Zu loudspeakers

[213Cobra]

>> If horns didn't bring something special to the party, do you really think old JBLs, Altecs and Tannoys would be worth so much on the used market? <<

A '63 Split-Window Corvette costs a fortune 56 years after it was produced, and I love it, but compared to anything modern it drives like a truck. Its used value is due to being scarce, interesting and beautiful now, not because it's intrinsically good as a sports car today. Yeah, those speakers were great in the context of their time, but I now have more modern ways to get more sonic objectivity and musical truth. I very much like the vitality of horns but I've never heard a seamless *and* tonally neutral pair, including those you've mentioned. What you value has a different tilt, and that's fine with me.

>> The irony of what you are saying is that the US audiophile is the guy, on average, with the MOST space for horns. <<

And nevertheless the least likely to buy them, for reasons I mentioned. The hifi market in the US is relatively large because the US is relatively large. But relative to the US economy, and relative to consumer spending, it's nothing. For most people, hifi, let alone high-end audio, just doesn't exist anymore. Americans as a whole do not care about nor pay for sound quality. Apple can't even get a significant number of people to pay a modest premium for a (much) better-sounding Smart Speaker than the alternative dreck offered by Google and Amazon. You can fold up a horn-loading scheme into a box the size of an LS3/5a and still no one will buy it here in any numbers of consequence. You have an infinitesimal coterie of wealthy buyers who might buy Avantgardes more for ego sculpture than for sound, and an even smaller subset who will buy them for sound. Horns just aren't a significant factor in domestic hifi in the US. In PA uses, sure.

>> There is nothing inherent in a large transformer that it has to sound "ponderous" and this is probably more to do with insufficient winding to compensate and provide a good high frequency extension, which is what often suffers as the size of the iron increases. I can tell you that adequate iron will prevent the Druid from having "fat bottomed" bass. I also have a single ended pentode amp at home (MasterSound Dueundici, which is 11 watt SEP using an EL34) that sounds good but in no way better than either of my SETs (JJ322 and Aries Cerat Genus). It is light and fast but lacks harmonic rightness in comparison and bass punch. Still, it is fun to play with. I have also had PP triode (VAC 30/30 (300B) and PureSound A30 (triode wired tetrode)), OTL (Silvaweld and Transcendent sound), SE(Transistor) hybrid (NAT Symbiosis SE), SET hybrids (KR Audio) and other SETs (Ayon Crossfire, Wall Audio Opus M50, Cary CAD 572SE, Ayon Vulcan Evo (for review)). Only the Silvaweld OTLs gave a serious run against the SETs (KR, Ayon and Aries Cerat in particular were good) but they lacked the wholistic rightness. <<

No, I didn't mention high frequency extension. I am referring to agility. A large OPT doesn't have to sound ponderous, compared to an OPT wound for speed, but it usually does. You don't notice this listening to the massive iron alone. You notice it after hearing a succession of amps from many makers using lighter xformer topologies. No xformer is perfect. There are performance and characteristics trade-offs in core materials, core sizes, wire types, windings, potting vs. no-potting, etc. Theortically, heavy iron can be built to sound agile, musical and harmonically correct. But it seldom is. I built amps 45 years ago, including having wound my own xformers. I no longer have time for it so I have to choose from what others build. Given the trade-offs, I would rather not sacrifice agility and transparency to get the bass right. But you might. I can stay close to the balance I had in SET, in other ways. Essentially, all SET ZNFB deep bass performance is compromised. It is the primary area of fidelity vulnerability in that topology. But it happens to be euphonic for many people, or one chooses amp/speaker combinations that render bass well enough to keep intact the holistic musicality of SET and make it worthwhile. If you don't like your EL34 SEP amp, try something built around the F2a BPT or EL156 BPP -- with good iron.

I agree with you on the Mastersound. Even Mastersound SET lacks "harmonic rightness." I certainly would not recommend anything VAC as harmonically correct; nor Cary or Ayon. In any topology. OTLs have a sound that puts them in the realm and of course you can get this for OTL-SET:
https://www.transcendentsound.com/mini-beast.html

There's an amp for everybody if you look hard enough.

>> Just because Phil (213cobra) says everything else is lacking coherence doesn't make it so. <<

It does for me.

Phil

 

[213Cobra]

>> ...Since, unfortunately we can't listen together and need to properly calibrate our vocabulary, what do you mean by "greater objectivity"? To me, objectivity is about the lean, clean sound of Spectral, Magico, Sanders amps, uber analytical Berkeley Reference DAC, and much of pro gear. I would rather hang myself than listen to that. And those sterile mother fuyers would rather kill themselves than listen to tubes and horn-type gear. <<

Objectivity is the absence of exaggeration. Is the octave to octave balance correct? Are dynamics close to reality? Is scale realistic? Can you hear "the whole note?" Are instrument sounds tonally convincing? If yes, you can get sound that is musical and engaging, but not luring you with pleasant distortions. Spectral, Magico, Sanders, Berkeley, etc. do not deliver yesses to these questions. And if they bring frequency accuracy it is through the use of other compromising items like crossovers in speakers; over-processed digital, etc.

