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


Hi,

I'd love to hear the impressions of people who've actually spent some time with these speakers to share their sense of their plusses and minuses. Mapman here on Audiogon is a big fan, and has shared lots on them, but I'm wondering who else might be familiar with them.
rebbi
Steve's review is very fair and accurate.  They are a really fun speaker.

I have the 5000's.  I do wonder sometimes what an even "Better" tweeter would sound like. (could be upgraditis).  I also find they do sound even more focused and detailed when I have the "hat's/grills" off.  

I've asked Even at Ohm if they have ever looked at a snapring type system to clean up the look when the "hat's" are off.  He said yes, but not seriously.  I really would like to have a clean upper snap ring around the top of the can, and the base where they screw in.  Just for a cleaner look... with some cloth only in between would be awesome to clean them up more.

Had someone here recently to demo an amp I was selling, he ended up loving the Walsh speakers (had been kicking around Golden Ears or B+W) and said he will be demoing the Walsh speakers for sure when the time comes.  But he also asked to hear them with my Pass 250.8... he was floored.  Something about the combo works great.

Fun speakers, and very fair and accurate review by Steve.
@snapsc: First, your tweeter question. Where the resister on the tweeter (there is no crossover in the literal sense) kicks in is not divulged by Ohm, and is a matter of some debate. On the old Ohm web site, there was a page that indicated the tweeter only handled 7kHz and up, but others have tried measuring the main drivers and found them rolling off above about 2-3kHz.

As for the quality of the tweeters, Guttenberg has a point. I would say they are adequate. They are not harsh, peak-y or otherwise flawed. Do they have that hard to describe sense of fine detail and filigree one hears on the best speakers? Generally not, although with some really god recordings, they can have that treble magic. I have noticed that the treble on 96/24 needle drops I make do sound subtly but clearly better - cleaner, more refined - than Red Book standard needle drops I make.

Do I wish the tweeter was more refined? Perhaps, although the level of treble refinement did improve when I recently switched my amp. I doubt this could be done without raising prices, though.

Second: If you go with a model not suggested for your room size, you may overdrive them, and possibly damage them. My room size meant I could go with either the 2000s or 3000s. I went with the 2000s, as I already had a good pair of subs (Vandersteen 2Wq), and wished to continue using them. In my room, this combo has worked exceedingly well. I get the huge, tight bass I crave, with the wonderful soundstage and timbre of the Ohms. If you can manage it, and if you’re as much of a bass freak as I am, consider both the appropriate-sized model and a pair of decent subwoofers. I doubt you will be disappointed. 10 years this fall since I got them, and I have no interest in upgrading, at all.
Given the Ohm website price of $1400 for parts...not including refinishing the cabinets...and then probably $500 of packing and shipping to and from Ohm.....it seems overall that a new pair of 2000s might be equally good...so maybe it comes down to aesthetics??
Yeah, the listing implies they work with third party shippers, but if I were interested in pursuing this option outside of Charlotte, I'd call Goodwill first to confirm terms.
If they work it's a good deal.  If not the cabs look like they could likely be used for trade in value sent straight to Ohm, but keep track of shipping costs and check with Ohm to be sure.  The hoods are easy to redo with new fabric ( I redid my old Walsh 2s  once myself).   
I have my 100s (8" driver in Ohm Walsh 2 cabs, same as 2000s I think) in a decent sized open concept family room with adjacent kitchen and the rest of the first floor open and adjacent to that. Amp is 60w/ch.

This is my "second system" so I am willing to give up some things there compared to my main with the big Ohm 5s (12" drivers) in a moderate to large more sealed L shaped room on teh lower level driven by 500w/ch amps.

I feel no need for sub in there. Neither did I with Dynaudio Contour monitors.

The only thing I’d say I sacrifice that I miss sometimes with 8" Ohms in a larger area is concert level SPLs. That’s mostly because of only 60 w/ch though. It does go plenty loud we don’t realize how loud it actually is until you try to talk to someone and have to turn it down.

Also I doubt the low end bass extension is as good as my bigger Ohm rig, but I can’t say its really an issue of any concern for me.

No reason to not use a sub with Ohms if one thinks its needed. I’ve had Ohms since 1978 ( I still have my original Ohm Ls in my unfinished basement area) including Ohm Walsh since ~ 1982 and have never felt the need for a sub with any of them.

