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

Its true that omni speakers produce a distinctly different class of sound that can wow people immediately regardless because the presentation is so inherently unique. Most may never bother or feel need to move forward from their initial setup at that point I would imagine because they have already accomplished a major change for the better in their sound that is hard to match otherwise.

WG,

Sorry to hear that.

WG,

I the grand scale of things, your asking price is very favorable. There is no speaker I know of capable of more at anywhere near that price point. There are decent monitors, but these compete with fullranges and the OHMs play with the best IMHO.

The challenge with the OHM Walshes from a sellers perspective I think is that many see older OHM Walshes out there for under $1000 these days and are not aware of the differences in performance between old and new OHM Walshes. The cans and cabinets all tend to look similar, more so than most designs, so I think it is important to make sure prospective buyers know exactly what they are getting, a speaker that in most rooms competes with the best out there, and not a 30 year old less refined design.

Hey the nice GP DDD speakers are back up for sale now for about the cost of a new pair of 5000s.

I wish I lived close enough to the seller to give a listen.

GPs

Yes, I would like to compare as well. I suspect they would sound quite different.

If anybody has recently upgraded from series 3 to the latest 1000 series models, I'd be interested in hearing some about what you do or do not hear different or better with the newer designs?

YEs, I find with the OHMs, it is much like making really good soup. All the ingredients matter and attention to detail 9and some patience) is the key to getting really good results.

Foster, I know all teh gyrations you have gone through so I am very happy that your patience and attention to detail appears to be paying off.

BTW, after bringing in the 100S3s and later the 5S3s, the only part of my system at the time that did not change as well towards the goal of optimizing performance was my Linn Axis turntable, speaker wires and Denon103R cart. Everything else changed including amp (twice), pre-amp + phono pre-amp, DAC and ICs. So pretty much nothing remained the same. But it was all worth it.....

Yes, I am very interested in hearing more peoples impressions of the latest and greatest OHM drivers and how these compare.

Things have been mostly stable over the past year with my gear.

I have fought some noise issues relating to aging tubes in the ARC pre-amp and some apparent RF noise issues relating to the use of the DNM Reson ICs with the BC Ref1000ms.

Now, with six new Groove Tube 12AX7s in the ARC and with MIT Terminator IC in place of the DNM, things are well tuned once again.

The Super Walsh 2 100S3s have pushed things to the highest level in years in my wife's always acoustically troublesome sunroom.

My Dynaudio monitors are sounding fantastic, better than ever, in my small office room where the gear is located.

The F5s pretty much do all that is possible in my bigger, L shaped main listening room.

I've also experimented back and forth with tube and SS mhdt DACs in the system. The SS Constantine is doing all I could ask for there currently and has found its home there.

The MIT networked ICs seem to be an ideal match for the BEl Canto ref1000m. I read MIT wires are exclusively recommended for Spectron Class D amps. There may be a synergy in general between the MIT wires and Class D switching amps from what I hear.

Frazeur1,

I decided to first try tubes I could walk into Guitar Center down the road and buy for $20 each first. The Groove Tube Gold 12AX7s I bought solved the problem. Also, surprisingly, I am hard pressed to hear a difference from teh previous ARC stock tubes that came in the SP16. Perhaps a tad more background noise in the phono section, but nothing of any consequence.

So far, I do not feel a need to order tubes from ARC. I could still decide to do that and keep these as an extra set, but I cannot justify it currently.

I picked up the 1m MIT terminator ICs on Ebay several years back for <$50 each, as I recall.

I also bought a pair of .5 m Harmonic Tech ICs from the Essential Audio Tweaks store on ebay for much more along with the DNM Resons, which were comparable to the MITs in price more or less. All of these are good but different with different strengths and weaknesses.

Whoops, sorry.

The correct name of the store on ebay I referenced above is

"essentialhifitweak", not "Essential Audio Tweaks" as I indicated.

http://stores.ebay.com/essentialhifitweak

I have found their stufff to offer good value and their descriptions of how the products I have bought sound to be reasonable and accurate.

"I guess when you find something that works so well, why change it?"

I tend to agree.

ICs, particularly used ones that can be resold easily without taking a loss, are relatively easy things to tinker with though if one gets the urge to try some different flavors of good sound.