You know what I mean by objectivity by stated preferences we share.

Phil

 

[spiritofmusic]

But Phil, fans of all kinds of spkrs and amps would subscribe to yr definition. You'd never get anyone defending their buying decision by going on to say it wasnt realistic, tonally unconvincing, unrealistic dynamically, not reproducing the whole note. No Magico or Spectral owner will claim anything otherwise, and I'm sure genuinely would believe it to be true.

Peter A here runs Pass on Magico, and is famed for a fastidiously put together system. He'd take issue w you his system doesn't pass yr tests.

No, I believe we're all after the same things, but some parameters become more critical which may take an overall presentation down a path that others would not want for their system.

I heard a hugely impressive system recently using hybrid amps, it's detail resolution and imaging was way beyond mine, but to get this result it veered into being too fwd and forensic, and took away from the illusion of reality.

So Phil, we may agree all on general parameters, but personal tastes for more detail resolution, pin point imaging, thunderous bass, laser like treble won't be satisfied by Zu.

And I guarantee you, those favouring these won't feel Zu fulfils the right checklist.

It so happens that on this forum, you, SETDrugs, Caesar, me, we feel Zu provides the most holistic blend of attributes off yr list. But the Magico, Wilson, Apogees, horns etc crowd do too.

Just check out endless navel gazing on WBF over the years on simply trying to get unanimity on terms like: transparent, seamless, neutral etc.

(Actually don't, Phil. Life is way too short LOL).

 

[KeithR]

3. High Water Sound either plays Cessaro or Horning

I am not aware of any others, but will be scouring the show.

High Water will have Horning this year - Jeff hasn't received the Wagner 2 but said he might bring them to Long Beach in June. Ralph is backed up on orders apparently.

 

[213Cobra]

>> It so happens that on this forum, you, SETDrugs, Caesar, me, we feel Zu provides the most holistic blend of attributes off yr list. But the Magico, Wilson, Apogees, horns etc crowd do too. <<

Yeah. Uh, no. I don't really care what they think and I'm not asking their advice, either. -Phil

 

[spiritofmusic]

No problem, Phil. This forum is for opinions first, advice a very distant second LOL.

 

[morricab]

High Water will have Horning this year - Jeff hasn't received the Wagner 2 but said he might bring them to Long Beach in June. Ralph is backed up on orders apparently.

Another indication of increasing horn popularity? Can't build'em fast enough....and they cost a fortune!

 

[morricab]

High Water will have Horning this year - Jeff hasn't received the Wagner 2 but said he might bring them to Long Beach in June. Ralph is backed up on orders apparently.

You should listen to the Hornings...they should be quite good.

 

[microstrip]

>> It so happens that on this forum, you, SETDrugs, Caesar, me, we feel Zu provides the most holistic blend of attributes off yr list. But the Magico, Wilson, Apogees, horns etc crowd do too. <<

Yeah. Uh, no. I don't really care what they think and I'm not asking their advice, either. -Phil

No, but they would be happy if you would use the quoting system of WBF when replying - it would make your posts mush easier to read and IMHO authors of the original post deserve a proper reference.

 

[213Cobra]

No, but they would be happy if you would use the quoting system of WBF when replying - it would make your posts mush easier to read and IMHO authors of the original post deserve a proper reference.

How's this? I know I'm on an audiophile forum now, thankfully. It just wasn't cranky enough around here to be sure. Much better, now, thanks. -Phil

 

[morricab]

>> If horns didn't bring something special to the party, do you really think old JBLs, Altecs and Tannoys would be worth so much on the used market? <<

A '63 Split-Window Corvette costs a fortune 56 years after it was produced, and I love it, but compared to anything modern it drives like a truck. Its used value is due to being scarce, interesting and beautiful now, not because it's intrinsically good as a sports car today. Yeah, those speakers were great in the context of their time, but I now have more modern ways to get more sonic objectivity and musical truth. I very much like the vitality of horns but I've never heard a seamless *and* tonally neutral pair, including those you've mentioned. What you value has a different tilt, and that's fine with me.

>> The irony of what you are saying is that the US audiophile is the guy, on average, with the MOST space for horns. <<

And nevertheless the least likely to buy them, for reasons I mentioned. The hifi market in the US is relatively large because the US is relatively large. But relative to the US economy, and relative to consumer spending, it's nothing. For most people, hifi, let alone high-end audio, just doesn't exist anymore. Americans as a whole do not care about nor pay for sound quality. Apple can't even get a significant number of people to pay a modest premium for a (much) better-sounding Smart Speaker than the alternative dreck offered by Google and Amazon. You can fold up a horn-loading scheme into a box the size of an LS3/5a and still no one will buy it here in any numbers of consequence. You have an infinitesimal coterie of wealthy buyers who might buy Avantgardes more for ego sculpture than for sound, and an even smaller subset who will buy them for sound. Horns just aren't a significant factor in domestic hifi in the US. In PA uses, sure.

