2. speakers
  3. 1069785686

Thiel 3.6's - Stereophile measurements

I have not had the benefit of an audition with these speakers. There are few dealers still selling them. My question is regarding the measurements which accompany the Stereophile review from 1993. The frequency response measurements show a big suckout in the midrange at 45" distance. At 10-15 feet is this suckout apparent? Are there any coherency issues with this speaker that I should be aware of? My listening position is 14 feet from where the speakers will probably be setup in my room.
jazzdude
pops
2,277 posts
 
Hi bill, I know you have said your system leans towards the bright side, we have similar systems including thiel 3.6, one difference is my preamp is a CJ premier 14 and I can't recall yours. Our cables are almost identical, I have MIT reference IC's and until recently an Oracle V3. In my system the V3 pushed my system a little too bright or in your face. I went back to 750+S3 and the sound is more relaxed, especially on the top end - I think you have a V4. Just an observation in my system - might have nothing to do with yours.
Good Luck, Jerry

gnobber
46 posts
 
Hi Jerry (Pops),

you have a great memory! You're right, I think that cabling can be used to adjust a system wrt brightness. I had moved up from the 750 to the Oracle V4's, where I began hearing more bass weight and pitch, and more depth, so I would be hesitant to go back in the MIT line.

My interest in the 2.4 was to hear the latest in Thiel technology with the coaxial tweeter/midrange, and to see how they are handling the detail/brightness dilemma. Do you still have your 3.6's, or have you moved up to CS6's?
take care, Bill
pops
2,277 posts
 
Hi Bill,

I still have the 3.6's, very happy but would love to move up to 6's. I would be curious about the same thing you mentioned - I keep thinking an upgrade to the 3.6 should be coming soon, that's really what I'm waiting on. Happy Holidays. Jerry
tombowlus
416 posts
 
Jazzdude:

Yes, I do mean "fuzzy" in the sense that you are thinking of, and I suppose that you could also use the word "opaque." However, keep in mind that I say this only "by comparison to the 2.4's" - which are so phenomenally "UN-fuzzy" and "UN-opaque". I would not say that the 3.6's are a fuzzy speaker. In fact, I very much like their detailed midrange. It's just that the 2.4's take this focus and detail to a higher level. Now, that may or may not be a great thing, depending on the rest of your system and room. Personally, with my setup, I prefer the more full sound of the 3.6's, and I am quite happy with their level of detail and accuracy.

Hopefully, I am not confusing you more than I already have...

Tom.
More to discover