Had to mention here that somebody has a pair of original OHM C2s listed on agon for $50 in the NYC metro area.

Assuming all is in order, that is a steal! I am tempted to buy despite having no need.

The C2s are one of the larger and better 70's vintage era speakers that I recall. They sold for $700/pair back then and were one of the best in that range I recall hearing. They are a touch brighter than most OHMs on teh top end, which makes them very good for low to moderate level listening.

These could be worth a $700 trade in towards newer OHMS as well assuming the cabinets are refurbishable.

My best moments of late come when I listen to some old favorite recording that I have heard so may times with so many different kinds of gear over the years and I cannot find a fault in what I hear.

Its been a while since I have been where I am afraid to change a darn thing for fear of not being able to get back to where I was.

Also, I must say that the Dynaudio monitors are sounding the best ever these days in their smaller room and there is not much more I could reasonable ask of them.

However the difference between the monitors and the OHMs, despite having a subtly different but not dissimilar overall tonality and different way of doing imaging and soundstage, have always been in the impact and "meat on the bones" areas.

Its just not reasonable to expect any small monitor to deliver 100% on hard rock or modern pop or any large scale classical or jazz works. They are just not big enough for the job. They can get to 80% or so perhaps of what is possible, but cannot tackle the last few tough % in that regard.

OHm sold me as a salesperson at Tech Hifi where I had access to many speakers, but the OHMs were always the best sounding to me at almost any common price point back then.

I started with OHM Ls and graduated to Walsh 2s around 1982 or so after.

Magnepans weaned me off the Walsh 2s as my main speakers around 1987 or so, but I also still enjoyed the Walsh 2s as a second speaker at teh time though a few weaknesses in resolution and detail were revealed.

I added a pair of B&W P6s and Triangle Titus in the 1990's.

I got the upgrade bug a few years back. I ended up replacing the Maggies, Walsh2's and B&Ws with what I run today which includes 3 pair of OHMs, my original Ls from teh seventies that I rebuilt myself, the 100 series 3 drivers in the Walsh 2 cabinets, and the OHM 5 series 3.

Maybe an upgrade to latest X000 series or whatever might come after will happen someday.

Went to a lovely wedding yesterday in a fairly contemporary and nicely designed church complete with sizable pipe organ, vaulted ceilings, the works pretty much in a very nice sized but not cavernous room.

I love pipe organs! Fascinating devices.

Of course my ears are always tuned to what I hear at any live event involving music as they were yesterday.

I came out feeling even more enamoured of the big OHM 5s. I love what they do and how they do it. I seem to never come away from live musical events feeling shorted listening at home anymore these days, which has not always been the case. More convinced than ever that the OHM Walsh speakers are truly an audiophiles dream at a very affordable price.

Agoner Foster_9 would be a good one to email for feedback on OHM versus Mirage. He has Mirage currently I believe and dabbled with OHMs for a while also.

Both have omni dispersion patterns to an extent for a larger than normal sweet spot but significantly different designs and approaches so I would expect a significant sound difference between the two in general.

I have a fair number of country recordings both old and new. With rare exception, they all tend to sound very to really good and a revelation to most anything similar I have heard prior anywhere.

Carja,

Nice. Thanks for sharing that!

WOuld love to see some pictures of the 5000s in Bubinga wood.

IS it a veneer or solid Bubinga? I'm guessing the first, especially of no extra cost.

I ask because I see Bubinga is an exotic wood sought for use in instrument construction, similar perhaps to Baltic Birch.

There are many very exotic and well received speaker lines out there that construct their cabinets from these kinds of exotic woods that lend themselves well to musical intruments as well in that this is a key aspect of the actual sound of such designs. I've often wondered what a pair of OHM Walsh speakers with similar construction might sound like. I think the results could be quite extraordinary if done right, but a different tuning process would probably be required for the Walsh driver, so I think it would entail a significantly different functional design.

Just curious. I suspect yours are babinga veneer which would not change the OHM Walsh design for sonic reasons, but would still deliver the usual still excellent sound plus being more lovely to look at.

Enjoy!

Found this about Bubinga wood in wikipedia. Interesting....

"Uses

The genus is well-known for its luxury timbers. The best-known timber is bubinga (Guibourtia demeusei, aka kevazingo). Another is ovangkol. Species of Guibourtia also produce Congo copal.