Note I use them mostly for music.  I am not a home theater guy.

https://ohmspeaker.com/news/how-big-is-a-big-room/
https://ohmspeaker.com/news/speaker-size-how-small-is-too-small/
https://ohmspeaker.com/news/when-good-better-best-is-not-good-enough/
Relevant.
I realize you said @snapsc that you're not necessarily intending to follow Ohm's recommendations....
I am probably the least competent commentator on this thread, as I have fallen into communities of speaker owners (Allison Acoustics and Ohm) more by chance than design; and I have purchased used when the opportunity arose, rather than a painstaking trial-and-error process.
I can share a couple of small observations:1) I got rid of my subwoofer with my 4XO's.  Only rarely do I miss a more solidly defined low end.2) Strangely enough, I recall more bass feeling (in the feet, not the chest) from my much smaller Allison CD-7s when I was using them as my mains (they're now my surrounds).
If you like more bass, I'd consider adding subwoofer to taste.
-austingonzo

Thanks guys....so how do you guys feel about putting a pair of the 2000s in a really big room with a 15" sealed sub to fill in the bottom end....vs buying a pair of 4000s, 5000s, or the sound cylinder....assume listening at 80db with 85db peaks 15' back.  I've got plenty of power from a very beautiful sounding amp...the 2Cherry which delivers 200W @8ohms and 400W @4ohms?

 I know that this is not what is recommended on their speaker per room size page.

Understand.  I was just logging back in to say I know I mixed terms (sound level and imaging), but I think the statement is still representative of how he approaches the entire endeavor.
There are a lot of blog posts on the Ohm site, and they are worth reading through.  You get a pretty good idea of how John thinks about his business and his products, including the topics you asked about.
-austingonzo
Yes, and having been in Carnegie Hall listening and knowing that, I would say he does a very good job.

Of course, that is the reference sound but actual perspective at home will vary case by case based on the room and listening position relative to the speakers.

As you move further back or more forward in the room or around in general, the perspective will change. That can only happen with the omni imaging and practically full room sweet range of Ohms and their ilk like mbl.

Also the gear upstream feeding the Ohms can also have a very big effect on resulting imaging, level of detail and tonality, though you don’t need anything fancy to get just "good" sound out of the Ohms. Ohms are designed for all music lovers, not just audiophiles.

Yes, I even hear those differences when I change between certain interconnects and power cords with my Ohms perhaps more so than with any of the other speakers I have ever used.  They are very revealing speakers.   
John speaks to his imaging philosophy: "My reference sound level is the level I enjoy in a live setting, sitting in the center about 12-15 rows back in Carnegie Hall: be the performance a solo singer or full orchestra."
https://ohmspeaker.com/news/speaker-size-how-small-is-too-small/
My ls50s are in a small 12X12 room with a powered sub. I would not use them in a large room.

My 8" and 12" Ohms are both in much larger rooms. Tweets in the standard design are angled in 45 degrees and cross well in front of my usual listening position. Sometimes I listen from a different location with more direct exposure and that tends to make things more like others that tend to have tweets facing forward.

You can also angle out the Ohms for more direct sound from tweets to tip up the treble, but that tends to narrow the soundstage, so its a balancing act. I tend to not do that.

My Ohm 5s have the 4 3 way frequency level adjustments, one in midrange and one in treble. Those adjustments make the big OHMs like the current 5000 very adjustable for personal preferences. There are 4 3 way level adjustments on each speak. That provides 3 to the 8th power or 6561 different combos making it easy to tune them to most any room and personal preference as needed. So I do not really perceive any lacking treble. However, I would note that I have older ears that do not hear out to 20khz anymore like they used to, so its possible others may hear things differently.

For me, the unique lifelike imaging of the Ohms (also mbl) as a whole provide a much more detailed listening experience overall when set up right than conventional speakers. That applies not just in cases where speakers like Magnepan shine, ie very well recorded smaller acoustic works, but good quality big dynamic large scale recordings, like orchestra and big band, which is where I found Magnepans to be lacking prior.

Laid back to me means pretty much what you said. I’ve heard large mbls set up optimally. Those tend to be similarly laid back as well. I’d say its a tendency of omni design speakers in general compared to those that fire straight at you. Magnepans fire forward and back and require a lot of distance to walls, so those are a different story all together.



