Zu Soul Superfly

Would the VTL Tiny Triode be a good match? $700 too much to pay for this amp?

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.

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.

Phil

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.

Zanon,

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.

Paulfolbrecht:

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.

Miklorsmith: 45W is OK. 5 or 8 is just not.

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.

IMO
YMMV
Dealer disclaimer

Amplifier question:

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.

>>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.

Phil

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

Phil,

Just to clarrify, this is not built by Tim Rawson and it was probably unfair for me to call it "Rawson-esq" as Tim act(ed) with Nelson Pass' blessing using his actual schematics. The gentleman building the Wineclone appears to be bootlegging and after actually exchanging messages with Vinny today, it is without his blessing.

Notwithstanding, I'm curious if you have actually heard the 30.2, Phil. From the reviews I've read of the clari-t amp and even the 30, your position seems to be supported regarding a slightly bleached midrange, but from what I've read of the 30.2 it sounded as if it had a warmer tonal balance than most tube amplifiers along with being very harmonically full. Hmm..

I'm also curious about the debate over power needs. My First Watt is a transconductance amp, so it may not count, but its only what? 10wpc and it controls the drivers with tremendous authority.

On a side note, I spoke with Gerrit at Zu today (his favorite amps for Zus is the Yamamoto A08s and Melody i2a3) and they got my carpet spikes in the mail. He also highly recommended that I work on getting my speakers properly situated before even considering a change of amplifiers. I've been doing precisely that for the last hour or so and its paying off. Perhaps I'd do best to put off an amplifier 'upgrade' until I can afford to make an improvement rather than lateral move.

One of the amps I used on the Essence was an 8 watt Luxman EL84. It powered them very well, though this amp with the ribbons on the Essence made them bright. I agree with Phil that the Essence was a mistake.

Although I am critical of Zu because I had a bad experience with the Essence I admit that I took a blind chance on the drop drawer praise by strageon ebane and a few other reviewers. I had my doubts but am glad they sold well and many people like them.

Anyone planning on a Mastersound amp on the Zu's? Talk about a value speaker with a seriously undervalued used market amp! I had the 24 watt 300BPSE and found it to be an amazing integrated. I'm thinking about getting a second system going, and this looks like a fun match.

Phil:

You seem to have me confused with salesperson or marketer. I am neither. I am a Zu fan, and I think that they would benefit from people being more honest about their products.

A non-audiophile music lover should stick with their 128kb mp3 and their ipod earbuds. Not that they need my encouragement to do this, as they are doing it already.

Anyone who is thinking about dropping $2K for speakers should care about sound, otherwise they are simply fool with money who wants to show off. In that case, there are flashier looking (and sounding) speakers I would point them to.

So you want to spend $2K, and you care about sound, and you are considering Soul. Good. That person can now read discussion between me and you and make up own mind about what is helpful and what is not.

Contrary to you, I do not think this individual should not care about placement or flea watts. Room interaction and time smear with high dispersion soul FRD will blur attack and kill sustain. You will have no tone left, or very unremarkable tone, just as my Druids are off axis. There will be nothing to appreciate.

Flea watts kill dynamics with congested midrange at very low listening levels. Now, maybe some people don't care about a midrange sounding like a chest cold -- their taste of course -- but it will not seem "dynamic" to anyone. If someone has small room then OK, they can go to 30W or better 40W and might be OK. And please, my issue with flea watt has nothing to do with level. The congestion has to do with ease and comes long before you are anywhere close to clipping.

While Souls eliminate fiddling with gap height (which I like) I fear higher dispersion FRD will require additional room treatment (which I do not). But I have not heard so cannot say.

It is interesting you say Souls are "substantially more likely" than Druid as people went on and one about how lively Druids were. This must by massive hyperactivity. Although they are both rated 101dbW, in practise my Druids sounded like mid to high 90s, so it is possible that Souls are more sensitive even though their "official" rating is the same.

If Miklorsmith likes Deficitions at 2W all I can say is his tastes differ widely from my own. I would not recommend his path to anyone.

Anyone who comes here from Google Bing whatever: you should get Soul as they represent excellent value and are wonderful speaker. But, to get your $2K value you will have to care about placement. I am sorry. But I hope you will find it rewarding like me, as I learned so much about music through this. And for gods sake, get amp with at least 40W

Its funny, even as we regurgitate the importance of proper setup and room interaction, I don't believe many of us actually put the work in.

I've spent the last few hours making small adjustments to my speaker placement (and doing the best I can with the hardwood footers on carpet) and its made a positive difference. I actually broke out the laser site to help with toe in and I think the efforts were worthwhile.

Staging is better and from my listening position and the sound is better balanced and perhaps a touch more nuisanced. I think the biggest change I'm detecting though is that the presentation just seems a bit smoother.

One problem I am running into is the arm of one chair kinda blocks my right channel a little (see most recent system in my profile) but we are getting there!

>>A non-audiophile music lover should stick with their 128kb mp3 and their ipod earbuds. Not that they need my encouragement to do this, as they are doing it already.<<

This is the surest way to make sure hi-fi dies as a discrete interest in the panoply of passions people can take up in life, beginning when they are young.

