2. speakers
  3. 170648-305

Fixed (Easy!) a Major Design Flaw of the Ohm Walsh Model F

Not sure if it affects all units, but I see it in several images. They obviously didn't care about actual mirror image build back then. They likely didn't think it would matter, but it does. I also do not know whether this has ever been discussed previously in forums, magazines, etc; I'm not willing to search to see, because it doesn't matter that much to me whether it's been discussed previously. If so, great, the Ohm community is on the ball. 

I refer to the nearly haphazard alignment of the metal braces for the driver, which are not aligned in the same places on both speakers. In my work to get this speaker to sound as wondrous as they say it should I noted an irritating beaming of the treble. I have encountered such prior when speakers with tweeters such as ring radiators were on axis. I recognized the vertical metal braces were not symmetrical, and from a lot of experience in the past with performance non-conformity I knew that could be a major contributor to the issue. 

Solution? Let go of the idea of both cabinets being parallel, and make the driver housings/drivers (with the metal braces) symmetrical. Beautiful, a nice tightening of the center image, chasing away of an annoying over emphasis on LF due to a touch more mid-bass filling in unobstructed, and more midrange peeking through. This is an easy fix if you are plagued with this problem, and if you and the furniture authority you live with can handle it.  

I also went with a parallel (double) speaker cable setup by using two sets of cables with banana terminations. I used spade adapters to accommodate a set of spades, and they have hollow backs which allow the second set of banana terminations to be added. This is most definitely do at your own risk, and note that I have bypassed the fuse as well, so I'm a bit more daring with this set than I would with other speakers. I have not that much into them, so if they blow up, they blow up. They were on the way to the dump when I adopted them and had them rehabbed, so I have done a great audiophile work, earning all kinds of points as a Music Lover!  ;) 

I am disproving the old adage - at least in my world - of them needing 300 Watts and blowing up at 301 Watts. I have 600wpc on them and with the double speaker cables (parallel) they are responding beautifully. Still the characteristic muffled mid/bass which will not be eliminated. Please, not interested in arguing that; I hear dozens of speakers in my room and I'm talking about direct comparison to ones I use(d), so if your perspective is different, great. So be it. YMMV etc. 

I'm not pushing them to the limit, but more than I thought I might. I have done perhaps a dozen discrete systems to get them to this state of being very enjoyable. They have responded well enough that I probably won't get rid of them. The one trick I didn't use yet in this setup is to put them on hockey pucks to elevate the soundstage and alter the tonal mix at the ear and decouple from floor. Must remember to try that! 

Current setup:
Small Green Computer sonicTransporter and SONORE Signature Rendu SE
Clarity Cable Supernatural USB
Eastern Electric Minimax Tube DAC Supreme with Staccato discrete opamps
-DAC direct to amp; absolute necessity of using software attenuation in ROON! Do NOT go direct to amp without attenuation!)
Legacy Audio i.V4 Ultra Amplifier (NOTE: channels of this amp are NOT to be joined; I am using bewaring from one channel to achieve the speaker cable doubling for the single terminations of the Model F)
Iconoclast Cables with BAV (Belden Audio/Video) PCs 

I'm gonna have my new friend who has the Tekton Moabs come over to hear.  :)

All equipment with exception of Ohm speakers have been previously reviewed for Dagogo.com 
douglas_schroeder

Showing 3 responses by douglas_schroeder

douglas_schroeder OP
3,281 posts
 
mapman, thank you! It is fun to see how far an older transducer can be taken in terms of performance. It's an interesting juxtaposition between the inventiveness of the omni and the lack of concern over the placement of bracing. Imo, audio was not nearly as exacting in absolute terms back then. It is probably more accurate to say the standard in terms of precision has changed due to tech development. When one hears the significant change due to proper alignment of the metal supports, i.e. parallel to each other and aimed at the respective ear, it is clear enough that it makes me wonder how they couldn't have seen/heard it? I conclude it is a prime example of persons in the industry thinking it wouldn't make much of a difference. But it does. Nearly any manufacturer today would avoid such things. 

The more exacting designs today elicit superior performance. Now that big watts, double speaker cables and subs are used with the Model F, it is a very nice experience. The 600wpc and double cables make the mid to upper treble shine nicely, and there is lovely decay on cymbals and chimes. The delicacy of the treble is quite nice. But, the paper cone going into the big bass bin is not up to the task in relation to better tower speakers' mid-bass on down. Newer towers have more taut, precise bass. The cone firing into the bass bin is a potential distraction, like sealed boxes with larger drivers that excite the cabinet. The subs help to mask it fairly well. 

I am very pleased by how the metal posts aimed right at the ears blocks the beaming of the tweeter so as to allow more appreciation of the upper midrange and omni dispersion pattern. The speaker finally sounds quite detailed, yet with warmth in voices. 
douglas_schroeder OP
3,281 posts
 

uncleang, yup, I did so. On my other thread here to the effect of resurrecting the Ohm Walsh Model F, posted when I first obtainted htem, I disucss the rehab process and my discovery of how much of a benefit it was to remove half the stuffing from inside the cabinets. 

What specifically did you do with the Walsh 4's? 

douglas_schroeder OP
3,281 posts
 

uncleang, serious commitment to the cause! Kudos! It's fun to try tuning a speaker to optimum performance. I am not so committed to this particular speaker system, as it's an ancillary interest. It's never going to be in the echelon of the other speakers I use. Even the recently acquired Wharfedale Opus 2-M2 bookhself speakers have fundamentally superior incisiveness and cleanness, i.e. better microdynamics and without the relatively muffled character of the large paper ends of the Model F's drivers firing into the cabinet. It can be moderated, but it will not go away entirely because of the design. 

 

Because the cabinets are junk literally, having a rift along two axes of one cabinet, I  have thought of experimenting with using a doorknob hole saw to punch holes into the cabinets at the bottom to make ports. Could be fun! It may transform the speaker in a very good way, or ruin it! :)  I could put about three of them on the back side and see what happens. If they get ruined, so be it. LIke I said, it's not a high dollar commitment to the experience. This is for fun and experimentation. In principle I do not make vintage my attempt on SOTA. The new Model F5 is superior holistically, as seen in my review at dagogo.com 

This all reminds me of when prior to reviewing I bought piecemeal three sets of cables to do my own verification of efficacy of cables. It was a great time of learning. Cost something, but wow did it transform how I build systems!  :) 

 

More to discover