anyone heard zu definition speakers?

The Def's are not good nearfield speakers. That's one advantage of the Druids over the Def's. According to Zu, and borne out by my experience, these need 10 - 20 feet of distance from listener to speaker to come alive.

FWIW, Sean at Zu told me they weren't happy with the results they were able to get with the Def's at RMAF. They thought the results with the Druids were good though.

Tbg,

I know of speakers more expensive than Zu Definitions that are different and might be better in some environments. However, one thing I am learning about Zu speakers is that all the models are so good at their price that they shift the focus to the quality of the power amps. In fact, rather than spend any more on speakers, I think it is entirely sensible to end up with power amplification that is considerably more expensive than the Zu speakers are. I have both Druids and Definitions and on both I have amps considerably more expensive than the speakers. I have no doubt that in the case of Zu Defitions, it is better to put $9,000 in speakers and, say, $16,000 in qualified amps, than $20,000 on other speakers + $5,000 on amps. This principle applies to the Druid even more dramatically.

You cannot properly audition and evaluate Definitions unless you are in a room that allows the listener to sit AT LEAST 10' from the face of the speakers. Any closer and the tonal balance is disturbed, octave-to-octave tone no longer consistent. The Druid works wonderfully closer than 10' but the Defintion will not fully integrate closer. This was the foremost problem with Definitions at RMAF and yet many people heard through that.

I have heard Lowther-based horns and other architectures, and have not liked them. Very good dynamics, small windows of holography and strobe-like flashes of uncanny midrange tone but overall not natural, consistent or convincing to me. The Zu driver as implemented by Zu has broader truthful frequency range, more speed and impact where appropriate, is considerably more tonally accurate to me, and you get a more practical sweet spot. But look, I've never heard a Lowther-based speaker that to my brain has not been crippled by deeply distracting tonal anomalies. The Zu driver is convincing whereas Lowther, Fostex, etc., have not proven to be so, IME. Many other people obviously are hearing them differently.

Someone local to me who was at RMAF opined that the Bastani Apollo is better than the Definition, $15,000. I can't say as I haven't heard them, but....Dude can hear, so maybe he's right.

Phil

Tbg, the Watt/Puppy 7s dont sound boxi for me. I think they have superb soundstaging. How could Definitions better this?
Can you explain more about timbre,tone,naturalnes of instruments(violin, cello, etc.), agility,speed and musicality ...between this two speakers,please.
They say ZU sperakers are not audiophile speakers, but speakers for music lovers?!
I am new in a SET arena.

Schorly, all that I can really suggest is that you get a listen to them. Word are a poor excuse for sounds. One of the reasons for pursuing efficient speakers is that then you can use single ended triodes and typically the less powerful tubes. I, however, chose horns because of their ability to respond more rapidly to the signal they receive and to stop more quickly after the signal stopped. As many have said, all speakers represent a compromise typically between price, size, speed, efficiency, and frequency response. It is much like the weather depending on where you live. You have the choice of freezing your butt of in the cold of winter and having confortable summers or sweating heavily in the summer and confortable winters, but you have got to withstand a 100 degree difference between the heat of summer and the cold of winter.

Lets put it this way the Definition will be like standing in the middle of a huge military air show, all around Huge soundstage, incredible dynamics and far higher DB with effortless bottom end, they have attack like no other speaker anywhere near the price, the only ones in some comprable terms are the Avantgarde duos, and at a far less accurate level the mighty klipsch K-horns, the wilsons will be like one of the jets coming at you from a mile away still capable but just not as impressive. Is the Zu more enjoyable or accurate? I don't know it will be up to the listener, but I heard the Grand slams or something in a 70,000 system and would take the Definitions any day of the week, OH actually I lied I would take the wilson system so I can sell for Way more money and still buy the definitions all electronics and maybe a Mercedes :)

This is not a slam at wilson but cost wise a no brainer if you are looking for Big effortless with much less money.