2. speakers
  3. 1278947419

Thiel 3.7 vs Wilson Sasha

I auditioned Thiel 3.7 and Wilson Sasha recently. The upstream for 3.7 is Bryston BCD-1+BP 26+7B SST2+Cardas Neutral Reference cables, while the upstream for Sasha is Ayre CX-7eMP+K5+V5+Tranparent Reference cables. Both speakers were driven very well. Let me compare them in each category below.
1. Treble: 3.7 is more reavling, 3.7 win.
2. Mid range: 3.7 is more reavling and transparent, while Sahsa is fuller, it all depends on your preference, a tie.
3. Bass: 3.7 is more reavling and transparent, while Sasha has an obvious deeper bass extension, and more weight. Sasha win.
4. Coherency: Both have great coherency. But from my point of view, 3.7 has an edge.
5. Color: 3.7 is very neutral and transparent. Sasha is neutral too, but it is a little bit towards warmth side.
6. Sound stage: both can produce a huge sound stage, a tie.
7. Imaging: 3.7's imaging is pin point sharp. Sasha has great imaging ability too. 3.7 win.
Overall, both are outstanding speakers. Personally, I prefer Thiel 3.7's sound signature. IMO, regarding price, Thiel 3.7 might be one of the best buy in High-End world.
actuary616
jtein
36 posts
 
After auditioning Wilson Sasha, Sonus Faber Elipsa and Cremona M, Magico V2, Avantgarde Uno G2, this is why I purchased the Thiel 3.7.

I'm a musician and play regularly in a band. When the drummer hits the snaredrum with his drumstick, you don't just hear a sound coming from the snaredrum. You can actually feel the energy from the "whack" of the drumstick on the snaredrum. Or the energy from the "whump" of the foot pedal against the bass drum that reverberates in your body. I found that from all the abovementioned speakers I auditioned, the 3.7 gave me that. Articulately too. The same goes for other instruments and vocals too. IMO, high-end gear should have the ability to transport the listener onto the stage where the musicians are playing their instruments.
elberoth2's avatar
elberoth2
1,223 posts
 
Actuary616 - as Audiofreakgeek has mentioned, you cannot compare two speakers in two different systems. This is really pointless, esp. when the associated amps sound as different as Ayre and Bryston combos !

I'm not really surprised by what you have heard, since this is EXACTLY what I would have predicted, having heard both amp cobbinations Ayre and Bryston. In general Bryston amp is much more revealing and transparent with much better control over the speaker than Ayre, while Ayre is fuller and more organic sounding. Souds familiar ?

As a sidenote - I had a chance to compare 3.7 to the older Sophia 2 in friends system (he owned Thiels 3.7 and Sophias were on loan; the rest of the system was ARC Ref 3, Ref 210 monos and EMM SE digital combo) and we BOTH preferred the Sophias 2 over 3.7, which I ended up buying. Since then I sold the Sophias and upgraded to the Sashas - which are far superior to the Sophia 2, in all areas. I cannot even imagine how big the difference would be now between the Sasha and 3.7 ...
richard_stacy
686 posts
 
Never compared the 2 but both speakers I could live with forever. I just wanted to tell Elbroth2 that I lust after his room evrytime I see his name! That is simply a perfect room in every way and I love the lighting in the rest of your home as well. We share taste in decor for sure!
actuary616 OP
38 posts
 
Elberoth2,

Your reaoning is understandable. My comparison is not strict. I used to listen 3.7s driven by Ayre CD player and amps, and my feeling didn't change a lot. Sasha are definitely very good speakers, but not worthing the money. Sound quality wise, they are at the same level at 3.7s. IMO, 3.7s are comparable to any speakers below 30K. They are one of the best buys in Hi-End world.
elberoth2's avatar
elberoth2
1,223 posts
 
Actuary616,

To my ears 3.7s sound a bit uninvolving - a bit flat and just not sophisticated enough in HF ... but to each his own. They are a good buy at $13k, no doubt. At $30k ... not so much (Borat voice) ;-)

Richard - thank you !
More to discover