Zu on Zu


I’ve just read through the bottom third of a very, very long and passionate thread here regarding Zu speakers, generally centered around whether or not our designs employ crossover networks or not. After doing this, and with a great deal of restraint not to write you all off or retort “screw ‘em all” (Yes, I try and keep a clean mouth, had the other word there for a bit but on reread... But honestly, I might have to use such words to keep the attention here.)

I feel a nice long ramble coming on but before I open it up full throttle all cross-country like letting it all ride, let me make a few brief points. I also know that in order to accurately communicate we must use technical jargon and it is also evident that the majority I will be communicating with are concept-oriented and likely do not have a fundamental background in loudspeaker design or physics. Very likely you are getting your info from that STD cookbook—how to build iffy loudspeaker by VD. Big mistake if you ask Gene Czerwinski, Lars Nordland, and others that have made loudspeakers their life's work. If you haven’t at least studied Harry F Olson (Hey Lars, Harry was a Swede too, born in the US though, didn’t have your cool accent) and you are posting your opinion as acoustic-physics-based you should stop, do more home work and come back ready to play ball. So, this will be wordy, technical, maybe even problem/proof centric, we’ll see. Yes, this is a pain in my butt, it is a big distraction, the few hours that are going to go into this are stolen from my family and I’m pissed about it. If this were during the work day I would still be pissed because I got better things to do, this is not a real contribution to the art of audio, my contribution should be realized in product and systems, not Q&A. But there is a need and if I let the anti-zu thing go too far it will most certainly hurt revenue and thus the mechanism through which Zu’s ideas are realized. It is also difficult as I do not think in a linear fashion. Ideas are expressed in my mind as if they were on a stage, roughed in concepts seem to just take shape, the various parts interplaying and emerging simultaneously, and I am able to see the problems in my head, work them out virtually. I suck at math generally to say nothing of my English and spelling skills. Going from thought to pounding on this keyboard is like flying along at 170 MPH and then having to slow down for a school zone. I also drop words, sometime complete ideas, hands are always behind. So, read with care, realize this is not what I like doing and feel free to NOT expect more of this blather here. We will however address the wives' tales, misunderstandings and music over at ZuAudio.com. We hope to give the Zu guys some proof support and also hopefully convince some of you ATC and Klipsch onwers to give us a try -- okay, at least respect what we have created. By the way, you ATC guys, I have my one secrete sauce and rebuild tweaks for their very cool 3” dome. It’s three hours per driver, shop rate is $60 / hour. Satisfaction guaranteed. On second thought, I’ll be asked a bunch of questions, let’s come back to this if Zu really is just a fad. I do think that is one of the top 50 drivers of all time. Love the thing.

Cynicism is a good thing. I don’t care if you don’t like the Zu sound, I don’t care if you think you can do it better, I don’t care if you only like to listen to unamplified triangle made from C76200 alloy played only at night 100 miles from the closest paved road—I don’t care. But when you armchair engineer my stuff and rag on my customers, and do it with this “I don’t mean to offend” attitude but you really do—ya, this gets to me, at least it did tonight.

There are a ton of things I think Zu should now begin to talk about. Finding the time for such writings will be difficult but we are committed to it. For now I can only briefly address the whole crossover thing. I will come back to it and give it a proper writing with Adam to run proofs and math and to pick up what I let drop. I swear we will do it in the very near future.

Enough all ready. Zu Tone, Druid and Definition loudspeakers do not use a crossover network.

