Those Def IIIs in Anthracite on Ebay were my Def2s, now upgraded. I moved to the new 4s recently.
I can personally attest to the amazing condition---there is not a nick, scratch, mark on either speaker. They are only 2 years old as well.
and yes, the Def4 is a large upgrade, as it should be!
|
I really prefer the 40 watts I have now on my Quads than any other smaller watt amps I have tried. YMMV (strongly, due to room size etc)
Also, fwiw, Quad II Classics at 15w sounded demonstrably stronger than 25 watt 845s. |
I've held out of the fray--but what I can say is my MK4s actually sound palatable with a $600 Onkyo digital integrated. The same combo drove me from the room with Def2s. The reason is the tweeter is more extended, but relaxed--and the mids are cleared up quite a bit by having the new bass driver implementation.
I have a Rives L1 treated room.
KeithR |
I am in the process of switching from top tier SS (Mac 601 monoblocks) to Sophia Electric 845 SET monos. Note- these aren't the Macs of old and are far from slow, sluggish, and dark.
I receive the new amps this week, so hope to have some impressions for you guys in a week.
I have owned or tried in my system:
BAT 300xSE
McIntosh MA6600
Shindo Haut Brion
Triode Labs 845 integrated
AudioValve Assistant
Vac Phi 200
Shindo Montille
McIntosh MC601s
MasterSound Due Venti
Onkyo 9555 integrated
Audion Black Shadows (though had a prob with the amp grounding---so were uncharacteristically noisy)
I decided to punt the MC601s as they don't do nuance well. I believe i can give up some slam (and there is no better amp I've tried for that, period) for some nuance and more texture. That said, the Macs are phenomenal amps and do the 3d thing that usually is reserved for tubes only.
The Shindo Haut Brion had my favorite mids---nothing plays strings better, period, that I've owned or demo'd. However it was dynamically lacking- and Shindo monos are pricy compared to many alternatives. I will probably pick up a used Cortese some day for fun.
KeithR |
I've had both Anthracite (metallic grey) and Maserati blue Zus---I prefer the dark blue with the Def4 aluminum bottoms as they are quite dark at night which adds interesting contrast.
If I was going black, I would do phantom black pearl (Audi) or something similar rather than a pure gloss black. |
So I have had a week of experience with the latest chassis Sophia 845 monoblocks. They are beautiful to look at and seem well built at 50+lbs each.
Impressed thus far. Big, big sound and probably the most dynamic tube amp I've had in my system (please scroll up to find a long list of them). Have not tube-rolled as of yet, but that will be coming once broken in. Historically, I have not liked the B tube that so many recommend (sounds closed-in to me). The amps are lively and extended- and not the warmest out there. Compared to the Audions, I'd say the Audions have probably a bit more tone, but less drive/dynamics. Noise on the amps is very low for SET and I feel will be even better once burned-in/optimized.
The amps are the only ones I've heard that do strings as well as Shindo--which says something. SET spooky midrange of course is there. Only negative thus far is a bit of midrange glare, which I believe is Chinese tube related. Have a pair of RCA NOS 6ns7s that I will drop in soon.
Bass is quite good, but not Mac 601 SS depth. This is to be expected.
|
plucked strings- there is a rightness that is tough to describe.
the midrange glare is pretty muted. i'm being very picky here. 213Cobra feels the A tube is the reason behind this. i think the cheap input tubes are the reason. we shall see.
I've heard the Black Shadows 20+ times over the years. well aware of their sound. comparing the two head to head may happen, but it's not a priority. in fact, it's not particularly of significance to me as I chose Sophias over Audions and others.
KeithR |
Form factor changed a couple years ago. The current website shows my amps as they appear in front of me. The new chassis is much larger with no wood caps.
I have only seen "old chassis" versions appear on Audiogon, hence the reference. |
FYI- I believe a Berkeley run direct to go tube amps is a stellar combo (if you don't do vinyl)
That is my current setup, though will try a Mac C2300 preamp in front after the amps are broken in. |
After all my trials and tribulations with amps, I've settled on Quads II 40s. They have an excellent balance of dynamics, air, and tone.
They are also the most inexpensive pair of amps I've had in my system. Go figure. |
Agear- I'm pretty much settled on tube right now. I've had Mcintosh and FirstWatt, so well aware of the best of SS type designs w/ Zu, which I'm sure ASR is in the same league as.
My room is a bit of a bear and eats bass, so that has led me to P/P amps in general--SET hasn't worked out in my room. |
I will be honest--if it took $$$$ of K/S cables to make the ASR sound really exceptional, I have some issues with the entire premise.
I will be more than happy to try an ASR if someone can arrange a SoCal dealer drop one off in my home for a week (I have a call into the distributor). In fact, we could easily arrange a shoot out with Quads and Black Shadows for all to hear. |
no SoCal ASR dealer guys, sorry. |
I don't have speaker footers, but just received a set of Wave Kinetics...to go under the amps. |
Charles1dad- that's my opinion as well. and why I've personally tried like 13 amps in my system. |
Agear- let's be fair and highlight that the Alef gear starts at 60k an amp.
