[LeroyC33]

Hello, everyone.  I have been reading a lot of threads about Zu speakers lately, and I have been wondering about this for a long time, and I couldn’t figure this out.  Whenever people talk about Zu speakers, they talk about Zu speakers having a distinctive “Zu sound” that is different from other speakers.  But, even from reading many threads about Zu speakers, I cannot figure out exactly what that sound is.  What exactly is the “Zu sound”?  Not to open up a firestorm here, but how exactly do Zu speakers differ from other speakers in terms of their sound?  Do Zu speakers disappear into the music more than other speakers do, do they sound less like speakers and more like a live performance than other speakers do, do they sound less like box, or triangle speakers, as the case may be, than other box speakers, etc., etc., etc.?  Can anyone who has heard them answer this for me?  I would really like to know how their sound differs from other speakers, and what exactly the “Zu sound” is?

Thanks in advance to all who answer, I appreciate it.

[sts9fan]

I have had my druids for over a year now but I could not answer your question.  What I can tell you is that I love em!

[miklorsmith]

I doubt this will turn into a firestorm.  I've owned four pairs now.  The answer isn't short and I won't cover it all, but here are sketches:

First, like anything, hearing them is way better than any description, regardless of aptitude.  The three best words are coherence, tone, and dynamics.  Not incidentally, these factors are my top three in assessing merit.  Zu showed me these qualities, spotlighted, and I have come to treasure them through exposure.

Coherence - They speak with one voice, unlike the obviously assembled parts of other speakers.  As a guitar works the fretboard, a singer expresses great range, a cello joins the fray, and a drumkit punches through it all, the parts are painted on one cloth.  They also render large ensembles exceptionally.

Tone - String pluck, resulting vibration, and sympathetic instrument resonance transmit directly.  Horns drip with tonal wetness and that drum skin isn't just a *thwack*.

Dynamics - This word is generally used describing capability from quiet to loud in a short time.  I use it differently, meaning the ability to track minute changes in the handling of an instrument.  They do go macrodynamic all over your ass and don't fall apart like some sissy single-drivers.  It makes sense due to exceedingly high efficiency and minimal (no) XO networks through the meat of the music band.  The pro-derived drivers explain the unflappable composure.

They are not terribly fussy about electronics or recording quality.  Some will probably say that means they are not high-resolution instruments, I believe it is because they focus on musical elements and ferret out what is good rather than magnifying what is not.

Where they fall short - they are not the last word in microscopic detail.  This may be good or bad; they do not kick you in the chest on double bass (though the Def. Pros and 2s can be dialed to do this); they are not the last word in frequency extension (except the Def. 2s); some may not be the ultimate in flat frequency response; imaging/soundstaging, don't know - others say they are good, I don't pay attention.

Depending in which camp your tent resides, they might be *very* different, or not so much.  Omega speakers are directed at many of the same values and their sound is more similar than different.  Other hi-efficionados are following the same core values and probably would take little adjustment time.  If you have heard only 87-91 db two-and three-way speakers they probably will sound a lot different.

They are working through the complaints.  The Def. 2s are a marked change from the 1.5s and Pros, in a good way.  They keep what made them great and add shimmering highs, even more direct expression, and a much better bass bin.  The Druids now have an option for the hi-zoot supertweeter network which should quell a lot of dissent.  And, the Presence (which I have not heard) fills a significant price gap.

[Srajan Ebaen]

It's a good question, actually 

Whether I'm equal to answering it remains to be seen...

Some speakers approach things with resolution. It's all about infinite detail.

Zu approaches things with tone and timing, then dynamics. Resolution in the typical meaning comes further down the road. Zu also likes bass which adds foundation and deepens tone. So there's tone density and tone color and excellent rhythm and good dynamics (though not as extreme as horns do dynamics). Until now, the top end wasn't as open and endless as tends to be the norm (which a Raal ribbon tweeter would address if it could be made to integrate). Edge definition, that crispy-fried outline articulation, also isn't "to spec" in the current audio trend for hyper realism. Yet the Zu sound isn't at all sloppy or fuzzy.

