nkonor,
I will indeed watch that sale. I’m really liking the 2.7s. I hit a "sweet spot" in positioning them which gave me the best depth and tonality. Now they are getting more soundstage depth like the 3.7s. Tonally the sound is ravishing on the 2.7s - lush, transient clarity, sparkle on top, rich dark tones when appropriate in the lower mids, and an aliveness that even the 3.7s don’t quite do.
There are many tracks that I actually like a bit better on the 2.7s, though also tracks that were better on the 3.7s. Sometimes I will miss the vastness of the 3.7s presentation that can just be hallucinatory. The 2.7s counter this with a greater sense of density in imaging - the way a bongo or a synth part will just ripple the air right in front of me. Centered vocals have a "thereness" that is like someone has rushed in and set up a center channel.
In contrast to what we often hear "get the smaller speaker for the smaller room," the 2.7s have been more challenging to set up in getting the type of performance I was used to with the 3.7s. In fact they seem to have a warmth in the upper bass either due to design, or to interaction with my room (though my room is well treated). I’ve got it almost dialed out, but not totally. Most of the time, though, the bass is superb.
Overall I’d still call the 3.7s the betters speaker - bigger, airier soundstage, richer/bigger sonic presentation and image sizes, more relaxed, slightly more resolving I think, and it seems perhaps the cabinet design and different rippled woofer of the 3.7s get the best out of the whole package - they just sound more perfectly realized in terms of completely disappearing as a sound source.
But the 2.7s are so gorgeous sounding I may almost have been weened off the 3.7s. I’ve actually ordered a pair of JL Audio 110 subs. I usually HATE subwoofers, but I want to see if I can integrate them to give some more bass reach and weight to the 2.7s, and if that happens I will likely sell my 3.7s.
