I recently acquired a pair of Ohm f-5, series 3 loudspeakers from Ohm. These were very reasonably priced by Ohm, especially with trade-in. As such, I decided to try them.
These are the latest Walsh 5 Series 3 drivers that have been available for just over a year from Ohm mounted on refinished Ohm F cabinets with a modified port design. So you get Ohm's current best Walsh 5 driver's mounted in legendary Ohm F cabinets. How cool!
I have been breaking these in now for ~ 6 weeks. Verdict: I can't imagine better overall sound reproduction for any price! I can elaborate more on the sound if anyone is interested. In general, I'd say all the rave things you can read about Ohm Walsh 5s on the web are true. These are true relatively unknown audio wonders. Not the prettiest speakers in the world (though they look fine), but certainly one of the most innovative in terms of providing state of the art sound at an affordable price.
The adjustments on the Walsh 5 drivers allow you to flexibly match the speakers to your room, which lowers the risk that the speakers will be hard to place or optimize sonically.
I also have a pair of Ohm Walsh 2 Series 3's (Ohm Walsh 2s upgraded with the smaller (than Walsh 5) 100 Series 3 drivers. These sound outstanding as well and very similar overall to the f-5 S3's in smaller rooms, but do not have the driver adjustments, which makes them somewhat harder to place optimally depending on room acoustics. |
"If I have ever made any valuable discoveries, it has been owing more to patient attention, than to any other talent."
Isaac Newton (1642 - 1727) |
Mwr0707,
I would agree with your comments regarding room acoustics and the benefits of the 'realistic" sound produced by the Ohm Walsh Series 3 drivers.
It sounds like your drivers may not be fully broken in yet from your description, in which case expect that the best is yet to come in that the larger Ohm Walsh drivers take a good while to break in.
Audiogoners, seriously, if you are an audiophile constantly looking to better the sound coming out of your speakers, and you have a grand or two to toss around just in order to try something with a radically different approach to sound reproduction, for a reasonable cost, I'd recommend trying a pair of full range Ohm Walsh Series 3 speakers. You can buy an old pair of cabinets and purchase an upgrade from Ohm, buy refurbished units from Ohm, or buy new cabinets and drivers from Ohm, depending on budget and taste.
Ohm has the common man looking for a way to achieve lifelike audio performances in a cost effective manner covered. You really have nothing to lose.
My reference speakers prior to purchasing two pair of Ohm Walsh Series 3 speakers this past year were my Dynaudio Contour 1.3 mkII monitors. Compared to the Ohm Walsh Series 3 speakers (Walsh 2s and f-5s that I own), the Dynaudios are crisper, seem to sound more detailed with more resolution, noticeable in particular with well recorded acoustic string instruments, and have pinpoint sound-staging. They work very well in my small 12'X12' listening room. Yet, despite this and the fact that the Dynaudios have by far the best speaker cables of any of 6 pairs of speakers in my house, the Walsh Series 3 sound more lifelike so I end up preferring these in almost all cases when I do a/b comparisons.
However, the Dynaudios are still great monitors and still wow me more often than not on their own, just not quite as often as the Ohm's.
I also lived happily for 20 years with a pair of full size Maggies until recently when I replaced these with the Ohm f-5s. The f-5s through a similar though different and, in smaller rooms, a more focused and holographic-like soundstage, are not as hard to place correctly, have better overall response, particularly in the bottom end, and the dynamics are better (they move a lot of air!).
By the way, I sold Ohm speakers in a hifi shop years ago which is how I got acquainted with them but I am not affiliated with Ohm in any way.
One of these days, I would like to try a good pair of horn-loaded speakers also, like the vintage Klipschs for comparison. I recall the sound of these speakers and would be interested in trying them out and comparing again. |
I wouldn't change anything until fully broken in. My W5's took a good 3 months, including several sessions running them full out with a 300W/ch amp! My Walsh 2s (100 drivers) were acquired used, and were fully broken in. I use them for reference. The most noticeable difference was in the bass. The Walsh 2s, though in a smaller room, were actually more satisfying in the bass department at first. The rest of the sound tended to smooth out over time I would say as well. Their overall timbre remind me of my Maggie 1.3c's now, which is a very good thing, but have a hell of a lot more satisfying bass. The Ohms were not this smooth at first, as I recall.
