Regarding the OEM source of the amp modules in D-Sonics amps, if you read the 6Moons review, you'll see that Dennis ain't talkin'. IMHO, that's his prerogative. It's all about the sound. If the amp sounds good, what difference does it make, really, which amp modules he is using? FWIW, my McIntosh C220 works swell with my 10K ohm input resistance Odyssey Audio SS amp, even with 20' RCA runs and the Vandersteen outboard HP filters. No HF roll off that I can hear.
Peterr53: Thanks for the post. Fascinating. FWIW, my Walsh 2000s have no issue with image hieght. In most cases, the image reaches my 6' ceiling. I had Sound Ancors custom make solid, adjustable three-point spiked, cradle bases for my 2000s for around $325/pr. A real step up in imaging and transient detail. |
Peterr53: Perfect imaging? Is there such a thing? I never said perfect. I like the imaging I get with and without the stands. But my cement floor is uneven, and the speakers wobbled. With the bases, the center image is solid and stable, and I get less drift of left and right images, although I still get some. My room is far from perfect (it's evolving, slowly). I would like more depth, and a bid more even spread of the stage in front of me. But I did get some of both when I tried the Arion Audio RS500 amps (along with a lot of other improvements). Hence the quest for big power amps that I can afford.
Yes, I have 6' ceilings in my basement man cave (just like a real cave!). The steam pipes are boxed out and are even lower than 6' in spots. I am 5'8", so no problems, and mostly, I am sitting down anyway. It is the best place in my small home for a stereo/HT rig. There are many pros and cons, but the best is that I can crank it up to "11" at any hour and I disturb nobody; not the neighbors, not sleeping family members two flights up. |
Wtf: Exactly! Dennis is not obligated to disclose information about his amps, and you are not obligated to buy one. Similarly, witness the absence of Magnepan reviews in Stereophile. Stereophile requires bench testing for all full reviews in the magazine. That's the editor's prerogative. Magnepan won't allow this bench testing, because of the unique nature of their speakers, which produces, in their view, test results inconsistant with the speakers' performance. Magnepan's prerogative, and an impass. So, no Stereophile reviews of Magnepan speakers. I guess Dennis would rather lose some sales than disclose information which he feels gives him a competitive edge. For every audiophile who skips D-Sonic amps because of this, there is probably another one, like me, who cares mostly about the way the sausage tastes, not how it's made. YMMV, as they say.
And, I must say, that this topic is very relevent to a thread on Ohm speakers, since John Strohbeen is somewhat quiet on some of the ingredients of his own special sauce. |
Mapman: I am not sure I agree with you on Class D amps. While many Class D manufacturers take OEM modules, almost all of them have their own approach to power supplies, input stages, etc. AFAIK, the amp module itself can be made to sound drasticly different depending on the builder's choices for these and other parts of the finished product. Heck, your Bel Cantos use an OEM Class D module, don't they? Yet they are known to sound much better than other brands using the same modules. I could be way off on this, but even the D-Sonic amps include a circuit board and other parts of the signal/power chain that are of Dennis' own selection (if not design). Just my $0.02. |
Love the new site. But, it look slike black ash veneer is no longer an option. I love my 2000s and center in black. Some day, I want a pair of wall-mounts for the rear-surround channels, and I'd like them to be black as well. Maybe this is a custom order?
