Ohm Walsh Micro Talls: who's actually heard 'em?

Why does my opinion bother you? At least I'm consistent.

If you disagree with something your free to express your opinion as well.

Marty.

I am not equiped to do such measurements, but what you relate is consistent with my observations.

I did a lot of research into headphones recently and looked at a lot of phone measurements online. I've always thought the OHM sound to resemble Sennheiser, which some often cite as "rolled off".

What I recall noticing is that most Sennheiser phones measure relatively flat whereas many other leading competing brands have frequency respones seemingly designed to compensate for teh well documented non linear frequency response of human ears. As I noted above, human ears frequency response drops off at the extremes even more so at lower volumes. So transducers taht are "flatter" may not sound as right at lower volumes as a result.

Joek, my brilliant Ipad spell checker changed my spelling of your name into "joke" and I did not notice until after posting. My apologies if that came across improperly. For some reason this is one of those threads that does not allow me to edit posts afterwards.

Here again is the invaluable adio frequency chart that shows what music occurs at various frequencies as well as the frequency response of human hearing for comparison. I always find it most useful to help understand what I am hearing and why.

Audio Frequency Chart

Which Sennheisers? Just curious.

A lot of the better Senns are said to benefit from good quality amplification. OHMs are teh same way.

I have portable Sennheiser Momentum over ear phones which are said to be somewhat easier to drive than teh "audiophile" models, but I find the amp used makes a huge difference still in terms of clarity. They sound best by far to me so far with the Bel Canto c5i I picked up recently and I hear the same results off teh C5i with my OHM 100s3.

OHMs are similar I find. The amplification and source used makes a similar difference. They can become somewhat veiled if things are not going right, but not so at all when they are.

Yes, please enjoy and keep us posted especially if any problems.

Glad to hear the thread was helpful and things working out well. 

IC between amp and pre-amp will affect all sources, not just CD.   You need to try both and decide which option works best for all the sources you care about.   If just CD, it may not matter much but no way to know for sure with out trying both listening and deciding yourself.  

Do the upgrade if you can squeeze it.  The drivers have improved greatly since original Walsh 2s.  I know in that I had Walsh 2s for years (1981 to ~2008) and kept them to compare a/b to my current 100s3s before keeping the 100s.   

Nice. Trade in is the way to go and installing drivers oneself with instruction from ohm saves money as well.   Should not be hard especially if no current bottom mounted crossover board to rip out. 

I had original Walsh 2s from 1982-2008, a long time.

Once at an outdoor party I had them cranked to max off a high quality Tandberg 80 w/ch receiver.   No problems.   The music sounded loud and live in the adjacent field over 50 yards away.   With good quality amplification, I always considered all OHM Walshes about as indestructible as they come.   They still sounded great in 2008 though I never cranked them that loud probably and age will eventually do in anything.   Plus its always possible to blow up speakers if one goes to extremes too quickly or an unexpected accident happens.  Caution when testing the limits is always advised.   I've always found a lower power amp that clips sooner is more likely to cause speaker damage than a higher powered one that can go loud without strain.   In general I think teh OHM walshes are capable of going full range louder and clearer than most any other passive speaker in their price range.   So you will be in a very good place to start after the upgrade.  I am very confident of that.

It's a good resource.  Jim Smith knows his stuff.  I heard and bought a pair of Maggie's once from his old shop Audition in Birmingham Al.  I strived to get them to sound as good at home as they did there.  

Rather than a computer for streaming music, for WAF consider a tablet with digital output to external DAC perhaps. Or I find analog sound out from my newer Iphone 6 running good quality streaming software to be very good quality these days. I use Plex to stream from my music server mostly with my systems. Plex runs on browsers, tablets, phones, and various other common platforms. Other apps that stream from internet music sources do as well.

Applying just moderate caution, I’ve used teh 500 w/ch BEl Canto ref1000m amps with all my speakers, large and small, at all volumes with no issues.

My speakers range from tiny Realistic Minumus 7s on the deck to slightly larger Triangle Titus to slightly larger Dynaudio Contour 1.3 mkII to somewhat larger OHM 100s to my big OHM F5 series 3. Sounds great with all.

The rule is to experiment with high volume gradually, especially with more dynamic recordings. You are usually good. If you hear any signs of audible distortion, then back off until the cause is clear and addressed.

500 w/ch is probably overkill for the more efficient Triangle Titus speakers, but I think the power benefits all the others to some degree as well, though I could probably get by with less.

