I've heard the mag 1.7s and like the "openness" and other attributes. However, the size and placement requirements are a killer for me. I'm thinking Ohm and Spatial would be somewhat similar. However, I can't demo them. Any thoughts on these compared to the mags and any other "open" speakers I should consider?
soundchasr, that there is so many choices and options is either paradise or hell. *G* That does give rise to the 'spirited discussions' in these forums I've listened to many over my years; few of the current ones, next to none of the vaunted 'phile megabuck selections. I quit the audio stairway to heaven some years back. It was becoming too expensive of a habit to maintain...geoffkait comment elsewhere that it has all the elements of a drug addiction, so one does need to keep ones' perspective in hand. ;)
Anyway....keep your conscience and wallet in mind...unless you fall in love. Then you're doomed and on your own. *L*
mapman, Yes....there is/was a patent on the original Ohm/Walsh drivers:
I'm basing what I do on this, the 75 deg. cone slope, but reducing the size of the 'main cone'. There is a point where the cone shifts from a radial radiation pattern to a pistonic motion to create your major bass fq.
Those get handed off to a sub, both physically and via xover. In this case, actively.
The same goes for the higher fq. Where the CLS uses its' 'Tufflex Transmission Block', I opt to actively xover to another smaller Walsh directly above the main cone.
This cone is modeled after the Infinity 'ice cream cone' driver, of which I owned a pair of the tower version. It was basically a 'super tweeter'; my biggest issue was that it was 'upside down', best enjoyed sitting on the floor....😏
Actually luck to have an extended series of conversations with one who actually engaged in building the prototypes on (you guessed it) a kitchen table.... I'm lucky to have a more 'refined' place for my efforts...
By having the cones vertically aligned, I get to dodge phase and time distortion. And since I literally 'tri-amp' and have an active crossover (Behringer DCX2496) that can do almost anything I'd care to throw at them.
Some of us have rather unique obsessions....;)
Dale Harder opined that my cones were too heavy, which I readily agreed to. The originals were 5 mil litho aluminum, which I got a sleeve of 100 sheets gratis from a friend 2 decades ago. Since I've moved on to 2 mil alum and titanium. The tweets are 1 mil alum, and a PIA to form; look at it hard, and it creases...
The prices are what I would call reasonable for owning any of his units. His 'normal gig' is owning a company that (I believe) makes laser equipment....HHR ES is his labor of love, and it shows. *S*
I've never had the chance to hear them. He 'does' shows occasionally, but likely only those that happen to be nearby.
Imho, the original Ohms suffered from being 'ahead of their era' in terms of the available adhesives and material tech and application. Dale appears to have managed to solve that.
The single driver conundrum is a hard nut to crack, even with direct radiator drivers. With an omni, the stakes grow higher...
JS would probably be the first to agree with that. He (and Ohm) have arrived at a reasonable and rational compromise that works, and does so at a series of price points vs. unit sizes and capabilities.
I used to own a pair of ESS AMT1c, the largest speaker pair I've owned. Like many who note that they'd wished to still own 'X', I'm part of that crowd too. *S* And the Kenwood LO7 mono amps that drove them. At that time, I began applying room eq with an Audio Control eq that had a calibrated mic.
That was 3 decades ago.....time flies...
I'm just striving to have perfection with a smaller footprint, and a SAF of 9/10....literally, a stark column.
Think lipstick, writ large.
BTW...when there's 4 of them, in a 'surround' arrangement....immersion is easy, even in 2ch. Loud is good...each main cone is eq to a 10"+ driver. Big issue was cooking the voice coils...
"Ah, the stench of a cooked former...." (*sigh* Back to the workbench...)
I haven't bothered with Dolby anything....yet. ;)
Enough....at this point I've certainly cemented my 'outlier status'. And I've runneth off at the keys yet again....*L*
@audioconnection so my Spatial M3 Sapphires that some posters asked about are not on rollers. They are IsoAcoustic Gaia Footers that couple the speakers to the hardwood floor. Amazing Results using them. I was a Vandersteen owner for 30 years and thought I would miss their warmer sound. The Spatials give me more of everything plain and simple
I, too, had a set of Ohm Fs that I purchased in 1975 or so. I've never heard anything since that came close to throwing a magical, ethereal, 3-D sonic image that just floated in space. I regretted selling them almost immediately.