Frazeurl: I have long guessed that tube amps sound louder because their distortion products are pleasant. If a SS amp begins to distort, you would either turn it down or off. But the distortion and clipping characteristics of a tube design would not stop most people from listening. Since we hear distortion as loudness, tube amps are said to sound louder given the same rated output before clipping. My $0.02 |
Mapman is spot-on. I do own a pair of MWTs, the previous version to the current one, and the sonics are quite similar to my 2000s. My Walsh center channel speaker is perfect match to my 2000s. |
Jwc2012: I have a pair of 2000s in a 2800 c.f. basement. Although you might be sitting nearfield (I sit 9' back), the speaker doesn't know or care where you are sitting. It is going to fill the enite space. Even with powered subs, crossed over, 1st order, at 80Hz, my 150 watt/channel amp is clipping in the midrange. So, if you are going to run the 2000 cans full range, make sure you have enough juice, and check with John at Ohm to make sure the 2000 cans will work. If I had a lot more money and a little more space, I would have gone with the 3000s. Just my $0.02. |
I will second Mapman's post. My 2000s sound wonderfull at lower volumes. So good, that when they are playing at moderate background levels, I will often stop to listen, even though I have things to do. And that's usually with low-res Pandora or internet radio! I did try my 2000s with an older Onkyo AVR, rated at 80 watts/channel, and even full range, the sound was surprisingly good. That said, my 150 watt/channel amp is clipping on sustained peaks in the midrange, and I am totally focused on upgrading to something much more powerful. But financially, that's about year away. |
Jwc2012: To answer your post, I have an Odyssey Stratos HT3 w/ cap upgrade. Not sure of the headroom, but I was very surprised to hear it clip. I thought it was room accoustics until I borrowed a pair of Class D 500 watt mono blocks, and the issues pretty much dissappeared. I do listen loud, but not crazy loud, I would guess 80-90 dB is not unusual. But, my room is 2800 c.f., and fairly "dead". Perhaps there is an issue with the amp. While still under warrenty, I did have to have a leaky cap replaced. However, this 65 lb. beast costs a fortune to ship, and I really preferred the overall sonic results I got with those Class D amps, so I would want to upgrade anyway. I will move the Odyssey to power the center and surrounds in my combo stereo/HT rig once I upgrade to a more powerful amp. I know this sounds a bit weird, but I am trusting my ears on this one. |
If you review some of my older posts, the answer is, quite well. I have a combo 2-channel/HT rig, with Walsh 2000s and a Walsh Center up front, MicroWalsh Talls for the surrounds and a pair of Paradigm Atoms for the rear surrounds (some day I'll have MicroWalsh Walls instead). Add to that a dedicated subwoofer for the LFE and center/surround bass, and a pair of subs to augment the 2000s (which as a set run full range), and my HT is awesome. Last night I watched a BD of Oz the Great and Powerful. It sounded great and powerful, indeed! |
Coot: FWIW, I too have my eyes on that D-Sonics amp (although financially, I am farther away from a purchase now than I thought I'd be). I did ask John Strohbeen about that much power into the 2000s. His reply was, "go for it, but keep an eye on the volume control". IOW, don't turn it up loud, then leave the room for an hour. That much power could potentially overdrive the speakers. But if you are in the room, it would be obvious that the level is excessive. As for the bass, I would think the 5000s, properly driven, will have all the low end extension you desire. That said, I do have a pair of powered subs with my 2000s. Truthfully, I might be okay without them (the bass on the 2000s is pretty good), but I doubt any loudspeaker can move as much air in the bottom octave as my pair of powered subs. BTW, the D-Sonic is more like $2400 than $2800 (unless you are Canadian, I guess). |
I am using an older set of Kimber 4PR. I really cannot compare these to anything, since I had them before I got my Walsh 2000s, but I can't identify any problems with the Kimber. I would like to upgrade at some point, but financial considerations have put this, and any other upgrades, on hold. |
Wow. Thanks, Coot. That's the first negative experience I have read with the D-Sonics. And, the ONLY experience I have read abouit with D-Sonics feeding Ohms. The posts regarding power filters vs. plugging into the wall cannot be stressed enough. I am still evaluating, but it appears that my amp clipping issues (see earlier posts) were mostly the result of two different power filters the amp had been plugged into. With my current amp (Odyssey Audio Stratos HT3 w/cap upgrade) plugged into the wall, most of the clipping issues seem to have dissappeared. Also, the soundstage presentation has widened out a bit. Good thing, too, since I won't be able to do any upgrading for a while.