The wood is often used by luthiers for harps and other instruments, such as bass guitars, because of its mellow and well-rounded sound. Warwick Bass is known to use Bubinga and Ovangkol. It has been used in drum shells as well. Drum companies such as Tama offer various high-end drum kits with plies of Bubinga in the shells.[4] Crafter also use bubinga on some of their instruments.[5] Bubinga is also used in both acoustic and electric guitars for its figure and hardness.

Bubinga is sometimes used in the production of archery bows, in particular as the main wood of the handle in some flat bows.

Bubinga is also used in furniture making, usually for tables, as large slabs of the dense wood can be cut, and with very little manipulation, be used for a table top.

Bubinga often has an appearance similar to the mineral tiger eye. Light brown through dark brown and red, some samples show as almost purple.

Luxury car maker Lexus also makes use of the wood in their luxury vehicles.

They are known to produce chalconoids (chemical compounds related to chalcone), relatives of medically important chemicals called stilbenoids, one famous one being resveratrol.[citation needed]"

Phaelon,

Always glad to hear of new OHM affectionados. Welcome aboard! It's a very good ship to be on I would say.

"And they keep getting better every time I upgrade things upstream."

Yes, me too, though I am mostly done now.

After some detours trying out other lines out over the years, it still then took me several years of rededicated focus to get to where I wanted to be. I'm glad I got back on the OHM bandwagon and persisted.

Yes, I've found a tube pre-amp can be a very good ingredient to mix in with digital. I would expect a significant difference with the CJ pre-amp. I use an ARC sp16 in my main rig and currently a 25 year old NAD 7020 receiver pinch hitting temporarily off the bench in my second 2 channel a/v rig. Its quite listenable in taht particular smaller rig.

Clean records->excellent tweak!

WIth their bottom ports, what the Walshes sit on can make a big difference with how they interact with the room and the resulting sound. I need to try something like that in my tile floor 12X12 sunroom where every speaker I try including the Walshes tend to have a bass bump.

"my beloved Walsh 2000s do not leave me with speaker envy."

I'm in a similar boat. Have heard lots of great systems and speakers. Still content.

Gotta say though that it took a lot of tweaking to my system over the last few years subsequent to the OHM Walsh upgrade with some additional expense associated to get to the point where others reference systems I hear do not leave me wanting. The OHMs are pretty forgiving and many may not care, with most gear, but it really takes a lot of focus and work to get things to that highest possible level. It usually takes a lot of hard work to achieve great things. Nothing unique there!

I've found significant differences with different ICs with the OHMS, more so than any other speaker I have owned.

HAven't crossed the bridge of dabbling with power cords yet. HAve not felt the need. I hesitate to change anything at present. Everything has been dialed in for the OHM F5s for about a year now. Maybe sometime soon.

Musical and muscular! I like that description!

I'd love to see some nice photos of those bubinga 5000s.

Never heard Is but have almost picked up a pair on several occasions. They are reputed to be quite awsome. They were an interim top of the line design prior to the Walsh cls driver but do not utilize any Walsh driver techlology.

Carja,

The only way I know is to post a virtual system.

These are 5000's right?

IF so, then you have the on-board adjustments to match to room size and acoustics so room size should not be a problem.

IF put my 5s with similar adjustments in my smaller 12X12 room just to see/hear how well they worked there compared to my 100S3s, and was able to adjust the 5s to sound very much like the 100s, although the physical cabinet size of the 5s took up too much floor space in such a small room in comparison to the Walsh 2 cabinets where the 100S3 drivers reside.

5000s are taller and narrower than 5s I believe so issues fitting into the room are more likely height of driver related in that in general the Walsh CLS speakers tend to sound best listening at a vertical level at or above drivers, especially if in a more nearfield listening scenario.

I posted this to Carja's system thread but am including here also in case of value to others:

I think the key to soundstage depth with the OHMS is distance from rear wall (several feet if possible) + some degree of sound reflectivity off the rear wall. The sliding glass door can work to your advantage with this but not if the speakers are too close to the wall.

Distance from rear and side walls is needed to get adequate delay for reflected sound to produce needed spatial queues for widest and deepest soundstage.

