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

Thanks for the response Mapman. The Ohms have a nice system feeding them: Mac Mini, PS Audio Perfectwave DAC MKII, Ayre K5-XE, and Mark Levinson No. 432 amplifier.

So far they are really good speakers minus the issues raised above. To my surprise they are much more musical compared to the Magnepans in my room. I find myself surprised at the ease of sound coming out of these things and love the ease at which they image vs the Magnepans. In my 13x12 room the Ohms copious amounts of bass. So far my ears give out before they do. I will get everything adjusted with Dirac once I get the basic placement of the speakers down.

My only other quibble with these speakers and it is non acoustic is that the bases of the speaker are finished rather poorly compared to the great cCherry veneer work. I expect a little more from a speaker costing nearly 3k.

Crazy enough I figure I would try Dirac out this evening. Very impressed with the bass response and I knew the speakers were digging down into subwoofer range just by listening to abusive music like Lorde. Sure enough on measuring them in Dirac the Oh,s measured a flat response down to 20hz prior to any correction being applied. This is well beyond what they were sped'ed for by Ohm. It is amazing what these speakers can do for bass. I haven't heard any speaker so effortless convey bass dynamics.

Well been doing a lot of reading and finally took the plunge and purchased a set of Ohm Walsh 2000s with cherry veneer. I am a long time Magnepan owner and currently they are replacing my Magnepan 3.6s. Need to down size some stuff with a baby on the way. 

So far the break in process is going well with about 20 hours on them thus far. I am fiddling with positioning and by and large really enjoy their sound. There are only a couple things I am not quite getting out of them vs the 3.6s. Vertical height happens but isn't quite as big and broad on a consistent basis as the Magnepans seems recording dependent. Also there are points where instruments like cymbals are clearly coming from the tweeter in the speaker lose that in air feeling. They are lack the finesse and air of the ribbons. Overall though an extremely musical speaker and they make me rethink what a cone speaker can do in terms of producing a sound stage vs big planars.

Any thoughts on placement to solve the couple of issues above?

Bondmap,
Thanks for the link. I too am a satisfied Sound Anchor customer. :)

Mapman,
I will definitely report back this evening. Really glad you mentioned the Subdudes because funny enough I have really been wanting to try experimenting with raising the Ohms up a big since I a tall guy and have a fairly high listening chair and oh jee I just happen to have two of them sitting in a closet within 5 ft of my listening room. So that will kill two birds with one stone.

Thanks for the advice Mapman! I in fact do have the speakers on a suspended floor and I do feel it vibrate along with the walls and pretty much everything if I have music like Lorde and Interstellar playing! Even better though is I actually have some old sub dudes sitting around which would actually give me some more physical height out of the speakers and address the problem you are suggesting. Sounds like a fun evening of music is ahead with a couple of experiments and probably a remeasuring using Dirac when I am done.

Thanks for the response bondmanp. I would say my experience so far with the Ohms is that my image stability in terms of voice height is very consistent at about 4 to 5 feet high regardless of the recording. The changes is the image height and I think it has to do also with how pressured the room gets. The louder I crank of the speaker the bigger the sound tends to get, maybe 10-20% larger soundstage. Additionally as you point out height definitely can vary with recording. Play the Interstellar soundtrack last night by the wind noise was can height, but by the end of the track with the orchestra in full force the height was nearly hitting my 8 foot ceilings.

As for toe-in and Dirac so far I have only tried them toe'ed out which seems to add more image height but I will try them toe'ed in. Dirac also was a great difference in my room. I can turn Dirac on and off instantly with my setup and the difference has been improved control and extension (probably due to Dirac killing a 15db bump between 40 and 60 hz) and a much smoother and focused mids and highs. Also the holographic surround effect has been tuned now to be more precise and realistic.