If you want good Class D amps that worked very well with my Ohm 2000s, I suggest the Arion RS-500. Pricey (~$4K/pr), but I think they are less expensive than new Bel Cantos. |
My lack of recent posts should not be misunderstood. I am still loving my Walsh 2000s, and do not anticipate changing out my speakers in the forseeable future. Unfortunately, any and all upgrades are on indefinite hold. While still marginally employed, the wheels have come off the cart at work. The good news is that I am in a good place, audio-wise, with hundreds and hundreds of CDs to load on my server, and even more vinyl to digitize and place on the server. Just hoping nothing breaks! |
Well, guys, that's big advantage of a basement man cave! Even though my all black Walsh 2000s look pretty good atop their Sound Anchors bases, the wife couldn't care less what I put down there. Also, the x000 series caps are made a little differently, with a more substantial frame. As a result, they are more symmetrical and even in appearance than the older, thin-framed caps, IMO. Enjoy your new acquisitions, Ron! |
Mapman - I never liked Def tech speakers (although I have an old PF15 sub for LFE use only). But I really like the Golden Ear products. I know, same designer. But that folded ribbon tweeter is so sweet compared to the harsh metal domes in the def techs.
Anyway. Had an audiophile buddy over recently to hear my Ohms. He is a speaker designer himself, and quite knowledgable and skilled. He liked the Ohms a lot, although he remarked that they were a little rolled off up top (I like it that way), and not quite as airy as his own designs (which I have heard, and I agree). He also used his iphone to measure my in-room response. It was surprisingly smooth except for an odd dip around 500Hz (narrow-band). It did tilt down a bit from left to right, as I expected. Remember, I toe them in a bit, which will roll off the highs a little. All done on purpose. |
Sale at Ohm!!!! As sent to me by Ohm Speakers:
Through May 30, 2014, you can get Free Freight and 15% Off Everything on the Ohm website, when you use coupon code MD2014 at check out. (Free Freight is limited to the 48 contiguous states).
Yes, new speakers.
Yes, home theater systems.
Yes, upgrades and service on vintage speakers.
Yes, Outlet Store items.
Yes, EVERYTHING!
Our Summer Shut-Down is June 28 to July 14; so, we hope to get your order shipped before we leave.
Call me if you have any questions.
John Strohbeen, President, 800-783-1553 |
So, my daughter's boyfriend, who loves music (country mostly, but whaddayagonnado?), was visiting, and he was curious about the big rig. I don't have a lot of country, but I threw on k.d. Lang's "Wash Me Clean" from the CD Inengue, and put him in the sweet spot chair. His jaw hit the floor as my Ohm 2000s filled the room with a huge soundstage, full of details and that smooth sound that makes me smile each time I listen. He may never look upon his iPhone or his laptop the same way again. I am certain he never heard anything like it. That's how we enlarge the hobby. If I could do this with 10 people, I bet at least one would be motivated to start looking for a system of their own. |
Long time no post, thanks to my company's draconian web blocking policies. But, a few things to add.
Subwoofing: As you may know, I augment my 2000s with a pair of Vandersteen 2Wq subwoofers, which are now equipped with the battery biased Vandersteen crossovers. Those looking for top-flight bass extension for any speaker that produces a good response down to 40Hz has to look at these subs. I bought them and the crossovers used, and the blending with the 2000s is totally seamless. Also, they work perfectly in corners, as per their design goal.
Upper-mid/lower-treble range: The Ohm Walsh 2000 performance in this range is one of the main reasons I bought them. Many speakers hype this range in order to add detail and presence. But turn them up a bit, and - ouch! IMHO, KEFs have this exaggerated presence range to varying degrees. I listen to my 2000s at lower volumes when checking email, using internet radio or basic Pandora, and I never find them lacking at these lower volumes. In fact, I have to keep it lower, because if I turn the volume up even a little, I will get distracted by the beautiful music I hear.
Still better: A while back, I moved my amp from my rack to the front wall near the speakers. This required a long IC run from the preamp. It also left me with a lot of extra speaker-wire. Since I wanted to upgrade the speaker wire (Kimber 4PR), I left them in place and coiled up the excess on foam cable risers. Stuff happens, and I have never been able to afford a speaker cable upgrade.