>> There is nothing inherent in a large transformer that it has to sound "ponderous" and this is probably more to do with insufficient winding to compensate and provide a good high frequency extension, which is what often suffers as the size of the iron increases. I can tell you that adequate iron will prevent the Druid from having "fat bottomed" bass. I also have a single ended pentode amp at home (MasterSound Dueundici, which is 11 watt SEP using an EL34) that sounds good but in no way better than either of my SETs (JJ322 and Aries Cerat Genus). It is light and fast but lacks harmonic rightness in comparison and bass punch. Still, it is fun to play with. I have also had PP triode (VAC 30/30 (300B) and PureSound A30 (triode wired tetrode)), OTL (Silvaweld and Transcendent sound), SE(Transistor) hybrid (NAT Symbiosis SE), SET hybrids (KR Audio) and other SETs (Ayon Crossfire, Wall Audio Opus M50, Cary CAD 572SE, Ayon Vulcan Evo (for review)). Only the Silvaweld OTLs gave a serious run against the SETs (KR, Ayon and Aries Cerat in particular were good) but they lacked the wholistic rightness. <<

No, I didn't mention high frequency extension. I am referring to agility. A large OPT doesn't have to sound ponderous, compared to an OPT wound for speed, but it usually does. You don't notice this listening to the massive iron alone. You notice it after hearing a succession of amps from many makers using lighter xformer topologies. No xformer is perfect. There are performance and characteristics trade-offs in core materials, core sizes, wire types, windings, potting vs. no-potting, etc. Theortically, heavy iron can be built to sound agile, musical and harmonically correct. But it seldom is. I built amps 45 years ago, including having wound my own xformers. I no longer have time for it so I have to choose from what others build. Given the trade-offs, I would rather not sacrifice agility and transparency to get the bass right. But you might. I can stay close to the balance I had in SET, in other ways. Essentially, all SET ZNFB deep bass performance is compromised. It is the primary area of fidelity vulnerability in that topology. But it happens to be euphonic for many people, or one chooses amp/speaker combinations that render bass well enough to keep intact the holistic musicality of SET and make it worthwhile. If you don't like your EL34 SEP amp, try something built around the F2a BPT or EL156 BPP -- with good iron.

I agree with you on the Mastersound. Even Mastersound SET lacks "harmonic rightness." I certainly would not recommend anything VAC as harmonically correct; nor Cary or Ayon. In any topology. OTLs have a sound that puts them in the realm and of course you can get this for OTL-SET:
https://www.transcendentsound.com/mini-beast.html

There's an amp for everybody if you look hard enough.

>> Just because Phil (213cobra) says everything else is lacking coherence doesn't make it so. <<

It does for me.

Phil

Suffice to say good designers can make an OPT that is neither ponderous sounding nor has deficits in the bass you have discovered with your Audions, as good as they may be otherwise. I hear it on a daily basis with speakers that go deeper and require more control than the Zu Druid VI. No need for negative feedback, just properly driven tubes into a properly designed, properly sized OPT so you don't get saturation. Lack of control in bass is a sign of saturated cores distorting and making a soft, bloated bass that sounds sloppy and colors up the spectrum. It doesn't have to sound "soft" or "rounded", OTLs tell us that this is not an inherent tube trait but is through the lens of OPTs.

IMO, your argument about the old Corvette is a fallacy because if you applied this to audio you could just throw SETs and tube and your high efficiency speakers out the window. They are not "modern" . However, there is nothing in the tech from 50s and 60s horns (heck even the really old Western electric stuff) that is "obsolete" in the same way an old Corvette is. The performance criteria is sonic appeal and I can tell you that a fair amount of that old stuff sounds really good...the Japanese are not stupid...they realize what was good from America and snatched it up.

I would put up a pair of JBL Hartsfields or Everests against whatever Zu you happen to have and I doubt the outcome would favor the Zu. Ask most horn guys about the old JBL and Altec drivers and they are still highly regarded despite lots of modern choices. Good audio engineering doesn't go out of fashion (forever) because people wake up and realize it sounds good.

I can't help the marketing and stupidity of the average consumer. What I can tell from high end circles and show reports though is that more horns are making appearances even in America. Some reviews of JBL studio monitors in the online magazines have been quite positive of this type of New/old speaker.

In the end though, none of this detracts from your like of Zu speakers, I am sure the newest iterations are good sounding and heck I even like the idea. I am not sure they are the best implementation of this concept (augmented widebanders) but interesting nonetheless.

Getting to hear some other European horn designs (other than Avantgarde) seems to be difficult in America...pity...still there are some interesting ones in the US like Volti and the Classic speakers (don't know if that is the true correct name... but they even make a Hartsfield copy)

 

[213Cobra]

Suffice to say good designers can make an OPT that is neither ponderous sounding nor has deficits in the bass you have discovered with your Audions, as good as they may be otherwise. I hear it on a daily basis with speakers that go deeper and require more control than the Zu Druid VI. No need for negative feedback, just properly driven tubes into a properly designed, properly sized OPT so you don't get saturation. Lack of control in bass is a sign of saturated cores distorting and making a soft, bloated bass that sounds sloppy and colors up the spectrum. It doesn't have to sound "soft" or "rounded", OTLs tell us that this is not an inherent tube trait but is through the lens of OPTs.

