Jwc,
Talk to John Strohbeen at Ohm for upgrade or trade in options.
Which Tech Hifi did you get your Es at?
I worked at the New Brunswick nj store around that time. The Ohms were the house brand of sorts and always sounded best to me.
I bought my 100s3s in Walsh 2 cabinets used here on agon and owned them concurrently for comparison with my older Walsh 2s for a while. Then i traded in the old Walsh 2s and added a pair of larger F5s with series 3 drivers. I have both pair of series 3 speakers currently plus my old ohm Ls from my tech hifi days that I did a custom upgrade job on myself using a combo of both OHM and non Ohm provided parts. |
Anybody know what the Ohm F-5015 John has been touting on the site is? It carries a hefty price tag compared to any other models currently offered I have seen recently. |
Coot,
If you find out please post. I would really like to know. |
A separate cosmetically matched 15" sub bundled in with f-5000 is as good a guess as any I can come up with to hit that high price. I guess only John knows for sure. I would call but don't like to bother him unless I am serious about possibly buying something which I am not in this case. |
Coot,
THe BC ref1000m will definitely address any congestion and bass issues. Strongly recommended. I'd expect very good results with the Wyreds as well. |
Yes, John, pics please !!!!
Not that I would need these monsters, but I wanna see anyhow! |
$185/pair during the sale for these Cam 16s sounds like a no brainer to me for anyone in the market for a good "cheap pair of speakers" as Billy Joel once said. I've almost picked up a pair of one of the CAM line on several occasions used on Ebay. These are refurbed with all teh latest and greatest stuff John can put in there. |
Coot,
Another amp I have used to good effect with my 5s as a pinchhitter for the BCs once is the Tube Audio Design 125 Hibachi monoblocks. These are an absolute steal usually at under $1000 when the y come up for sale here. Unfortunately, TAD was a one man shop and the designer and support guy who was great with service and communications passed away recently,
The TAD 125s are 180w/ch and go for more of a tube amp sound in a mostly SS package. With my 5s, they are lovely all around with a particularly vivid midrange. Ultimate bass authority, slam and control is just a tad behind the BCs at most normal volumes. THe BCs however just continue to expand the sound effortlessly as the volume goes up whereas the TADs will start to compress a bit sooner.
I use the TADs normally with my smaller 100S3 OHMs and they are a perfect match there! |
"What is your answer to those who whine that digital amps are not great in the treble - say with a soprano voice. Not sure specifically what they mean, but I've read that many times. A roughness I think. That's my fear about W4S in particular and somewhat the BC's."
I do not hear any issues. Might be a personal preference thing for how certain amps sound in particular systems.
The BCs/Wyreds/IcePower are highly damped. This works extremely well with the larger OHMs but may not be optimal with other speakers that do not benefit as much from high damping.
THe BCs are the best I have heard with my OHMs. Other amps might have more pros and cons with my smaller monitors. THe BCs sound great but a touch brighter on my Dynaudio monitors than the OHMs. WIth my very small Triangle monitors, the sound is towards the lean side. The Triangle Titus monitors would be best served by a tube amp for example. BUt they still sound very good with the BCs. |
Coot,
The w4sound is one i considered and simi!ar to bc ref 1000m amps i ended up splurging for. A match made in heaven, especially with a tube preamp.
John often recommends NAD amps whicb i like as well.
I recommend 250w/ch min, high current, and damping factor of 40 or higher with the large ohms. My f5s that i settled on the Bel Cantos for use the similar size walsh 5 driver that came prior to the 5000. |
Coot,
No, i did not compare.
BC does some power supply enhancements to the icepower unit used with the 1000m specifically. That was the main reason i splurged. But i have not had an opportunity to compare. |
I suspect the b& ks will do a very respectable job so worth trying first. Then you have a reference for comparison once the 5000s break in.
I started with a 120 w/ch musical fidelity A3cr at first with my 5s and got good results but nothing compared to the bc's. |
Stinky,
Nice to hear of good results by others with other even more affordable Class D amps.
I've read about Class D Audio and thought this would be an interesting option to try with the Walshes. Assuming these are stock IcePower amps, I would expect similar very good results used with most pre-amps, though 10K input impedance of stock IcePower might not be the best match posible on paper with some tube pre-amps. With SS pre-amps, the performance is likely similar to similar amps from Wyred I would expect. |
Looking at the Class D Audio products, I recall now they appear to be a proprietary Class D design, not based on Icepower. So having not heard these, comparisons to Wyred or other Icepower amps by me would be pre-mature. There could be major sonic differences. WOuld like to try these sometime though and see/hear. |
Butte,
Have not heard X000 series yet but my 100S3s and 5S3s were upgrades from original Walsh 2s I bought back around 1982 or so. X000s are accordidng to JS evolutionary not revolutionary compared to prior series 3.
