Zingali Overture series thumbs "up" or "down"

I am unable to demo the Zingali Overture 2s and 4s. Does anyoone have first hand experience and/or useful coments? (no dealers please). Thanks
I auditioned some of the smaller Zingalis (one floor stander and one book shelf) at a local retailer. I don't remember which models they were. I had very mixed feelings about them. On large scale recordings, they sounded phenomenal. They sounded their best with a recording of a swing band. The horns sounded incredibly realistic (I have heard this band live several times, and always make a point of standing near the stage at least once during the night so I can hear the unamplified sound). Large symphony also sounded excellent, and popular music sounded pretty good too. I was disappointed in the sound of a small chamber group, and solo singers. I concluded that the Zingalis had a harmonic distortion that sounded much like the sound of a musical instrument horn. This restored the sounds of recorded horns that "accurate" equipment can't reproduce. However, I felt the speakers imposed this harmonic structure on everything they palyed, which wasn't always so good. They never did sound bad, and even when their colorations didn't work to their advantage, I thought they still sounded quite pleasant. I had a similar feeling with a Golden Tube audio amp, which worked wonders on bowed strings, but made everyuthing (including Chris Isaac's voice) sound like it was being bowed.
Honest1 puts it very well. They sounded very colored to me as well, although, some people enjoy that type of sound. The Zingalis are nice sounding, but lack the detail of some of the other speakers on the market.

