I just ordered a pair of the new Zu speakers on a whim. I was going to wait for information, but the fact that they threw in the free superfly upgrades to the first 30 people got me.
From a similar thread it sounds like some of you guys have heard the speaker despite information only being released today. I'm wondering what you can share about it?
Also, I am really hoping it works with a Firstwatt F1 amplifier. Can anyone comment as to that? I know the Druid's and Essences worked OK.
I can't say how well Rawson clones or emulates the sonic character of Red Wine. I've heard Red Wine and other various Class D architectures on Zu speakers. In Red Wine's case, the sound is very smooth and listenable, certainly preferable to many far more expensive and ghastly solid state amplifiers. Their sins are of omission. While less so than many of thier ilk, the Red Wine amps still sound desiccated, spatially flattened and a little bleached of midrange tone compared to alternatives in their price range. It's not a sound I can live with if I don't have to, and I don't. On the positive side, Rossi's amps are quiet, dynamic, smooth on top and bass is fast and well-defined.
If Rawson builds a good clone, depending on his price and how you view the competitive options financially, you might value the positives over the negatives. Zu thinks Red Wine Audio amps are good matches to their speakers. Others here do, too.
Even at under $1000, I'd rather have a number of affordable Asian tube amps or some used tube and solid state options from Audiogon if I were financially tapped and needed amplification.
>>PHIL: Non-audiophile people who don't notice and don't care are probably better served by $500 polks or $100 speakers available at any garage sale than $2000 Souls. Anyone who cares enough about sound to spend for the Souls really should care enough for at least modest placement.<<
No, I don't agree. A non-audiophile music lover can easily appreciate the tone and dynamic superiority of a Zu speaker over what's possible from Polk-bracket speakers. They don't have to care about anything else to love Souls. "...at least modest placement..." conforms to my contention that such a person can put their Souls where they work for them in terms of room function and still appreciate the value of their purchase. They can learn about placement after they buy, and decide for themselves if any effort at optimization of the room for listening is worth the effort and possible inconvenience, to them.
>>I shake my head that you recommend tiny triode monoblock for Soul.<<
The Tiny Triode is 25/25w of EL84 power with ability to run in tetrode mode at closer to 40/40w. Come listen to what 20/20w of 845 SET muscle does on Soul. The 845 will outmuscle the EL84 but those amps will be just fine at the poster's budget and in most rooms.
>>Whomever follows up this advise is setting themselves up for disappointment.<<
He asked whether those amps will sound good on Soul. They will and they won't sound choked in the midrange in any unusual way. An 845 SET amp will sound better, but he's looking at a $700 option. At that price, given the options, the Tiny Triode will sound beautiful and even within its dynamic limits listening volume will be high enough. Like any push-pull tube amp, it will let you know through escalating congestion and compression (unlike most SS amps which will simply degrade precipitously) that you're running out of dynamic headroom as you raise volume. But the clean watts are going to give him a punchy, fulfilling sound. Soul sounds substantially more lively than Druid at moderate power, due to the shove of the newer driver motor.
>>That is his business of course.<<
Ain't that the truth.
>>Miklorsmith: 45W is OK. 5 or 8 is just not.<<
Read more closely. He didn't say 45w. He wrote "45 SET," meaning his single-ended-triode amps using the 45 triode tube. He's referring to 2 watts or so on his Definitions.
***
Again, the point of contention here is that you want all the advice here to be "audiophile" targeted. I'm happy to give the audiophile view but my larger objective is to remove perceived barriers to interest in high-end audio. People who aren't yet in the tent but are investigating our realm use Google, Yahoo and Bing to explore and they find what we write here, in AudioAsylum, AudioCircle and similar. We aren't just talking to ourselves here.
Zu expressly designed Soul to be unfussy, for anyone who loves music in their life to buy and appreciate without complication. It's designed to sound shockingly good on a $300 receiver taking signal from a PC/DAC or a $49 CD player, as well as be worthy of the full gamut of obsessive audiophilia and the best possible gear that can be associated with it.
Zu succeeded, even beyond their prior such success with Druid 4-08.
In the grand scheme of available amplification for a person on a budget, used Tiny Triodes or anything else similar to them are going to sound impressive and convincing on a pair of Superfly. They really do simplify. Let's open doors, not shut them. Now if someone has a question about $7000 amps rather than $700, my answer might reflect a more demanding POV.
I was recently reading reviews on the Red Wine Audio 30.2 and it sounds as if it might be an absolutely perfect match for the Zu Soul Superflys. But at its price it was only a fantasy at the moment as I'm pretty effin' tapped out money wise.
Then yesterday I came across a post on Audiogon for a Tim Rawson-esqe clone of the amplifier (Wineclone). I don't speak technical, but it is affordable (albeit ugly) and I'm wondering if someone with both Zu experience and a more technical understanding of class d amps can tell me if they think this would be a good route.
If it were used I'd buy it and experiment for myself, but I don't want to take a depreciation hit if it doesn't work out.
I'd probably have it built with the available upgrades and minus volume control to use with my Minimax Preamp and two sources.