The series 3 had similar seemingly uncontrained ability to go loud and clear, however the sound quality was siginficantly refined in most every other way to compete with other more modern designs in ways the originals could not. Mostly to do with overall clarity , focus and detail across the board + bigger soundstage and improved imaging. I owned my original Walsh 2s concurrently with my series 3 Walsh 2s when I first acquired them a few years back. The difference in sound was striking at first listen and obvious in direct a/b comparisons I did at the time.
X000 series is again supposedly further refinement upon the same according to JS. |
I'm reading Crown XLS amp IS Class D. Don't know much more about them though. Might be a good value + worth a try. Crown is mostly used for pro audio applications these days but home audio use should be possible. They use older Crown amps at my gym for classes + such. |
Bondman,
I recall you live in NJ/NY metro area.
Here's hoping that you came through Sandy OK. |
"Many TV shows and films dissappoint, but music from my own library almost never does. Lovin' my Ohms!"
Amen, brother! |
Bond,
Your findings with the different power cord plugs are interesting.
Are you sure the only difference was the type of plug? Could the connection to the cord itself perhaps have been more sound with the new plug versus old?
In any case, interesting that you heard a difference. |
Remember tbat the newer Walshes in particular are very transparent and many tweaks can be done to fine tune the sound, including ICs.
My experience was similar to buttecreekers when i first hooked up my walsh 2 series 3 ohms in place of original walsh 2s. Totally different sound and presentation overall. The difference was in no way subtle. |
This weekend, i experimented with the ohm 100 series 3 speakers back in the sun room, which i have not tried in quite awhile in that in the past, the bass was always just too heavy in there.
What a nice surprise this time that they are sounding spot on! The only difference is this time they
are each sitting on a one foot square ceramic tile acting as a plinth under the bass ports in the bottom. They sit on a thick wool oriental rug on a tile floor, that i have always had trouble with acoustically. Its a keeper
now! I can see why all newer 1000 series models have the plinth on the bottom. IT helps avoid too much interaction between bass port and floor/room acoustics.
Triangle titus are back in the larger family room where the 100s were prior on my second system. Set up nicely on stands (for the first time ever in that room) and no sub this time. The m&k needs to be rebuilt, a project for another day.
The triangles too sound quite glorious, a natural mate with the warmer electronics in that system. I think i can live without a sub there for a while with no problem. The 100s sounded the warmest I have ever heard OHM Walshes sound in my second system, with the NAD pre-amp, TAD Hibachi monoblocks,and mhdt Paradisea tube DAC. The Triangles are more efficient and tend more towards the cold/analytic side and benefit nicely from warmer gear upstream, including a tube or two.
As it stands, i may just donate my ohm Ls that i custom rebuilt myself a
while back to my sister. They will work well for her i think. These are in
my
unfinished area and do not get used often, only on occasion while playing
table tennis. I can easily pick up something inexpensive to replace those
eventually just to try something different. |
Monk,
Very cool you have the Blue Circle OHMs! I'd love to hear those.
OHM models 5 and 5000 have 4 three way level adjustments. Perspective equates to a mid-range adjustment essentially on those. I suspect yours is similar?
The other three are for treble and low and mid bass.
I find the controls extremely useful to help tweak the sound as needed to compensate fro room acoustics. |
Monk, sounds like things are working out just the way they should. Enjoy! You have some very unique speakers there! |
Bondman,
Welcome to the dark side! :-) |
Bond,
Not all 300w+ amps are created equal.
With my newer OHMs, I started with a 300w/ch + Carver m4.0t amplifier. Its designed to sound like a tube amp and not particularly beefy/ high current for that wattage. Went plenty loud, but the low end tonal balance was lacking. THen a 120w/ch musical fidelity A3CR. Better overall up to moderately high volumes, but still not the cat's meow. Then teh BC ref1000m Class Ds. MEow!! |
Bond,
I've run my 100's of my 180w/ch Tube Audio Design Hibachi amps in a somewhat large room and know things are not 100% there at higher volumes because I know what my 5s running of the 500w/ch Class Ds sound like.
I used the TADs to fill in for the BCs when I had to sen done of the BCs in for some work. The performance was very respectable but still fell short of near perfection at higher volumes in comparison, which is pretty much what I expected.
MAX OUT YOUR OHMS FIRST! That's an easy, affordable and happy path to audio nirvana for many I would sugest. |
Underdriven Ohms sound like This. Not Bad. But maxed out OHMS sound like This. Much better! |
The newer d sonics seem to have a lot going for them. Have not heard but really want to. |
Bond,
Yep, ref1000m still current model. It has had good longevity and I can vouch for why.
Other BC amps like ref500m use next generation, newer Icepower modules though from what I recall.