Compared to the Rethm Saadhana which is based on a Lowther DX55 with serious modifications, the Zu sound isn't as holographic and acute. The Lowther is dialed for speed and precision. The Zu sound does scale very well.

Coherence with Zu is very good which won't tell you a thing until its opposite has been replaced. If you're used to a patched-together sound, you will no longer hear it as being patched together and call it perfectly coherent. You'll only appreciate coherence if you migrate to something with less seams - and then less again.

Another way of saying it is that Zu is a somewhat old-fashioned sound that goes back to the days of tubes where tone, color, micro-dynamics and organic flow were valued. Where Zu is modern is with its insistence on full bass coverage and to be able to crank the wick without apparent compression (of course anything can be overdriven if you keep going beyond sanity). Apparently -- I concur with miklorsmith -- recent tweaks at Zu are about integrating a more sophisticated treble and with it, a bit more apparent treble resolution to satisfy those 'modern' expectations without giving up on their core values.

My Presence loaners just got here so it's too early to tell but once they've got the necessary hours on 'em, I'll be able to compare 'em to my Definition Pros and see what gives on that count.

One last useful bit? Zu likes tubes and their speakers are deliberately friendly to 'em. You needn't use 'em and transistors will work splendidly but if you're a valve cat, Zu speakers are one brand that'll do 'em justice. And though on paper, others may say the same thing, it doesn't always work out that way.

[ferenc_k]

Just to add one thing. You can start with the Tone and later can add one or two Mini Method subs. A Tone + 2 Mini Methods is a real world class system and give you a lots of flexibility if you have a difficult room. The Tone + Mini Methods is one of the best sat and sub speaker combo. The sealed box speaker plus a pair of sealed box sub is very easy to integrate and can go practically any loud or quiet you want and keep the body and textures of the singers and instruments even in a late night listening session. Very enjoyable if you are about rhythm, pace, timing and punch nad you are listening modern pop, world and jazz music as well.

[LeroyC33]

Do Zu speakers sound more "realistic", "true-to-life", and give more of a "you-are-there" quality than other speakers?  Do they sound more like a live performance where the performer is right in front of you than other speakers?  I currently have the Hyperion HPS-968s, which are a good pair of speakers, but I am looking for speakers which make the music sound more realistic, and more live, and I am trying to decide whether or not I should make a bid on those Zu Definition Mk2s, that are up for auction on Audiogon.  I don't want to spend all those thousands of dollars on Zu speakers, and then find out that they are worse-sounding, (in terms of being less realistic), than my 968s.

It's strange, when I posted this same question up on Audiogon, there were several negative replies, and no positive ones, with many people saying that the Zu speakers are fatiguing to listen to for long periods of time.  Here is the link to that discussion:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?cspkr&1202417980&read&3&4&

And, while I find everyone's answers to be very informative, and I respect everyone's opinion, I am trying to find out whether or not the speakers sound more realistic and more true-to-life and real, like the performer is performing right in front of you than other speakers.  Do the Zu speakers' particular sound make the music played through them sound more realistic--like live music that is played right in front of you, or less realistic and have their own particular signature--that sounds different from reality, and maybe that's the reason why everyone likes them, than the real thing being played right in front of you?

I respect everyone's opinion, and respect the right for everyone to like their own particular pair of speakers as their favorite that puts out a particular sound that suits them and that sounds good to them, regardless of whether it sounds realistic or not, and I believe that all speakers are equal anyway, it just depends on the listener's preference for the particular sound that they like. But, my particular idea of good sound is sound that sounds "real", or like a live performer is playing right in front of you.  And I am wondering if the Zu's deliver on that promise, and whether or not they sound more like live music is being played right in front of you than other speakers.  Please forgive my particular taste, I know that a pair of speakers can sound perfectly good to someone whether or not they sound very realistic at all. 

What is the difference between real music, and then music as played through the Zus, and then real music played through other speakers?  Which of them sounds more like reality?

Just an honest inquiry here for possible future purchasing's sake, not desiring to start any trouble, but feel free to chime in anyone.  Anyone who can shed some light on this situation is welcome to reply.

[saisunil]

In some way - you are seeking - what most audiophiles seek (me included ) - to get as close to the live music as possible.