>>Anyone who is thinking about dropping $2K for speakers should care about sound, otherwise they are simply fool with money who wants to show off. In that case, there are flashier looking (and sounding) speakers I would point them to.<<

$2,000 isn't the same thing to everyone. To some people of little hi-fi enthusiasm but enormous music enthusiasm, it's a minor expense. There are far more looking for unfussy speakers who can deliver good sound than there are audiophiles, if they can be made aware of their options. Soul isn't a show-off speaker. It's the Model T or '32 Ford coupe with a flat-head V8, of high-end sound -- and that's a compliment. Such a buyer can care about sound and still not want to obsess on placement, or orient a room's function around their speakers. They can appreciate tonal correctness in a seriously umoptimized installation.

>>Contrary to you, I do not think this individual should not care about placement or flea watts. Room interaction and time smear with high dispersion soul FRD will blur attack and kill sustain. You will have no tone left, or very unremarkable tone, just as my Druids are off axis. There will be nothing to appreciate.<<

For whatever reason you're not reading what I write. I have never written that such a buyer "should not care about placement or flea watts." What I've written is that they should hot have to, to enjoy the essence of their loudspeaker choice. And in fact, Zu has customers who don't and won't. Terrific. At least they're in our tent and can move forward while exposing still more uninitiated people to hi-fi.

It's not a binary result. It's an overstatement to say there will be nothing to appreciate. Room interaction and time smear? The customer I'm referring to has no sense of those nuances, nor interest in getting bogged down by them. Yet they can still hear their system as spectacular to them. Get them interested, then educate.

>>Flea watts kill dynamics with congested midrange at very low listening levels.<<

No, in fact, they don't have to. In some cases, flea watt amps suffer from so much circuit simplicity that they lack sufficient voltage gain. You need a robust preamp, something more in the 18 - 22db of gain range, rather than today's all-too-common 12db gain preamp. Drive it well and a low listening level on a flea amp can be quite robust tonally and dynamically, within the power the amp can deliver. The congestion people are hearing with too little gain in their signal chain is sometimes coming from the source.

>>The congestion has to do with ease and comes long before you are anywhere close to clipping.<<

Many parameters to consider here. You can listen to flea-power amps that exhibit no discernible midrange congestion on Zu speakers, within natural limits and driven properly. Call up Gerritt and tell him his Yamamoto 45 amp is congested.

>>While Souls eliminate fiddling with gap height (which I like) I fear higher dispersion FRD will require additional room treatment (which I do not). But I have not heard so cannot say.<<

Room treatments. Another typical hi-fi botch. Many treated rooms sound worse than they started. Look, hi-fi isn't supposed to be this difficult. Use normal furnishings, bookshelves with books, blinds, curtains, whatever, to adjust a room. But what natural music performance environment is remotely close to perfect or treated for perfection? A grand total of *none.*

I installed a pair of Soul Superfly in a friend's room that has absolutely zero treatment and they sound sensational without further attention. Dispersion is better and considerabily less directional than Druid, but certainly narrower and without floor/ceiling effects mitigation of Definition. Getting the amp right with Zu speakers trumps by a wide margin anything you can do with room treatments or placement.

>>It is interesting you say Souls are "substantially more lively" than Druid as people went on and one about how lively Druids were. This must by massive hyperactivity. Although they are both rated 101dbW, in practise my Druids sounded like mid to high 90s, so it is possible that Souls are more sensitive even though their "official" rating is the same.<<

Druids, in their moment of sunshine, were a revelation in dynamic aliveness. But Soul is better although I'll say that it took my Druids three years to fully wake up. The efficiency -- or as Zu correctly states, the power transfer -- is the same but the "shove" is different. Shove and prevailing efficiency arent' the same. Two 101db/w/m speakers can differ in transient dynamic aliveness. Soul Superfly improves on Druid in this respect, and it's both an updated driver issue and the full-Griewe implementation in Soul that Druid lacks.

>>If Miklorsmith likes Definitions at 2W all I can say is his tastes differ widely from my own. I would not recommend his path to anyone.<<

Yes and yes. But Mike keeps higher power solid state amps around when he wants to rock out.

Phil

>>... I don't believe many of us actually put the work in...I actually broke out the laser ...<<

Funny. I'm tearing down both of my Zu systems tonight as I'm having custom maple tables delivered for my gear, and the laser is on the coffee table in front of me, ready for its assigned task when I reinstall everything tomorrow.

Phil

Gopher: Good for you, and you are 100% correct, most people including audiophiles do not put in effort.

You can see this clearly here on audiogon. Lots of discussion over what is best $1000 interconnect, no discussion on fact that corner loaded left channel is 3-6db louder than wall loaded right channel. Much of "audiophile" should rename itself "gearfetish".

Phil: It seems you are dead set on setting up potential Soul owner for disappointment. I cannot dissuade you. There is no tone without proper alignment, it is dead. And I will not honor your "loud preamp" argument with response. If you want dead tone with the type of "dynamic" you get with loud pre-amp, and pay $3K+ for pleasure, then please do buy Soul, plops down, and pay flea watt tubes. Phil will appear and try to sell you more stuff.

Audiofeil: Thank you for injecting some reality into discussion!

Suppose you have high power SET with Zu? Like aleph 60? I would like to think problems I have heard with Zu & SET are the obviously inadequate W, not anything to do with topology of SET which I think will work well for speaker.

for you Zu guys---i just ordered a Triode 845SE integrated amp for my Definition 2s. It's a 20 watt SET driven by 845s, of course. Can report back on the sound---but the build quality at its price level seems impressive.

I also have a Mcintosh MA6600 that works very, very well with my Zus. I had a BAT integrated before, and the McIntosh is 100% better match for Zus. If you go SS, you need warm SS.

