I felt KEF Reference 203's outshined a $50k Meridian setup. I didn't want to feel that way because I wanted a Meridian setup so badly, but I couldn't deny what my ears heard. Meridian DSP 5500, 5000c, 5000 (18bit). Another good sub-$5k option are B&W Nautilus in varying models but I have no personal experience with Theil or Wilson, feel free to send me some if you want my opinion. :) |
Musictime,
Thanks for the kind words about my review. I was not sure how people would react because of the strong stance I took, and rather harsh comments I made, but they were from the heart and how I really felt.
I was not ready for the number of e-mails I received about the quasi review (30+) and it has become rather hard to keep track of what conversation I am having with whom. I did just read through my review for the first time and it had a ton of typos, so maybe I will fix all the spelling/typing errors and post it latter. |
James63,
I received your review of the demo day. I hope you are able to somehow post it (maybe split it up into a post then reply), because its well written with good insight.
I think it would peak some interesting debate. |
Musictime,
I wrote you up a review of my demo but it ended up being three pages long and I could not post it as a new thread....
I e-mail it to you instead. If anyone else wants to read my BS about the Sophia 3 vs 3.7, just send me an e-mail, and I will forward it your way. |
James63,
Thanks for your post. When you do have some time, I would be interested in hearing the deatails of your demo day. I do agree that there is alot of personal taste at this level of audio reproduction. I wonder how much the difference in opinion on these speakers is due synergery (or lack of) of the upstream components. |
Musictime,
All of our choices are more personal at this stage in the game than anything. I demoed the Sophia 3 and Thiel 3.7 in the same room same system yesterday for about two hours.... I pretty much feel the same way as the original poster but my review would be even less kind to the Wilsons.
Maybe I will start a new thread and go into the detail. I am pretty worn-out from traveling (work related) at the moment though. |
I think that it is silly to think that you can really understand the differences in speakers if the demo uses different electronics or rooms. How do you attribute the differenct characteristics heard to the speaker, but not to the upstream signal or the room interactions?
My last serious demo was when I bought my Wilson Sophias. I had already owned the Thiel CS 1.6s (a very highly regarded speaker) as my fronts for a couple of years. I made a special trip to the dealer (over 200 miles away) to do some auditioning. I listened to another pair of Thiel's (but I can not remember which particular model) as I was considering staying with that house sound.
We started by auditioning the Thiel's with using the same amplfier that I owned at that time so that we could be as close to my system as possible. I then demoed the Wilson Sohpias whith those electronics. We then switched to some other higher powered amps so that I could make sure that I was hearing all the potential out of both pairs of speakers. The pre-amp and source was never changed. The process took several hours but I was able to make very accurate conclusions on how these speakers sounded in their dedicated auditioning room and how they would sound in my home.
During that audition there was a clear winner and I knew that I was certainly hearing the differences in the speakers. Even my wife (who has never been a fan of how the Wilsons look, even to this day, 6 years later) could hear the diffences. Simply put, the Wilsons just sounded more like real music. |
Well here is a shot list of great $5000ish speakers. I have included some "expert" reviews... if you don't want to trust my opinion. So here we go flame suit on.
Thiel C2.4 (price just raised from $4900 to $5900 last month)
"The Thiel CS2.4 is a great loudspeaker, one of the very best I've heard regardless of price. Its treble soars and its bass plummets, but all the while the CS2.4 sounds utterly neutral and musically communicative. This speaker looks gorgeous and has the earmarks of heirloom-quality craftsmanship. The CS2.4 will be at home in a tweaked-out dedicated listening room or in a finely decorated living room, and its moderate size means it won't take up much space in either."
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/thiel_cs24.htm
PSB Synchrony One
"With a proper amp, though, you'll find that these speakers are capable of remarkable performance from top to bottom with bass performance that is notable for the speakers' size and price, loudness capabilities that belong to speakers twice the size, and a midrange presentation that sets a new standard for tonal accuracy, clarity and detail."
"To my ears, the Synchrony One is the best PSB speaker yet, and it establishes a benchmark for value and performance -- something that seems synonymous with Paul Bartons name."
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/psb_synchrony_one.htm
Magnepan 1.7
"Here we have a $1995 speaker whose staging, focus, and low-level resolution are not just much better than that of its excellent predecessor but downright superb by any standard short of a CLX or an M5, with detailing in bass choirs that was so good it reminded me of the Maggie 1-Us (which had the most lifelike detail in the mid-to-upper bass I've ever heard). " Jonathan Valin
http://www.avguide.com/blog/magnepan-mg-17-unqualified-triumph
Magnepan 3.6
No review needed hundreds of owners here alone...