The big OHM F5s in my larger room are teh only ones where I think I might feel I was missing something. The smaller OHM 100s could probably get by fine in most intended rooms with a good clean 80 watts or so. Once I used 180w/ch TAD Hibachi amps in place of the BCs when they were out for service. They did great with the 100s in my 12X12 office room. The big F5s in my larger listening room did very good as well but they definitely ran out of gas a tad in comparison at some of the higher listening volumes I do in there.

Remember that power demands increase exponentially with volume so having extra power in reserve when needed is always a nice insurance policy at minimum I find.

OHM has been sold direct to buyers only for a number of years now since the 80s.  Despite being pretty unique, others in the business have little business reason to give them much if any special attention.   There are not many substitutes if one likes them.   The closest things are other omnis like mbl and German Physiks and a handful of other very small brands.  The successful ones seem to be the ones that stake out the high end in terms of cost and quality that has a very limited market.  Most people have no special interest in weird looking speakers.   Despite that how many thousands of speakers has OHm likely sold since the introduction of teh Walsh line back in 1981 or so?   The basic design has remained mostly unchanged, just tweaked and improved over the years.

I hear you Joe.  I think it's an omni thing and particularly unique when done with a wide range coherent Walsh style driver.  

No room for bad connections ever.  That's for sure.  Especially with good high power setups.

I had similar hum when I first inserted Bel Canto C5i into my system to replace previous amplifier.   Turns out source was the cable line into the cable box I had connected as audio input.   Try disconnecting any coax cable signal wire input and see if it goes away.  Using this resolved the problem  http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002KR2RM?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s...

Nice recent article from JS on OHM site in his blog. It describes how to use the 4 level adjustments on each 5XXX model OHM. My F5s have these and these controls have been gold for getting things tuned in just right in my rooms. I kinda figured out their effects over time but nice to have "the man" describe the intent. A very unique feature that is pretty fundamental really. Blasphemy having "equalizer" controls on a speaker though in some parts I suppose but to me it just makes sense and in fact works.

http://ohmspeaker.com/news/making-the-sound-fit-the-room/

I've heard it all over the years.  Many speakers have their unique charms but I find none as satisfying musically overall as my big F5s.  The 100s also but only in a smaller room.   No tubes needed but one or two further upstream cannot hurt.  

T8

disconnecting the cable wire should indicate if that is the problem. If the hum exists only with cable wire connected. 

I I had this problem with Comcast specifically. I switched to Verizon which uses optical ire feeds afterwards and no more hum.  But the transformer device I mentioned did solve that problem with Comcast. 

No no way to know if the cable line is the problem or not with testing by disconnecting the cable feed. 

Glad to hear.  just enjoy!

In addition to the crossover electronics. Which should be pretty simple I think there is also what is called the "sub bass activator" circuit which is used to help extend the bass.  I'm assuming the latest x000 models still use that.   Js would know.  It's a circuit sold as an upgrade to older models as well.  I bought a pair when I refurbed my old Ohm Ls. 

crossover most likelycontained in teh can with the drivers.

SBA can work off the full range signal feed into the can.

With my 5 series 3 drivers on the OHM F cabinets, everything was in the can as best I recall from when I first connected those.

There are automatic digital room correction devices available today that users swear by and I suspect can do a very complete job of adapting speaker output to rooms if done properly.    One way to skin the cat fairly completely in one blow if desired.

There are many other more traditional ways as well to address the problem that work well with some trial and error over time.

My opinion is one of the most common and significant problems many aspiring audiophiles face are floor interactions that often muddies the bass.   Muddy bass not only sounds bad but obscures other good things that may be happening.   Any modern construction home with suspended plywood floors is susceptible to this I believe including mine,   The solution is to use isolation devices under speakers like isolating pads or stands.   Heavy rigid spiked stands  or spikes under floorstanders alone do not solve the problem.   its a big problem that probably effects teh majority of listeners these days.

How do I know this is a problem?   I use my OHMs and other speakers both in two finished basement rooms on solid concrete foundation, and same speakers one level up in two rooms with suspended plywood floors.   In basement the bass with all speakers is both clean and articulate in both rooms.   Upstairs teh same speakers have muddied bass that greatly impacts the sound quality.  

It took me many years in my house to discover this.    Isolating stands (I use Isoacoustics brand under smaller monitors) and pads (I use Auralex subdudeunder my smaller Walshes upstairs) are the cheap and easy solution.  In the basement, I allow the speakers to couple to the solid foundation (opposite of isolating) with no ill effects.

