Zuki Amps?

[bdubs767]

So when are we pooling our money and getting one of these to try? If it is so great, we can then dump it on eBay when done with it.

Ill organize and you do one of your tests?

[mr tibbs]

There is that elitist air that many forum'goers have, meaning product superiority based on price alone.

That is all I can see with these so far. Until a pic of the guts is released there really is nothing else that will sway me to spend that kind of money on someone elses say. After all, a pic is worth a thousand words.

[Eric D]

I would like to see Cecil test it as well. He has a big power supply and can load test it.

My goal would be lots of detail photos and several people inputting info about its design, hopefully discrediting it if it is a farce, or showing its strong points if these really are great amps.

[denim]

The zuki website is outstanding.....

[mr tibbs]

The zuki website is outstanding.....

[denim]

The zuki website is outstanding.....

Not trying to be mean, but why not post up vital info on the amplifiers? Are they hiding something? All of our T/S are on the product page for all to see.

[fuzzysnuggleduck]

I would like to see Cecil test it as well. He has a big power supply and can load test it.

My goal would be lots of detail photos and several people inputting info about its design, hopefully discrediting it if it is a farce, or showing its strong points if these really are great amps.

That would be a good idea.

I was thinking that if some independent 3rd party bought the amp and did fair and impartial analyzation of it's physical design, components and real world testing, we could all have a better idea of what these amps are and what they can or can't do.

That fact that internal pictures are being withheld is somewhat suspicious regardless of what anyone claims the amps can or can't do.

[bdubs767]

I would like to see Cecil test it as well. He has a big power supply and can load test it.

My goal would be lots of detail photos and several people inputting info about its design, hopefully discrediting it if it is a farce, or showing its strong points if these really are great amps.

That would be a good idea.

I was thinking that if some independent 3rd party bought the amp and did fair and impartial analyzation of it's physical design, components and real world testing, we could all have a better idea of what these amps are and what they can or can't do.

That fact that internal pictures are being withheld is somewhat suspicious regardless of what anyone claims the amps can or can't do.

I can do that...

On my seas neos and seas w18nx. THen send it to doc and C for some internal pics, analyze, and specs.

[mr tibbs]

I'm taking my time and reading through the reviews of these. I'll try to keep a running tab of interesting facts (or opinions of reviewers) and make a list. Stay tuned....

[bdubs767]

I'm taking my time and reading through the reviews of these. I'll try to keep a running tab of interesting facts (or opinions of reviewers) and make a list. Stay tuned....

That will be GREAT....Im going to keep an open mind though, until I listen I guess.


Im going to set it up in a room though not in a car.

[mr tibbs]

Here are direct quotes from the reviews:

1. It's very heavy for its size, indicating excellent build quality, and meaty heatsinks. Sure enough, its one of the most substantial heatsinks I've put my hands on, ever.

2. It says it puts out 5 watts per channel, at .005% distortion. Now, what I can tell you is that this is underrated quite severely. I honestly don't know how much power it puts out, but I'd say it was a fair amount above the rated output.

3. Internally, it looks like art. Simple, clean design with no jumper wires, very nice to see. I'm not an amp expert (like Chad, or Patrick himself), but it was impressive.

4. It is a dual power supply, symmetric design. Essentially, it runs as though it is two amps on one board. Its completely isolated, like running a pair of monos.

8. It has a very small, height, width, and length, overall. I haven't broken out the tape measure on it, but I'd estimate it to be about 17 x 2 x 8 or so.

I'd also recommend a line driver, or a head unit that puts out near 5 volts. It really seems to come alive then.

Its not for everyone! It certainly isn't for the person who cares what it puts out. What he wants everyone to know is that the amp was designed to output 5W per channel continuous across the entire audio spectrum with .005% distortion with the gains set at dead minimum. What you do with the amp beyond that is all up to you. His answer is that distortion will increase, but smiles will also increase, proportionately. Its not about ratings, or even about the distortion rating. I asked him about CEA compliant ratings, and his answer is that he didn't build them for anybody who cares about ratings, really. Its about the sound, gentlemen. And in that realm, it performs great.

Internal pics will not be shown at the request of Patrick. His reasoning is a good one - you are buying good sound, not an amplifier layout. He has original ideas in it, and it is truly a one-off design mimicking no one. So, obviously if you purchase one, you'll need to cut through the warranty sticker to do so, and you are doing so at your own peril. Fair enough?