Why do you think you might need to upgrade the CD? What kind of amp do you use? The Ohms like amps with a high damping factor to control the drivers better. Look up "damping factor" on Wikipedia for more info on damping factor and how it relates to speakers.
John at Ohm recommended NAD electronics. I use a Carver m400t with very good results. I've tried my Tandberg receiver's amp with these and liked the Carver much better. I also think the Walsh drivers are better suited to solid state electronics in general due to their dynamic nature than to tubes, though I've never heard the Ohms driven with a really top notch tube amp.
|
Ohm is not a big shop. Wouldn't surprise me if they get backlogged from time to time.
With my Walsh 5's, I was told I would have them before they close for the summer (they close for the month of July) if I got my order in two weeks in advance + they were delivered on time, exceptionally well packed + in good shape.
On one other occasion, I placed a parts order on one day + received them UPS the next day. Ohm is located in Brooklyn, NY only about 230 miles from me.
My experience has been they generally do what they say and will try to make things right if they make a mistake. |
Ohm does a lot of different tweaks to all their various models that they've produced over the years. They do almost anything in regards to customizing and upgrading in order to best suit specific customers needs. This is much different and complex than most speaker lines that have a set of clearly defined models and perhaps a few options. It may be hard to know exactly what to expect sometimes perhaps given all the different configurations possible, especially when an older model is upgraded.
With so many options open, mistakes can happen. Best to ask lots of questions up front to be sure to get the full picture before waiting for the product to arrive and be surprised by something.
For example the binding posts under one of my Walsh 2 S3's are positioned in a way that makes it more difficult to attach a heavy speaker cable like my Audioquest CV-6's with the cables running out the rear. Not sure exactly why this is, but it is a minor inconvenience for me in my case. They are still a bargain in my mind. |
Line,
I can claim similar results regarding driving the Walsh 5 S3 and Walsh 100 S3 drivers to high volumes with my system. Never a hint of stress or strain!
This is just a theory, but since the Walsh drivers take a while to break in to best sound, it may not be a good idea to drive them to the limit fresh out of the box, but rather work up to high levels gradually. I tend to do this with most new stuff just to be safe.
MWR0707,
I've heard a lot of good things abut the Outlaw amps. I would probably consider one myself if I had the need.
I don't know a thing about your player, but my understanding is that in general mixed video/audio format disk players are not not up to snuff with comparable cd-only designs, which makes sense. I use a $400 Marantz DVD player in a smaller A/V system with CDs and it sounds good, but I'ved never tried it in my reference audio system. I've used a $600 dollar Denon CD player/recorder in my reference audio system for two years. I am satisfied with it and I suspect I could do better with another CD player maybe, but it has not been an issue for me. The Denon sounds clean, smooth, lively, and great overall! I could easily recommend it for the budget and/or feature conscience. You get two drives and the ability to make essentially perfect sounding recordings to boot. |
MWR0707,
The f-5 series 3s are in approx. a 27X20 foot inverted "L"shape room as sketched below with a thinly carpeted solid concrete floor. I do not measure decibels, but I like music to be played at realistic sound levels, including rock music. I push the Walsh 5 drivers as hard as my ears can stand before I stop. I have not reached a point where I notice any ill effect on the sound due to volume. The power level lights on my Carver m4.0t do light to near max levels, but does not appear to run out of juice. You can hear and feel the music throughout the house (~3700 square feet) at this point. Nothing I've ever had before ever came close to being able to produce this level of sonic exhiliration!
------------------
|
|
X X |
------- |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Oh well, my sketch doesn't display very clearly does it?
