Thiel 1.6 vs Proac 1.5

Break-in! Which-ever you get, please make sure you break the speakers in very thoroughly. My unbroken in Thiel 2.3's had no bass for a few hours, then one-note bass for a dozen or more hours, then finally, remarkable bass. Same for lean-ness in the midrange, except that this took well over 100 hours to disapate.. Similar experience with my Proac 2.5's. Unfortunately, given how new the Thiel 1.6 is, any in-store demo will likely be with unbroken in models. Sigh.

Both speakers want 150W plus in a medium sized or larger room. Use a warmish amp like the Plinius 8200 and warmish cables like Cardas and the Thiel 1.5 is not at all harsh. Can't comment on the 1.6. The Proac 1.5 needs a bit more open accompaniments to get them to be lively.

Personally I find the Thiel 1.5 to be very musically engaging, more so than the Thiel 2.3.

Both are good but ProAc has that certain undefinable (but definately hearable) "magic"...like the Thiel, love the ProAc.

I listened to them side by side, in a mccormack arcam system, went with the thiel. I was expecting the proac to be more forgiving than the thiel, but it wasn't. The thiel bass was better defined, and I think the thiel was more detailed. I'm breaking the Thiels in now.

Thanks!

I wonder how many of these respondents have actually heard the new 1.6? I'm guessing that most are just generalizing about the Thiel "house sound".

I listened to the 1.6s a couple of weeks ago and found them to be a far departure from most Thiels that I've listened to (1.5, 2.3, 3.5, 3.6, 6). They sounded quite warm and...could it be?...a bit dark. Excellent soundstage (a lot more height than the 1.5s) with a lot of depth, too. On the negative side, they were kind of boring...at least to this listener. I followed up the audition with a pair of Sonus Faber Concerto Homes. The SF line is just so darned musical. My foot began tapping and I found myself becoming much more emotionally engaged in the music.

Front end, by the way, was all ARC. CD-3, LS-25, VT200.