“Crossover”, like “speaker” is short for loudspeaker, is short for “crossover network” as applied to audio. Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary copyright 1996 defines a crossover for audio networks as: An audio circuit device that sorts the impulses received and channels them into high or low-frequency loudspeakers. This is a very non-technical definition but gets the point across. Our full range driver is directly connected to the binding posts with nothing more than cable, designed to reduce reactive loads, from voicecoil to input terminals. There are no devices of any kind between. Simple right? No, many think that the dynamic behavior of the drive unit must be factored in. I agree, the engineer must consider this but it is not part of a defined crossover though must influence a builders selection and execution if a crossover network will be used. Since our driver is an electrodynamic coil-in-static-flux type it has reactive components. These can not be eliminated. We tried many new types of coil windings on our motor, trying to first reduce the inductive rise without sacrificing dynamic range while also looking at how to increase electromagnetic densities. After a lot, or is it alot, of this and that, success and flat out failures, we ended up with a basic down and back, windings on top of former voicecoil. This voicecoil is rather big for a drive unit with a bandwidth of 8.5 octaves in room response, 5/8ths of an inch long and 2 inches wide, immersed in a high density magnetic (B) field uniformly covering the complete coil, static B field density has a practical usable length of 1 inch allowing for linear full coil immersion operation of roughly 1/4”, 1/2” peak to peak. The drawing of the motor assembly resembles a neutral hung design. Consider now that we have a mechanical xmax on the suspension system, spider and surround with a gib factor of about 20 / 80, you can see that our drive unit is quite capable of very high SPL levels, very linear dynamic behavior, reduced inductive rise as the coil only sees a shunt or little static B field at full band power levels in the 100 Watts RMS area. Full bandwidth thermal dissipation capacity on our Zu260FR/G2 is 200 Watts, 400 Watts if used with an active high-pass set at 50 Hz (2nd order) for those of you who might find yourself using them for DJ monitoring. What, none of you are in to the DJ scene, man you really are missing out. A motor, which accounts for all the electromagnetic functions of a driver, must also be modeled with the transducer's intended impedance matching counter part, the thing that couples to the air and that things suspension, and visa versa.

I also noticed that somebody here is a big active crossover fan. Cool. This has real promise and is how everything in pro is done. While the digital technology has finally come around well enough to make decent sound I personally feel that for great texture and tone the main transducer should cover as wide a bandwidth as possible keeping that first crossover point below the modern third octave (64 Hz point give or take a bit). But this really is a completely differnet topic, we are talking about home audio applications, not OzFest stuff where active crossovers and crazy solutions are essential. For this club style party we played at HE2006, we ran our druids with the Crown I-Tech power amps. A two way system with a LR12dB/ at 52 on the Druids, BW6dB/ at 28Hz on our Druid riser subs. The room had a big fat boom in the thwack range. We really lit the system up for DJ Presto at about 2:30 AM, man was that cool, crystal clear, hard hitting sweet sound at concert levels that would make even Gordy Johnson cry!

Speaking of the show. I had this 20 minute talk with a Bose guy. I really wanted to say, but didn’t, hey, what cool stuff have you made anyway, spending ten times the Chinese made product costs on market, get the flip out of my room. Instead I had to listen to his absolute understanding of cone modes and break up. This is why you ain't gnu see anything cool from Bose anytime soom. This is a lead-in really. Here is an actual quote by an earlier blogger’s post: “I too am sure that nothing aphysical can be happening---if only because that would not be allowed by physical laws.” Really, somebody wrote that? Not sure if this was a Zuid or a Zu is a fad guy, either way we can’t think like this. If an anti, say something that sounds kinda good, use the word physics to back you up and move on. That’s a load of crap. First, we humans know little more than that friendly little black ant crawling under your door. Don’t they call ‘em piss ants or something. Really, you take any branch of physics, try and take it down to a fundamental level and see if the whole thing doesn’t fall apart. Yes, Newtonian physics let us get surprisingly close to the average model of many things, let’s us measure and repeat basic stuff. But the further we dig the more we realize we are nothing, understanding virtually nothing on a base level, only knowing how to repeat and model not truly getting the whys of it all. Physical laws are discovered, they do not allow or disallow, they behave in a particular way under particular conditions, understanding being based on the particular way you measured and model the thing. Again, you break stuff down far enough and new models and behavior emerge. The physics student that does not subscribe to absolute will be find himself in a position for discovery and contribution with greater frequency and magnitude. Me, I’m only a physics major drop out, largely self taught in acoustics starting with passion at the age of thirteen. Favorite reading back then was Olson. If a Zu guy said this now you know why I started jumping up and down when I read it.

