Soliloquy 6.2i vs VS vr4jr , Zu Druid & Usher 6371


I have the Soliloquy's and have the ' upgrade' bug !
I am not able to sample equipment very easily and am looking to narrow down my choices here .
I am using an Audio Aero Prima integrated amp with a Granite 657 CDP .
While I don't have any real problems with this set-up I would like to improve on it .
My listening room is small at 11ft. X 12ft. thus I listen in the near field , @ 6ft. from the speakers . I do listen to rock music but usually at low volume levels as well as contemporary blues and some female vocalists like Diana Krall. I value good ole toe tapping head bobbing involvement most of all .
The only other speaker that I have any experience with is JM Labs Electra 926. I did not care for them as they did not have any 'heart' and were a little tizzy on the top end .
I would like to know how these choices would compare to my Soliloquys in my situation . Would these be a side ways move or an upgrade ? I realize that each one will have a different sound and would like to know what that difference is .
Any other moves from the Sols, that were an improvemnt, would be welcomed .
Thank you .
saki70
It's interesting to me that each of these Zu vs. Whoever threads leads to the same types of discussions around the Zu's. Having heard none of these other options (but plenty like them), I'll postulate that the others will sound much more alike and the Druids will sound different from the group.

They don't sound like XO's in a box. XO's in a box can separate themselves within class but ultimately they will sound more like each other than the Druid. Further, the Druid will be happiest with completely different amplification than the other speakers. So, even if you had the same speakers in the same room, compatibility and preference would likely fall to the best amp/speaker match.

All that said, if one could optimize amplification for each speaker in the same room, I'd guess "the vote" for each listener would put the Druid first or last. What they do well, the others won't match, and the Druids won't do exactly what the others do.

I'm a cheerleader for Zu, sure. Skepticism is warranted too. If I bought every product people thought was the "best ever", I'd be $4m in debt and looking for a medium-sized warehouse to store it all.
Phil, Miklorsmith: Your kind of advocacy of Zu is appreciated, that is how I became curious about Zu's in the first place. As to why discussions end up revolving around Zu's, you'd notice, eg in this thread itself, that Zu's start out as one among many on someone's short list. Then their extreme cheerleaders move in. (And yes they have said Zu is "revolutionary" for not having a cross-over.) It is that kind of advocacy we should call.

Jeff: Good luck with your audition. I look forward to your first impressions and later a full review. I would suggest starting a new thread. Please list other speakers you compared them against, and also on what kind of music.

Other thoughts on Zu: (i) As I said above, designers know their product and capabilities best and as long as they are tweaking the design and think they can improve it (at the same price point) I am happy to let them try. When they settle down, I'll listen to the final result. (ii) I also think there is huge gap between Druids and Definitions, between 2 drivers and 7, between $2800 and $9000. So the Zu floorstander range has a hole in the middle with room for a model or two. Maybe that's what they are working on.
Thank you Macrojack and Ton1313 for your comparisons .

Jeffreyds ; please keep me posted , either here, by email or on a new thread. I am really quite interested .

One thing that I have noticed , from reading here on the 'Gon , is that I haven't really heard a bad word about the Zu's . The only dissenting words concern the 'cheerleading', by the actual owners , and maybe the cabinet finish's. Nothing about the sound .

Any one else with a comparison ?
Zu's revolutionary aspect derives first from the accomplishment of their wideband full-range driver. Without that, the crossoverless design would not be possible, or it wouldn't yield the same results. Druid and Definitions are systems, holistically designed to meet music fidelity objectives beyond what's attainable by price-competitive products.

Keep in mind that Zu pursues this stellar sound in a consistent way with inconsistent speaker topologies. The Druid is an open-cabinet system that leverages an acoustic energy management principle first developed to manage motorcycle engine exhaust for power maximization from the engine. The Definition, on the other hand, is a sealed box system, but not strictly an acoustic suspension design, as the cones move little and do not rely on the enclosed air spring for support. However, both designs, along with the sealed box Tones achieve a family sound that delivers unprecedented fidelity in compact footprints.

You're right, the Zu advocates are a relatively small population. This is a small company that invests very little money in promotion and has no dealer channel. But it is growing and had won a reputation for innovation and sensational sound quality out of scale to their actual presence in the market.

Also, Aktchi, you're correct -- from a marketing standpoint, Zu has a hole in the middle of their line. Today, Druids deliver 70% of the Definition's fidelity and quality at less than 30% of the price. And the right amp is crucial to that equation (not necessarily expensive). So there is mitigation to that gap. That is to say, $2800 Druids are fully worth, for example, $8,000 of power amplification. What you'd spend on a more expensive speaker, if put instead into better amps for Druids, would achieve much the same thing or better. But Zu will nevertheless plug this gap when they have the right product.

Sean & Adam are committed to continuous improvement, so the Zu models will never be "done." However, refinements will become progressively more incremental as has happened with Druid, in part because its the FRD that drives much of the result, and it's excellent now. You can consider their speakers "settled down" but not immune to improvement.

I've owned many highly credible speakers over more than 30 years of audiophilia. And I've worked in the business, maintained connections to it, and have heard nearly everything worth hearing at some time or other. I'm not speaking out of context when I say Zu's sound is real. That said, however, I agree with the prior comment that when auditioned by mainstream audiophiles in context of a group of decent speakers, Zu will be ranked by many as either first or last. Hearing a truly phase-coherent, transient-uniform, tonally accurate, dynamically faithful, efficient speaker sans crossover for the first time is powerfully disorienting to people who have never heard the precedents for Zu's design principles. Which is almost everyone on this board.

Phil
The Zu Droids sound like an interesting speaker. I havent auditioned them though. I have auditioned the other three however. If you like the Soliloquy sound, then I dont think you gain anything with the Usher 6300s series or the VS 4JRs.

I have a bunch of the Soliloquy speaker models myself and put my 5.3is a step ahead of the VS 4JRs and somewhat even with the Usher 6300s. I do use a class A amp with a tube based CD player however which seems to mix well with the Soliloquies would be my only other comment.