|
I have just finished reading this thread from start to finish. It took me a couple of weeks to wade through it. In some ways, it has been a fascinating read punctuated by the original poster selling his Ohms. I have to admit being disappointed about that event, but was pleased that the thread continued on.
I own 2 sets of early Ohm-Walsh speakers, a set of Walsh 1s and Walsh 2s. I paid less than $200 for each set so I wasn't gambling much.
My original interest in Ohms was sparked by reading a review of some amplifier whose name escapes me at the moment, but the Ohm speakers were mentioned. I believe the review was in a San Francisco based paper. Being a curious type, I did some internet searching and came upon the Ohm website. The technical aspect of the Walsh design was fascinating to me (I'm an engineer) so I looked around locally (SoCal) and found my speakers.
The Walsh 1s were good, but I hadn't bought a new CD player yet. That only happened after the Walsh 2s showed up. There was a noticeable difference between the two models. Let's just say the Walsh 2s are still listened to and the Walsh 1s are in the garage waiting for the 2.2000 upgrade when the budget allows.
Reading this thread has prompted me to buy a used Parasound 1500A amp. It hasn't been set up yet because there doesn't seem to be a way to connect it to my current A/V receiver (Onyko HT-R430). It has the normal line-level outs (tape, etc.), but no pre-amp out.
I know, I know; buy a pre-amp. I get that, but in order to have a decent WAF, I have maintain an FM tuner and a remote. This makes things more complicated and, hence, more expensive I'm sure.
Any ideas out there?
BTW, I'm reading Jim Smith's book 'Get Better Sound'. Any comments on that?
Thanks,
Tate
|
I guess I’m talking to myself here. :-)
I just bought a B&K Reference 5 S2 pre-amp on Audiogon that satisfies my requirements for a tuner and a remote so I’m pleased with that.
I’ll post how it sounds with the Parasound 1500A amp when I get it hooked up; probably after the new year.
|
I really am talking to myself so I don't need to be shy.
The preamp/tuner and power amp were integrated into my system and the Onyko got relegated to garage duty.
At first, I wasn't sure if I had made the right decision in jettisoning the old Onyko receiver. I realized that some adjustments might be necessary to get the new components and the room tuned in.
The bass response was good so I kicked the treble up slightly to better match what I had the old receiver set to and, voila, the sound was starting get there.
While I was expecting a big difference in the sound, the reality was measured in more subtle layers. The bass was stronger and better defined and I didn't need as much volume to hear the details. My wife wasn't complaining to me about the SPL.
This last point is important because I want her to be able to share some of the music with me. Before, it wasn't happening at the levels I needed.
I have reviewed some of my CDs on the new set-up and I'm hearing details and a general openess that wasn't there before. Also, the congestion at higher volume levels is gone.
My original goal, 3 months ago, was to get closer to a reference system I had heard while on vacation. Now, I can say I'm about 90% there.
I still have some cable tuning to do and, eventually, an Ohm speaker upgrade to 2.2000. I might change the listening area some if I can get the WAF high enough.
My current modest system is partially the result of reading this Ohm discussion and components purchased on this site. I can say that I am very satisfied with the result considering the amount of money spent (about $1,500 so far). Buying used components made it financially possible to do for me. Additionally, I don't have to do any major break-in proceedures; someone has done it already!
|
Someone is listening.
Thanks, mapman.
|
Yes, thanks Frazeur1.
I wanted to get the system to a certain point and then go slow.
On my B&K preamp/tuner my only comment is that the tuner part doesn't seem to be very good (no bass), but otherwise it is fine.
I did buy a pair (one set) of Morrow Audio MA1 interconnects and I wasn't sure if they would be more effective between the preamp and the power amp or between the CD player and the preamp.
Any thoughts there?
|
Thanks mapman, but I will have to wait on the IC comparison as I recently blew out the 30 year old surrounds on my Walsh 2s. This explains why I was losing the bass. The Parasound power amp did the deed.
I sent an email to John Strobeen to see what route I should take (repair or upgrade).
In the meantime, I plan to install a set of Walsh 1s as a stop gap measure until the issue is resolved.