WRT CEA ratings, I asked him that myself. He shrugged and said "I didn't build it for that", which he's right ya know. Consider it "spec-less" if it bothers you. It took me a while to accept that myself. I've always been into numbers, too.

its a 24dB/oct x-over. I don't remember the x-over frequencies, but I'm looking at the pic i put up on page one (in zoom), and it shows from left to right:

The lowpass dial shows - 30hz, 200hz, and 500hz clockwise
There is an in-out switch that goes in for low-pass, and out for high-pass.
The bass Eq dials in at - 0dB, 10dB, and 18dB. I don't recall what it is centered at, I'll find out for you.
The Highpass dial shows - 15hz, 70hz, and 200hz
The level signal dial shows - 5v, 2.5v, and .3v

This is repeated for channels 3 and 4, as well.

This is from zuki himself

a few things about the amplifier.

1. it was designed to be used for the front stage of a 2-way system,and 1 zuki mono amp for the sub.

2. the amplifiers were designed to give thier rated power at the lowest gain pot settings (all the way counter-clockwise).

3. i used a home cd player with internal volume control and a set of apogee mini-grand to end up with this amp after many design attempts the builder claimed would work. yet the first amp designs sent ,could not drive the speakers (sounded like they lacked bass or high end was veiled /dull or amp sample had a turn on thump or quiet passage noise),or would shut down/roll back power after a few songs for one reason or another from internal protection devices

4. the amplifier was supposed to come without fuses.
(like my first amps scott's @ fi car audio has) but for some reason, when you build something,it doesn't always come like you were told the first ones did.

5. the amplifier is a fullrange amplifier.(it has an adjustable hi-pass x-over which can be adjusted all the way open to full range)
what i mean is, it will play full range or when you activate the low pass x-over, it will filter out the highs from a full range of frequencies (24 db x-over slope)

6. it is two exact 2 channel amplifiers in one chassis
with bass foundation knob for each side
(to add more impact to front stage if needed)

7. no this is not the 290.00 limited edition amplifier
the limited amplifier is different

8. the amplifier will not be for everbody, (not for competition cars)as you can easily go and buy a very good high power amplifier by a huge company that can afford to build amps for less.
but i have to start somewhere and i thought, not selling garbage would be the best place to start.

/zuki

From what I get from Zuki, these are not going to be super loud, but designed for extreme SQ.

The 5 watt rating is not designed as a joke, but as a real rating that is secondary to all of his criteria.

There are no pigmys (though it was a funny gesture), its just a board design that maximizes simplicity and functionality in a dual power supply (well, dual everything, really), clean design. The amp isn't smoke and mirrors, but it is unique and original. Its also very good at what it does.

Just like decompiling code in a program that is closed-source is considered illegal, and violates the end-user license agreement, so to is the nature of this amp's sticker that must be removed to open the amp. You CAN open it, but you are violating your warranty by doing so. The amp is conservatively set on all the adjustable pots inside, and tinkerers could easily fry the thing if they try to pull a "Home Improvement*" modification to add more power. One way to assure that this doesn't cost Zuki Audio money is to void the warranty by opening the case. It isn't anything more complicated then that, and the issue of copy-cats.



That's about it for now, maybe this will help some of us understand what is so magical about these. Then again......

[fuzzysnuggleduck]

Here is my analysis of the business case regarding Zuki. I make no claims as to what these amps can or can't do, I'm just looking at it from a business point of view.

1. Either the amp has novel design that is patentable or it doesn't. There is no in-between.

If the design is patentable (that is, it's novel enough), there is no business case Zuki can make for not patenting the design. Disallowing reviewers from posting internals and voiding a warranty upon opening of the amp provide no significant protection of intellectual property. There is no business case for not patenting a novel design. That leaves us with the other option that there is no novel design. In such a case, I do not see any business reason for disallowing the posting of internals. Voiding a warranty when the amp is opened is a fairly standard practice in the electronics industry and has zero bearing on protecting any intellectual property as it this caveat exists only to protect Zuki from people opening the amps and damaging them.

2. If a big name manufacturer wants to copy this amp, preventing pictures from being posted online will have zero effect on their ability to copy the amp. If they amp is significantly different enough internally for a big name company to make a business case for stealing the design, only a valid patent held by Zuki will be sufficient in protecting their intellectual property. If the amp is not significantly different enough but for whatever reason produces superior sound, it's only a matter of time before the design is copied, without or without pictures posted online and there is nothing Zuki can do about this.