@mapman 

Thanks for all of the comparisons.  I have to ask about what "laid back" means to you and what you are hearing?

I would probably say that for me, "laid back" suggests that the high mids and treble may be down a few db thereby giving two impressions....first that you are listening from row 20...and second, that some of the top end detail is missing....or that you are straining to hear it.

Somehow, though, my interpretations seems incorrect vs what many have said about the Ohms.  Example....you equate the Ohms to the LS50s for detail, coherency and attack...and having owned the LS50s for a while, I agree and would not at all suggest that the top end was rolled off or that they were laid back?

One thing though that I would say about the LS50s is that in a large room, even when crossed over to a 15" sealed sub, they still sounded relatively small...and so I had to let them go....on the other hand, I heard the Blade 2s at the Florida audio show in a small crappy room...and they still sounded excellent in every respect.
The overall presentation is radically different between Magnepan and Ohm Walsh as described including treble.

My newer Ohms replaced Magnepans and I have run them at the same time off the same system but in different rooms as many popular brands, B&W, Dynaudio, Triangle and currently Kef ls50s. Treble on each is different as is overall presentation but never lacking.

Each will even sound different in different rooms with different placement. What is "best" will come down largely to personal preference.

The Ohm Walshes tend to be more laid back and very neutral tone  never drawing any special attention to specific frequencies, just the music overall.

Magnepans somewhat more forward overall with unique inner detail.

Kef ls50 has a lot of attack, very good detail and overall coherency like the Ohms. .

Dynaudio Contour with Esotar tweeter a tad hotter sounding with some amps.

Triangle Titus also very laid back, a tad thinner, but very fast and articulate overall, the most Magnepan-like tonality of the bunch.

b&w P6 a warmer sound overall with very good meat on the bones in the bass like the Ohms but not great imagers.
@mapman

So my question to those of you that own one of the models would be about the high end.....  If the crossover is really in the 6-8k range, then I would say that the Walsh driver is carrying most of the load for the midrange and top end except for some of the really high harmonic overtones. 


Guttenberg's comments made it seem that while the speaker has a great midrange and overall presence, it may be lacking in openness or ambience or top end detail or realism....at least as compared to the LRS which is a pretty limited sample.


It would be great if you guys that own the speaker could comment on what your actual experience is and whether you think his portrayal of the top end is correct.

Interesting review and comparison to the Magnepan LRS by Steve Guttenberg....bottom line, while not perfect, he loved the ohm walsh 2000

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV1EOFzcu9M




@bondmanp thanks for the offer. Jersey is a pretty Long drive. Appreciate the offer still. 

@blin116 this could work out as I have to drive back to SFO to catch a plane on the way back. Will be sending you an email! 
@bondmanp : I am happy with how the things work overall. I did not have much exposure to different audio components so I would not be describing what I have beyond "I like it" ;-) I do not hear any obvious flaws and if there are any, I am happy not to know about them...
Last year got a good deal locally on a pair of old Ohms 2XO and got a SDS-250c to drive them. But then we moved to a place that called for larger speakers and I traded-in those for the Cylinders. Then bought a used SDS-470c to see if I was missing something with its little brother. Frankly, I am not sure I can hear the difference between the two but I’ll probably keep the 470c just because... The only thing I don’t like in 470 is that it idles much warmer than the 250c (that barely warms up above the ambient temperature if left on).
@blin116...  Interesting.  I was ready to order an amp from Class D Audio when I was offered a great deal on another class D amp from a guy I know that builds them. Do you feel the SDS-470C is a good match for the Ohms?  That amp seems to offer a lot of bang for the buck.
@fyusmal: If you want to listen to a pair of Super Sound Cylinders "beta" you are welcome to stop by, I am in Walnut Creek, CA (3 hr. drive from Lake Tahoe). The amp is a ClassDAudio SDS-470c. I only have digital sources.
If interested, send me an email to "misc AT blin POINT com" and we can arrange the details.
The special thing still about even original Walsh 2s, besides the usual big sweet area etc. is how robust and coherent they are. The drivers are protected well by that can. Also they can deliver a lot of fairly wide range sound compared to most anything else in the price range. I’ve told the story how I once used them on the porch of a farmhouse at an outdoor event with listeners in a field 50-100 yards away, run off a 80w/ch Tandberg tr2080 receiver and it was like the musicians were playing on that front porch. Plus I owned and used mine from ~1981-2008 before trading in to replace my Magnepans (which I bought ~ 1987 and went to the factory for a complete refurb less than ten years later) at the time and they still worked perfectly. Pretty good for for a $5 design! :^)
@mapman has the right idea: buy and pay Ohm for maintenance or upgrade and sit pretty for dramatically lower investment.
Someone picked those up at auction for $200 yesterday.  Hopefully, it's someone on this thread who can appreciate them.
-austingonzo
First let me say that all I care about  is the sound, not the parts used to create it, and perhaps WAF to some extent.    