Any comments on the repair vs, upgrade question?
|
After talking to John Strohbeen today, I bit the bullet and ordered the 2.2000 driver upgrade. I will be sending my Walsh 2 speakers back to John for a partial trade toward the 2.2000s that will end up going into the Walsh 1 cabinets. He mentioned that it is an easier install into the Walsh 1 because you don't have to dig out the cross-overs like on the Walsh 2s.
Sounds good to me!
In a couple of weeks, I will have everything back together so I can work on comparing the IC cables. They can start their break-in in the meantime.
The Walsh 1s actually sound pretty good now that they are installed in the new system, but John said to not turn them up too loud! I really didn't think I was playing them beyond reason, but...
|
Mapman: I remember your earlier post about playing the W2s outdoors.
Just to be clear, I didn’t have any issues with my speakers when using my Onyko receiver (100 wpc). It was only when I put the Parasound 1500 into the mix that the problems occurred. I will be more careful in the future.
Using my Samsung Note 5 to stream music is an option that I can look into, but the B&K tuner seems ok now that I have removed the W2s from the mix. I think I had already blown the voice coils by that time so it only appeared to be missing the bass. With the W1s installed, all is well with the tuner again.
I want to thank all the posters to this thread as I’m sure my system would be pretty pathetic without all of the input. My good choices were a result of following the suggestions found here.
When I mentioned this thread to John S., he just chuckled.
Also, any feedback on Jim Smith’s book (Get Better Sound)?
|
Just to correct the record, when I asked to John S. on the phone, he theorized that the damage I did to the walsh 2s was to the voil coils and not the surrounds. Even though the speakers are over 30 years old, he said that the surrounds were probably ok as they are made of cloth and are durable.
|
The tuner+remote is 100% for the WAF.
I don’t think having a computer hooked up in our living room is going to pass muster.
I emailed John Strohbeen asking "how does one know if the speakers are over-driven?" and he answered this.
"The upgrade comes with a 3-Year Limited Parts & Labor warranty. If you blow them up and we consider it abuse, we will tell you; but still cover it under the warranty the first time. After that you will know how loud is too loud and we can discuss moving up to mode with a Walsh 3000 size driver. I normally only have this discussion after the damage in done; but since you did in your Walsh 2s..."
I really didn’t try to over do it with the volume control, but I like to hear the live concert-level sound. Also, some music really only sounds good when cranked-up. Additionally, I had read on this thread that the Walsh type speakers needed lots of power to sound their best. I provided the power, but...
Hopefully, I can restrain myself enough not to do more damage. The highest I went on the Parasound amp was -10db. I know this is probably a meaningless number as it is source dependent.
I am looking forward to the new drivers after reading all the positive reviews on them. I also am aware of the break-in issues so I will be patient.
|
I thought it was interesting that he didn't mention Ohm-Walsh speakers. It seemed as if he didn't consider them "audiophile" enough. That is just my opinion, of course.
Also, he would have then had to make special comments about fitting them to the room and maybe he didn't think that was worth the effort considering the small population of owners.
Anyway, it was still an interesting read and, there is no doubt, he knows his stuff.
|
That the basic Ohm-Walsh design has remained the same for decades, accounts for the stable "voice" they make.
I like the fact that the design has been refined over time, but not changed. This is called 'development'; think Volkswagen Beetle for example. Rather than being driven by maketing forces (whiz-bang selling points), the Ohm-Walsh speaker evolution is driven by engineering forces (thanks, John).
Mapman, you are correct to say that there is little interest in the greater audio comunity because this competitive business is extremely marketing-driven; the latest and greatest fads are headline material. While performance is part of that equation, it is sometimes secondary to how something looks and/or is marketed. Many consumers need to have a visual representation of how 'cool' there equipment is.
Imagine, if all audio electronic equipment was housed in non-descript black boxes with only the manufacturer's name on it; that would be a marketer's nightmare. Components would have to be sold only on their sonic merits - ouch!
Ohm-Walsh speakers are like that. With only a couple of visual face-lifts over 4 decades, this product line has been remarkably stable. The fact that the company is still in business speaks volumes (excuse the multiple puns) about the sonic quality of the speakers themselves.
I have the utmost respect for the Ohm company for staying the course in this extreme marketing-driven segment.
|
I have a speaker hum that is really bad. After the usual disconnecting of the various components, I found it was coming from the TV.