For the last speakers I was actually thinking of Dynaudio's S5.4 but they are a good bit more than I thought... But the list of brands that make good budget speakers goes on and I am sure someone could add to my list with Gallo, Usher, Revel, Dynaudio, and countless other speakers I will never hear...
Some speakers in the $10,000-$15000 that I demoed at length that did not make the cut.
Focal 1037s $1100ish (bad integration, tweeter oddities, bass VERY room depentant, but had a very clear midrange)
B&W 802D (moments of glory, but odd bass anomalies, very poor dynamic contrasts, colored as a whole, I did like them at one time though).
Klipsch P-38F $12000 (wheres the music?, each driver was great but sounded separated in space, too much bass in room I heard them, not for me but I heard them in the same room as the Magnepan 20.1 so it was not a fair fight)
Wilson Audio Duettes $14000ish (Poor detail retrieval for $14000 and only ok in general, uneven bass in a very good room, some resonance in the kick drum+ range possibly caused by port noise). I realize there is some adjustability to these but I did not take the time, YMMV.
I am sure many of you have speakers/brands you love to hate and great brands that don't get press... and there are lots of speakers that fall into no man's land of good but not great. |
I mentioned the price point because you can only enjoy a speaker in your home with the electronics that you can afford. If you're shopping for speakers and electronics, you have to get what sounds the best to you at a cost that you an afford.
I would also like to see that list... let's hear it. |
I would also love to see that list. |
|
James63,
I agree with you. |
Ketchup,
I do not agree with price point shopping for hi-fi... This is one market you do not always get what you pay for... I can think of at least 5, $5000 or less speakers that would out shine LOTs of $10000-$15000 speakers. |
Why would you pair up one speaker with an amp that is voiced for it and then listen to another speaker with the same amp if it's not voiced for it? I'm not saying that's what happened in the original post, just saying. In my opinion, you can surely compare different speakers with different amps but they have to be at the same price point (that you can afford), they have to be the "best" amp for the speaker, and the comparison must be in the same room (preferably your room). It may be the only way to compare two different speakers... with the electronics that let them sound their best. |
Thiel 3.7s with a pair of JL Audio L112s
and plenty of clean power---250 wts+
= n i r v a n a |
Thiel 3.7s with a pair of JL Audio L112s
and plenty of clean power---250 wts+
= n i r v a n a |
I have heard the Thiel CS 3.7 with 1 Thiel Smart Sub. My audiophile review of the sound is, "I did not like it". I will be buying the Thiel CS 3.7 to use without any subs. |
I have been listening to 3.7s for around two weeks. I love them very much! Every speaker has its shorcoming. To my ears, 3.7's base is very flat, tight, transparent, and resolving. So quality wise, 3.7 has great bass. However, its base doesn't go down very deep, and not "punchy". Some people might its base is a little bit "shy". I have Thiel resolve this issue perfectly by adding their smart subs. I never heard them, so I can't comment on that. |
I mean not off course , you should always test with the same "upstream" components /room , stereophile has a fine balance off testing :listening/measurements |
|
I'd pick the Thiel 3.7s over both the Wilson Sasha and the Magico Q5.
Thiel makes an excellent speaker at their respective price point. Not perfect, but again, consider the price.
To Egrady, I always thought my 7.2s required some volume to become involving. Not excessively loud, but they need to move some air to get the detail. In contrast, my Avalons sound fantastic at a whisper or a roar. The 7.2 was such a great speaker, it took the Avalon Isis to get me interested in upgrading. |
I recently heard also the Magico Q5 and the M5 series.
Both driven with super high end gears.
Definitely i can appreciate the refinement of these speakers.
But for a floorstander, it isn't quite as full range sounding as say a Wilson Sophia or sasha.
For the amount of $ these speakers are involved, I'd really have to think twice about them.
I've also recently heard the Sophia 3s and the Sashas.
For the cost of these speakers compared to the Magicos,I'd put my money on these speakers and spend the rest on electronics.
However, I can understand why some people would prefer the Magicos over the other speakers.
As they say, to each his own ! |
Egrady,
"Can the 3.7 resolve low level detail as well as the electrostatic like Wilson"
In short yes. The 3.7s are one of the most resolving box speakers I have ever heard. But I have never heard a box speaker get more details in the mids than a good electrostatic (wilsons are far from it too...). I also own a pair of CS2.4, while they are a good speaker the 3.7 is on another level.
