Thanks for the RT suggestion, I'll definitely check it out! |
Just making note of the fact that we are slowly but surely inching up toward 1000 posts in this thread. I think we need to throw some sort of virtual party online when that happens. Shame we can talk get together over somebody's house and listen to music -- that would be the best. |
What's the over/under for hitting 1000? |
When we get to 999, we I think we should honor Rebbi with the 1000th post... :) |
I second Rebbi getting the 1000th post! |
|
We have not spent [too] much time discussing room treatments or room correction in this thread although there has been some very helpful information about set-up. Someone is using an equalizer (Mamboni or maybe it's Martykl). I need to get a better understanding about the Ohms. They seem so counter-intuitive to me in the way they interact with the room. For a long time, I took it as a given to minimize the room's interaction. It seems the Ohms approach embraces it all. I am very puzzled.
Bondmanp recently achieved some great results from his post. In fact, he recently emailed me with some very detailed and insightful comments. In fact, I'd post them here if I had his permission.
I plan read more about their design and will talk to John Strohbeen, but I don't want to waste his time asking a bunch of questions, so if anyone else has achieved great success with either treatments or correction such as TacT, Audyssey, MCAAC, or ARC (or not), I would certainly appreciate reading about your experiences. Thanks. |
IMHO, the single best way to optimize the incredible soundstaging and imaging of the Ohm Walshs without sacrificing their remarkable dynamics and tonal accuracy is to acoustically treat the room to absorb all first reflections, particularly side walls and ceiling reflections. While it is true that the sound radiation pattern of the Ohm Walsh has been tailored to minimize room reflections while directing high dispersion sound into the interior of the room, the imaging and soundstaging become razor sharp and vivid when first reflections are completely eliminated by judicious use of room treatments. Basically, the Ohm Walshs sound best placed along the short wall of a rectangular room that is acoustically live but where the middle third of the room's long dimension is treated with absorptive covering on the side walls and ceiling to eliminate first reflections. This is how my room is configured and the sound is spectactular. |
Finsup,
I use the Velodyne SMS-1 to room correct a pair of Rythmik subwoofers. My Ohm 100s are crossed to the subs at 75hz by an analog NHT x-2. The "subwoofer out" signal from the x-2 goes to the digital Velo unit and on into the subs (no digital processing in the main signal path, FWIW). Two bassbusters handle the excess energy between about 80hz and 125 hz in my room. Side reflections are dispersed by a wall of irregularly shelved LPs on one side and a bay window on the other. The wall behind the speakers is 2/3 covered with absorbtive and dispersion materials.
This set-up produces really good results, both subjectively and measured.
Marty |
Just a note to say that I'm still amazed by how much the 100's like better amplification. The Manley Shrimp preamp / Bel Canto S300 combo sounds very sweet. I was listening to Donald Fagen's "Goodbye Look" the other day and wow... marimbas everywhere, and you can follow every harmony line in the vocals.
My room is quite lively, though -- hardwood floors, painted drywall and windows, and I wonder how some judiciously placed absorption might benefit things... at least a rug on the floor! |
I've managed to get both pair of OHMs tuned into their respective rooms pretty well and to my satisfaction without having to add any special room treatments.
One thing I have to add is that the last thing I felt my system was coming up just a tad short on until recently was ability to deliver all the details of a larger scale orchestral or symphonic work totally coherently in comparison to some of the best systems I have heard in this regard from digital source. The final tweak that resolved this and has me swooning of late was switching to all DNM Reson ICs from source to pre-amp and pre-amp to amp. My conclusion is that the minimalist single solid conductor design of these ICs is darn near optimal for letting complex musical passages pass through coherently and totally in phase. I've been stunned by the results frankly. At all volumes now, even the most complex passages come through in a most coherent and involving manner.
Its made justifying switching to a bigger amp even more difficult for me to justify than before. Everything just sound so right now, regardless of content/complexity. I set my music server to jukebox mode and just never want to stop listening. Whatever the next cut that happens to come up is I can just tune in and listen contently wondering what I will hear next that likely I had never heard before. |
|
Good to hear it, Mapman.