And i'm one of those silly guys with a treated room as well--- while Zus may work great in untreated rooms, the discerning audiophile who takes the effort and time to put simple treatments will be rewarded. The difference in clarity, imaging, bass definition, and detail was night and day in my room---i would estimate 70% of your sound is speaker/room interaction. There are things I wish I had done differently now-- but putting in a bass trap or two, treating first reflections, putting some bookshelves in the back of the room, and dealing with a lowish ceiling (in my case--boy i wish i had 10' ceilings) are extremely easy to do and well worth it, despite any kind of speaker design.

Cheers,

KeithR

>>It seems you are dead set on setting up potential Soul owner for disappointment. I cannot dissuade you. There is no tone without proper alignment, it is dead. And I will not honor your "loud preamp" argument with response. If you want dead tone with the type of "dynamic" you get with loud pre-amp, and pay $3K+ for pleasure, then please do buy Soul, plops down, and pay flea watt tubes. Phil will appear and try to sell you more stuff.<<

In fact, no. You do not accurately represent my point of view nor what I wrote, and perhaps you haven't even read it thoroughly.

For you and I, tone can be dialed-in from where it starts with the speaker's and the system's intrinsic qualities. But a non-audiophile music lover can easily avoid what you refer to as "dead" sound or absence of tone. Alignment cannot create tone where it isn't intrinsically present. On the other hand, alignment can improve tone that is already intrinsic to the gear. It's just degrees. You and I might need more because we know it can be extracted. But we're not going to enlarge the community by insisting that everyone must be so precision-oriented to have fun with music via hi-fi. And certainly, that's not what Zu wishes to enforce. I want people to buy the right amp for any Zu FRD-based speaker so they have intrinsic tone, and then they can choose how far they want to go in system optimization themselves. You won't find me recommending endless incremental purchases to reach a goal.

I didn't recommend a "loud preamp." What I wrote explicitly is that some low-power SET amps (not all, and not always low powered) have lower-than-normal total voltage gain. If you pair a low gain preamp with a low-gain power amp, wherein the input sensitivity of the power amp will not allow it to be driven to full power from normal sources via said preamp, you will have more noise, less tone, and "dead" dynamic life. It's not a matter of having a "loud" preamp, but having one with neither too little nor too much gain. Too much gain presents its own problems, but if you don't have enough gain for a particular source to drive the amp to full power, you won't even get those full 2 or 3 watts.

Now, you haven't found me recommending flea-powered amps. Not once. I've written the opposite. 20 - 60 watts is the sweet spot. Although there is a strong argument for McIntosh MC501s or even MC1201s on 101db/w/m Zu speakers. The sense of complete lack of dynamic restriction from 500 - 1200w is sonically valuable if the rest of the amp is right. But, again, there is a group of people whose commitment to a tube (e.g. 45, 2a3, 50) is so firm that what they're really looking for is a speaker than can leverage their amp, rather than an amp that can leverage their speaker. I understand this. Gerritt at Zu loves the Yamamoto A-08 for reasons that satisfy him. There are many others. For that kind of listener, a Zu speaker will perform beautifully, and in fact if you are set on having only 2 watts, Soul Superfly will work better than anything Zu has built to-date.

People who like flea-power in amplification usually arrive there after having had more conventional amp topologies and power levels. So, they know what they are doing. I'm not concerned about the 2 watt crowd, because very few neophytes start their hi-fi evolution with 2w SET. Those that end up with flea power and like it, will be happy with Superfly. It's just not me. I use 25w 845 SET monoblocks on Definitions, and 25w PSET 300B monoblocks on Druids.

Phil

I must admit I have become a little disappointed with this thread. As has been observed on another forum (Google it) this thread has become a little bit of a p•••••g contest. There is from an outsiders perspective the irony that there is a debate going on about attracting non-audiophiles into the tent whilst in the midst of s discussion almost guaranteed to put them off.

FWIW I do not consider myself an audiophile. My first system was based on ignorance and from reading reviews. I struck lucky with two thirds of it and five years later sorted the other third through making the same mistake. I now have source and amps sorted and simply need speakers that produce the best from it. Little I have read here beyond Phils description of the differences between Soul and Druid would make me consider the Soul.

The problem is perhaps that people see audiophile as something to aspire to. Ignorance is clearly not bliss but generally you find that people don't use their technical knowledge to solely their own benefit but to also engage in the aforesaid type of contest.

Describing people with 2k who don't care about ghe other stuff in the terms they've been described on here won't bring them into the camp. It'll do the exact opposite. The reality is that most who spend on audio do so for a myriad of reasons that are beyond classification. Insulting any of them is unhelpful.

I have been doing this for 20 years. I've spent 9 of them listening to music and maybe have some clue about what I'm talking about for the last three.

It kind of said it all on here that whilst you were all engaged in bot talking about the speaker it tool the manufacturer to point out to Gopher that an amp is not a priority at this stage.

Anyone want to talk about ghe Soul Superfly now? :)

Mike

My basic position is that Zu Soul is a "very big tent" speaker. A huge range of people can / will find satisfaction with it. I also take the position that with Zu FRD speakers, the most important decision after buying the speakers is the amp to drive them. This decision will drive the character of the system and it overwhelms room tweaking or anything else. It doesn't saddle the Soul buyer with a high expense -- there are many affordable amps that will sound good -- but anyone inclined to spend for extraordinary quality will find that Soul can fully take advantage of outstanding amplifiers.