I recently had a few of my audio buddies over for some listening, and I requested that no punches be pulled on the sound. It took one of them about 5 minutes to look at the coils of speaker wire and ask me if I felt my highs were a bit closed in. Why, yes, I do feel they are a bit closed in, with too much center image and not enough soundstage width. I had chalked that up to the room or limitations of the 2000s. Well, he informed me that a coil of wire like that acts as an inductor, and rolls off the highs. In about 20 minutes, he and one other guest had started cutting and reterminating my speaker wire for a much shorter run, and no coils of wire. WOW! I now had air, a wider soundstage, and much more open highs, with no downside (like excess brightness or etch). A great, free upgrade. Better than free, really, as I will sell the excess cable they cut up. |
Congratulations on the purchase, mas426. I am sure you will enjoy them. Just let them break in. I have heard Joseph Audio speakers many times at shows, and always enjoyed them, but you don't get much Joseph Audio for a grand! If you haven't heard Ohms in 35 years, you may be in for a pleasant surprise. |
t8kc: Not to worry, this is THE Ohm thread on Audiogon, and many people lurk in addition to posting. I think you've made some excellent decisions. The new 2.2000 will need a lot of break-in. Be patient, and you will be richly rewarded. John has made major improvements in the power-handling abilities of the Walsh line over the years. For a week, I had a loaner pair of 500 wpc Arion Class D amps, the sound was great, and nothing blew up or launched itself from the speaker cabinets of my Walsh 2000s. IIRC, Mapman uses 500 wpc Bel Cantos on his Ohms.
BTW, in the future, you can get local and international radio stations via the web using many different audio streamers and computers. Cheap and easy. I have a tuner in my system, but never use it any more. |
t8kc: You may need an in-line filter for the hum. Whatever nexus your audio system has with the TV might need this. If the hum is from the TV transformer itself, not much you can do except to try some of the plug-in devices designed to quiet noisy transformers. Both my plasma TV buzz pretty loudly. I just ignore it as I am not nearly into video and film as I am into audio. When the TVs are off, there is no hum. I also get a little buzz from my FiOS box. If it bothered me a lot, I would get some of those line filters.
joefish: I have had my 2000s about as long as you have had your MWTs. I concur entirely with your thoughts. The texture and palpable aspect of instruments (including the human instrument - voice) is one of the best aspects of the Walsh design.
|
Roger that, Mapman! I have my 2000s on Sound Anchor craddle bases, tri-spiked into the shallow carpet-over-cement-floor in my basement Man Cave. Bass is tight, well-defined, powerful, extended and bloat-free (I crossover the 2000s to my pair of Vandy 2Wq subs @80Hz). Bases are required for stability. That cement is solid, but not flat. Basement man caves rock!!! |
FYI, as I understand it, there is no actual crossover in the x000 Walsh line. Just a resister to protect the tweeter below about 7 kHz. The Walsh driver rolls off naturally at around 7-8 kHz. |
Accurus - I would suspect room accoustics, but my Walsh 2000s do hieght extremely well. On some material, the voice sounds as if it is pressed against the low, 6' ceiling in my basement man cave. However, particularly when it comes to image placement and soundstage dimensions, I find the 2000s will reflect the information on the recording. I had an audio buddy over recently who owns some very good Mirage dipole towers. He picked the music. At the end of the demo, he remarked that he liked the Ohms, but that they don't seem to have a very large soundstage. I then put on "Wash Me Clean" by K.D. Lang, and the entire front half of the room exploded in a ginormous, holographic soundstage. His jaw dropped. Likewise for hieght. Some vocals sound as it they are coming from two feet off the floor, some higher, and some at the 6' hieght of my ceiling. IMO, one of the best characteristics of the 2000s is that they will reveal the qualities of each recording, but still make it possible to listen to and enjoy even poorly made recordings. Many typical rock recordings that I could not listen to on my old speakers are enjoyable on the Ohms. Thin, bright, congested recordings still sound that way, but they breathe a little more, and the bright, etched treble doesn't seem to dominate and crowd out the whole experience the way it can on many other speakers. I often found myself thinking, "oh, so this is what the recording engineer was thinking" for recordings that were unlistenable on my old speakers.
