Joe,
I don't know the W2s, but I believe that the paino timbre issue you observed isn't common to the entire Ohm line. Along with its unusual imaging capabilities, this was specifically the quality that most impressed me about my Ohm 100s. IMHO, the ability to allow a listener to easily identify piano type is usually a good indication of a speaker's timbral capability and, in this regard, I find the 100s awfully good. The "bell-like" tone of an upright is reproduced by my 100s in a way that sounds immediately real to me. With some other speakers I've heard (even some that - I'd say - sound "beautiful") this hasn't always been the case. Just MHO.
Marty |
Marty,
Have you ever heard the Magico Minis?
Cost aside, these always leave an impression with me when I hear them and was interested in your take on them if you have? |
Map,
I haven't managed to hear Magico yet. David Weinhart Design in Bel Air (not too far from me) carries them and I've thought about dropping in for a listen. Truth is, I don't usually do that unless there's at least a passing chance that I'll buy something. Right now, I'm REALLY happy with the Ohm + Subs, so I've been reluctant to bother Dave. One day, I'll stop by to check out something he sells (maybe not speakers) and ask for a listen. 'Til then, I'll remain curious, too.
Marty |
Aren't the Minis something like $25,000 a pair? Yikes! |
Actually, now over $30000 pair, up $10000 from last year.
Yikes is right!
Apparently, people are buying them and they were quite ear catching both times I've heard them. Transient attack was one of the best I've heard, yet they seemed relatively easy on the ear regardless. Not all recordings I heard struck me uniquely, but the piano and percussion in particular on a few remastered cuts off Billy Joel's "The Stranger" did.
Last time I heard them about a year ago, on the same system at Sound By Singer in NYC, using a high end VAC amp, VTL pre, and DCS Puccini player (all very pricey as well), the naturalness of massed strings in an orchestral work struck me as well and led me towards a few tweaks in my system as a result.
They are price is no object statement speakers with very high build quality and a useful reference as such I would say. |
My Walshs are retrofitted with the 100s3 transducers so per John S they are like buying a 100S3. I am guessing that part of the issue will be electronics. John felt I would be ok with the Mac but at 45 WRMS its just at the low end of what the paperwork says I should have. I will upgrade my amp in time but it will have to wait a bit having upgraded 2 pairs of speakers, CD, rack and a pre in the last 6 months. My wife has her eyes set on granite counters as a "higher priority". Until then I am going to focus on getting them broken in and setup correctly. BTW, Map, the C2s were upgraded with Ohms new woofer and sub-bass activator a few years ago and that helped in extending their life and bottom end. They may be a little bright but given my living room setup they sounded pretty good to me even when compared to some friends Rogers and Spendor speakers side by side. I may just have to get used to the sound of this kind of Walsh design. I am going to borrow a friends Mac tube amp and see how that changes things over the 4th weekend. |
Joek,
Sounds like a reasonable approach. My gut tells me that your Mac integrated is OK for the Walshes but that you will find you can do much better. The Walshes need current in addition to watts and most integrated tend to compromise in that area out of design necessity.
FWIW, before I upgraded speaks, I owned original Walsh 2's, OHM Ls refitted with basic Radio Shack woofers, Magnepans, and B&Ws all concurrently running off the same system but in different rooms just like now.
I decided to go the OHM upgrade route before going anywhere else. I was initially considering OHM upgraded OHM Hs (1 step up the old line from C2) in that these were always my favs and the price was very reasonable.
Then I was able to pick up my Dynaudios, which I always liked, for a reasonable price. These are excellent at what they do but not quite in the same league as some of the best larger full range models I heard around and my goal was ultimate satisfaction.
Then I decided to try my current Walsh 2's with the S3 drivers that I picked up for even less than refurbed Hs would cost used here on A'gon and tried that.
The S3s sound much different than even the original Walsh 2s or of course any box design, so I was not sure at first, but as things settled in, I never looked back. I liked what I heard enough to then splurge and I bought the F5 S3s from OHM for my largest room in addition to the Walsh2 S3s and Ls I already owned. Then my attention turned to tweaking the rest of my system to bring the best out of the Walshes. |
Joe,
45 wpc is almost certainly a problem with these speakers. In my (14'X23' - with high ceiling, open rear wall) room, the 122 wpc ARC VT130SE is operating at the margin. I'd be very happy with another 6db of elbowroom if I had it, so a 500wpc amp would be more my cup of tea. (Of course - YMMV) This might not address your issues re: timbre, but it will definitely allow more a dynamic presentation.