Finsup, nothing I sent you is private info, so feel free to share.
I did indeed install some absorbing foam panels at a first reflection point. This has greatly evened out the sound from the L/R channels, which had been very different in my asymetrical room. I also placed foam pipe insulation along some sharp edges that drop down from my ceiling. Along with some careful dialing in of the speakers, I am hearing a significant improvement in the sound overall. The forwardness that had bothered me on piano passages is greatly reduced. More treatments will come, but I am too busy and too broke right now. Overall, I am pretty pleased.
A succession of audiophile buddies have passed through my listening room. Although there was some limited criticism (these are very critical listeners!), they all have been fairly impressed, and amazed at the value the 2000s represent.
Last night, I listened to disc 2 of Danny Elfman's Music For a Darkened Theater, #2. Fantastic dynamics, long sustained tails of musical notes, startling percussion that made me jump, and a huge soundstage. And that timbre, always that true-to-life timbre. Perhaps it could be a little better, but I was hard-pressed to put my finger on exactly how.
One more audiphile friend is stopping by tonight (and his system cost him easily $40K). Unless he thinks I can do better with a specific speaker for $3K or less, I expect to be keeping the 2000s (just 9 days remain in my trial period). |
Bondman,
Tell us what your critical listener friends said? |
Amp news:
I'm giving serious consideration to trying a pair of Bel Canto ref1000 mkiis that are up for sale. The seller is confirming for me that these are in fact mkiis, which go for a hefty premium over original ref100s due to input stage and power supply enhancements.
On paper, the 100k unbalanced input impedance (200k balanced) of the ref1000 mkiis are an ideal match for tube pre-amps. FWIW the input impedance of my MF A3CR is 72K ohms, also very good. The ref1000s deliver 500w/ch into 8 ohm, doubling into 4.
I figure if I do this, I 'm going to try to go for broke.
We'll see... |
Tell us what your critical listener friends said?
+1 |
Finsup -
Most of the criticism was that the high frequencies might be a tad rolled off. This might be changed by changing the toe-in, but, frankly, I like the frequency balance as is. Note that although the highs are a little rolled off, there is no lack of extension or transient information; it's all there, at a slightly reduced level, which makes these speakers easy on the ears during long listening sessions.
Some felt that the 2000s were not the last word in soundstage depth, although they did exhibit a reasonable amount. Note that there is a large, tube-based RPTV in between and behind the speakers, which has to have a negative affect on depth.
Most of the other criticisms involved my room acoustics and speaker cables (they are too long and not properly positioned).
90% or more of the comments were positive. Some checked items off a list - soundstage, imaging, timbre, frequency balance, extension, PRAT, etc., and found them all more than acceptable for the price, and in some cases acceptable at ANY price - a real strong endorsement IMO.
The last fellow stopped by earlier this week, and generally agreed with the others. That, and a few more hours of listening myself have convinced me that keeping the 2000s is the right move.
Since they are staying, I jumped on a pair of used MWTs offered locally here on Audiogon, to be used as surrounds. I wasn't going to address the surround channels before the center channel and spiked bases, but opportunity knocked, so I jumped. Now my wallet needs to catch its breath for a bit! |
Bond,
Thanks for sharing your info.
For me, well, I finally got the urge to spring for the bigger amp. The Bel Canto Ref1000mkiis should arrive in a day or two. That will be fun!
It was between the Wyreds and the Bels, and I decided to go for broke with the Bels despite the significant cost difference and hopefully put my upgrade urges to rest for a while. Yeah, we'll see about that!
I'll post back as soon as I have something to report. |
Since they are staying, I jumped on a pair of used MWTs offered locally here on Audiogon, to be used as surrounds. Woot! Wow that is terrific! I am very much looking forward to your impressions in an HT/MC set-up once you get them in. It was between the Wyreds and the Bels, and I decided to go for broke with the Bels despite the significant cost difference... Methinks youll have power to spare. ...and hopefully put my upgrade urges to rest for a while I for one hope not! : ) I am living vicariously through you guys
|
Rebbi! What the devil! I see a pair of Ohm 100/S3's for sale! Guess we will have to strip you of your Ohm Stripes immediately sir! That 1000th post here will have to be awarded to someone else I guess.
