Butte,
Have not heard X000 series yet but my 100S3s and 5S3s were upgrades from original Walsh 2s I bought back around 1982 or so. X000s are accordidng to JS evolutionary not revolutionary compared to prior series 3.
The series 3 had similar seemingly uncontrained ability to go loud and clear, however the sound quality was siginficantly refined in most every other way to compete with other more modern designs in ways the originals could not. Mostly to do with overall clarity , focus and detail across the board + bigger soundstage and improved imaging. I owned my original Walsh 2s concurrently with my series 3 Walsh 2s when I first acquired them a few years back. The difference in sound was striking at first listen and obvious in direct a/b comparisons I did at the time.
X000 series is again supposedly further refinement upon the same according to JS. |
Feedback on 4.5000 upgrade?
Can anyone share some feedback on the 4.5000 upgrade? I recently ordered the upgrade for my 28 year old 4's, and would love to hear anyone's feedback regarding the install, as well as their opinions on the sonic differences.
Thanks, Dave |
Happy to share. I kind of felt obliged to contribute my experience considering how many times I have used these forums (and this string in particular). And to spread the word about John Strohbeen's generosity with his time and efforts.
As far as comparisons go, I'm hoping to get my local shop interested in hearing the Class D Audio amp. 300 wpc at only 20 lbs, I can easily move it around. If I do, I will share my (profoundly non-expert) impressions. If you're near Portland, OR, let me know. |
Looking at the Class D Audio products, I recall now they appear to be a proprietary Class D design, not based on Icepower. So having not heard these, comparisons to Wyred or other Icepower amps by me would be pre-mature. There could be major sonic differences. WOuld like to try these sometime though and see/hear. |
Stinky,
Nice to hear of good results by others with other even more affordable Class D amps.
I've read about Class D Audio and thought this would be an interesting option to try with the Walshes. Assuming these are stock IcePower amps, I would expect similar very good results used with most pre-amps, though 10K input impedance of stock IcePower might not be the best match posible on paper with some tube pre-amps. With SS pre-amps, the performance is likely similar to similar amps from Wyred I would expect. |
About Ohm center channels: I have Ohm 1000s and wanted to get a center channel. I called John Strohbeen during the sale. He advised, based on my space and distance from the center channel, that the Micro Walsh driver would be sufficient and voice matched with the 1000s (saving me a couple hundred compared to the 1000 driver). We then discussed my space, my mounting options, etc. He is presently building a box from scratch to meet my needs. Obviously, I haven't heard it yet, but based on the sound of my 1000s, and my experience doing business with Mr. Strohbeen, I expect it to be outstanding.
Also, FWIW, my amp is the Class D Audio SDS-470C Custom. Well reviewed, and to my untrained but willing and eager ears, sounds great. 300 WPC at 8 ohms, 600 WPC at 4 ohms, for $695. Should drive the new Walsh 2.2000s (purchased during the Columbus Day sale) quite nicely. |
Thanks, Map. I appreciate you taking the time to respond. Also for sharing your experience with others here! |
Coot,
I recall audiogoner Mamboni moved to the Wyred amps for his larger newer OHMs recently and was most pleased. THat is a good omen! Mamboni is/was a professional musician in an orchestra I believe and is one of the most knowledgeable OHM/Walsh driver owners I know. |
"What is your answer to those who whine that digital amps are not great in the treble - say with a soprano voice. Not sure specifically what they mean, but I've read that many times. A roughness I think. That's my fear about W4S in particular and somewhat the BC's."
I do not hear any issues. Might be a personal preference thing for how certain amps sound in particular systems.
The BCs/Wyreds/IcePower are highly damped. This works extremely well with the larger OHMs but may not be optimal with other speakers that do not benefit as much from high damping.
THe BCs are the best I have heard with my OHMs. Other amps might have more pros and cons with my smaller monitors. THe BCs sound great but a touch brighter on my Dynaudio monitors than the OHMs. WIth my very small Triangle monitors, the sound is towards the lean side. The Triangle Titus monitors would be best served by a tube amp for example. BUt they still sound very good with the BCs. |
What is your answer to those who whine that digital amps are not great in the treble - say with a soprano voice. Not sure specifically what they mean, but I've read that many times. A roughness I think. That's my fear about W4S in particular and somewhat the BC's. |
Coot,
Another amp I have used to good effect with my 5s as a pinchhitter for the BCs once is the Tube Audio Design 125 Hibachi monoblocks. These are an absolute steal usually at under $1000 when the y come up for sale here. Unfortunately, TAD was a one man shop and the designer and support guy who was great with service and communications passed away recently,
The TAD 125s are 180w/ch and go for more of a tube amp sound in a mostly SS package. With my 5s, they are lovely all around with a particularly vivid midrange. Ultimate bass authority, slam and control is just a tad behind the BCs at most normal volumes. THe BCs however just continue to expand the sound effortlessly as the volume goes up whereas the TADs will start to compress a bit sooner.