Good Luck,
Marty |
I'd been happily running the 100S3s for 7 months with my Cayin TA-30 tube integrated, at 35wpc. In earlier posts to this thread (much earlier!) I stated that I found the power fine and dandy for these speakers. And I did -- they sounded quite engaging, with good bass and wonderful voicing on voices, pianos, etc.
Well, last week I lucked into Yamaha separates on craigslist (M-85 amp/C-85 preamp) and I must say that while I have no idea what it means to say that the Ohms need more "current," I will say that the 240wpc M-85 is clearly driving these speakers more musically, with greater authority -- it isn't just volume, which in my 12x15 room I'll never be able to fully explore(!), it's the incredibly effortless performance the speakers now have -- peak music, fast bursts - they're just right there rythmically. Plus bass is more powerful, more musical, more distinctly focused in the soundstage.
So, while I still say that lower power will work with the Ohms, I'm now thinking they really do need more .... current? |
Guys,
I know this has been covered here and elsewhere prior, but just a reminder that more watts will let you go louder but current is key to delivering smooth tonal balance top to bottom at low to typical listening levels in particular with the OHMs due to variation in input impedance at various frequencies (often referred to as a "difficult" or "complex" load).
A high efficiency, high current amp can be identified by mostly double rated wattage output from 8 to 4 ohms and then ideally from 4 to 2 ohms as well. |
Mapman, I mentioned this before but I'll be using a Blue Circle BmPH 160 @ 8ohms, 240 @ 4ohms. So no doubling down here. I'll be using it with the Walsh 5 S3. |
Foster_9,
Yes, not uncommon with integrateds. More juice and bigger transformers produces more EMF that can create noise in nearby low level pre-amp sections, especially phono pre-amp sections.
Though I don't think integrated amps are optimal for the OHMs, there are some very well built and good sounding integrateds nonetheless. I suspect the Blue Circle is one of those though I am not intimately familiar with it.
John Potis raved in a review about a pair of Blue Circle monoblocks taking his Walsh 4 mkIIs to an entirely new level and Blue Circle is using OHM drivers in their new speaker line as well, so I think Blue Circle/OHM in general is a good match. |
Mapman,
I'd love to have the chance to try my Ohm 100's with another amp. I'm running mine with a Unison Unico 80 w/ch integrated, hybrid (tubes in the preamp section). It's sounding increasingly sweet to me, but I have nothing to compare the Unico to, really, so it's hard to know. |
REb,
I did consider a hybrid integrated recently when upgrading and looking for a taste of tubes.
The Unisons were high on my list. I suspect the Unico does quite well with 100s.
BTW, I think current is a bigger factor with the larger Walsh drivers for larger rooms. I notice the difference much more with my 5's than my 100s. |
Mapman, Thanks for the defintion on the whole current thing...I was just about to write looking for that when you explained how to look at it. All this discussion is making me think I need to come up with an interim solution on the power side. I already know I want to go for something higher end in the $2-4k range down the line but that is probably a year away. SO, I am going to have to look at what I can get in the $400-500 range used probably not new for the interim. I saw some stuff from NAD and Cambridge Audio on A'gon but I am guessing this wont pass the "current test". I will have to post and see what ideas people have....this is turning into an obsession. |
Joe,
Underwood HiiFi is in your zip code. They do a fairly brisk trade in used goods, so you might give 'em a ring. They also handle Bel Canto - an integrated I (briefly) used successfully with my 100s. If they have/can get a used one, it would likely be <$1K, though how much "<", I couldn't say.
Good Luck,
Marty
PS My comment re: 45wpc likely being a problem. It's always possible that a 45wpc has a wildly overspeced power supply and CAN supply adequate current. However, IME, that's pretty unlikely, which is why I said 45WPC is "almost" certainly a problem. Just clarifying. |
Good point Marty. Specs alone may be a general indicator but seldom tell the whole story. |
Finally received a set of very customized/upgraded Walsh 5-S3 with prototype 5000 drivers modified for extra treble. (this is John's description). Will set them up after work today. I was just too out of it after work yesterday. Looking forward to it. |
Well, since we're all discussing current, why don't those of you who have amps with current ratings post the current ratings here. Although I don't own Ohms - not yet :-) - my Odyssey Audio Stratos HT3 is rated to deliver 45 amps of current. I do not know if that is per each of the 3 channels or total. Here is a link to the specs of my amp (I did get the cap upgrade option): http://www.odysseyaudio.com/products-stratos-ht3.html
Before I take the plunge, I will check with John at Ohm to see if this is a good choice for his speakers in my room (a basement, 24' X 20' X 6' ceiling [DUCK!]), but if you folks want to give me your opinion about this, I am all ears.