3. The probability of this amp producing superior sound without any significant patentable technology is very low and as such, it's likely that the amp is not significantly different enough to patent. Without technological superiority, there is little reason any big name manufacturer would find it profitable to "steal" this design. Even if they do, they would be well within legal boundaries to do so because there is nothing significantly different from their existing amp lines... but that again would make for a poor business case for "stealing" the design, why steal a design that isn't significantly different from yours?

From here we're left with two main options:

1. The amp is not significantly different enough to patent and has such not been patented. This would then be an indicator of a relatively low sonic difference.

2. The amp is significantly different from other designs but for whatever reason Zuki Audio has chosen to NOT patent their novel design.

With option #1, we have an amp that is not significantly different than other amps available today but is being sold under the impression that for whatever reason, the insignificant differences in design produce superior sound. The company has no novel intellectual property but sells product under the impression that their product is unique.

With option #2 we have a company that has come up with a novel design that may in fact produce superior sound but for whatever reason, has not patented this design and as such, has not protected it's intellectual property. In this case, the lack of patent will undoubtably result in copycat amps, if the design truly does produce superior quality sound. I wouldn't invest in a company that doesn't see the value in protecting it's own intellectual property.

[mr tibbs]

Here is my analysis of the business case regarding Zuki. I make no claims as to what these amps can or can't do, I'm just looking at it from a business point of view.

1. Either the amp has novel design that is patentable or it doesn't. There is no in-between.

If the design is patentable (that is, it's novel enough), there is no business case Zuki can make for not patenting the design. Disallowing reviewers from posting internals and voiding a warranty upon opening of the amp provide no significant protection of intellectual property. There is no business case for not patenting a novel design. That leaves us with the other option that there is no novel design. In such a case, I do not see any business reason for disallowing the posting of internals. Voiding a warranty when the amp is opened is a fairly standard practice in the electronics industry and has zero bearing on protecting any intellectual property as it this caveat exists only to protect Zuki from people opening the amps and damaging them.

2. If a big name manufacturer wants to copy this amp, preventing pictures from being posted online will have zero effect on their ability to copy the amp. If they amp is significantly different enough internally for a big name company to make a business case for stealing the design, only a valid patent held by Zuki will be sufficient in protecting their intellectual property. If the amp is not significantly different enough but for whatever reason produces superior sound, it's only a matter of time before the design is copied, without or without pictures posted online and there is nothing Zuki can do about this.

3. The probability of this amp producing superior sound without any significant patentable technology is very low and as such, it's likely that the amp is not significantly enough to patent. Without technological superiority, there is little reason any big name manufacturer would find it profitable to "steal" this design. Even if they do, they would be well within legal boundaries to do so because there is nothing significantly different from their existing amp lines... but that again would make for a poor business case for "stealing" the design, why steal a design that isn't significantly different from yours?

Your missing something, what if it's design is very similar to something already being produced? I know if I were building a car and the engine said Ferrari all over it but I was selling it for half price in a different body I sure as hell would not want pics posted on the interweb.

[fuzzysnuggleduck]

Here is my analysis of the business case regarding Zuki. I make no claims as to what these amps can or can't do, I'm just looking at it from a business point of view.

1. Either the amp has novel design that is patentable or it doesn't. There is no in-between.

If the design is patentable (that is, it's novel enough), there is no business case Zuki can make for not patenting the design. Disallowing reviewers from posting internals and voiding a warranty upon opening of the amp provide no significant protection of intellectual property. There is no business case for not patenting a novel design. That leaves us with the other option that there is no novel design. In such a case, I do not see any business reason for disallowing the posting of internals. Voiding a warranty when the amp is opened is a fairly standard practice in the electronics industry and has zero bearing on protecting any intellectual property as it this caveat exists only to protect Zuki from people opening the amps and damaging them.

2. If a big name manufacturer wants to copy this amp, preventing pictures from being posted online will have zero effect on their ability to copy the amp. If they amp is significantly different enough internally for a big name company to make a business case for stealing the design, only a valid patent held by Zuki will be sufficient in protecting their intellectual property. If the amp is not significantly different enough but for whatever reason produces superior sound, it's only a matter of time before the design is copied, without or without pictures posted online and there is nothing Zuki can do about this.

