[ton1313]

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/zu/druid.html

I had the Druids in my system for @ 3 years & was absolutley thrilled with their perfornmance. This article is from a reviewer that actually purchased the speakers, rather than just having them sent to him for a review.


Enjoy

[miklorsmith]

I own these and love them.  They are detailed and musical and can unravel the most complex passages with ease, at any volume.  They don't  need power but can "do" it if need be.  This review closely reflects my time and observations with these, all the way down to the break-in!

They need a quiet setup, and your preamp volume control may need some adjustment though.  There are some matching issues with hypersensitive speakers.

[Vinnie R.]

I own these and love them.  They are detailed and musical and can unravel the most complex passages with ease, at any volume.  They don't  need power but can "do" it if need be.  This review closely reflects my time and observations with these, all the way down to the break-in!

They need a quiet setup, and your preamp volume control may need some adjustment though.  There are some matching issues with hypersensitive speakers.

Srajan should be getting the Clari-T and custom Clari-T (that Michael Lavorgna just reviewed: http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/redwine/clarit.html) and will let 'em rip with the Druids!  This is going to be some review  

Thanks to miklorsmith for letting Srajan know about this combo!

[ton1313]

I hope that he further posts what happens when he gets the new gear.

I do have to say that I did get rid of my Druids, only to upgrade to the Zu Definitions, and the difference is not subtle

I can only hope that Srajan gets a chance to review the Definitions. If he really liked the Druids, he will freak out with the Definitions.

[miklorsmith]

The Definitions are pretty and the only thing I'd consider "upgrading" to, though I'm interested in OB's too.  How much do those beasts weigh?  Four powered 10's per side for bass, plus two passive wide-rangers, plus a supertweeter??!?!?!  With 101 db sensitivity?  Man, those must be Smokin'.  

It appears Srajan also has a Modwright SWL 9.0SE on-hand to facilitate his pursuit.  Basically, I'll be getting his impressions of my setup.  How very cool.  Meshing my beloved Modwright and Vino gear, in tactical prose!  A rose, indeed.

Again, what a fun time to be doing all this.  Can't wait for my stock Teac to start yet another chapter!!

[JeffB]

I was looking at the spec sheet for the TA2024 chip, located here:
http://www.tripath.com/downloads/TA2024.pdf

There is a graph of frequency response against 4 Ohm and 8 Ohm.
On 4 Ohm speakers the graph starts to dip at about 6k and hangs on pretty good until 10k.  At 20k its down .5 db.
On 8 Ohm speakers the graph starts to rise at about 3k and holds on pretty good until 10k.  At 20k is up .7 db.
The 4 Ohm graph is a little flatter than the 8 Ohm graph.  Although the 8 Ohm graph is a little flatter below 40Hz.

The Druid's are 12 Ohm.
I wonder if the high frequencies rise even faster at 12 Ohm.

Of course you can't really judge anything based upon specs.

[213Cobra]

I have a pair of Zu Druids on one system and a pair of Definitions on another. Srajan's perceptions of the Druids are spot-on.

The Definitions weigh 120 lbs each, about double what the Druids weigh. The two speakers sound significantly different while at the same time sharing in common the elemental assets of Zu's understanding of fidelity. The distinguishing characteristics of both are 1/ absolute uniformity of transient behavior up and down the frequency range; 2/ phase coherence that when first experienced sounds "wrong" until your brain understands you're not listening to a "normal" loudspeaker (this lag of comprehension takes from minutes to hours, depending on the listener's perceptive abilities and experience); 3/ aliveness that only comes from high efficiency combined with power handling; 4/ intimacy that presents detailed information even at low levels; 5/ ability to project sound into the room for uncanny perception of depth dimension when appropriate; 6/ all of the above are delivered without the destruction of tonal fidelity that usually accompanies speakers that are strong in only 2 or 3 of the preceding characteristics.

