"10-02-07: Mrtennis
i have heard zu speakers several times at ces. what is the big deal ? the overall sound seems to be to emphasize the treble. they are very unforgiving.
Mrtennis (Threads | Answers) "
And you never will get the deal, so what? I owned panels, horns, trans lines, Line arrays, Sub sat systems.. Hi efficiency, Low efficiency.. Whatever.. Guess what your music taste, or what you need does not demand the attributes of a Zu speaker or any other than a low output Electrostat speaker, so be it. But trust me with many of the recordings I have I expect very real, very visceral impact and Zero Breakup with dynamic and low level details. So most of the speakers I hear are veiled, Or are Two thinned out and "Live" sounding, or simply can't keep up.. Here is the exact point where Zu bridges the gap closer than any other from one extreme of Panels or Ribbons, to the other extreme of horns..
A current review below on the new Quad ESL's, and exactly why they might be great for somebody looking to get a recording to sound nice, but not for somebody looking for limitless expectations to cover everything. Just realize your different in that your requirements simply make you different, but that does not mean others don't understand your world, you just don't seem to necessarily understand theirs, so whos at a disadvantage here in the end? Bottom line why the big deal about Zu?
Because when push comes to shove they can run circles in many areas around other " acoustic transducers " I am not putting this in for argument sake, but I am simply answering your question. By the way most people do not require EXTREME extension like a concert venue, so be it, but for those that want that capability in home.. Well thats Zu's market not yours. Their are many fine speakers, but finding the one with as close to everything as possible sometimes is more important to one over the other.
"The ESL 2905 does not like loud music. If you don't either, you're in business. At about 98dB/1 meter, the 2905 thinks it's time to close shop and shut down. As sound pressure builds up towards this 98dB threshold, there's a terrible sonic fallout at first. It's like a damaged CD where samples fail. If you ignore these early warnings and fail to immediately turn down the volume, the Quad protection system will taker over and shut you down. Too bad, you've played too loud. However, a German magazine documented that using 5 ESLs in a surround setting can produce enough SPLs to blow your mind or eardrums." |
Eldartford, it would be easier if you had the series II 901s, which were essentially an acoustic suspension design with the rolloff set at about 6db/octave starting at around 200Hz. The boost at 30Hz was about 20dB! I was driving those with a HK Citation 16 in circa 1976. pipe organ recordings drove the HK to 200watts easily and the speakers responded nicely!
The low frequency curve on the newer 901s is more complicated since the design is now a complicated vented design. there is also some high frequency compensation. |
in my opinion, the zu speakers are imbalanced, i.e., bright.
if you like headaches, listen to the zu speakers for a while.
as to quads, the current generation is more inaccurate timbrally than the original esl.
again, it is a matter of taste, but zu cable and speakers are bright.
i have auditioned the cable in myn own system, but not the speakers.
i don't like to suffer. for those who do, buy the zu speakers. |
Inpepinnovations...Yes..the small sealed box aspect of the original Bose 901 was an important element of the design. Most speaker designers try to get the resonant frequency of their driver/box down as low as possible. Prof. Bose noted that if you push the resonant frequency the other way, up, (and 200 Hz sounds familiar) the roll-off below resonance, although steep, is very smooth and can be effectively corrected by electronics.
The resulting requirement for a high power amp was the downfall of this design. I assume that the present-day 901
which is vented also has a high resonant frequency, although, as you say, this is more complicated than a simple "too small" sealed box. |
" don't like to suffer. for those who do, buy the zu speakers."
You are right, I noticed your always even trying to tame your system further with your inquiries on this forum alone, seems you will never find your holy grail.
Always blaming CD players, Tube types etcÂ… Look at your track record seriously posting, so now you think that its also due to the speaker or specific cables? I mean you basically disagree with everything on any product here and say they are bright. So your credibility on this issue I am sorry but does not count anymore, because its actually a very solvable problem, you just don't seem to have the understanding to do it.
It seems you will never get the Zero High frequency sound you desire. Or you would not keep posting asking for super warm slow as molasses components, which tells me your still not all that happy with even the ESLs supposed perfect performance.
I am serious in this suggestion, No offense, try a good clock radio, because unfortunatley seeing your posting history you lose a lot of credibility to your statements as basically every single product even ones you finally purchase are too "Bright" and your always still searching...
Also rooms are horrible to just about every speaker I encounter, all can be bright, but no not all Dissapate with less directionality to help cover that up better like some panels no doubt. But it can be done.
Good luck |
For anyone who hasn't read Aktchi's comment above, please scroll up and read it. It's one of the best posts on the site. Off-topic, but important.