Seriously, I hope that whatever direction you chose to go, that it brings you much enjoyment! I think you will miss the Ohm's though! Tim |
I'm sure you've found that the only way to find out for sure if the grass can be greener to try something different. That's also part of the learning process.
There are lots of good sounding fish in the audio sea! Hearing the differences and experimenting is part of the fun. |
Guys,
I was waiting for the other shoe to drop when I posted that ad! :-)
I remember Mapman saying a long time ago that some people would "get" the unique Ohm presentation and some wouldn't. After a year and a half of living with the Ohms, I think I may fall into the latter category. Or (and I suspect this is part of it) it may have to do with my room.
In any event, I really got the itch to hear what a good monitor would sound like in my room.
I got a pair of Ascend Sierra 1's on 30 day factory direct audition. They're beautiful to look at and their bamboo cabinets are amazingly inert! The reviews are spectacular but I found the sound nothing special. In particular, the sound never broke free of the boxes.
Then on a whim, I took home a pair of PSB Synchrony Two B speakers from one of our local audio shops. And I mean, literally, my jaw dropped. They sounded so fantastic... Detailed, sweet voices, plenty of bass energy for my room, and they TOTALLY vanished, acoustically. Enormous sound stage and great sense of ambient space, along with pinpoint imaging within the soundstage. I had that "I could listen to these for hours on end" feeling.
So, yes, I put the 100's up for sale.
I think it's important to say that the Ohm line is remarkable! I also want to say that I've loved being a part of this thread and this virtual community. And for every person who has discovered Ohms through this thread -- and for every sale that this thread has generated for John, I feel happy. My decision isn't a judgment on any of your tastes and I wish everybody much pleasure and delight now and in the future from music and this crazy hobby of ours. And I still will be recommending Ohms to other people on Audiogon and elsewhere! |
The only thing more shocking would be Mapman getting rid of his Ohm's for an Acoustimas 10 :P
Seriously, this is the nature of our community I guess. And it's why I will probably never be an authority on speakers- I tend to keep mind for a long time.
Thanks for starting the thread, Rebbi. And I vote that you still get 1000 |
Well, good luck Rebbi, and thank you for your posts, which contributed to my (re)discovery of Ohm Acoustics. Me, I had my previous speakers for about 10 years before I decided an upgrade was necessary.
While I agree that hearing new gear and speakers is a fun part of our hobby, I just don't have the time or financial resources to do this very often. I satisfy this curiousity with audio shows (although not since Primedia went bust) and participation in my local audio club. Through this club, I've been fortunate to hear many speakers and different brands of gear. One of the things that led to my decision to keep the Ohms was hearing speakers that were much more expensive, well reviewed and well regarded, that did not impress me as much or more than the 2000s.
Finsup - I swapped in the MWTs for the 2000s last night to make sure they function properly. I am truly amazed at their performance. I did not push them very hard, but these used MWTs (not the current MicroWalsh SE), when run with my Vandersteen subs, sounded very similar to my the 2000s, almost identical! I do not regret spending for the 2000s, since they are properly sized for my room, but I can't recommend the MicroWalsh SE for smaller rooms or for people who use subwoofers strongly enough. Hopefully, I will get them in place as surrounds this weekend. I'll keep you posted.
Mapman - Congrats on the new muscle amps! Please let us know how the Ohms like the extra juice. If you have a chance to run them into your smaller Ohms, I'd love to hear if that is a worthwhile improvement as well. Although my Odyssey Stratos HT3 is no wimp (150 solid state watts/channel), I have wondered what the 2000s would do with a massive amp like your Bel Cantos. |
PSB Synchrony 2's?