The Definitions deliver more of the above prioritized differently, and expand the Zu ideal. First, you get the 20Hz - 40Hz information not delivered by the Druid. The overall tonal character of the midrange through treble is even more neutral. Lateral imaging is more forgiving of room and placement compromises. Dynamic character is effortless on moderate power. Overall, the Definition manages to sound meatier and more delicate at the same time. It is in all practical ways a better speaker  than the Druid, and it should be for the cost difference.

However, the experience of hearing both Druids and Definitions is to be impressed by how much the Druid offers at 1/3 the price, rather than be overwhelmed by the Definition's superiority. I enjoy having both. The Druid feels intimate and clubby, but ready to explode as the music demands. The Definition is more sparkling and energetic, but able to tamp its enthusiasm to reveal the quiet corners of a performance.

It's what the two Zu models share that is most important, and I am speaking as a person involved in audiophilia for over 30 years: These speakers are absent fatigue. Your room introduces compression before the speaker does.  They are among the least room and placement-sensitive speakers I've ever heard and certainly the least so of any I've owned.  They are at once startlingly revealing and yet mediocre recordings never sounded better. You have time to upgrade your associated equipment because Zu speakers manage to make the best of what they are fed. Yet they show the truth about what can benefit from further attention.

I could write much more, but perhaps question will focus my reactions to them. Whichever Zu speaker one can afford, either can mitigate or eliminate many dissatisfactions people in our hobby have about their sound systems.

Phil

The Definitions are pretty and the only thing I'd consider "upgrading" to, though I'm interested in OB's too.  How much do those beasts weigh?  Four powered 10's per side for bass, plus two passive wide-rangers, plus a supertweeter??!?!?!  With 101 db sensitivity?  Man, those must be Smokin'.  

It appears Srajan also has a Modwright SWL 9.0SE on-hand to facilitate his pursuit.  Basically, I'll be getting his impressions of my setup.  How very cool.  Meshing my beloved Modwright and Vino gear, in tactical ...

[ton1313]

Well put Phil.

Absolutely no listening fatigue! I forgot about that. When Zu did their east coast demo, I was there for the entire presentation and listened all day without my attention wanting to do something else.

That really is one of their best features.

[miklorsmith]

The website is wrong about the impedance, I believe.  The site shows 12 ohms, while I think the MK-IV version has been reduced to 8.  Anybody know different?

No fatigue at all.  And, I wouldn't say they make bad recordings sound bad but they do make you question the recording engineer's decisions/skill.

Excellent words, 213Cobra.  I'll start saving my sheckels straight away.  

[Vinnie R.]

And, I wouldn't say they make bad recordings sound bad but they do make you question the recording engineer's decisions/skill.

This is what a very good audio system does...it let's the music through with "no chaser"  

[JohnnyLightOn]

In the specs for the Definition, it describes them as "limited dispersion".  Does that mean there is a small listening sweet spot?

[213Cobra]

The website is wrong about the impedance, I believe.  The site shows 12 ohms, while I think the MK-IV version has been reduced to 8.  Anybody know different?...

My Druids were upgraded to Mk IV configuration when I bought them in an Audiogon purchase, and shipped to me from the factory.  Sean Casey verified the 12 ohm impedance spec in several contexts of our communications then and since. The Definition is nominally 6 ohms with an even smoother impedance curve.

Another quality of Zu speaker engineering is that music with complexity and density to transient events -- OK, music with lots of stuff going on -- is not smeared as volume increases. At concert-level volumes individual instruments can be followed in dense rock. This weekend, my wife and I listened to the SACD reissue of Pink Floyd "Dark Side of the Moon" on the Definitions for the first time at as much volume as my room could handle (because, well....you either listen to that album loud or you don't listen to it at all).  No speaker in my experience ever played that recording so cleanly. We experienced none of the underlying fatigue or anxiety usually produced by encroaching compression and smearing as volume rises. Now this is an attribute of Zu transducer engineering, with contributions from lack of crossover, there being only a simple network to roll-in the supertweeter and mechanical roll-off between the FRD and the sub-bass array. But it's also a product of efficiency that allows even modest-power amplifiers to perform with plenty of headroom.  High-volume music washes over you and you sense the speakers and amps are completely relaxed about doing the work. Similarly, the SACD of Dylan's "Highway 61" never sounded to me as immediate, powerful and clear at appropriately intense volume as on either Druids or Definitions.