I have only heard the Zu's at shows - twice.
Both time - I  could not tolerate to stay in the room for more than 10 minutes (max).
Another room that has been consistently disengaging for me in the shows is Vandy's.

To my ears and my tastes - Zu's were too lit up (almost sounded distorted) and Vendys were too dark for me. I wanted to give two examples of speakers with large following and seemingly opposite approach and sound extremely different. Both these speaker makers claim to get you close to what's on the disk/source.

I know there are folks that love speakers for Zu and Vendy.

So more to the point that you got to hear these speakers to decide which ones are for you. There are always deals going on.... It is important to match amp/source/cables etc for true synergy to your ears in your room.
Associated equipment, choice of music, room etc. all contributes in addition to personal taste and preferences.

Good Luck

[miklorsmith]

So, you're trying to discern whether going from one well-regarded speaker to another will be an upgrade to you personally?  Based on others' opinions?

I have heard a lot of hyped up speakers and come away unimpressed.  It seems my particular biases lean toward the values listed above where others place them lower on their list.  Or, maybe we envision differently what those terms mean.

I did read the Agon thread, it's a puzzler to me.  Well, the part about the ears bleeding for sure.  Zu threads have always been divisive but I've never heard that one before.  I owned the Druids and found them quite musical.  The bottom-heavy comment I can understand, though mine never sounded that way.  I would imagine the same listener with the new tweeter network in the same speakers would feel differently.

As to more "there" feeling?  To me, these are the most "there" I've experienced.  Obviously, other folks feel differently.  Which are you?  The long posts above are aimed at describing what Zu does well to try to help you figure out whether your personal values dovetail with theirs.  What "live" means to you is different than other folks, so me telling you they sound more "present" or "there" or "live" or whatever can easily be undone by someone else who disagrees.  The Agon posts were simply that way - "I don't like it".  This is helpful if a show of hands is your benchmark, not so much if you're trying to discern the character of the speaker.

At the current price, those Def. 2s are a steal and could be resold with little loss if need be.  I will say of the number of folks that have heard my 2s, all have been impressed.  I think they check every mark on the audiophile checklist, allow tiny amplifiers, and offer a combination of strengths I don't know exists in any other speaker on the planet.

On the question of shows, Zu has never shown well as has been documented over the last several years.  They will admit that and in fact did not have a room at RMAF.  Why?  I don't know, and they probably don't either.  I would try to seek them out in an owner's home to reach true assessment.

But, this is just my opinion.

[sloopjohnb]

Does anyone have any experience with the Druid Credenza?

I was wondering about the pairing of a Druid Credenza and a Mini Method sub or maybe 2 Mini Methods.

What would be the limitations as far as room size for a system like this.

I am trying to find speakers and a phono stage that will match with an amp I just purchased,

Melody I300B Integrated Amplifier

thanks,
woody

[Anglo]

It's a good question, actually 

Whether I'm equal to answering it remains to be seen...

Some speakers approach things with resolution. It's all about infinite detail.

Zu approaches things with tone and timing, then dynamics. Resolution in the typical meaning comes further down the road. Zu also likes bass which adds foundation and deepens tone. So there's tone density and tone color and excellent rhythm and good dynamics (though not as extreme as horns do dynamics). Until now, the top end wasn't as open and endless as tends to be the norm (which a Raal ribbon tweeter would address if it could be made to integrate). Edge definition, that crispy-fried outline articulation, also isn't "to spec" in the current audio trend for hyper realism. Yet the Zu sound isn't at all sloppy or fuzzy.

Compared to the Rethm Saadhana which is based on a Lowther DX55 with serious modifications, the Zu sound isn't as holographic and acute. The Lowther is dialed for speed and precision. The Zu sound does scale very well.

Coherence with Zu is very good which won't tell you a thing until its opposite has been replaced. If you're used to a patched-together sound, you will no longer hear it as being patched together and call it perfectly coherent. You'll only appreciate coherence if you migrate to something with less seams - and then less again.