I also have a pair of Vandersteen 2Wq subwoofers which would stay if I upgrade to Ohms. They roll in @6dB/octave starting @80Hz, and the Vandersteen in-line resistors roll off at the same slope starting at 80Hz. So the output to the mains is down 6dB at 40Hz, and 12dB at 20Hz.
The amp has a pretty liquid, detailed, yet smooth character, with good dynamic punch, good PRAT, and good soundstage width. Hieght and depth are fair, nothing spectacular. BTW, if you are looking for a bang for the buck amplifier with hefty current capability, the Odyssey Audio line is worth a look. |
5000s. Nice!
They supposedly use new drivers and are more efficient, so power parameters for optimal performance might be different and I would expect less demanding.
Please keep us posted. I have not heard any user feedback on these new drivers yet. |
More from me in the "music that sounds amazing on the Ohms" category...
Try Paul Simon's 2006 studio album, "Surprise." Simon collaborated with electronica master Brian Eno. Great music (it grew on me), great lyrics, as you'd expect from Simon. And all kinds of opportunities to show off and enjoy what the Ohms can do, spatially (and in terms of great midrange with vocals) on this one. Enjoy! |
Bond,
From what I can tell from the specs, 45amps, 150w into 8 OHm and 2 ohm load stable are all good indicators for good performance driving complex loads like the OHMs. |
I've been enjoying this post for some time and took the plunge and bought a barely used pair of MWT's in rosewood and have been breaking them in for about a month. I'm powering them with a Bel Canto S300. I use a modded squeezebox running into a Peachtree Nova using the pre and DAC only. It is a pretty hot set up and I want more... Does anyone think that going for Ohm 4.5 MKii's is moving forward or backward? I am considering moving the MWT's as surrounds and the 4.5's as L/R with an HSU sub replacing my beloved KEF reference surround system. Any thoughts? I love the MWT's in my two chanell system and think that an all Ohm HT would be fabulous. Best, Peter |
Nolo,
That is a very excellent sounding setup for the MWTs!
Would you be expanding that somehow to surround by adding amps and processors I'm assuming? If possible, I'd do that (keep with amp separates) rather than move to a surround receiver. That would most likely be a step backwards in terms of getting the most out of the OHMs.
I'm not a surround kind of guy, but if I were, I'm pretty certain I would prefer to build around OHMs and the wide range omni Walsh drivers in them. It seems a natural fit.
4.5 mkIIs are Walsh 5 mk II drivers (which I have never heard) on OHM 4 cabinets, right? I think this is the model that reviewer John Potis owned, reviewed, and praised.
Assuming this, from what I have read, yes, it should be a big step up for non-nearfield listening in a larger room in terms of impact and overall weight to the performance.
mkII drivers use a different tweeter than S3s I believe but the full range Walsh drivers are the same or mostly similar as I understand it. There may be a slight difference towards the top end as a result but mkIIs can probably be had for less. Its probably a very reasonable tradeoff, especially for home theater use. |
Thank you Mapman for the comments. I'm usint the MWT's in the 2 channel rig and have a notion to go with an outboard processor with a blue ray player to take advantage to the high res possibilities, but I have a dedicated HT room with the KEF system. The MWT's sound so right, like live music and, as a musician, I am all over that concept. Maybe I should just keep the MWT's as is and look down the road at a more full range Ohm surround setup. By the way, I'm just outside of the, so called, nearfield sweet spot at about 8' listening distance with a L/R separation of about 6.5' due to room constraints. I'll play around more with toe in but, they sound pretty terrific face forward. Thanks for keeping the comments coming! |
Marty, thanks for the Underwood lead. I will check them out. I am in Hawaii so its still a phone call and freight but some good used equipment is fine.