3. The probability of this amp producing superior sound without any significant patentable technology is very low and as such, it's likely that the amp is not significantly enough to patent. Without technological superiority, there is little reason any big name manufacturer would find it profitable to "steal" this design. Even if they do, they would be well within legal boundaries to do so because there is nothing significantly different from their existing amp lines... but that again would make for a poor business case for "stealing" the design, why steal a design that isn't significantly different from yours?

Your missing something, what if it's design is very similar to something already being produced? I know if I were building a car and the engine said Ferrari all over it but I was selling it for half price in a different body I sure as hell would not want pics posted on the interweb.

Why not? Wouldn't the possibility of buying a Ferrari-powered vehicle at half the price attract customers more so than stating your car as "as fast a Ferrari" and providing nothing to back it up?

[mr tibbs]

Someone elses views on the situation:

Agreed. The only way I see the need to protect internal photos would be one of a couple things:

1. It's a ripoff of another design. Like maybe these were eerily similar to a British amp manufacturer's designs.

2. There isn't much to look at and the seller wants the whole black magic theory to come into play.

3. It's a design anyone can buy (Ubuy for example) and doesn't want everyone to know that they can buy the same design from Clarion for 25% less.

I've emailed Patrick a few times back and forth, and he seems like a helpful guy, but I just don't buy the whole copycat thing. The simple fact of the matter is that a few hundred dollars to buy an amp is ABSOLUTELY NEGLIBLE to a real company like Harmon, RF, JL, etc. If these amps were that special, they could buy 10 and test them all.

Total load of shit, and we all know it.

[Bfowler]

Your missing something, what if it's design is very similar to something already being produced? I know if I were building a car and the engine said Ferrari all over it but I was selling it for half price in a different body I sure as hell would not want pics posted on the interweb.

you could go the other way with that too though...what if they jacked a pyramid amp design and got a few people to say its a great sounding amp and charged a premium for it (hyundai engine and put it in a a ferrari and sold it as a ferrari)

(not saying it is, just playing devils advocate)

[mr tibbs]

Here is my analysis of the business case regarding Zuki. I make no claims as to what these amps can or can't do, I'm just looking at it from a business point of view.

1. Either the amp has novel design that is patentable or it doesn't. There is no in-between.

If the design is patentable (that is, it's novel enough), there is no business case Zuki can make for not patenting the design. Disallowing reviewers from posting internals and voiding a warranty upon opening of the amp provide no significant protection of intellectual property. There is no business case for not patenting a novel design. That leaves us with the other option that there is no novel design. In such a case, I do not see any business reason for disallowing the posting of internals. Voiding a warranty when the amp is opened is a fairly standard practice in the electronics industry and has zero bearing on protecting any intellectual property as it this caveat exists only to protect Zuki from people opening the amps and damaging them.

2. If a big name manufacturer wants to copy this amp, preventing pictures from being posted online will have zero effect on their ability to copy the amp. If they amp is significantly different enough internally for a big name company to make a business case for stealing the design, only a valid patent held by Zuki will be sufficient in protecting their intellectual property. If the amp is not significantly different enough but for whatever reason produces superior sound, it's only a matter of time before the design is copied, without or without pictures posted online and there is nothing Zuki can do about this.

3. The probability of this amp producing superior sound without any significant patentable technology is very low and as such, it's likely that the amp is not significantly enough to patent. Without technological superiority, there is little reason any big name manufacturer would find it profitable to "steal" this design. Even if they do, they would be well within legal boundaries to do so because there is nothing significantly different from their existing amp lines... but that again would make for a poor business case for "stealing" the design, why steal a design that isn't significantly different from yours?

Your missing something, what if it's design is very similar to something already being produced? I know if I were building a car and the engine said Ferrari all over it but I was selling it for half price in a different body I sure as hell would not want pics posted on the interweb.

Why not? Wouldn't the possibility of buying a Ferrari-powered vehicle at half the price attract customers more so than stating your car as "as fast a Ferrari" and providing nothing to back it up?

Yes, it could be an advantage, unless I was buying the engines illegally behind Ferrari's back. Then I would want nobody to know. I think you get what my bad analogy was getting at.

[mr tibbs]

Your missing something, what if it's design is very similar to something already being produced? I know if I were building a car and the engine said Ferrari all over it but I was selling it for half price in a different body I sure as hell would not want pics posted on the interweb.

you could go the other way with that too though...what if they jacked a pyramid amp design and got a few people to say its a great sounding amp and charged a premium for it (hyundai engine and put it in a a ferrari and sold it as a ferrari)

(not saying it is, just playing devils advocate)

I keep thinking this as well, someone is going to pop this baby open and find an old Lanzar (post Zed) design in there and all hell is going to break loose.