Having as much experience with Zu products and probably more than anybody posting here, it is unrealistic for any Zu speaker to perform optimally with a flea power SET/PSET amp be it 45, 50, PX-25, or 2A3.
Every Zu speaker, including models with a self contained subwoofer system, requires at least 15WPC; some need more.
No question they can be driven with single digit power but nowhere near their full capability.
It is certainly possible I will hear a class-d that does not sound like another class-d. I hope it sounds better.
I am merely stating fact that tri-path sounded as good (or bad) as $1000 Rotel.
I am not one of those people who thinks just because it costs more it is good.
PHIL: Non-audiophile people who don't notice and don't care are probably better served by $500 polks or $100 speakers available at any garage sale than $2000 Souls. Anyone who cares enough about sound to spend for the Souls really should care enough for at least modest placement.
I shake my head that you recommend tiny triode monoblock for Soul. Whomever follows up this advise is setting themselves up for disappointment. Unless of course they seek a congested midrange, and again, I point them to $500 polks (actually, $200 polk monitor so you can truly enjoy that choked sound). Well whatever. Maybe Curious_george is from the "plop them down" school of thought and does not care whether left is louder than right. That is his business of course.
The thing is that "Class D" is just a general classification and in fact various "class D" amps have almost nothing in common. In the implementation, that is. In terms of sound, there is probably some general overlap. But to me a (say) Red Wine tripath amp sound quite a bit different from a gainclone or a Bel Canto ICE amp. I am no golden ear and think these differences are pretty easily audible.
45 SET plays pretty loudly on my Def. 2's, no congestion at 'normal loud' levels. Can't play house parties.
My RWA 70.2s kick absolute tail on them, Class D ain't all the same. Their 50 watts or so into 6 ohms (which the Defs are) + active bass power from giant pro amps + bass EQ = girl with guitar all the way up to clean rave sound.
I haven't heard the Tiny Triode monoblocks on Zu, but I would proceed with confidence. I have yet to hear an EL84 amp not sound musical powering the Zu FRD. Within its power limits, for example, the very modest Almarro A205 single-ended EL84 embarrasses many more expensive amps of various types on Druids, and therefore I'm sure on Soul too. And it's only 5 to 8w.
The Tiny Triode should prove both toneful and quite versatile on Superfly. You'll have around 20 honest watts in pseudo-triode mode with four EL84s running into 16 ohms from an 8 ohms tap, and perhaps 35w in normal tetrode mode, so at the flip of a switch you'll have the laid-back sound of triode mode with adequate power, and able to call up the more vivid and punchy tetrode sound when you want more oomph.
$700 seems to me a great price for those amps, which were limited production, no longer made, and quite scarce.
I can't say how the TT-25s would sound with the Zus, but I liked them with my former Abbys. I do remember reading a recent thread on audio asylum about them presenting a poor synergy with lowthers though.
$700 seems like a fine price. I have owned them twice over the years and I think I was able to re-sell for about $1000 after I had gotten my kicks for a while. The amp market is changing though.
No, I meant what I said. Which wasn't that a 3db - 6db difference in channel balance doesn't matter to me, or you or many other people here but that there are plenty of folks in the non-audiophile music-focused crowd that either don't notice it or don't care enough to change what's causing it even if they drop two Large on a pair of speakers. Their comparative indifference to one quality that matters to us may not compromise their enjoyment of music from their hi-fi whatsoever.
As for flea-power SET amps, that's the whole point. 2 - 3 watts aren't convincing to me and I suppose not for you, but for someone who values specific attributes of a 45 or 2a3 SET amp enough to listen within the dynamic limits of a third clean watt on a 101db/w/m speaker, the midrange won't be congested. It just gets congested quickly if said listener pushes even a skosh beyond that. So someone like me doesn't have to recommend flea power to appreciate why some folks are satisfied by a narrow performance attribute. After all, Quad ESL57s don't have much dynamic range, nor power handling worth mentioning, plus they beam like lasers, yet they still have a fanatical following after more than 50 years.
I have no defense however to offer for the sound quality of Class-D, thus far in its evolution. Except that it gets some people out of earbuds and into speakers, which is a first step for bringing fresh blood into our interest. Does a cheap Tri-Path sound any worse than, say, a grating Dynaco SCA-80Q did circa 1970? No. It sounds better and it's vastly cheaper and more accessible too in real dollars. Give the kids and anyone else with thin finances a break. If we get them in in the tent, we have plenty of time to show them old school.
I am so sorry. When you said "you'd be surprised about the number of people for whom a 5db difference of any kind just doesn't register" I thought you meant I'd be surprised about the number of people for whom a 5db difference of any kind just doesn't register.
It seems that what you actually meant was that a "3-6db difference between left and right channels" *does* make a difference.
And class-d suddenly sounds better when you pay quadruple digits for it, but a wheezing congested midrange as 3 puny watts fails to power high-90 low-100 speaker is fine to those "willing to live within their limits" because people are enamored so of their watts, and care nothing for the sound it products.