As for what speakers in their price range could beat the Ohms I would honestly say not many from my listening experience. As I said in another post compared to my 3.6s which are renowned for being a top tier speaker the Ohms excel in numerous places. One could look at the Magnepan 1.7i's or .7s but in terms of dynamics the Magnepans would quickly be put in their place and the Ohms definitely have a less veiled and open sound to them compared to the Magnepans. Which is odd since that is one of the hallmarks of Magnepans. But the Ohms just have this open unrestrained sound to them that is easy to forget when listening to them, but you quickly remember when comparing them to other speakers.

One interesting this is that people talk about Magnepans having an airy sound which they do when it comes to the texture of the sound (especially on ribbon models). However the Ohms excel at having sound literally sounding like it is coming out of nowhere. It sounds not airy in texture, but as if the sound placement is just coming out of nowhere and it is a somewhat weird, but easily adapted to trait. The Ohms when playing some material have the ability to project a wall of sound as if the air itself is the speaker. I have never had that experience before on any system I have heard.

Overall more break-in coming and I will certainly try the toe-out. After spending 4 hours moving the speakers in 6 in increments and then fine tuning I think I have place down minus the toe-in experiments. However all of this break-in work will be for not since my left driver can was damaged at the factory and I have replacement cans for both speakers coming in this Tuesday. I spoke with John the next day about the damage and site unseen he instantly offered to send out new drivers. So the break in process will start fresh on Tuesday, but I am excited to take a closer look at the cans taken off the speakers and atleast I have the placement sorted out so it will be time to pull out the tape and mark some spots on the carpet.

PS: Can you send a link to the exact Sound Anchor product you are using with your Ohms? I am interested in picking some up and wanted to give them a shot. I currently use Sound Anchor stands on the Magnepan 3.6s and really enjoy the effect they had.

I will also be posting on here a full review at some point and sending it off to Ohm to use as they want. I will say that I can't believe more people don't own these speakers. Once some time has been spent setting them up they offer a good hybrid of what dynamic cones due best with what planars can do. With the gear in my system I also don't feel like I am losing resolution compared to the 3.6s. I know I have lost some air or delicacy compared to the ribbon in the Magnepans, but I don't think I have lost resolution and I have gained musicality and dynamics. The music so far has been far more engaging.

Ok so far fiddle with toe in vs toe out. Prior I had them toed out about 1 inch. I then tried 1 inch toed in and that did some added rear ambient energy but 2 inch seems to enhanced that effect and made everything sound a bit bigger not just in the rear but the fronts. Definitely a duller upper range but after I fiddle with the iOS platforms I can run Dirac and it can compensate for the recessed highs. More incoming...

Sorry to not get back to the thread quicker on the changes with the updates. Things have been hectic, but I will say that the height is better the speakers speakers on the Subdudes. Bass is definitely different as it is far more dipole and airy and not as cone like of a sound.

I did get the new drivers for my speakers yesterday as one arrived dented. I took apart the left speaker and I will take pictures of the driver and the inside of the cabinet tonight for the sake of sharing knowledge of this speakers.

Here are some shots I took of the new Walsh driver before I installed it in my Ohm 2000s:
Driver:
http://imgur.com/ZifshlN

Cabinet Minus Acoustic Filling:
http://imgur.com/ynVYcEm

In terms of sound quality it is all back to square one again. Since I have new drivers to break in. It will be a few days before I really give them a critical listen.

Been swamped this past week and really haven't had a chance to break the Ohms in anymore. Currently in an extended listening session with them and wondering about cabinet resonance. As I move the speakers around to get the best imaging as am noticing that the cabinet has a lot sound resonating in the cabinet. I can't imagine this being any good for the sound. I am wondering about thoughts on treating it with some sort of dampening material.

I am using the Subdudes. However the subdues won't address the issue I am raising which is the side of the cabinets are definitely resonating. You can knock on the cabinet and it is clearly not inert. 

