I have long dismissed Ohm speakers as anything that could be competitive in todays state of the art. But of course I want to believe that this "old" American company still has some horsepower left to compete with asian built speakers built by people that take in less money in a week than my dog sitter takes in the couple hours it takes to let my dogs out to crap when I am away for a day :)? The reviews I have read here and there report incredible imaging but what about other aspects of the Ohm 5 II. Any thoughts?
Three or four years ago I auditioned the Ohm Walsh 200 MkII's with their at-home trial and found them missing the special qualities I remembered. They were a bit on the heavy sounding side and lacked the sense of space I was after. That was a pity as I really wanted them to be as magical as the F's from many years before.
I never owned the F's and heard them so very long ago; but what you said here confirms what i do remember and how the F's sounded compared with MkII's.
I think the F's cone is the coolest looking speaker there is.
Gentlemen, I have read your discussions on the Ohm Walsh A and F drivers with enthusiasm. Didn't think anyone still cared. I am new to this site. Anyway, for what it is worth, and to my knowledge, I believe I am the only person in the world that builds F's and A's from scratch to this day. I have studied these drivers and their principals for the last 30 years. I am the only person that hand winds voice coils, makes complete cabinets, magnet assemblies and complete cones from new materials. I use the same materials as the originals and some improvements. My drivers are meticulously assembled in every detail. In addition, I refurbish old units as well. I have spoken with many people over the years whom claimed to be able to re-cone or repair these marvels, but NO ONE has ever done so as the original. My name is Dale Harder. I can be reached at dale@hhr-lasers.com
Would you mind sharing some photos of your re-creations? Also, if it doesn't involve giving away any secrets, would you mind discussing the improvements you have made to the original designs (both A & F)?
Hi Jamscience, Sorry I haven't gotten back sooner. I have remained pretty faithful to the old design in order to maintain a baseline. However, I have hopefully improved on the voicecoil, making it substantially lighter and able to withstand more power. My newest coils will be in production very soon, up to now, I have hand made each and everyone. I am also working to improve the suspension and dampening of the cone. As for pics, I am happy to share some, just drop me a line at my home email...dale@hhr-lasers.com.
Hi Guys, For what is worth, I am now offering the Ohm Walsh F+ and A+ by Dale Harder, in limited productions, with exotic hardwoods and some 30+ improvements beyond the original models. Some of the improvements are: New cones, improved magnets, stiffer spiders, lower weight high power voice coils, box stiffeners and resonance control, Cardas gold connectors, silver Litz wire leads. I also refurbish completely, older models and upgrade them, cabinets and all. If your interested please contact me for info, pictures, etc. dale@hhr-lasers.com 440-888-2163 A new web site is forthcoming. I will also be offering new and refurbished high power tube amps and full range ribbon systems.
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.
Regarding the Ohm Walsh F and A Loudspeakers. The purpose of this guide is to provide potential buyers and users much needed clarification and information regarding the magical and little understood Ohm Walsh model “A” and “F” Coherent Wave Transmission Line Driver/Audio Speaker from the 70’s and 80’s. I will not go into details of the previous guides here, but I will attempt to clarify many misconceptions and incorrect information which has arisen throughout the years. Let me begin by saying, unfortunately, not only have these speakers had a tremendous amount of misinformation disseminated throughout the years, but there are also many dangers presented by perhaps well meaning individuals whom attempt to recone these old units and sell them on e-bay and various audio markets as “working” or “refurbished”. This is the furthest from the truth, for no one, not even Ohm Acoustics, rebuilds these any longer. So far as I know, and it is my humble opinion, but, I am currently the only person in the world that can build these units from scratch or refurbish the old units, including cabinetry and some 30 upgrades to materials and performance specifications. I am here to tell you in no uncertain terms that these speakers represent some of the most sophisticated and difficult to build audio transducers ever made and mass marketed while still representing some of the finest musical reproduction capabilities of any speaker ever devised ranking easily amongst the finest speakers in the world for decades. The capabilities of these drivers, when properly executed, have been known to rival and compete with many “cost is no object” systems such as full range ribbons, Apogee, Quad ESl’s and Infinity’s super IRS standard systems, costing $60,000 in the 70’s. At the time of their final production in 1984, the Ohm F model commanded as much as $4,000 retail and the “A” model commanding $6,500. The drivers truly representing the word “exotic” and the cabinetry bordering on works of art. As many others have stated the driver of the “F” model consists of a steeply inverted cone standing some 12 ¾” in height with a slant of 75.5 degrees. The cone is constructed of two metal foil sections and one paper section. The top third is made from titanium foil having a thickness of .0025”, the mid section is made from polished and tempered aluminum foil, (Not Stainless Steel), having a thickness of .003” and finally the last section is made from felted paper having