>>...and people who say 3-6db difference between left and right channel make no difference, and toe-in (for massively directional HF speakers) makes no difference.<<
Now, Zanon. I don't think we had anyone in this thread say any of those things. But some people do like their 3 watts and are willing to live within their limits.
It is entirely possible I will not be able to tell the difference between those amps I mention. After I hear them, I will say one way or the other.
I can hear strain with low power t-amp (below ~50 WPC) which I do not hear with 100 WPC Rotel ICE implementation, but what can I say. Class-d sounds like class-d.
I mean, we have people who say Zu's work with 3W flea amps, and people who say 3-6db difference between left and right channel make no difference, and toe-in (for massively directional HF speakers) makes no difference. So you can add to that list a guy who says class-d sounds like class-d no matter how much you pay for its.
Just thought I'd chime in with some additional amp options in the $500-800 range that over the years I've had some experience with. Conrad-johnson MV 50 or 52(the 52 has polypropylene caps in the power supply) which is EL34 based would be excellent(45 watts/ch)as would an Audio Research classic 30(30 watts/ch). As both are older amps they likely have 16 ohm output taps which would be ideal with the 16 ohm impedance of the Zu soul.
Zanon, if you can't tell the different between a Tripath and an ICE amp, you probably can't tell the difference between an EL34 and KT88 or a 2A3 and 300B either.
>>If you check with 213Cobra he will agree with the musicality of an EL-34 amp.<<
Yup. No doubt. Takes me back. I ran a pair of Dyna Stereo 70s strapped as ~70w monoblocks 35 years ago, when you could still buy Stereo 70 kits new and real West German Telefunkens and Siemens EL34s were plentiful. I built many for friends. Today, there are inexpensive upgrades, in parts or even replacement of the input circuit. But even stock, a well-maintained Stereo 70 will be euphonic in beautiful ways, and have a lot less push-pull grunge than most modern push-pull tube amps. As I just wrote in another post, almost any EL34 tube amp is a safe bet for good sound, and Zu's efficiency means a single stereo amp pushing out 30 - 35w/ch goes far. Most days on Audiogon there are a couple of rehabbed, modded or hot-rodded Stereo 70s. Other great, but more expensive, vintage iron: McIntosh MC2225, MC240, MC30 & 60 monoblocks. No cheap Marantz 8Bs left, but that would sound gorgeous. Lots of Chinese El34 and EL84 amp options.
In vintage solid state, you'd get music from Quad 405, 405-II and even a 303, which are around for mad money these days. Sweet into 16 ohms.
>>is there an amp i can find here in the $500-$800 range that can power my Soul's? i agree that my cambridge 540 and HK 3490 are lacking in the lower midrange/bass arena.<<
Make the best deal you can on an NAD integrated amp in that price range. You'll also find some pretty good sounding Chinese EL34 tube amps under a variety of obscure brand names on eBay that will do fine. You can buy an EL34 amp with your eyes closed and not fear. It's very hard to screw up an EL34 tube amp, and many of those unknown (to us in the West) Chinese tube amp designers know exactly what they're doing with simple circuits and good parts.
Ctaudio15, I would think for $5-800 you could easily find a Dyna ST 70 and upgrade it (cleaning connectors, controls, and switch, and replacing caps and weak tubes), or one already upgraded. If you check with 213Cobra he will agree with the musicality of an EL-34 amp.
Unfortunately I have very limited experience with Zu speakers but I built an original ST 70 and have owned a few more in the decades since then. They may not be the last word in detail or woofer control but they are unfailingly musical (when operating correctly) and remain affordable.
I have been singularly unimpressed by classD amplification, whether $30 t-amp or $1000 Rotel. They both sound the same, except Rotel has more watts (it's ICE implementation).
with classD, I say, don't spend money on fancy implementation. It all sounds classD.
I drive my Druids very nicely with an AudioSector Patek. I suspect it would do similar justice to the Souls, and would be at the high end of your budget if you could find one used. If you need an integrated (like your Cambridge and HK) AudioSector makes a passive integrated too.
is there an amp i can find here in the $500-$800 range that can power my Soul's? i agree that my cambridge 540 and HK 3490 are lacking in the lower midrange/bass arena.
I just brought home one of my father's extra amplifiers to experiment. Its a class D job, a Panasonic XR-25 digital receiver. I've got it's volume maxed out and am using my tube preamp into the tape input.
What I'm hearing is interesting but definitely inferior so far to my First Watt F1.
The midrange is thin and kind of lifeless. Its detailed but very flat and lacking in texture, but sound staging is great, resolution top to bottom is really nice and my speakers seem like they may be benefiting from the additional power.
Bass isn't any more impactful, in fact its probably less so, but space and air seems like it might have improved.
This was a cheapie experiment and not intended for a second to replace my First Watt, but it does have me curious/eager to try other amplification.
Thanks guys, As of now I am running a Modwright modified Oppo BDP83 into the Supernait. This summers plan is to add a music server into the SN DAC and eventually buy the Naim DAC. I am also getting a turntable this year. hopefully the Rega P7. When my Superflys get here, I'll report back what I hear with both the Supernait and the little Nait 1.
