Somebody stop me

[stonecobbler]

I am considering the thiel 3.6 instead of the 3.7 Maggie's , I would keep my 1.6's when I crave the Maggie sound but I just can't get past the "over all" quality of the thiels , I think it just comes down to the variety of music I listen too and a lot of it requires that bottom end , subwoofer suggestions just don't cut it as I would have to spend a wack of dough to get a sub that would be quick enough to mate with the pace of the Maggie's. being an audiophile is exhausting.

[Yamaki]

uhm...I have no argument with that so I won't be of much help to you in preventing you from spending money...

[russell]

Used pair of Maggie 20.1's?

[stonecobbler]

I know Russell , but when and where do I get them, and for sure I am looking at an amp upgrade.

[cmalak]

stonecobbler...you came to the wrong place if you want folks to stop you from spending money on this hobby I have the Thiel 2.4s and they are a very nice speaker. The one thing I would make sure you test out before you pull the trigger on the Thiel 3.6s is that your Sherbourne can drive them properly (not in terms power output to get them to play loud but int erms of current delivery so that you don't get tonal aberrations). The 3.6s are current hungry beasts, spending the entire frequency range (from 50 Hz on up) below 3 ohms as you can see from the impedance and phase graph below. See the Stereophile measurement link here: Thiel CS3.6 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com



Quote from JA's measurement piece:

The CS3.6's impedance magnitude and phase plot (fig.1) reveals a very low impedance value. The loudspeaker is under 3 ohms through most of the range, dropping to a minimum of 2.3 ohms at 3.6kHz (the cursor position). The low impedance value explains the CS3.6's need for the iron-fisted Mark Levinson No.23.5 to provide control in the bass; the CS3.6 would appear to be current-hungry. There is, however, a consistency to the impedance curve that makes the CS3.6 look much like a resistor to the amplifier, rather than an impedance that varies greatly with frequency. The phase angle—represented by the dashed line—is quite benign. The passive radiator tuning can be seen as the valley centered at 29Hz. Both the bass peaks are low in amplitude.

I am a big fan of Thiel speakers but they can be ruthlessly revealing if partnered with less than stellar equipment so I hope you have had a chance to test out in your system with your gear. Here's Robert Harley's concluding remarks on the 3.6s from his 1995 review when he was still at Stereophile at the time:

I can say without reservation that the Thiel CS3.6 is a remarkable loudspeaker. It is extraordinarily uncolored, providing a transparent picture-window view into the music. Its exemplary tonal balance, superb spatial presentation, and excellent dynamics combine to produce a compelling musical experience. Moreover, it is significantly more musical than earlier Thiel products, with a smoother treble balance and less aggressive presentation. The CS3.6 is a loudspeaker I could easily live with on a long-term basis. Not all listeners, however, will like the CS3.6's immediacy and high resolving power. This definitely isn't a loudspeaker for those who prefer a softer-than-life, or unfocused, perspective.

The CS3.6's primary shortcoming is a tendency to be ruthlessly revealing of imperfections in source and upstream electronics. The loudspeaker's high resolving power works as well on musical information as it does on such electronic artifacts as glare, grain, and hash. Careful selection of the highest-quality associated components is required to get the best out of the CS3.6. My only other caveat is that the prospective buyer should be aware of the CS3.6's potential for midbass fatness in some rooms and systems. Overall, however, I found little to criticize in the CS3.6.

The CS3.6 is not only a great loudspeaker, but a terrific bargain at $3900. It does many things well, and has no serious flaws. If I had $4000 to spend on loudspeakers, the CS3.6 would easily be my first choice. Indeed, it should be considered by those considering spending twice this amount—the CS3.6 is that good. What more can one say?

[russell]

Perhaps you should upgrade your amp before you do anything.

[cmalak]

stonecobbler...is this your Sherbourne 250 amp: PA 2-250 Stereo Amplifier | Sherbourn Technologies?

Looking at the specs it does not recommend being matched with a speaker load below 4 ohms.

[stonecobbler]

Yes that is my amp and wow didn't know they are 3 ohm speakers, I thought the Maggie's were pigs for power, maybe that is why when I auditioned the thiels they sounded slightly muddy with my amp, but I thought it was something I could live with, as I do live with the lack of bottom end with my Maggie's, back to the store again to have another listen,,dam

[cmalak]

Originally Posted by stonecobbler

Yes that is my amp and wow didn't know they are 3 ohm speakers, I thought the Maggie's were pigs for power, maybe that is why when I auditioned the thiels they sounded slightly muddy with my amp, but I thought it was something I could live with, as I do live with the lack of bottom end with my Maggie's, back to the store again to have another listen,,dam

stonecobbler...the 3.6s are current hungry pigs and notoriously hard to drive. Typically with amps that are curent limited (couldn't find the specs on current delivery on your amp), they will sound thin and less resolved in the bass, which will tend to shift the tonal balance to the mids and upper registers, which will make it sound peaky and bright. Plus any muddiness in the bass will cover up a lot of the microdetail this speaker is capable of delivering. Great speaker but it does need a beast of an amp (with gentle gloves).

[russell]

Originally Posted by russell

Perhaps you should upgrade your amp before you do anything.

+1