Buy them for music, learn about hi-fi through what they can show you if you care to, regardless how much experience you bring to the transaction. If you don't care about the hi-fi aspects, you'll enjoy them anyway (perhaps more). Music enjoyment is the first objective. No one cares about imaging when out hearing a bar band, but jump factor and dynamics definitely count.

Phil

I agree with Mike, this thread seems to have been somewhat derailed.

From my perspective I took a punt on the Soul Superfly, being located at the arse end of the world it was really quite a big punt. Shipping cost alone was about $450 and another $300 on taxes once landed! So I don't really have the luxury of taking advantage of the 60 day return policy. Why did I take the punt, I've previously owned Zu cables and like the company philosophy, etc. Have long wanted to try their speakers and this was a great (albeit risky) opportunity.

I do care about sound and in an ideal world would love to optimise room placement, etc however in the real world with wife and children this is often not the case. Having bought them unheard and unseen, I appreciated comments from Phil on the unfussiness of the Soul. These will be a second system in a small spare room. With little flexibility on placement, I realise I might not get 100% from the speakers but life is about compromise. If Phil is right, real world speakers for real people. Am I an audiophile? Probably describe myself as aspiring audiophile but really want to get back to enjoying music and off the gear treadmill. I think the audiophile trap is getting to worried about the gear and forgetting about the music. I've enjoyed Gopher's and Phil's comments about SOul Superfly and look forward to more.

Personally, I have the opportunity to buy VTL Tiny Triode, early edition with red chassis and no ability to switch from triode to tetrode (that I am aware of) and that thinking was based on comments that EL84 would be a nice match for Soul. I already have (and will be using) a GTA 300B MkII Special Edition. Somewhere in the garage is a GTA SE-40 (uses 5881) which needs some TLC which I can also resurrect. Just wanted to keep my options open.

So like Mike, I'd like to read more about Soul Superfly ;)

Phil: I take sound-centric position, not gear centric position. Placement and room is how your low MF, upper bass, and bass will sound, regardless of amps. I also have not heard good results with some of the amps you recommend AND I disagree with your pre-amp suggestion.

Soul is "big tent" speaker but so is $500 polks. Frankly, I like them more than most hi-fi speakers costing 10x. But to each their own. $500 polk floorstander will sound better than plastic earbud when playing mp3

Mike: Soul is a mystery because so few people have heard them. We have Phil's description (which, despite fact Phil and I disagree on other things I am grateful for) and a happy customer in Gopher.

We can also only make comparison to Essence and Druid. Essence has similar FRD, but clearly it is very different as anechoic reading on Zu site for Soul is so different from same reading in stereophile for Essence. So even though they look the same, it seems they are quite different. Supertweeter is welcome return to Druid. Port loading is closer to Essence than Druid, but most different.

Based on just these, I cannot say soul is easier to setup than druid. With Druid you needed to care about port loading and toe in. Its very directional FRD meant you did not need to worry about first order reflection. With Soul you can forget about port loading, but supertweeter still needs toe in care and it has wider FRD, so now you need to care about first order reflection when before you didn't.

Keithr: Nothing silly about caring about sound and paying attention to room. What is silly is paying $1000 for cables and arguing about pre-amps while you have 120Hz suckout, left channel 5db louder than right, and massive timesmear. We listen to a combination of speakers + rooms and the industry has yet to create a speaker system that manages rooms in a truly easy way. It would be, I imagine, something with omni bass, plus very directional HF, plus some kind of automatic dEQ. I do not like dipole bass (which can get pretty omni) nor do I like dEQ, but this would be true "plop it down" system. Bose I imagine might have something like this but I have no interest in them either.

>>Placement and room is how your low MF, upper bass, and bass will sound, regardless of amps.<<

Nope, don't agree. Especially with tube amps the range of driver control has a large effect on the full spectrum of low-frequency sound. Lots of minor, non-audiophile ways to mitigate room behavior, but the amp/speaker interface is set and with Zu, no amount of room optimization will change the character imposed by the amp/FRD synergy (or not). With Zu, it overwhelms room factors as a first order priority and driver for what you'll hear.

>>We listen to a combination of speakers + rooms and the industry has yet to create a speaker system that manages rooms in a truly easy way. It would be, I imagine, something with omni bass, plus very directional HF, plus some kind of automatic dEQ. I do not like dipole bass (which can get pretty omni) nor do I like dEQ, but this would be true "plop it down" system. Bose I imagine might have something like this but I have no interest in them either.<<

No one hears music in a perfect room, not even the primary performance. I am close to the investors in Audyssey, and have heard their consumer, commercial and behind-the-scenes developments. They'll "correct" your room. Whether doing so sounds better is debatable. It's not that they don't make the corrections they claim to make, it's what they have to do to the original signal to make them.

I've heard treated rooms, "advanced" acoustics concert halls. All of it disappointing. Anyone old enough to have heard a performance in the allegedly "perfect" for its time Avery Fisher Hall? Despite referencing attributes of Symphony Hall in Boston, BBN hosed the sound. It never really got fixed.

Rooms have acoustic anomalies. They can be mitigated with minor adjustment and normal furnishings. If someone wants to go further, have at it. Not me. There's another way: live within the room. I want hi-fi out in the open living spaces. I want people to be able to relate to it in their own homes. Obsessive audiophilia is knifing hi-fi for a steady bleed-out. Do what you want to optimize your Superfly installation, but don't fear you can't get good sound if you don't. Wire them up; place them logically; start having fun. They work with anything from a $300 HK receiver to $25,000 SET amps to big McIntosh power. It's as worry-free as a speaker gets in 2010. Have fun.

