2. speakers
  3. 1304640533

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
roscoeiii's avatar
roscoeiii
1,155 posts
 
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...
gopher
499 posts
 
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?
johnk's avatar
johnk
1,976 posts
 
Rawsons are not even close Ive owned 3 of his and 4 1st watt.
morganc
255 posts
 
The Rawson F3 that I had was not even close to the XA30.5 that I have btw, but I think that is an unfair comparison to the First Watt Products. The F3 Clone was pretty durn good though.
paulfolbrecht
603 posts
 
The Definition (full Def 2 - I've never heard the Omen Def) with the First Watt F3 was just an incredible pairing. It did it all and had no real weaknesses, on any type of music.

(With that setup with my Tom Evans phono & line stages, for the first time ever I was completely satisfied without a tube in the chain anywhere. Gave up absolutely nothing to any tube gear in the areas where tubes are typically considered to be superior. But then the TE gear is not like tubes or transistors.)

Of course, I still sold the F3 (my 2nd). I got a Graaf GM20 OTL amp and like it just a bit better - but it was really a matter of taste, not superiority. In fact, I'm not sure I can say I've *ever* heard an amp "better" than the F3. When that thing is warm it's like the best low-power SET in tone and dimensionality but with real extension and a much lower noise floor.

(You may think your 45 SET is extended, and quiet, and it may be, but it's not like what can be done with no output transformers and - gulp - little chunks of sand instead of tubes. I have had other tube gear that was utterly silent for all intents and purposes (Shindo Monbrison) but not a tube amp that had a noise floor as seemingly nonexistent as the F3's. Now, why did I sell that thing again?)

It's such a crazy hobby, what with the virtually infinite number of permutations of gear possible. Not really a safe mix with the overly curious.
More to discover