First, I would give the break-in more time. Mine took about six or seven weeks to get most of the way there, and full break in took about six months. Mapman's tweek suggestion is also important. IMO, Ohms don't need tweeks to sound good, but they can be beneficial. To give my 2000s a solid footing on my uneven basement floor, I had a pair of cradle bases made for me by Sound Anchors (~$325/pair), with three-point adjustable spikes. They really firmed up the imaging and cleaned up the sound, subtley, but noticebly.
Second, make sure you compare the sound with and without the DSP carefully. I am not sure that all room EQ programs work as well with unconventional speaker designs as they do with the conventional dynamic box speakers that they were most likely designed for. FWIW, I use the MCACC room EQ on my Pioneer AVR, but only for watching video. The signal for 2-channel listening is outside the surround sound, and DSP, loop.
As for the finish, I would say that this is not the strong point of Ohm. It is adequate, but I think any major upgrades in the fit and finish would add significantly to the price, and John Strohbeen is trying to keep his speakers affordable. I would put it this way: Strictly in terms of sonics, what can you buy for under $3K that sounds as good as the 2000s? I have not heard the current Maggies, but many people, like me, don't have the space to set them up properly. In fact, the only other speaker I've heard that I would consider in this price range is the Golden Ear Triton 3. However, I think they are about to get a revision and price hike, and I have not heard them in my home, so I have no direct comparison to refer to. FWIW, my cradle bases hide most of the plinth.
Enjoy your 2000s, and keep us posted if you have any further thoughts. |
Oh, as for the upper treble, I concur with your assessment. I have wondered what the 2000s would sound like with a folded ribbon tweeter, or an omni tweeter. But again, this tends to be recording-dependent, IME. I agree with mapman here. Remember, with the Ohm Walsh line, the tweets are angled inward, toward the listening position. So, toe-in will decrease direct sound from the tweeter, and toe-out increase direct sound from the tweeter; opposite of conventional baffle speakers. I have mine very slightly toed-in. |
Accurus - I am not sure how to email you via this site, but the link is soundanchors[dotcom]/products/2085/floor-bases I am not associated in any way with Sound Anchors, other than as a satisfied customer. |
blueranger: I had put up quite a few foam panels on the back-wall, and at the first reflection points on the ceiling and side-walls. I felt things sounded too dead, so I removed some, and noticed an improvement in dynamic impact and a wider soundstage. Also, I tried covering my 60" plasma set with a thick comforter, and didn't feel there was any improvement.
In short, I guess there is not much point to an omni-style speaker if you're room is treated so that all the indirect-radiating sound is absorbed and not reflected. And remember; these speakers are voiced with the reflected, indirect-radiating sound taken into account.
I want very badly to try some diffusers instead of absorbers to the sides and behind the speakers. Sadly, diffusers are a bit pricier than absorbers. But I may try some ebay specials if they aren't too heavy (I suck at things like mounting heavy objects on my drywall-over-stud walls). |
acurus - Thanks for the pics. Most of us Ohm owners have never seen the drivers that give us so much pleasure. I have to admit, the driver looks fairly conventional compared with the original Ohm Walsh drivers. But who cares? The end results speak for themselves.
I am curious about two things, though. The rumors are that some of the x000 drivers, including the 2000, is an aluminum driver. The only reason I'd want to know is because aluminum drivers have never been my cup of tea. If the 2000 cone is indeed aluminum, it would be yet another feather in John Strohbeen's cap. That he could get sound like that out of aluminum would be impressive. Similarly, I'd love to see the tweeter, which, I believe, is a soft dome type. Again, I am curious, as I prefer soft domes to metal domes, in general. |
frazeur1 - Thanks. Good points, all, and I concur. It's like sausage. Who cares what it looks like being made when the results are so pleasing!