a thickness of .025”. The finished cone weighs an incredible 124 grams. I would like to mention that aluminum foil off the shelf from “Reynolds” will not do the trick here. While the above materials represent the bulk of the cone, the magic of their function lies in fact in the treatment and correct assembly of each section. To be brief, the top titanium section has a special treatment applied to its internal surface that acts as a sound absorber, a stiffening agent and cone nodal breakup control. It resembles grey modeling clay, but it isn’t, and lasts a good deal longer. However, be aware this material is critical for proper operation and it does dry out and crack after 15 to 20 years, so it should be replaced. Reconers never do this, let alone know the proper materials to use. Next, the Aluminum section is also treated internally and externally in several special ways. Externally, the cone has ribbing lines running vertically for the entire length of the aluminum section that have been scribed into the aluminum at precise intervals, depth and angle. This ribbing helps to make the cone stiffer, but also is used to “tune the cone”. Internally, the foil is covered with a specially selected grade of “open cell” damping foam of precise thickness. The foam runs the entire length of the aluminum section and covers about 1/3 of the titanium. One of the most important things overlooked or not attempted by refurbishers is the replacement of this special foam. One reason is because it is very difficult to remove the old and then equally difficult to replace the new. In addition, this foam is not readily available off the shelf. If the foam surround is decayed from aging, as all units now are, then the internal foam is decayed as well and MUST be replaced regardless of weather it looks OK or not. Typically this foam crumbles or rots turning into “gooey” fragments and falls of in gobs if touched. It is used for damping, control of cone ringing and control of the speed of the wave front traversing the cone. The final cone section of the “F” model, the paper is perhaps my favorite when it comes to being misunderstood and overlooked. The bottom third felted paper section servers many functions, but is most responsible for producing the lower bass frequencies of the driver. A close examination reveals lots of slits cut into the paper and what looks like silicone seal applied to the internal side of the cone. My favorite story is perhaps one I read of an individual that sent his speakers to be repaired only to find upon their return that the silicone had been applied to the slits that he had so carefully had peeled off, thinking that someone before him had placed it their as some sort of repair. He was incensed and demanded a full refund because he felt the speaker had been incorrectly repaired. Here again, this sealant MUST be there and must be applied correctly. A closer look will reveal 4 rows of slits placed horizontally in exacting positions across the cone surface. These slits control cone break-up, provide a properly terminated high loss transmission line and prevent reflected sound from the cone annulus from returning back up the cone and interfering with the oncoming wave. Further, the paper is treated with a properly positioned internal “ring” of paper that is also a stiffener and produces a density change in the material. Finally, the paper portion is terminated with another paper “ring” that is cut and glued to the main paper body, again producing a state change and acoustic signature. Now that we have a basic understanding of the driver’s conical section, let’s examine the remaining and very critical suspension and compliance portion of the Walsh Driver. The suspension of this transducer consists of some very familiar parts, namely a foam surround and a spider roll as is commonly seen in many piston driven speaker assemblies. As many of you may know the stiffness of the spider and the thickness of the surround as well as the type of materials used, combine to form a system that controls the driver’s acoustic parameters. These parameters are based upon some of the Thiele and Small calculations and are critical for the system to produce the desired frequency response, desired bass roll off, total system impedance, high end response and box functions. The suspension is designed to work with either a ported or sealed enclosure. Changing any of these components represents significant changes to the overall system performance and can make or break the speaker’s ability to reproduce realistic sound. Trust me when I say, that not just any old “off the shelf” foam surround or any spider of the same size and color will work in the proper function of these drivers. It will not! Any reconer or refurbisher that try’s to use stock parts will obtain marginal performance at best. I would also mention that reusing the old spider is not advisable since most have been stretched considerably due to the weight of the cone pulling it down for many years . The surround not only suspends the cone and correctly centers it, but is also provides for critical damping of the acoustic wave as it reaches the end of the cone and thus prevents most of the acoustic energy from being reflected back up the cone. The spider serves to center the voice coil and provides mechanical resistance to the driver’s motion. This mechanical resistance couples with the voice coils DC resistance to produce the speaker’s total impedance or load to the driving amplifier. Will it play you ask? Yes, the speaker may play, and it may even sound acceptable to some, but it will be far from optimal and therefore far from being one of the finest speakers in the world. More than likely, the speakers will sound dull, lackluster, even muffled in the high end. The clarity will suffer on voice reproduction and choral