Physics, it’s super cool. It’s our chosen discipline here at Zu. We hope to add to the knowledge base, not simply follow everyone else’s models. And when it comes to loudspeaker and cable design we want to lead, we intrinsically question others models and proofs, preferring to go it on our own, discovery is still a much bigger fixx than recreation.

Give us a break, we are a bunch of guys that love music and sound just like the rest that post here, bootstrapping our ideas to life. We are just asking for a bit of time to mature, get our communications together, figure out marketing a bit, find ways to get the product in your home for a listen. If you don’t like it, no big deal. But if you are pissed off cause you think you should be where I am, then get busy man. Make it happen.

Look for more at ZuAudio.com in a few weeks. Really, we are committed to the communication of technical assays, if for no other reason than to save our supporters from going crazy here at Audiogon.

I’m tired, need to see my wife, get some lovin, eat breakfast with the kids -- at home and not at Zu.

Later,

Sean
sean_zucable

Showing 11 responses by bartokfan

I think phil does raise an interesting observation, that is some of us go in listening to a speaker and fail to grasp how close the sound images the instrument, at the moment of recording, or say an orch live at concert. I arely go to concerts, but do have some ideas locked in my hearing. If we were to put someone in a room and a guy standing at the front with a row of switches labeled A,B,C,D,E,F, 6 speakers, thats enough for the point. And lets say the guy flips swithches like a blind testing, and you grade them in 1st place to 6th place. How long a session would you need before you made definited ratings as to YOUR personal likes? For me it wouldn't atke long to place in an order, now that I own my current speaker, which provides a point of reference. I had a pr of 1981 Philips 2 ways. Someone from Madisound told me that indeed that Philips was a first class speaker 'in those days". That tweeter is w=also used by the ol Macintosh. I always thought it was a nice speaker, UNTIL I took them to my friends house who had a pr of big 3 way Mirage 1's, also now an old model. True, his 3 ways do have advantages of a bigger woofer and 3 drivers, captured more fq's. I realizedc how poor the Philips REALLY were. But the philips next to the B7W's 602's , bought in 2001, held their own against the B7W's. And in ways were better at imaging. The Philips showed up the B&W's faults, weaknesses that were less noticable at the time of purchased from a showroom of B&W's....then in 2004 I got the Seas and the B&W's once agin had a supreme meltdown. True the seas' was a MTM design, the B&W's a simple 2 way. Taking that into consideration, I can assure you the B&W's totally miss the image of a live instrument. Totally. But at the time of purchase/audition, I thought they were not bad a step up from the retired 2 way Philips.
Point being, ...well I for one have only recently made some developments in my critical listening.
I'm sure the Zu's do some things very nice. But when you A/B to another top competitor, then what happens? There may be some areas you had not heard before now become revealed. Who knows maybe the Zu's will be shown to be exactly what you always wanted, which competitor speaker B has failed in. There's weaknesses in my Seas, but easily acceptable, and the +'s far outadvantage the minor weaknesses. I know this, but its best for me, at the moment. For under 2K i'm not going to complain.
I do not see Macro making intentional affront to 883dave, its macro's "modus operandi" and was not meant to be disrespectful. Though he should be careful in expression before he clicks post..
Well like Zu says he's willing to work with us to get his speaker in our home for a test listen. I'd be willing to pay half shipping costs, Zu pays ship one way, I pay ship back. I'd give them a fair review next to my comparable Thor, comparable price/size,weight/dynamics. I feel my system's components offer a relatively fair enviornment. As you know I believe the Seas' drivers to be THE standard by which all others are judged.
btw ZU, lets use FedX, as UPS is a joke.
If the Druid's were over 100 lbs I wouldn't bother in asking, as I don't fool with speakers over 125 lbs. Weight/sound/price, all 3 are very important factors when deciding on a speaker. I would never buy a speaker over 150 lbs. Zu keeps his top of line Definition at 125. BRAVO to Zu for that.
Which makes for my next topic. over weight speakers. Now you know the Wilson's are gonna get slammed, yet again. hehe