Phil

I contacted zu about possible upgrades to my Mk408 Druids. Sean said the new soul frd would provide more mid presence at the expense of a liitle bass output. 12 ohms vs 16 ohms means my mundorf 1.0 cap and 12 ohm duelund resistor will need to be changed to a Duelund 10 ohm resistor.

So it's worth the gamble...... I think......

The Druids play dynamics like no other.... But I have mini methods filling the bass.

I will see if the wider dispersion of the soul frd interferes with the room. I disagree that the soul bass output will be more true than I have now. My bass is amazing at the moment from 40hz and lower.

Great hobby to be able to do these experiments and hear any results!!!

The comments/experience on this thread are very interesting.

For me Zu have not produced a poor speaker, of the ones that I have owned Druid and Essence and others heard extensively the Presence and Definitions.

The Essence speaker to me is more or less a plonk and play speaker, it can be improved by fine placement, and with my current system is a very good match/balance with the other components, I can just plonk any CD on and really enjoy the music.

My experience with the Druids is that the system components need to be carefully matched, and the speakers do need time investing to get the best out of them (placement). Get the components wrong and you will be chasing the speakers around the room trying to get to the best sound, which IME can never be achieved, believe me I have spent months just doing that. Putting the Essence on the same system resolved some of the problems exhibited by the system with the Druids, but were not a complete fix, changing the system components did provide the solutions to the problems experienced with the Druids and partnering equipment.

I totally agree with Phil's findings re the power amp signature and matching with the Zu speakers, as I have experienced such, if the amp is dark sounding then the Zu speakers will show this, the same can be said of source components, dark sounding CD players IME do not work with the Druids, but are a better match for the Essence.
Zu speakers IME produce what is given to them they do not add or subtract to the music, they are the purest transducer of music that I have come across to date.

There will be times when people will say that they do not like what the speakers are doing, my question to this is "are you sure that it is the speakers, or are they highlighting a problem or less than appropriate matching of source components/amplification?"

Still waiting for the Zu Soul Superfly's to land in the UK, as so far anything from Zu has lived upto expectations.

Phil: Yes -- audessey was what I was trying to remember. I don't know if they have well integrated with any reasonable price floorstander yet. Either way, I have not loved the sound of any dEQ system but this is matter of taste.

It is fine you don't agree about importance of room and placement. Enjoy playing with your amps and preamps. And cables.

Also, listing a bunch of incorrect room/hall treatments says nothing about correct room. There is no shortage of stupidty and consequently bad results in this world.

Curious_george: I think you made very good choice buying Soul speaker. I am very eager to learn what you think when they finally make it to you.

Also please, placement is something you can do more of or less of within constraints, just like everything else in audio. My druids too are in family room with two year old and newborn, they are not in dedicated mancave. (unfortunately).

But still, even within this very domestic environment, they are carefully setup to make most of sweet spot which is in particular spot on couch. And difference in quality has taken me from dissappointing sound to perfectly enjoyable sound. If I move from sweet spot, I get back to dissappointing sound but that is OK for me, it is not bad, just not what I had hoped for given buzz around Zu. So casual listening, speaker just play and I am doing whatever. Active listening, I must be in sweet spot. Sweet spot is only big enough for 1 btw.

Distance from corner and back wall (had to move them closer) improve base. Distance apart (had to move them closer) improve tonal density. Putting on wood base improve base over carpet. millimeter toe-in did wonders for sound stage and HF. Very careful measurement gave me equal SPL both channel, and equal distance from ear (again, millimeter level). My room eats bass, so had to add sub. Positioning that took hours. Then integrated it via careful phase, volume, and digital delay. Did not need first order reflection changes on top, left, and right because of topography for room and fleece blanket over table (easily removed) solved it for bottom.

So there you have it! It is not crazy "audiophile" mancave with zero WAF but perfectly ordinary looking living room with two speakers in them used every day. However, placement of everything is millimeter precise to optimize sound of system and it make big difference. It create tonal quality (which dies off axis in non-optimized spot) and it maximized dynamic (which I still don't love from very expensive Rotel ICE amp). More importantly for all of this, it was through placement that I learn about my system and sound it makes. If you want to understand "tone" then working to optimize for it will teach you more than 100 audigon forum posts.

I know exactly what strengths and weaknesses of my system are, I know exactly why it sounds like it does, and I know exactly what parts of sound are coming from room, coming from speaker, and coming from room/speaker interaction. Therefore, I know exactly what I need to do to improve sound. Gear alone will never give you this insight and knowledge into your own playback. Taking responsibiity of speaker/room interaction is first step of taking ownership over your own sound. It gets you off the gear train, which I personally have no interest in but other people seem to enjoy fetishizing (to each their own).

Avonessence: Looking forward to your review!

Naggots: It is the new FRD I am most interested in. My instinct is not to love wider dispersion but Zu knows what it is doing in FRD so I am very curious.

>>Enjoy playing with your amps and preamps. And cables.<<

Well, I've made no changes in preamps, amps or cables in five years, and that's for two complete Zu/SET systems. I did upgrade my Druids to 4-08 parts and I traded in my Definition 1.5s to get Def 2.0s, to get rid of the MDF cabinet glare in the earlier version. My turntables are 30 years old.

The positioning of my speakers in both systems has not changed since two hours after first installation. There are no room treatments other than the mitigation of normal household furnishings. Meanwhile, by far the best time I spent on audo outside of listening to music in the past 25 years was the solid week of investigation of coupling, isolation and general resonance control I was able to carve out last year.