Most modern houses and floors are built  to have some give to provide earthquake resistance.  Good for that but bad for sound.  If you can jump up and down and things in teh room move or vibrate you have a problem.   Your room essentially "rings like a bell" except at a much lower frequency.

Also I will say the tonality of the ohms is very dependent on the signal fed it.    I've done tweaks like wires and minor wall treatments to fine tune the sound.  Also had to switch amps twice since replacing my Maggie's in order to get things right.  The ohms can be like like Maggie's or quad Es on steroids in many ways but there are differences.  

Not sure what can be done about image height to make more like tall planers.  Dispersion pattern is much different.  Two different beasts in that regard.  

YOu can experiment with toe out perhaps in order to get more direct exposure from the tweeter for more air and such abovev7khz or so but it is a soft dome tweeter which seldom sounds like a ribbon.   Ribbons tend to have narrower dispersion patterns so not a good fit with a speaker like Ohm that goes for very wide pseudo omni sound. 

I have ohm 5series 3 with the 4 three way tone adjustments the uppermost of which boosts or cuts treble.  I have older ears and find the 3db boost possible with that of benefit sometimes but I can easily do without it.  Mileage will vary on that for each. 

Accurus sounds like a very good setup.

Both pair of ohms I own are refurbs.  

I also have Dynaudio monitors with great sound and very high quality cabinets. Others as well. But the Ohms get most of my listening time for just the thing you cited. They just sound the most musical overall.

accurus I love the rigorous examination you are giving the OHMS!  It helps confirm a lot of what I have been saying over the years.

I feel like with the right size OHMs for a room,   a good quality source, and the right amplification to drive them to their max (which many average OHM owners may not have and not know or care what they are missing) you are basically just hearing the recording the way it should sound in your room.  So the recording is pretty much everything.   The best sound the best and the poor ones lag way behind but are mostly all still listenable once you realize it is what it is and enjoy it or not for reasons other than absolute sound quality.  Its like having a  good HDTV.   Huge range of picture quality possible depending on teh source.

One other thing I would mention is that  I have found OHMS or any speakers for that matter that sit on upper level suspended plywood floors found in most modern homes may benefit from placement on isolating platforms or stands.   Stands that couple to the floor will sound way different than those that isolate.

I have my OHM 100s in Walsh 2 cabinets on Auralex Sub dude platforms when used on my nicely finished second level with plywood flooring.   When I run them on the first floor (house foundation level) the stands are not needed.     In general I find you do not want any speakers interacting with lively floors.   It muddies the bass and obscures detail.

Let us know how the subdudes work out. Should take things up a few levels still I suspect. They did for me. Exact same true with Isoacoustics brand isolating stands I use with small monitors in another similar room. I’ve used those with my Triangle monitors and just this week with an old Pair of Boston Acoustics A40 series ii speakers I bought 30 years ago and just refoamed this week. Wow! An audiophile could pick up a pair of those for $50 or less at a thrift store, fix them up with a $20 kit, and be nicely set in many smaller to medium size rooms. Not OHMS but they really sound good these days with modern high quality gear driving them. You definitely have to spend 10X as much or more to do better with new stuff.

I'd like to be able to hear the Isotar soft dome tweeters in my Dynaudios used in teh OHMs.   Would probably up the cost even more though.

"I just happen to have two of them sitting in a closet within 5 ft of my listening room. "

Now that's what I call fate!

I use 3 12X12 sound panels on sidewalls at primary reflection points based on where I listen from most often. May try some on ceiling at some point but have not felt the need.

My advice with OHms specifically is treat only as needed. Start minimally and experiment from there. Primary reflection points on walls and ceiling based on your most common listening position are always the place to start to get maximum effect per panel.

I also have double sliding glass door with vertical blinds behind my big F5s. I listen with blinds both open and shut and does not matter much to me. YMMV.

With omnis, you want to use the room to best effect. With more directional speakers the tendency is to fight the room acoustics which often leads to extensive treatments.

A lot depends on the room, how lively it is in general and the details which contribute to that or not.

My assessment is that out of the box, teh OHMs are designed to fit into most typical modern drywalled/carpeted/finished rooms with minimal or even no treatments needed but its up to the individual to tweak from there if needed.

Room acoustics are always a factor, no matter what speakers but may play less of a role, either positive or negative, in general with more directional speakers like those with waveguides,, horns, more directional tweeters like ribbons, etc.