I've heard Defs, Presence, Essence and Druids. Avonessence also had Druids and Essence with Naim.
FWIW. I think you're in for a treat. Naim gear works incredibly well with Zu and those who think the world begins and ends with tubes would do well to not dismiss solid state as not having the same synergy. The interesting thing is that the lesser speakers work better IMHO and they can work even better when you take the myriad of power supplies out of the equation.
The best single dem I have ever had was Druids on the end of a bare cdx2, 202 and 200. I can tell you that I was utterly rooted to the spot for around ten minutes listening to a genre of music that leaves me utterly cold (modern blues) and I was not alone. Must have been eight of us in there stood or sat and we all felt the same, which rather gives the lie to some concerns expressed on here about dispersion and the sweet spot.
Presence pulled off the same trick but Essence only really delivered when a cds3 was added, and the latter is not to my taste at all.
My biggest regret of recent years is that I didn't simply sell my hi-cap, xps2 and napsc to part fund getting some Druids. A recent near three week dem of Essence at home taught me a lot about acoustics and the flaws in both my system and the speaker. I believe theres little better at the price and I was heading for a purchase until Zu delivered the Superfly. If it is any way the true successor to the Druid as Phil asserts then I am at the end of my particular journey for some years to come.
My suspicion is that the Superfly will drag levels of performance out of the Supernait that will leave fellow owners a little bewildered. Being a cautious type by nature I still want a home dem but boy have I come close to cracking this weekend :)
QUOTE "06-19-10: Hifin Anybody pair Zu's up with Naim? I have the Superfly on the way and have both a Supernait and Nait 1 at home to drive them."
Hi Hifin,
I had Druids and then Essence with Naim amps (552/250.2, CDS3/XPS2) before moving onto Rega Isis CD, Rega Osiris with the Zu Essence.
A friend has Druids with CDX2/555PS, 252/250.2, which is very good.
I have heard the Zu Essence with the Naim Uniti and to me it was superior in all aspects of music than with £25K of Naim Electronics with the Naim Ovators.
I suspect that you will thorougly enjoy the ZU Souls with the the Naim amps. Out of curiosity, what source are you using?
HK3490 will be step up from what I have now. I am serious, it's the amp I'm going to get.
The horn mounted supertweeter means Soul will probably still be pretty directional, so toe-in will make big difference to how soundstage resolves. You can do this in your space.
Druids with whizzer were even more directional, so once you were toed in and correct from wall etc. you were done. Since Soul has wider dispersion, I would consider placing small treatment in 1st order reflection on walls, but only if you fear attack is not as clear as it could be (time smeared)
Sweet spot is small with Zu's -- this is actually good thing. Big sweet spots do not exist IMO.
I have B&W 683 system in my HT room, love the sounds for movies, TV and music. Seriously no complains, 683's rock, to me they sound exactly what a serious speaker in its price range should sound like. 2.1 music sounds great, however After a year with them i think i was left a little uninspired. I had never heard a Zu speaker before, but I really wanted something made me feel like I was at a show (I love live music) figured with 60 day trial why not.
The sound differences between the 683's and the Souls are completely different. Not sure what the real buzz words are, but they just have a personality to them, where as the 683's sound exactly how I imagine a HT speaker to sound the Soul's really excel in voice and guitars. Keep in mind they arent fully broken in, but i would say they sound forward and tight. Guitar solos sound so much better its kinda scary. Jeff Buckley's voice on Lover You Should have come over makes me feel as if hes playing a few feet away. Been listening to RHCP, Pearl Jam, Jeff Buckley, Jimmy Eat World, Guess Who, CSNY. I think im going to have to look into a good DAC or different amp b/c im really loving the sound of older music on the Souls (sounds warmer), the newer music sounds a bit bright/digital/harsh. Keep in mind Im using a HK3490 receiver, with Trends USB dac running Apple Lossless. So a very low cost set up considering must people here are rocking $1k + amps. I just cant afford that right now.
Placement sucks, they are just in my loft, probably 5 feet apart with one wall against the right speaker. anyways, i can get one chair in the sweetspot and thats my happy place. I move into a house next month so ill get a chance to really set them up right and let them breath.
No such luck, Mike. I check this thread obsessively! I'm watching the Hot Fuzz HD DVD with the wife right now doing 2 channel HT with my Superflys. I love 'em!
I live in a condo so I can't really crank them hardcore, but they're "unreasonably loud" now keeping their composure very well.
They sound great with my First Watt F1, but Phil has me really curious about tube power...
See my system profile for pictures of my own placement. I am pretty audio obsessed, but my ability to play with placing is limited. If anyone has any suggestions based on what they see, I am all ears.
I was actually in the same place when I bought my first Zus. Did not know much about speakers, repaired 30 year old speakers I bought from neighbours when they were cleaning out their garage, and now me and my family are listening to more music than ever before.