Suffice it to say the L shaped room is 27' long and 20 wide at the base only. The top portion of the room is only about 12' wide. Most listening occurs within the 12'wide section, though the pseudo-omni design produces a coherent soundstage with not much change in timbre anywhere in the room. No box design speaker can do this. The closest I've come is with front ported speakers with good dispersion sitting right up against the far wall. |
Unsound,
Some purists appear to not buy this, but Ohm clearly builds and uses Walsh design drivers. They are in fact not the same Walsh design as the original A's and F's, the first and somewhat legendary Ohm speakers to apply the Walsh design principles over 30 years ago.
However, there is no doubt in my mind that the current Ohm Walsh drivers are based on the same design principles as the originals. |
I've never heard Ohm Fs.
I a/b compared the new Series 3 100 drivers versus original Walsh 2 drivers from the early 80's before I purchased the larger f-5s with the Walsh 5 series 3 drivers.
The original Walsh 2 drivers had significant and very noticeable sonic shortcomings when compared the the new Series 3 Walsh 100 drivers or even my "modern" Dynaudio or Triangle (with subwoofer) monitors.
Though inferior, I still enjoyed the original vintage Walsh 2s for many years still, mainly due to the characteristics of the Walsh sound. |
Dale harder, you sound like a true affectionado of the Walsh sound as am I, at least the ones that I am familiar with!
Aren't the Ohm Walsh drivers, which radiate from the back of the driver mounted vertically as do Ohm Fs, truly omnidirectional even though Ohm choses by design to dampen the output to the rear?
I know all about the separate tweeter which is not omni and crossover and how this is a compromise on a "pure" Walsh implementation. However it is done, the soundstage does hold together in most any position relative to the speaker that I've observed. It may not be 100% pure Walsh but it is definitely much further away from a conventional box design than it is from a pure Walsh driver like the F's. It's a good design compromise as I see it that enables Ohm to anufacture and sell these Walsh speakers, with most of the benefit of a pure Walsh design, at a competitive price. To me that represents an innovation on the original Walsh design.
With so many variations of the typical box/dynamic speaker design out there, and little consensus on which is in fact best, surely a few variations on the innovative design principles put forth by Lincoln Walsh is not too radical!
Any way to hear a pair of Walsh TLS speakers on the east coast?
Having sold Ohm speakers years ago but having never actually heard Ohm Fs, I'd love to be able to a/b compare Ohm's current Walsh speakers against other designs like these or even German Physics or the MBL omnis. What difference would I hear in comparison to the Walsh 5 series 3? |
TEchnically, Ohm does refer to the drivers in their "Walsh" product line as "Coherent Line Source" (CLS) drivers on their web site, not as Walsh Drivers. My understanding is the CLS drivers incorporate design principles that were realized in Ohms early Walsh design speakers, the A and F. They are realized somewhat differently now with the CLS drivers, but with the same sonic design goals in mind.
One of the key new factors (requirements) driving the CLS design was cost effectiveness. The fact that Ohm is still in business after 30-40 years still selling innovative speaker designs and supporting all past models as well is truly a great testament to their approach.
This topic has been covered in depth in other threads on Audiogon that I've read. I believe someone even provided a link to a patent document relating to the CLS drivers. |
I think this will be my last comment on this thread.
I've always desired a pair of Ohm F's or A's in proper working condition. My only reservation would be the common assertion that they were not made to be played at very high decibel levels, which is a requirement for me. Apparently there are still a few around today that have been built or rebuilt properly that I could acquire if I was really determined.
My solution for a reasonable cost to meet my requirements was a pair of Ohm f5s, the best drivers Ohm sells today, that can play really loud and clear with the right amplifiers, mounted in refurbished and modified Ohm F cabinets.
So the bottom half of these speakers at least look the same as the original legendary Ohm Fs that I never got to hear. And some who have heard both believe they sound very similar even though 30 years apart in design, which makes me feel even better.
To me they represent a fine combination of the best of the old and the new.