Not to rehash old news but a Walsh driver is a bending wave based driver (look up speaker types and bending wave speakers on Wiki)  .   Bending wave drivers was Lincoln Walsh's concept and innovation.   Ohm was teh company that produced the first commercial implementation of a very wide range Walsh driver.   It was bleeding edge sound wise but a fragile design that blew out not quite as often as a fuse perhaps if not very careful.  It turned out to not be commercially viable as a result.

John Strohbeen's later Walsh brand "CLS" driver solved tat problem but sacrificed the "Walsh" driver producing sound above 7khz or so to make the product more durable.   So it is based on Walsh's principles but a totally different design that is more commercially viable.

Waves bend essentially when passing through any medium with variable density.

Like Bond said, the unique technology is interesting but its the results that has spoken for itself now for over 30 years.

 

BTW I would say JS’s design decision to punt on the coherent source Walsh driver above 7khz or so was a sound one.

Just take a look at the Interactive Frequency Chart

http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm

Some but not much happens above 7khz or so musically. That is not a bad tradeoff for a design that I have found to be most robust and durable as well as great sounding and practical for many.

Most conventional 2 way speakers have cross over much lower which if not done really well messes with the sound and coherency of a lot of elements of the music including vocals in particular.

Over the years I find I am seldom a fan of any but the best 3-way speaker designs out there when I hear them.  Its those darn multiple crossovers in  the business area of the music that is mostly the culprit I think.

Hmm my recollection of Dueval is nothing like ohm. Dueval drivers are mounted in cabinet and fire upward towards at an acoustical dispersion component which disperses the sound omnidirectionally. 

Ohm walsh drivers face down ward into the cabinet which is either ported or sealed. The driver is completely above the cabinet and the sound radiates omnidirectionally from the outer edge of the rear of the driver.  Just like original wider range Walsh drivers or the also limited range ddd driver used in German physics.  

I've never heard Dueval or original ohm a or Fs. So cannot comment on how things sound similar or different. 

Accurus are you using the Subdudes?

Not saying that it's good or bad but not all cabinets are inert. 

Is is there an audible issue with the sound of the music?  

Just an educated guess, but i suspect cabinet design for a Walsh style driver is much different than conventional dynamic designs. Remember most of the higher frequency sound exits the cone above the cabinet so less energy is imparted into the cabinet all other things aside. So resonance effects are much different I suspect and the design may lend itself to less issues in general with the cabinet.

In any case, its not something I’ve even thought about before mostly because I have had no reason.

My Dynaudio monitors are very inert with double isolated cabinet design.

But guess which speakers I choose in the end?  

So I find it an interesting question but not sure it matters much as long as the end results satisfy.

Of course as always, YMMV.

Also note that both my Walsh speakers use older refurbed pyramid shaped cabinets not new ones. So I can’t speak to how the newer cabs work compared to the old, but I do know JS in general attempts to tune each to achieve a certain similar sound.

One other thing I can note is that my impression has been JS views cabinet volume as the key design criteria for selecting OHM models  with larger cabinets able to deliver more bass as needed.

Also I would add that with my two pair of OHM Walshes, I find that once teh floor interactions are dealt with as needed (similar to any speaker not just OHm Walsh) there is nothing I hear that I could attribute to unwanted cabinet resonances, Although of course room acoustics in general are always a big factor in what you hear.

Accurus I recall you were using something to correct for room acoustics and may have mentioned earlier on what that measured in your room, prior to Subdudes I believe.    I'm wondering what you are reading now with subdudes and if any significant anamolies if room acoustics can be ruled out.

"It dips a little below 20hz by 2-3 db but no signifigant deviation. Not bad for a speaker rated to only 30hz. "

That's pretty exceptional for most any speaker of modest size to be able to deliver below 20hz  I would think and frankly didn't know the smaller OHMs had it in  them.

I do know they are champs at going loud and clear with whatever amount of clean power thrown their way though.    They nor my 500 w/ch Class D amps never break a sweat.

I use only my ears to measure, so you are way ahead of me.... :^)

My sound is totally detached from the speakers.   That includes drivers as well as cabinets.   

John does use some higher end veneers by request I have read.   Anything might be possible for a price.  But he seeks to keep prices down and sound quality high.   My guess is he feels the standard cabs are all that is needed to do the job right.  Only one way to know:  ask him.

It would not be hard to add acoustic damping material inside as an experiment if desired once one is comfortable with removing the driver boards.  