I sent a cdp to califorinia and it was bubbled wrap with 2 layers in a single box, arrived trashed. partly my fault for not double boxing. Now its 6 months and am still waiting on my $500 ck. Katrina has claims backed up for at least 1 yr. This is why I suggest Fedx. Fedx is more careful also.
Some guy on audio aslyum made a short comment on the Zu's he heard on SEVERAL systems. Thats fair to me. You can read it there.
I just mentioned that the Zu's were reviewed on audio asylum, short, one sentence, but to the point. Have a look.
Isn't the Zu best setup with a low watt/single ended tube amp? How many of us are interested in low watt tube? So this speaker is geared toward a specific customer. Sure its not limited to single ended, but its IDEAL for low watt tube.
PatD on audio aslyum provides a link to the Druids measurment graphs. I can't interpret graphs. But take his word for what he sees..
Paul
Undertow i apologize for making comments that were not fair to Zu's, because I've not heard them. I was refering to a post over at AA from PatD who posted a graph on them. You;ll have to read that for yourself. You can raed atmasphere's review and others, and make your own decision. I'm sure its afine speaker, and hopefully I'll get the opportunity to hear them. Until then we can only read owners comments here on the gon. From Atmas' comments seems the Zu may have qualities I'm interested in. One good thing i like about the Zu's is the light weight, 70 for the Druids and 120 for the Def's. This is a big plus. I hope to hear them one day. Seems everyone will have their own preference in speakers and all things audio. There is no one sound fits all.
Paul
Macro what do you think about Zu's Def at 9K, comes loaded with 4 USA made 10 inch high efficiency internal powered woofers + Zu's 10 inch Zu universal woofer + the dome tweeter, all this for 9K. Frankly I don't want any of the speaker to be internally powered. I'm old school, the amp drives the speaker. >>>The only other option is the Druid with the same tweet and the single Zu 10 inch woofer, at 2800. Nothing in between. Looking at other speakers prices, Theils, Vandersteens, the Druid is fairly priced. But the next step up is 9K, out of most of our budgets. I realize that Zu is busy at working up more models, and we all should wait to see his newer models offered between these 2. Can some one explain why a speaker needs 4 10 inch woofers + another 10 inch universal woofer? Why not just 1 internal powered woofer. When I see too many drivers in a cabinet, a red flag goes up,. Guess I got that from those early 70's speakers of the disco days. Though I realize this 4 woofer is a different concept from the muti driver loaded speaker, like the Legacy's.
Sure we all may have different wants/wishes for a speaker's voicing of the muisc. About the graph, I guess if someone asked what what I like in a speraker, then we looked at my speakers curve graphs, he may tell , "nope, this Seas is not the one you are looking for, from the specs its not in line what you want". Another thing is that the Zu's next to my Seas may show flaws in my "ideal" Seas', weaknesses I did not know exsisted uptil A/B next to something with better qualities in some areas. I guess there is no one perfect speaker, only what we feel is "ideal" for us. And then of course the Zu's may show their weaknesses next to the Seas'. Can work both ways.
On the comment that it took a few days to get to know the Zu sound/image more intimately, I can understand that. I know I sat in the B&W room (my wife WANTED them, had no choice, never bring the wife along)), this was 4 yrs ago, and so bought the 602, after comparing them to my 1981 Philips 2 ways, the weaknesses that were NOT SO NOTICABLE in the lsitening room, came alive at home , after a few months. Then the seas' blew them out the water EVEN MORE. The old Philips revealed its weaknesses also next to the Seas, faults I did not know were there, until the Seas arrived on the scene. I guess the Zu/Seas thing would be interesting, but really I feel "all things considered" I've found what i'm looking for, in spite of any weaknesses that may be in the Seas.
I'm sure the Zu's have some nice qualities I hope to hear one day. A second system is always a possibility. Nothing wrong with that, in fact thats a good thing. Man you've made it when you say 'oh thats my second system" Audio heaven :-)
"I'll bet the dip at 150hz is still there even with the speaker on the floor" (as opposed to someones previous objexction taht the tests were performed on the Zu driver sitting in mid air). ....oops...Dip at 150, classical music has alot going on at that critical juncture. Oh well.