Cheers! |
Oh, well, I'm back for at least one more go-round!
Could "piston" the CLS piston drivers used in Ohms Walsh line speakers actually be an improvement in some ways in regards to sound as well as perhaps in reliability over even a perfectly functioning F or even A?
Having never heard a pure Walsh driver, I can't say. But during a listening session with the F5s yesterday, I was reminded why I started looking to better my Maggies in the first place.
It wasn't just a search for a lower and quality bottom end (and easier placement in the room), but also the dynamics and impact of the sound. Properly set-up Maggies and their ilk are magical even at the lowest volumes, but they do not move a lot of air and create the air pressure differentials that I believe are physically required to reproduce a live performance,especially for large musical ensembles like a symphony orchestra or big band or even for loud emplified formats like rock, at realistic volume levels.
These types of music require a speaker that can create significant air pressure differentials in the room, in my opinion, like a larger dynamic speaker does, which is why I jumped off the planar speaker bandwagon in the first place to some extent. I like the "magic" detail and clarity of these designs (like Maggies) however, especially at lesser volumes. Good monitor speakers can compete in this arena but are still to small to really excel in delivering realistic "oomph" to the music when needed.
So my question is, could the Ohm CLS driver, based on the Walsh design, be superior to even a perfectly constructed and/or commercially viable Walsh driver (at least any that have been built to-date or that are even remotely commercially available) in terms of dynamics and impact?
I do not miss my Maggies with the F5's. The sound has a similar presentation but with "oomph". I had a magical moment just yesterday unlike any I've had prior with my systems with the Concord Jazz CD recording of "The Classic COncert Live" with MelTorme, GErry Mulligan and GEorge Shearing. When I closed my eyes, Mel Torme and the big band were performing in my basement family room! There was one extended note in a vocal finale where I had to look around to see what was happening! I thought maybe someone had snuck up behind me! It just totally transcended any vocal renedering and listening experience I recall! Outstanding! |
Two additional questions for Dale:
1) Do you sell Walsh drivers designed specifically for the modified (now ported) Ohm f5 cabinet?
2) When I read your description of the Walsh driver, it is not clear to me why a Walsh driver is not pistonic. IT sounds like it uses a voice coil and a foam surround in the suspension similar to conventional drivers, though the similarity appears to end there.
Thanks. |
Unsound, I believe I clearly stated that the two are different designs.
CAn we agree that they are similar in certain ways?
I'm just trying to understand exactly how the two are the same and how different since I may never be able to hear them together in an a/b test to decide how they sound different, which in the end is all I would really care about. I am an engineer by trade and appreciate the technical aspects of different speaker designs, but in the end all I really care about myself is how the product sounds.
Dale has described the Walsh driver in great detail. But the best explanation I've heard about how the Ohm Walsh Series 3 drivers manage to produce the smooth omnidirectional soundfield, which some who have heard both say at least sounds similar to the original Walsh speakers, is able to do this.
I know its not the directional tweeter that produces the consistent sonic timbre in an omnidirectional manner, so it must be the downward facing driver, whatever that is, WAlsh or otherwise.
Though shaped differently, doesn't the sound emanate from the back of the CLS driver as it does from the "true Walsh"?
The best description I've heard is that the sound "leaks through" and tricks the ears somehow. Well god bless that leak if so! All leaks should work this well!
The history of the Walsh driver between its conception by Lincoln Walsh and its most famous realization by Ohm is also not clear to me.
Ohm is a very small shop as I understand it. I do not believe they employ teams of engineers. Did John Strohbeen, who as I understand it is the founder and primary engineering force behind Ohm since its inception in 60's, design and build the A's and F's? I believe he and/or his team designed the CLS drivers used now for certain. IF true, then As, Fs and CLS speakers were all designed and brought to market by the same person, who is an MIT educated engineer as I understand it. If not, then they all at least came from the same company headed by the same person at all times.
