What speaker after Thiel 7.2?

I wonder what it is about some companies (certainly including Thiel) that incites such a vitriolic set of responses from the usually more evenly stated (and more helpful) responses you usually see on these forums?
I've only had experience with the 2.4 and the 1.6, and find it somewhat puzzling that they're being compared to Bose. Granted this company has a long history but the Thiels I've heard have been both good speakers and good values, so I genuinely find the venom behind some of these comments strange. Of course when people's businesses are involved and the sale or lack of sales of a speaker puts food on the table, some of the vehemance is more understandable, but what about the rest?

Hi Rob, I looked at your system and it appears your Thiels are placed rather close together, perhaps 6 or 7 feet apart. For best results more distance is optimum but you might not have that option in your room. It makes a gigantic difference with my 3.6's, 9 feet is minimum, I currently have them 9.5 feet apart and the presentation is much more open and transparant. Acoustic guitar especially has so much more air making it sound much more realistic. I certainly don't mean to be presumptuous, just an observation. You have a great system.

Thanks for the replies. I am extremely happy with my speakers. With the repositioning I mentioned earlier, they are like a whole other speaker. I have them a little over 9 ft apart with no toe-in and I sit about 12 ft away. I have them in the living room on the first floor, and they sound great in every room of the house. At this point, I'd rather tweak and refine what I have than head in a whole other direction.

Rob

When I worked for THIEL, Jim Thiel, would almost always, set the 7.2's up as you have currently described; that is fairly far apart, as they have a large window of sound, and pointed almost straight forward--almost no inward cant to them.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, the 1st order crossover causes lobing at certain distances, which if you fall outside the window of those distances, or those reflections within the room, you can get a very good sound.
Again, it is easy to criticize someone else's body of work.
I hope that you are happy with your 7.2's they're good in so many ways.

Lrsky wrote

"But if you have a large room with limited room reflections from certain problematic distances they could be very good. Most people would say they are fairly good speakers, despite what one writer here said.

Lrsky, Does fairly good cut it for you at $14,000?

"Dear Ferry Porsche I'd like a fairly good racecar this year for LeMans" "Buy a Jaguar" was his response

Fairly good cuts it for me at $600

"limited room reflections from certain problematic distances"

Yeah be nice to have those distances in the manual. But those distances aren't available, and if the 7.2 shouldn't have reflections from the side walls why would the 2.3 rely on sidewall reflections to "fill-in the midrange response dip". ??? I really want to know.

"Don't be discouraged that someone rains on your product, it's typical of human nature, born of a lack of information or jealousy that perhaps they couldn't afford a speaker costing $12K"

Would anyone like the 7.2's crossover schematic? I know a good deal more about the 7.2 than you might think. Would you like to know why I have the schematic? Do you understand the crossover and how that crossover really works? Ever measure the drivers, ever measure the speaker?

As for raining on his speaker he opened the can by asking the question "What speakers after Thiel 7.2", and I'm the jealous ill-informed idiot that has an issue with a "fairly good" $12,000 (in basic black) speaker. Thiel is supposed to be the best not "fairly good" with undisclosed known room interaction problems and cone breakup problems.

I don't like being negative, but what have I said that isn't true? My opinion is negative about the 7.2 and I apologize to anyone I have harmed but I stand by the proof I have to back it up. I've "owned" CS7.2's two instances for several months at a time, they were in my home on my system. On axis to +/- 15 degrees they measure very well steady state and have excellent bass measurements and it shows in their sound. Dynamically they fall apart, the only reason I can go on so much about this was this was a long comprehensive project to make these speakers work so they would sell. The effort was sincere, and the concluding results unfortunate and dissappointing. I said enough, too much really.

The demo offer is still open to David 99 and Rtn1, Chuck if I find a cheap pair your the first guy I'll email.

PS: Sonance "I've only had experience with the 2.4 and the 1.6, and find it somewhat puzzling that they're being compared to Bose"

1st the performance of the speaker was not being compared to Bose, the analogy addressed the fact that reputation sustains them more than the actual performance of the speaker. Regular people buy bose because they are told they are good....does that help clarify the matter?

2nd if you look at the 2 main posts on this topic, you will note that I like the CS2.4, I think its a great speaker. But I don't get credit for that. :)

Venom? What did I say that was venomous, the fact that I have lots of facts and experience with the product something very few people in this thread have. Have you heard any of the speakers I recommended over the Thiels, (please note the topic of this thread) which one in your experience doesn't outperform the CS7.2?

I'm just asking, because i'd like to know?

Have a good weekend guys