IMO, your argument about the old Corvette is a fallacy because if you applied this to audio you could just throw SETs and tube and your high efficiency speakers out the window. They are not "modern" . However, there is nothing in the tech from 50s and 60s horns (heck even the really old Western electric stuff) that is "obsolete" in the same way an old Corvette is. The performance criteria is sonic appeal and I can tell you that a fair amount of that old stuff sounds really good...the Japanese are not stupid...they realize what was good from America and snatched it up.

I would put up a pair of JBL Hartsfields or Everests against whatever Zu you happen to have and I doubt the outcome would favor the Zu. Ask most horn guys about the old JBL and Altec drivers and they are still highly regarded despite lots of modern choices. Good audio engineering doesn't go out of fashion (forever) because people wake up and realize it sounds good.

I can't help the marketing and stupidity of the average consumer. What I can tell from high end circles and show reports though is that more horns are making appearances even in America. Some reviews of JBL studio monitors in the online magazines have been quite positive of this type of New/old speaker.

In the end though, none of this detracts from your like of Zu speakers, I am sure the newest iterations are good sounding and heck I even like the idea. I am not sure they are the best implementation of this concept (augmented widebanders) but interesting nonetheless.

Getting to hear some other European horn designs (other than Avantgarde) seems to be difficult in America...pity...still there are some interesting ones in the US like Volti and the Classic speakers (don't know if that is the true correct name... but they even make a Hartsfield copy)

****

Yes, you keep saying this, that an OPT can be made that is neither ponderous nor bass-imperfect. Except it never gets done. Have you ever wound six different transformers to the same electrical specs, to listen to their differences used with the same circuit? I have. The perfect xformer doesn't exist. Every execution involves trade-offs. Sure, you can build OPT-based tube amps that have better deep bass than the Audion Golden Dream. But they don't match the rest of its attributes. I agree it is not tube alones, it's tubes + xformers. But even OTL has its own sound.

You missed the point about my 1963 Corvette reference. It was just to point out that telling me something old is valuable tells me nothing about its quality -- only about its desirability with more buyers than there is supply. That's all. The old horns are generally materially obsolete, but they have their sound and compared to many modern abominations in speaker execution, the old gear can be splendid. In context. More horns might be making appearances in the US. But appearances at shows aren't the same as adoption. They are a non-starter here for most of the market, but a few of anything can be sold in an economy this large.

Hifi is, alas, a mere sliver of audio life in the USA. And horns will remain exotic.

Phil

 

[morricab]

****

Yes, you keep saying this, that an OPT can be made that is neither ponderous nor bass-imperfect. Except it never gets done. Have you ever wound six different transformers to the same electrical specs, to listen to their differences used with the same circuit? I have. The perfect xformer doesn't exist. Every execution involves trade-offs. Sure, you can build OPT-based tube amps that have better deep bass than the Audion Golden Dream. But they don't match the rest of its attributes. I agree it is not tube alones, it's tubes + xformers. But even OTL has its own sound.

You missed the point about my 1963 Corvette reference. It was just to point out that telling me something old is valuable tells me nothing about its quality -- only about its desirability with more buyers than there is supply. That's all. The old horns are generally materially obsolete, but they have their sound and compared to many modern abominations in speaker execution, the old gear can be splendid. In context. More horns might be making appearances in the US. But appearances at shows aren't the same as adoption. They are a non-starter here for most of the market, but a few of anything can be sold in an economy this large.

Hifi is, alas, a mere sliver of audio life in the USA. And horns will remain exotic.

Phil

Well, to my ears there are examples out there that I have heard that are neither ponderous nor lacking elsewhere...I agree with you that it is rare...

No, I didn't miss the point with the Corvette...had you not put the performance deficits of the Corvette into your analogy I would have agreed that sometimes things are desirable because of age, reputation from that era, scarcity or whatever. You mentioned though it drives like a truck and I think you were clearly implying that old horn speakers "drive like a truck" from an audio reproduction perspective. You have reinforced this by saying this time that they are materially obsolete. Are ALNICO and ferrite magnets obsolete? Many think ALNICO is still the preferred permanent magnet material. Are aluminum dome compression driver diaphragms obsolete? Are paper cone woofers with according fabric surrounds obsolete (turns out paper has a lot of good properties like weight and self-damping)? Metal horns might be (although there are a number of them available today...primarily out of cast aluminum...I own and prefer wood horns) but then again maybe not. For me, the only thing that seems to be materially obsolete is the horn geometry because we now have a lot of computer optimized constant directivity horn/waveguides; however, a good Tractrix or Spherical horn geometry can work very nice even though they are not CD. So, help me out please and tell me where the material obsolesence resides. For a Corvette from 63, it is pretty clear from performance numbers and, as you said, how it feels to drive one. The advances in brakes, suspension, steering, chassis stiffness etc. are clear and explain the difference from a modern car. The anatomy of a 1960s Altec or JBL horn will not be substantially different from a modern speaker with the exception of the passive parts (capacitors and resistors in particular) in terms of measured performance or sound quality.

Hifi is a mere sliver of audio life in the whole world...not just the USA. In Switzerland, most people would not dream of owning a speaker over 1 meter tall with big amps and wires everywhere...most simply don't care enough to dedicate real space to making music.