This was a huge relief because the wife had been pointing her angry finger at my newly acquired amp and pre-amp as the source of the problem!
Any ideas out there on how to deal with this issue?
I will play around with the cables and power cable grounding, but I wonder what a permanent fix will look like.
|
Thanks for the help mapman, I will check it out.
|
I read the article and found it interesting. John has a way with illuminating speaker aspects that are subtle. The substitution of different terms for the various frequency ranges was illustrative.
I don't understand the orthodoxy of audiopholes in regards to not using equalization or tone controls when fitting the speaker sound to the room. John gets it, but others don't seem to.
Even Jim Smith (Get Better Sound) rarely mentions changing the sound coming out of the speakers, but focuses primarily on changing the room to fit the speakers. That thinking seems backwards to me, but I'm just a lowly mechanical engineer...or am I missing something important here?
|
Bondman,
The hum I'm getting is with the TV on or off. It only went away when I disconnected the audio cables from the TV to the preamp. I ordered a TII 220 Ground Loop Isolator for the cable box connection and hope this fixes the issue.
|
I'm expecting my Walsh 2.2000 upgrade tomorrow.
It will be interesting to hear the difference.
Any tips on the install?
Since I am using the Walsh 1 cabinets, no crossover removal is needed.
|
Finally got the time to install the upgraded 2.2000 drivers in my Walsh 1 cabinets. The install was straight forward, but did require some finesse to install the drivers in the top of the cabinet. I'm not a wood guy so I had to pay attention to removing all the old particle board/glue residue before re-gluing the new board in place.
Once assembled and when the glue had set up, I had the chance to try the speakers out. The volume was kept at a sane level for a couple of CDs and then I started to increase the sound level.
The result was a definite increase in the bass response (expected) and a good clean, balanced sound through the range. The new drivers are smooth and consistant. The old drivers (both the OW1 and OW2) had some holes in the frequency range where the the volume fall-off was obvious.
I am aware that some time has to pass for the break-in period. My plan is to just play them without being too critical until a couple of months have passed.
As is, they are better by far than the old drivers and I am happy. I shouldn't need to do much to my current system except enjoy it for now.
To review, I'm running a B&K Reference 5 S2 preamp into a Parasound HCA1500A amp. My source is a Yamaha CD-S300 player connected by standard RCA cable to the B&K preamp. I have a set of Marrow MA1 interconnects from the preamp to the amp. The speaker connection is 14GA bare-ended standard type wire. Speaker placement is about 6' apart and a foot from the back wall.
I have no illusions about being an audiophile, I just want good sound. Any suggestions are welcome.
|
Frazeur1, the old board was removed with a hammer and is destroyed in the process. The new board has the driver already mounted and fits into the existing space after all the old glue/board remains are removed. I used a file to help smooth things out.
The directions talked about using wood glue and no mention was made of "hot-glue" as some have talked about on this thread.
The new cross-over was screwed into the bottom of the cabinet and can be removed if necessary as it has a contour switch on it (low/medium/high) that, I believe, affects the bass response.
As I didn't have any grills before, I don't have a reference as to whether the new grills are different than the originals due to the new drivers. They fit equally as well on both.
It is too bad that this site doesn't allow photo posting on the threads as I could show you better what I'm talking about.
|
Ok, it may not be a cross-over exactly, but there are some electronics attached to the input board and there is switch and some capacitors. I have a photo if anyone is interested.
My TV related speaker hum ended up being a bad set of RCA cables between the cable box and the preamp.
After talking to the cable TV repairman, he told me that digital cable doesn't cause any hum and that was only an issue back in the analog days. Hey, what do I know?
|
Mapman,
Yes, that is probably what it is.
Thanks!
|
avsjerry,
I don't think the "pillow" procedure will be applied unless she finds out how much I have spent on audio gear lately...just saying.
My temporary solution is to just unplug the TV RCA cable when I want to listen to music seriously.
I wish the fix was more elegant and convenient, but having limited room (I live in a small house) means only one stereo system.
The Ohms do provide nice sound for movies.
|
Nice write up.
Thanks for taking the time to report on your experiences.
It is helpful to read a comprehensive finding on the Ohms.