I've never listened to much recorded symphonic music because compared to a live performance, the sound is so disappointing.  I grew up close enough to Philadephia to have had many chances to hear the Eugene Ormandy-led Philadelphia Orchestra live when I was a kid. Later, I spent a decade in Boston able to regularly attend Boston Symphony concerts in the incomparable Symphony Hall.  By contrast, even the most ambitous home systems got orchestral music seriously wrong. Too many drivers with too much crossover circuitry and brute-force amplification that was indelicate. Or too little dynamic range. Or insufficient weight to the sound. Or disturbing compression. And usually some combination of all these were present.  So I'd listen to symphonic music only when I was in the mood to experience melody without any pretense of expecting drama. I didn't even try to assemble a system that would be credible on orchestral music because all my experience hearing systems that could scale to a symphony got further from communicating emotion as size, complexity and price rose. Has there ever been any worse sound than Krell tri-amplification using six mono amps? Even Jadis tube amps in that configuration stepped away from what could be accomplished with less.

When I got Druids I started listening to orchestral music again, with just a 300B stereo amp. The dynamic aliveness was present again.  Subtlety is preserved when dynamics are assertive. Spaces in the music aren't crowded out. And the Definitions go further, extending the bass foundation, opening the soundstage, planting the characteristics of the native hall of the recording in your room. You will no longer have to choose between dry juggernaut acoustic power and emotional liquid anemia.

A word about cables. I've never spent much time in the cables rathole. Not that cables don't make a difference. It's just that they seldom make an unconditional improvement.  Instead, cables behave as though you were just handed a parametric equalizer with the settings fixed in place by someone else who never listened to your room and system. If you could know how all cables sound you could choose for tuning out other component anomalies. The value isn't there, the economics of cables are completely in favor of the vendor, and pricing is based on whim not margin. With some exceptions, most of the cable business is a calculated wealth transfer scheme untethered to value delivery in the product.

However, when I bought my Druids, communications with Zu evidenced them to be devoid of nonsense. Without pushing, Sean Casey laid out his case for his Ibis speaker cables. I bought them and it's a good thing I did.  The Zu Ibis cable is the first speaker cable I've ever auditioned that unconditionally improved every aspect of system performance. It is all advantage at the expense of nothing other than money.  Every other cable I've heard, regardless of price, has introduced error along with advance.  Always an unacceptable degradation to get a specific improvement. The same is true with their Birth and Mother power cords. So many power cords make amps and disc players in particular sound worse. Not Zu. I haven't tried their interconnects yet but will. I expect to have full Zu cabling in the few months.

Both of Zu's speakers are worthy of the best associated equipment you can possibly afford and yet you will find whatever amps and sources you have never sounded better. You can focus on simplifying your system with fewer and higher quality components. Focus on amp quality not power or ability to handle challenging loads. Many modest disc players are delivering good sound that crossovers and inelegant amps are mangling on the way to the transducers.  Put Zu speakers in your system it gets easier to balance the rest of your system, musically and financially. Zu speakers can reduce the gear churn for every audiophile who settles on them. You will be surprised how many dissatisfactions with upstream equipment trace to speaker deficiencies. The weakest link probably isn't the one you're eyeing for upgrade right now.

Phil

[213Cobra]

In the specs for the Definition, it describes them as "limited dispersion".  Does that mean there is a small listening sweet spot?