Excellent choice. As I think I've posted around here on A'gon somewhere, these are one of very few speakers that I could afford that I have heard that I could live happily with long term I think if I had to. They are a reasonable alternate to the OHMs I would say. Not many others I have heard in the same price range are.
FWIW Rebbe, I don't think there are any affordable monitors out there that can do things as well overall as the OHMs, at least when it comes to large scale orchestral or other works that require some low end muscle, at least not without a sub. |
Rebbi - It sounds like you gave the Ohms a listen for a long time, but it's you're time to move on. Once in a while I get the bug to try something else, but it passes. You have to try things out, glad to see you found another speaker that suits you.
I'd have to guess that because your room is on the live side, the Ohms, as great as they are, are less forgiving than more directional speakers. I've owned psb's before and also liked them a lot - nice speakers!
The truth of the matter is, I've been hitting the audio forums a lot less than I used to - with the exception of this thread, so thanks Rebbi! |
the ref1000mkiis arrived yesterday just in time for me to be snowed in with them and get some listening in.
i'll leave a teaser and say that things have changed significantly. details to follow once i have more time to tune in.
reb, your room does remind me of a very lively room with wood floors that i had my original walsh 2s in almost 30 years ago. lets just say it was a very unique and challenging environment to get things tuned into! |
Bondmanp,
With your participation in a local audio club, maybe someone there has some amps they'd bring over to try out -- just for grins... |
Its striking to me how much the sound of both my OHM Walsh pairs changes whenever I make a change to electronics. The difference now with the Bel Canto Ref 1000mkii's is perhaps the most striking of all. The sound is exceptionally lean and mean now. Everything is rock solid tight and dynamics and transient response has improved markedly. The difference is most apparent with well recorded drums but is in play most everywhere.
A good example is Ringo's bass drum on "Come Together" from the newly remastered release of Abbey Road. It sounds like a real bass drum now as a result of improved dynamics in combo with improved portrayal of harmonic overtones.
I also heard the foghorn blast that is typically buried in the mix of the tune "yellow Submarine" (from the remastered album of the same name from a few years back), it was quite distinct and clear.
You can often tell when things are going well when the music draws you in and you just want to turn up the volume and the toes start tapping or you reach for that air guitar! That's what I was doing yesterday afternoon. But things were also shining brightly at even the lowest volumes more so than ever before.
These amps are the bomb so far!
On the down side, I noticed a barely noticeable bit of what I believe to be some intermittent low level high frequency tube noise apparently on one channel of the pre-amp that I had never noticed before. Nothing horrible, but barely noticeable as a slight high pitched whine when sitting idle. At first I suspected a problem with one of the new amps, but switching inputs to the amps switched the problem to the other speaker, so the amps appear innocent. It may be time to open up the ARC pre-amp for the first time and dabble with the tubes. |
Thanks, Mapman - I look forward to more comments on the new amps. FWIW, I have a very similar issue with my Conrad-Johnson PV-11 preamp. Most frustrating is that the problem has persisted through two full retubes and a third replacement of the specific problem tube. The good news is that it is very intermittent, occuring maybe 10% of the time. Since getting the PV-11 out of my rack is a PITA, I am living with it for now, listening through it. When things calm down (when? if!), I will readdress this issue. But I will say that, IMO, having some glass in the system is worth the associated hassles.
Finsup - got the MWTs set up as surrounds yesterday, and did a quick and dirty channel balance. Unfortunately, the first film I watched turned out to be a 1980 picture with mono sound. I will let you know how it sounds when I get to a 5.1 soundtrack.
I did invite some club members in to hear the 2000s, but never thought to invite them to bring their amps (D'OH!). I might someday bring my 2000s to a meeting, where several amps might be available to swap in.
I have noticed something interesting lately, as I have played more rock/pop CDs: Although the Ohms are kinder to poorly recorded CDs than my Vandersteens were (especially in the upper-mids/lower-treble range), they do reveal bad recordings for what they are. They are just less exciting and involving, even while they are listenable. |
"They are just less exciting and involving, even while they are listenable."