Yes its notoriously pretty ugly inside an original Walsh 2. Good thing its all out of sight. I doubt the newer ones are much prettier inside the cans but the sound is competitive now with other modern speakers whereas original Walsh 2s are not.

I know because I a/b compared my original Walsh 2s against my ohm 100s in original Walsh 2 cabs when I acquired those before trading in my 2s for newer bigger 5 series 3, that I still use in my main system. The 100s are in my second family room system.

I also run small Kef ls50s and just recently now Vanatoo Transparent One encore monitors in other smaller rooms off the same system as the Ohms. Just prior recently, I ran Dynaudio and Triangle speakers in those rooms. Triangle still uses paper drivers I’m pretty sure because those still offer unique advantages these days in terms of speed and transparency. Those were not characteristics of original Walsh 2s, though definitely more so with the newer models.

Its the cabinets that have trade-in value. So I believe you can still pick up an old pair cheap and get up to 40% off new models just by trading in.

I did that when buying my Ohm 5 series 3 speakers back in 2008. Traded in my old Walsh 2s and picked up a pair of old C2s on ebay for not much and had them shipped straight to Ohm for 40% off trade in. The final cost of the Walsh F5 series three speakers to me in 2008 was ~$2400. These are the 12" drivers of the time with 4 built in 3-way level adjustments in refurbed OHm F cabinets. They listed for ~ $5500 at the time whereas same driver in new cabs were $6000 at the time.

Building speakers for a living in NYC these days can’t be cheap. I know John Strohbeen strives to offer the best sound possible per $$$ and has been in business now for over 40 years so he must be doing something right.
I took a 2 apart , thin plain paper drivers etc . Entire guts could not have cost5 bucks  !
Also note that older ohm speakers can be traded in for discounts on new ones assuming the cabs can be refurbished (most can). They can also be upgraded so any old Ohms can have significant value still that way.

Those original Walsh 2s from the 80s are a lot of speaker for the $ these days assuming the drivers are in good shape  (possible) but are not nearly as refined sounding top to bottom as the newer models. 
While the wife and kiddo were out on Saturday, I indulged in some high-SPL listening of Graceland and other albums on vinyl.  My normal listening level is around 7-9 o'clock position on my Pioneer VSX-D1S (http://www.hifi-classic.net/review/pioneer-vsx-d1s-435.html
On Saturday I took it up to 12.  I  didn't notice the loudness at all until there was a squawking saxophone that  set me off, and I had to dial it back to 11 temporarily.  I  get emotional when I  listen now, so I sat in my listening chair with tears in my eyes for several hours.

Yes, my 4XO's like power.
Thanks so much Mapman, for the thoughtful, detailed response. It carries considerable weight with me that many Ohm owners on this thread are experienced audiophiles and have had experience with a number of other systems/speakers. I also appreciate the cordial, civil tone I’ve seen here. 
I switched (ha!) to a Class D amp a few months ago.  10k input impedance and 500 watts per channel.  Still breaking it in.  I will have more to say about it with my 2000s, but for now, I concur with everything mapman says about high power class D amps and Ohms.
I should qualify that I have run my OHMS off two SS amps designed to deliver sound like a tube amp: Carver m4.0t and Tube Audio Design Hibachis. These both sounded Ok but it takes a more highly damped, beefy, high current, low output impedance SS amp to make the OHMs sing best. More watts like that will get you higher SPLs with the Ohms and they do that very well. I have found good quality modern Class D amps tend to do that in smaller more affordable packages and these tend to really get the most possible out of OHM Walsh speakers and that is a lot. You can throw the kitchen sink at them and they will never sound stressed or compressed. Most any amp will run out of gas first.