Another way of saying it is that Zu is a somewhat old-fashioned sound that goes back to the days of tubes where tone, color, micro-dynamics and organic flow were valued. Where Zu is modern is with its insistence on full bass coverage and to be able to crank the wick without apparent compression (of course anything can be overdriven if you keep going beyond sanity). Apparently -- I concur with miklorsmith -- recent tweaks at Zu are about integrating a more sophisticated treble and with it, a bit more apparent treble resolution to satisfy those 'modern' expectations without giving up on their core values.

My Presence loaners just got here so it's too early to tell but once they've got the necessary hours on 'em, I'll be able to compare 'em to my Definition Pros and see what gives on that count.

One last useful bit? Zu likes tubes and their speakers are deliberately friendly to 'em. You needn't use 'em and transistors will work splendidly but if you're a valve cat, Zu speakers are one brand that'll do 'em justice. And though on paper, others may say the same thing, it doesn't always work out that way.

Fantastic write up.

I really like this forum.

[213Cobra]

I have Druid Credenzas in my office, which is a 15' x 18' room with 11' ceiling. I am powering them with an ICL-Softone 300B stereo integrated amp with 7/7w power. This combination can easily drive a larger space.

Credenzas + a pair of Mini-Methods will approximate a Druid Mk4 with some added bass depth and punch. If you have the floor space, buy Druids. If you have a Credenza precluding floorstanding speakers, get Credenzas and add one or two Mini-Methods (or a Method) if you want full range extending below 55Hz or so. Credenza is essentially the top 18" of a Druid, and while the cabinet is bottom-vented, it is too short to offer the complete Greiwe effect. However, Credenza isn't really suited to stands. It is a Credenza or table-top speaker.

As for a phono section that will mate with a Melody tube amp and Zu speakers, I have three to suggest that won't break the bank:

1/ Wright Sound Wpp200c -- This is a tube unit, neutral and beautiful sounding, with 60db gain.
2/ Jasmine LP 2.0 -- Robust, well-engineered solid state Chinese phono pre that is superbly musical and a good complement to a tube system; 70db gain.
3/ Used Bel Canto Phono 1, or if you have the cash, the current production Phono 3. The Phono 1 is a silicon jewel that can be had for well under $1000; 60db gain.

All work well with Zu's sensational Zu103 iteration of the Denon DL103 phono cartridge.

As for the sound of Zu, the simplest way to describe it is: Lifelike, natural and alive. I heard the Definition 2, Presence, Druid Mk4.08 compared with each other and with Definition 1.5 and older Druids all together in the same space last weekend. I'll comment on the full line in a separate post. But for now I'll say that Definition 2.0 is on balance the best single speaker I've listened to in over 35 years of high-end audio. Also, I disagree with SixMoons on the Presence -- it isn't better than Definition 1.5, but it is a class-leading superb speaker that closes a critical price gap in Zu's line and it is spectacularly well-executed. Current Druids continue their uniquely effective delivery of peak value, holistic sonic representation, near-field musical intimacy, amp friendliness and tone-rich accuracy into a market that dearly needs their simplification of affordable hi-fi system assembly. I posted more complete comments to Audiogon yesterday, but the continuing censorship practices there seem to have short-stopped my contribution.

Phil

[miklorsmith]

Thanks Phil!  That crap won't happen here, fire away!!   

[dspringham]

Phil & Mike (Miklorsmith)

Thanks for your valuable and sensible contributions regarding the Zu products. In fact, I made the decision to purchase a preowned pair of Druid IV's sight unseen (or unheard) based on past posts made by both of you regarding the "Zu sound" - and I am happy to say I have no desire to upgrade at this point in time. I have especially enjoyed Phils perspectives based on his thirty-some years of hi-fi experience and I support Mike's last comment - "fire away" Phil.

My persepctive of the Zu Druid sound...

I did purchase and install the new Druid "Signature" tweeters with upgraded (simplified) network and found the improvement in the highs to be delightful (more extended and open) while uncompromising to the "rightous tonal foundation" upon which the Druid is based.

Just for comparison, I did audition a pair of Devore Super 8's (a very well designed and regarded system) and "in my room, with my electronics" they came off sounding "thin" next to the Druids. The Devores were very resolute with great detail but just did not have the tonal "heft" and overall fullness to which I have become accustomed with the Druid. Well recorded vocals (ie kd lang, or recenty vintage Frank Sinatra -wow!) reproduced on the Druids just seem to resonate like a tenor saxophone reed - full of body and richness but with the essential rawness (when called upon) to convey realism. Maybe it was a placement problem with the Devores, but I felt no desire to switch.

