The $3,600 gamble

For the wall behind your head some of the best treatments are books if you have bookshelves or Oriental rugs. I was just picking up one of my oriental's from my local dealer (they cleaned it) and they told me a lot of their business comes from audio /  pro audio for just that purpose. Yes, you can go the Gik route but it's really not that difficult to do it yourself with materials that add more character to a room (as opposed to panels that are obviously designed as acoustical treatments).

So, you may wonder how a guy with Thiel speakers thinks about his side system with Omen Def Mk 2's?  I've got about 20 hours under my belt with them this far, but before I go further I'll give you a rundown of the upstream components - it's really quite lowly stuff: a Musical Paradise mk3 integrated tube amp, a Pioneer PL530 turntable with Denon 103r cart going through my old Dynavector mk3 phono preamp. All tied together with some basic AQ interconnects. My speaker cables are a home brew of four strands of 18 ga. wire per side twisted and then counter twisted. Also note that these heavy speakers are in a 10' x 11' carpeted room. Speakers are pulled off the front wall about 24" and they are about 18" off the side walls and toed in such that the tweeters intersect in my head. My gap,at the bottom is about 1/4 +/- and there is no tilt to the speaker. 

Also what may or may not be of relevance is I am not a person that goes and sees live music much. I don't like crowds, and while a sound system cannot produce live music like live music can, I'm ok with that, since the live performances I have gone to have never blown me away with sound quality (other than the Pink Floyd concert I went to in the Super Dome). Don't get me wrong, performances have blown me away, but the sound quality - no. I can't seem to get over that hearing a singer sing through PA speakers is anything near high end. To me the reproduced song on my sound system "is" the event and that is what I want to hear a clearly as I can.  Anyway, that's a window into my perspective. 

So as you can imagine compared to the Thiels, where you can hear a fly fart with all its 3D richness, the Omens present a different picture. First lets get something straight. My main rig with Thiels is a better system in almost every way - HOWEVER - the Zu's do something unique the Thiels do not, they seem to make the music effortless. They also (because of where they are placed in the room) produce a good amount of bass - which is only getting better. No need for a sub here. At first they seemed a bit anemic bur after 10 hours or so of play, and many placement tweaks, they have a very full sound with good tone and overall seem to have a balanced frequency response. If there are major peaks or dips it's not jumping out at me at this time. Another thing these speakers do is dynamics. Better than the Thiels, especially drums. They seem to get the "thwack" right. They are not bright either, but I'm using a tube integrated SET so that shouldn't be a surprise. Oh, and for the record I'm using RCA tubes on the preamp section and Golden Lion KT88's on the amp section. 

I'm also loving that these speakers are efficient, these things get loud with a full rich sound. 

As far, as imaging goes I'm getting a pretty good sound field, but the room size is my biggest limitation here. It's a very forward/full sound - the performers are there, in the room with you. I personally like that trait.  My Thiels do that to, though the sound is a bit more fleshed out. Compared to the Thiels the Zu's sound is more rounded off at the corners, but that allows you to listen for hours with no fatigue if you want to do that. 

I hope this helps anyone looking into these speakers.  Feel free to ask me any questions if you are interested. 

Very interesting comments regarding the Vandersteen versus ZU equation.  
I've spent a lot of time with a friends pair of Vandy 3A Sig, using similar ARC gear and same songs/res level.  Two different monsters.  Once one add's the Radian upgrade to the Omen Def's, the prices of these two speakers brand new is near par.  I've been very lucky to go back and forth listening to mine and same said friend with 3A's, the differences are much smaller than one would expect.  The Vandy's certainly go deeper unassisted, but the liveliness of the ZU's is their hallmark trade.   This same friend also has a pair of VR33's and to me, they are not a speaker I can live with for past ten minutes of moderate listening.  I was shocked at how much more I like the Vandy over the VR33.  Their size, weight, driver configuration is similar with rear firing 10" drivers. 

In the end, no amount of listening to the Vandy 3A Sig would ever move me from my ZU Omen Def mkII's with Radian's.  The obvious difference for me is recognizing I like the energy of a super efficient speaker, the immediacy of voice presence and especially drum thwack.  Those who like a little more polite, evenly distributed frequency response are well served by the Vandy's.  No losers in this price range and or options available. 

Welcome to the Omen Def club Greg!

Last Lemming and Impeculies, your comments coincide with mine regarding the Zu. They do seem to do things right.
However, I still find the Vandy's a touch more refined and believable in the soundstage and depth of sound reproduction.

The best way for me to explain the sound of the Zu’s would be to make an analogy:

Its like a photo vs a great work of art of what the photo is of, for example, if you were to see a photograph of a scene Monet painted you could argue that the photo is a more acurate representation of the scene Monet painted, however the Monet painting would most likely move you far more. The fact the Monet’s fetch millions probably backs this up. This isn’t to say the photo isn’t nice, but it’s very specific, there is little room for interpretation. The Monet allows each person to see in there mind their own interpretation that moves them the most, it’s more vivid, it’s the essence of the scene distilled to the viewer through an imperfect medium. It’s the same reason books are better than the movies they are based on, and I feel Vinyl is better than the Digital. The Zu’s are like the Monet, not perfect, but the music is rendered in such a way that the parts that are presented to you move you. At least for me. I have both types of audio systems and luckily I have the option to look at great photos (my Thiel’s) and paintings (my Zu’s) depending on my mood. Neither is right or wrong, just deferent presentations.

And if my analogy is flawed I’m ok with that if it fits across my gist of what I’m after so please don’t read too much into it;)