I use my Ohms in my two larger rooms. I use Bel Canto ref1000m amps 500w/ch into 8 ohms, high current delivery, with my big OHM 5s (12 inch driver with 4 three way level adjustments to tune for use in most any room) and this setup does it all. I use smaller but similar 60 w/ch Bel Canto c5i integrated with my OHM 100s (8" driver). The only limitation there is how loud and dynamic I can go which is still quite up there by most standards but not rock concert or symphony hall level loud like I can in my bigger setup.
The other key differences would be

1) size and sound dispersion pattern differences which would determine which might work best/synergize with your specific room, always a key concern for getting the best sound possible out of any particular room.

2) Bass levels. This will vary greatly in a particular room depending on placement and may be hard to get right with the wrong speakers in the room. Closer to walls and even more so corners will boost bass levels whereas some distance from walls is needed for a good sound stage and imaging if those are areas of concern for you . Ohms can go surprising close to walls if needed and the speaker size and associated cost will determine the bass levels. Larger and smaller Walsh models are designed to sound the same. The diffference is which will work best in a room of a particular size. There is a calculator on teh site to help determine and always worth a discussion with Ohm to determine best. There are different Tekton models available to match best to a room but each tends to have a somewhat different design and I would anticipate different corresponding sound. The ones I heard were Double Impact in a typical hotel sized room. They did surprisingly well in there off of a relatively low powered tube amp as I recall.

I’m sure there are other timbral differences between Ohm and Tekton but my exposure to Tekton is too limited to say other than in my one limited audition with a tube amp for about 30 minutes I found the Tekton Double Impact timbre to be pleasing and easy on the ears in a fairly near field configuration much like every OHM Walsh I have ever heard in various setups over the years. I’ve owned and continue to enjoy Ohm Walsh and other lines for almost 40 years now amazingly enough. I’ve always used SS amps with my OHMs and have never heard them off a tube amp, though I know others here have gone that way.

3) The only speakers I have heard that compete with OHM in regards to delivering live-like imaging and soundstage is mbl. Others may do soundstage and imaging quite well but many recordings will still sound like recordings whereas the OHMs deliver a live-like presentation with most any recording, including monophonic recordings, which really opens up a lot of new highly-rewarding listening possibilities that might be overlooked otherwise. They always sound like the performers are in your room. I would say OHMs are a unique speaker for music lovers.

Hope that helps. Good luck.

Thanks, Mapman, for your thoughts regarding the Tektons v the Ohms. Would you elaborate further on what you perceived as the differences between the two, aside from the greater efficiency of the Tektons?
@fyusmal....Although I would be pleased to have you over for demo of my 2000s, I live in New Jersey, so you would have to alter your travel plans. I am very close to Newark Liberty Airport, about 10 minutes away.

I am totally with you on the music limitations thing. Some speakers are tuned to work best with classical, or acoustic jazz, or even any well recorded music. The beauty of my Ohms is that, while they don’t turn a pig’s ear into a silk purse, you get the feeling that you at least understand why the engineers on a poor recording made the choices they did. For example, they really wanted the guitar to dominate, and the drums were sacrificed to emphasize the guitar. But I listen to a very wide variety of genres, and I enjoy them all on the Ohms.

A true story: An audiophile friend with nearly $200,000 invested in his rig had speakers that were custom made to his specifications, complete with huge outboard crossovers, & powered subs.

This audiophile is a hardcore classical music fan and choir members. On his classical and opera recordings, his system is amazing. On one visit I asked him to indulge me and let me play a great, but poorly recorded CD of psychobilly by The Reverend Horton Heat on his system. It was AWFUL. Completely unlistenable. On my Ohms, my feet are tapping, and my head is bobbin’, and my hand is slapping a big imaginary standup bass.

I have heard some great panel speakers, costing $25,000 or more, but none I would trade my modest Ohm 2000s for.

Hi everyone


I’ve been lurking here recently, trawling through as many posts as I can going as far back as 2010 and I’ve gotten as far as Peters very interesting modifications.


I have recently stumbled on to the ohm Walsh tall review by the audiophiloac and it’s piqued my interest. It’s been endless reading and researching since then.