That is the nature of the beast with lesser recordings to some extent.
In my case, lesser pop/rock recordings typically have manifested themselves with a dull and perhaps slightly muddy low end on most everything I have ever heard them on.
A good example is the original CD master of the Allman Brothers Brothers and Sisters album. This always has had somewhat of a murky low end to it, not just on CD but on original vinyl as well. That appeared to be missing in action for the most part this past weekend however with the new amps. As a result, the rest of what is there, though still way off from the best recordings, is able to come through quite nicely.
I noticed this while listening over the weekend not only with both pair of OHMS, but my Dynaudio monitors as well. These tended to have a touch of fat bass off the A3CR amp when sitting closer to the walls than ideal in my wife's 12X12 sunroom.
At first, things sounded rather lean with the Bel amps compared to the Musical Fidelity A3CR, but after things settled in I realized that the bass was tighter, more dynamic and more harmonically rich even on lesser recordings than prior.
The Bels have really opened up the dynamics to a significant extent on better recordings. |
Map,
Thanks for sharing and I'm delighted tha the Bel Canto Amps are
floating your boat! I have lesser stuff -- "just" the dual-mono S300, but it (and the Manley pre) really made a lovely difference in the sound of my 100s. Bel Canto is good stuff!
Enjoy!! |
Thanks Rebbe.
I had to grit my teeth a bit when swallowing the cost of these amps (not small change even used), but I have to say that at least they are delivering in spades so far as was hoped! |
Bond,
I lucked out somewhat. I open up the pre-amp. It uses 6 12AX7 dual triodes, 3 in the line section and 3 in the phono section. The problem was in the line section since I heard it on all inputs. So I switched tube pairs 1 by one between line and phono section. After the 3rd swap (of three total), the low level high pitched noise that sounded like a dentist drill was gone. And the phono section now with the tube that was causing the problem sounds fine! Go figure. Apparently the tube had an issue in the line stage but is quiet in the phono. I can live with that. I will be sure to pick up a few spare tubes and keep them around however for whenever the next issue comes up. Darn valves, pain in the butts but sure sound nice! |
Finsup - Listened to two of my favorite 5.1 DVDs last night: "Best of Sessions At 54th Street Vol. 1" and Peter Gabriel's "Play". All I can say is wow! I still have to dial in the channel balance much more carefully than I have so far, but here's what I heard: Although my center channel is still a Vandersteen VCC-1, back-to-front uniformity of timbre was spot on. The sound pans around following the cameras on the Sessions DVD, and the effect was spooky. Plenty of spine-chills. Also, this setup easily floated sound between the front and surround speakers, above my head(!), and immediately behind my head. Detail resolution by the truckload, even exposing some kinks in the mixes on the Peter Gabriel DVD. Surround soundtracks on films should be a hoot with my rig once I get it balanced right. Note that the MWT surrounds are elevated on two cinderblocks for hieght. Now I really have a Jones for the Ohm center channel - darned economy! Finsup, IMHO, the Ohm Walsh series makes an incredible surround-sound setup.
Mapman - I agree with your take on the Ohms and poor rock recordings. I just got the best of the Replacements CD ("Did You Know Who I Thought I Was?"). The sound was underwhelming. Interesingly, as the tracks progressed to later recordings, the sound improved slightly. The last track, which is listed as "re-recorded", sounded noticeably better than the rest. |
Bond,
Your surround sound experience with the Walshes is very interesting. I have not read much about Walshes in surround sound systems and I do not do surround sound, so this is all news to me. My gut instinct is that the wide range omni Walsh design is a natural for surround sound despite the fact that the basic Walsh design was in existence way before home surround sound systems.
BTW I noticed that someone has a pair of wall mount Walshes for surround sound up for auction here currently. |
Bond, you are using just "regular" micro-talls right? I was talking with John Strohbeen about using them for surround duty, he says they will work fine, but the omni version of them works even better for surround duties. I would love to hear the differences as I was thinking of possibly trying that myself with my 3000's as the fronts.
