Hi Unsound,
I totally respect your opinion and you are a gentleman whose inputs in past posts have helped me a great deal in getting my main system to the point I am truly happy with it. What I personally prefer most in the 2.4s over my 3.5s is the detail. I notice more of everything from top to bottom in a recording with the 2.4s and do not feel that this is due to frequency response issues. As Gary at Thiel says, "2.4s reveal everything in the recording whether you like it or not."
I see that a legitimate point of view of this could be that the 2.4s have crossed the line from wonderfully detailed into being "clinical or hyperarticulate". I certainly don't feel my 3.5s are lifeless or homogenized, so it seems perfectly appropriate to describe them as more coherent. As you point out it is a matter of personal preference.
If I run across some affordable Audio Physics I will certainly try to audition them since their design philosophy suggests they might have a lot of the 2.4 characteristics that I like, but my intuition tells me moving to Thiel 2.3s, although a worthy suggestion, would feel like a lateral move.
Based on all the input so far it appears that my best bet is to be more patient and just keep looking for 3.6s, which from all I've read, are somewhat more detailed than the 3.5s. I am, however, still open to any other suggestions.
Thanks to All
I totally respect your opinion and you are a gentleman whose inputs in past posts have helped me a great deal in getting my main system to the point I am truly happy with it. What I personally prefer most in the 2.4s over my 3.5s is the detail. I notice more of everything from top to bottom in a recording with the 2.4s and do not feel that this is due to frequency response issues. As Gary at Thiel says, "2.4s reveal everything in the recording whether you like it or not."
I see that a legitimate point of view of this could be that the 2.4s have crossed the line from wonderfully detailed into being "clinical or hyperarticulate". I certainly don't feel my 3.5s are lifeless or homogenized, so it seems perfectly appropriate to describe them as more coherent. As you point out it is a matter of personal preference.
If I run across some affordable Audio Physics I will certainly try to audition them since their design philosophy suggests they might have a lot of the 2.4 characteristics that I like, but my intuition tells me moving to Thiel 2.3s, although a worthy suggestion, would feel like a lateral move.
Based on all the input so far it appears that my best bet is to be more patient and just keep looking for 3.6s, which from all I've read, are somewhat more detailed than the 3.5s. I am, however, still open to any other suggestions.
Thanks to All