I have a situation which seems similar to Accurus back in 2017. My present setup is a Magnepan 3.7 powered by pass labs 350.5 and I’ve been considering a change for sometime. A change because first, I have newborn twins, so I imagine it’s just a matter of time before they get their tiny fingers into the ribbons. Two, I’ve got a small listening space that’s not quite optimal for the Maggie’s. The space is also relatively live sounding due to brick walls and concrete flooring. Three, I’ve noticed over the years of listening to Maggie’s that I tailor my listening to very specific music that sounds good on the Maggie’s, and that really limits the exploration of a diversity of content.


I have always been a music first audio Enthusiant, so point three really bothers me. Why am I not enjoying certain types of music anymore, such as rock and pop? With that in mind I’ve embarked on exploring new vocal chords for my audio system. (speakers). I’ve looked and listened to spatials and even considered blindly purchasing the well reviewed pure audio project speakers and as of right now the ohms sounds (theoretically) like it could be a winner within a Budget. I have contacted Evan and as I’ve found out, there’s no possible way to audition these speakers apart from a home trial. Which is a bit of a small issue as I live in Singapore. 


I will be headed to North Tahoe late September for some mountain biking and was also hoping to find a retailer or some way to audition but to no avail. It also seems like I would have just missed the Rocky Mountain Audio show which is going on now. 


So at the risk of sounding brusque, I shall gently ask if there would be any kind soul in California willing to let a curious stranger listen to their ohms. It is a lot to ask and I would be highly appreciative of the gesture. 


Barring that, I would love to hear opinions about what could possibly deliver the large soundstage that I’m used to from the Magnepan while still being friendly to smaller rooms and curious young children.  


Thank you in advance and have a good day! 



Thanks guys, for your thoughts. What I may do is audition both and send back the set that is least satisfactory. Should be an interesting experiment...
vidiot33 -- you've summed things up nicely, but I'll add a comment about fit & finish. The 1000s I bought a year ago are quite nicely done. Nothing fancy, but a good finish. I had demoed a set of 200s something over a decade ago (and didn't keep them at) and they were indeed somewhat subpar in the veneer's surface finish quality. The 1000s I now have are heads and tails above the 200s in this regard. No complaints on my part (or my wife's) as they look great in our room.
I’ve heard Tekton double impact at a show.

Obviously OHM and Tekton are very different.

Ohm Walsh unique strength is the very large sweet range and overall coherence.

Tekton tends to be higher efficiency if needed and watts are limited and seem designed to pair well with tube amps.

The build quality critique is a red herring in that these have been proven to have very good longevity with owners and are very hard to damage compared to many. Build is very robust but the finish is not that of various luxury lines out there. I think I recall Tekton does offer upgraded finishes.   Check with Ohm to see if that is an available option with them these days. 


Very interesting thread. It’s taken me some time to get through all of it. I’ve come to a couple of conclusions regarding these:
-they are nearly universally beloved by their owners 
-they are image champs 
-although not particularly sensitive to placement, they require some experimentation for optimal results
-they require fairly signification amperage to get the most out of them
-they are sufficiently resolving to display the differences in associated gear
-fit, finish and construction quality is sub par (though if this makes a difference, it is apparently not reflected in the sound quality and is offset by the outstanding customer service).
-the owner is accessible and very helpful
  I’ll be downsizing soon to a condo, and sold my home theater speakers. I’m
interested in acquiring a new set of speakers that will work well in the new environs. I was all set to go with a set of Tekton Electrons when I heard YouTube reviews from Steve Guttenberg and Z regarding these and have read and heard all I could about them. I believe the 2000’s would be comparable to the Electrons and they’re less expensive. I’d welcome any owner feedback, particularly those who are familiar with the Tekton house sound.


Goodness!  I'm not sure how anyone got the impression I have a trust issue with John.  The trust issue is with UPS.

John and I had a discussion about how to return the drivers for maintenance.  I assumed he had a reverse logistics solution in place to send out call tags and packing materials.  No sirree!  He trusts UPS about as much as he can throw them, as witnessed by the excess of packaging noted by previous posters when shipping new product.

Our conversation consisted of his recommending that I take the drivers to the UPS office and let THEM choose the packaging (double boxed at a minimum) and insure the hell out of them.

John said or did nothing to shake my confidence in him.

-austingonzo
oblgny
As a native New Yawkah I can tell you ... I have the good fortune of residing within driving distance of the Ohm factory, in my county of birth, Brooklyn.
I'm not a New Yorker, but Brooklyn is not a county. It's one of the five boroughs of New York City and is located in Kings County.