 

[213Cobra]

Well, to my ears there are examples out there that I have heard that are neither ponderous nor lacking elsewhere...I agree with you that it is rare...

No, I didn't miss the point with the Corvette...had you not put the performance deficits of the Corvette into your analogy I would have agreed that sometimes things are desirable because of age, reputation from that era, scarcity or whatever. You mentioned though it drives like a truck and I think you were clearly implying that old horn speakers "drive like a truck" from an audio reproduction perspective. You have reinforced this by saying this time that they are materially obsolete. Are ALNICO and ferrite magnets obsolete? Many think ALNICO is still the preferred permanent magnet material. Are aluminum dome compression driver diaphragms obsolete? Are paper cone woofers with according fabric surrounds obsolete (turns out paper has a lot of good properties like weight and self-damping)? Metal horns might be (although there are a number of them available today...primarily out of cast aluminum...I own and prefer wood horns) but then again maybe not. For me, the only thing that seems to be materially obsolete is the horn geometry because we now have a lot of computer optimized constant directivity horn/waveguides; however, a good Tractrix or Spherical horn geometry can work very nice even though they are not CD. So, help me out please and tell me where the material obsolesence resides. For a Corvette from 63, it is pretty clear from performance numbers and, as you said, how it feels to drive one. The advances in brakes, suspension, steering, chassis stiffness etc. are clear and explain the difference from a modern car. The anatomy of a 1960s Altec or JBL horn will not be substantially different from a modern speaker with the exception of the passive parts (capacitors and resistors in particular) in terms of measured performance or sound quality.

Hifi is a mere sliver of audio life in the whole world...not just the USA. In Switzerland, most people would not dream of owning a speaker over 1 meter tall with big amps and wires everywhere...most simply don't care enough to dedicate real space to making music.

***

No, ALNICO and ferrite magnets aren't obsolete, but they yield specific sounds. In design terms, they are building elements that essentially combine specific properties into a voicing. Everything in audio is a fixed-parametric equalizer of sorts, assembled into a balance deemed practically ideal by the designer. Is paper obsolete? Paper as used in a 1930s loudspeaker is. Zu uses a pulp-based cone, but as they hit the limits of what could be achieved by engineered paper, they ventured into nano-treating their material and it's a significant contributor to what a Zu speaker sounds like today. ALNICO is cherished in guitar speakers, primarily for how those motors sound with intentional distortions both input and intrinsic, so it's not always fidelity that's being served by these choices.

You cannot advance the sound of a vintage Altec or JBL horn by just remaking it the same way over and over again. You are going to have to use advanced modeling methods to improve the acoustic geometry, and then you will have to upgrade the vintage materials or supplement them with more modern mating components if you are to advance the basic design. If this isn't done, a Zu Druid from 2005 would, for example, be all that a Druid design can muster. Instead, the FRD motor has been steadily improved. Carbon fiber and other modern synthetics have been combined with various engineered wood products for better energy management in the cabinet. Cones get nano material supplements. But this is not what people who buy or replicate an Altec 604, for example, do. They don't even want to rescue a damaged driver by reconing. They want a sound locked in amber. Which is OK, but that is an exercise in indulging a temporally-restricted tonal coloration. If you like that, be my guest. You are getting a sound bounded by what was possible 50 - 90 years ago. Some of those old designs have beautiful qualities, but let's not pretend they couldn't be improved by judicious applications of modern materials and methods, as Zu has done by relentlessly improving their essential design execution since 2000.

If this were done, *maybe* someone could produce domestic horn speakers that cohere. No one seems interested.

It may not matter. The most vibrant audiophile community in many parts of the world, and certainly here in the US, is the head-fi movement. High end hifi continues to make itself ever-less-relevant by taking the lazy path of selling goods to a very wealthy few, at very high average unit prices, instead of actually doing the work of creating a constituency for accessible products built to a high standard, that the great middle can afford and imagine being interested in. Bucking this incessant, vendor-driven narrowing of the interest pool for hi-fi are a broad spectrum of Chinese and Taiwanese makers, and a handful of western companies like Zu.

Phil

 

[Audiophile Bill]

***

No, ALNICO and ferrite magnets aren't obsolete, but they yield specific sounds. In design terms, they are building elements that essentially combine specific properties into a voicing. Everything in audio is a fixed-parametric equalizer of sorts, assembled into a balance deemed practically ideal by the designer. Is paper obsolete? Paper as used in a 1930s loudspeaker is. Zu uses a pulp-based cone, but as they hit the limits of what could be achieved by engineered paper, they ventured into nano-treating their material and it's a significant contributor to what a Zu speaker sounds like today. ALNICO is cherished in guitar speakers, primarily for how those motors sound with intentional distortions both input and intrinsic, so it's not always fidelity that's being served by these choices.