*If* you become interested in improving your sound further, I would suggest exploring careful placement and setup before spending money on gear. As you may or may not have noticed, this area is packed with people who obsess about gear, and there is very little discussion of music or actual sound. I have learned more about how to hear sound through experimenting with placement than reading any number of posts about "which speaker is best" etc. etc.
Any chance you could make your two cents a dollar or more and give us some more detail? I appreciate you're not into the techy side and feel that's often a positive. Why should you hsve to be? However, when you're cranking them up what are you hearing? What are they doing differently to what you've heard before?
Also, how/where have you positioned them etc?
In a way it's all boring stuff but for those of us on another continent then it paints another piece of the picture.
Interested parties will note Gopher has gone AWOL. Presumably he's been kidnapped by music.
Here is some insight from someone who knows very little about "audiophile" talk, doesnt care for graphs and isnt even sure what a push pull amps even is.
I bought the SuperFlys on whim only b/c of their intro special discount. (thanks ZU) I love playing rock and roll loud, the speakers look great, and I've been cranking them all week long in my apartment. In my case Zu did an excellent job of marketing to a new consumer base, im 27 and bought these speakers over a new TV and im glad i did because "Since I've Been Loving You" sounds soooo sweet cranked up. I hope Zu keeps up their marketing efforts to hit younger individuals who dont really know to much or care about specs, but that do LOVE the sweet Zu sound of their favorite band cranked up.
QUOTE "If you put Zus in room without care then you will not get their tonal honesty in midrange, or dynamic life. They will sound good, but nothing special. That is what my Zus sound like off axis, good, but not special. So they will ask "why all the hype?" END QUOTE
I do not want what I am about to post as being negative to Zu or their business.
Zanon makes a point with regard to just plonking the speakers in a room. Here in the UK, a large percentage of people buy from dealers, some of which are experienced in setting up and placing speakers in listeners rooms to get the best out of the system. There are not many of us who have the expertise and patience to get such a speaker as Zu's to work at the optimum easily, unless by pure luck you plonk them down and it just happens to be the right position, distance from walls, toe-in etc. That is why certain manufacturers in the UK have been the market leader, it may not be the best available but properly set up produces music which the best available not optimally set up would never attain (unless expertly set up). Since owning the Zu speakers I have learnt more about music, room acoustics and what to do to set up a system to get the best out of it. This brings me onto the subject of direct selling, a good experienced dealer is worth his salt with equipment/speakers such as these, and will bring more positive feedback from owners than otherwise, which in turn enhances the brand, giving them more business, which assists in R&D. We as the owners loose out because we have to pay more, but for that extra money we get excellent service, excellent installation/set-up, and excellent back up. Manuals, talking with distributers is all well and good, but if you are not trained or it is not explained what someone is listening for when setting up systems/speakers then this will be all completely wasteful, and end up with the product being dismissed as not suitable.
This is all in my humble opinion.
Zu make excellent speakers (to date I have not heard anything better), have rock solid integrity and want to bring to people what they are passionate about - music.
Would love others feedback and opinions of the above.
>>So, you will see people complaining about dynamics when, in fact, they are running them with flea amps and Zus, while sensitive, are simply not that sensitive. Maybe horns will work with 2W SET. Not Zus.<<
I've had 2w 45 and 2a3 amps in my living room, wired up to Definitions, Presence and Druids. It's not my idea of perfection but the flea-watters in the room were fully satisfied. Zu speakers really are 101db/w/m, but they're not 114db/w/m like some horns. Big difference, with other compromises. The true 2w aficionado is realistic about dynamics and listens for tone within the power limits of their amp. The people who think 2w isn't enough likely wouldn't like 2 watts on anything in that efficiency range. On the other hand, you can blow minds with the sound available through Definitions powered by a ZVex ImpAmp, which is kind of sheer dumb fun when you do it.
>>It is perfectly OK that we have different opinions about speakers, music, Zu etc<<
I don't think we have are apart on any significant issue regarding Zu speakers. Your observations of why some people perceive them as they do are correct. I only add that there is a music lover audience that will never cotton to audiophile obsessions, and they too can find Zu plug'n'play. Which I've witnessed.
>>An audiophile who does not care about placement should just buy headphones.<<
But there is a non-audiophile market that just loves music and will pay for good gear. Zu designs to be inclusive, not exclusive. It's one of their core objectives, to expand hifi appeal beyond audiophiles.
>>It makes no sense for someone who plans to just "plop them down" to pay extra $800 and buy Soul Superfly over Soul standard.<<
Over 30 years ago when I worked in high-end audio my best customer wore hearing aids in both ears. He spent gobs and of course only heard midrange, and felt bass. But his sense of tone correctness was uncanny, while his spatial perception was useless. People buy for lots of reasons. There will be people who buy Superfly over std. Soul just to get the metal hardware where plain Soul will have plastics, for example. What "makes sense" to audiophiles is irrelevant outside our little circle. And it *is* a little circle.
>>But, would anyone buy speaker where left channel is 5db louder than right? Would anyone pay extra for speaker where one channel is louder than the other? Would you say "tone is so real, I do not care that left speaker is louder than right speaker!"<<
Perhaps you'd be surprised about the number of people for whom a 5db difference of any kind just doesn't register.