Of several families of options, explored in combinations and in isolation, what came out on top? If you use a turntable, placing it on cones in turn resting on Aurios media bearings will be a revelation. The improvement exceeds any cartridge and tonearm upgrade I've ever done, by a wide margin. If you use a digital disc player, magnetic levitation (when space and low player weight render it feasible) drives more improvement than upgrading to a player 10X the price of the one you have. When the player is too heavy for that, go with Aurios Classic media bearings or similar. THESE were the vivid, dramatic improvements, once Zu speakers were in place.

Point is, by getting the amp/speaker combinations right, my systems have been quite stable in configuration as well as where I placed them. The one area of changeout has been digital players. The other area of interest prompting acquisition is analog, for which I indulge in more phono cartridges that I actually need.

A speaker designer and maker (not Zu in this case) visited me after I got Zu speakers and revamped my amplification. He looked at my systems and after registering his objections about having coffee tables in the listening area of each system, and lamenting the presence of flat panel TVs, he asked me how I arrived at my speaker placement. I told him the truth. I bought Zu shortly after moving into a new house. I looked at the rooms, and on visual assessment identified where the speakers would go both for best sound and functional compatibility with each room. I also showed him how far I'd moved the speakers from their initial position during the first hour listening. There was less than three inches of movement in any direction, from first plop down.

He said he was sure he could do much better if I'd allow him to. I marked the floor with masking tape to reference the original position and let him have at it. He was competent and he makes good speakers. We ended up back in the same spots, he admitting that I had already found the right and best locations for the rooms. Of course I knew this when I let him indulge his confidence. Now, I've been doing this for decades and have moved around a lot, faced with having to sort many rooms as a result. I also once worked in the business and sorted placement for many customers. But I've never found it even remotely difficult, time-consuming or esoteric in any way. Live with the room and appreciate its voicing. Tone is intrinsic to the gear or it's not there at all. You can get tone from a jail cell if the gear is toneful to begin with. Put another way, you can hear when a guitar player has achieved exceptional tone in acoustically unfavorable circumstances -- and they're almost all acoustically unfavorable. You can hear it walking down Sixth Street in Austin almost any night before you even enter a room. Zu speakers are like that. They have intrinsic tone under even the worst circumstances.

My time spent on hi-fi now is almost all music listening rather than gear futzing. Druids were easy for me to sort out, with respect to amplification. With Definitions I willingly ran through five months of experimentation before settling on 845 SET. After that, all set. Here's one thing you can count on: from the best sound you can get from your new Zu speakers in the first three days, everything will meaningfully improve for the next two years if you do nothing more than play music.

I've been spending my own money on hi-fi for 40 years now and the most significant thing about Zu speakers is that they arrested the search for better sound and eliminated the frustrations of audiophilia, with the result that I've bought more music in the last five years than in the prior 20. I think Soul will make this true for many others. Given its compact size, price, amp-friendliness and low-tweak set-up, after a single astute amp choice within your budget (or perhaps you already own one), music will regain its rightful claim on your money and time spent on audio.

Phil

I have followed this thread with interest . . . as the owner of a pair of Zu Definition 2s that I also consider a “big tent” speaker, albeit an expensive one.

I agree with Phil, there are many music lovers more than willing to spend 2-3k on a pair of musically satisfying speakers; I know that I am. I am talking about people who want good, involving music when they cook, eat, work, read, relax, play, walk about the house, visit with friends, etc. People who are willing to make real-world compromises to incorporate music into the rest of their lives, for whom aesthetics are important, and who need speakers that are modest in size and that can be placed where they integrate into their environment. Not people for whom the only acceptable audio experience is sitting in the middle of the sweet spot in a dead-quiet, isolated space, totally focused on the sound. And, no, mass-market hi-fi is not an adequate solution. It seems that Soul Superfly may fit this bill nicely . . . and at a reasonable price. (If Superfly had been available 3.5 years ago, I probably would have tried them first . . . and maybe last.)

I have found Zu’s direct market approach to be totally consumer-friendly. Whoever answers the phone at Zu is polite and helpful and knowledgeable and if unable to answer my question, quickly finds someone who can. When Ron Williams was in my neighborhood, he spent an hour tweaking my speakers' placement. And, yes, it did make a difference. This is the opposite experience that I have had at most B&M audio stores. However, while Zu stands by their 60 day home trial – something no B&M store has ever offered – packing and unpacking and shipping speakers of this size is not a cakewalk. What I do not understand is how Zu expects to reach the music lover with its current, direct-market approach. How can a music-loving consumer discover Zu when most audio stores have barely heard of them? The internet levels the playing field for small companies, but the consumer must still search . . . and sometimes search diligently.

I have also learned what Phil means when he says that Zu speakers shift the focus of the sound to the amplifier. Every amplifier that I have tried sounds very different on the Definitions. Not better or worst, but always different. (I should thank Phil for the time that he spent answering my questions and those of others on Audiogon and similar forums.) Like the Zu speakers, my current electronics have been chosen for their visual appeal and craftsmanship (works of art, really) and ease of integration into my environment . . . not just for their rich sound.