That said, I really like my Ohm 1000s. For $2K, there is nothing else that I would own.
Jerry are you talking about the original Walsh driver patent Expiring (I’m assuming there was one) or the newer one for the “Walsh Style” CLS design that JS and Ohm have used since the early 80s?
I know there are other Walsh drivers in the original mold like GP DDD driver. I don’t think they could have done that if an original Walsh driver patent were in effect.
The original Ohm A and F Walsh speakers sounded great but the single driver full range design was brittle and not suited for the masses. Hence the CLS approach or DDD approach which only covers higher frequencies.
I’ve always found the OHM CLS design to be virtually indestructable. I’ve put mine through a lot of abuse over the years and nary an issue. They just get louder more dynamic and clear the more juice you throw at them so JS nailed that flaw with the original design.
Dale Harder is the guy who claims to have solved a lot of the original Walsh driver issues with his newer designs but don’t hear much about those. Would love to hear them though. Hoping he does CAF sometime.
John Strohbeen at Ohm pays a lot of attention to getting that certain sound he is looking for (his favorite seats in Carnegie Hall) but keeping costs minimal to achieve it. IMHO. He could care less about “high end”, only about getting better sound to more people.
I’ve been to Carnegie Hall and felt quite at home there in regards to what I heard. 🏅
Thanks @asvjerry do you have any you recommend in my price range? Although I’ve been leaning toward Ohm and Spatial I’m far from making up my mind. I’m still trying to figure out how to demo some of these including Wharfedale and Vandersteen. Everyone has been so helpful and there are so many choices!
mapman, DC in the typical room usually has zero SAF...*L* Unless the spouse is an audiofilly or one is single...;) But since Maggies' are dipoles, I'll bet they sounded great....
soundchasr, honestly, Ohms are a terrific commercial omni speaker line. Something for every room size, nearly every budget, and their trial policy allows one to 'test for fit and taste'. I have recommended them in the past. Being a dipole & omni type, I have my own favs as most do.
Give 'em a go...they have their own preferences as to placement. But with patience and a bit of 'push 'n poke around' you'll likely be pleased. Some have commented that they pair well with a sub, but that's up to ones' urges for bass on tap....;)
Personally, I don't own a pair. As a young jerk about town, I happened to hear a pair of the original Ohm type F speakers in the early '70's. I've heard nothing since that has struck me as comparable. I have some technical and design 'issues' with the current Ohms, but that's just my problems. *L*
For the past few years, I've been working on DIY'ing a Walsh speaker with some success. I listen daily to a 'bookshelf' 2 way version, used as monitors for my 'puter. A small sub beneath my desk provides the 'bottom' from about 150hz. Not perfect, but they do work....and imho, rather well.
There's a free-standing pair of a similar nature, with a larger sub as well. These undergo 'alterations' as I waste my limited spare time improving them. A set of 4 are in the works; two to receive alum. cones, and two with titanium cones.
All 4 will receive existing Walsh tweeters.
The original Ohm patent has expired....quite a while ago...
As mapman pointed out, looking under the 'can' in an Ohm will surprise.
Imho.....disappointing.....but that's just me being 'technical' about a Walsh. *S* 'Purism' has it's price....
But that doesn't stop them from being a great speaker....and you asked *S*.
I bought my Magnepans circa 1986 from a shop called Audition in Birmingham AL.
That shop was owned by no other than Jim Smith who literally wrote the book on speaker setup and was Mr Magnepan at the time (Mr. Avant-garde more recently). Jim himself may have demoed and sold them to me. Not sure about that.
That was the only time I walked in a shop and bought speakers immediately when hearing. The sound was that good. The speakers were located almost dead center of the listening room.