I understand the 45 wpc comment. I think the old Mac MA 5100 is actually doing a decent job at lesser volumes. BUT, that said my sense from the different postings and a couple of emails to John at Ohm is that I would be much more satisfied with more headroom, overall power, current etc. I am a little conflicted on tubes vs SS especially as I really liked the sound of the Mac tube amps I heard back in DE near my in-laws but those are out of my short term reach financially if I want to stay married. So I am thinking interim 6-12 month solution. |
Thank you Mapman for the comments. I'm usint the MWT's in the 2 channel rig and have a notion to go with an outboard processor with a blue ray player to take advantage to the high res possibilities, but I have a dedicated HT room with the KEF system. The MWT's sound so right, like live music and, as a musician, I am all over that concept. Maybe I should just keep the MWT's as is and look down the road at a more full range Ohm surround setup. By the way, I'm just outside of the, so called, nearfield sweet spot at about 8' listening distance with a L/R separation of about 6.5' due to room constraints. I'll play around more with toe in but, they sound pretty terrific face forward. Thanks for keeping the comments coming! |
Nolo,
MWTs would make excellent surrounds I think.
For surround sound, be sure to go over the options with JS. Though we don't talk about them much here, there are large/small/short/tall/wall mount Walsh models designed specifically for home theater use I believe.
I believe OHM can also do various tweaks to the basic design for home theater use if desired. |
With reverence to the previous owner, I went ahead and purchased the late John Potis' pair of Ohm Walsh 4.5.2 in a trade/purchase arrangement. I will try the 4.5.2's as L/R in my HT set up with the KEF center and surrounds to get a base line opinion. Later on, I will move the MWT's into the surround position and drag my KEF R107's into my 2-channel rig and see what happens with full range in my living room. Lots of possibilities here with a lot of lugging of large full range speakers up and down stairs but, after all, why are we here if not to experiment with all the options that we are presented with. I hope to comment on the various stages of my search for sonic satisfaction and share my expeeriences with all of the other Ohm afficianados my impressions. It's the journey not necessarily the destination! Thanks for your help. Best... |
Mapman, sent you an email regarding the Ohms. |
|
Nice.
I see they have a link to an ebay store there also with some refurbed box designs like Hs and C2s, which I would love to hear. I almost went down the refurbed H path before I tried the Walsh2 S3s. H's were my favorites back when I used to sell OHMs in the late 70s. in the days of the OHM Fs and prior to the Walsh line (the store I worked i did not carry the Fs so I never got to hear them). |
Oh, and the prices for the upgraded classic OHM C2s and Hs appear to be only $100 more than those models sold for new back in the 70s. That would seem to indicate a good value. I preferred the OHMs over all other lines we carried back then including Advent, Infinity, EPI/Epicure, JBL, and Electrovoice.
Hs would probably knock your socks off these days with a good modern amp. Those babies rocked! |
HI all. I obstained from writing any more on this thread until I hooked up my main amp- a Parasound HCA 2205. Well I did, so I'm back.
First of all, my hat's off to the Harmon Kardon AVR-20, which helped to break them in and give me a sense of the overall sound and placement.
However, with more power, and importantly more current, my MWT's blow me away. At lower volume, the sound is rich and full. At higher volume, above 80 Dbs, I felt that the highs were a bit forward with the HK, but everything sounds nice, even and balanced with beter amplification.
To be fair though, I'm also using the burr/brown DAC's in the AVC-1800 instead of my cheap and old Sony DVD player.
At any rate, I'm done with this phase of my upgrade. Next up is replacing my DVD player. And then I really am done for a while...
The MWT's continue to exceed expectation. It seems I rarely feel that way about anything these days. The Ohm's decimate my Deftech BP-2006's, and I feel that it's the best possible upgrade I could have made, especially for the price.
-P |
|
Hi Parasound, like you I've abstained from posting about my experience with the Ohms during this interim period. I've waited while they settled in. I've been moving them around a bit, adjusting the controls, and changing speaker cables, while waiting for them to reach their potential in my room. I have the Walsh 5 S-3's with prototype 5000 drivers. Mine were additionally modified by Ohm (John) for increased highs (treble and air). I never heard the Walsh 5 S-3 speakers before Ohm went to the 5000 drivers so I can't compare their performance to the previous Walsh 5 S-3's, but I've finally concluded these speakers are the best I've had in my house.
My Walsh 5 S-3 5000's (that's what I call them) excel at detail, high end, air, and midrange accuracy. The bass has not reached its potential in my room yet, but is also detailed, accurate, fast, with some weight. Using my current integrated amp and in this room, as yet they aren't playing with as much bass weight as they can. In my opinion my Blue Circle BmPh integrated is not sending the 5000's quite enough current to really move maximum air in the mid bass and low end. I'm in the process of getting a new integrated with more current and power that doubles down. Then I'll see (hear) what the 5000's can really do in the low end. Even now though I'm very happy with the 5000's because they're very resolving, with lots of detail and air and and now I appreciate what others have said about "the magic being in the midrange." Never heard such excellent, clear and detailed midrange performance before. These speakers are as clear as a bell. I'm sure the best is yet to come. I can highly recommend these latest generation drivers from Ohm. |
Foster_9,
Thanks for the very interesting report! I'm delighted to hear that you're having such a good experience with your new speakers.
