Zu Essence + Sub vs Zu Definition MK2?

i've heard the druid iv compared to the Definition---its not remotely close. i konw the essence addst he ribbon supertweet, which adds some higher resolution---but not like the definition from what i've heard.

i think the main thing with zu is i prefer having the MTM design for their FRDs. its amazing how much great resolution they have with that design.

Heard the Essence at RMAF. Had the the RF7s many moons ago. A quantum leap over the RF7s and better than past Zu speakers I have heard in the past.

You do not need a sub with the ZU Essence. Sell your sub and put the money into a great low wattage Class A Amp like a Pass Labs XA 30.5. The ZU go way down and deep, tight and super fast with the right Amp. You could even get the new Pass labs INT 30A which is the same amp as the XA 30.5 but with a killer Preamp built in. The

I sell both Pass and Zu.

Essence does not require a sub for 99% of all music IMO.

Having heard all Zu speakers with a variety of amplifiers (including the XA30.5) I would use Essence with an SET or OTL all things being equal.

Dealer disclaimer.

Besides the bass what is the difference in the Essence and Definition, imaging, sweet spot size, etc?

I have Definition 2, Druid Mk 4.08 and Credenza in my systems and have heard Essence in my house for direct comparison.

Essence is in many respects a "Super Druid," with extended bass, better horizontal dispersion and a more linear, extended top end than Druid. Retaining the simple single FRD + supertweeter architecture of Druid, Essence retains the essential tone and directness of the earlier speaker.

But Essence is not, unsurprisingly, in the same league as the Definition 2. The elastic sonic scale possible with the dual FRD configuration and 4 x 1-" sub-bass array, plus the acoustic management of high frequencies (along with mitigation of floor and ceiling effects) rendered by the FRD-ST-FRD drivers placement, yield resolution soundstaging just not available from Essence.

This is not in any way denigrating of what Essence is. Definition 2 and Essence are two different loudspeakers and very different price points, Definition 2 costing about 3X Essence. Essence plus a subwoofer will not equal Definition 2s or even Definition 1.9 if any are left, no matter how good the subwoofer.

I'll further say that you don't need a subwoofer with Essence anyway. It's flat to about 30 Hz (and sounds it), with useful signal deeper still. Most people don't have a room to support deeper bass than that, and the bass quality from Essence is better than 99% of subwoofers. Essence is a striking bargain, which allows you to keep things simple. Better to sell your sub, and put the money into better amplification. With Zu speakers in a system, the fulcrum of fidelity moves to power amplification. It's the power amps that will further define the character of your system.

But don't expect that you will have an equivalent to Definition 2. That is another level of investment entirely.

Phil

I would have to agree with Audiofeil... he is spot on in that the Essence was designed for and is a near perfect match to a whole world of fairly small watt tube amps. At 97db 1w/1m and 12 ohm, few speakers made today offer such a great opportunity and value. Let your ears decide... and that may take a road trip.

Happy Listening!

Understood, I realize the Def. 2 is another level all together, I am looking to eliminate my center channel and go 4.1 for HT and improve my 2 channel. Will the Essence be sufficient for a 4.1 set up with my Klipsch sub and surrounds for HT? 2 channel is my primary concern but I want to make sure that the Essence has a wide enough sweet spot for a phantom center set up.

Mac-7,
Have you tried a phantom center w/ your current set-up?

Yes, and i am somewhat happy with it, i was hoping the Essence would give a wider sweet spot.

Anyone using the Druid or Essence in a 4.1 or phantom center set up?

Essence is wider dispersion, and will give you a better phantom center. Also give you more wall reflections btw.