Have not heard newer D-Sonic amps but they have potential to be game changers, from what I read, even with tube pre-amps, which was not the case with their earlier Icepower based products. |
Ult,
I think you have a lot of options with your gear, particularly that amp, OHM included.
I think your listening room/acoustics and listening habits may be the thing to determine the best solution.
One thing very unique about the OHM line is how it scales up and down based on room size.
Emerald physics is most different from the other two. It relies on digital equalization as I recall. That could provide a lot of flexibility to deal with room acoustics compared to many alternatives. I recall they are open baffle but use more conventional directional drivers, which might result in a smaller sweet spot for listening compared to omnis.
Decware design is more variable from model to model with their more omni designs it seems. Haven't heard them so cannot compare meaningfully, but I do like the line a lot, especially for products that are designed more around tube amp technology. OHM is not so much nor is Emerald Physics, but your high power hybrid amp would seem to put you in a good place to have options.
Glad you liked "Deadwing". Its still my favorite PT album overall, though FOABP is up there two, though a much harder listen. |
BOndman,
That's neat that you have an audio club in your parts. |
Zap,
Sorry to hear that!
Keep us all posted and let us know if we can help with the speaker situation at least. Cheers! |
Haven't heard NHT in a while but from my recollection, they have a different tonality than OHM, more like the French Triangle speakers that I also listen to and enjoy regularly on my "other" system. |
"As to the NHT's, they are a bit bright"
Well, gotta say that is one thing I have never attributed to anything designed by John Strohbeen.
I run Dynaudio Contour 1.3 mkII monitors off the same system as my OHMs. Only difference other than speakers is the room and I am able to utilize better speaker wires there in that my gear including amp also resides in that room.
I would not call the Dynaudios bright, but the sound is night and day way more forward and hotter than either OHM Walshes in my other rooms. The OHMs connect via in-wall speaker wires I had put in when the house was built to enable speakers off my system in multiple rooms.
A lot (a whole lot) is really amp (and room acoustics) dependent. With my prior amps, I noticed little tonal difference between Dynaudio and OHM, other than low end extension perhaps. With the Bel Canto ref1000ms pushing both to their max, I think more of the individual unique character of each speaker design comes out.
With prior amps, I would have said my Triangles were the "brightest or hottest" sounding. Now, I run those on different system better geared towards those, and the Dyns are clearly teh most unique tonally. |
Ult,
In general, the ohms might be worth a try a tad closer to the rear and side walls than otherwise if the walls are more acoustically damped. Sounds like you are on the right track though.
My 5s sit about 4 to 5 feet out from the rear wall which has a doublesliding glass door with vertical blinds behind them. Walls are standard drywall with 2 foot square acoustic panels at prime side wall reflection points, speakers also 3 feet or so from sidewalls. They fire down the length of my L shaped room, about 34 feet long. I often prefer opening the verticals and exposing the glass doors. No bad effects as many might fear in general.
I'd let john know if you think the speakers are not wired as they should beand see what he says. |
Not sure the vintage of that Onkyo specifically but similar vintage Onkyo amps I recall from late 70's Tech Hifi days were some of the better ones out there in the day and the looks speak for themselves. Have never heard them on modern OHMs, but how could it not sound really good, especially with separate powered subs to help carry the load? |
"It's loud, but we can talk to each other without really raising our voices."
That's a very good omen!!! |
Polarin. Nice stat! Go OHM! |
I should also point out that that the low bass adjustment on 5's or newer 5000's may be labeled "room size" with small, medium large room size adjustments. I have used these to put my large F5s into a small 12X12 room and see how that works. IT works quite well actually. The adjustments on the 5s do enable those to go into most any size room pretty well. But if they will never be used in what OHM would consider a "large" room, it might be overkill. Smaller models for less cost should be able to do as well or better. Fitting speaker model to room size is key with the OHM CLSs, regardless of vintage. |
"The 5000's through a huge soundstage and take control of the room with live listening levels."
For me, that's the pinnacle of "high end audio"
Lots of speakers can do most of the other stuff well. Its a lot harder to do it at a scale that sounds real. Nothing does it better than OHMs for a price that the average person might afford. That's a tribute to John Strohbeen and his inherent "blue collar" mentality when it comes to his business. |
"but all I can think about is how good the 2000s sounded with those 500 watters."
Bond, I fear you have crossed into the dark side and there is no turning back... :^) |
IN general, for best sound in an OHM speaker investment, I would look to go with the newest model possible suitable for room size for allowed budget.
Trade-ins up to two pair and 40% discount is possible.
Buying used pairs on ebay just for trade in value is not a bad idea, especially if arrangements are made to ship directly to OHM for trade-in.
