Wilson Sophia II vs. Thiel CS3.7


Anyone compare the two directly?

Looking for detailed impressions on these two loudspeakers only if you feel you auditioned them in their absolute best light. Mis-matched systems and problems with synergy don't really reveal what a speaker can do, so be honest and voice your opinion only if you really know the strengths and weakness of each speaker.

Bass:

Which one went deeper, tighter more impactful, tuneful?

Midrange:

Which one had more presence, texture, tonal accuracy, inner detail, transparency?

Highs:

Which one extended farther, had less grain, sounded most natural?

Overall:

Which one was more coherent, dynamic, resolving, transparent?

Which one had a wider soundstage, fuller images, shaper images, better depth, layering, separation of instruments?

Which one has the more accurate tone for acoustic instruments?

Again, looking purely for sonic differences, how do they honestly compare to each other?

Thanks!
hce4
Well can't help for many of the questions you asked but have listened to Wilson Maxx 2 and Watt/Puppy as well as the Sophia in a variety of settings. I have not heard the CS3.7s but own the CS6s.

I would choose Thiel over Wilson any day simply because Jim Thiel engineers his products to reproduce as accurately as possible the harmonic structure needed for correct timbre content via phase and time coherent designs. Wilson uses midrange drivers that are sized inappropriately for their frequency range and has to wire them out of phase relative to the tweeter and woofer to correct for cabinet and crossover anomalies. That makes no sense to me.

Those features alone are enough for me. The Sophia sounds nowhere as good as my CS6s and I can only imagine that the 3.7s will be even better.
Cheers
Steve
Though they both might be considered traditional dynamic loudspeakers, the designers seem to have very different ideas and priorities. I haven't heard the 3.7's yet. I'm not sure if I've heard the II version of the Sophia's yet. Though I might be in the minority, in that I actually like both lines, but based on my previous experience with all of each designer's previous models, there's no doubt about it, I'd choose Thiels. You might feel differently.
I've heard both in different systems. (sophia not II) So thats the best i have to go on.
Bass- I thought the Wilsons went lower with a little more athority. But the Thiels didnt seem lacking. But I think the Wilson has better bass.

Treble- Alot more energy with the Wilsons but near as smooth and not more detailed. Just more noticable. A little on the hard side for me. i preferred the 3.7

Midrange- Both nice, both transperent. But the Thiels had a more fleshed out, and slightly warmer sound. I preferred the 3.7

Both are coherent, dynamic, and transparent. I would think electronics would play the main roll in how the speakers perform. Same thing with the imaging and soundstage. Both are very good.

Another very good speaker in the $10K range is the Vandersteen Quatro wood. Not as detailed as either of the others, but IMO better midrange and bass that can be adjusted to your room. Along with equal imaging and soundstage. Plus you can run the treble/mids on small amps.
Good luck with your purchase.
Thanks for the responses. I suppose my original post was too long and specific, any general comments are welcomed, especially given the fact that the Thiel CS3.7 is new and not many people may have had a chance to directly compare the two.

Unsound, I like both lines too, hence all the questions!

Tom, thanks! Your comments are spot on and have substenance. The Quatros are also on my mind, but having heard 5As with Antique sound labs, I admit I wasn't impressed.

Stevecham, interesting! However listening to Wilson's, I don't get the impression they're engineered improperly. Admittedly, the Thiels did surprise me more than the Wilsons, here's why:

In my brief auditions of Thiel and the Wilson, I've been struck by two different things from each speaker:

The Thiel was utterly coherent and seamless.

The Wilson sounded to me extremely precise and crisp.

I felt like the Wilson's could be capable bigger, more articulate sound. BUT, the Thiels top to bottom consistency and balance was more compelling and somehow more musical than the mechanical precision of the Wilsons.

To go into further detail, the Wilson's treble had the slightest amount of grain which becomes fatiguing after a few hours, the Thiel's had a less noticable treble (perhaps less pronounced or perhaps less grain or perhaps just better integrated with the midrange woofer). The bass was deep, impactful and envolping on the Wilson's, but the Thiel's had slightly better resolution and articulation. The midrange on the Wilson's was a little more transparent and energetic, while the Thiel's was more rounded and ever so slightly warm.

Given the price, I'd rest easier spending my money on the Thiel, depite the massive price increas from $9,900 to $12,900 within a year of their debut. However, the Sophias IIs, being more transparent, could possible fly to heigher heights than the CS3.7s with top shelf components when closest reproduction of source material is the goal.

Again, these opinions are based on relatively brief auditions, and while I do plan on a more in depth listen sometime, I'd love to hear some additional thoughts...