Phil, You just have all the answers, :) I love it. "The strength of Sonus Faber is that the line represents "voiced" loudspeakers." Yeah you could call it "voiced" if you like, but I have to disagree with the desirability of the net effect of "voiced"....voiced hurts Fidelity. The Cremona's violate atleast three of your speaker "ideals" which others I listed do not. "None of the above match Zu for essential fidelity." What is Fidelity to you, certainly not the accepted definition. The Manger I KNOW beats the Zu in Fidelity, it may be the most advanced driver in the world. Zu may still sound better but that is not Fidelity necessarily. "The Cremona and above are among the best speakers using crossovers in terms of being able to represent music holistically. Zu is better still, for reasons already outlined."
I can think of a half dozen speakers that out shine the Cremona's in the "holistic" department. Certainly all of your experience has left you confused with too many options. Fact is anyone would have purchased the Manger until you heard the Zu, but you didn't you were going to buy a Sonus faber and of course this is the inconsistency I speak of. Flip Flop, and then you found the Zu. Your audio life was saved by two full range drivers in chorus. COMPLETELY against your ideals. Shows how much you learned in all your years, you're still trial and error.
"Uneven FRD frequency response? True in lesser FRD systems. Not true for the Zu FRD. Again, when you audition it, then you can comment from an informed perspective." I've seen the measurements in two magazines at best its +/- 4 dB from 200hz to 10khz, that is hardly what I would call ideal. You can't "hear" the actual frequency response Phil. Typical audiophile thinks he can hear stuff he can't Everybody I know has an issue with the bass, I could careless, what bothers me is the incredibly ragged off axis response and dips in critical frequency ranges. The fact the driver actually appears to have an impedance hump where it shouldn't will adversely effect phase and the "tone". This is the Druid, with just one driver.
"They have very fast rise time, are not obscuring of detail in the least."
Really, well what is it and what are THEY.....hide and seek with you all the time. As for their bandwidth, that is meaningless in my point about how you've tried to dull the highs in your system. I like how everything in your system is so perfect but what I like better is you don't know that you're dulling your highs. McIntosh amplifiers are adjusted and a bit rounded, just look at their square wave sometime. Tsk, Tsk, you should know better that too argue what you "think" you hear with someone who want facts. Its really intellectually dishonest of you to TELL me what you hear is the truth. I simply cannot share these kinds of FACTS? with you. So you're going have to do better than pronouns and supposition if we're going to elevate this conversation to a productive level. "Zu's solution is an unusually large advance", This is strictly in your (ever decreasingly credible) opinion! Because I don't see it. because the only FACTS on this speaker that I have seen, barely makes them goode. I see a hot rodded eminence driver with some clever tuning to help with baffle step compensation and other than that it appears to behave like almost every other 10" midrange one can buy. Yeah I still have to hear it but if we deal with facts not opinion, I'm going to need a great deal more information from you to support your claims. Right now those two magazines are the arbitor of my opinion because they both show similar results on your "advanced" driver. BTW this is not a disparagement of ZU, this is a disparagement of what you say the facts are and what the facts really are and your consistent misuse of the word Fidelity
"Definitions DON'T have is the even worse problem of massed crossovers."
Oh yeah, but I wonder if you know what happens when two speakers cover the same frequency spaced as they are? Do you know? They kind of crossover.
"But Definitions have greater resolution, more linear accuracy, can scale more extensively, and throw a wider usable soundstage." I love when people make my point for me; How do you think the Definitions have greater resolution and "throw" a wider soundstage? Personally I think you're just making this up from a technical standpoint, well actually I don't. I'm sure you "hear" it this way but you would would be very upset to find that the reason you like the fuzzier presentation is because the two drivers combine to actually diffuse the high frequencies. You really should do more real research because unwittingly you just made my argument that 2 speakers (ie the Zu Druid) is not as good as 4 speakers (Zu Definition). So you do prefer multichannel better. All you have to do now is spread all those speaker out a little. :) And I'm not being cute, check it out before you come back with something smug based on your complete misunderstanding of what's happening.
Man Phil, you don't know yourself very well. "Top to bottom, everything I've outlined is present in my system configuration. Highly-refined wideband and simple circuits, wide-response, fast, articulate sources, and speakers built around a uniquely wide-range, neutral FRD that uses a minimum number of drivers to achieve their bandwidth, response, resolution and natural tone." Phil, you're like Bill Clinton, minimum? response? fast? I think you're trying to redefine these terms. The whole Denon Cartridge thing, still sticks, and once again you simply do not know what really matters in creating the "tone" of a system. "I've owned Bob Stuart's speakers in the past. He usually has at least one really good speaker at a price" This conversation is not about his speakers Equating his speakers with the entirety of his work is typical of your knowledge base, but I'm surprised you had to go there at all.
"I have multiple pairs of tube amps. One pair is very wideband, flat 5Hz - 115kHz, better than many solid state and certainly MC amps. They have very fast rise time, are not obscuring of detail in the least."
So whats the spectral content of those amplifiers? you don't even know, which is why you make a completey irrelevant statement about MC amplifiers. I could have SET MC amplifiers could I not? Do I have to use MC amps in a MC system? No I do not. BTW which tube amp is 5hz-115khz? into a resistive load, remember static amplifier performance does not equal dynamic amplifier performance! "I recall what I "knew" when I was 3 years into hifi. Time will change your perspective. You can be sure of it."
Yes it will, but because I listen to people with greater experience than myself, that actually SHOW me REAL information and let me derive my own opinion. I am already better off than you. I am not in a world of disolusion. Because to simply base all my knowledge on marketing text and hearing sessions would keep me spinning. And like you I will never know what I'm looking for.
In Closing
One thing I do know about your system is you prefer the multi-channel version of your speakers over the two channel one....let that be a lesson to you.
There's your sign. ;)