>>Audiogon is full of people who go one about "detail, slam, air etc. etc." but seem deaf to fact that left ear is listening to whisper while right ear is listening to speech.<<
We agree. What passes for accuracy in hi-fi today is usually excessively detailed, over-resolved. The normal attenuation of top end in real acoustic spaces is replaced by close-mic'ing and rising top end, spraying out sounds you never hear from live music in real acoustic spaces. We agree.
I place my speakers by millimeters within a functional rubric in a room. Some people think that's excessive and they've spent much more than me. Even on Audiogon it's a diverse little circle. What can you do? There's no component for everyone.
Many of the risks you cite regarding reactions to the sound of unoptimized Zu installations are mitigated by Soul. I'll say it's one of the easiest speakers to place for good sound that I've ever worked with. Much less fussy than Druid. Dialing in Soul is more about choices for what kind of staging you want, presence or reticence, and room factors to mitigate, than about going from "ack!" to "ahhhh."
Just for the record, I'd like to point out that the amplifier only "sees" the impedance curve (magnitude, frequency, and phase) that a speaker system presents; it doesn't "see" the individual drivers or crossover parts separately. Therefore, it is quite possible for a speaker with a complex crossover to present a smoother load to the amplifier than one with a minimalist crossover, or no crossover.
I applaud what Zu has done with their innovative format. They set the bar high and make the rest of us work very hard.
This statement I fully agree with: "Ragged response that shows short bandwidth abberations against a backdrop of general octave-to-octave balance can sound just fine and convincing, as opposed to a speaker with smoother curve but clearly visible octave-to-octave dysfunction, which can sound completely wrong." Let me add that dips are far less audible than peaks. In the Druid for instance, Zu did a fine job of juggling the inevitable tradeoffs in a way that minimized their audibility. It looks like the Soul has fewer tradeoffs, and if anything its designers are now even more expert jugglers.
It is perfectly OK that we have different opinions about speakers, music, Zu etc. That is what makes hobby fun.
However, I feel that we do not do Zu, or any speaker, any favors by not being honest about its function. If Bjesien looks elsewhere, he will find many Zu critics. Some of them have good points, some don't, but many of their criticisms come from bad implementation/expectation. Ignoring all of this does not help Bjesien or Zu.
So, you will see people complaining about dynamics when, in fact, they are running them with flea amps and Zus, while sensitive, are simply not that sensitive. Maybe horns will work with 2W SET. Not Zus.
You will see people complain about dry, cardboard presentation (and not the "magical midrange" which Zu is supposed to give). This is usually because they experience same upper bass suckout that I do and have done nothing about it.
You will see people complain about lack of foundation and weak bass. This is because speakers need to be pushed towards wall and corner, or maybe be put in smaller room. Or have improved Greiwe loading. Again, wrong setup.
You will see people complaining about ragged highs or poor imaging. Or flat presentation. This has always, I have found, been due to incorrect toe-in. Easy to fix, but we are talking milimiter movements.
You will hear people complain about lack of detail, resolution, or air. This is because they have "hi-fi" taste, which Zus (thank Gods) do not deliver. With exception of Essence.
Very occasionally, you will hear people complain about congestion at high level. This I think is simply consequence of FRD topology. There is simply no solution unless you go multi-driver, and that opens up problems of phase, time, crossover, sensitivity, integration, etc. etc. Take your poison. For me, it is no brainer, Zu all the way.
Look, I am huge Zu fan. But I am also honest about them! I buy them, I recommend others buy them.
If you put Zus in room without care then you will not get their tonal honesty in midrange, or dynamic life. They will sound good, but nothing special. That is what my Zus sound like off axis, good, but not special. So they will ask "why all the hype?"
If you do not care about placement, you lose tonal honesty because you get suckout in upper bass and HF does not resolve correctly. So, you get watered down fundamental right where you want it most plus screwed up harmonics -- where is your tone gone? Add a flea amp, and your dynamic life dies as well. So, people listen to this and say "Zus are bad speakers". Total shame and so unnecessary. And please note, nowhere do I mention "audiophile imaging" as I don't care about imaging at all.
An audiophile who does not care about placement should just buy headphones. Or stick with listening to Kenny G. It makes no sense for someone who plans to just "plop them down" to pay extra $800 and buy Soul Superfly over Soul standard. Maybe Zu should make Soul SuperDuperfly, and charge and extra $800 for them for people who really don't care about actual sound.
Let me give you typical example. You have people with speakers, one in corner, one against just wall. Corner loaded speaker is +2db at listening position. But they do not test this, and do not adjust balance to make up for corner loading.
That's fine, maybe they don't know, maybe they don't care, maybe it does not get in the way of their enjoyment of Kenny G.
