Some impression on Zu Omen Definition


I just pick up a pair of Zu Omen Definition, and I have mixed feelings. It sound very different from my B&W.

First of all, the height of the sound. For my B&W, the sound is a bit higher than my ear level. But for the Zu, it is the same or a bit lower than my ear level. This sounds a bit weird. Because usually the singer will be on a stage, so, it is more natural to expect the sound is higher from my ear level.

Secondly is the depth. For my B&W, the singer is behind the speaker plane. For the Zu, the singer is very forward. It almost feel it is in front of the speaker plane. I don't know which way is better. Due to this difference, for the 30 mins or so .. I feel very weird listening to Zu.

Why would 2 speakers have so much different in presentation? The zu is much taller than the B&W, so, I expect it will project a bigger soundstage. And usually the sound stage is behind the speaker. But with the height and forward sounding, I can't say produce a big sound stage. Or can I say it produce a sound stage in front of the speaker plane, and I need to sit back further?
gte357s
I've got no affiliation with the seller, but FYI there is a Rawson F3 clone on now.
And I would also highly recommend that all Rawson fans try a Pass built FirsWatt. The clones don't hold a candle to the FirstWatts built by the master...
Roscoe,

You and Paul Folbrech's comments have me on the lookout for a good deal on a used commercial F3. He mentioned too that his Pass built F3 sounded better than his Rawson.

Is it the Rawson builds that are inferior or DIYs in general? I ask because I know some people critique Rawson's work, but could someone more 'meticulous' in sticking to the plans provided to the DIY community build an equal, or did Pass keep a few tricks up his sleeve?