I'm really just interested in learning and enjoying the music. |
I found a wikipedia entry for Lincoln Walsh to help answer some of my own questions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Walsh
It provides some info regarding the relationship between Lincoln Walsh, his speaker designs, and others including Ohm and John Strohbeen.
it states:
"Unfortunately, Walsh died before his speaker was released to the public. Current Ohm Chief Engineer, John Strohbeen further developed Walsh's concepts." |
I wonder if anyone out there has ever tried to custom-build a 2-way, downward firing OHM CLS-like design using conventional drivers where the bass driver sits on top of the enclosure and fires downward, and if so what were the results? Has any owner of Ohm Walsh speaker cabinets, or someone who might build a custom cabinet from scratch, ever tried this?
Inquiring minds want to know! Pictures to go with the description would be a bonus!
|
With both my Walsh2 S3's in a 12X12 room and my f5 S3's in an L shaped ~27X20 foot room, I've found the soundstage and imaging is best defined with the speakers at least 2-3 feet away from any wall (proportionally further in a larger room perhaps) and the speakers maybe 30-40% closer together than their distance to the primary listening position. With this configuration, instruments are very well defined and locatable within the soundstage, which fills in nicely from wall to wall mostly from behind the plane of the speakers.
Currently, my Walsh 2 S3s are less than ideally located only about 18 inches from the rear wall in a 12X12 room due to restrictions placed by my wife in her sunroom. This reduces the detail of the soundstage somewhat but otherwise they still sound great.
My original Walsh 2s from ~1982, which I just upgraded this year, paled by comparison in a/b tests in most every aspect of sonic rendering with the S3s. |
MWr0707,
One thing I'm realizing with the Ohms is that I think an easy and sound way to determine best placement is to think of your room as a concert hall and identify where in the room you would place the performers in the room if they were playing live and then where you would like to sit to listen.
Then Place the Ohms immediately to the front of the performance area. Avoid placing too close to the walls if possible. The soundstage should then cover the area desired as best as is possible.
Lean towards placing the Ohms closer together rather than farther apart when unsure. I've found the soundstage holds together better when the speakers are not too far apart.
With the Ohms, its like setting up a live performance. It becomes an exercise in placing performers within the room based on where you will listen from. Like a live performance, the best seats are usually front and center somewhere, but there are plenty of good seats in the house, unlike most conventional speakers. |
Maybe a slight adjustment with speakers slightly closer together and maybe a touch farther out from the wall, if possible like below?
The "more restrained" upper midrange may just be the nature of the 200s timbre. having never heard Fs, its hard for me to say, but I think the S3 drivers natural upper midrange could be described that way compared to some speakers. I would say it is "more restrained" than my Dynaudio Contour 1.3 mk IIs for sure, but this is not a bad thing for me in my case.
You might try different interconnects perhaps to adjust this somewhat if desired. What source devices and interconnects are you using currently? I use several different types. OF these the MIT Terminator 2s I use off my CD would be my choice for this purpose compared to others I use (DNM Reson and HArmonic TEchnology Truth Link), which tend to also be more restrained.
=========TV========|
|==================|
|====X=======X=====|
|==================|
|==================|
|====SOFASOFASOFA=|
|==========wallwallwall|
|==========wwwwwww|
|==========wwwwwww
|==================| |
Tonal balance will vary with location based on room acoustics as is the case with any speaker. All rooms are different and affect sound differently.
I think I can say with confidence that the best results with tonal balance is most likely to occur as well if the speakers are not too close to the wall.
In my case, the upper midrange of my Walsh 5's (adjustable 300 drivers, see photo of the adjustments in my system section), which are 5 feet out from the wall in a much larger room is more "restrained" than the 100 drivers in the smaller room. This is intentional in my case in that I have the "perspective" adjustment set to "far". I think this setting attenuates or lowers the midrange level.