I’ve been to other Maggie dealers since and the setup is typically just a few feet out from the wall but they never sounded as good as that day in Alabama again to me.
I tried hard to reproduce in my room at home but never quite achieved the Jim Smith magic.
mapman, thanks for the 'house tour'..*S* I've been wondering what/where/how you've been set up, knowing you're an Ohm fan....
soundchasr, my spouse likes our SMGa Maggies too....half-way into the room is a non-starter, but for the sake of martial bliss I've a devious plan. Some will cringe, but....'X' for Y...;)
The rest of my thoughts on Walsh speakers is known to most, so I'll just hold my tongue on that. *S* One can do as well, but will spend more to do so...imho....
Happy listening, soundchasr...👍...whichever way you go....
(((@audiosaurusrex Are those rollers on the bottom of the speakers so you can move them out of the way?? THAT IS AWESOME.))) Placing speakers on rollers or rubber sponges will only blur the sound.It's like taking a picture while driving on a bumpy road or a moving target. try to pound out a horseshoe on an anvil it works try it in the mud and it doesn't. Perhaps your speakers are too bright and blurring them is to your preference but it is a band aid as mentioned above you may also want to check out the latest Vandersteen 2 Sig 3 Best JohnnyR
WAF between Spatial and Ohm, especially once you get them located properly, is a lot different so that will be interesting. The Walsh speakers in particular with the newer cabs tend to not draw attention to themselves which some will like and others not as much.
Yes I am a big vintage prog rock fan and saw The Musical Box do their simulated 1972 vintage Genesis live show a few years back. They did the entire Foxtrot album start to finish and it was simply awesome.
Then I came home and did a replay with my Ohms. :)
Yea the Ohms with the Walsh style wave bending drivers where the sound is emitted from the rear of the driver are kind of a open baffle hybrid design where the cabs come into play primarily for bass delivery.
Pretty sure the design is patented and nobody else does it this way. German Physics uses wave bending omni Walsh drivers but those cover the higher frequencies (which are more directional to start with) not the lows whereas Ohm is the opposite. GPs like most omnis including mbl require a lot of distance to walls to perform but not Ohm because sound is physically attenuated inside the cans in wall facing directions by default. Nobody else does that for you....you need room treatments for similar results close to walls.
Just don’t look inside the cans.......UGLLY!!!! John Strohbeen is the guru who figured out how to do this cost effectively without customers having to witness the resulting mess by hiding it in a very clean looking "can".
They do quite well at delivering a lot of good bass out of a relatively small package and go loud with suitable amp without ever showing any signs of stress, better than most.
Driver and cab size determines bass levels possible and suitability for a particular room size.
@rickytickytwo... I am with you on the open baffle preference. Ohms are actually baffle-less designs, with the "cans" sitting proud of the cabinet. Bass frequencies fire into the top of the cabinet and fire out of a vent at the bottom above the plinth. But most of the sound fires off the back of the cone and from the free air tweeter.
Although the Ohms in both those rooms are only a few feet apart, the soundstage extends wall to wall, a good 18-20’ in both cases with players very well located specifically within with most all recordings. Good mono recordings will image with a very lifelike, somewhat dimensional presentation, from dead center of the wall regardless of where along the wall the Ohms are placed. The Ohms do mono recordings better than anything in regards to a lifelike presentation. The bottom portion of my L shaped room extends about 10’ to the left of the bigger Ohms in teh first pic, the F5 series 3 (12" driver, refurbed Ohm F cabinets). The smaller are 100S3 (8" driver) in refurbed Ohm Walsh 2 cabs. Both series 3 drivers are 1 generation older than current X000 line.
I liked the Spatials very much and they made the cut when I heard them but only a single demo in a hotel room at a show so my exposure is limited.
I am on the open baffle bandwagon. As mentioned by Ozzy68 they are very open. They have good texture and tone as well. I was lucky enough to land a used pair of Spatial Audio M-1 Triode masters and I am happy with them. If you are open to buying used, you may get more bang for your buck. Also, if you don't mind kits and want to get more bang for your buck you may try GR Research NX Oticas :
http://gr-research.com/obseries.aspx
Not sure I agree about Maggies having better detail or image specificity.