Map, glad to hear the pre is okay and that your new Bels are doing the business! Enjoy! |
The surround thing is interesting to me as well. I'm hoping to have surround within the next year, and another set of MWT's or the MW Walls is on my list.
I also plan on skipping the center channel and using the speakers in phantom mode. |
"I was talking with John Strohbeen about using them for surround duty, he says they will work fine, but the omni version of them works even better for surround duties."
I think the omni version does not employ the internal damping in the wall facing directions (at least not in the same configuration) and the super tweeter is mounted to face up rather than angled forward. There may be other tweaks as well to go along with these. |
Yep, that is basically what is going on in the omni version Map. I would think either one would do a fine job though with proper positioning.
With the time I have played with my 3's in the front left/right, I don't feel a need for a center either. I think that would obviously depend on distance apart/screen size too.
I am still debating the whole surround-sound thing anyway, and it is hard to break with the traditional 2-channel sound that I love and know. But I have found it doesn't mean that you can't do both nearly as well, might just cost a little more! Tim |
Guys - I really don't know what version I have. I am the third owner. I looked, and there is no "aim toward center of room" sticker on either speaker. My system is a 7.1 setup, with the MWTs on the sidewalls, just behind my chair, and a pair of Paradigm Atoms on tall stands near the back wall, some 8 feet behind the listening seat.
IMO, the one thing that makes Ohm Walsh speakers ideal for surround applications, other than the omni-dispersion pattern, is the uniformity of the sonics throughout the line. If you keep up with the columns of Kal Rubinson ("Music In the Round" in Stereophile), and other writers on the subject of surround music (not film soundtracks), having a mismatched surround system, especially in the center, is worse than having no surround at all. Problems arise for people like me who have a combined 2-channel/home theater system, since putting a third tower in the center would match the mains, but block the TV. If my experience with the MWTs and the 2000s is any guide, the Ohm Walsh Center should be a very, very close sonic match for the 2000s, making multichannel music a future possibility for me (although for now, I have no multichannel format player, and use non-matching amps and preamps for the mains and center/surround channels). But I could see how Ohm's approach could solve a lot of problems for those with TVs who want to move to surround sound for music and have uniform sound in each channel. Of course, this use of different size Ohm Walsh speakers requires a subwoofer to handle the deep bass that the smaller Ohms and Ohm center channel speaker obviously cannot reproduce in medium size and larger rooms.
Even though they were close, my Vandersteen VCC-1 center did not match exactly the Vandersteen 1C mains and surrounds I replaced with the Ohms. IMO, few manufacturers even aim for identical sound throughout their product line. Even when they do, the center is usually a compromised design, and a poor sonic match for the tower models in the same line. Ohm is one of the few speaker makers that truly has one "sound" that is just scaled for different room volumes. |
"Ohm is one of the few speaker makers that truly has one "sound" that is just scaled for different room volumes. "
I suspect OHM might lay claim to being the best at this in particular. |
Bond/Map, I totally agree on this. I think that is one reason why I am looking at possibly even doing surround at this point instead of scrapping the whole thing. I have the processor and amps that are all as matched as one could want(within reason/budget). It is a matter of just using my 3/3000's for the fronts, and because I don't have a super-wide space to cover between my L/R fronts, I can get away with not having a center. I just need to come off of some money and buy the MWT's for the rears. I think the voicing will be very seamless/uniform. I very much agree with Kal and others on this point.