My Walsh 2's (100 driver) may be more analogous to your 200s in that, though smaller and designed for smaller rooms, there are no adjustments. I've had these in two very different 12X12 rooms which I can say confidently did affect the tonal balance to some extent based on room acoustics. |
Mwr0707, do you recall if the soundstage of the F's was located primarily behind the speakers when listening straight on axis like the CLS series 3 drivers?
Maybe there is a difference here that you perceive as "more restrained" upper midrange?
With the Walsh 5 S3 drivers, the "perspective" adjustment, which corresponds mainly to midrange, I believe can be set to "close", "medium" or "far". The "far" setting seems to move the soundstage more back behind the speakers when listening dead on.
Unfortunately, I do not know which settings on the Walsh5 S3 match or come closest to matching the sound of the 300 or 200 drivers, which do not have adjustments.
You might want to pop John Strohbeen an email and get his input. |
MWr0707,
I used to sell many of Ohms non-Walsh dynamic models years ago, including the E, L, C2, and H. Unfortunately, the shop I worked in never got a pair of As or Fs so I never heard these.
I still have and enjoy my Ls that I've had now for ~ 30 years (see my system photo).
However, most of these models, including my Ls, had a similar tonal balance, which I believe was modeled after the F, if I recall correctly, which was the flagship model of the time.
Many of these models had high and low treble or midrange level adjustment switches on them, but in general, the sound of these speakers, which I remember well, and still experience with my Ls is significantly more forward in the upper midrange, compared to Ohms latest drivers (my Ls and f5s are in adjacent rooms for easy comparison).
The tonal balance/timber of the series 3 drivers are definitely more recessed and perhaps neutral sounding or perhaps laid back in this range compared to my Ls or my Dynaudio or Triangle monitors. The Triangles timbre probably matches the Ohm S3 drivers most closely of these three.
I use phono, CD and FM tuner sources mainly. I switched from the DNM REson interconnect to the MIT Terminator 2 with my Denon CD, which was the only source in my system which I felt needed a tweak in this area with the F5s. The results now are more to my liking, definitely a touch "brighter" and more forward but still smooth as silk.
I picked up my MIT terminator 2 interconnect on Ebay for less than $50. |
Good catch! If you're hearing a difference with the covers off, definitely change the fabric.
Try your local fabric store. I re-did the fabric on my old Walsh 2's myself once, mainly because the original fabric had worn and I wanted to change the color to match decor. I found very loosely weaved light cream colored medium strand wool fabric in the local fabric store that I was able to stretch and shape over the frame, staple to the underside of the grill, and trim. It had a few folds along the seams, and looked ugly underneath the grille mainly to my laziness in trimming excess fabric, but looked really nice from the outside! The loose weave provided sonic transparency via the holes between the stitching when stretched around the frame.
Or if you know anyone handy with a sewing machine, it wouldn't be to hard to even sew up the seams or even have something professionally custom made, for an even cleaner look if needed.
Or just call Ohm and see what they might have to offer. |
Dale,
Thanks so much for the info! it all sounds right to me!
I'm also hoping that your project, which is obviously the result of a knowledgeable guy with a passion who is on to something, receives much more attention down the road. I would love to hear your creations.
If you are ever in the Washington/Baltimore corridor area with your creations, I'll volunteer right now to help get them set up and give them a listen! |
MWr0707,
I bet your FRS-11's are not on castors. If so, maybe consider putting them on castors in order toenable you to reposition the speakers easily if desired for optimal listening at a particular room location, if the speakers cannot reside there normally due to room constraints.
I did this with my old Walsh 2s, which were not on castors. THe F5s are.
If you are comfortable with a battery powered screwdriver and drill, it may not be very hard to do with stock castors that you can pick up at Home Depot or euquivalent. As long as the speakers sit squarely on the castors, there is no practical sonic affect from doing this due to the vertical firing nature of the driver.
If you do not like it for any reason, the casters can be unscrewed from the bottom and removed.
Or, maybe John at Ohm can provide a set of the nice heavy duty locking castors they use and provide guidance on installing them.
Just an idea to help provide some flexibility if needed in your room. |
