Zu Druid questions

Jack, the short version is: We preferred the Libtec.

Of course, it will depend on the type of sound the listener wants. For us, we compared them directly and pretty easily picked our favorite. That was using the Druid Mk4's and Bel Canto only, in our rooms. Obviously if using different equipment and rooms and ears, other cables might work differently. Or not.

I had the Libtec first, used for a while in the HT then moved them to the studio. I then bought Wax and put in the HT room. We could immediately tell the difference, but wanted to get some run in time and make sure before final decisions.

After several weeks of using both, I ran a single cable of each type to two Druids set side by side in the recording studio. This was mono only, which I have found usually helps focus on the tonal differences in equalizers, which is what cables really are anyway. Results might vary a bit in overall stereo image, etc. with a pair of speakers, but I think not enough to outweigh the frequency response of the singles in my experience.

Now both cables are fairly long -- Libtec is 12 ft, Wax is 15 ft. This might affect the responses, but actually should provide even more sensitivity to variations. Playback was an ordinary HHB studio CD player/recorder going through Lavry Blue for DA then to Presonus Central Station passive switcher/attenuator. Interconnects are decent grade Straightwire 75 ohm S/PDIF coax and superb Belden 89207 Teflon plenum balanced cable that I made myself. I've used that chain plenty, it is reliable and has transparent sound quality.

So, they are both nice speaker wires. My wife/studio partner/singing partner and I took turns switching and listening blind to each, up close and from various distances. Turns out that listening blind didn't last for long, the differences were obvious.

We played a variety of excellent productions that I almost always use for comparisons -- The great Bob Ludwig's *master*piece of Dire Strait's 'On Every Street'; Emmylou & Lanois' collaboration on 'Stumble Into Grace'; Van Morrison's 'Back on Top'; and The Wailin' Jennys first album '40 Days'. Plus some material that I've recorded and a current mastering project for someone else.

Lynnie and I occasionally have some contradictory opinions on audio choices, sometimes completely 180 degrees. Some of it is gender related, there is no question that females hear differently than males. And I take advantage of her musical training and excellent hearing to balance my own opinions.

Well, this shootout was unanimous. It was immediately obvious when switching that the Libtec just presents more emotion. And that is the bottom line for us.

Wax is a great cable, beating out the other options I still have left around here (Kubala-Sosna and Tara Prism). It is a 'dry' sound compared to the Libtec and those others. Wax also reveals the most powerful dynamics I've ever heard, the drum hits on those reference recordings were really special. I think the overall tone is a bit forward, seems to have almost a reverse smiley curve around 1 kHz. This can really punch those drums to the front.

So the sound of Wax with the Druids is very detailed in the midrange, can get almost a bit 'honky' if the recording has some of that already. But not in a bad way. It's a pretty unique sounding cable in my experience, and I liked much of its character, particularly with vocals. You know how it is trying to describe sound, especially cable effects. I'll just say it was a strong, open, dry sound, with no hyped bass or treble and a slightly forward midrange. Can make vocals and drums sound larger than life, brings out the wood in acoustic instruments. I did not think it was a completely accurate presentation of the raw recordings I have done of us singing and playing, but it was a fun variation.

Libtec is pretty much the opposite. A bit lush, but not overdone. Definitely not hyped. Clear and beautiful, with the most remarkable intensity in the midrange. This cable brings out texture and resonance and harmonics, feels like I am hearing the live sources. It was hard to do A-B comparisons with the Libtec -- when switching to it, we didn't want to switch back. We just got captured by the emotional energy in the music and wanted to keep listening. I wish Zu could bundle these with every Druid sold, they are that wonderful in bringing out the full response of the already outstanding Druid speaker.

Hope that helps. Just our opinions of course, but that is all we have to work with every day.
And remember, we are unique, just like everyone else :)

Steve

I had all zu cables at this point, on the definition the Libtec was the most rounded and smooth sounding.. The wax was nothing too special honestly.. The Ibis for much more money can be a bit sharper, but over time they might be the best, but again at way more money.

Thanks so much for your cable opinions. They are very helpful. BTW, I just picked up a pair of Cornwall II's. Haven't heard them in years, but they are of my all time favorites. I can't wait to see how they match up with the Zu's.

Jack, I can hardly imagine two more opposite sounding speakers than Druids and heritage Klipsch. I've used/owned La Scala, Heresy, and KHorns, and those compression squawkers and squreamers always gave me a case of 'icepicks in the ears' with most modern recordings, especially since the bass is so subdued/out-of-proportion at normal listening levels. I always ended up wiring up my own crossovers and bi/tri-amping to try to get some bass into them without having to run at 100 dB.

Maybe the Cornwall is different. Just curious why/how you are trying to mate them with Druids? But I know about dragging up old favorites from years gone by. I have tried a few times to resurrect my old Celestion Dittons and get them to fit into current systems -- with no luck.

Steve

Squeegybug, the CW's are indeed very different. I've also owned the LaScalla's and they're exactly as you described. Everyone I know replaced the stock crossover's to tame these and they had very little bass, if any, below ~ 50Hz or so. I consider a sub essential with these speakers, but not so for my Zu's. I did like my LaScalla's very much though when played loud.

The K-Horns to me sounded just like the LaScalla's with better bass when positioned properly in a corner, but I never owned these.

The Corwall's on the other hand have a much more subdued mid-range and bass is one of their strengths. They don't have great bass extension, but it's much better than the LaScalla's and is very strong to at least what the Zu's are capable of. Just a much more balanced sound (compared to the LS that is, not the Zu's).

I have a large room with open floor plan and vaulted ceilings. This space just gobbles up everything my SVS 20-39 sub can throw out. Even with the sub I have a suck out at ~ 90-120Hz range. The CW's filled the room with all the bass one could ask for and put my sub to shame down to ~ 40Hz. Kick drums and the like are handled with total authority and sound as lifelike as I've heard from any speaker. If ever there was a rock speaker, these are it.

The CW's are also very efficient and for this reason many use small tube amps with very little power to drive them, which I think is a big mistake. It take's some good power to get those 15's pounding like they should and in my experience the more power you feed them, the better.

BTW, the Zu's and CW's have identical efficiency ratings, yet when I measured them it wasn't even close. I had the output level of my processor set to +1 to acheive 75dB at my listening positon with my Zu's, but for Klipsch it was set a -6 to achieve the same level.

I said from the begining that Zu's efficieny ratings are hyped and I stand by this statement. The output levels were set just 1 click less to obtain the same output as my old Usher's which were rated 87dB @ 1W.

Don't get me wrong, the CW's will not be replacing my Zu's and are not gonig to be used with them. My Zu's are used in my main system which I use for HT as well as two channel audio. I also bought the Zu center.

They're going to be used in a 2nd two channel system I'm putting together in another room. I always considered the Klipsch to be one of the most revealing speakers I've heard, but they just don't match the Zu's. The Zu's are just in another league when it comes to tonal accuracy. As discussed, they just sound right and have a balance few speakers can match. My Zu's are here to stay. :0) I enjoy both, but in very different ways.

BTW, my wife loves the Klipsch. She rarely comments on my audio changes and generally could care less. However, when she came in from work and saw the CW's, she said "see, these sound the best." The only time she ever played my stereo was back when I had the CW's before. I would come home and she would have the stereo cranked while doing her house work. She never turned it on again after I sold the CW's, even to this day. However, when I asked if she wanted me to move these into the main room, she just smiled and said "I don't think so. Too big!".

Now I just have to figure out what gear works well with the big guys. I used Adcom before, but it wasn't really a great match, just available where I was stationed.