Definitely with the Ohms I am hearing half way down the cabinet midrange from the woofer part of the Walsh driver. Just seems like it can't be any good to have resonance from the cabinet as typically most manufacturers go for inert cabinets and market them as such. As pointed out by myself and others the cabinets seem certainly on the cheap side especially the bases which I may one day replace with a solid piece of granite or polished corian just to give the speakers a more high end look.

Mapman you are correct that I have acoustic treatment in my room. I have four GIK Acoustics corner traps running floor to ceiling in the front that have the diffusion panels on them and I also have two ASC tube traps in the rear that have the diffussors our as well. This weekend when I actually had time to listen I did install two more ASC traps on their side with the diffusors in front of the wall directly to the side of each speaker. I got a perceived increase in bass response from that. At some point I will remeasure the room using Dirac to see how the response has changed how I have moved the speakers a bit so the measurements I am sure will be a bit off from the first. However I will say a couple things about the subdudes and the measurement I did get with Dirac.

The subdudes improve for my height and high listening chair the needed boot to get the Walsh drivers to where I think the soundstage is level in the room rather than hanging low. Additionally the bass is more airy and more dipole like in nature, however until my 3.6s they can't provide the feeling on certain types of bass that the entire front wall is a driver. I think that is something where the laws of physics kick in on a small Ohm speaker vs a 6 foot tall line source. However bass dynamics with micro or macro are greatly improved with the Ohms. The other thing that the subdudes definitely do is remove pretty much all of the bass vibrations out of the floor which gives the perception of less bass, but it is tighter and better defined. My left full wall still vibrates if you play bass heavy music such as Daft Punk, Lorde or the Interstellar soundtrack.

In regards to Dirac and room measurements from the last measures I got Dirac is saying that I have a fairly smooth response in my room down to 10hz. It dips a little below 20hz by 2-3 db but no signifigant deviation. Not bad for a speaker rated to only 30hz. With some exceptional trapping and fiddling I could get Dirac to correct my Magnepan 3.6s down to 20 hz or so in room, however you would easily hit the dynamic limitations of the driver and have the mylar slap the magnet structure. So I believe the measuremens are legitimate even though I am measuring some insanely low bass coming from these speakers. Playing Lorde's "White Teeth Teens" the bass of the Ohm 2000's easily surpases a push/pull M&K MX-80 that I have setup in my office system. Frankly I really can't see with the proper amplifcation and speaker model choice with the Ohms would ever need a subwoofer. I know my Mark Levinson 432 at 800 watts into 4 ohms is pretty overkill for the Ohms, but I have yet to have a session with the Ohms where they or the Mark Levinson show any signs of strain or frankly any sign of anything but a natural sound (with Dirac engaged). My ears give out long before the speakers or amplifier ever do.

I will continue to break in the drivers and provide more measurements as time allows, but definitely think the Ohms are a superb speaker, but I would like to see improved cabinet construction. As a Magnepan I think Ohm and Magnepan share a similar value philsophy, however as Magnepan owners know they do benefit from the numerous modifications out there including an improved frame.

Mapman,
    I used to be a big believer in listening with my ears only, however there are things that Dirac does that no golden ear can including time alignment, etc. Typically I tend to place the speakers by ear first so that I get the soundstaging and imaging that I think is optimal and then let Dirac clean things up from there. My experience with Dirac is that he just cleans up the sound of the speakers where they are placed rather than transform things. So knowing how to listen and placing the speakers in the best position by ear is still critically important even in the world of digital correction.

Bondmap,
Assuming my listening session tonight doesn't drive me to want to reposition the speakers I will remeasure everything for the position they are currently in and take screenshots to post.

Please note though that I do not use a +3 db bass to -3db treble line. I do use a custom curve that bumps up the bass a bit as I like the bass that way a bit better. You will will see how tight of a response Dirac can get out of the speakers.

Mapman,
You pretty much just described how Dirac like any other room correction software works.

