Dali, Amphion, Zu

Yes I bought Dali Ikon 6 from dealer in California.

I use to have Dynaudio 52S and before that I had B&W 805.

805 was too dry. Dynaudio was very good and more musical.

The Dali Ikon 6 is the same price and is easier to drive has more base(tighter), more air and overall the sound is real and plesure to listen. You should check it.
According two a dealer in Los Angeles who has 35 years in the audio video business Dali speakers are the best in the world for the money. And I agree with him. They are not popular in USA but in Europe are a big name.

Does the Dali Ikon 6 sound okay with a solid state amp? I have an NAD C372 integrated. Also, can someone who has one tell me how much you paid for it? Thanks in advance.

Tony

Just heard the Amphion Argons and have a pair of Zu Tones on home audition. At the moment anyway, I'd give the Argons the nod on voices -- more transparent and open, though the Zu folks tell me that my Tones need more time, and the slight thickness I hear in the mids will take care of itself.

The Argons are very nice, though I did hear some timing discontinuities that you don't hear w/the Tones -- they have a really inviting dynamic flow. Am inclined to keep them if the midrange issue I hear fades, they have a lot of strengths. I would, however, ignore all claims of 'blowing away anything in their price range', etc. These are silly statements as there are obviously a lot of talented speaker designers out there. There are, for example, things I like about my VMPS speakers better than the Zu's.

Incidentally, Zu is far from the first speaker to have no crossover to a driver. Epos has done this for years, w/a simple circuit to include the tweeter, others have/do as well.

It is certainly true that many manufacturers have experimented with elimination of the crossover from their speakers. There have been varying degrees of success but the fact that many attempt it seems to validate the claim that crossovers are best avoided.
Where I feel Zu surpasses previous efforts is in the bandwidth of their midrange driver.
If your Tones have fewer than 200 hours on them, you can certainly look for improvement as they loosen up. I have no experience with the Tone itself but the issue is really with the mid range driver which is the same as the one in my Druids. They improved steadily for months with daily use.

Agreed it is a heckuva driver. I am a little nervous though in that I'm not fully happy w/the midrange transparency and my 60 days will be up soon. Am trying to amp up the break-in.

I'm less sold that crossovers are best eliminated. Certain kinds of transducers might be best for different frequency ranges. Ribbons for highs and mids, dynamic drivers for lower tones, for ex. In this scenario, a crossover is obviously required. I have, experientially and without intention over the last 20 years of listening, found that I like designs w/first order slopes, and don't like those w/fourth order slopes. They sound flat and lacking in flow to me and I've owned some highly regarded ones. Maybe this is the cost of hacking up the signal so much to accomodate the drivers

Anyway, my point is that it's all a tradeoff and comes down to personal taste. There are obvious advantages to a single driver doing most of the work. I'll be happy to be wrong, but I suspect my VMPS RM40s with their ribbon mids are always going to sound cleaner w/voices to my ears than the Tones.

As an aside, another standmount I've heard recently that I really like is the Aurum Cantas Volla. And hey, I believe it uses a third order slope.