Gary

Putting basic room treatments is certainly better than the audiophile who has 10k+ in cables, vibration pods, racks, stones, rca caps, cd demag machines, power conditioning boxes, power cords, voltage machines, etc. unfortunately i know too many of these folks. and the basic laws of physics govern room acoustics, unlike the rather subjective laws around other audiophile obsessions. but we can agree to disagree.

and with current technology, the stuff can actually look good (which 10 years ago it didn't). check out Art Panels by several manufacturers, for instance. having a zillion tube traps isn't good looking---but custom bass traps are pretty invisible in any room. and a custom bass trap costs less than an interconnect these days!

and sure Avery Fischer Hall doesn't sound great---but Disney Hall and the Meyerson do sound pretty good imo.

Speaker, amp, room. keep it simple and it works. the Soul buyer isn't going to change there room, just like any other inexpensive speaker buyer. so at least get the amp right.

cheers,

KeithR

Nag, Im not sure what the upgrade will cost you, but have you considered selling your druids to fund souls? It may prove to be A larger, more cost effective upgrade.

Zanon, how big a difference was wood vs carpet? I have spikes coming from Zu, hopefully tomorrow but am wondering if I should just place it on some 13x13 mdf with the hard floor footers.

>>I have spikes coming from Zu, hopefully tomorrow but am wondering if I should just place it on some 13x13 mdf with the hard floor footers.<<

I don't recommend this. It's better to have the speaker on an MDF or other material tile on carpet via the hard floor nubs than setting them on carpet directly without spikes, but spikes planted firmly into/through the carpet will give you and audibly more planted, firmed sound. Now if the MDF tile has spikes driven into the carpet and then the Soul on nubs is on the tile, that loosely emulates the Essence' double plinth. But why complicate things when spikes in the Soul cabinet will solve the problem in the simplest way. A 13"x13" tile lying on carpet still allows movement by the speaker sitting on it.

If you do take the tile-on-carpet option, forget nasty MDF and do it with maple.

A friend of mine partial to carpet once solved this problem in an interesting and effective way. He had his carpet cut out for his speaker footprints, inlaid parquet on the exposed floor, and put his speakers on firm footing directly on wood. Sonically, better than carpet spikes or a tile-on-carpet.

Phil

Thanks for the pointers, Phil. Can't wait to try the spikes. I realize this is NOT optimal but have been enjoying the hell out of it/listening to a ton of music just the same.

I'm also glad I put some more effort into placement, particularly making my listening room more of an equilateral triangle and using a sight to aim the tweeters a couple feet behind my head position. It is making me question whether I need to change amplification or if I'd be better served just rolling tubes in my preamp.

I am still very curious about that SLA battery powered alleged clone amp, but not sheerly as an upgrade. I want something that uses less electricity or at least is more efficient than the First Watt for summer time listening. The F1 is a friggin' sauna in the corner of my den which actually puts off enough heat to raise the temperature have the AC constantly kicking on (hate background noise) when I'm listening. Also, I'd love to just leave it on 24/7.

We shall see what happens, funds are unexpectedly tight at the moment so I'd have to sell off something to rationalize it.

I have been following this thread with interest. I was already to buy some Reynaud Bliss speakers based solely on reviews and emails from Bob Neil, then I saw this thread. I had not thought about Zu Druids before because they were 4 ft high and I thought that would not work since my room is only 11 x 14 and I listen in the near field. At 3 ft tall the Soul may be a contender. Can someone tell me if they communicate well at lower volumes. I have a Leben CS300XS and I listen at average levels of about 75 - 77 dB (according to my Radio Shack meter).

Gopher - FYI, I have one of these Wineclones, and it is a good amp. In fact it is very good for the money.

Regarding the Blessing of the Wineclone, the amp is simply a battery-powered Tripath amp. There's no patent on that - very simple idea - and no need for anyone's blessing.

I've been using mostly tube and occasionally Class A ss amps continually since buying my first component amp in 1970. Other than advising anyone to keep such an amp away from the HVAC thermostat, I've never had an amp put out enough heat to determine how often my AC runs. So other than the room being very small and the amp sitting next to the thermostat, it's hard for me to imagine a different amp for climate control reasons.

I know people who use tube amps except when they run their "summer" configuration around solid state. I haven't sensed any difference in their incidence of AC. Anyway, I know the F1 releases some heat. If you like Nelson Pass amps, you might like the M2. Very clever and voiced to be more like a tube amp, including passive magnetic gain in the input stage.

You already have a great amp. If you really need a cooler running solid state amp, consider a Quad 909, an evolution of Peter Walker's excellent current dumpiing amp, the Quad 405.

Phil

Mike,

I'm not sure what actual level I listen at, but these speakers have been enjoyable at night when I keep things a bit softer. Take that with a grain of salt as I'm told I listen to music irrationally loud--I don't feel thats the case at all but to each their own. Its not a speaker that must be cranked to come alive though, nor is it (thankfully) a speaker that comes apart when cranked (I just left a speaker like that).

Paul,

Thanks for sharing your experience with the wineclone. It is intriguing and relatively cheap (albeit fuggly). I just may give it a whirl--I'm not in a rush but I am curious after reading of Srajen's account of pairing the Signature 30.2 with Zu speakers.

Also, as it pertains to blessings--it is pretty obvious that Wineclone is marketing itself as a copy of the Red Wine Audio Signature 30.2... If its name isn't enough of a giveaway, the tag line is ""WineClone" Integrated Amplifier -- A $3000 amp for $349. " and further goes on to state "WineClone", was modeled after a very expensive ($3000) amplifier of a similar name. "

I'm not going to get into the ethics of it or anything, but it has piqued my curiosity. Especially at the price. I may drop you an email one of these days to pick your brain about its sound if you don't mind.