In my specific instance I use it on my Mac Mini that I have setup with Audirvana playback software using the Dirac Plugin and also use the Dirac software for playing movies so that they also benefit from Dirac.

Just a quick observation about the Ohms that I realized during a prolonged listening session. The Magnepans really made me listen to certain types of music. Those tracks where ones that I knew sounded good and there were many tracks that sounded terrible that I just stayed away from. I am noticing with the Ohms I am listening to albums that I haven't listened to in years and enjoying them as the speakers are just far more musical and listenable vs the Magnepans on the same track. There are some things with the Magnepans like I miss like the ribbon tweete, but the Ohms sound so much more dynamic, musical and cohesive.

Please see the link for a screenshot of my Dirac response curve before and after. The green is after and the blue is before. 

Lets try this again with the linking:
http://imgur.com/wQzU3N8

Mapman to answer your questions. I used the recommended USB microphone: UMIK-1 and bought a USB cable extender so it could reach around my room. I used the stereo version of the software (they make a home theater / more channel version) which is around $430. It is expensive, but there is no other product that is going to what Dirac can do acoustically for the money. But I would say if you can swing it even after getting Dirac get acoustic treatment in conjunction with Dirac. Dirac can only fix so much including room nulls.

Mapman,
As I said in an above post I have boosted the EQ curve to be tilted towards the bass. I tend to like this sound as it sounds a bit more reinforced on the low end.

Dirac, by default does not use a flat curve. it is +2 db in bass and -2 db at the treble. According to their research most listeners tend to dislike a flat response as it sounds thin due to the fact that our ears don't heard evenly. As I have said I bump the curve a bit more as I prefer that sound. Other manufacturers like Audio Source who make numerous equalizers has the exact same position about flat frequency response. However you can make the EQ curve flat if you so choose or really anything.

Dirac will let you set a target curve any which way you like and will tailor the response according to the target curve.

I have never done nearfield measurements with the Ohms.

Listening to Dirac in my room provides a couple of cool things. First listening becomes more fatique free, imaging becomes less blurry, and the overall presentation is more natural and spacious. You also tend to hear more information in tracks as things seem to be presented in a more even handed manner. Certainly worth the $500 price of admission after you purchase a calibrated microphone.

Well it has been a few weeks with my Ohm Walsh 2000's and I think it is time for a review. Say that with the following qualifiers: A: The speakers probably have about 30 hours in on them at moderate to loud volume so the break in is there to judge the final sound. B: I think I have figured out placement and had one of those breakthrough listen sessions where I had a "Eureka!' moment about how to place the speakers, make some room adjustments, as well as change how I am recording in Dirac.

So let’s begin with the room and system that these Ohm Walshs are being used with. I have them placed in a small 13x13 room with a bit over 8 foot ceilings. That room also has an open at all times double french door. This room is used mainly for audio though it does have 2 channel home theater uses here and there. The room has bass traps located in the corners of the room from floor to ceiling and I am working with GIK to purchase more acoustic treatment for the room per their plans. Per suggestions from Mapman I have placed the Ohms on top of SubDude HD anti vibration stands. The gear is as follows:

Source: Mac Mini with Audirvana and Dirac Integration
DAC: PS Audio PerfectWave MKII
Preamp: Ayre K-5xe
Amplifier: Mark Levinson No. 432
Speakers: Ohm Walsh 2000s

Past Speakers:
Some useful information is that I am a Magnepan guy and have been for the last 20 years. When I first heard them at a dealer showcase I loved the open nature of the speakers as well as their room filling sound. Magnepans are certainly not perfect speakers, but if soundstaging, a large surface area to have sound emanate from the speaker, and in the case of the ribbon based models a sense of detail and air around instruments are important criteria are important to you then Magnepans are your speaker if you have the room, equipment and patience for them.