But, would anyone buy speaker where left channel is 5db louder than right? Would anyone pay extra for speaker where one channel is louder than the other? Would you say "tone is so real, I do not care that left speaker is louder than right speaker!" Maybe you would, I cannot say. But ridiculousness of situation is obvious to me. Audiogon is full of people who go one about "detail, slam, air etc. etc." but seem deaf to fact that left ear is listening to whisper while right ear is listening to speech. It must be magic of Kenny G's dulcet tones.
>>Maybe music lover who cannot be bothered with setup is actively listening to music where actual sound is not so important. Again, I wonder why they bother buying $2000 speakers.<<
There's more to music enjoyment for many people than audiophile imaging and mitigation of room issues. Put a pair of Zu speakers down where they work in the room, aesthetically or for room function, and you can still appreciate the tonal honesty in the midrange and the jump factor giveing them dynamic life. We shouldn't discount the music lover's appreciation of a good speaker just because they aren't interested in set-up to audiophile standards. $2000 can be cheap to the music lover looking for realistic tone and dynamic life.
>>But coming back to Bjesien question -- he asked something honest and reasonable and we should do our best to answer it honestly and reasonable too.<<
Please! I am very happy with Druid HF extension because I do not like what I feel is exaggerated, unnatural HF extension which defines "hi fi" today. If Soul has HiFi extension it is not for me, although looking at super tweeter I would not expect it is so. This is maybe #1 reason HiFi people do not like Zu's. I hope nothing has changed in this respect with Soul.
Maybe I would not like Definitions based on what you suggest about their sound?
Second main reason people do not like Zu's is you get potentially dry presentation with suckout at upper bass. You can do things to fix this, but it can happen, especially if your room is working against you in this freq. range. This is a more serious problem, but then Zu has these very flat curves for Soul and it is possible new driver behaves better in this critical region.
Third main reason people dislike Druid at least is bass is not great at 30Hz, and is freak at 60Hz. I think this 70% room and 30% loading, and I can believe that new loading in Soul is better here. This is area I am most interested in actually
I think Zu's have been set-up to their disadvantage by people saying they are friendly to flea-amp SETs. In real world it is just not so. If expectation had been set correctly, I think people would be perfectly satisfied with Zu amp matching, it's just that they think 2W SET is a good idea and then wonder why it does not sound right.
PHIL: Druids are perfectly fine off axis, or setup without care. But in order to have them sound their best, you need to take care. That is all.
For people who do not care how speakers sound, then they should by $200 polk. For Zus, I play in living room, and when I don't care, walking around etc., they sound fine. But, when I sit in listening position they sound great.
There is no speaker that can sound great if you do not care about setup. It is not possible. And if you do not care about sounding great, then stick with table radio of those free white buds you get with iPod.
Maybe music lover who cannot be bothered with setup is actively listening to music where actual sound is not so important. Again, I wonder why they bother buying $2000 speakers.
But coming back to Bjesien question -- he asked something honest and reasonable and we should do our best to answer it honestly and reasonable too.
I would concur with Zanon that the Druid does not have HF extension for my liking. I have not heard Soul.
However, the more expensive brethren do much better in this regard (I own Definition 2s)---not a beryllium tweeter, make no mistake---but I do not find a lack of detail in the high frequencies.
I think the biggest drawback of Zus so far is that they aren't as amplifier friendly as a 100db speaker would allow you to believe. Or should I say, they don't sound good on all types of amplifiers. Amplifier matching on my Def2s has definitely been more difficult, but at the same time more pleasing.
>>Biggest potential dissappointment with Zu Speakers is that it does not have HF extension, and so does not create hi-fi "air" "detail" "pin-point imaging" etc.<<
Hmmm. The supertweeter goes out to 25kHz before roll-off. The original Druid certainly lacked HF detail but this problem was pretty much solved in Druid 4-08, and has never been an issue with Definition. Soul Superfly sounds extended. I have no trouble getting pin-point imaging from Soul or Definition, and Druids are much improved in this respect since 4-08. But, right, it isn't the emphasized top-end sound characterized as "hi-fi." It's more like music actually sounds in real acoustic spaces.
Now for anyone who wants that "hi-fi" sound, there's a ribbon-supertweeter Essence to take care of that.
>>With my druid setup in very large room, I think Zu needs more watts than Phil suggests. You will need to make your own call. Also, in my room, I have suckout at upper bass, which makes presentation dry. I have engaged various strategies to fix that with placement etc.<<
Lots of variables, room to room. The good thing is, if you need more power to really load an acoustic space, Zu speakers can handle it. I will say, however, that loading more power into Druids can deliver a sense of compression sooner than Soul Superfly. That is, unlike the more scalable Definition, Druids can reach a point where more power doesn't seem to be doing any more for you. I usually find this point in the 80 - 120w range with Druids. Whereas Soul just feels like it can run with more juice. It has more dynamic elasticity and throwing more watts at it will make a difference in how a large space is loaded. Both the stronger motor/lighter cone and the full Griewe loading contribute. Also, to get the same apparent dynamic life from solid state and tubes, you'll need more solid state watts generally.
