Z1 | Vox 3awf. On subjective resolution and airiness, this was a meet of equals. One ribbon forward, the other up, both served the same bubbly. On depth of field and specific layers, both were akin again. Only on first blush did the Z1's virtual stage seem set back even farther. That related to a relative upper-bass emphasis caused by lack of real 1st-octave presence. Versus the lower-reaching Swiss, that absence of low bass built a certain hollowness below and associated coolness above. It was that cooler tinge which suggested still more through-the-front-wall distance of soundstage perspective. The Vox played it clearly fleshier through a midband fortified by two balanced-force woofers moving extra air. This revisits earlier comments on balance versus standing out. The Z1's outstanding sense of speed and see-through lucidness builds directly upon its lighter tonal balance. By contrast to my other speakers, that was somewhat top heavy so arguably north of center. To overwrite and make a point, it's the ribbon which leads us by the hand whereas with the Swiss, the AlNiCo widebander plays tour guide.
That same difference factored on perceived percussive perspicacity when drums sticks and brushes tickle and click rims, skins and cymbals. With the Z1, those ticks, dings and clicks felt even brisker, even more peeled out thus high-contrast specific. Once more that played into subjective speed. It's that very direct sense of cutting through butter with a hot knife. The Vox 3awf tracked transient just as keenly. Its fleshier follow-up simply had them stand out less. I call that a more organic than blunt take on very high resolution. On electronica/ambient fare with substantial low synths and drums, even for our smaller ~24m² room I'd fancy a Z1 with subwoofer assist. The Vox is still borderline self sufficient then, the Kaiser easily solos it. For the Z1, KEF's new €1'500 KC62 with 6.5" balanced-force woofers, 1'000 watts class D, DSP feed-forward error correction plus motion feedback looks ideally priced and styled to match. One could add two of the ultra-compact KEF to a Z1 with stand and still pay less than for a Z2. A Z1 with dual hi-tech subs for €15'400 would play even larger spaces superbly and look the bomb. As a fancier of active/smart low bass, I'd probably still rate this 4-some combo over a €23K/pr Z3. Now it was time to leave the competition behind and assess the Z1 on its own merit in the main system. Clear already was that for our domestic consumption relative to 'normal' SPL and room sizes, Børresen seemed to have really pushed the Z1 close to the B-01. The main enforcer must be Michael's new mid/woofer. Despite iron in its motor, cleverly suppressed inductance comes unexpectedly close to the flagship monitor's zero-iron version (even if technically, the N52 neodymium magnets of the B range alloy neodymium, iron and boron to contain a mixed form of iron).
Had Børresen just minted their own worst competitor with the new Z range?
In the downstairs rig, I'd forgotten Gordon Gecko. Greed is good. Here one should go after at least a Z2. Replacing a good-sized 8" 2-way with a 4½" monitor couldn't fail but tip up tonal balance. That wasn't the speaker's fault. Your proxy buyer had exercised poor judgment, period. In a rare reversal of habits, your man had opted for not quite enough speaker for his room. That had nothing to do with achievable SPL, capacious soundstaging, absentee mid bass or other imaginary demerits. It simply meant that the tonal center of gravity had shifted up. That gave the midrange an energetic emphasis. It also allowed the ribbon to apply its gloss further down the bandwidth than it otherwise would whilst—certainly for as long as I recalled our own speakers—I sensed behind all that detail and intensity a certain void again. With KEF's review sub still in the wind, I had to hit a mental reset instead. That meant nothing more complicated than to wait. We allow our ear/brain to accommodate a new balance until that becomes the status quo. Once in place, we treat any new thing on its own merit. But first the internal comparator must leave the building. I'd let a few days pass while the system played in the background. Let it trickle in until it set in.
When my mental blueprint of our sonic reference proved too hard to erase, I repurposed our Pass Labs XA-30.8 from the 2.0 video system. That instantly dropped the center of gravity on tonal balance and built out growl down low to fulfill the primitive but true promise of big amps making small speakers sound biggest. Our 200-watt 1MHz monos are suitably big re: power but their voicing mirrors the Z1's own. The physically far larger class A Pass isn't just far heavier on the scale but sounds it, too. Now I had Z1 ready to strut its stuff best foot forward in this larger space. At $6'500, the Pass prices like the entry-level Aavik I-180 integrated so also on that score was a reasonable match. No need to wait on the Gryphon and throw off that balance again.