The Need for Change:
After all these years with Magnepans and in particular for me 3.6s dominating my small audio room I wanted to downsize the system with the anticipation of a newborn baby coming into the mix. I spent countless hours searching the web for a speaker that could have a large soundstage and three dimensional sound of my Magnepans for around $3000. The task was difficult as so many speakers related to Magnepans are dipoles and are some sort of planar. Even cone based designs that were open baffle required the speaker to be at least 3 feet from the back wall which was no improvement over the placement of the current 3.6s. Then I randomly stumbled upon Ohm speakers via a random audio thread and started some digging around. Overall the information sounded interesting, but the question of soundstage height was not being answered. Most reviewers and those that write about monopole speakers talk about spacious sound but typically it is within the height of the speakers and really it is the width and depth that are the spacious sound rather than the height. Now some of you may be thinking "Seriously what is the deal with this guy and soundstage height?" I will tell you that until you have lived with 6 foot tall and 2 foot wide panels in your listening room you don't realize what you are missing. There is a sense of life scale that few speakers regardless of price are able to match much less a set of speakers sub $5000. Needless to say a lot of internet research ensued about the Ohms and thanks to a lot of posts on this thread and some others, plus Ohm's generous in home trial took the big risk out since if they failed to meet my needs there were going back. By the way for those of you who want the quick answer: the Magnepans are sold and the Ohms were not returned.

Build Quality:
So after unpacking the speakers I found that my left speaker can had a sizeable dent that John at Ohm replaced with no questions asked. Other than that the speakers look pretty good from afar. However I feel that fit and finish are something that remains to be desired. The cans look pretty cool with their perforated metal, but overall nothing about the speaker screams high end audio or matches the quality of the sound they reproduce. I think that is a real shame because we often listen with our eyes as well as our ears. I think the worst offender in terms of build quality that I found were two fold. One is internal and only found when I replaced the damage driver in my speaker which is that the port in the speaker looks to be made of cardboard and the gloss finish base of the speaker looks spray painted. I know some will argue that this is a cost saving measure and it is about the sound, but I have seen $100 Paradigm Atoms that I have had less qualms about fit and finish. I think visual impressions are important especially when we are talking about a $2000+ speaker.

Placement:
Placement is a tough issue for the Ohms. Contrary to what Ohm states about the relative ease of place I found this to not be true for me. Sure you can set them down close to the wall and listen and they sound ok, but really to get the wall of sound that has depth not just behind the speaker but behind the listener careful attention and note taking must be done when moving the speakers around in order to find their best positioning. Are the Ohms as sensitive as Magnepans and one should fear being a quarter inch out of alignment...? No. But paying attention to what you are doing and spending a few weeks moving and taking notes really does help and I think that is especially true for any speaker that isn't a monopole.

Tone, Dynamics and All of the Other Fancy Sound Adjectives:
Lets start by saying that at least from my experience what I think any Ohm listener will be surprised about is the bass. These speakers make bass. Lots and lots of clean effortless bass. I mean this statement not from the usual "Oh these speakers make good bass for their size." I mean to say that these speakers measured in my room are making bass into the 10hz range. For a speaker rated down to around 30hz the Ohms easy pass that spec. This is clean and music bass. It doesn't sound like subwoofers are on, but rather that a pair of stereo speakers that dig down deep on soundtracks such as Interstellar.

The Ohms are very musical and open. As much as I thought the Magnepans made music I find myself tapping my foot more and not even realizing it. These speakers have this open sense and just unsteadiness sense about them. This is certainly in part due to their dynamic power but even vocals and background sounds just have this matter of factness about them. Sound is just there and it is clean and pure. I have heard people talk about musical speakers and for the first time I truly understand what that sounds like. Now before you start thinking that the Ohms must be the ultimate speaker for audiophile, the answer is it depends on what you like in your music presentation. What these speakers do not do is provide that microscopic sound that is often written about in audio magazines. You are not going to hear the air moving around instruments. But what you are going to hear is something that sounds extremely cohesive and part of a well placed soundscape. That for my listening room covers all four walls in the room and that includes going around my head if the right track is played. However I consistently get sound going as far towards the side walls as far back as my listening position.