REfurbishable cabinets are the main requirement for trade-in. Condition of drivers or sound quality of trade-ins does not matter. This was the case for me when I did this a few years back. JS could confirm current trade-in guidelines up front.
Occasional sales also help. JS knows what he can offer at a sale price at any particular time.
Sale + trade-in together might even be possible. Only JS knows for sure but he will tell you if you ask. |
Smaller than optimal OHMs for room size + subwoofer(s) to make up the difference if needed is always another viable option. |
Sunny,
The basic OHM CLS design has not changed much over the years. All including gen 1 from early 80's play as loud or louder than most anything else at comparable price I would say. I have used them outdoors for parties with listeners 50-100 yards away off 80 watt tandberg receiver and it went loud and clear with illusion of live music. I have never heard OHm walsh speakers be the bottleneck in terms of ability to go loud. Bigger models need more power and are capable of going louder with more bass extension, which is where the increased power demands comes in. Larger drivers are needed to go louder without compression and larger cabinets to go lower in most any speaker design. OHMs have this aspect nailed, few speakers do it better.
Tonal balance and detail has improved over teh years but the inherent design has not.
Omnis have a lot of advantages but most people are not used to them. Not all omnis are created equal. Walsh drivers have unique advantages. OHM has figured out how to do them well and keep it affordable. There is no better design for delivering the illusion of a live performance in ones home for reasonable cost IMHO. In my opinion, Lincoln Walsh got dynamic drivers right and most of the rest of the world works with a handicap accordingly. Of course, that is just my opinion. Most people are perfectly happy with traditional dynamic speaker designs. I like many myself, but always end up levitating back to the Walsh speakers. |
I've heard a folded ribbon/heil type tweeter that looks like the one in those in a pair of Goldenear Aon speakers recently. THose were very impressive with a very smooth and somewhat polite top end compared to say the native OHM X00 series three line or Dynaudios with esotar tweeters that I currently own. I have not always been a fan of how ribbon tweeters integrate with conventional cone drivers but those using recent technology were as good as I have heard. I could see where they might blend in well with OHM Walsh drivers which also tend to be quite fast when properly driven The omni dispersion design of those M&Ds an interesting approach in that the a weak aspect of those tweeters that I have heard is that they are quite directional compared to soft dome tweeters. |
Ohm 5 MK II is second generation CLS design, one generation earlier than my 5 F3s.
I have not heard mkII series so cannot comment on sound. I have also owned and heard 1st generation Walsh 2s.
I should be a lot of speaker for $2300.
All 5s have the same 4 3 way level adjustments for low bass, mid bass, mid-range and treble that help tweak the sound to room.
Unless you have a large enough room to justify the size of the 5, you might be able to go with a smaller and perhaps even newer model used in similar price range. The main thing you give up is the level controls, but there are many other ways to tweak sound in a room with the right size Walsh speaker if needed. |
An omni tweeter, especially using the folded ribbon Heil kind, sounds like a good thing. My only concern would be how well it integrates with the rest in lieu of a crossover. It appears to be designed to integrate cleanly and easily out of the box without a crossover with other M&D speakers which makes sense.
I would expect adding to the OHMs would make them sound more like mbl than prior. mbl uses multiple omni drivers including tweeter. mbls tend to need more distance to walls than OHM for best sound since they are full omni. The tweets might as well? OHMs by default can go closer to walls due to attenuation applied to CLS drivers in wall facing irections inside the cans. Not sure if closer distance to walls would be an issue or not with the omni tweets. |
Tobe,
Inquiring minds want to know.....
Looking forward to your findings. |
TObe,
Thanks for that info.
Its a very intriguing combo or potentially adding more sibilence, definition, pierce and air, the things that are heard above 7-8Khz or so, to to the top end with the OHMs if one is looking for more of that than the built in directional soft dome tweet can provide. |
I am convinced that there is more to the Class D amp sound I hear with the OHMs than power and current alone accounts for.
There is a tube amp-like aspect to the amps ability to go loud without causing fatigue or overall brightness. I have read (in an article published by a gentleman from SPectron) where this might be due to unique negative feedback design advantages with switching amps that can help keep the timing delay when applying NF minimal compared to other amp designs. Its consistent with what Ralph from Atmasphere regularly cites as an advantage of no NF amps. Or in the case of switching amps, ability to apply negative feedback more efficiently. I do not understand the technical details of how this works, but what I have read there and similar accounts from other reputable sources tells me that this might be a unique positive attribute of CLass D amps.
ALso, latest generation Class D amps appear to be pushing the bar significantly higher still in terms of switching frequency possible, which enables better low pass filtering needed with switching amps and on paper at least would seem to raise the bar in terms of technical capabilities of Class D. Can things get even better? I suspect so, though CLass D amps already seem to bring a lot of unique benefit to the table IMHO. |