groupings. The bass will be dull, slow and lack articulation. The difference is a hand made sports car compared to a small compact model. Once again, to my knowledge, I am the only person in the world that has these items made to order and to my specifications so as to be compatible with the originals and or the enhanced new units that I build. Finally, we come to the very heart and soul of this phenomenal driver, namely the voice coil. The voice coil is not only responsible for providing the electrical impulses that are transformed via. the interaction between the electrical input signal and the high energy Alnico magnet, but it also represents the power handling ability of the driver and its ability to produce the highest frequencies as well as the lowest simultaneously. Unlike any other driver, this single voice coil must be capable of functioning over the entire audio range of 20 Hz to 20 KHz. and beyond. This transducer is made from a very thin anodized aluminum ribbon wire with a rectangular cross section that is wound on the tall edge and adhered to the inside of an anodized aluminum former. The coil consists of a single layer and must withstand extreme temperatures approaching 300 degrees C during operation, and yet, it must also be extremely lightweight, since the mass of the VC represents the critical mass of the moving system that must be accelerated or decelerated in order to pluck the cone and produce the highest frequency sound waves. The original goal was to have a VC that weighed less than 4 grams. Because of this, the Walsh driver is the only speaker in the world that can successfully pass a square wave retaining more than 95% of its original shape. I would like to point out that there are also variants of this coil that are used in different “F” cones and also the Big brother Ohm Walsh “A”. Having said this, please understand that there are NO substitutions for these coils and the use of any other type of coil, wire, winding, form etc. from presently available stocks will not work. As with the other parts, I make these coils to order and have them expertly wound to my specifications and application. While I have endeavored to present the Walsh “F” in considerable detail, one may infer from this information that the Walsh “A” functions in much the same fashion and in theory this is true. However, the “A” is an entirely different version of the Walsh principal in action, having a cone with a nominal 18 inch size. This driver is only slightly taller than the “F”, but has a dual flare cone and is made entirely of metal foils. The top section of the cone employs a 3 inch voice coil similar to its smaller brother, but of a nominal 8 ohm impedance. The top portion of the cone is made from thin titanium foil and employs a steep angle of 75.5 degrees. While this section is somewhat longer than the “F” cone, where the titanium meets the aluminum section the cone flares abruptly to a cone angle of 62.5 degrees. There it continues to the entire extent of the cone body and ultimate diameter of approximately 14.5 inches. As with the smaller “F”, the cone is terminated by a special cloth pleated surround, designed to do exactly what its foam counterpart does in the “F” model. The actual size of the driver is a misnomer and is more truly measured at 16 inches to the outside of the surround and 18 inches to the driver frame. The cone is completed with treatments to its inside with putties, foams, diamond shaped hash markings for stiffness and for tuning. The “A” represents an unbelievable work of art, form and function. Sonically, it has no equal with the ability to go subsonic and produce thunderous bass while simultaneously producing the full subtle air of voice and delicate articulated highs. Not bad for a cone that weighs more than 346 grams. In conclusion I would like to reiterate that the Wash “F” and “A” Transmission Line drivers are extremely difficult to build, highly complex in their execution and make considerable demands on construction techniques and materials even today. In fact, just to show how much thought went into the design of these speakers consider this…every glue in every joint was chosen for it sonic properties as well as its merits as an adhesive. I would like to share you with a little back round on myself. My name is Dale Harder and I reside in Parma Ohio. I am an Aerospace, Laser, Electro-Optics and Audio engineer, and have been in these fields for more than 30 years. My long love affair with the Ohm Walsh Speakers started in 1972 and to my knowledge I am currently the only person in the world that can still build true “Walsh Style” drivers from scratch or refurbish the old Ohm Walsh units including cabinetry. I have devoted much of my life to improving upon this series of speakers purely for my own enjoyment. I would also like to state that I am in no way connected with Ohm Acoustics nor they with me at the present time. The information that I have given is from my own learning and experience and while I have endeavored to be accurate and true, I assume no responsibility for any of its use or content. Further, I do not manufacture these speakers under the name of Ohm Walsh “A” or “F” as that would be a trademark infringement. I simply emulate the Walsh principals. I do however manufacture new drivers and complete speakers or refurbish older units with some 30 + improvements using the Walsh "A" or "F" as a base guide. The new speakers are called the Walsh TLS-I and TLS-II Lastly, I Do Not sell parts for do-it-yourselfers, sorry, so please don’t ask. I hope this has shed some light on these unique speakers. Thanks and Good listening, Dale Harder. dale@hhr-lasers.com
I lived with a set of F's for a year in the 70s. Like most others, I became "imprinted" with the stunning 3-D imaging, smooth frequency response, and wide sweet area.