I find it interesting you found the Wilson more revealing than thiel. Was it just in the highs or was it also in the mids and bass? I am not a stickler for highs and find most good speakers recreate the highs good enough for me because of my tastes I may not have noticed the CS2.4s short coming in the highs (if it exists). But I am very picky about the mids and bass. I like a LOT of midrange detail and smooth textured bass. In those two areas I feel Thiel hit a home run with the 3.7s. |
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?
|
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. |
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,
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 ! |
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. |
Never compared the 2 but both speakers I could live with forever. I just wanted to tell Elbroth2 that I lust after his room evrytime I see his name! That is simply a perfect room in every way and I love the lighting in the rest of your home as well. We share taste in decor for sure! |
Actuary616 - as Audiofreakgeek has mentioned, you cannot compare two speakers in two different systems. This is really pointless, esp. when the associated amps sound as different as Ayre and Bryston combos !
I'm not really surprised by what you have heard, since this is EXACTLY what I would have predicted, having heard both amp cobbinations Ayre and Bryston. In general Bryston amp is much more revealing and transparent with much better control over the speaker than Ayre, while Ayre is fuller and more organic sounding. Souds familiar ?
As a sidenote - I had a chance to compare 3.7 to the older Sophia 2 in friends system (he owned Thiels 3.7 and Sophias were on loan; the rest of the system was ARC Ref 3, Ref 210 monos and EMM SE digital combo) and we BOTH preferred the Sophias 2 over 3.7, which I ended up buying. Since then I sold the Sophias and upgraded to the Sashas - which are far superior to the Sophia 2, in all areas. I cannot even imagine how big the difference would be now between the Sasha and 3.7 ... |
After auditioning Wilson Sasha, Sonus Faber Elipsa and Cremona M, Magico V2, Avantgarde Uno G2, this is why I purchased the Thiel 3.7.
I'm a musician and play regularly in a band. When the drummer hits the snaredrum with his drumstick, you don't just hear a sound coming from the snaredrum. You can actually feel the energy from the "whack" of the drumstick on the snaredrum. Or the energy from the "whump" of the foot pedal against the bass drum that reverberates in your body. I found that from all the abovementioned speakers I auditioned, the 3.7 gave me that. Articulately too. The same goes for other instruments and vocals too. IMO, high-end gear should have the ability to transport the listener onto the stage where the musicians are playing their instruments. |
Funny how Sound Lab was mentioned. Two of our friends who tagged along during the auditions happen to be stat lovers/owners (so was I, or at least until a few years back). One of them using Sound Lab, the other CLX +subs, I tend to prefer the latter set-up. They listen primarily to big band, classical and jazz, whilst I listen to almost all genres ranging from pop, jazz, disco, classic, r&b to country--you name it.
Although SLs are 'probably' as good as claimed in certain areas, but for some of my music, they just didn't cut it. Sure, bass was there aplenty, but I found their drives and dynamic socks/punch to be comparatively lacking. Try playing loud the likes of Sergio Mendez, Sade, UB40, Fourplay, or hard pops ala late MJ, Madonna, or even some fusion artists' (Klugh, Benson, Gruisin, Benoit, Ritenour, Carlton) you'll get what I mean.
Nothing's perfect, thus trade offs are almost always inevitable. And yes, musical preferences too play a big role on one's choice. But in the here and now, so as to be more relevant, it's simply--Thiel? or Wilson?.. I guess. |
Having heard the Magicos at a dealership--never optimal, I would reiterate that they are not my cup of tea. The $18K Magicos (forgot model #'s), lacked detail in the upper midrange--enough to be notable and bothersome to me. The larger ones at $27K were much better, as one would expect given the price differential, but not enough to sway me into the Magico camp. The A1 Sound Labs are much more transparent, coherent, and uniformly musical.
Making a multi thousand dollar purchase in this arena gives us many choices--the Magicos would not be one of those choices. Again, IMHO.
Larry |
Bvdiman,
I will try to audition Magico if possible. Thank you for explanation. |
Actuary616,
Follow your heart.. As I have mentioned, they are all potentially good speakers, our observations were nit picking weaknesses of each upon a friend's buying decision. What we heard might also be a reflection of the dealer's taste. I suspect that that particular dealer at Thiel was dialing in for max transparency and resolution that he neglected/willingly sacrificed some of the warmth and musicality aspect of things. Which I thought could probably be mitigated with as simple as some cable and cord changes then. I did not ask what was used, but he was a dealer for Cardas and Wirewold. Anyway, congrates on your purchase and happy listening! |
Bvdiman,
Thanks a lot for the detialed responce, it is exactly what I was looking for. Sounds like the Magico are pretty nice too. I can see why you thought the 3.7 were not organic.
