this will give you better bass and there have been numerous 6s on the market.

Rob

Cinematic-
Im confused by your comparison of the 2.3 to the 3.5's
You clearly state your dislike of the 2.3's but you wrote "I only remember liking the 3.5's" then you went on and wrote "the 2.3 does not offer you much more than you are already getting from the 3.5's" and " you would be changing speakers but not upgrading"
Correct me if Im wrong but the message I get from this is,the 2 speakers sound similar?
If this is so,how can you like one and hate the other?