Mapman - The only other omnis I've heard are the MBLs (extraordinary). I did hear those new electrostatic panel omnis at a show, and was not impressed. I later was told that they were damaged prior to arrival at the show. Near me, VPI has a large suburban colonial home in which the entire main floor is dedicated to audio system demonstrations. One of the speakers Mr. Weisberg has there is a dual pair of the big original Ohm (F's or A's) that have been restored (and modified?), and placed one atop the other, with the upper pair inverted and held in place with a wooden frame. The one time I was there, KEF was co-hosting an event, so the Ohms were just on static displpay (I don't think there were any closets large enough for them, and I doubt anyone wanted to haul them to the basement). Oh, well. Maybe next time. I've been told by people who have heard these beasts that they might be one of the best loudspeaker systems of all time, regardless of price. |
Acurus - I am sure I am not the only one who would love to see response graphs of your Ohms before and after Dirac Live. Pretty please? |
I have noticed that as well, accurus.
My own thoughts on this are: For these prices, you don't get a Wilson or Magico type cabinet that is completely inert. John Strohbeen knows this. Rather than spend lots of money to minimize cabinet resonances, which would raise the prices he would have to charge for his speakers, he voiced them working with the resonances. Furthermore, a singing cabinet will have less impact on the sound with the drivers sitting completely proud of the cabinet, as they do with the current Walsh line, than such resonances would have on a conventional dynamic box speaker. |
accurus - I know exactly what you mean about the Ohms and not-so-great recordings. I have commented on this aspect of the Ohms myself. And thanks for making me feel fine about not having the space for Maggies.
Is it just me, or is the link you mentioned above to your response graphs missing from your post? Maybe my employer's web filters are to blame. |
acurus: Thanks for the thoughtful review. As an owner of 2000s, I concure with most of your impressions. There are some points I would add, though.
I would not assume that after 30 hours the 2000s are fully broken-in. They may be most of the way there, but mine underwent subtle changes for the first six months I owned them.
One aspect of the Ohms that seems counterintuitive is that, even while they make every recording enjoyable, they still expose the characteristics of each recording. What I mean is that the Ohms allow me to hear whether a recording is well done, like a Reference Recordings LP, or if it is a nasty, compressed, and bass-shy recording. The worst of the lot that I own is actually a great record, "Manic Compression" by Quicksand. As the title implies, it is congested, compressed and lacking in depth. But through the Ohms, I can listen to it, and through all of its faults, and enjoy it. But if one assumes that because the Walsh line is an omni that every recording will be a wall of sound affair with wall-to-wall and floor-to-ceiling soundstaging, one would be wrong. Some recordings place the vocalist at the ceiling of my 6' high basement. Some recordings sound as if the vocalist is sitting in my center-channel speaker, about 18" off the floor, even though there is no signal being sent to it. This is not the Ohms; it is the recording. Surprisingly, the Ohms will deliver the soundstaging on the recording - no more and no less. Perhaps the Maggies embiggened every recording. I would call that a defect, not a benefit. I don't want my speakers to homogenize all recordings, and produce a uniform soundstage that fits my room. I want to hear what the recording engineer heard. Ping-pong stereo should sound like ping-pong stereo, and great recordings (kd Lang - "Wash Me Clean") should explode into a wall of holographic sound. And with the 2000s, that's exactly what I get. But, to come full circle, the best part is that even those horrid pop recordings sound pretty good, less congested, more open and just more listenable than they do on some much more expensive rigs.
Lastly, I think the level of your electronics speaks volumes about the Ohm's value. You could have three pairs of 2000s for what you paid for your DAC! That's why I doubt I will ever replace my 2000s.