I use the TADs normally with my smaller 100S3 OHMs and they are a perfect match there! |
Coot,
THe BC ref1000m will definitely address any congestion and bass issues. Strongly recommended. I'd expect very good results with the Wyreds as well. |
Okay, got you. I didn't know if this was the case or if the 5000's were new or what. Makes sense then, and you could maybe benefit from a bit more power there possibly. Those pipe organs can sure push a system to it's limits, that is for sure.
I haven't heard the Van Alstine, but have heard good things about his equipment. I would say if you can purchase with a trial, that would be the way to go in order to make sure you aren't just wasting your money there. Either way, enjoy the tunes! Tim |
Oh I've been running the b&K on the 5000's for 2 yrs. Well broken in and definitely make beautiful music together on solo piano and chamber music. But on large scale works they get congested. We also play quite a lot of pipe organ and I feel the bass is lacking support. Hence the desire for more power.
I am leaning towards the Van Alstine 600R because it's a hybrid valve/FET which may have a smoother top end than the W4S - more like what I am getting with the B&K but with tighter and lower bass. |
I suspect the b& ks will do a very respectable job so worth trying first. Then you have a reference for comparison once the 5000s break in.
I started with a 120 w/ch musical fidelity A3cr at first with my 5s and got good results but nothing compared to the bc's. |
Coot,
No, i did not compare.
BC does some power supply enhancements to the icepower unit used with the 1000m specifically. That was the main reason i splurged. But i have not had an opportunity to compare. |
Coot, just curious but have you tried your B&K on the 5000's yet? You might see how it goes before spending the money, you might be surprised. Or not......I do like the Bel Canto amps myself though. Enjoy the 5000's! Tim |
Mapman,
Did you do a critical comparison between the BC's and the W4S? What was it that influenced your decision to pay the xtra? |
I was considering the NAD M2 but I'm a separates kind of guy. |
Coot,
The w4sound is one i considered and simi!ar to bc ref 1000m amps i ended up splurging for. A match made in heaven, especially with a tube preamp.
John often recommends NAD amps whicb i like as well.
I recommend 250w/ch min, high current, and damping factor of 40 or higher with the large ohms. My f5s that i settled on the Bel Cantos for use the similar size walsh 5 driver that came prior to the 5000. |
Help me decide which amp for my 5000s.
Currently 23yr-old B&K EX442, ~190wpc. John S. says I may need more power.
I'm interested in either W4S ST-1000 or VanAlstine 600R.
What I'm after is lower, fuller bass and less midrange congestion. Open to other suggestions, not to exceed $4k. |
I just happened on this thread for the first time, today.
This is in response to a post inquiring about an Ohm Walsh center channel.
I've been a very happy Ohm Walsh 4 owner since about 1985. Still have them and still enjoy their sound.
I've had a couple of different center channels in my system over the years, but neither of them ever really seemed to integrate well with the Walsh 4's. So, I gave John S. a call and we started a process of constructing a center channel for my particular needs.
My particular environment has an 8 foot long, by 6 foot tall armoire as my equipment rack. It sits out away from the front wall approx. 3 feet to the face of the cabinet. The Walsh 4's are located to the outside corners of the armoire, and closer to the listening environment by approx. 8 inches from the face of the armoire to the backs of the Walsh 4's. In between the Walsh 4's, and in front of the armoire, is a 92" retractable pj screen, suspended with bracketing that extends down from the ceiling.
All this leads to where the center channel is mounted. Above the suspended pj screen housing, and attached to the ceiling with the driver being inverted and placed just in front of the screen.
The process started around Thanksgiving of 2011. Well, after multiple phone conversations, and rosewood samples being sent to me(to match my original Walsh 4 cab's), we came up with a design, and finish, that I was ready for. Around mid January of 2012, the speaker was delivered. It arrived safely, and then came the daunting task of installation.
The design John came up with to install it on the ceiling, made the install much easier than I anticipated.
For my environment, we decided on the use of the 3000 series driver. The cabinet is approx. 50" deep (fore and aft), and 13" wide (left to right), by 7" tall (from ceiling to floor). The driver, with magnetically attached grill, then extends down from the 7", another 10" down to be set just above the pj screen housing. Knowing my general seating positions, John re-positioned the tweeter accordingly.
Now, as for the most important part of all this? The sound is just what I've been missing all these years! Seamless transitions around the forward sound stage. the timbre match is finally the same. I couldn't be happier!
On a side note; about 6 months earlier I found a pair of FRS-15's, sent the drivers back to Ohm for surround refurb and the once over. Now I have Ohm Walsh's all around(except sub, of course)! Multi-channel listening is fantastic!
Just a couple of days ago, I decided to upgrade my 4's to the 4.5000's. The rest of my system has had ongoing upgrades, throughout the years, it's time for my 4's to get one as well.
Dave |
$185/pair during the sale for these Cam 16s sounds like a no brainer to me for anyone in the market for a good "cheap pair of speakers" as Billy Joel once said. I've almost picked up a pair of one of the CAM line on several occasions used on Ebay. These are refurbed with all teh latest and greatest stuff John can put in there. |
Map, I will gladly take your F-5's off your hands, not that I will have the room for them soon, but oh well.
