Are Ohm Walsh's a step up from Martin Login Electro Motion ESL's

I remember in the early days OHMs could not play loud, so be good to investigate

Right now you can pick up a pair of Emerald Physics 2.8s for a song (I have 3.4s, essentially the same but without dual 15" carbon fiber woofres). Can be driven by a single ~ 100w amp, but can handle big power, Do a search I saw a pair yesterday on another sales site

hth

This is my default "sent them this" speaker setup  link

http://www.cardas.com/room_setup_calculators.php

Not a cure all, just another FREE thing to try. Every room/setup is different.

I hear good results with this as a starting point.

Let me add some more pictures of that room.  First the speakers are off the wall more than they look and yes the corner is there it's not in the corner 

I added a pic to my virtual system that shows Ohms on Subdude pads in family room with placement not too far off from OPs.

https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/9811

...and yes it sounds good with coherent soundstage even on that chair right up front to the left. 😊

mapman, yes, that's why I stated true omni as problematic. He could make a quasi-omni work, but still it's not ideal. I concur with there not being a clear step up transitioning from small ESL to small omni. He could force the issue, but has a wall all along one side versus open on the other which might slaugter the soundstage. Who knows how much that would screw up a pair of omni speakers. Imo it would be the least favored genre of speaker to use for that location. 

You iknow I'm not anti-omni; I have the Walsh Model F running now along with the Legacy XTREME XD Subs. Maybe it's just me, but they sound very good with nostaliga music from the 70's. 

I have absorption panels on walls at first reflection points with my larger Ohms which are highly tuned in. Smaller ones in family room sound great with no special treatments. I would assert Ohms are hard to beat for easy placement for good sound but still respond highly to tweaking if the goal is to get them totally dialed in. Ymmv in regards to setup and how much time you spend to get them totally dialed in.

Martin Logans- Narrow sweet spot, excellent imaging and transperancy. However they compress at volume. Very coherant, until the woofer takes over.

Current Ohm’s - Huge Sweet Spot, flat out do not compress, extremely coherant, nice imaging, but not as precise as the ML’s. Huge soundstage (if set-up right)

Current OHM’s actually do best in the live end of a room, they do fine near corners, jammed in a corner isn’t optimal, but where you have your speakers they will work fine. In many ways they do best set-up "opposite" of many traditional speakers.

The OHM’s will be a very different sound than the ML’s, though both have excellent midrange coherance.

When I had my Ohm’s (which I enjoyed a great deal). I actually felt they sounded best without bass traps in the front corners (though I’ve decided all speakers sound best in my room without the traps in the front corners, only the rears). But I also felt they sounded way better without my GIK panels at the first reflection points, though I did leave them up at the second reflection points.

Yet, where they were placed was darn near the same spot all of my speakers sound best. (sure, a bit of movement back and forth etc, but generally in my room most speakers sound best in the same area. Most rooms do)

To your original question - better is subjective. They will certainly be different. Better... that is all up to what you decide you like.

See this diagram that shows dispersion pattern of Ohm Walsh CLS driver and how levels are attenuated in wall facing directions to avoid early reflections and allow placement closer to walls and corners. 
 

Hey Doug you know the Ohm Walsh are not true Omni right? If they were definitely not in corners. But they are designed to go closer to walls than many. Still I have never landed on a corner placement with my Ohms by choice . Can work but may not be optimal placement for them . In general Ohm Walsh are easy to place for good results but there is always still such a thing as optimal placement if possible in one’s particular case.

Big difference between ohm and ML dispersion being just one. Both are good speakers subject to preference and what works best in each case. So I would be cautious about using the term "a step up". Either might do very well if set up properly. The ohms clearly solve the sweet spot problem though versus ml. Trying to play with toe in or no toe in is a good idea always.

I agree with douglas schroeder.

The OP has limited wiggle room, and to really appreciate most speakers, they need room to breath. 4-6 feet out. The OP presumably did the ML "light shining" position regarding the toe in?

I have a pair of Theos(step up from the OP’s) that sound quite good for their small size-Not a Soundlab, Maggie or big ML, but very convincing.

6 feet out from the front wall, 3.5 from the side. Combination of damping/diffusion to taste.

A true omni is not an ideal recommendation for that room if the positioning is that close to wall, and because of the corner. The man would have to treat the corner, which could screw up the M/T. It might be a different story if the room could be rearranged and the speakers moved out further. YMMV

How about for a start you not toe in the ML speakers. You’re complaining about how narrow the sweet spot is, but you have them toed in. So, change it and put them parallel to the head wall. Obviously this will open up the center image, but you’ll have perhaps enough size for two to listen. You’re not going to get much out into the room at all with those speakers. You would need a different genre.

Auralec Subdude just make sure big enough for those MLs. Available off Amazon not expensive and should be returnable. I’m thinking it would help clean up bass that can also Obscure midrange detail if needed. Hardwood floor coverings especially on suspended plywood floor structure common with upper levels of many homes can be rough acoustically. Carpet on floor in front of speakers can also help if needed.

check my system pics that show my ohm 100s with 8" drivers on Auralec Subdude pads in family room on second level of my house  

Corner placement boosts bass. With Ohm Walsh probably a small model maybe even microwalsh may be best. You could add a sub at location of your choice if even needed. Run it by the folks there they have a good rep as straight shooters and won’t try to sell you something you don’t need.

Btw if it were me I would want to try some isolation pad under the MLs 
 

any recommendations?  I have them on spikes.  But would would try pads.  

Ohms are going to be very different in presentation from the MLs -- you know that, right? Panel electrostatics have a narrow, focussed sweet spot, while omnis like the Ohms have a more spacious sound. What is better will be a matter of taste.

You could call Ohm and talk to John Strohbeen and get his views. He’s a really good guy.

I agree that placement of one speaker in a corner is not optimal. I am not so sure that that’s worse for an omni than for a panel speaker. It might be. It might not. Ask John what he thinks. Even better, rearrange your whole home and life to position the speakers more symmetrically. 😉

All speakers will leap in sound quality with improvements of the system. The improvement is relative, not absolute, as though the MLs are now vastly outstripping the performance of other speakers. There are dozens of levels of such improvement on the performance spectrum of systems.  

Ohms in that room could be problematic. With one close to a corner, the response could be skewed in terms of reflection from the L speaker. 

Thanks for the iso pad hint.  Have to say I got a new turntable today and the MLs sound really good all the sudden. 

Btw if it were me I would want to try some isolation pad under the MLs from the look of the floor. Not a big room so smaller Ohms would probably do it were you to go that way. Iso pads under those as well probably from the looks.

Could be just what the doctor ordered. I coveted Quad ESL sound but bigger and more dynamic and that is what the Ohm Walshes delivered. Plus it’s a no brainer regarding Ohm sweet spot versus ESL.