Since OHM omni sound output is attenuated by default to the rear to accomodate placement closer to walls desired by many for practical reasons, having a surface behind that refelcts the sound more can actually help to retain the needed reflected sound levels desired since the speakers are further out from the rear wall than intended and reflected sound levels lower in magnitude as a result compared to say a pure omni which will produce higher sound levels reflected from rear (and side) walls and when set up properly with distance from walls produce very deep soundstage.

This is what you would hear with a true omni like mbl set up with 5 feet or more distance from rear and side walls.

There are some good references on the internet that explains the geometry of stereo soundstage imaging and how distance from walls of 5 feet or greater in a typical set up is generally needed for best results. The listeners position in terms of distance to speakers relative to distance traveled by side and rear reflected sound is also a key factor.

Also note that the addjustments on the 5000s are useful for boosting bass levels somewhat as may often be needed when speakers are far away from walls with less bass level reinforcement. Without these adjustments, bass that sounds right closer to walls may be somewhat less if away from walls. However distance from walls is needed for the biggest and deepest soundstage. It is a dilemma. OHM does not suggest 5 feet or more distance from the rear wall. That kind of common setup as recommended is a good compromise for most in that speaks are out of the way, bass levels good, but soundstage maybe not as deep as might be, if that is something that matters to you. ITs probably a lesser consideration for most, so a reasonable solution.

FWIW, in my main rig with the 5s, I keep speaks over 5 feet out from rear wall and 4 feet or so from sides, the most possible in a fairly long and narrow room.

In my 2 channel a/v rig where the 100s reside, they are closer to the rear wall for WAF and other practical reasons in our heavily used family room. SOundstage is not as deep, but still pretty good.

I don't expect a wall mount TV alone to make much difference. Maybe somewhat more so if low enough to be at the primary reflection points on the rear wall based on where you listen from.

I scored 2 mercury perfect presence lps today at goodwill for $1 each. Bingo! I've never heard of this label on lp before. The sound off tne ohms is stunning!

It's a shame that they don't make many recordings like those anymore.

The inside of the one lp's gatefold is filled with a bunch of technical information and charts and diagrams outlining the recording process in great detail, including where the players were located in the recording venue for reference in that the expectation is that you should be able to locate them within the soundstage at the locations indicated.

Back in those days (very early 60's), hifi stereo recordings were new and a novelty that was marketed to the masses based on the sound quality in packages like these.

Imagine that?

I was just a young kid at the time but I think that was probably a big part of creating my interest in music and stereos at the time.

THen the novelty of stereo hifi wore off I suppose for most except us audiophile type kooks and the rest is history I suppose.

Sndsrtaud,

What's your assessment of the 3000s versus the 100s you had prior? Do you know if the 100s were series 2 or 3?

Thanks.

Some of the Silverline designs like the Boleros in particular appear pretty formidable. Nice to hear the OHMs might play in the same league.

Snds,

You're right. It's all about the presentation that differentiates the ohms from other good designs. .

Omni's are a different beast with a totally different presentation. Would not make any sense to use them as a reference to compare traditional designs against. You can compare and contrast but its essentially apples and oranges.

Nevertheless, I have seen it done on occasion.

The late John Potis was an OHM speaker fan for many years, reviewed them and used them for comparison to other products he reviewed.

With recent mentions of Miller Sound and John Potis, I happened to come across this which I thought a very fun read:

Road Tour

Sndsrtaud,

IT can vary, but I use DNM Reson ICs throughout my system. I like these for their flexibility, cost effectiveness, coherence and overall clarity. The bass tends towards the leaner side compared to some ICs but is very articulate and full and a nice match to the OHMs.

For a fuller low end, I also like MIT networked ICs. I use the older and less expensive Terminator series ICs. I tend to prefer these more with my monitors.

FOr speaker cables, I have no clear preference. I use industrial grade in wall speaker wire to my f5s which reside in the room adjacent to my gear. The results are very good having tuned everything accordingly.

In my main room where my gear resides, I use more expensive AUdioquest cv6 speaker cables. I have had my 100s and Triangle monitors in there. My Dynaudio monitors are in there currently. The CV6 sounds very open and dynamic in there with all, but the OHMs tend to respond to tweaks the most.

".what sort of image height do you perceive when the vocalist is at realistic listening levels i.e. singing between speakers or slightly behind the speaker plane? If 5-6ft, does this effect extend to multi-tracked lead vocalist in either channel?