Davkle: I am a dealer for a number of other speakers, but none that I would consider competitors.
I've had the pleasure of hearing the 2s, 3s and 4s with a variety of amps and cables. I don't have a clue what Jtinn is talking about when he says they lack detail. My experience has been that they have boatloads of detail, and in some systems it may in fact be a detriment. They love warm, higher powered amps and copper cables. Silver cables and strident solid-state amps caused considerable "shout" that is frequently heard with horns. Higher-powered tube amps really make bass in the 2s and 4s come alive with detail and dynamics. I found the bass in the 3s to be too punchy and not nearly as refined. As for differences between the 2s and 4s, the 2s are identical to the 4s with the exception of a second woofer and a larger cabinet. The bass response of the 4s may be too much in smaller rooms as the second woofer and larger cabinet really make a difference. I found the 4s to be about right in my 15' x 35' listening room (8' to 16' high ceiling). I also heard the 2s in a 14' x 18' (8' ceiling) and they sounded very similar in terms of bass detail. As for the mid range and highs, I can honestly say I've never heard speakers sound so realistic. The attack and decay of cymbals and piano notes are exceptional, and the texture portrayed in saxophone music is amazing. It's a matching game with all speakers and the Zingalis are exceptional sounding when paired with complimentary components.
I heard the 3s with some recent monstrosities from Theta and Mark Levinson. There was a ''live'' feeling to the sound but it was no hi-end by any means. I cannot agree more with Honest1- a rare event that i share exactly the same experience for an audio piece. Actually, apart from the 'live' felling, auditioning the speaker for quite long,it became clear that there was a persisent character that altered the pitch of the music to an ultimately unbearable point. The lack of bass extension was also another noteworthy aspect of their sound. I cannot imagine that i could live with these speakers.
Monstrosities from Levinson? I dont understand .... What was driving the Zingalis when you heard them. By the way, of the VERY positive feedback I have rcvd on either the 2s or 4s ALL have said they dislike the 3s (which has a 6 1/2 vs 8" woofer that seems poorly matched). Thanks for the feedback. Happy listening. David
I purchased a pair of Overture S-4's only after a prolonged burn in period. On first connecting them in my system they were constipated and edgy, but after about one hundred hours the magic happened. The mids are the most natural I have experienced in my small (12 X 14 w/ 9' ceilings) well treated listening room, and the highs are magical.They also produce fast tuneful bass into the upper 20hz range. I found they match exceptionally well with tube electronics, and they are definately rewarding of quality equipment. Be careful with speaker cable choices. The very good Harmonic Tech PRO-9'S make them sound lifeless and listless. After experimenting Audience AU 24's seem the perfect match. Dynamics and detail are astounding and they never sound bright or forward. These are exceptional speakers.
Overture .4s is quite simply the best speaker I have ever heard. Ultra natural, gorgeous bass, and the most marvellously open midrange, totally box-free sound free of any coloration.
The ultimate test is piano - and through the Zingalis, Brahms's Variations and Fugue on a theme of Handel (Sheffield Lab) transports me into a recital room, positioned 20 feet from the instrument, indistinguishable from the real thing.
They are also remarkably free of any distortion, so that opera music that might generally struggle to remain defined and dynamic through all other speakers I have previously owned, is played effortlessly, and with natural highs and crescendoes that are creamy smooth yet not lacking punch.
I understand Zingalis fly with low powered valve amps. Yet I can't imagine it gets any better than my setup, and I'm feeding them with an Accuphase 406V that is rated 170 wpc. Front end is Michell turntable, Sumiko Pearwood cartridge, Plinius phono stage and Morch arm.
Clearly there are no hard and fast rules, and my dealer tells me they are unfussy of amplification.
I am set on Zingali Overture speakers for a new system (Audio Note Meishu integrated amp) and I'm debating on which model to go for. I heard the .3s and agree they were superb in the high and midrange but that bass left something to be desired, so leaning more toward .2s or .4s. My new listening room is small (12x14 or so), with 8 foot ceilings and a floating wood floor w/large area rug(s). Would the .4s potentially be "too much" in terms of boominess? The .2s are also more in my initial price range although I would pay more for the .4s if people feel there are significant advantages.
Judging by the lack of reviews for 6+ years, I guess not too many are using these. I just picked up a slightly used pair over Overature 4s and am still adjusting them and learning how to place them in a system. The dealer had them in a SET system with carefully selected music and they sounded first rate. Reading others posts, I would go along with Skipperrik and Ciscomc. I find the bass to be great. The detail to be excellent.Good bass extension, deep and powerfull,tight control and no boom. The bass is much more than i would expect from two 6" woofers. The midrange tends to be a "shouty and PAish" (with the wrong cables) as someone stated, so, I hope this goes away with burn in and the right cables. As stated, the cable selection does have a BIG inpact. Just by trying the cables on hand, I am finding that Analysis Oval 9(large braded copper) sound much better (better tonal balance and softer mids) than Cardas Quadlink (which i tend to perfer 99% of the time) Cardas tends to feed the midrange shout more than tame it. The speakers tend to sound best on solo insturments or simple arrangements. They did sound poor to average on hard rock or complex music like Joe Walsh's "Turn to Stone" (which, btw, is a AWESOME SoundLabs). They sound excellent on the Eagles' "Hotel California". These speakers are also very dependant on placement from the walls. The dealer suggested really close to wall and even room corners. I think this gives the better Hz balance, but not the best soundstage and/or image. The space between the speakers needs to be somewhat larger than I am used to too, which looks wrong but sounds better? IMO, they are really tube speakers. Right now, I am using an el-cheapo 60w UL-PP, so with a better amp they would sound better.

All in all these may be an above average speaker with allot of effort, but I am saving $$$$ for another pair of Soundlabs. I really NEED my Soundlabs back !!!!
I've owned O3's for several years.

The coloration comments strike me as somewhat curious, as these are quite neutral (especially compared to some other horn designs I've heard) to my ear - until you run the SPLs up. Then they get a noticeably "hard" edge. Many speakers exhibit some form of this behavior, but the O3s get edgy pretty quickly. If you listen loud, I'd approach these with caution.

The other issue is more prosaic, but still bothersome. The foam surrounds disintegrated on both speakers after app. 3 years. A PITA.

Hi Marty.

Do you know what brand of drivers they used? I have poked around on line and found some indication that Zingali, at one time or another, OEMed the drivers from JBL, but maybe only on the "pro" models made before a certain year. So, i was not sure what they put in the home models made in about 1996 or so?
I can say the Zingali speakers are fantastic. I used to run my Overture 2s with Audio Note 300B SETs but now have a Plinius SA-103 125W Class A. They are fast, deep, dynamic and very detailed yet smooth with a good source. They have magic midrange and are superb on vocals. I also like electronic dance and metal and they rock with the best of them. I am wanting anther pair of Client Name Evos next, I love them.