The dispersion limitation on the Definition is vertical and is engineered as a design choice. Floor and ceiling effects are minimized and the vertical sweet spot is seated position.  The horizontal optimal listening window is more generous than the Druid's, and this has benefits for home theater and group listening to music. However, sweet spots in both speakers have gradual boundaries. The sound doesn't collapse upon an inch of movement outside an imaginary boundary.

Phil

[JohnnyLightOn]

Thanks for the info, Phil.  

[Tbadder1]

Boy am I glad to see this thread.  For some reason Druids have been dumped on over the last couple of years (like the Soundstage review) but I've always thought they were the best single driver system I've ever heard.  I kow the supertweeter makes that statement kind of inaccurate, but done right, there's no excuse not to have a supertweeter.  I think they blow away the Fostex designs out there.  I mean I love to rock, and these babies like it loud, soft adn in between without strain or break up.  And I'm using a 300B amp and get terrific spls.  It's true the matching stuff though.  I was first driving them with a 2A3, too much hum.  300B--dead quiet.  What a truly delightful speaker for an incredibly reasonable price.

[topster]

The point that the Druids require a quiet, noise-free setup was mentioned both by miklorsmith and also by Srajan.

Maybe I'm missing something, but why would very efficient speakers make this a requirement? Wouldn't the noise level be relative to the level of the music, and be amplified relatively by the amplifier to the level of SPL needed by the listener?

I don't see where the efficiency of the speakers come into this equation.

Maybe someone could enlightenment me on this.

[Panelhead]

The point that the Druids require a quiet, noise-free setup was mentioned both by miklorsmith and also by Srajan.

Maybe I'm missing something, but why would very efficient speakers make this a requirement? Wouldn't the noise level be relative to the level of the music, and be amplified relatively by the amplifier to the level of SPL needed by the listener?

I don't see where the efficiency of the speakers come into this equation.

Maybe someone could enlightenment me on this.

  The higher efficiency speakers produce more volume per volt. This makes the hum and other noises much louder.
  I went to 100 dB speakers a long time ago. They make grounding issues and power supplies much more critical.

                                 George

[topster]

The higher efficiency speakers produce more volume per volt. This makes the hum and other noises much louder.
  I went to 100 dB speakers a long time ago. They make grounding issues and power supplies much more critical.

                                 George

I agree with that, but that also applies to the music. So for a given listening volume, higher efficiency speakers require less gain than lower efficiency speakers, meaning the noise would be amplified less. Which should mean that for the same listening volume, the noise to music amplitude ratio should be identical regardless of speaker efficiency.

Unless the point of the exercise is to turn up the gain on the amplifier to listen to background noise without putting any music on. If that's so, I can see that high efficiency speakers will play the noise louder at a given amplifier level.

Let me know if I'm missing something.

Thanks!  

[Panelhead]

What you are missing is that the amplifier hum is source level independent. The amplifier hum is a constant.
  When you crank up the volume and hear more hum it is a function of the source and/or the preamp noise level.
  The ratio of source noise to amp noise is what the volume pot adjusts. The higher efficiency speakers are like turning the amp volume up, more noise. The decreases the ratio of amp noise to source noise.
  With lower efficiency speakers amplifier noise is minimized. Along with dynamics, detail, and a couple of other nice artifacts.
   Hope that helps.


                             George

[topster]

What you are missing is that the amplifier hum is source level independent. The amplifier hum is a constant.
  When you crank up the volume and hear more hum it is a function of the source and/or the preamp noise level.
  The ratio of source noise to amp noise is what the volume pot adjusts. The higher efficiency speakers are like turning the amp volume up, more noise. The decreases the ratio of amp noise to source noise.
  With lower efficiency speakers amplifier noise is minimized. Along with dynamics, ...

Ah! You're right. I assumed all the noise occurred prior to the amplification and that obviously isn't true. So what's important is that the power amplifier is quiet, not so much the other stuff upstream.

Thanks!