Thiel 3.6's vs. Vandersteen 3 sigs

Thanks for all of the great perspectives. I definitely agree with some of your experiences (even the old Thiels seemed to thrive with more power; would go deeper. Also, they were always a bit too bright for me. CD's could get annoying although vinyl would sound pretty sweet. Lastly, they sound impressive at first, with enough bass that a sub is not seemingly required). The Vandies sound rather plain in comparison and I don't mean that in a bad way. Bass extension would put them well ahead, overall. OK, so I'm going to look for a Vandersteen sub or the 3A's.

Agree with Sdatch. I've had my 3.6 for nearly 8 years. It's a fine speaker, considering what you can get them for these days on the used market. But they are very revealing of the source. (Or you can say that they are "picky" of what equipment they are mated to.) And they are power hungry. I've had many changes in my system in the past 8 years, and have been amazed at the "improvements" every time.

After living with it for 8 years, I was sure that I had driven them to their full potential. But earlier this year, I changed the amp from my long time reference, a Mark Levinson #333 (300wpc) to a Pass X350.5 (350wpc). I was floored by the improvement. Deeper bass, bigger soundstage, much more refined midrange. I wonder how much better the 3.6 can sound.

And if you think the 3.6 sounds analytical and harsh, please come by and hear my system. I've had over a dozen people that had the same opinion (incluidng some ex-3.6 owners)changed their minds after hearing my sytem.

FrankC

Digital Front End: Mark Levinson #37 + Sonic Frontier SFD2 Mk II (NOS Amperex 6DJ8 tubes)
Analog Front End: Michell Orbe SE + SME V + Shelter 901/Benz M2 + ARC PH3 SE (NOS Amperex 7308 tubes)
Amplification: ARC LS-25 Mk I w/ GNSC ref mod (NOS Amperex 7308 + Telefunken 6DJ8 tubes) + Pass X350.5

Bdunne, budget aside, I think you would be better off selling that 2s and buying 3As, then adding a sub with the 2s. You may not feel the need for a sub with the 3As, and I think you will find the midrange to be better as well -- you can always add a sub (preferably two)if you feel the need for sub 28Hz bass.

If I had to change from my 3.6's, I would be looking at the Vandies. They do share many characteristics. The disadvantage of Thiel's is the amp/current required. It sounds like you may have this covered. I have considered demo'ing the Rogue pre to see how a tube pre would sound with the 3.6. I would stay away from the sub, I've never heard a setup integrated enough for me. The 3.6 goes very deep and is very tight, especially with a big amp. I use Classe CAM-350's with great results. I would try to hear the 3.6 with your electronics before deciding. You can't lose either way.

No Thiels are not analytical, or harsh, or forward sounding.
The reason they sound that way when you heard them is because the components driving them were low fi.
If you use high quality components with good cables and follow placement recommendations, they are sublime. Vandersteens on the other hand sound good with cheap electronics because they are made with cheap components and designed for the average music listener, not the sophoisticated one.
The top end of Vandys is dull and rolled off, and the bass is boomy and inaccurate....just the cure for cheap electronics which sound harsh and have no real bass because they have cheap power supplies that can't deliver enough current to move the woofer accurately) and they are therefore perfect for unsophisticated listeners.