My 5s have the 4 3 way level adjustments on each which provides a lot of flexibility fitting speakers to room as needed.   Similar to current 5000s.   Other models do not have those so more like most speakers there.
 

accurus,

How does Dirac work? I assume there are measuring activities to determine current state, ability to select or define corrections, and then apply the corrections during playback.

What devices does Dirac run on for various tasks? Which do you use?

Thanks.

I use Plex and other apps on a PC so standalone option would seem to provide the flexibility I need. 

I've added Dirac to my wish list.....

Accurus agree 100% on that.  Perhaps the single best thing about the OHMs for a music lover.   My story is similar moving from Maggies and others before back to OHM after many years.

Also wondering what microphone you use with teh software and how much was the total investment?

I love teh idea that this is a program that runs on regular computers and attempts to do so much to optimize sound quality.   Might have to give it a look sometime.

Nice!


I like the overlay of target, before and after measurements! I’m noticing the target is not flat response. I’m guessing that is because software attempt to compensate for non-flatness of human hearing. Just a guess?

Did you attempt any nearfield measurements with the OHMs ie measure them with room acoustics minimized? Just wondering what that would look like.

What’s is your assessment of the results after Dirac versus prior from a non technical music enjoyment perspective?

Very interesting stuff. Its a software only (no special hardware required besides microphone) significant tweak for sure as measured for the cost. Nothing grey or left to uncertainty from a technical perspective there.

Very cool!!!! Affordable software only tweaks like this are just another reason to like computer audio.

Thanks for that well though out and detailed review. I would pretty much concur with everything said.  The 10hz response was a bit of a shocker to me,  but in a small room with optimal setup I guess extreme things are possible.   To date, when it comes to pure enjoyment of music, I have always ended back with the OHMs.

I do not recall reading of many confirmed cases EVER of home gear delivering down to 10 hz, even more so especially with the modern trend towards smaller speakers and drivers and for a cost that many might afford.

Its rare to hear any reports of anything useful happening below 20hz. That’s traditionally considered the useful low range for human hearing.

I can only say that the OHMs are very robust and have always taken any load I’ve thrown at them most effortlessly. My current Bel Canto amps are rated 500w/ch into 8 ohm, doubling into 4.

Modern digital room correction products like Dirac no doubt up the ante in regards to what one might throw at a pair of speakers. Also the best modern amplifiers are capable of pushing speakers harder and with less distortion than ever before. Power demands increase exponentially at lower frequencies. Most amps would still likely give up the goat trying to deliver a flat response at higher volume at those low frequencies as well.

So its just not something that one expects to occur very often but would certainly seem withing the realm of possibility especially in a smaller room with a robust amp and digital processing to reduce peaks in the lower bass region.  Published frequency response charts of older OHM Walsh models that I have seen seemed to suggest the bass hump typically associated with most any ported design like most OHM Walsh models.   Newer models with built in powered subs are acoustically sealed not ported I believe.  Imagine what those might do even off many less robust external amplifiers used, including tube amps if preferred!

Accurus thanks so much for sharing your findings. You provide a lot of useful new objective information about the OHMs and their capabilities. Few people take the time and initiative to leverage them to their max and share their findings as you have.

Dirac is definitely moving up on my audio wish list especially as I move more towards using commercial computers as a digital music source.

Lance thx. I still want to do the return visit to hear your decware and other gear.  It's been hectic and hard to getaway on weekends. 

My plans to set up another system around tube gear keeps getting sidelined due to WAF.  Now to make matters worse my new addition today is a hk onyx Bluetooth speaker that is very impressive sounding and is small with WAF out the gazoo.   

Also Dirac now has my attention. 😗

Last week I bought a HK Onyx studio 2 bluetooth speaker to add some portable sound to the house. Its very nice sounding and now my wife is pushing to get wired speakers out of her sunroom altogether, which is something I could probably live with as well.

So now I’m assessing options With no wired speakers in sunroom, I have two extra pair to do something with. I’m investigating trade-in options with JS . I might propose a smaller pair of light colored speakers in there like 1000s. OR maybe I could trade my two extra pair of OHMS (Ls and Walsh 2100S3) towards a 5000 driver upgrade finally perhaps.

Always something....

Its nice that all OHMs have pretty good trade-in value when the time comes to make a change. It really helps to make an upgrade or change more affordable.

accurus, you truly live up to your moniker!   Good stuff!

Accurus you're hearing similar results as I it seems.   Pretty scary.  😉

I often wonder if others just switched to Ohms and put in just half the effort you have to let them shine if that might just finally put an end to the elusive goal many seek which is to make all music sound enjoyable.