Thiel 2.3 vs 2.4


I have 3.5's and love the deep bass.
I am tempted though to go with a newer and more modern speaker.
Im seeing some good deals on the 2.3's and Im wondering how much of a difference there is between the 2.3's and 2.4's
I have heard the 2.4's at Thiel and they are an incredible speaker!
I have become a devoted Thiel fan so please no other speaker recommendations.
My main concern is losing the deep bass of the 3.5's.
I understand the 2.3's only go down to 36hz or so.
Thanks in advance!
david99
Both speakers need a LOT of breakin and complementary equipment (in the sense of high quality and also not being overly lean). The upgrade to the midrange driver of the 2.3 made a major difference to my ear, and eliminated my one serious concern with the speaker. I have heard many Thiels sound wonderful and awful, the same speaker, depending on degree of breakin and associated equipment. Also, they need current. If you underpower them they will provide the volume but it will be unpleasant. Finally, as to your question, to me the 2.4 is worth many times the value of the 2.3. It seems to have a more relaxed, natural sound, and overall seems to improve in many ways.
Art
Sorry I wasn't more diplomatic? 3.5's were great in their day, driver technology limits them today, but I don't know of a 17 yr. old speaker that wouldn't have that problem.

I don't know what you guys want, do you want me to pitter patter around the truth and not make myself clear?

Measure a 2.3 sometime and then explain to me where the superiority is in this design where the accuracy is and its desirable Qualities show up. Why does its replacement seem to eclipse it by such a great margin?

addressing 1.6 issues

As for the "breakup mode" or possible distortion from the tweeter being over driven, do you see the huge distortion spike at 1.2Khz, that is not good and it is clearly audible. This is a $3000 speaker!

The measurements don't lie, even stereophile's measurements don't lie. That's were the truth is, an audio review magazine is a business and writers don't want their job to disappear in a poof of honesty.

Guys I'm getting the feeling that you don't understand that bad products get great subjective reviews all the time and as a participant in this industry It is a very bad thing. Because the magazines want to keep every possible stereo company in business and profitable. That way they have more clients.

Let's review some other quotes in this thread;

"to me the 2.4 is worth many times the value of the 2.3."
Artmaltman

The 2.4 is not "nearly the same speaker" as the 2.3. It's way, way better"
Keithr


"listened to both and fortunate that the dealer had a close out pair of the 2.3s and the 2.4s were better in every way"

Theo

Let me tell you a story that shows how bad the 2.3 is:

We were a reasonably successful Meridian dealer and we were selling 5-6 Meridian 568's a month on average, then we switched in the thiel 2.3's with the new MC1 Center channel and we didn't sell a 568 for 1 month, until we switched the thiels out and put the Dynaudio's back in. That next month 4 568's sold.

So bad you couldn't sell any of the equipment connected to them either! Do you want to know that information? Is that relevant to you? Or should I keep that stuff under the rug. You guys all have great jobs that allow you to afford this equipment. I realize that people are free to make their own decisions but he asked and this is my experience...not my opinion.

So, subjective words like pathetic and horrible are rough should be backed up which I think I have. I'm sorry i don't have the documentation any longer, I switched measurement programs. But words like reborn and excellent should be weighed just as heavily. I am not a Thiel hater, I'm a bad speaker hater, whether I made it myself or someone famous made it.

My list of bad speakers would shock you, and trust me many of them show up in class A lists.

Finally buy the CS2.4 its a great speaker and the great people at Thiel make it,and I like it. that's the best reason of all :) have a good holiday everyone,

PS: Sorry to have to say those thing about your speakers McTeague, my intentions were only to help D99 make the right choice atleast from a objective performance standpoint, value for the money etc.
Cinematic-
Thanks for the info.
I have had my 3.5's x-overs rebuilt,both Dynaudio tweeters replaced and both Scanspeak mids replaced.
Thiel tested them in their chamber and I was told they are 100% up to spec.
Im not sure what you mean by "driver technology limits them today"
Also,would you recommend I keep the 3.5's instead of going with the 2.3's?
p.s. The 2.4's are out of my price range.(I have a great job but the money sucks.....nurse)
I might wait, I only remember liking the Thiel 3.5's, I don't think I've heard a pair since 1990. but my instincts tell me the 2.3 does not offer much more than the 3.5 is giving you already, especially since you spent money to keep the parts new. You would be changing speakers but not upgrading.

I cannot be a judge for you but if I were to buy a speaker to upgrade the 3.5's the CS3.6 comes to mind. I bet you could find a 3.6 in the 2.3 price range. Your electronics will likely hook up nicely to them also. The 3.6 is easier to drive than the 3.5

The 3.6 is a nice upgrade for sure and a certain one in my mind despite its age I like the 3.6 over the 2.3.

It can't be too far off until you can score a demo or previously owned CS2.4. So it depends on how much patience you have....might want to broaden your scope and look at the 3.6 too. See if the 2.4's are worth the wait.

++There are just newer drivers with refinements from those companies, like the revelator split paper series and Dynaudio is several generations passed the D26? things have gotten better when it comes to woofers and tweeters.