I'm still breaking mine in, but I do enjoy them everyday.
|
Here is an update on my Walsh 1/2.200 upgrade.
I have allowed some months to pass for break-in.
Recently, I bought some old Yamaha NS-6 speakers at a yard sale for $10.
I proceeded to recover the grills and replace the drivers as a gift for my son.
The result was decent and I was able to compare them to the Ohms.
The Ohms had much nicer bass with more rounded tones and lower frequency respose. Also, the Ohms sounded more open with clearer treble.
None of this surprised me, but it was nice to get some confirmation.
When my son (a lawyer and musician) came over to pick up the speakers, I had him audition some CDs he was familiar with on the Ohms. To cut the story short, he was blown away by my Ohms.
One sample he played was a tecno track that had very fast bass notes from a synthesizer. He couldn't believe that the Ohms could keep up. He said most speakers he has heard play that track created a muddy sound.
I have to say that I really am enjoying my upgraded Walsh 1 speakers. They intergate well into the rest of my modest system (Parasound 1500A amp, B&K Reference 5 S2 preamp/tuner and Sony NS-315 CD player).
Thanks to John S.
|
Bondman, I don't see changing my music system anytime soon unless I move to a different house so the Ohms are here to stay. I like the fact that they sound good even in another room. Apparently, this is a characteristic of the omni aspect of their design. I may do some minor upgrading of the cables as time goes on.
|
I basically agree with what Bondman just said.
Here is my recent experience comparing various Ohm speakers.
Ohm-Walsh 1
Nice sound, but lacking bass; if I didn’t compare with a Walsh 2, I would have been satisfied. I used it with a subwoofer for awhile and this helped.
Ohm-Walsh 2
Better than the 1s, but these blew out when I upgraded my amp.
Ohm-Walsh 2.2000
Fresh upgrade to fix the above blow out issue. Really a step up all around especially after break-in. Huge bass and nice upper end. I do feel that the voices seem a bit muted.
Ohm-Walsh 4XO
I had to buy these as they were in mint condition and the price was right. They seem livelier then the 2.2000s. More open, but not quite as much bass bias as the 2.2000 upgrade. The cabinets are huge; my wife thinks I have lost my mind.
The bass sounds just as good, but it is more muted. I also noticed that the 4XOs are more efficient (91 dB vs 88 dB) and they definitely don’t require as much turning of the volume knob.
I plan to run the 4XOs for a while and the switch back to the 2.2000s for a final comparison.
BTW, the Walsh 4 cabinets are much better (and heavier) than the cheaper Walsh 1 & 2 models. I like the casters too.
|
Ok, the jury is in.
The Walsh 4s win.
After much listening and knob twisting, there is now no doubt.
The W4s have more definition and are more transparent.
I was able to turn the bass up a notch on the tone control which gave it enough kick to satisfy me.
The defining test was listening to the intro from "Money for Nothing".
The drums had much more tone and roundness compared to the W2.2000 speakers which sounded flatter.
At that point I couldn't go back.
Now, what to do?
It looks like a pair of Ohm-Walsh 2.2000 speakers will be for sale soon.
Or, I might relagate them to garage duty.
Anyone interested in the 2.2000s out there?
|
Peter, thanks for all this engineering work. It is fun to "see" what is going on with these speakers. I concur that the mid-range can be attenuated in the Ohm-Walsh speakers. My 4XO speakers sound good, but the mid range needs some boosting to sound balanced. I have no trouble with the bass or treble.
|
My engineering experience tells me to believe what you actually measure and not what someone else tells you. Also, many magazine guys, in all fields, are typically writers first and technicians last. And I have first hand experience on that one.
Believe who you will, but in the end it is the result that matters and not the conversation that gets you there.
I love my used 4XOs, but was mightly disappointed in my new walsh 2.2000 upgrades so there is a variance in quality.
|
mapman, based on your speaker timeline, my 4XOs are of the series 2 variety. The Ohm website lists the manufacturing date range as late 1980s to early 1990s. If Ohm had made improvements up through the current series (which my 2.2000 are), they should blow away the "old" 4XO version.
I used an amp with sufficient power (Parasound 1500) and increased the volume during the 2.2000 testing to compensate for the efficiency difference which isn't huge (2 dB).
