anyone heard zu definition speakers?

They were the MK-IV's. The bass is taut and very satisfying down to 40hz. They don't have the kick of a true fullranger, but overall I'd definitely take the Druids over any multi-way I've heard.

I was contemplating subs. It's expensive to get a reference quality sub that would be fast enough to keep up with the Druids and still provide 20 hz extension. And, you'd need two of them for true stereo. I thought about the Method, but then it's not stereo and you're at $5,300 for the tandem, which is getting closer to the Def's.

I was worried about room integration and space. Accurate subs aren't small. And, you'd potentially be fighting room issues forever. Overall, the Definition is an excellent solution to all the concerns I've had about other arrangement. It's the 7-driver, single-driver speaker. :)

I'm happy to help to the Zu guys, if writing here makes a difference. When you have a 30+ years perspective on hifi as I do, you realize how few new designs and products stand out; how few there are that change your agenda as an audiophile; how few expand the possibilities. Especially in speakers.

In speakers in the 1950s, before I was involved, the AR1 was transformative. In the '60s, the Quad ESL, the KLH Nine and Janzsen peeled back enough veils obscuring fidelity to make plywood, by making the electrostatic speaker viable in the home. In the 1970s, when I was getting familiar with the realm, the Dahlquist DQ10 showed you could get electrostatic-like detail and focus with much better dynamic range, through carefully networked dynamic drivers; and the BBC LS3/5a defined a surprising new paradigm for nearly 2 generations of compact monitors. The '80s had little to show for design advances, apart from the magnificent aberration of Apogee. Most of the energy was put into applying rapid advances in materials and manufacturing quality to derivative designs. In the '90s the slap upside the head in speakers was the revival of efficiency and full-range drivers, instigated by the rediscovery of the loveliness of SET amps. Not all of these developments are equally noteworthy.

Now we have Zu and the founders have channeled their dissatisfaction with shouty horns, wimpy FRDs, and music-strangling cross-overs into an honest investigation for how to do it all better. They dove back into dormant research already learned and forgotten, re-examined the physics of getting fidelity from transducers, innovated and brought us speakers that have it all. Not perfect, but clearly better than what came before, and a real advance for any kind of listener with nearly any music or amp preference.

Few have done such a thing, lately. And no, little balls or big colorful plastic horns don't count. Nor does a Frank Gehryesque stack of boxes in nice paint, for example.

New, small companies like this progress on the evangelism and energy of their early customers. And the fact that this is a company committed to manufacturing in the USA and...AND...is making money exporting to Asia, only makes it more worthwhile to spend a little time explaining Zu when I can. It's all stream-of-consciousness writing however and I only wish I had time to write it more concisely.

By the way, it is in the treble where a Druid owner upgrading to Definitions will find their first surprise. Everything from impedance curve to frequency response on the Definition is flatter. That means the Druid's trace of old-school warmth is mitigated. As wonderfully open as the Druid is, the Definition puts Tom Waits' and his cigarettes in your living room. So, get a can of Glade, before they show up at your door.

Phil

At $9K+ they are not going to be showing up at my door. Maybe the rich neighbors on the other side of town, but not mine. The Zu guys appear to be a talented and dedicated bunch, so let's hope the next piece of innovation they bring us is priced for the average joe. By definition, innovation doesn't have to be expensive.

I owned the Druids and they are outstanding at $2,800. They were far more convincing musically than Gallo Ref. 3's they replaced.

And, at (I think) $1,700, the Tone monitors still support 101 db efficiency and the same delicious house sound the others provide.

Nealhood, agree $9K is not average joe territory, not in my neighborhood anyway. But much of this thread has been extolling the virtues of the Druid which, it has been said, may be preferred by many to the Def. At under $3K I would surmise it is not too far away from the average $ most audiophiles spend on speakers, Bose brainwashees not counted. The Gallo Ref 3, for example, has been lauded as being a great value for money and it is in the same price range.

Also, I need to pick a nit here, less so from a grammatical than a polemic standpoint, although both apply. When you say "by definition" you are implying a textbook/dictionary meaning, but then you cannot qualify the qualifier by saying "doesn't have to be". Just a very confusing sentence there dude, and that's not even considering your ostensibly Freudian-slip use of the word "definition", as in... the speaker under discussion!