John told me a few months ago that EVENTUALLY (as in, within a year or so) driver upgrades to the new generation would be available for the rest of the Ohm Walsh line... I think he said they'd become available from the top of the line on down. I'll look forward to getting those upgraded drivers in my lowly 100's, too! ;-) |
Thanks Foster. That was worth the wait
My master plan is to get the 100's after I move to Virginia next year (assuming I have a large enough room) and run the MWT's for surrounds. OR- get another pair of MWT's.
In either case, I'm pretty excited about what I read about the new drivers.
And yes- it seems that Ohm's like a lot of current. I also notice it in the mid-range region. The only word that comes to mind is 'smooth'. |
Thank you Rebbi! As my system developments continue with the 5000's I'll post updates to this outstanding Ohm thread. (the most informative anywhere!) |
"And yes- it seems that Ohm's like a lot of current. I also notice it in the mid-range region. The only word that comes to mind is 'smooth'."
Good point.
In addition to low end impact and "mojo" due to moving more air, higher current also does seem to result in better overall smoothness top to bottom I believe.
Hi Current is like a 20 mph wind rotating a windmill on Earth with denser atmosphere.
Low current is like the same velocity wind rotating the same windmill on Mars with sparse atmosphere.
Regarding impact and authority, the same velocity wind will also knock that hat off your head a lot faster in earth's denser atmosphere. Also big hats (bass) requiring more pressure to move will be affected more. The smaller hats (midrange)are more susceptible as well. The tiny hats (treble) stand no chance. |
BTW, the OHMs have been around for a long time and lots of non-audiphile type people still own them. I bought my first Walsh 2s in a typical, not "high end" audio store in 1982 for ~ $600 retail I believe.
My point is that there are a lot of people out there who could afford and own OHMs that probably never heard or cared to hear them optimally driven by larger, high quality, high current power amps. They sound much more ordinary driven by ordinary or average systems. A lot of audiophiles that have heard the OHMs over the years may have never heard them run optimally, hence the more mixed press that they have received over the years! |
Another amusing way to look at it:
Athletes have their juice and we OHM owners have ours! |
I'm finally experiencing the imaging and soundstage capabilities, and it takes a bit getting used to.
I'm used to 'monkey coffins' that image instruments and vocals precisely in the middle. Very, very artificial. A real guitar will revel its location, but the sound is not locked into a sweet spot. All this means is that I'm used to speakers that behave this way.
The Ohm's do not. They do this weird disappearing act, in which the soundstage seemingly overtakes the whole room. A solo acoustic guitar or vocal isn't locked-in to a specific position, but more-or-less inhabits space between the speakers. But if something is recorded to the extreme right or left, it can be a startling experience.
There's also no compression. What I mean is, bad recordings sound bad, great ones sound awesome. I'm still used to box speakers making EVERYTHING sound ok.
I love every characteristic I'm referring to. But it's like falling in love with my wife- it seems there's always something new to experience. And get used to...
-P |
"But it's like falling in love with my wife- it seems there's always something new to experience"
Wow. This IS getting serious!!
LOL!! |
Waxing poetic Parasound! You're a lucky fella to feel that way. |
Mapman, I went to buy a pair of C2's back in the 70's; had money in hand. Got there and the dealer was out of stock and some kind of strike somewhere meant they didn't know when they would get more C2's. I was very disappointed and had no patience. Went directly to another shop down the street and bought a pair of ESS Heil AMT instead. Those ESS were very nice but I always wondered what I was missing in the C2's. |
Foster,
Coincidentally, the speakers I had before my first OHMS in 1978, the OHM Ls, were Lafayette Criterions which I think was made by ESS and had the Heil tweets as well. |
You guys must be much older than I am! LOL!
My first "real" speakers were Epicure 10's that I bought in college. They had this funky, inverted dome tweeter... |
Rebbe,
I seem to recall the Eps had the same kind of tweet back in 1978.
Eps I heard were OK as I recall, a little "recessed" sounding perhaps (no pun intended) but you all already know what my favorites were even then, right? |
A friend had some EPI's back in the late 70's. Had them on stands. It was the first stand mount I'd seen. I really loved those speakers and envied him. They were the best I'd heard to that point. |