Phil,

It sounds completely silly, I realize but it puts out a LOT of heat. In fact, yesterday I burned my hand trying to slip a set of black diamond racing cones underneath it (I found them in my tweak chest and don't even recall buying them!).

Its also too hot for me to feel comfortable putting in my enclosed hutch where I'd really like it to be. I'm concerned for overheating problems.

Though I did bring up amps again, I'm not feeling a need to graduate/move on. The pairing is quite nice and I'd like to hold on to the Rawson built F1 AND try something inexpensive as well.

Gopher: I did not like sound of druid on spikes in carpet. My room eats enough bass as it is, this made things much worse. I did not get the "more planted" sound that Phil refers to, my bass was just even more eaten.

I also cannot tell you what wood planks I put them on. I cannot say if it was seasoned maple, norweigen birch ply, or high-quality MDF held together by glue made from thoroughbread stallions and the prayers of buddhist monks. It was just planks for hard wood I had lying around and I use it. Another benefit of the wood was that it made moving the speakers very easy, something that is quite hard with big spikes.

If I try this again in the future, I am interested to see what an even denser material like stone might do over wood. I think it is density of material that may be having effect, not "firmsness of planting". What is driving my thought here is how speaker sounds different put on slab floor instead of raised floor with cavity underneath.

And good job finding right position for supertweeter. This made big difference for me as well, and as you see, it makes you rethink what else you need to change in your playbacks!

Mike_cole: I mostly listen at lower volumes, sadly. I would like to play loud more often. They do very well at low and high volume, if you have sufficient watts.

Phil or anyone else who might know: What is the appropriate height for the Superflys? I first tried the lowest setting that allowed me to lock the spikes in place with nuts, but it was too high and sounded a little funny.

I'm now using it at about CD case height without the nuts and its sounding more balanced and resolved than on the hard floor mounts, but the spikes are not as rigid as they aren't locked. It might also be just a touch harder in the midrange, but I also swapped in a new IC that needs burn in.

I've continued to tweak and have re-achieved something special. I'm operating at just about a CD case over denser (as opposed to plush) carpeting.

The hardness is gone from the mids and things are a hair more coherent in this range. The big change, as expected, is on the low end. Bass punch and definition is a lot greater now. Well integrated, impactful bass--daddy likes.

I've found battery gear to be dull, boring. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of low power and have the off-grid bug in me. That said there is something missing in the less than 3k components I've heard including RWA paired with Devore Super 8's. I listened less.

Just wanted to mention that.

>> I did not get the "more planted" sound that Phil refers to, my bass was just even more eaten.<<

Right, you won't. Druid and Soul are different. Soul has tall spikes and the finger vents in the bottom are insensitive to floor gap, unlike Druid. Druid on spikes in carpet -- takes some real attention to get right. Soul on its spikes on carpet -- simple.

Phil

Phil,

Insensitive as in "not as critical" or insensitive as in irrelevant?

I'd like to lock the spikes in place with the nuts but would have to raise the height for that.

Also I feel like presentation has been different higher vs. lower, though in fairness I didn't have it perfectly balanced when they were higher. I broke out the bubble level when I was working for the jewel case height.qqq

>>What is the appropriate height for the Superflys?<<

Hard to say what's going on without knowing more about your overall situation. Soul is intended to be fairly insensitive to floor gap; generally no user adjustment needed. In setting up a Soul Superfly system in the buyer's carpeted room, I found height adjustment proved both unnecessary and not meaningful, short of killing sound by taking out the spikes and placing the speakers directly on the carpet.

Phil

>>Insensitive as in "not as critical" or insensitive as in irrelevant?<<

Meaning not critical, verging on not relevant. Large differences can have some effect but the design doesn't intend requirement for futzing with floor gap height. The Griewe scheme is now primarily internal via the cartridge and the finger vents on the bottom. You can find *some point* in the gap range where approaching no floor gap is not good but short of heading hard for zero, it should not be a critical factor. You need 1/4" gap or more. You'll notice in Zu's own photographs of the speakers, the spikes are quite tall.

>>Also I feel like presentation has been different higher vs. lower, though in fairness I didn't have it perfectly balanced when they were higher. I broke out the bubble level when I was working for the jewel case height.<<

Depending on many other acoustic factors you might be sensitive to differences in presentation associated with small changes in driver height. Or, as I said, if you head for zero on the floor gap less than 1/4", things will change. You may notice diffrences without having a clear idea which is actually better from a fidelity standpoint. No one can tell you what you're hearing isn't heard, but from a physics standpoint, Soul's design removes the floor gap from performance influence from 1/4" and taller.

Phil

gopher......The soul upgrade drivers will cost $400 after $200 back when I return my mk408 frd

the Duelund 10ohm resistors $40

as I live in Australia the the shipping cost is $1k and the upgrade to soul after selling Druids wld be another $1k..... I think I'll get 98% of what I want in the sound with the Frd upgrade. I acoustic damped the Druids boxes, upgraded hi pass for next to nothing ($200). As I mentioned before I have mini methods to help with bass...... Without which Druids would be lifeless in my room.

Worth a try anyway I think.....

Gopher,

Yes, the WC is a copy of the concept - probably Vinnie deserves the credit for that (almost certainly). It is an amp that gives a large portion of the same performance at around 15% of the price. For some, that is very appealing.

I found Zu varial and especially the Ash digital Ic to really open up the HF, compared to cardas and stereovox. I think as my pre and power amps are tubed maybe it was dark before?

For me it had more effect than changing amps?