Anyone listen to Zu Audio's Definition Mk3?

Hi Mrpaul, you're the most recent owner to praise the new Def4s. Mine are to be installed in exactly 2 weeks. They've been out for a pro review, so should be no bedding in issues.
I've bought them blind (deaf?) w/out audition to replace my beloved 2s, so this unanimous thumbs up is filling me with (cautious) confidence.
The thing I am most concerned about is whether there is any loss of the seductive Zu tone dense presentation, with perhaps a move to a more spotlit hi fi type sound.
I would hate it if improved treble extension, midrange transparency and bass control in the 4s led to a hyped up exaggerated presentation I moved away from in the first place going to Zu 5 years ago.
Deep down your comments as well as Phil's and Gopher's should mean this fear is unfounded, but as in so much of audio, new very rarely means truly improved.

Hi Spiritofmusic,

In my system there is no loss of the "seductive Zu tone". If anything it is more dense and fleshed out due to the increased mid-range resolution and improved bass and treble. Instruments sound more natural and realistic. With these improvements I find myself listening to a lot of older, less stellar recordings and enjoying them greatly. I think you are going to like them very much. It's hard to describe how much better they are across the board than the 2s.

Regards,

Fantastic, Mrpaul. Much as I love my 2s, treble was always a conundrum. It appeared to be absent in the traditional hifi style of presentation ie not spotlit at all. Just a wall of highly communicative dynamic tonally rich midrange. Then a percussion instrument or high pitched string would appear to remind me, yes, treble info is there after all, just v. reticent. Bass integration was a real issue too until I invested in the SpatialComputer Black Hole, and now I have less reservations.
It's so reassuring that greater resolution thru the frequency extremes augmented by greater performance of the all-important FRDs are keeping all that is great about the 2s but taking things to a better all-around package.
It's interesting that with me, satisfaction with the Zu sound means that I'm "hearing" the xover in other spkrs, even those at the very high end. Once smitten by the Zu sound it's hard to go back.
These really are going to have to be my final spkr upgrade, and I'm really stoked for a week on Monday!

So, this has nothing to do with Def Mk 3, but I did finally get f3 amp to pair with Zu Druid Mk 4 and would thought I would write it up for others.

I try F3 because I wanted to try SET class A topology and did not want to use tubes. F3 is reasonably priced SS amp with that design. I use my peachtree as DAC and Pre. Druids are high-passed with dual subwoofers.

First, I was worried about low wattage but it is not a problem. Speakers can be driven very loud, and I do not hear mid-range compression I have heard with low W amplification in the past.

Second, once again I see why druids are so revealing. Phil123 is right, amplification choice makes a difference. All of a sudden discover I accidentally had one speaker wired out of phase. Did not notice much difference with peachtree, big difference with F3.

Third, off-axis listening is now fantastic. I mean crazy good. BY off axis, I mean I am sitting at 90 degrees to speaker and cannot even see driver, but it still sounds so much better than I did in past. THis is the big mystery, I have no idea how this is even possible.

Four, at low volume, you get very rich texture and good dynamic range. It is surprising how much you can get even though music is very quiet.

Five, at normal/high volume, the sound is neutral and very clear. Maybe a little hyper-clear. I don't hear any particular emphasis on high or low frequency, nor does attack seem over emphasized or decay too strong. I would not describe it is particularly fast or articular or lean. It is just very clear. It is light like buld that is slightly too bright, or glass prescription 0.25 too strong sometimes. I re-adjust toe-in and this softened presentation a little without losing clarity.

Six, dynamics are excellent, micro and macro.

Seven, tonal texture is excellent.

Eight, sweet spot somehow became much bigger. This was the one thing I wanted to change about my system the most and I am surprised it was done with amp.

So, I am happy camper and have learned something. I may try omen defs later this year, but as sweet spot problem is fixed it is not as high a priority.

I am following this thread with interest because I am also thinking about upgrading to the Definition Mk. IV. In this context I was astonished to read Danny Kaey's review in Positive Feedback of the excellent DarTZeel amp with more than 200 watts which he ran successfully on his Def. IV speakers. On paper this seems like overkill or even a mismatch? Can someone perhaps shed some light on this?