The problem that I am talking about is the inability of the 2.2000 speakers to reproduce sound that is clearly there in the 4XO speakers. Speakers typically don't create sound, they reproduce it from a source. So, if the source is the same and sound is missing from one set of speakers then something is wrong with the speakers.
It seems to me that trying to rationalize missing sound on the "room" when two sets of speakers share the same space is a stretch. I'm happy to be proven wrong as I would rather have both sets of my speakers play well.
I also think that trying to discount actual users expriences as spurious by comparing them to what was reported in a magazine years ago using a different set of speakers isn't the last word when discussing what is happening today.
I like Ohm speakers. The engineering genius of Lincoln Walsh is appreciated. When actual users report on the possible failings of the Ohm manufacturing company, I think it is important to talk about it. Ohm makes a profit constructing speakers; they need to hear (are you listening JS?) what is going on with their product and how their customers are reacting.
|
bondman, here is the quote from one of my earlier posts.
"Ok, the jury is in.
The Walsh 4s win.
After much listening and knob twisting, there is now no doubt.
The W4s have more definition and are more transparent.
I was able to turn the bass up a notch on the tone control which gave it enough kick to satisfy me.
The defining test was listening to the intro from "Money for Nothing".
The drums had much more tone and roundness compared to the W2.2000 speakers which sounded flatter.
At that point I couldn't go back.
Now, what to do?
It looks like a pair of Ohm-Walsh 2.2000 speakers will be for sale soon.
Or, I might relagate them to garage duty."
What surprised me was that I contacted Ohm about the issues and they just shined me on. They were pushing the line that it must be the room. This ignored the fact that I did a direct comparison between their 2 speakers in the same location.
I think that to assume all Ohm-Walsh speakers sound the same and are all voiced alike is to ignore the realities of production. A human is assembling them from parts sourced from who knows where. My 2.2000 upgrade speakers, with 6 months of break-in, never got better. As soon as I auditioned the 4XOs, the game was over.
|
peterr53, keep up the good work.
Very interesting.
I am seriously thinking about looking at what is under the cans of my 2.2000 upgrade that has issues.
|
Also, peterr53, if you would like to test the fall off of another set of Ohms, just let me know (I'm in SoCal).
|
I went to visit peterr53 today and found out something interesting about my Ohm-Walsh 2.2000 speakers. They need more than the 200W/channel that I am currently using (Parasound 1500). When we hooked up the speakers to his 1,000 w/channel system, the sound I originally expected came through.
We played the sample I use (intro to Money for Nothing - Dire Straights) with some revealing drum whacks. They sounded correct. Now I know why my 4XOs sound good with the same amp; they require just enough power from the amp. Funny how threshold situations can cause all sorts of confusion. So mystery solved! Now I have to start the search for more amp power.
Peterr53 has already outlined his system here, but hearing it in person is amazing. His subs (18") blow away any I have heard to date. The whole house shakes and you think you have been punched in the chest by Mike Tyson. Very viseral and impressive.
He previewed an action movie and the added bass really made it an experience to remember; better than the local cinema sound for sure. He claims 8 Hz and I believe it.
I can't wait to hear the finished product of his Walsh 5 modification.
|
mapman & bondmanp,
One option would be to buy a second Parasound 1500 (used) and run them bridged (mono). This would give 600+W/channel. First, I have to check my home wiring to make sure enough current is reaching the amp (doubly true with 2 amps). The never ending quest...
I am very happy that the 2.2000 upgrade was successful. It was getting depressing that maybe it was a waste of resources.
For now, I will chug along with the 4XOs until I can improve the system.
|
An other alternative is to keep my current amp and add a powered subwoofer to unload the low frequencies (>80 Hz) on the Ohms. This might allow the 2.2000s operate on the current amp power while extending the bass range down into the mid 20 Hz area.
Any thoughts on that idea?
|
Hi,
Yes, Ohm sends out the speaker cans already assembled. I installed them as per the directions with the orientation already marked on the base plates. It wasn't possible to see inside the cans so I couldn't check the position of the tweeter as it corresponded to the sticker on the base plate.
I wasn't happy with the sound and complained to Ohm, but they gave me the usual run around about fixing the room and a longer break-in.