|
accurus - I am very anxious to hear what you think diffussion does for the Ohms. I am just guessing, but it makes sense to me that diffusion would benefit the Ohms much more than absorbtion. Absorbtion seems counterintuitive to an omni or quasi-omni speaker. Can I ask how much the polyfusors set you back? Unlike foam wedges, decent diffusion panels seem pretty pricey. |
Well, acurus and mapman, as much as I love the way my rig with the 2000s sounds now, you two have made up my mind. As soon as I can afford to, I am going to start adding diffusors to my room. Wish me luck! |
mapman - interesting post. I had put a lot of foam panels up on the front wall and side walls at the hieght of the Ohm cans. I found I had too much center-fill, and not enough of a soundstage width. I removed some, and noticed an improvement without losing too much of the center fill. Since my listening area is small and asymetrical, I speculate that some diffusion might exapnd the soundstage even further. Not that I suffer from a compact soundstage now; on the right recordings, the soundstage is absolutely holographic and, as The Donald would say, HUGE! Guilding the lilly? Perhaps. But I want to hear for myself what the diffusion panels will do. |
Thanks for the update, t8kc. I wouldn’t say that everyone who has heard my 2000s has had the same reaction as your son, although several have (and more react positively than not). In fact, my son-in-law was so impressed with my 2000s that he is trying to plan a new basement man cave around a complete 5.1 channel Ohm set up. Taste in speakers is like any other personal preference. You like peanut butter, someone else doesn’t. But the good news is that you have many years of great listening ahead of you. Six and a half years in (I was one of the early buyers of the 2000s) I still can’t get enough of my 2000s. I constantly lament that I don’t have enough time to do serious listening. Every change I make in electronics and room acoustics is quickly exposed by the 2000s as either a benefit or a detriment. As I have said before, barring hitting the Powerball, the 2000s will most likely be my last speaker purchase. |
Mapman - LOL! Flipping the direction of the fuse is on my "to do" list. Believe it or not, even 5 minutes for that is hard to come by. You won't hear any hyperbole from me about the fuse. I am not really a hard core tweeker. It is what it is. FWIW, I would have been happy with a much cheaper Acme fuse (well regarded by other local audiophiles), but the value I needed is not offered by Acme. It may possibly end up being one of those things where I know that my fuse is not holding anything back, even if the stock fuse didn't either. Sort of a piece of mind deal. I did think it was funny, or interesting, that someone on that thread read my initial impressions and immediately *knew* that I had the fuse installed in the wrong direction. Maybe he's correct. |
Actually, mapman, I have read about the "other room" phenomenon in the audio press for years. I am lucky (especially at my age) to have a bathroom in my basement near the man cave. When I go in there I leave the music on. I am always fascinated by how much the music sounds live, but in another room, in the bathroom with the door closed. I would suggest that there are more similarities between live and recorded acoustic music when heard from another room than there are when heard from the same room. |
sudont: Welcome to the thread and to the world of Ohm. I was very interested about your comments regarding the Hiel folded ribbon tweets vs. Ohm. I have yet to hear a folded ribbon tweeter that I didn't like. But, and this is key, the Walsh driver goes up to about 7kHz, where the super-tweeter rolls in (the Walsh driver rolls off by itself above 7kHz). So, a large portion of the treble is being reproduced by the Walsh driver.
As to the positioning issue, you are fortunate to have the switch, to reduce the bass reinforcment you get when placing any speaker too close to the walls. Also, at some point, you may wish to experiment with diffusion panels at the side and rear reflection points.
But please be patient. Unless you are playing them many hours each day, they will take several months to fully break in. Mine took close to six months. Also, while the speakers don’t insist you sit in a narrow sweet spot, I prefer to listen dead center for optimal soundstage presentation. YMMV, of course.
And don’t forget that John Strohbeen is always available if you have any questions or concerns. You can usually reach him on business days at the Ohm factory in Brooklyn. He’s a heck of a nice guy, and a very talented speaker designer/voicer. |
sudont: I also thought I might have been hearing the cabinets "sing" in the lower mids. The cabinets of my 2000s do vibrate. But I think I was actually hearing the hollow body of instruments like acoustic guitars, cellos, etc. I would bet that John Strohbeen was well aware that inexpensive cabinets will resonate, and works with that rather than drive up costs by trying to prevent it. Also, with the drivers sitting proud of the cabinet, I don't think a lively cabinet is as much an issue as it would be with typical dynamic speakers mounted on a baffle in a cabinet.
