Thiel Owners

Integrated amps have evolved indeed. What strikes me about rwmeditz's experience of "holographic image" is how the impedance difference of the 2 speakers might be operating. The 3.5 bottoms around 5 ohms from 100 to 1K Hz with rising lower impedance. It presents a rather simple / orderly load for an amplifier. The 2.2 bottoms around 3.5 ohms from 100 to 200 Hz with another dip just under 40 Hz, presenting a more difficult load. I wonder what you would hear if both speakers were driven by a big, high-current amp. Comments are very welcome.

tomthiel
I suspect a bigger, deeper and wider soundstage driven by a higher current power amp.  Now that I have two accomplished Integrated amps for comparison, Creek and Ayre. Both are musical in a pleasant presentation without criticism. Simply reach for disc after disc.
The Ayre, being more powerful spec-wise, delivered more micro details and subtleties. Charles Hansen's Diamond Circuit is incredible.
The Creek, being an older amp made in England, held its own for substantially less money. Carefully matching cables and power cords, this amp is a real contender without any embarrassment.  Both brands offer matching CD players. Creek never built a SACD player, however, a Music Hall Maverick is a sonic match, IMO.

This lesson describes evolution of the Integrated Amp.Happy Listening!

tomthiel
To followup on jafant’s question regarding the hot rod updates, are you able to provide some details regarding your progress on the 3.6 upgrades?
Are you planning to release “complete hot rod kits” for each model, or generic suggestions for updating the various models?
Any update regarding when 3.6 designs may be ready, and when Rob G. will be able to offer them?
Many thanks!
rosami

I'm honored to be asked for my thoughts, especially from the master artisan and craftsman himself and the very knowledgeable Jafant, but I'm afraid the tech eludes me and I know nothing other than what I hear and feel. It explains why I'm still running them on an underpowered integrated. I knew I had to get my 2.2s when I got chills listening to exerpts of each of 3 pieces of music I knew very well, 1 rock, 1 classical, 1 jazz. Same for the 3.5's. The music made not just an artistic impression, but a much rarer visceral emotional one also through the Thiels. The music spoke to my soul, which is what Jim Thiel was likely hoping to accomplish for himself with his ultimate God speaker. Neither of mine will ever be sold, but one day they will find their way to my kids. 
Although I never play that loud, my wife begs to differ but our musical tastes rarely intersect, rarely a max of 85 db at peak, the 2.2s needed to be played fairly loud to realize the bass and soundstage, either because of lower sensitivity or lower resistance levels or weak integrated. In addition, the tone and separation are not as sweet, 3D, or separated. 

Continued,
The 3.5s immediately revealed themselves. Obviously they played louder and deeper, I use the EQ. They are not as position dependent, and I'm somewhat limited in placing them, so it will never be ideal. But positioned where the 2.2s were I was center orchestra at Carnegie Hall with the 3.5s, with the 2.2s I was rear balcony. 3.5 - much wider and deeper soundstage, deep bass rising up from the earth, tympani reverb palpable. Nonsibilant crystal clear highs, the notes of the triangles sparkling and shimmering. Every instrument where it should be and its sound coming at you and expanding like a cone as it should. The flow of the rhythm comes at you like the waves of the ocean. The notes fading into the absolute void of space, utter darkness. Tones as sweet as Jerry Garcias notes, real organic maple syrup, not sterile sugar or sickly sweet saccharine. The Beatles Let it Be was like hearing it for the first time again, and I was a fan ever since Sgt. Pepper and Magical Mystery. The voices on Beethoven's 9th and Mahler's 2nd are ethereal, sublime and poetic.

I still love the 2.2s, but with my integrated they have a little less of all the above, especially imaging and sweetness. They are still wonderful, but less vivid, color rather than technicolor, cotton rather than silk. It almost seems that you have to invest more of yourself to get the emotional connection to the music while the 3.5s offer it up immediately if you are open for it. Perhaps the 2.2 is more technically proficient or analytical and the 3.5 more visceral or impressionistic. As I said when I started, it is the way I experience the music that I can share, the technical aspects I know nothing about other than what I learned from you here, and for that I am very grateful. For me the gear is a means to the end - MUSIC!