>>I totally disagree with people who say speakers should be "unfussy about placement" simply because, at lower frequency, you will have room interaction and either it is working for you or working against you. Druids benefitted greatly from placement but did not need much treatment, soul are less directional so maybe they need more treatment but less placement help?<<
I'll write it again. There's no conflict between a speaker being unfussy about placement and potential benefits of precision set-up. An unfussy speaker like Soul nevertheless benefits from dialed-in placement, not to mention that the room does too. The point about unfussiness in placement is that the music lover who can't be bothered -- and that's the market Zu would really like to wake up -- can plop them down and get good, rather than crap, sound. WE here on Audiogon might not think it's right, but there's a market that just wants to put speakers where they look good or can be accommodated by the room. That crowd will like this speaker.
>>Finally, i find, contra phil, that on really massive orchestral work at high volume they overload poor single driver somewhat.<<
See prior comment about difference between Druid and Soul. Druids, somewhat, sure. Soul far less. Also, it could be your amp running out of headroom.
Biggest potential dissappointment with Zu Speakers is that it does not have HF extension, and so does not create hi-fi "air" "detail" "pin-point imaging" etc.
Personally, I find all of that stuff totally fake and do not like it. But it is to hi-fi taste, which is why we have all these terrible sounding piston speakers out there. Still, if you like that sound you will know it, and it was what Zu was chasing with the Essence.
With my druid setup in very large room, I think Zu needs more watts than Phil suggests. You will need to make your own call. Also, in my room, I have suckout at upper bass, which makes presentation dry. I have engaged various strategies to fix that with placement etc. I totally disagree with people who say speakers should be "unfussy about placement" simply because, at lower frequency, you will have room interaction and either it is working for you or working against you. Druids benefitted greatly from placement but did not need much treatment, soul are less directional so maybe they need more treatment but less placement help?
Finally, i find, contra phil, that on really massive orchestral work at high volume they overload poor single driver somewhat.
Still, scads better than most other speakers and a great price.
>>I'm curious about the flaws of this $1700 speaker.<<
No one has heard the base version yet. Only the Superfly upgrade, $2600, has been shipped so far. A limited number were sold at an intro price of $1800.
I haven't heard the perfect speaker at any price. The flaws of the Zu Soul will make themselves apparant relative to individual expectations that are difficult to anticipate. What do you expect for $2600 or $1800? Someone somewhere will think a speaker of that price should have usable output below 30Hz. OK, Soul doesn't have that. Someone somewhere might think a speaker at this price should have perfect semi-polar dispersion. Nope, not Soul. It's dispersive but compared to some speakers it's still a little directional. It pays to play with placement. Someone somewhere will say Soul isn't revealing to the nth degree of detail. It's not -- its design prioritizes tonal truth over scintilla.
But it's hard to fault a speaker under $3K with this level of balance, tone density, dynamic life, overall fidelty, unfussiness in placement, fit, finish, reliability and construction, as well as adaptability to such a huge range of amplification.
One does not have to be a sycophant to like this speaker. It's just plain convincing, accommodating, compact and well-executed. If I thought it is less than that, I'd say so. I thought Zu Essence was a mistake, for example. The speaker is shipping now, so let's see who shows up having heard it who doesn't like it, and why.
Me too but I'm inclined to hear a demo before drawing ant conclusions on that. There will always be flaws but individuals have to weigh up whether they outgun the plussea for themselves.
There may have been a nicer way of asking though :)
Mike
Phil,
Excellent list of music. Thank you. I may have more questions :)
>>Are there any particularly good inexpensive amps you've heard with Zus?<<
Yes. EL84 tube amps are a surefire success. If your room is small enough, the Almarro A205 is only 5/5w SEP, but sounds irrationally good. Sophia Baby. Glow amp. Lots of Chinese tube amps using EL84 and similar tubes in 5 - 25w SEP and push-pull.
The NAD C3XXBEEE series of integrated amps. A used NAD M3 is a great solid state alternative. Red Wine Audio does well. Cheap T amps are not my thing but they really clean up and get some tone on Zu speakers.
Prima Luna - whichever you can afford. Same for Melody. I'll make a special note for Jasmine Audio. This is a Chinese maker producing well-built, well-thought-out circuits. Their Jasmine LP2.0SE solid state phono stage is a genuine giant killer. Most of their electronics are tube circuits. Their various integrated and power amps are affordable and deeply musical. The designer is musically sophisticated and highly competent. cruzeFIRST Audio in Florida is a dealer online, but he doesn't always have inventory. You can buy direct from China. Prices are low and execution quality is beyond reproach. They make affordable but excellent EL34, 156 and KT88 integrated amps. Everything that company makes sounds beautiful. Look at www.jasmineaudio.net.
Stepping up, the full Sophia line. If you find *any* Audion amplifier, it's a golden synergistic match to Zu. Lots of options in McIntosh autoformer amps, and used or new Pass/First Watt. Dyna ST70 will be musical but if unmodified, bass will be euphonically flabby. Atmasphere OTL amps -- perfect for Druid and Soul. But in the hundreds, NAD, Almarro, Xindac, the occasional Dared and Jasmine are foolproof.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