There were other speakers with more brightness and detail, but at moderate volumes (70-80db) for long periods of time, to my ears, nothing compared to the F's.
I recently learned that Ohm sell their latest drivers for many of their older models. Being well aware that the new drivers are not the same design as the original F Walsh, I talked with John Strohbeen about my experience with the F's.
John never said that the new models were the same as the F's. He did say that in some ways, they were better, and that I should listen to them for myself. Not an unexpected response from the designer and owner of the company, but what was the risk to try... shipping them back if I didn't like them.
I found a set of FRS-11s on eBay for a good price and ordered the 200 Series 3 upgrade.
I perceive the "color" of the sound to be somewhat different than the original F's. I think this is the subjective part that each listener has to evaluate individually. To my ears, the results are still very pleasant.
On the first few tracks I listened to, it seemed to me like the bass was restrained. Then I listened to a well recorded track with loud and deep bass content and I felt the old Ohm punch again. I had forgotten what playback without over-emphasized mid-bass sounded like.
Since the room they are in has an irregular shape and is half-open to living space behind, the bass response varies according to listening position. As you might expect, the more enclosed parts of the listening space have louder bass. I may add a subwoofer to the open part of the listening space for better bass balance across the entire width of the listening room.
These speakers do not provide intense focus and detail. Decades ago, we used to call that a "bright" or "West Coast" sound. I always found it somewhat unrealistic and tiring after an hour. To me, the color of a live performance has always been driven by the acoustics of the room. I perceive these speakers as very realistic in comparison to live performances. As an example, I compare the sound of voices from the speakers to the sound of voices from people speaking in the room.
What I think I enjoy most is walking across the room and hearing the 3d image shift as it would for a live performance. After almost 30 years, it's a return to speakers that give the experience of "being there".
It's been almost a month, and I'm very happy with the results.
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.
Can you describe the changes you perceived after break-in? How long did it take? I'm thinking that I should avoid tinkering such as upgrading the CD player until the sound has stabilized.
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.
I also had a couple of "small shop" issues. Ohm was very responsive and everything ended up fine.
I look at it as investing a little of my time in exchange for getting what I wanted at a great value.
As you read through this thread, you will notice a variety of concerns that some people have about these speakers. I find it interesting how much factors other than "how do they sound" rank for some.
If a particular design spec, a particular appearance, or a crisp sales experience are high priorities, you may want to look elsewhere. My top priority was getting the "Walsh sound" I experienced 30 years ago. I'm happy that I've been able to get very close to that.
What size room are your 5's in? When you were running them full out, were you monitoring the power output of your amp, or measuring in some other way? I ask because I'm really not sure how to determine where full out really is, or if I could even stand it without ear protection or risk disturbing the neighbors. I find it uncomfortable to listen at much more than 85db for any period of time. Do you measure sound pressure?
I have the Walsh 5's series 2 and drive them with a Carver amp. that outputs 600 watts per. ch. into 8 ohms and 1200 into 4 ohms. I have on occasion play them loud enough (in a 16' X 24' X 9' room) that i cannot hear my own voice when taking normally. I heard that the series 3 are easier to drive but don't know if that is a fact or not.