Also, has anyone seen anywhere what this great warranty is that these people are so afraid of losing actually is? I have yet to see anywhere what the actual warranty is. Another mystery.....

[fuzzysnuggleduck]

Yes, it could be an advantage, unless I was buying the engines illegally behind Ferrari's back. Then I would want nobody to know. I think you get what my bad analogy was getting at.

In this case, we're talking about illegal business. I don't think that scenario applies here... but even if it did, all it would take is for one person to buy the amp, open it up and notice that the internals are another company's intellectual property and Zuki would then potentially be under threat of legal action. If the internals turn out to be run of the mill unpatentable amp design, than my case for option #1 still stands.

Either the amp is different and Zuki doesn't see or understand the value of patenting their invention or the amp is not significantly differently and trying to keep the internals away from prying eyes is all about maintaining the magic aura.

In my opinion there is a big difference between saying "the amp isn't all that different from current designs, but here is a picture of the board and here is what we feel makes the difference in our design" and "this amp is sonically superior but the proof behind it's sonic superiority is a secret that isn't patentable".

In the first statement, the decision on whether or not any differences will affect sonic reproduction is left up to the discerning audiophile. In the second statement, they are basically saying that what makes the difference is of no important, but believe us about the difference.

[majette]

i have communicated and dealt with zuki over the years from the elitecaraudio.com forums. over the years he has purchased a lot of old school amps and said he was studying what made certain amps better than others, then designed his own amp line. the Eleets name is a play on the Elite Car Audio name. i have not seen the amp in person but from talking to him, and his being a highly regarded regular on the eca forum, i believe he would put out a product that does exactly what he says it does.

[fuzzysnuggleduck]

i have communicated and dealt with zuki over the years from the elitecaraudio.com forums. over the years he has purchased a lot of old school amps and said he was studying what made certain amps better than others, then designed his own amp line. the Eleets name is a play on the Elite Car Audio name. i have not seen the amp in person but from talking to him, and his being a highly regarded regular on the eca forum, i believe he would put out a product that does exactly what he says it does.

I don't know the guy, but I believe you.

I just think the business case for not showing the internals is bullshit and as such, it makes me suspicious of the entire operation.

[mr tibbs]

i have communicated and dealt with zuki over the years from the elitecaraudio.com forums. over the years he has purchased a lot of old school amps and said he was studying what made certain amps better than others, then designed his own amp line. the Eleets name is a play on the Elite Car Audio name. i have not seen the amp in person but from talking to him, and his being a highly regarded regular on the eca forum, i believe he would put out a product that does exactly what he says it does.

To me his product is not really in question, it's the whole secrecy of the damn thing that seems kinda weird. I have honestly yet to see a bad review of these amps, it just the fact that he does not publish specs and does not want internal pics posted that bring up the questions. I'm sure it's a quality built piece of work, but is it worth what he is asking? I for one (along with many others apparently) will not pay the price to find out.

[fuzzysnuggleduck]

I for one (along with many others apparently) will not pay the price to find out.

Which is exactly why I'm having such a hard time understanding the business decisions here. Not providing internals and not releasing full specifications is shutting out a whole group of potential customers. I just don't see how this makes any business sense at all.

[mr tibbs]

Maybe we're looking at this the wrong way. I don't know Zuki, I only vaguely know of him and from what I gather he really does love this hobby. Maybe he's not looking at this from a money making stand point. MAybe, just maybe he's a purist who is doing this for the love of the hobby and wants to help out others that love the hobby as well. If you look at it that way it kinda makes more sense, just a little. Maybe his thoughts are along the lines of if people but it great, if not who cares?? That's about the only way I can think to justify a marketing plan like this.

[Eric D]

Let me get this straight, it is designed to output 5W with the gain all the way down?

So, if I have an 8V line driver and the gain all the way down this amp will output 5W?

Or if I have a 2V deck and the gain all the way down, the amp will output 5W?

It sounds like his novel design is a tracking input gain or some type of audio compressor. Anyone ever hear of the company NAD? They build amps which cannot clip (or so they say, never tried one myself), which to my best guess simply ramp down gain as the output approaches clipping. Guess what, this is another form of protection, so these amps are not protection free.

Really, I am just rambling here, but I am getting a ton of laughs off of the claims made about this product. I am just trying to pull something sane out of them all.