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
Thanks for the sales pitch Johnny. At least a disclaimer would be nice.....

Shakey
I would also consider the Vandersteen 5a as they do bass with their built in Bass amp and adjustable Room EQ
in my opinion better than both and like the thiels are Phase and time correct yet have lower baffle diffraction which allows them to disappear image off the charts are also run with a high pass/ bi amps the Bass which lowers the main amps distortion dramatically improving coherency dynamics transparency and clarity.
Cheers Johnnyr
James63,

The Sasha goes down MUCH deeper than the Sophia 2. Not even close, even with the Sasha ports stuffed.
Give me an example of one speaker hat sold at a premium over the orginal new price paid 8 years into its life cycle. Does not happen. Better strategy is to wait 8 years and pick one up used for 40% (tops) or original retail. I did the same with the Revel studio's that I first heared in 2002 and bought in 2009.
CS3.7 will probably have a very long product cycle like most Thiel speakers. I think at least 10yrs and by then they will probably sell for in the $25k-$30K range. so if you can get a pr now, get it and enjoy them now, and by the time you are itching to upgrade them, you can probably sell them for what you paid for now or maybe more. Another vote!
James63,
I think 3.7's base is more revealing and transparent. Sasha just has more base, but the quality is not as good as 3.7.
IMO, your mini review is quite silly..as stated by another, unless you are comparing with the same front end gear in the same room your review has no merit.Ive heard both speakers and the Sasha blows away the 3.7s but thats just my opinoin and its worth nothing except to me
Pkoh,

Thanks for the tip on the Naim. I have a dealer that carries them and I have heard them on Magnepan 1.7 and they seemed pretty good. I might give them a go some time.

Now back on topic.

Pkoh,

I would like more detail on how the bass compared. Was the Wilson truly better or did it just have more bass quantity/output? This is a real question and I am not trying to give you a hard time. I would really like to known. My thoughts on the subject are below feel free to disagree if you heard differently...

Wilson:
I ask because looking at measurements and listing to the Sophia 2, the woofer start to fall quickly around 40hz and the port picks up the rest. The combined outputs bring the bass down to 29hz. The Watt Puppy 8 (I have not see measurements of the Sasha) had a similar approach the port picking up the bass where the woof left off.

My issues with the port picking up the bottom-end is it looses texture and detail compared to a larger woofer etc. My other issues is the port is almost always a good 5-10 db lower than the woofers output. Making for lumpy bass at the extremes and room placement complications. In order to have the port the same loudness as the woofer it would need to be very long and thin, causing cuffing. The last problem I have with a port is the sound coming from inside the box (let out through the port...) is colored on many speakers.

Thiel:
Now the Thiels use a passive radiator which has some real advantages. The 3.7s woofer also takes a dive around 40hzb but the passive radiator acts just like a driver with piston motion. The piston motion maintains detail until the radiator drops off at 30hz. Also the output of the passive radiator is tuned to the same loudness as the driver (tensioning the surround and box volume used for tuning) and the speaker measures flat till 31hz with no boundary reinforcement. The last but most important advantage of a radiator is it helps block the internal noise of the box and does not create port noise.

So again my question, is the Sasha bass better or just more prominet? I question the 20hz spec honestly. I know many people would/will say the room will add bass down low... but it just muds it up for me.

Now with all that being said I really like the bass on both speakers but I heard them at different dealers with a large amount of time between auditions. But I think the radiator is great and I am at loss as to why more bands don't use them. They are a good trade off between a sealed box and ports.

Thoughs?
In Korea, The thiels and WPs are imported by the same importer so we can do a side by side comp. at the importer's showroom. Anyway, both speakers are truly great, for the price Thiel does a lot, but WP Sasha definitely beats out Thiel 3.7 in the bass department hands down but not sure if you want to spend that much more. James, for your Thiel 2.4, you should definitely consider used Naim audio set as a candidate. I am not sure what the model # was but they looked pretty old, may be from 90s, but they totally tamed the 2.4 beautifully.
Based an a single experience walking into a showroom and listening to the Thiels (with expensive Krell electronics), I have to agree that dollar for dollar these were the best sounding speakers I ever heard (either that or this dealer had a magic setup touch). I had a somewhat similar revelation about 9 years ago with the revel studios - than 14K, which I ended up being able to afford used 8 years later. I never liked the Puppies (sounded worse than the Revels at twice the price) so I am somewhat negatively biased against Wilson.
FWIW- I heard the 3.7 with Mac 1201's and the sound was sublime. If I was considering the 3.7's I would also want to hear them with the Mac's 2301's.

Maybe the Mac's transformers mitigate the upper mid range energy that James63 mentions.