I think folks have to try amps in their system to judge them appropriately on the 4s. I've personally tried the Audions, Sophias, McIntoshes, Quads, FirstWatt, Vacs, etc. I tried to set up an ASR demo, but there is no Cali dealer and I don't want to pay hefty shipping charges from the NA distributor.
I can't definitely say one amp is best over the other--they are all quite different. I will say on the SET side, I preferred the Sophia sound to the Audions. But I preferred the P-P Quads to all the SETS I have tried.
I also don't like 845Bs one iota (and for 4 years now). The top end is incorrect in my opinion with that tube and it's rolled off. The Cryo'd 845A that 213Cobra mentioned is a much more linear option that doesn't have the glare of the Chinese original.
I also strongly believe in Room Acoustics and have a Rives L1 designed room- no component outside of speakers has made a larger improvement. Untrapped bass masks a lot of problems imo and that is another reason my amp journey may differ from others. |
There is not a single system that doesn't benefit from at minimum treating first reflections and a bass trap or two. And it can be 100% hidden these days and has become a much bigger industry over the past 5 years as folks finally figure it out. So no excuse there either. Audiophiles imo are lazy and want to buy cables, vibration, racks, points, paint, contact solution, green markets, etc and ignore the room too often. Like teflon dialetric is going to make a bigger difference than the room. Please! Are there things about my room I would change? Absolutely--my diffusors on the front wall were costly and not sure how much benefit they really achieve.
Some people are lucky to have golden ratio rooms with higher ceilings- 99% don't. In fact, I honestly don't think you can be a true audiophile without working to achieve basic room acoustics. Put bookshelves in the back of your room to store records as well for one easy one.
While I have a squarish room that Phil noted has some definitive bass issues, any rectangular room not built in a golden ratio has just as many issues. Per my numerous demos, Phil's room in particular suffers from a small sound stage, lack of detail, and separation of instruments due to slap echo and lack of bass trapping that he mentions above. He chooses not to go down that path, but knows he has a compromise in place (that's he's ok with, of course). Some day I will toss a few panels in the truck to take over and play with for a few hours....it will be an interesting experiment.
The difference in sound with and without will be similar in any room. That's because you can't cheat physics. |
Folks- Phil and I are good friends, but have disagreed on room treatment for the past few years. (ie. I knew he would write a sizzler to my response and it doesn't offend me)
Agear- 100% correct analysis. Philes need to work together and Phil has actually helped me tune my room for the better--our recent exercise in speaker placement/toe-in made my image more natural size-wise and overall much better sound. I have bass issues due to size and because the room can't pressurize (due to adjoining hallways). We also played with some furniture placement and figured some stuff out about my fireplace that I need to do something with. In general, audiophiles don't criticize enough and that leads to lazy sound. I was very happy when he said he thought images were too big- as that confirmed my suspicions as well.
It also effects our amp choices (getting back to the point of this thread)-- Audions don't provide the impact or bass depth that they do in Phil's room and frankly I had them for a month, with tons of tube changes, etc and they still didn't do it for me. I believe they work better in his room due to untreated/rising bass response. I also believe this has also been the case with a Zu Dominance owner who tried the same amps and now has FirstWatt SIT1s- and who also has a Rives treated room. In fairness, my room needs pushier bass due to size, but a PP 15w set of quads with a design from 1953 was much more dynamic and bigger bass than 25w Audions. Go figure.
Also, Phil has been asking me for quite some time to take out some of the room treatment, so I finally did it a few weeks back - and haven't seen an audiophile that shocked in quite some time. His comments above sum up the differences well in my room. The $500 in panels we took down had more of an impact than ANY cable or preamp I've tried, hands down. Unfortunately the ceiling tiles aren't easily removable, and they provided the largest difference that we couldn't judge that day- I hate low 8' ceilings!
That all said, I 100% stand by my comments as it relates to detail/sound stage. My Wilson/BAT system with no room treatment had similar issues that I didn't realize until I hired Rives. Smaller sound/image, less separation, etc. I can hear it instantly. For one, when I listen to an orchestra--i can separate where the clarinets are in the soundstage with tremendous accuracy. That only happens when slap echo is reduced. We know from measurements, that his room has rising bass response---so we know a bass trap will help tremendously clear up a muddied mid range. The effect will not be small.
Glory- this isn't a knock on Phil specifically like you insinuate. I think any untreated room has all the same issues. What have you done to alleviate room issues btw?