The speakers depending on the recording and even more so with the help of Dirac room correction have good height. Is it a 6ft tall Magnepan? Yeah sometimes. Sometimes it is less and of course I dislike that but the Ohms do so many of other things in a more musical and convincing manner that I can live with it. Where I think the Ohms could use help would be a taller tweeter array on top of the CLS driver as I think it would add more height to sounds that are localized to the left and right tweeters such as cymbals or other localized sounds. It is at those moments that it becomes clear that you are listening to a dome tweeter rather that the expansive CLS driver. 

Overall the Ohms are fantastically musical spellers.mthey are not the last word in accuracy but I think that is a compromise with any speaker design that at some point cohesion and musicality turn into isolated precise renderings that to an extent are artificial but can be pleasurable to listen to.

The Ohms have their flaws and if I had to pick two it would be the dome tweeter setup and the build quality. That being said these speakers do so much right. These speakers have brought me closer to the music in my listening space them any prior speaker setup has and frankly surpassing auditions I have had with spealkers costing 10 to 20 times more and that is not including the associated equipment and larger room. This isn't just with audiophile music like Diana Krall or orchestra music. I am talking about music like Daft Punk, AC/DC, Smashing Pumpkins, Lorde, etc.

Lastly to those reading this and weary about how these speakers compare to your expensive audiophile salon speakers I saw give their in home trial a shot. To me that is all the proof you need to know that Ohm is confident that you care have a similar experience in your listening room.

Thank you all for the kind words.

Mapman, the 10hz was a shocker for me too however it is definitely confirmed with the Ohms has the Magnepans never measured like that with Dirac and I have measured the room with the Ohms in various positions around 5-7 times as I have EQ'd for each new "ideal" spot they have been moved into. Each time there is clear 10hz output that I can see that is at a level in the audible band. I have also posted some shots prior in the thread as well. Listen to various extreme low bass tracks definitely confirms this as I am just getting tons of room shaking bass that I have never experienced before. Also I have a +10 db bass hump around 45 hz that is being corrected. So I am wondering if the extra bandwidth and is allowing for the 10hz to be better heard since the hump is being cut down so heavily.

Polarin you nailed it right on the head. Not many speakers are able to pull this off. I noticed after I got my Ohms that when listening to my Magnepans I was being selective about my music selection and played tracks that I knew sounded good on the Magnepans rather than what I was in the mood for. I wonder how many other audiophiles are doing this unconsciously. 

bondmanp: Thanks for reading over the long review. On the issue of break-in per one of John's article at Ohm it seems like break-in occurs fairly rapidly but what he seems to imply is that a lot of it is breaking your ears and brain into a different sound. I hope the drivers can open up more as I always am for free sound improvements. :)

I strongly disagree with the idea that the Magnepans enhance the size of recordings or that even if they did that this would be a deficit. I accept Magnepan's argument that one of their biggest strengths is that they don't have a tiny dome tweeter trying to convey acoustics for an entire room. One could easily argue as Magnepan does that the only way to get room filling sounds done correctly is to have a dipole with a line array type setup. 

Obviously different recording have different sounds and I think both the Ohms and the Magnepans do this well. I can't compare to your experience as I have over an 8 foot ceiling and I haven't had the 18 inches above the floor vocals. I think in your case that maybe due to the close proximity of the driver to the ceiling since the Ohms seem to have a lot of vertical air pressure. But I do agree that the Ohms are able to play a wider variety of music in a way that is more enjoyable.