As for the floor, please note that my 2000s sit on a custom pair of Sound Anchors cradle bases. These solid, heavy bases have three-point adjustable spikes and enabled me to level the speakers very easily. They sharpened up the imaging and transients noticeably. I think they cost me about $350 shipped. Worth every penny. That said, I use them on a carpeted cement basement floor, so YMMV. |
I will restate what I said before: The magic of the Ohms, whether walsh designs or not, is from John Strohbeen’s skill in voicing loudspeakers. While there are times I wonder about modding my 2000s (cabinet bracing, upgrading tweeter, etc.), I am loathe to mess with John’s handiwork. I just don’t see why I, who know nothing about voicing a speaker, would be able to improve on John’s design. I know, John was working within limited cost constraints, but even so, I doubt I could improve on his desings.
sudont: I agree with Mapman. I have a pair of Micro Walsh Talls as surround channel speakers, and except for a bit of bass extension and macro dynamic ability, they are essentially identical in sonics to my 2000s. Ditto for my Micro Walsh Center. And they are actually a slightly older model, too. AND, IIRC, the 2000s use an aluminum driver, and the MWTs do not. Again, it comes back to John’s talent as a speaker designer and voicer. |
Big news!! Ohm will be at the Chester Group New York Audio Show in November. Why is this big news? Because John Strohbeen told me himself that he eschews doing these shows, as he rarely has enough time to get the setup where he wants it to be.
I intend to visit the show and hope to finally meet John in person. To me, he is one of the great designers of speakers in the industry.
If you are able to attend the show, especially if you would like to hear Ohm speakers properly demonstrated, this is a rare opportunity. |
I went on Sunday. What a kick to meet John in person! I told him how his speakers bring beauty into my daily routine. He set up a pair of Walsh 1000s fed by a Peachtree integrated (150 watts/side, internal DAC), and used a $15 DVD player as a source. The sound was good, and the fellow in front of me bought a pair on the spot. My son-in-law, who accompanied me, almost pulled the trigger as well, until he called my daughter, and that was the end of that. But the rooms all suffered from an upper bass boom, and Ohm's room was no exception. I wondered aloud if moving the speakers a little further into the room would be better, but John's assistant said he had trieed that, and the positioning was as good as possible. I played a track from a PT CD that sounded lovely, lots of transient detail with no etch or excess brightness.
John also brought a lot of potted plants along (I am aware of their desireable acoustic properties). One of the simplest setups at the show, and one of the best sounding, except for the systems that DSP'd the room boom out. When you factor in the prices of the gear and speakers, I think Ohm's room was a standout.
To me, though, John is a legend in this business, and it was a thrill to shake his hand. |
Mapman - I saw Hillary there, too. She was buying a big pair of Magicos for some guy named Comey. ;-)
Too bad about the Stereophile writer (Steve Guttenberg? I saw him there on Sunday). I wish one of the magazines would take a fresh look at Ohm's current designs. |
Interesting that Austin seemed to equate extended highs with excess, or unwanted ambience. The Ohms are anything but tipped-up iin the treble. I think they might even be a tad rolled off in the highs. To be sure, the Ohm room did not sound as good as my own system. I have a better front end, better acoustics, better amplification, and I have dialed them in as well as my space permits, including giving my 2000s more space than John had in the hotel room. In my fantasy, John Strohbeen visits my man cave and opines on my system setup. I bet he might have some positive suggestions, but I also think he would like what he heard. |
Frazeur1: I questioned John's assistant about the positioning. Mine are toed in as well, but not quite as much as the show pair. He replied that they had spent a lot of time positioning he 1000s, and this was the best they could do.
I know for a fact that one fellow bought a pair of 1000s, taking advantage of the show special discount. I wouldn't be surprised if he sold a few pairs.
As for letting everyone know Ohm is alive and well, Ohm does do a fair amount of targeted web advertising. I think the press coverage, overall, was positive, and will be beneficial to Ohm. |
Sorry, frazeur1, I cannot recall the young fellow's name. But he looked to be in his 20s. |
ps: Out of curiousity, how long did you audition he Ohms? What about the sound prevented you from "falling in love"? TIA.
I do agree with about Sonus Faber, and I have enjoyed Sonus Faber speakers whenever I have heard them. The (rather pricey) pair at the show last week was one of the stand outs. I might have put the Venere 2.5 in contention had they been available in late 2009 when I began my speaker upgrade search. |