You cannot advance the sound of a vintage Altec or JBL horn by just remaking it the same way over and over again. You are going to have to use advanced modeling methods to improve the acoustic geometry, and then you will have to upgrade the vintage materials or supplement them with more modern mating components if you are to advance the basic design. If this isn't done, a Zu Druid from 2005 would, for example, be all that a Druid design can muster. Instead, the FRD motor has been steadily improved. Carbon fiber and other modern synthetics have been combined with various engineered wood products for better energy management in the cabinet. Cones get nano material supplements. But this is not what people who buy or replicate an Altec 604, for example, do. They don't even want to rescue a damaged driver by reconing. They want a sound locked in amber. Which is OK, but that is an exercise in indulging a temporally-restricted tonal coloration. If you like that, be my guest. You are getting a sound bounded by what was possible 50 - 90 years ago. Some of those old designs have beautiful qualities, but let's not pretend they couldn't be improved by judicious applications of modern materials and methods, as Zu has done by relentlessly improving their essential design execution since 2000.

If this were done, *maybe* someone could produce domestic horn speakers that cohere. No one seems interested.

It may not matter. The most vibrant audiophile community in many parts of the world, and certainly here in the US, is the head-fi movement. High end hifi continues to make itself ever-less-relevant by taking the lazy path of selling goods to a very wealthy few, at very high average unit prices, instead of actually doing the work of creating a constituency for accessible products built to a high standard, that the great middle can afford and imagine being interested in. Bucking this incessant, vendor-driven narrowing of the interest pool for hi-fi are a broad spectrum of Chinese and Taiwanese makers, and a handful of western companies like Zu.

Phil

Phil - I suspect Zu drivers and don’t measure particularly well vs many vintage and modern offerings.

***

No, ALNICO and ferrite magnets aren't obsolete, but they yield specific sounds. In design terms, they are building elements that essentially combine specific properties into a voicing. Everything in audio is a fixed-parametric equalizer of sorts, assembled into a balance deemed practically ideal by the designer. Is paper obsolete? Paper as used in a 1930s loudspeaker is. Zu uses a pulp-based cone, but as they hit the limits of what could be achieved by engineered paper, they ventured into nano-treating their material and it's a significant contributor to what a Zu speaker sounds like today. ALNICO is cherished in guitar speakers, primarily for how those motors sound with intentional distortions both input and intrinsic, so it's not always fidelity that's being served by these choices.

You cannot advance the sound of a vintage Altec or JBL horn by just remaking it the same way over and over again. You are going to have to use advanced modeling methods to improve the acoustic geometry, and then you will have to upgrade the vintage materials or supplement them with more modern mating components if you are to advance the basic design. If this isn't done, a Zu Druid from 2005 would, for example, be all that a Druid design can muster. Instead, the FRD motor has been steadily improved. Carbon fiber and other modern synthetics have been combined with various engineered wood products for better energy management in the cabinet. Cones get nano material supplements. But this is not what people who buy or replicate an Altec 604, for example, do. They don't even want to rescue a damaged driver by reconing. They want a sound locked in amber. Which is OK, but that is an exercise in indulging a temporally-restricted tonal coloration. If you like that, be my guest. You are getting a sound bounded by what was possible 50 - 90 years ago. Some of those old designs have beautiful qualities, but let's not pretend they couldn't be improved by judicious applications of modern materials and methods, as Zu has done by relentlessly improving their essential design execution since 2000.

If this were done, *maybe* someone could produce domestic horn speakers that cohere. No one seems interested.

It may not matter. The most vibrant audiophile community in many parts of the world, and certainly here in the US, is the head-fi movement. High end hifi continues to make itself ever-less-relevant by taking the lazy path of selling goods to a very wealthy few, at very high average unit prices, instead of actually doing the work of creating a constituency for accessible products built to a high standard, that the great middle can afford and imagine being interested in. Bucking this incessant, vendor-driven narrowing of the interest pool for hi-fi are a broad spectrum of Chinese and Taiwanese makers, and a handful of western companies like Zu.

Phil

Hi Phil,

Based on your reply above, since I have not heard Zu speakers, I looked at some measured data (quite hard to find) from Stereophile. Now I am certainly not a measurebator but since you talk about Zu advancing the state of play in driver materials and science, I was expecting big things. Alas this is not the case at all for the Soul Supreme speaker, which measures horridly.

“Finally, the Zu Soul Supreme's cumulative spectral-decay or waterfall plot (fig.7) looks awful, with a significant resonant mode at 2.8kHz—that accounts for Herb's presence-region rise—and hashy-looking delayed energy in the top audio octave. Yet, other than noticing a somewhat clanky quality with recordings of acoustic piano, I didn't find the Zu to sound as bad as this graph implies. In fact, I enjoyed the afternoon I spent listening to the speakers in Herb's system. As with Zu Audio's Essence speaker, reviewed by Art Dudley in October 2009, Sean Casey appears to have carefully balanced the Soul Supreme's performance to sound more neutral than its measured behavior would suggest, allowing the listener to appreciate its high sensitivity and evenly balanced midrange.
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content...loudspeaker-measurements#27PO9ZDmVUWXKSKq.99”

 

[SETDrugs]

Audiophile Bill,

I've owned the Soul Supreme for last nearly 5 years and I will say that for some of attributes that I prioritize the most, its easily the best speaker I've owned and one of the best I've heard including at shows. Having said this, this was an afterthought speaker from Zu. Soul Supreme is basically using the cabinet of the Superfly but with the Radian tweeter. As it stands now, Superfly is at lower end of Zu offerings.