I also agree that the 3.7's are a great bargain.
James63

Unfortunately, I never heard CS 2.4. When Thiel presented 3.7 on 2007 CES, they used Bryston BCD-1+BP 26+28B SST to drive 3.7. James Tanner, VP of Bryston, mentioned that James Thiel spoke to him in person, that 28B SST combo made 3.7 to produce the best sound he heard so far. Thiel used Bryston combo in another couple important shows. I believe it should be a good match for 3.7. It worth auditioning.
Actuary,

Yeah I like Thiels pretty well. I have never heard Thiels with Bryston amps. I have been rolling amps on my CS2.4 for a little while now. I think I am going to stop with Wyred 4 Sounds. Like the Thiels I find it very hard to find a reason to move on.

But if you think the Brystons are that good a match I will look into it. I still have Pass Labs on my list and may pick one up for a good used price.The CS2.4 are a touch hollower (thinner) in the mids than the 3.7 and I thought the Brystons might move the mids in the wrong direction, thoughts?

Have you heard the CS2.4? I bought them off Audiogon (from a dealer) unheard based on how well I liked 3.7s. They turned out to be a real eye opener for price per performance.
James63, it seems both of us are big fans of Thiel 3.7. 3.7 is a very power hungary speaker. It require high power and high current amp. Bryston BP 26+14B SST2(or 7B SST2) amps are not very expensive, but they can drive 3.7 extremely well. I ordered one set for myself. You may audtion this combo too. Have fun.
Goodwins High End in Boston is very willing to switch heavy speakers around for a demo. I heard three $20K ish speakers - Magico, Rockport and Verity - all in the same system during one afternoon session. Some dealers are willing to pull out the dolly and do a bit of work for customers. Try to get this service to establish a short list and then ask for an in home demo to be sure.
Roxy54, sorry for confusion. I mean it's difficult to hear two speakers with exact same upstream at one spot. Even if the dealer has such equipment, they are two heavy to be switched.
Great post!!! These are two of my favorite brands and I like to see them compared but I do not see comparisons much because of the price difference.

It is nice to see a post like this. You may take some flack because the systems were not the same... But it is very hard to hear both back to back even it the dealer has both on the floor because of the size weight of these speakers.

My Wilsons experience:
I have heard the Wilson Duette in the same room same system back to back just a few minutes apart from the 3.7s. It was no contest the 3.7s fit my taste better in all aspects. Sounds like a dumb demo but hey the duette is $14,200 (in red) and the 3.7 were $12,900 (in cherry).

I have also heard the Sophia 2 (Mcintosh front-end 252 etc) in several systems and head a few songs on the Sashas (all Mcintosh-front end).

My Thiel Experience:
I have demoed the 3.7 two different occasions (Musical Fidelity and Mcintosh 252). I also own a pair of Thiel CS2.4 (benchmark HDR-DAC1/Wyred 4 Sound ST-500) .

My opinion:
While I like both lines of speakers very well I would choose the 3.7s over anything short of the Sasha down. I did not spend much time with the Sasha but all your points match my feelings between the two lines in general. Sound wise I could live happily ever after with the 3.7 or Sasha. But my budget ($$$) leans more toward Sophia so I will have to see how the Sophia 3 sounds.

I think if people are sensitive to upper midrange energy they may like the Wilsons better. The midrange is NOT forward on the 3.7s but it pulls out every detail (think CLX) and could be tiresome if they listen to high SPL. I keep it pretty quiet because I like my hearing so it is not an issue for me. All in all it hard not to notice the 13 thousand is price difference.

PS. I would like to hear from anyone who has compared Magico (V2 but anything would help) to the 3.7s. I do not have a dealer and I am not willing to fly for a demo.
Actuary- believe your own ears because that is what really matters. My personal experience with both Thiel and Wilson speakers (and this goes back to the 90s) is that neither impressed me that much in Audio showrooms. I heard both brands in more than two audio showrooms each and with all the right equipment, wires and software. I had two buddies, one with a Thiel system and one with the Wilson Watt/Puppy system. In their homes both systems sounded awesome. In the stores, I wouldn't have given either brand a second notice. It was my buddy's home system that prompted me to go for the Thiels. I guess what I am saying is, if you could get both pair of speakers in your home for an audition, it might well be worth your trouble.
Actuary,
Did you really mean that you don't think that there is a system that can drive them well, or did you mean that you don't think there isn't a system that can't drive them well?
(in other words, you feel that they are easy to drive)
My point is both are great speakers, but I prefer Thiel 3.7, and it might be one of the best buy in High-End world.
I understand your reasoning. But I don't think there is a system can drive these two speakers very well.
8. Dynamic range: Both are great, a tie.
9. Transient response: Both are great. 3.7's transient response is the best I've heard in any speakers. 3.7 win.
10. Tonal balance: Both are great, 3.7 is silky smooth. I think it has an edge.

What is your point?

The relevancy of your comparison is flawed. The only way to judge one vs the other is to make the comparison on exactly the same system.

Both electronics are good, but unless everything is a constant you really have no idea what is doing what.