Lastly on the DAC yes it was expensive, but luckily I got mine on a closeout from Underwood Hifi for $1500 so not nearly as damaging as the full MSRP. :)

mlsstl: I fully agree with you about the room being critical! I have been working with GIK Acoustics to get the last of the room acoustic pieces I need to finish up the room. I did some furniture moving per their request and a major difference was heard there. Frankly I think if anyone has a listening room they shouldn't even consider by expensive equipment until they look at atleast corner traps. People get hung up on by super expensive cables that cost about as much all the room treatment would cost and the room treatment will have the biggest difference on the sound by a long shot. I think by the time everything is said and done I will have about $2800 wrapped up in room treatment, but differences are dramatic both in measurements and subjective listening.

I should have 4 new acoustic panels in next week. I just ordered a pair of GIK Acoustics Monster Bass Traps for the rear wall with the range limiter option and also ordered a pair of Polyfusors for the side wall. Looking forward to hearing and measuring the differences in my system. This is the first time I will have treated anything behind the corners of the room.

bondmanp - The polyfusors ran $270 + shipping for the pair. Down the road I am going to pick up 8 of the gridfusors to place near the ceiling and according to GIK that should pretty much do it for my room needs minus me doing some crazy stuff that the wife won't allow and frankly with the experimentation that I did place the speakers so close sounded bad.

I agree with you bondmanp that diffusion makes a lot of sense with the Ohms as they are relying on sound bounching around the room to help create their holographic imaging. In my own setup everything that I have purchased for the room has had some level of diffusion behind it minus the bass traps going behind my listening. All of the corner traps have difusion panels in them and the polyfusors obviously have difusion. I have tried removing the difusion panels and the room just goes dead. Things image like a microscope, but you sense of scale and image size is gone. 

Having an extended listening session with the Ohms this evening and I find myself again amazed how musical these speakers. Recordings I haven't listened to in years due to their poor sound on the Magnepans sound great in the Ohms. Certainly some albums sound better then others but all are enjoyable. That is a testament to a good loudspeaker and some I have not heard many speakers pull off regardless of price.

For all here.
I would really recommend taking up GIK Acoustics' offer for free room consultation. I doubt many of us here (myself included) are acoustical engineers and if you contact GIK they will let you work with one on a custom room solution. I went this route and it was pain free as I trouble issues for the room were identified and a variety of products to fix the solution were given to me to choose from. At this point I feel confident after the next batch of treatments arrives on Wednesday and I make one more order for some ceiling difusion, i.e. I followed the plan laid out by the acoustic engineer that I should have considering the confines of my room a setup that takes care of most of the issues.

Anyway just my thought. :)

Well the panels came in yesterday and I got the polyfusors setup in the side walls. Definitely an improved blackness in the room and the speakers blend more seamlessly into the room and soundstage. Imaging is also greatly improved. As solid as the anchoring of the center voice and instruments were it is now even better locked in sounds have far better separation. Everything has a separation sonic sound and things are less homogenous (Not to say they were by any stretch before). Bass is even airier and taughter. Bass just seems to float in a way I typically associated in with dipoles/planars but it has the huge advantage of the dynamic driver punch.

On the objective side there was a measurable difference in the 200 to 500hz range that levels out 3 nulls that were being measured pre Dirac correction and in the post Dirac impulse response was smoothed out with the panels in place.

Tonight I will be installing the monster bass traps with the range limiters in the rear since the hardware that came to mount them wasn't sufficient and I need to get some from the hardware store.

One lesson reinforced to me is that regardless of digital room correct you need a solid acoustic space in the room. Dirac only improved in the latest acoustic installation, but with the added panels in place there is a clear improvement in the sound even with Dirac on. So before buying $1500 interconnects spend however much you can on room acoustic treatment and then put the icing on the cake.

Looking forward to installing the monster bass panels tonight. :)

Yeah at some point I will get the room in shape enough to feel comfortable sending out images of it on the web. Right now it needs to be repainted and it is got stuff everywhere since I just installed all these new panels.