Also I'm sure most people in this niche hobby buy speakers based on what they hear and not on specs or measurements. Even with these technical anomalies, the Stereophile editors did say that the speaker was very carefully balanced to sound more neutral than what the graph suggests.

Furthermore, based on everything I've read of the new Druid 6 and the upcoming Soul 6 with the new advancements in cabinet methodology/construction and all new drivers, I'm sure Sean has taken a major step forward in addressing these issues if not making them irrelevant. Hence, what Phil has been trying to get across sounds very promising and exciting for Zu owners like me who have grown to appreciate and love all of its strengths but also mindful of some shortcomings and weaknesses that although may not be as subjectively as apparent will nonetheless hopefully further reinforce Zu as a major player in the hi-end speaker world.

 

[Audiophile Bill]

Audiophile Bill,

I've owned the Soul Supreme for last nearly 5 years and I will say that for some of attributes that I prioritize the most, its easily the best speaker I've owned and one of the best I've heard including at shows. Having said this, this was an afterthought speaker from Zu. Soul Supreme is basically using the cabinet of the Superfly but with the Radian tweeter. As it stands now, Superfly is at lower end of Zu offerings.

Also I'm sure most people in this niche hobby buy speakers based on what they hear and not on specs or measurements. Even with these technical anomalies, the Stereophile editors did say that the speaker was very carefully balanced to sound more neutral than what the graph suggests.

Furthermore, based on everything I've read of the new Druid 6 and the upcoming Soul 6 with the new advancements in cabinet methodology/construction and all new drivers, I'm sure Sean has taken a major step forward in addressing these issues if not making them irrelevant. Hence, what Phil has been trying to get across sounds very promising and exciting for Zu owners like me who have grown to appreciate and love all of its strengths but also mindful of some shortcomings and weaknesses that although may not be as subjectively as apparent will nonetheless hopefully further reinforce Zu as a major player in the hi-end speaker world.

Hello SETDrugs,

My post was answering the assertion put forth that Zu speakers have advanced the science thereby improving on older designs using inferior materials - a supposition I strongly disagree with.

As already specified up front, I am not and I repeat not a measurebator. But since the discussion is about advancement of materials and speaker science and not having heard Zu I can only cite professional independent measurements to verify such statements. The quote I posted was from the only (which I why my post specifically cited that they are hard to come by) data I could find.

That being said, the model in the article uses the same widebander and Radian tweeter it seems:

“You get the fantastic Zu103 high output nano infused full-range driver, Radian 850 based tweeter (networked with ClarityCap MR caps and Mills top-shelf MRA-12 resistor) all interconnected and cabled with Zu Event internal cabling.”

So whilst clearly other models will measure considerably differently due to crossover designs, cabinets etc. We can still “make” some things from these measurements since their bigger brothers use 2 of the same widebanders with the same tweeter using apparently minimal crossover - the crossover doesn’t appear to be trying to correct driver anomalies it seems.

Sorry to be somewhat pissing on the Zu bonfire - I personally don’t subscribe at all to newer speakers being superior to many vintage designs. Ymmv etc.

 

[morricab]

Hello SETDrugs,

My post was answering the assertion put forth that Zu speakers have advanced the science thereby improving on older designs using inferior materials - a supposition I strongly disagree with.

As already specified up front, I am not and I repeat not a measurebator. But since the discussion is about advancement of materials and speaker science and not having heard Zu I can only cite professional independent measurements to verify such statements. The quote I posted was from the only (which I why my post specifically cited that they are hard to come by) data I could find.

That being said, the model in the article uses the same widebander and Radian tweeter it seems:

“You get the fantastic Zu103 high output nano infused full-range driver, Radian 850 based tweeter (networked with ClarityCap MR caps and Mills top-shelf MRA-12 resistor) all interconnected and cabled with Zu Event internal cabling.”

So whilst clearly other models will measure considerably differently due to crossover designs, cabinets etc. We can still “make” some things from these measurements since their bigger brothers use 2 of the same widebanders with the same tweeter using apparently minimal crossover - the crossover doesn’t appear to be trying to correct driver anomalies it seems.

Sorry to be somewhat pissing on the Zu bonfire - I personally don’t subscribe at all to newer speakers being superior to many vintage designs. Ymmv etc.

Well said, my ears tell me it is not nostalgia...I am not nostalgic by nature. My own horns are rather modern (circa 2000) but they follow a similar formula (10 inch doped paper mid/bass in a back loaded horn and wood horn 1 inch compression driver ) of classic designs. The sound is uncolored and highly dynamic. I can hear the greatness in some of the classic designs as well.

 

[213Cobra]

Phil - I suspect Zu drivers and don’t measure particularly well vs many vintage and modern offerings.


Hi Phil,

Based on your reply above, since I have not heard Zu speakers, I looked at some measured data (quite hard to find) from Stereophile. Now I am certainly not a measurebator but since you talk about Zu advancing the state of play in driver materials and science, I was expecting big things. Alas this is not the case at all for the Soul Supreme speaker, which measures horridly.