I find them very music dependant and hit or miss based on music choise. Not the speakers fault but actually a sign of transparency.
In all the 3.7 are the only speaker of the three in my price range but I would try a different brand if I could fine a good deal on the used market. The only real turn off of Magicos for me is the lack of dispersion (I have not heard them) in the highs. I like a wide sweet spot because my wife joins me from time to time. I also think the sound stage is better with less toe in and narrow dispersion means they will need some toe in.
Thanks again and enjoy the music. |
Bvdiman,
Sasha is a little bit fuller and warmer than 3.7. But for tonal balance, coherence, especially flat response in bass department, 3.7 definitely beats down Sasha. I value these characters as top priority. Although Sasha is a little bit warmer, 3.7 is more involving to my taste. I mainly listen to classic and jazz. I think 3.7 perform extremely well in these two genres. I played Mozart violin concertos recently, and I don't think 3.7 lacks organic and dense at all. IMO, 3.7 is the best speakers for jazz and piano music. I prefer 3.7 to Dynaudio Evidence Temptation system which costs more than 100K in these two categories.
BTW, sorry for my bad English. My native language is not English. |
James63,
In my quest, I value first and foremost the musicality aspect of things--in which the music, mediated through my stereo set, has to have that special ability to draw/drag me in emotionally into the performances. Neutral is more my taste, but coherency, tonal rightness, dense, organic and palpable presentations are also of top priorities. Not so big on imaging and soundstaging, but the fact that the Magicos do it well is an added bonus.
Three great speakers (in their own rights) to comment on, just so happen for my taste, Magico's balance slots in just nicely in-between the two--CS3.7 and Sasha.
During the Thiel audition, we felt its presentation to ultimately lack that organic, weighty feel, hence palpability, that, in spite of use with all tube Mcintosh 2301 (hope I got the model right) partnered with their dual 2in1 pre (tube section was used). Likewise the Krell Revel demo, albeit fuller sounding, but missing to our ears were some essential tonal harmonic richness and overtones which the ARC driven Sasha has. |
Actuary616 and Jtein:
Congratulations on your new systems! I think you both did it right by making a short list and listening for yourself. Once your at this level in the game personal preference plays a big part.
Bvdiman
Your comments are interesting. I agree with you on the Sasha for sure but I did not find the 3.7 thin. Does your taste lean toward the warm side?
I think the best thing about both the Sasha and 3.7s that set them apart from other brands is there transients or in the words of Dave Wilson "dynamic contrast". They are both quick and detailed and fun to listen too while staying accurate.
I do feel that the Sasha (Wilsons in general) are voiced more by ear than Thiels speakers. Jim always stated he wanted total accuracy while Dave Wilson states he wants both accuracy and beauty. I feel that both these speakers represent want there designer was shooting for.
can you give me any comments on how the 3.7 compare to the Magico line. I see you have owned Both the mini and V3. |
I, too, fully concur with Actuary's comparisons #1-10 except #3. IMO, I believe the CS3.7 wins in the bass department. I've auditioned Sasha while I was still deciding on what speakers to purchase and the bass I heard didn't come anywhere near the bass extension of the CS3.7...which was surprising. I haven't heard either, but Wes Phillips stated this about the bass in the Stereophile review: Choose not alone a mate
I briefly auditioned the Thiels while the Avalon Indras that I reviewed in October were still here. The two speakers were essentially cut from the same clothboth had startling clarity and detail without the in-your-face quality usually implied by "detail." Like the Thiels, the Indras lack a sock-'em bottom end. Of course, the difference in price could buy the Thiels a pretty good subwoofer system. But shipping schedules kept the Indra/Thiel comparison brief, so I trotted out the trusty Wilson Audio WATT/Puppy 8 system, because it's such a known reference point for a compact high-quality monitor.