That's a hard one to answer.

Specific recording parameters are a big factor. You get what's there. Often, that is a lot. There is always good natural ambience to vocals that make them sound natural in the space and easy to locate, usually somewhere between the driver height and the ceiling, from a typical listening position, but are seldom pinpoint in location, more like a live performance than what you would hear typically between two smaller stereo speakers.

THis tends to carry over even into mono recordings and make those seem very lifelike with a natural 3-d ambience, though not stereo, sometimes it can be hard to tell it is pure mono.

The omni-like wide dispersion helps keep the presentation sounding coherent from most anywhere you would listen from, so the sweet spot is essentially quite broad.

"Reading back through this Thread I'm staggered at some of the amplifier power reserves being rumoured. In the case of 500W or 1000W > 4 ohms, how does the Ohm 5000 react to Telarc 1812 type peaks? I've seen this type of program material blow many a fine bass driver :(
What is your experience?"

I have 5s, series 3, not 5000s, which I expect are similar, but I can speak for the 5s.

I have some old telarc CDs and records and I have witnessed exactly what you are talking about back in their heyday. They are known for overall dynamic range and peaks.

Lots of music I play has very demanding peaks, like orchestral, big band, electronica, etc., both on CD and record.

My goal with the OHM 5s and use of monster amps as I call them with same was to be able to raise the roof and go as loud as I would like without stress, breakup, compressed dynamics, etc. Like the biggest baddest systems one might hear out there, but at a price point I might handle.

I would say I accomplished that goal and have been most pleased. WHen I listen, I realize how fortunate I am to have been able to get to where I am audio/sound wise.

Some recordings make me nervous when I know what is coming next, not wanting to have to deal with any expensive repairs due to accidents, but I have yet to hear any of those bad things in my main rig with the BC ref1000m amps and the OHM 5s. I am not as brave with the rest of the gear I have at home, though most of it does quite well still in these regards by most any audiophile standards I would say.

Moon,

No ill effects from the wide range driver that i am aware of. I believe the Walsh driver confguration has a lot to do with its effectiveness from top to bottom, a fairly unique capability of Walsh drivers i would say.

Phaelon,

I'm not familiar with the 14" stands.

Does that elevate the driver 14" higher than just the F cabinets alone?

My 5s are in OHM refurbed and tweaked (now ported similar to other CLS models) F cabinets. I find this a good height for listening from a seated position in that tonality with CLS drivers seems to change unfavorably if listening from a position below the driver. I wonder if that is the case with F Walsh drivers, which I believe are also inherently taller than 5 CLS drivers as well?

Phaelon.

BEautiful! I can see where that would work quite well in that size room, especially with the wood floors, which I have always found to be somewhat problematic acoustically including with OHM Walshes, especially the bottom ported CLS models.

I put 12" slate tiles under my "super" Walsh 2s with teh 100S3 drivers when I moved those to my family room on the second floor even with dense carpet and padding on the wood flooring material. Not an issue with any of my speakers when they reside in the basement with its similar carpeting but over the concrete foundation. Dealing with acoustics associated with the floor is definitely important, especially with bottom ported models.

"My Magnepan with subs are maybe a bit more used as an analytical tool"

I tend to think the same way about the Dynaudio monitors that I also use. When one is exposed to more typical stereo "hifi" type sound normally all ones life, it can be hard to totally disassociate with that. But it seems I always levitate to the OHMs for the most pure musical enjoyment.

Blue OHMs...sounds perfect for some Muddy Waters, John Lee Hooker, Lynyrd Skynrd, Zeppelin, etc....

"Cranking" was a big part of the break-in process for me with my 5S3s. Any break in possible is a good thing though I would say.

There's a news flash now on the OHM site:

"IN THE NEWS
May 14, 2012

Thank You Germany.

The Walsh 1000s received a fine review in Germany and we are expecting to have a good translation very soon.

We are running about 10-15 working days for standard orders. Custom jobs are always welcome."

I've been very interested to hear how OHM does in Germany, what with the mbls, GPs, and other high tech companies there.

Economic forces could be just right these days to enable an American Product to compete against the GErman big boys on their own turf. I guess we may find out soon.

OK, you can find it on this site under "tests" if you look.

Translation by Google:

German OHM 1000 Review