I guess it wasn't just me who thought there was something wrong (thanks Peter).
Maybe we can have a listening session this weekend so I can enjoy the speakers at last. Now I have to start looking for some system upgrades before the 2.2000s replace my 4XOs.
|
Just to clear up the actual cost of the Ohm 2.2000 upgrade, I pulled out the invoice. The price for the upgrade by itself is $1,400 plus $60 shipping. The number I told Peter was $1,200 from memory. It turns out that I had a trade-in credit on another set of Walsh 2s (blown) plus I bought new speaker grills so that is where the $1,200 number came from.
|
peterr53,
Thanks for working on my speakers.
They sound a lot better now.
There is no doubt that you have the most powerful subwoofers I have ever heard.
The most illustrative test we did on my 2.2000s was monitoring the frequenct response in real time while we were listening to some of my music. Most of the sound was below 5K Hz! It showed me how importatnt the midrange is to good sound reproduction. Basically, 95% of audible music is between 30 HZ and 10K Hz. So, having a 20K tweeter doesn't accomplish much.
I also witnessed the 2.5K roll off of the main Ohm speaker. This isn't a bad thing as long as the tweeter picks up the slack.
In the future, I look forward to reporting on Peter's Walsh 5 upgrade. For now, he is using my 2.2000s as stand-ins and I appreciate his feedback and development work on them. At least the tweeters are pointed in the right direction now.
|
Peter, that is a lot of work!
I hope it all turns out well.
After all this effort, I will be interested to hear the result.
Thanks for the photo links; that helps with the visualization.
|
Peter,
Let me know when you are back in SoCal.
Interetingly, my daughter is in Sweden now.
She is vacationing at the Ice Hotel.
|
Looks good Peter!
I can't wait to see it in person.
|
Peterr53,
The speakers are looking good.
I will try to visit soon so I can check them out in person.
|
"A business must have the collective goals of their customers in mind. "
And, their bottom line.
|
There seem to be 2 camps here; those that are interested in the technical side and those that aren't.
I don't see why those that are on either side need to disparage the other. Why not just let the stories unfold and contribute when you have something constructive to say.
Leave your egos and bruised emotions aside and let the chips fall where they may.
This thread is about Ohm speakers and how they sound and not about the feelings of the posters.
BTW, John S. is perfectly capable of defending himself if he wants to and doesn't need any help.
|
Peter, it sounds like you had a good time at the show, sorry I missed going.
|
With all that surface area and 2000 watts per side even a small movement
will energize the room, no strain, no chuffing ports just pure
energy......amazing. If you feel wanting for good deep vibrations. I can attest to Peter's subwoofer system; the house does shake. It is better than most movie house systems - hands down. My 2.2000 Ohms (on loan to Peter) sound really good on his system. I couldn't get them to play well using a Parasound 1500A (205W@8Ohms), but with 500W/channel, they come alive. This is doubly true when paired with the subs. OTOH, my Walsh 4XOs sound wonderful using the same Parasound amp and have really good bass. I know the 4XOs are more sensitive (90db verses 88db) and this might be the difference. |
Maybe it’s your room? My 2000s do fine with 150 watts per
If the 4XOs sound good, why would the room cause the 2.2000s to sound bad? When I took the 2.2000 speakers to Peter's house, he couldn't believe how much power they needed to sound good. They were working his 500W/channel amps hard! The 4XOs seem just fine with my current amp (Parasound 1500) so my plan is to keep the 4XOs and sell the 2.2000s. I will eventually be posting them on the Audiogon 'for sale' site. |
Aren’t 4XO’s larger than 2.2000 as well? That + higher efficiency would
definitely make them different and probably more adept at bass in a
larger room with more amps.
The Walsh 2.2000 just never sounded that good; slightly muddy and lacking in detail. On Peter's rig, they sounded like different speakers - terrific. My 4XOs are a good match for my current low-budget system (B&K Reference 5 S2 preamp and Parasound 1500 amp). Plenty of clear bass, decent mid range and good high end for me, but I'm old and probably can't hear much above 12KHz or so. Rather than spend more money upgrading the electronics, I plan to just sell off the Walsh 2.2000 speakers to someone who has a better system than mine. |