-Dusty |
hi undertow:
i appreciate some of your observations. i think there are some inaccuracies here.
the esls are not bright. i don't own them.
there are many components which exhibit extra energy in the upper midrange/lower treble. not all components are bright and i have not stated that my stereo system has this problem.
most of my comments refer to components i do not own.
preferences for components and perceptions of component performance are subjective.
i am consistent in preferring a "dark" sound and as most components are designed to be "neutral", they are not to my liking. i still call it as i hear it. |
Okay, I accept that "YOU DON'T OWN THEM".. You said it, so obviously you just wanted to get a response on a thread that had nothing to do with you observation anyway.
Actually this conversation had nothing to do with the sound of a product, but you decided to ask and yes BASH the product, I mean if saying your sorry for any Zu owners being they are horribly not balanced and will never hear real music is not out of left field bashing than I don't know what is... It warranted a response, regardless that it actually has ZERO to do with any of the issues on this thread till you decided to start it with such comments.
So why not buy quads since you don't have them? I mean you feel they clearly "STOMP" specific things you never owned or really experienced in a correct setup, Why feel sorry for owners of every other component on this website as you state? Yet still like to question ones that do own them, and then don't accept the answers when you decided to ask the question?
It seems you actually have interest in a weird way to have it proved to you, I respect your opinion, but at the same time many things can shock you trust me... And properly setup components you have bias against might prove you are a little overstated in your extreme views from point A to B.
And just a little clue, most components can exhibit a extra energy in the upper midrange/lower treble, this is so common its silly.. And on another thread I was involved you basically dis-regard room and acoustics completley in trade for the right "Dark sounding" speaker, so in that case you are not going to ever hear these items at their best including your own. |
i don't own the original quads because the panels are subject to nedding replacement. i own a pair of quad 63s with two blown panels. as much as i like the quads, they are too fragile and not worth the maintainance.
so i comprimise and own another panel speaker. i am waiting for the new martin logan clx. hopefully its cost is within my budget and is balanced in frequency response.
we can agree to disagree when a stereo system sounds balanced, and/or natural sounding with respect to timbre.
all this back and forth does not substitute for an opportunity to jointly listen to a stereo system and compare perceptions.
i would welcome the opportunity to get together with some one at ces 2008 for an hour, and visit some rooms together.
then, we can have a meaningful exchange of opinion.right now, all of this is just talk, but it is entertaining. |
Audiokinesis I am not affiliated with Zu in any manner what so ever. I just happen to love the sound of their speakers.
However, I didn't realize Macrojack had an affiliation either and I do agree that full discolsure is a must on this forum. |
Audiokinesis I am not affiliated with Zu in any manner what so ever. I just happen to love the sound of their speakers.
However, I didn't realize Macrojack had an affiliation either and I do agree that full discolsure is a must on this forum.
Mrtennis, I couldn't belive your description of the Zu's. Bright? My one pick with the Zu's is that I think they lack just a bit in the high frequency extension; even with my Onix tube amp. The one thing they're not is bright.
BTW, I can't even get Zu to cut me a deal on a pair of cables. Tried and was told to bid on them when they come up for auction. No discount what so ever for a return customer or even a small discount.
Even one who loves and always speaks well of their product. Sean/Adam, are you listening. ;0)
Serioulsy though, there is no pyrmid scheme IMO. Just plenty of happy customers. |
Mrtennis, Trust me were friends.. I have no issue.. Only point was I did not get the outright statement that had ZERO to do with the issue about this guy being a dealer or not,you just decided to attack for whatever reason something that just added to a topic not even part of it, not sure what the agenda is, but its cool we all move on :
"10-01-07: Mrtennis
hi macrojack:
the quad esl stomps on the zu speakers. no cone design ever has or ever will be timbrally less inaccurate.
if you want to attain a very realistic presentation of an instrument, there is no better way than the original quads, especially 4 of them." |
Tbj, let us know how like like the Feastrex thanks.
"Different parts of the cone respond at different frequency,"
Assuming the cone is not behaving like a piston. But you don't know that. Even multi-way speakers, 1st order x-over included, can exhibit this. If you cannot hear the improvements in dimensionality and PRAT with a time and phase coherent speaker then stay with multi-way.
Perhaps this is one reason people like tubes. Put some dimensionality back in what the non-time and phase coherent speakers take out.
Further, Tannoy has a white paper on this, when you have 2 or more non-coincident drivers dispersion is compromised. In some areas the drivers cancel each other out. Read any of JA's analysis of speakers and you will see you have to listen below the tweeter's axis or a large suckout develops. A single driver or coincident drivers like Tannoy give the most even dispersion patterns. |