My 200 series 3s are in a den that is 2/3 open to a nook/kitchen to the rear. The dimension on the open side is 15.5' x 35' x 8'. The closed-in 1/3 is 12 feet deep instead of 35. It amazes me how well the Ohms handle this. The only qualitative difference I notice from the closed side of the room to the open side is the bass level.
I measure 90db 10' back from the speakers with the Outlaw 990 reading "-10db". This is quite loud (not rock concert loud) but it is near my comfort limits. I've never heard any distortion the few times I've pushed it louder.
I have no idea how to tell how much of the amplifier's 250wpc at the S3's 6 ohms I am using.
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.
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.
I could be wrong about this, but, I was led to believe that Ohm no longer uses Walsh drivers. Perhaps some are actually purchasing the Ohm sound, not the Walsh sound.
Ohm no longer uses the original Walsh drivers that were installed in the F's.
The new drivers are still mounted at the top of the box and fire down into it. The sound still radiates from the sides of the inverted cone. In the new design, this is not full range, and a front-diagonal-firing tweeter covers the high-end. The boxes are ported in the new design. For what it's worth, Ohm began using this new design in the 80s.
With my face close to the new driver, I can clearly hear the sound radiating from most of the circumference of the driver, except for the very high-end.
I still hear the same old deep, wide and realistic image that at this point, fills a very strangely shaped room, and is not focused at a single small sweet spot. No tilting speakers up or down, no adjusting chair position, etc.
Whether called the Walsh sound or the Ohm sound, this is the sound I was looking for. At this point I perceive the same imaging as with the old F's, but not quite the same timbre. The room the old F's were in was much smaller, more regularly shaped and had a carpeted concrete floor while today I am on wood floor. I suspect that may be contributing significantly to the different timbre I perceive.
We'll see what happens as they break in. They definitely play a lot louder than the old F's could. You also had to be careful with the old F's because they were easy to blow up with a bit too much power.
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 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.
Gentlemen, I think you have completely missed the point of my long treatise and the purpose of adding to this thread above. There is no comparrison to the old Walsh "F" or "A" relating to the current products.
The current products consit of two standard pistonic drivers, one being an iverted woofer and the other being a dome tweeter. This arrangent borrows a very small likeness to true Lincoln Walsh design and for lack of a better word "tricks" your ears into hearing somewhat onnidirectional sound, when in fact, it is only 180 degrees in dispersion. The back wave is suppressed from the woofer and the tweeter fires only frontward at a 45 degree angle to the norm.
The current product uses a complicated crossover network and is not truly time and phase aligned nor is the sound coherent. The Walsh principal, IMHO, is the finest speaker principal ever discovered, only the implimentation of that discovery has ever been lacking. Had it reached its full potential almost all piston drivers would be gone.
This is not to say that Ohm Acoustics has not done a fine job with what they currently offer, but true Walsh drivers they are not.
A Walsh speaker consists of one steep angled cone made to behave like a transmission line. It has no phase or time distortion, emits in a full 360 degrees and the sound wavefront is fulluy coherent just like a laser beam. There are no crossovers whatsoever. Placement is not super critical and the sound stage does not wander. If there is a sweet spot, then it is extremely wide and very, very accomodating.
The Lincoln Walsh discovery lives on in my NEW presentation of the "Waslh TLS" series of drivers and systems.
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?
I did understand your point. I found your treatise interesting.
My goal with these speakers was to achieve a certain sound. If my goal had been to acquire something conforming to the original engineering design, I wouldn't have bothered with the trial.
When I considered Ohm's 30-year history of offering upgrades and support and the no-risk trial, there was little downside to hearing how the new and different design compared to the originals.
In spite of the obvious design differences between the current Walsh drivers and the original Lincoln Walsh design, I can tell you that the sound from the new series 3 drivers is close to the original F's. Not identical, but close. In some ways, better.
Kudos to you for pursuing your interest in the original design. I'm also curious how your drivers sound. I'll remain interested in how that effort progresses.
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.
To my way of thinking comparing old Ohms with Walsh drivers to new Ohms with pistonic drivers, is something akin to comparing dynamic planars to electostatics. They may look similar and they may share some dispersion qualites, but they are still very different. If you enjoy them , that's what counts, but lets not suggest they are the same thing. It's ironic that other manufactures such as Dale and to a lesser degree Huff and some German Physiks are more like the original Walsh Ohms than Ohms present day Ohms.
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.
