Congratulations great choice.....
JohnnyR |
I spent the last 2 days auditioning the Vandys at home.
Game over. Loved em even more at home. At this price point, a great speaker. Ordered a pair this morning.
Thanks for all the advice. |
Many prefer the original Ohms with true Walsh drivers over the new Ohms with different drivers. |
"So my point is only that original OHM Walsh 4s from the 80's are not a valid reference point to compare when buying new today."
The only reason I emphasize this, is that many have only heard older Walshes (which had a pretty decent distribution network in B&M stores back in the 80s before OHM went direct sales only) however they all, including current line, share very similar aesthetics, especially the metal "cans" which enclose the actual CLS driver. The internals of the CLS driver can (which makes the sound) are what has undergone 3 levels of revision since, but there is often no way to know for sure what exact model/design/configuration might reside inside any particular "can".
Not to mention that John Strohbeen will readily modify the common base design as needed to meet individual needs/preferences (including commonly more omni A/V versus less omni 2 channel, and tonal modifications to the CLS Walsh driver configuration ) and I have no idea how anyone would know without performing major surgery on the "can" or being told by someone who happens to know for sure.
Not knowing for sure can be a hindrance mainly towards knowing exactly what on is buying used. Not a problem buying direct from OHM though. I'd expect you would get the standard 2 channel or A/V use current X000 series design, unless you request something else otherwise. |
My personal experience is limited to Vandersteen 1Cs, from which I upgraded to Ohm Walsh 2000s. All I can say is that I love my 2000s. They exhibit none of the issues of older Ohm Walsh's. They have very solid imaging, not at all diffuse, no veil that I can hear, loads of detail without over-hyping the transients, and clear, uncongested sound at all volume levels. I would characterize their presentation as warm, detailed, and extended, with complete freedom from etch, grain and glare, with very slightly attenuated treble.
I would recommend the following: Ohms come with a 120 day in-home trial. Find a Vandy dealer that will let you take the store demo pair of 2Ce Sig II's home for a weekend, and A/B the two. Of course, you'll have to purchase your electronics first, and break them in. Nothing beats hearing speakers in your room with your own gear and music, with no pressure to commit. Who knows? Maybe you won't like either speaker! |
Rgs,
Again, as Mamboni also related, current OHM Walshes are 3 design revisions (and 30 years) removed from originals in the 1980s. Imaging is much improved (night and day difference) and can compete with the best modern floorstanders I have heard even in the equivalent sweet spots.
Small high quality monitors probably will outdo the modern OHMs and most modern floorstanders as well in regards to pinpoint imaging in smaller rooms. Haven't compared to Vandys specifically. They might still have a smaller advantage. I do not know for sure.
Some treatments on side walls along the lines Mamboni mentioned will probably only help further if needed in most cases.
So my point is only that original OHM Walsh 4s from the 80's are not a valid reference point to compare when buying new today. |
I have had a pair of Ohm Walsh 4s for many years (now relegated to a TV system), and while they are sweet, the omni-thing always annoys me for critical listening where I need a point source for imaging. I've always like the Vandys I heard at shows (mainly the 5 series).
PS: If you want your system to shine, add a good preamp in front of the Luxman 505U (using the direct power-amp inputs on the Luxman). I use a high end tube preamp with my 507U and it is a huge upgrade in the areas of palpability and natural tonality. The Luxman as a power amp is unbelievably good (and runs nice and cool too). |
It is not a deal breaker
Saeyedoc is correct just use the Jumpers...
Dont major on the minors....
The Vandies give you world class performance either way.
They can be run with a single wire until able to buy a second set and find a nice improvement.
Even if you cant later they will still outperform
wanabe box speakers.
Vandersteen dealer 4 over 20 years
Cheers JohnnyR
|
You don't have to bi-wire the Vandys, just use a jumper between the two sets of terminals. Highly unlikely you'd notice a difference |
Do the Vandy's require Bi-wiring or can I just run 1 pair (+ and -) to each speaker?
Will no bi-wiring effect the sound?
This could be a deal breaker for me. |
i'll be seeing the moodies for the 6th time dec 1. you and me from seventh is likely in the program.:) |
Mapman
One thing we can agree on is
The Moody Blues - "Seventh Sojourn"
Timeless.... |
Hi Mamboni.
How far are your 5000s from the sidewall?
Also, I'm curious what the room dimensions are?