I will say that Maggies and Ohms both have unique presentations.
Also that Ohms especially will deliver what you give them and respond to upgrades upstream and tweaks. No two setups are likely to sound the same.
Maggies excel at inner detail of smaller ensemble acoustic recordings.
Ohms get the edge for overall delivery of all kinds of music. If you listen to pop/rock or large scale dynamic productions you want the Ohms in order to deliver the excitement. They can also do delicate beauty though that is probably Magnepan's powerhouse.
Another huge difference is placement of Maggies needed to perform versus Ohm.
I ditched the Maggies after many years in favor of Ohm specifically due to placement issues and lack of excitement with many things I listen too.
@soundchasr .. I listen to Jazz and Rock predominantly and at reasonable levels in my typically appointed 13’ x 18’ living room. The room has large archways on 2 walls.
I suspect a pair of Ohm speakers would be perfect for your room, they just don’t sound like Maggie’s, which are polar opposites in their presentation. Ohm’s are easier to place, very room friendly, have a very wide sweet spot, and a nice tonal balance. The MicroWalsh Talls benefit from a subwoofer or 2. The Maggies have better detail, image specificity, a smaller sweet spot, and also benefit from a sub. Both are wonderful speakers and is why I keep them. (I like variety and have enough storage space.) I’m using my MMG’s (with sub) now in fact, with a Marantz class d integrated. Sounds wonderful.
With your budget, you could consider something like my own setup, which is a pair of Ohms augmented with a pair of subs. I am a bit of a bass freak, and my Vandy subs will bust your budget unless you find them used, but a combo of the Ohm 1000s with a pair of subs would be my choice. I am beyond thrilled with my Ohm 2000s after 10 years, and I have no desire to change speakers.
I have listened to Spatial at LInear Tube Audio, and PAP at shows. Both share many similar characteristics. As mentioned, min distance from wall behind baffle. Clear defined bass and great sound staging. Generally speaking, the room needs much less treatment than with most boxes. Both designs are highly efficient. SET amps may apply also. PAP xo’s allow future customization via a screwdriver. Caps, resisters, etc, can be changed in minutes to match your hatch. PAP has just come out with a product in your price range. Enjoy.
I also had the Spatial M5 Sapphire for a few weeks and couldn’t stand them. They had none of the magic that the Vandy’s have. AND the speakers were damaged in shipping returning them to Spatial and Clayton put me on the hook for the costs. If it wasn't for the buyer protections on my Citibank credit card I would have been out the $2300 or whatever the costs were. Buyer beware.....
A couple people recommended the Vandersteen 2ce Sig II. I’ve had the 2ce and the 1ci in a small room similar to the OP, and I would highly recommend the 1ci over the 2.
soundchaser, I have Ohm speakers in my 13x20 living room with a ceiling that runs from 19' to 9' on the long wall. My Ohms are Ohm F cabinets upgraded (all new drivers, etc.) to 3000's one year ago. I bought them from the first owner after the upgrade, so thought I should phone John and talk to him about these particular speakers before closing the deal. I was shocked that it was John who picked up the phone! We talked about my room and how these speakers might work in it. He even looked up the sales invoice and confirmed the seller's story. You mentioned that you've spoken with John, did he mention the "upgraded" speakers? My Fs' cabinets are too big for your short wall (they're on my long wall), but he might have some upgraded smaller cabinets for a lower price. As far as their performance (in a challenging room placement), I enjoy vinyl, streamed music and 4K movies with these speakers immensely. I think John's willingness to talk with potential customers is worth a lot. Good luck!
i have not heard your other choices. I owned a pair of Vandys 2Esig. And they have an open and natural sound. I was suggesting you to check them if you can.
Wow 4-5 months is long for Ohm. Pandemic I suppose. Glad business is good. Ohm usually closes most of July and runs sales prior ie around now. So now is usually a good time to buy ( I did) but this year might be different.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
