Ohm Walsh F Hope of Resurrection
I for one would be very interested in the full pro review of how these specific restored Fs sound and compare to the modern competition, if the thought is that this kind of restore was worthwhile. Others who have actually heard fully functional Fs in the past might even be able to chime in and help paint a picture of how these compare to their recollection of the sound. Maybe even to newer Ohm Walsh models. Would be very interesting at least to me. I know time is valuable though and perhaps better spent on current things that more people might care about. |
@douglas_schroeder I think we are getting into the very subjective areas of hifi here in other words different flavors all of which can be enjoyable as opposed to any inherent superior approach. No one has all the “advantages”. Personally I do seem to levitate towards “coherent” designs above all else. That has everything to do with “wave launch”. My current Ohm Walsh and recently acquired KEF ls50s Metas with the latest refinement of their UniQ approach both float my boat in this regard currently. The sound of each is different in some regards but cut from the same cloth in terms of coherency as well as tonality and even imaging to a good extent. |
I think I read on the Ohm website or somewhere that redoing the material inside the cone was one of the major barriers faced in properly restoring the Fs and a key reason why Ohm abandoned that. The original F Walsh driver was a finely tuned device. Everything was there for a reason and understanding of how it worked exactly is not common. So it’s probably a safe assumption that most any modern restoration will sound different than original. I would bet on that. It’s likely a moot point what they sounded like originally but even these days those who actually heard them new still can’t seem to get that sound out of their head. I worked at Tech Hifi back in the latter days of the Fs. Heard pretty much every model back then .... except Fs. The store I worked in sold mostly refurbed gear to college students and a pair of Fs never came our way. My loss. |
Given the difference in dispersion patterns between those two as I understand it, I would wonder if the same location can serve both best. The Fs are full omni so probably will benefit from more distance from all walls I would expect. Never heard Fs but have heard mbl and GP. Mbl in particular only sounded uniquely and mind blowingly 3 dimensional in a very dealer custom showroom with lots of distance to walls, especially rear wall, non parallel side walls to the rear, and treatments (old United Audio showroom in Annapolis Junction MD) Same setup at shows: way more meh. Also I seem to recall Fs even new only spec’ed to 16 kHz whereas most speakers in their day were spec’ed to 20 kHz. Most people raved about the imaging but not about the high end extension. Separate super tweeters would be an interesting add I would think. |
Douglas John Strohbeen has stated in interviews the issues with driving Fs well without damage and maintaining them properly is supposedly the reason why the design was dropped. Not practically supportable. I think with any amp you just want to be very careful. It’s the CLS design driver that replaced the original Walsh driver that resolved that issue. Every CLS Ohm I have owned will take whatever you throw at them and deliver effortlessly. I have never heard or owned original Fs. Mine are newer CLS design on refurbed F cabinets. Totally different. So I can only repeat what I have read there. Ferrofluid was introduced into the F design as I understand it to help address that issue as well. Clipping is never good either hence the challenge. I would try a higher power amp like a Class D for more bang for the buck if needed . But be careful. |
Yep agree, can’t sacrifice quality, but when it comes to symphony orchestras, big bands, and the like, it takes more than average muscle as well to deliver the goods at home in a manner that at least somewhat resembles what one would hear live. Especially with modest sized full range speakers. Just have to be sure to take care of the ears along the way as well. Too much too often is not a good thing no matter how exhilarating it might be otherwise.. |
Well, good luck! Nothing to lose and who knows maybe they can still deliver something that is hard to find otherwise. I can tell you that the Walsh CLS design can take pretty much anything you throw at it with very little compression or risk of damage, so John Strohbeen definitely knows what he is doing there. Lessons learned over the years it seems from that article, starting with attempts to salvage original Ohm Fs. I’ve been running various models hard for almost 40 years now, never a problem. Seems like the mastered application of ferrofluid is a factor for that. IT’s still always best to avoid clipping at all costs... reserve power and the ability to handle it is your insurance policy for that with most good quality speakers in good working order. In the interest of getting the most possible out of my Ohm Walsh F5s, I’ve been running them with 500 w/ch (into 8ohm doubling to 1000 into 4) BEl Canto monoblocks for a number of years now with outstanding results. I bought them planning to throw the kitchen sink at the biggest Ohms in order to max out what they can do. Those amps can drive almost anything to their max and also work well with other smaller speakers I own or have owned with them like my smaller Ohm 2s, kef ls50s, Dynaudio Contour monitors and others, but the Ohms are champs at going loud and clear off however much power you want to throw at them. Meanwhile they do as well as most with lower power amps, but its when you throw the kitchen sink at them that they truly distinguish themselves from the competition and shine. Similar to mbl and GP in that regard as well from what I read. |
https://www.cnet.com/news/forty-years-ago-the-ohm-f-speaker-was-a-game-changer-it-still-is/ https://ohmspeaker.com/news/nasa-technology-comes-to-speakers-ferrofluid/ Could well be the ferro fluid as mentioned here. Was it magnetic? |
I don’t know how Dale works but maybe the drivers can be done and sent and then user installs them to avoid shipping large heavy cabs. I know in many cases Ohm is able to do repairs and upgrades that way. My F5s came in 3 cartons per speaker. One for the refurbed F cabinets, one for the driver, and one for the grille cover. Connection was a snap and drivers attached to cabs with wing nuts. |
My recollection is the Ohm trade-in policy is that cabinets have to be in good enough condition for restoration so they can be refurbed and reused. Drivers do not matter. I traded in an old pair of Walsh 2s and a pair of C2s towards mine and that lowered the price substantially. Plus it was summer sale time. |
FWIW, here’s a shot of my F5s, made at Ohm factory in Broooklyn for me ~ 2008: https://photos.app.goo.gl/et3PRwzdYj5wSebCA A lot of speaker built using refurbished Ohm F cabinets for the $5500 asking price at the time. |
Not sure who is around anymore with experience fixing those. You could try contacting Dale Harder. He may be able to provide insight. Ohm would provide very good sounding upgrades for the Fs but not repair for the original design which is different. I have Ohm F5 series 3 model which is latest drivers from around 2008 on Ohm F cabinets that I bought from Ohm. That was series 3. Current drivers are further refined next series, the latest 5000 drivers. I can post pics if interested. |
