anyone heard zu definition speakers?


I am sekeing to replace my current Quad 988's. My budget will go up to $15,000. I use Thor tube amplification 150 wattt monoblocks, Thor line stage aned phono stage, Thor Dac, with a Cary 306/200 which I use as a transport. My analog is a VPI Scoutmaster. In any case, My Quads don't have the dynamics and without the Audio Physics Sub there would be no bottom end at all. The room has been treated by Mike Kochman of Echo Busters and things have dramatically improved. But, the speaker. I've read that the ZU Definition was excellent. Have any fellow
music lovers heard the Zu Definition. All speaker suggestions would be welcome. My room is 20x 20 with 12 foot ceilings.
kjl
Ton1313 thanks for the info, I just got back from hearing them in PA. The Definitions were first with SS amps and they played a live drum solo from a Rush album. Really incredible dynamics. We played some other music with female vocals to orchestra and they were great but something was missing. Next they played the Druids with the same amps and although the drum kit was not as good, everything else was better. Finally, they used a 811 tube amp and a 300b tube amp on the Druids. That sound was incredible. I was blow away at how open the midrange was and how dynamic the instruments seemed. They did not play these amps on the Definitions while I was there, so I can't comment. I can't say about the Definitions, but the Druids are incredible speakers that have no business costing only 3K.
Baddabob,

I am using an S.S. Integra Research RDA-7, which was designed by Balanced Audio Technologies (AKA B.A.T.)
150 wats x 7 channels.

Delancy,

Glad you enjoyed. The Druids indeed offer supper performance at their asking price.
I own both Zu Definitions and Zu Druids on two separate systems, and I am a former Quad owner. I can pretty much answer anything you want to ask about Zu speakers and am happy to. I'll start by saying that the Definition and Druids are the only dynamic speakers in existence that I think can satisfy a Quad owner, as they combine the speed, articulation and transparency a Quad leads you to continue to expect for an illusion of fidelity, along with tonal accuracy and adding the dynamic impact and bandwidth that Quads are unable to deliver. Definitions are the most convincing speakers in your price range, bar none, IMO.

Phil
213cobra - Do you think the Definitions are better than the Druids or just different. The limited show listening I had showed them to be different in sound. The Druid seemed to have that single driver magic that made music sound seamless and coherent. The Definitions sounded great, but similar to many other box speakers. What is your experience?
Definitions are absolutely superior to Druids. Broader bandwidth, better power transfer, smoother and more extended top end, better treble dispersion for a broader sweet spot. Bass response flat to 16 Hz if the room is big enough to support that.

All the single-driver magic is present, but the speaker is less forgiving of an average amp. It's resolution is higher so assets and flaws of recordings and associated equipment are more transparently communicated. The Definition scales to big production music better as well. Also, because the driver arrangement of the Def allows the tweeter's acoustic performance to be partly managed acoustically, its high-pass network is simpler and the Definition excites fewer room effects, particularly diminishing the influence of ceiling and floor.

The Definition is tonally more accurate, and its very smooth impedance curve and low reactivity makes it a very easy load for an amplifier to drive.

The Def is 3X the price of the Druid, so you'd expect it to be better. But that's not to say the Druid doesn't have advantages over the Defintion. For one thing, the Druid, while a little more euphonically colored -- and I mean a little -- is the more intimate speaker. It can also be used in a relative near-field listening position, say 6.5' to 8' from the listener, whereas the Defintion is brought into focus when you're at least 10' away. The Druid has an extended shelf around -2db from about 4kHz and up, giving the Druid a slightly warmer character. And being a 12 ohm speaker, it makes a lot of SS amps sound cleaner than the Def's 6 ohm load.

If you like an intimate speaker and are willing to sacrifice a some soundstage scale and accept a smaller sweet spot, then you might enjoy and even prefer the Druid's focus and intimacy. Both speakers share the same transient incisiveness, dynamic consistency octave-to-octave, and with high efficiency plus high power handling, offer explosive aliveness with tonal accuracy.

All Zu speakers are notable for their lack of listening fatigue. I don't think the Definition sounds more similar to other box speakers, but it is a less idiosyncratic speaker so one more types of people instantly like.

I have both speakers in separate systems. Here's the thing: these speakers share common designers who imbued the same traits into both of them. When I am listening to one, I don't miss the other but I am always glad for having both. Despite the Definition's deeper bass and more linear tonal accuracy, and it's $9000/pr price, listening to both raises the question of whether Defintions with, say, $1500 in amplification are more satisfying than Druids with $9,000 in amp. There are some days you''d have real trouble resolving that one.

The Definition is the "better" speaker, superior on most worthwhile criteria. But there are people who will prefer the Druid and for certain if they must sit close, have a restricted space and wish to proceed economically. It's a big step to go from $2800/pr to $9000/pr for most people. If that's a concern you're not going to regret "settling" for Druids. But if you can afford Definitions and have one system only, you'd feel fine about reaching for the best.

Phil