The title track of the Dave Holland Quartet's Conference of the Birds (CD, ECM 1027) perfectly illustrated one of the W/P8's greatest strengths: The speaker propels music forward through its bottom-end impact. With Holland's big acoustic bass setting the pace, the piece loped along splendidly, with Sam Rivers and Anthony Braxton chattering away on flutes and soprano saxophones (switching from one to the other as required), while Barry Altschul supplemented the sound as needed with trap set, chimes, gongs, and marimba. The Thiels did a good job of delivering all that harmonic complexity, but the Wilsons had the nod in the slam departmentwhich also means they had better pace. |
Accompanying a friend in search for new speakers we recently went on an audition spree. This friend has extensively auditioned the three set of speakers for weeks before finalizing, I, however, only attended his last.
The $20k+ Revel with all Krell Evo gears, excellent top to bottom extensions, but rather uninvolving. Thiel 3.7 with Mc Intosh latest cdp, amp and pre (cool looking stuffs with windows showing off their nice glowing tubes innards--can't recall model), good holographic soundstaging, but thin bordering on clinical sounding. Sasha with ARC smaller Ref gears (210 I think it was, plus their CD8), the bass could be a bit overbearing at times in the dealer's room, but with surprisingly most inviting mids of the three, albeit a tad on the warm side of neutral--overall the most involving package. All sources were digital.
He ultimately bought the Sasha, our group of friends present conclusively agreed that he had made the right choice based on what we all heard at the different dealer demos on that decisive day. Again, synergy, rooms etc could have played a part, but aren't dealers supposed to know and show off their gears at their best. |
I now own the Thiel CS3.7 and Parasound JC1 monoblocks and JC2 preamp for almost 2 months now. All I can say is, "AHHH....THIS IS IT!" with a big wide grin.
I, too, fully concur with Actuary's comparisons #1-10 except #3. IMO, I believe the CS3.7 wins in the bass department. I've auditioned Sasha while I was still deciding on what speakers to purchase and the bass I heard didn't come anywhere near the bass extension of the CS3.7...which was surprising. The drummer and bassist sounded as if they did not have breakfast before the recording session! The Sasha gave me a sense of listening to two-dimensional hifi whereas the CS3.7 really made me feel the musicians and musical instruments are being played right there in my living room. So James63, you're right in your post in one of my threads. I saved $15k by getting the 3.7s over the Sasha.
I've heard Magico V2 driven by Soulution 720 preamp and 710 power amp. I thought I was in for a treat but to my shock, the whole thing sounded hard and uninvolving. |
I set up my system on Saturday. Bryston BCD-1+Cardas Golden Reference Interconnect+MPS-2+BP26+Cardas Neutral Reference+7B SST2+Cardas Neutral Reference+Thiel 3.7. The sound quality is terrific. I like it very much. I will add details later. |
Mordante
I bought BP26+7B SST2 from audiogon, and I paid $7,350 for them. I am in US, audio gears are cheaper than GB. |
Actuary616
I'm not sure from what planet you are but a Bryston 14B SST is 8.349,00, 7B SST 4.699,00 and BP-26 2.749,00 are very expensive amplifiers. Just ask random people at the street if they thing paying over 10k for amps isn't very expensive. Most people don't earn that much a month before tax. I don't at least. |
Without reading any of the responses I would say 3.7's. Personally I think Wilson's are overrated and I know for a fact that the 3.7's are very very good speakers because a buddy of mine has them and they image like a bitch. They do require power but efficient enough to use tubes. I have never been a Thiel fan but do like the 3.7's. |
Interesting thread. I haven't heard a Thiel for 20 years and my memory of it back then was 'all midrange' (certainly no bass).
As someone who just placed an order for a pair of Sashas, hoping it will be my last speaker, the comments about the Thiel 3.7 have got my attention. Sounds like a great speaker. |
James,
to your question, not sure if you did the comparison with Sasha, but Sasha is very different from sophia 2 or WP8. I am not a big fan of Sophia especially, and it is just not in the same league as Thiel or Sasha. Sasha's bass is not boomy as you might be suggesting due to it's ports on the back. the bass goes down deep, tight, and yes prominent but very well balanced with the rest of the freq. range. I was totally taken back by how well balanced and deep it went down while maitaining musical integrity. Having said that, I do own Thiel 3.7 because I felt it did most of what Sasha did for much lesser price tag. ;-) but as I always say, forget the measurements, reviews and all other crap and go with your ears. If you are into this price range of speakers, your ears are already very well trained and can differentiate good from bad, and best from better.. |
I have Thiels. My favorite three brands are Thiel, Wilson and Avalons. I really don't think you can go wrong. Go with your heart |
Bel canto amps are also a very good match with Thiel speakers. Heard them at a Singapore dealership 2 years ago and it sounded sublime. |