I 100% believe audiophiles need to focus more on the room BEFORE vibration, racks, cables, etc. Typical rectangles have up to 30db swings---that's just life. I'm not saying those other things don't matter (I am just starting to play with them now). And I'm not advocating only dedicated rooms. But bass traps can be done custom that match the room architecture, art panels now exist that look exactly like paintings (the GIK ones I own are ok, but there are much better/expensive options), in-wall acoustic panels are now sold, ceiling clouds can match certain decors- or custom soffit ceilings can be made. Bookshelves provide reasonable diffusion and there are window treatments that look good and help out. It's not hard--it just costs more perhaps.
but hey, that's just one man's opinion. I will update our thread after Phil/I's experiment in his room at some future date. to put it another way--I have NEVER heard of an audiophile who didn't praise room treatment more than any other "upgrade" once done. not a single one. |
Of course I enjoy listening at Phil's place. That's not the real question at all. I'm going over there soon for a vinyl evening in fact...something that I decide year after year to not pursue in my own system, yet still enjoy.
Funny, the thing I most dislike in Phil's Zu Definition-based system is the 845B tube, as is well documented on these pages/forums.
But there is always potential for better sound and I feel the improvement in his room if he decides to pursue it would be much larger than expected.
I think the easiest way for folks to begin is to buy a pair of GIK tri-traps for cheap and stick them in the corners. They are removable when company arrives. If they do nothing for you, return them. |
One last thing- people with dedicated rooms and lavish treatment have the potential to go overboard and try and remove every frequency anomoly and Rives in particular has taken some flack on boards and ended up with some unhappy folks. (I did a L1 existing room, so mine was incremental by nature).
But that doesn't mean the basic concepts of reducing slap echo and early reflections isn't a worthy cause.
Also, just like anything in this hobby--people become very picky and have high demands from acoustic companies. These audiophiles are just as bad as the "cables changed my life" crowd that put new cables on a cooker once a week and spend 10k on a system worth of copper.
Room treatment, just like speaker placement, can be changed and variable to tailor to likes/needs. Start easy and see what you like.
|
Charles1dad-
Hard not to like your own speakers in any room, so yes of course I enjoy sound at Phil's. But yes, I think it's a compromise and there is room for substantive improvement.
The contention that just because a room has treatments that it interferes with a living space is erroneous as well. I have architecturally interesting diffusers and ceiling tiles (vs. hidden) and host a variety of events during the year. I did art panels that turned out great in the back of the room with top of the line photography. I would have my reflections panels hidden as well if it were a more permanent installation- but as a result I have 3 grey panels that blend in with my wall paint color, but are somewhat obtrusive. I can take them down for any party if I'm that particular. And yes, I have a coffee table.
I just find a lot of made up excuses when it comes to treatments. Most people spend leagues of time worrying about the wrong things--when room/speaker makes by far makes the biggest difference in sound. Even 213Cobra has never tried an external piece of room treatment in his room, so until then all of his opinion is really just pure speculation.
One last thing- the thing people notice the most coming into my room isn't treatment, but the Zus themselves. So if you want gear that is hidden and unobtrusive, please look to a traditional looking speaker. They think I'm a whack job right when they come in the door! |
Gsm- I totally agree about the Dominance looking (and apparently in reality) super imposing. Seems like a speaker for a dedicated room compared to your Arch Digest styled room.
That said, several of us in SoCal have discussed the Experience...it would be bigger than the Def, but not as imposing as the Dominance. Although it's 19" deep, so still quite a bit larger. I personally don't think I would move beyond that---I would be in a Magico at any higher price point, which I believe is the best xover-based speaker on the planet by quite a large margin.
|
There should be a bit different dispersion pattern between Druid and Superfly I would guess since the height and tweeter placement are quite different. |
If someone wants a great Zu amp, check out the Mastersound Due Venti on the 'gon right now. Gorgeous sound (and looks) with Siemens EL34s in particular. No better cheap amp I've heard! |
an update on Def4 amps. One of my Quads went down and so I picked up an Almarro 318B here on the 'gon. I found it a poor match with Zu Definitions. The amp wasn't strong enough in the bass and clearly favored midrange and smooth type sound. It may work with monitors better, but it was one of the worst sounding amps I've heard on Definitions *in my system.* In it's price range, the SEP Mastersound with NOS tubes was much better to my personal tastes.
just landing this afternoon is a Vac Phi Beta, KT88-based, super integrated. I am hoping it will be the cat's meow once appropriately tubed. I have owned a Vac Phi 200 before which sounded a bit SS, but didn't use Black Treasure KT88s on it (which is a large upgrade on my Quads)--the Phi Beta has a full 6sn7 linestage inside that should complement it very well.
i do reminisce quite a bit about FirstWatt- if the SIT2 was 20 watts, I'd probably still own it. |
My issue with SET and Zu has been that the bass just isn't right. This is why I chose Quad II 40s over Audion Black Shadows (with in-home auditions). I think everyone in Zu-land needs to try out several topologies to find out the best match in your room and with your taste. Funny that every single person on this thread has a different amp--that says a lot.
And for bass, Tron soundtrack by Daft Punk Track #2 is my reference. Highly recommended. |
I'm back to listening to my Def4s with Quads and a Valvet preamp. The Quads are still fantastic amps. I think 6sn7 + KT88 is one of the best combos for Zu that I've heard. |