Great guy, great company and best of all, located in my place of birth, Brooklyn. 
austingonzo...

As a native New Yawkah I can tell you that John S. is an absolutely trustworthy and honest business man. I have the good fortune of residing within driving distance of the Ohm factory, in my county of birth, Brooklyn. 

A few years back I drove to Massachusetts to pick up a pair of used Walsh 2’s. I had no idea then that the company was still operating.  I bought them because I remember how good they sounded when I first heard them at a friend’s house waaaaaay back in high school. They were in as expected condition, operating well, but with both cans dented and some veneer issues.  No big deal really. 

I googled “Ohm” and discovered they were still in business - and in Brooklyn!  I sent John an email explaining my situation and he offered a few options I could consider. I went for the update option, new this, new that.  All for under $1k. I drove with the speakers to the factory and dropped them. 

The upgrades took about a week or two. I picked them up, wired ‘em in, and...wow.  I had the same speakers I drove 250 miles to pick up, only now the sound was measurable superior. After about a week the highs on the left speaker disappeared.  Poof!  No drama, no smoke, just no sound.  I called John and he said to bring them back.  A loosely soldered wire was fixed. Bingo. 

To shorten this story, I loved those speakers. The three trips back and forth totaled 300 miles for me. Ohm is special - different. Unique. So is the company. Talking with the guy who owns the company, someone who actually gives a hoot about quality and customer satisfaction is increasingly rare. Best of luck with yours, and enjoy!
Austingonzo, you have come to the right place. $250 got you a lot of speaker for the $$$$. Best wishes.

Like others over the years, I have slogged through all 57 pages of this post before opening an Audiogon account and making my first post to this forum thread.

I recently obtained a pair of 4XO's here in Austin from a young man who had been gifted them, but was wholly unready to understand and appreciate them.  I purchased them from him off of Craigslist for $250.

They do have some condition issues: chipped veneer, missing basket grilles and a can somehow completely freed from its epoxy among them.  I have installed them in my available listening area and have spent a fair amount of time trying to dial them in.  (The listening area is extremely problematic.)

I am relatively new to the audiophile ranks, and I have been slowly ramping up purchases of used gear and trying things out.  (This means making low dollar commitments and making plenty of mistakes, of course.)  In so doing, I'm following the pattern I established with amateur astronomy seven or eight years ago: read forums, buy used gear, join Society, etc.  One of my recent purchases was a set of Allison Acoustics CD-7's, which will now rotate to surround duties.

I have had an initial conversation with John S., and he was as gracious as everyone has previously mentioned.  My budget is extremely constrained (mortgage, kid, WAF, etc.), and so I likely will risk the UPS gods at some point soon to send the drivers in for maintenance.  I don't believe I can afford any trade ins/upgrades.  I am awaiting John's feedback and recommendations for addressing my space.

I am currently maintaining a Pioneer Elite VSX-LX301 for home theater duties and room correction (MCACC).  It is not rated for the impedance of the Ohms or the Allisons, but it is doing fine so far for the levels at which we listen to TV and movies.  I can also use it with my Sony BDP to access multichannel audio recordings stored on my home server.  I am doing my two-channel listening on a vintage Pioneer VSX-D1S transitional AVR.  That was a recent "upgrade" from another vintage AVR, the Rotel RX-950AX.  I have a Denon + Ortophon for my albums.  I also run Roon server on my workstation and feed a Raspberry Pi doing dual duty to a HiFiBerry Digi+ and a Scarlett 2 series for streaming.

At this point, I mostly wanted to say "hi" and share how interesting I found the 9+ year exchanges of experiences and opinions on this thread.  Thanks for letting me share my find with you.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/baNbck2X5xRqMmTJ9

-austingonzo
I use this.  Works very well and won't set you back much.


https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B000BBGCCI/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all

Got a Spin Clean record washing gadget recently but have not tried yet.   I clean teh records manually before digitizing to-date.




@bstatmeister... Yes the SC-2 is spendy.  I got mine via Indiegogo as a beta unit for half the price.  I use the KAB-1 record cleaner, similar to the RD V except you connect your own cannisters vacuum.  When I bought it, about 14 years ago, there was nothing as cost effective as the Record Doctor V.  If I were buying a record cleaner today, I would absolutely get the Record Doctor V.  Good luck.