However one thought I did have is besides this thread, Ohm users don't have a place to really congregate online. I was wondering if maybe we should look into starting up an Ohm users group. I guess I miss my Magnepan Users Group. :)

I am also curious as to what post of mine you are referencing?

Schubert, call it what you will but there are certain music types that you hear at every stereo shop demo or magazine review. This is what I would call audiophile music. If I hear one more Patricia Barber or Diana Krall demo I don't know what I will do. :) There are certainly favored demo tracks out there.

Martyki, thanks for the feedback and I will try to post another when I get more time. I have been swamped lately.

Schubert, that point that I was making with that statement is that the Ohm's make all recordings sound good. As I have sound now that I have the Ohm's I am realizing how much my listening sessions were pulled in the direction of tracks that sounded good for the Magnepans. Not the freedom to enjoy my diverse collection. Don't read too much into the whol classical music thing. I certainly have a few Bach and other albums in my Audirvana library. However what impresses me with the Ohms is that if I want to listen to AC/DC they sound amazingly good with that as well. I don't feel like I am going from hi-fi Patricia Barber's heart beat being heard on one album and then jumping to a good rock album that might as well sound like an MP3. That is the beauty of the Ohms is that they can play a variety of music in a sonically pleasing way.

Yeah you have mentioned this before, but I have noticed sound emanating from the side wall of the tower. It wasn't exactly quiet either and must have an impact on the sound. Do remember that I am using the smaller and from what I can tell less well build cabinets of the 1000 series vs you who is retrofitting to older and better build enclosures. So the difference maybe far more relevant to new Ohms then Ohms of days past.

I have taken my Ohms apart and posted images earlier in this thread. The cabinet seems fine just not really well built IMO.

Here is a link to the coverage Stereophile gave the Ohms.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/nyas-2016-day-one-jim-austin#32si0iLbhryvqxkY.97

I wasn't there to have a listen, but I have to say that I have never heard the "abundance of ambience" that he was talking about. One comment that did strike me and I wish reviewers would learn to acknowledge and identify their own listening bias is that laser sharp imaging that so many seem to want in hifi today that is not what "real" music sounds like.

Laser sharp imaging is an artifact of stereo speakers and is a design choice and not a sign of quality or increased desirability. I have seen folks slight Magnepans before for a lack for a lack of razor sharp imaging. Yet again if you look at Magnepan and Ohm's marketing material it is about recreating live music. Most speakers are not about recreating live music.

My Ohms were dialed in pretty well in my room. I continued to fiddle with placement, but consistently returned to the same position time and time again.

Honestly if I were to fault the Ohms it would be a tendency to have instruments sound like they are radiating directly off the tweeter, a lack of full resolution like a ribbon or Heil driver, and build quality which is just not up to snuff for a speaker at the price of the Ohms. I have seen other internet direct vendors build speakers for less than a quarter of what I paid for the Ohms that are built twice as well. An abundance of ambience would not be something that I would suggest. There were recordings that sounded large or chambered, but it was the recording and the same effect was present on other speakers in my room.

I continue to wonder how could my Walsh 2000s would sound if they were built to more exacting standards.

I have measured in room response with my Ohms using DIRAC and a calibrated mic and I am getting a gentle roll off about say 10 to 15k.

Something was mentioned earlier about the use of an iPad mic and I am wondering if this is an issue with the mic more than the driver.

I will however say that my own experience with Ohm build quality matches Peter's. Ohm commands a high price for a product that in my opinion has sub par build quality. I have an extra set of cans sitting around and at some point will tinker with upgrading the tweeter and crossover used to put in matching, but super parts and build a cabinet that matches Ohm's specs but is braced and dampened better and doesn't using a cardboard tube for the bass port.

All of us here love our Ohms, but I do feel that there is some rationalizing of poor build quality if it were any other speaker company would be called out for what it is. When I spend 3k on a speaker I am hoping that we could spring for a $2-3 plastic tube that I can buy from Parts Express.