Thanks. |
The newer Walsh 5000 is vastly superior to the classic Walsh 5 in several areas:
1. much more transparent and neutral. Midrange veil and slight colorations are gone.
2. the bass is much more taut and tuneful, superior to the somewhat tubby though cavernous bass of the classic 5's.
I had extended listening sessions with the Vandy 2ce at Verona and they were really dialled in and perfectly set up. In the sweet spot the sound is gloriously alive and you-are-there dimensional. They are not disimilar to the Walsh 5000s except the latter does it's magic over a wide sweet zone. Also, I had to dampen the sidewalls of my listening room to tame the midrange clutter of the Walsh 5000s. Now they energize the entire room and add a layer of acoustic not provided by the Vandies. Both are superb and I could live with either long term. They get the music right. Both need alot of clean power to sing. I am using the Wyred ST1000s and they are kick ass amps, ultra clean and refined. |
I own Ohm 100s and have spent a lot of time with Vandy 2s of various generations (tho, admittedly, less time of late). Therefore, I can't speak to the specific models you inquired about, but I can offer two observations that IME apply to the "house sound" common to Vandy 2s and my Ohms.
1) Omni presentation is very distinctive. Based on my own experience, my guess is that this delta will probably overwhelm the other differences that you hear. If you love it, you'll probably prefer the Ohms. If you don't love it, you'll likely choose Vandy.
2) That said, the Ohms are decidedly leaner than Vandy tonally. There seems to be a pretty broad spectrum of opinion on what constitutes "neutrality" through the mid-bass around here, so - depending on where you fall in that spectrum - this one may be a deal breaker either way, as well.
BTW, I'd never characterize the Ohms as "veiled" relative to Vandy (nor would I argue the opposite). Both are pretty detailed, revealing speakers tho neither is as striking (to my ear, anyway) in that regard as the best I've heard.
Just MHO.
Marty |
"Vandy's are more a stepped baffle"
Tex, thanks for clarifying that. I realized after posting that "open baffle" may not be the most accurate description.
Vandersteen and OHM both focus on delivering coherent sound, and seem to be mentioned together fairly often, but the technical approaches are totally different.
FWIW the thing that makes the OHMs unique, even among omnidirectional speakers, is the OHM CLS (Coherent Line SOurce) version of a Walsh driver used. Google search and read up on Walsh/CLS driver/speaker for more insight there. Vandersteen has its own approach for phase and time coherency that is also very well documented. |
Humbuster,
I apologize for posting my disappointment in how Audioconnection responded to Mapman rather than posting a response to your question.
I have not heard the Ohms and thus Im not in a position to offer an opinion but I do wish you best in your pursuit.
|
One clear difference between vandies and omnis including ohm is vandies
appear to work more like conventional box designs in regards to having a
small well defined sweet spot whereas omnis like ohms maintain imaging
and coherency of the soundstage and timbre better over a wide area, like
listening from different seats/perspectives live in a concert venue. |
Audio connection,
Who's babbling? So tell us something about the vandies then if you
can help answer the question.
Modern ohms do not sound like those from years ago.
I have heard vandersteens but not as much as ohms. |
((I'm less familiar with the Vandy sound. I would expect very good results from these as well but more like conventional 3-way speakers albeit open-baffle which might tend to take the presentation somewhere more in between conventional box designs and omnis.))
Why are you babbling ?
The man asks for an opinion of the Ohms Vs Vandersteens. All you did was affirm your buying decision to others with out any real facts.
I used to own Ohms they had a neat Omni effect but at the expense of being slightly veiled.
Cheers JohnnyR
Vandersteen dealer for over 20 years |
Actually, Vandy's are more a stepped baffle, but not an open baffle and provide both time and phase coherency. I've owned both speakers (although different versions) and both have their strengths (and weaknesses). In short, the Ohms have a larger, more diffuse soundstage while the Vandy's Image better although through a narrower window. Just depends on what you value most. Best of luck. |
Both seem reasonable matches to either amp.
I'm partial to the OHMs and the sound of omnis which tend to have a more life like presentation to me. Also I like that the OHMs use a single wide range driver up to 7Khz or so which is great for overall musical coherency.
I'm less familiar with the Vandy sound. I would expect very good results from these as well but more like conventional 3-way speakers albeit open-baffle which might tend to take the presentation somewhere more in between conventional box designs and omnis. |