With my Macbook/itunes feeding USB to Wavelength Cosecant DAC > Bent Audio TVC > Wyetech Labs Onyx SET monoblocks the Druids sound "just there". It amazes me how "in the room" Stan Getz sax can sound at loud or subdued sound levels. With SET amps the reproduction seems to comes off like individual instruments are floating on helium - kind of "billowy and airy", but at the same time anchored by tonal fulness and heft. Whew! I had better quit before I get carried away. Also run a Red Wine Sig 30.2 which sounds great as well.

The nice thing about the Druid is that they don't pick apart the sonics of the music - you can safely listen to "the good, the bad and the ugly" of the recorded world without being chased out of the room. I'm not ashamed to say that I have numerous itunes plus (256K) downloads that can sound very good with these speakers. I can enjoy a variety of genres and recording qualitities without recycling the same "audiophile" titles over and over again because "they sound so good". At least now my wife no longer says "you always listen to the same songs.

Just my perspective "based on my room with my system".

Regards,
Dave

[DeanSheen]

That 'Gon thread is a mess.

It would be fantastic if more of these could make it out in the wild for more informed opinions.

I still don't understand why all the hate and who exactly may be threatend by these speakers?

213Cobra:  If you could find the full text of your 'Gon post many of us would appreciate it.

[satfrat]

What exactly is the “Zu sound”? 
Thanks in advance to all who answer, I appreciate it.

It sounds like Zoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooo, etc. 

You're welcome.  aa
Cheers,
Robin

[213Cobra]

DeanSheen,

I'll post an expanded version of the lost 'Gon text here as a new topic in the next few days. Objective will be to give interested readers a comparative perspective of the complete Zu speaker strata, particularly to clarify the relative differences between Definition 1.5, Presence and Definition 2.0.

Phil

[Poindexter]

Srajan,  in lieu of a better comparison,

How would you describe 'The Zu Sound' relative to the Agios Tychonas horns?  This, simply because it's a landmark system we have both heard.  Appreciated.  Dug.

Hope you are prospering.

Aloha,

Poinz

[srayle]

As a former Zu Druid owner, coulda been my system synergy, but the midrange (Druid IV)'s I found not warm.
Three trusted audiophile friends who have listened to them (including our -Richard- of Audiocircle)
decidedly disliked them. Also another lifelong audiophile who has owned many, many
speakers over the years took a dislike to them instantly, describing them as 'cold'.

It took me a year to realize my incessant tube rolling, amp and preamp changing was an attempt
to warm up the midrange. The Zu sound is precise and dynamic, but overall I would describe the Zu sound
as 'steely'... they sound like they look, which is like Lyle Alzado's Harley.
YMMMV.

[Srajan Ebaen]

Poinz,

yo kiddin', mon?

There's co comparison to those horns. None. The kind of scale, immediacy and dynamics those do cannot be reproduced with non-hornloaded drivers. 

Steely? Zus? Never in my digs nor with any of my writers who heard 'em, reviewed 'em or own 'em. Never say never of course, it's just not something any of us seems to have experienced. However, the Druids are 12-ohm loads and there is a possibility with certain electronics not to be happy. For example, the low-power Decware amp I have is optimized for less than 4 ohms. It wasn't too keen on the Druids but had no issue on the Definitions.

Otherwise, re: the Zu sound, I think I've said enough about it in my reviews. The latest driver revisions as I'm currently listening to in the Presence take everything up a few notches and ditto for the new tweeter high-pass. I can't predict how that'll translate to the Druid in particular but I'd have to think that some of the complaints in the field would have to mellow out after these upgrades...

The Presence head now is closer to 16 ohms which is happy times for most SETs.

[Poindexter]

So, hows about compared to the Avant Gardes?  I have a stick on them, since there were two of them (the office rig, and the living room AV rig) chez Roman.

I have a post off to a very fave client who has Druids on this subject too,  so we can triangulate. 

Best Aloha,

Poinz