My problem will be more along the bass end. I have tried subs, a pair of Velodynes, and my room just is a nightmare to get them positioned and sounding right. I would rather use no subs at all compared to the crap I have been trying to achieve/get through. The good thing is, I don't really care for all that really low bass boom/bang. Hopefully the 3/3000 will do enough of the low end to satisfy me there. I guess there are always 4000/5000's! Right! Enjoy, Tim |
Tim - I hate to keep flogging this horse, but if you get the opportunity to hear them, the Vandersteen 2Wq subwoofers should solve your issues quite nicely. Unlike most mass-market subs, they are designed to go into a corner, on the floor. In my case, after years of tinkering with a Def Tech PF15 subwoofer (including moving it around, adding a Behringer 1124P parametric EQ and a Paradigm X30 sub controller), I finally got the Def Tech to be somewhat unoffensive for music and useful for films. The Vandys, which I bought two of, used, worked perfectly in the first and only location I've had them in - the front corners of my room. These are not "bass freak" subs; they are accurate, musical subs that will produce tuneful, extended, clean bass, and plenty of it, but only when the music calls for it. Best of all, now that I have the Ohms, I can attest that the 2Wq blends seemlessly and easily with at least the Ohms and Vandersteen mains. I suspect they will blend well with most loudspeakers that are solid down to 40Hz. I urge you to check them out at the Vandersteen web site, since the design concept and connection scheme is a bit different than the usual subwoofer. I would guess that, if you only need a sub for the center and surrounds, the home theater version of this subwoofer would suffice, but I haven't heard it in a long time, so YMMV. |
Guys,
Just pointing out that my Ohm Walsh 100's are still up for sale here. A few nibbles but as yet no bites. Thanks... end of advertisement. ;-) |
Tim,
I've written pretty extensively on the Velodyne SMS-1 sub controller. You may want to search these threads and check it out. Unless you are using DD series Velodyne subs, this device is absolutely transformative. It may take some work, but a decent sub (or 2 or 3) with an SMS-1 will get smooth bass response in even a difficult room (like mine) and seamless crossover to your mains, to boot.
Good Luck
Marty |
Thanks Bond/Marty on the sub info. My biggest problem with subs is a good place to put them to start with. My living room which is also my listening room, is rather odd. It is a good sounding room, just that it is broken up by entryway/hallways and a kitchen/dining area opening. No real corners that are usable for the most part. And floor space too is at a premium.
The other issue is the same issue for surround, running wires. It will take running them overhead in the attic and fishing them down two walls, one is easy, the other not so much. Everything is do-able, just time, money and a lot of effort. I am willing to go to take this on, but also taking my time before jumping in whole-hog.
If I decide to do the whole surround A/V thing, the subs probably will be the last thing I tackle. I will get the rears in place and go from there. Again, sometimes I think why bother, I get extremely good sound in 2-channel mode for video/movies. I am sometimes amazed at the enveloping sound I get with either my Ohm's or the Magnepan's when in the system. Agreed it isn't the same thing as "surround", but pretty darn good!
I already have an Anthem AVM-30 processor, Anthem MCA-20 and PVA-2 amps, so the real hard part is already available. I just happen to love my Audio Research gear too, and do to space, I can really only have one system. Music is my main priority anyway. I know, tough to live with huh?
Rebbi, that 1000th magical post is right around the corner! Tim |
I step away for a couple of days and come back to an explosion of new posts -- and just a post or two away from 1000...
Finally, I get to read some real-world experiences from someone who is using these in a multi-channel set-up. Bondmanp, thanks for describing your experiences in using these in a surround-sound setting. I, too, found your experience interesting in that you are not using matching speakers all around even using a Vandersteen for the all-important center speaker, all with good effect. Unless you have an acoustically-transparent screen, it will be difficult to use three matching speakers across the front when watching movies/concerts.
So, your report of good results is very encouraging. This sense of transparency and great sound quality is very important. Many of you have previously reported that you get an apparent 3D projection of music into your space and this provides a very wide listening area. Since I typically move around a lot when I listen to music, and often need to sit off-axis, what I am reading from you all is that this you are there experience has tipped the scales for me. I am budgeting now for a pair, maybe the 3000s, to start. I hope by this summer I can report back on my own experiences. |
1000 Yea..... I think I will buy some OHM's now. |
1001
I would like to thank everyone that has contributed to this thread.
...and an extra thank you to all Ohm owners.
Everyone should feel free to call me personally to discuss your needs and options.
Good Listening!
John Strohbeen
President
800-783-1553 |
