Anyone listen to Zu Audio's Definition Mk3?


Comparisons with the 1.5s and the others that came before? Getting the itch; again......
128x128warrenh
>>...twice the footprint, 25% taller, and 250% the volume of the Def 4s. Not insignificant for real-world applications.<<

When Zu says Definition offers the maximum loudspeaker performance available in about 1 square-foot of floor space regardless of price, I think they are right and that footprint happens to be practical even for many customers at least in the US who don't have extravagent digs. You really must have an extraordinary commitment to domestic high-fidelity music reproduction to go further in a loudspeaker. But of course in a pursuit like this, there's a lot of elasticity to where any two individuals would place the boundary demarcating the threshold of "extraordinary commitment." In a market sense, is Dominance worth its size and price? Yes, but only a relative handful of people will think so.

Phil
I briefly (very briefly!) flirted with the idea of Dominance before my upgrade to Def 4s. However, Dominance was too visually imposing, the size was simply unacceptable, and I am not that committed to "domestic high fidelity music reproduction." Conversely, the Def 4s look right, are properly sized for a normal living environment, have a look and finish that are excellent and perfect for my decor, and I am more than satisfied with the sound. Plus there is this black and white photograph that I covet . . .
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.
My Def 4s sit only a couple of inches from the back wall - closer to the back wall than my previous Def 2s that were out about a foot. (Zu positioned both pairs without my input.) Given a 12" square footprint and a near wall position, Def 4s are as room-friendly as I could want.
Gentlemen, some v. good news. I am to take delivery of my Def4s later this month, they are currently in the hands of a reviewer which will hopefully lead to a positive professional review.
I'm actually suprised there have been no other formal reviews, bar comments of the sound at various shows.
Re the Dominance; I live in a converted loft, listening space 22' x 27' x 13', spkrs 10' apart, 12' from listening position, free space behind, close on 8000 cubic feet listening volume. The acoustic is v. live and can support bass pretty far down (esp. with the help of SpatialComputer Black Hole bass node correction). In other words, my room could certainly support these uber spkrs.
I do believe that their aluminium standard finish is too much for any enviroment, but speciality finish in black anodised to incl. driver rings and base would allow them to fit in much more easily.
There are plenty of high end spkrs as, or more, imposing eg Magico Q7, Rockport Arrakis, Wilson Alexandria, Kharma Grand Exquisite, Evolution Acoustics MM3 and 7.
For obvious reasons $50000 is a bit of a stretch, heightened by the fact that, unlike the Def4s, there is no onboard sub amp, so the cost of this plus bass filter management would have to be found.
So, a lottery win day one purchase, and an interesting parallel dimension alternative to the Def4s, but I think I'm going to be PRETTY content when my new babies arrive in a few weeks!