2. speakers
  3. 1278947419

Thiel 3.7 vs Wilson Sasha

I auditioned Thiel 3.7 and Wilson Sasha recently. The upstream for 3.7 is Bryston BCD-1+BP 26+7B SST2+Cardas Neutral Reference cables, while the upstream for Sasha is Ayre CX-7eMP+K5+V5+Tranparent Reference cables. Both speakers were driven very well. Let me compare them in each category below.
1. Treble: 3.7 is more reavling, 3.7 win.
2. Mid range: 3.7 is more reavling and transparent, while Sahsa is fuller, it all depends on your preference, a tie.
3. Bass: 3.7 is more reavling and transparent, while Sasha has an obvious deeper bass extension, and more weight. Sasha win.
4. Coherency: Both have great coherency. But from my point of view, 3.7 has an edge.
5. Color: 3.7 is very neutral and transparent. Sasha is neutral too, but it is a little bit towards warmth side.
6. Sound stage: both can produce a huge sound stage, a tie.
7. Imaging: 3.7's imaging is pin point sharp. Sasha has great imaging ability too. 3.7 win.
Overall, both are outstanding speakers. Personally, I prefer Thiel 3.7's sound signature. IMO, regarding price, Thiel 3.7 might be one of the best buy in High-End world.
actuary616
actuary616 OP
38 posts
 
Elberoth2,

Your reaoning is understandable. My comparison is not strict. I used to listen 3.7s driven by Ayre CD player and amps, and my feeling didn't change a lot. Sasha are definitely very good speakers, but not worthing the money. Sound quality wise, they are at the same level at 3.7s. IMO, 3.7s are comparable to any speakers below 30K. They are one of the best buys in Hi-End world.
elberoth2's avatar
elberoth2
1,223 posts
 
Actuary616,

To my ears 3.7s sound a bit uninvolving - a bit flat and just not sophisticated enough in HF ... but to each his own. They are a good buy at $13k, no doubt. At $30k ... not so much (Borat voice) ;-)

Richard - thank you !
mr_bill
347 posts
 
I just heard the Sasha and The Thiel 3.7 and these two speakers stood head and shoulders above all the competition.
I was very impressed with both of these!
Great demo at Audio Perfection in Minneapolis of the Wilsons. Those guys are great there!
actuary616 OP
38 posts
 
Mr_bill,

Do you think these two speakers are very close? Can you specify the pros and cons while comparing these two speakers? I don't have opportunity to compare these two speakers side by side. Thank you.
egrady
138 posts
 
I've owned WP 5.1's and Thiel 2.4's. One of the things Wilson speakers are known for is their electrostatic like resolution of low level detail. The material used in their cabinets, while expensive, absorbs less energy than conventional MDF. While my 5.1's had issues, they did have that spooky realism of an electrostatic along with the slam of a good dynamic speaker. I suspect the cabinet material contributes toward this.

The Thiel 2.4 actually had a better sense of 3D space than the Wilson's in my listening room. But, I couldn't hear detail down the the noise floor as I could on the Wilson. In short, the 5.1's were so revealing I could hear micro details at lower volume levels as one could do with the Quad ESL 63. The Thiel simply didn't have the resolving power and required increased volume. I realize an argument can be made that the 5.1's resolving ability resulted from an overly hot upper midrange and treble. Which is why the later WP's have moved toward retaining the resolving power while reducing the excessive brightness of the 5.1.

My question to those that have heard the Thiel 3.7 and the Sasha is this. Can the 3.7 resolve low level detail as well as the electrostatic like Wilson or does it require increased volume levels?



More to discover