Please undertsand once again everyone that I am in no way bashing Ohm Acoustics products. In fact, I have a long love affair with them and they are the ones that did start this thing in the begining. They hooked me in 1971 and I have been hooked ever since.
In Honesty, the only other speakers I have ever heard that turned my head for a moment was the Apogee line of full range ribbon drivers and their new predecessor. But here again, not worth $50K.
John Strohbeen has done very well with his current line of products and they are quite affordable. They have even borrowed upon some of the sonic merits of the original Walsh ideas. But, none the less, they are still piston drivers. Albeit, the woofer has been made to behave like a bad transmission line, which is exactly what the original Walsh idea was. That is not a bad thing, just another avenue.
The true transmission line drive exists only in a trucated version designed by German Physiks or Ikonoklast. The latter utilizing the Walsh tweeter design and the G.P. design resembeling more of the Old Ohm G product. But IMHO, not worth $21,900 for the cheapest model.
By the way, there is a new kid on the block nipping at Ohm's heals with an new entry in the omni market very similar to the current Ohm products made by Rountree Acoustics. (Not Roundtree) It's called the Omnimon. Covered in Stereophile mag this month. Also online.
Regarding the Walcott speakers.. just another piston driver firing into an omniball for dispersion. Not a walsh driver or anything similar.
I have been a speaker engineer and desingner for most of my life and I have made all manner of speakers including exotic plama drivers. But to my dismay, the worst design of all, the piston driver has for wahtever reason prolifferated. It is a bad idea that just won't go away and hence my steadfast approach to the Walsh design.
Anyway, my whole point is to make people aware that this style of speaker is available again, hopefully with some improvements. For those whom loved this sound and its capabilities I hope I can fill your needs. For others, perhaps in time. If not, this is a big world and to each his own. I guess I view buying a set of speakers much like finding a wife. Finding a good match is never easy, but always worth the effort.
That is why we all share our love of this hobby and persue being audiophiles. The love of music.
I've had steadily growing interest in the Walsh speakers for a few years now as a result of the serious room acoustics/placement problems I've had with varying pistonic speakers. I'm just tired of the hassle. And when things are finely set up properly, I really hate being confined to, and the only one to enjoy, the "sweet spot".
A few questions about your "A" & "F" TLS speakers: Fequency response & impedence of your improved models? What is the safe max power handling? What kind of safe SPL output are they capable of? Recommended types of amps and power output? Any minimum room size requirements for best sound? What is the sonic difference between your "A" & "F"? And finally, what is the price for the two models?
Quick question for Dale. I owned a pair of Ohm F speakers back in the mid-1970s and absolutely loved them. As noted earlier in this thread, I auditioned a pair of 200s a few years back and though good, just didn't have the magic I remembered.
Unfortunately my current listening room would be unable to handle the large footprint of a F-sized TLS. Are you contemplating any smaller models based on this driver design?
I missed my chance to buy the Ohm speakers back in the 70s, but have always been interested (in an engineer's way) in the principles involved with the driver. I always knew that it was made up of several cones of differing material, but the complexity described by Dale is daunting. My concern would be performance changes over time and use as all the various tweeks age. Slits with sealant frighten me.
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!
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.
Mapman, Have your read all the other posts on this thread?Other than the driver/cabinet orientation, the current OHM's are not very much like the Walsh OHM's. Contrary to OHM's marketing jargon or not, by audiophile standards* the current OHMs are not a line source*, not coherent* (time and phase accurate, able to pass a square wave), not omni-directional*, and not bending wave* single driver* speakers. While the current OHM's may be easier to drive, play louder, and be more reliable (time will tell), than their thirty year old predecessors, those qualities were always availble from other different designs, which quite frankly the current OHM's have more in common with anyway. To the best of my knowledge if one wants a true Walsh design, one would have to go to Dale. If one wants a more modern Walsh design which may mitigate some of the issues of the original Walsh design, one should seek out those speakers that use German Physiks DDD (Dick's Dipole Driver). It should be mentioned that most of the speakers that use the DDD, do deviate some from the original Walsh system, though much, much less than OHM's current offerings. I'm not here to steal your joy. If you find the current OHM's to provide you with an appealling sound and you find them to be a good value, by all means enjoy! But, please let's not suggest to others that they are somethng they're not.
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.
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.
