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
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.
Matrix, I think it is easy to beat the Avantgarde Duos or in reality the Wilson Grand Slams. Have you heard the Definitions compared with the Beauhorns or other Lowther based speakers?
Tbg No I have not, I like the Duo's a lot however, but yeah for integration definatly the Zu's are much easier to deal with and more natural I guess, and CHEAPER!! But for the type of package you get with the Zu's I think they have it down pretty good mainly because at 4500.00 a piece where are you gonna get speakers with 16hz bass (4) 10" adjustable, and (2) full range very capable 10's? They are super simple which I like, and am sure the Beauhorns or Lowthers can do a lot of it, but then you get like (1) 9" driver or something in a full range, no matter what they will not compete on the full frequency spectrum or surface area sound up agains 6 10" woofers, but I could be wrong :) Mainly I speak on a value for the money with this, but It all depends on the music you like, I am mainly a Rock guy so Set based amps with single drivers will not perform as well for me is all, but there is something for everyone.
Matrix, the woofers on the Definitions are only from 40 Hz down as I recall. The Lowthers are only good down to about 64 Hz. You do need a subwoofer with them also.

As you suggest, the Beauhorns are not for big group sound such as swing big bands, opera, or symphonies. When I got the Acapella LaCampanellas, I realized what I had been missing in the midbass area.