“Finally, the Zu Soul Supreme's cumulative spectral-decay or waterfall plot (fig.7) looks awful, with a significant resonant mode at 2.8kHz—that accounts for Herb's presence-region rise—and hashy-looking delayed energy in the top audio octave. Yet, other than noticing a somewhat clanky quality with recordings of acoustic piano, I didn't find the Zu to sound as bad as this graph implies. In fact, I enjoyed the afternoon I spent listening to the speakers in Herb's system. As with Zu Audio's Essence speaker, reviewed by Art Dudley in October 2009, Sean Casey appears to have carefully balanced the Soul Supreme's performance to sound more neutral than its measured behavior would suggest, allowing the listener to appreciate its high sensitivity and evenly balanced midrange.
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content...loudspeaker-measurements#27PO9ZDmVUWXKSKq.99”

***

That's a three years old review of a speaker even older than the review, given publication cycles. It represents a 2014/15 state of affairs. But it's not ancient, so let's go with it. Everything you need to know is expressed here: "...In fact, I enjoyed the afternoon I spent listening to the speakers in Herb's system. As with Zu Audio's Essence speaker, reviewed by Art Dudley in October 2009, Sean Casey appears to have carefully balanced the Soul Supreme's performance to sound more neutral than its measured behavior would suggest, allowing the listener to appreciate its high sensitivity and evenly balanced midrange...." It's not the first time Atkinson has had to swallow this with Zu. It's time he thought about what he's doing wrong.

As Josef Manger pointed out in explaining his very good speakers: "Traditional loudspeaker testing is not incorrect in what it measures, but in what it does not measure." The audio testing community has very little understanding of what's relevant in quantified measurement of transducer performance wrt human perception of convincing music fidelity in reproduction. How do you think those vintage Altecs will measure, anyway?

Atkinson slips this little tidbit in: "...In the time domain, the Soul Supreme's step response (fig.6) has a superb, time-coincident, right-triangle shape, and it is in the correct polarity." It's barely a mention and yet it is a disproportionately huge influence. We know we aren't measuring the right combination of loudspeaker traits, or haven't learned how to, when you hear the awful amusicality of an allegedly well-measuring Magico, Wilson, Focal or the like. Over the last 15 years, Zu has steadily advanced the full range driver and in the upper half of the line, the equally-influential cabinetry.

BTW, the drivers in the Druid 6 are significantly upgraded further from what was in Soul Supreme circa 2015/16. And more to the point, the Druid 5 outperformed the Soul Supreme due to its more sophisticated cabinet, and Druid 6 goes well beyond that.

>>...I personally don’t subscribe at all to newer speakers being superior to many vintage designs. Ymmv etc.<<

Neither do I, nor have I ever said any such thing. If you read my original Druid 6 comments, you know I regard most of what the industry offers as unworthy, relative to the few items really worth owning. But I also know that if Altec or JBL applied the kind of rigorous updating to materials, design and build techniques to their vintage designs as Zu does to theirs, those vintage designs could be iterated into much better speakers. New for the sake of it doesn't assure positive results. Using only things that are old certainly does not, either. Sean Casey carries forward the insights and spirit of Harry Olson and James Lansing, without the materials, production and manual design constraints of their day.

Phil

 

[213Cobra]

Hello SETDrugs,

My post was answering the assertion put forth that Zu speakers have advanced the science thereby improving on older designs using inferior materials - a supposition I strongly disagree with.

As already specified up front, I am not and I repeat not a measurebator. But since the discussion is about advancement of materials and speaker science and not having heard Zu I can only cite professional independent measurements to verify such statements. The quote I posted was from the only (which I why my post specifically cited that they are hard to come by) data I could find.

That being said, the model in the article uses the same widebander and Radian tweeter it seems:

“You get the fantastic Zu103 high output nano infused full-range driver, Radian 850 based tweeter (networked with ClarityCap MR caps and Mills top-shelf MRA-12 resistor) all interconnected and cabled with Zu Event internal cabling.”

So whilst clearly other models will measure considerably differently due to crossover designs, cabinets etc. We can still “make” some things from these measurements since their bigger brothers use 2 of the same widebanders with the same tweeter using apparently minimal crossover - the crossover doesn’t appear to be trying to correct driver anomalies it seems.

Sorry to be somewhat pissing on the Zu bonfire - I personally don’t subscribe at all to newer speakers being superior to many vintage designs. Ymmv etc.

***

The Zu FRD in Druid 6 is substantially upgraded from the circa 2015 Soul Supreme's version. You are also not considering the substantial contributions the cabinets make to the FRD performance, especially in the control of cabinet talk, and the completeness of the Griewe implementation. Soul and Druid form factors are not equal in these respects. Zu doesn't use a crossover at all. The supertweeter is on a simple high-pass-filter allocation the spectrum above ~12kHz to the Radian 850. There is no dividing network. The FRD acoustically rolls off. In a Druid or Soul, the amp sees the FRD voice coil directly.

>>...I personally don’t subscribe at all to newer speakers being superior to many vintage designs. Ymmv etc.<<

Me neither.

Phil