Ok, well then there you have it! It's official!
Just about every audio enthusiasts and/or audiophile here apparently agrees that Thiel's are indeed better (+ value) and Wilson's are worse (+ > cost , thus = < value), correct?
Surely there must be a mathematician amongst us
who can turn the above theory into a real mathematical equation, and thus a scientific proof of some sort, yes?
OK so who then would like to step forward here and tackle this one for the Nobel prize in Home Audio? DOH!
Amazing... OK well let me just make sure I've got this right. So then would it be safe to surmise that, instead of buying a pair of, say, Wilson Sophia's, I could basically simply pull out several thousand dollars from my wallet, go over and flush it down the toilet, proceed to punch myself in the groin a few times, then make my way down the the local Thiel dealership to buy a pair of 3.7's, and I'd then still be ahead of the game, yes?
OK but wait. Wait. What if I were, say, into listening to stuff like Pink Floyd's SACD version of Dark Side of the Moon at concert playback volume levels?! Could I then assume that it would sound better plaid back on a pair of Thiel 3.7's on some tube amp's, over maybe a pair of WATT Puppies on Levinson's? Hummmmmm...I'm not so sure there. Or would it be safe to surmise that that listening to a full scale orchestral piece on vinyl would be best playing back through a system including a pair of Theil 2.4's over some Sophia's? Really? Or how about perhaps playing back Transformers or Iron Man at THX playback levels sounding better played through something like some Thiel SCS4's or even Power Points than it would using something like Wilson CUB's? Just checking...
Um, I'm not so sure that equation might work out after all. But that's just me. could be wrong ya know.