Yeah, I would love to see these beasts as well. |
Yes, John, pics please !!!!
Not that I would need these monsters, but I wanna see anyhow! |
I had sent John S. at Ohm a note earlier, and inquired about the Ohm F-5015, here is his response. Guess I wasn't too far off on my guess afterall....
The F-5015 is the ultimate upgrade Ohm F. The cabinet has a 15" XtremeXcursion, sealed subwoofer (on the bottom) and a 500 watt amplifier to get a 16Hz response at high output levels. The F driver board gets sealed and enlarge to be accept a Walsh 5000 driver. The grill is the size of the original F but is made from mostly perforated metal and has our current seamless grill cloth. When built all-new, we are targeting $12,000 per pair. I am using up F cabinets with these beta versions.
Maybe at some point there will be some pics, maybe.....Tim |
A separate cosmetically matched 15" sub bundled in with f-5000 is as good a guess as any I can come up with to hit that high price. I guess only John knows for sure. I would call but don't like to bother him unless I am serious about possibly buying something which I am not in this case. |
Map, it is an F-5000 with an active 15" sub built in.......Actually, I just made that one up, but one never knows. I too saw that and wondered, but the price for me is way beyond my means. Still curious too though. Tim |
Coot,
If you find out please post. I would really like to know. |
"John has been touting on his site"???
Touting? Hardly. He says go to the site for more information. Well there is very little information about any of his products. You have to pretty much call for any details (how does he get anything done if he's on the phone so much?). I keep hoping he will get the site redesigned but I've been hoping a long time and not much has changed.
Don't get me wrong - his products sound wonderful. I own a pair of 5000s and love 'em. I too am wondering what an F-5015 is. Guess I'll have to call, but a pic would be nice. |
Anybody know what the Ohm F-5015 John has been touting on the site is? It carries a hefty price tag compared to any other models currently offered I have seen recently. |
All, take a look at Ohm's website, John is having a Columbus Day sale on all Ohm speakers, limited to 37 pairs, get them at greatly reduced rates while you can! I hope some of you that might have been on the fence can take advantage of this and order a pair. Just a shameless plug for John and company from a long-time Ohm lover and listener! Enjoy the music! Tim |
Marty,
By that you mean that the soundstage and image extend to the right and left of the speakers, rather than remain between them, right? That's what I do not get with mine. I know that Ohms are not forward and the soundstage knocks out the back wall, which mine do a bit (but not dramatically). That's fine with me, though accounts of Ohms' imagining encompassing much of the room do have me envious.
My problem on occasion is with image height--not so much the knocking out the back wall as a bunch of musical midgets tunneling through it. That may be a matter of recordings. Better recorded material rarely if ever suffers from this problem.
Mapman: I bought them at the shop on Route 59 in Nanuet, NY (just over the Jersey line). I'm still kind of proud of my 13/14 year old self for picking out those speakers. A few years later I went to Rutgers in New Brunswick (class of '86). I think I bought an Onkyo receiver and tape deck from your shop around 1985. My roommate blew up the Es while throwing a party at our place on Louis Street; I had the Onkyo gear for the next 15 years. Ah, college. Seems like yesterday. I can barely remember it.
I'll call John S and see what can be done within my modest current budget. I'll also look to see if there are any good used deals around on newer models. If anybody knows of any for sale, let me know. In the meantime, I can't say I'm hurting for sound--those old 2s make excellent living room speakers and they sure beat the mass market junk out there today (and yesterday). |
Jwc,
Talk to John Strohbeen at Ohm for upgrade or trade in options.
Which Tech Hifi did you get your Es at?
I worked at the New Brunswick nj store around that time. The Ohms were the house brand of sorts and always sounded best to me.
I bought my 100s3s in Walsh 2 cabinets used here on agon and owned them concurrently for comparison with my older Walsh 2s for a while. Then i traded in the old Walsh 2s and added a pair of larger F5s with series 3 drivers. I have both pair of series 3 speakers currently plus my old ohm Ls from my tech hifi days that I did a custom upgrade job on myself using a combo of both OHM and non Ohm provided parts. |
JWC,
I can't speak to your Ohm W2s, but I can state that my 100s throw a very wide lateral stage that extends convincingly beyond the speaker position. I do agree, however, that the sense of depth starts at the plane of the speakers and goes back from there. This is the most obvious imaging difference (to my ear) between the Ohm versus the MBL, which extends dramatically forward and back from the plane of the speakers. OTOH, the Ohm sounds much more neutral octave to octave (again MHO) than any of the MBLs that I've auditioned (and that would be most all of 'em).
Not all omnis are created equal.
Marty |
Thanks Mapman.
Yep, 1st generation with stamped cans and controls on the bottom. Volume certainly not a problem. I'm driving these with a vintage Sansui amp (the Japanese version of the AU-819) with 90 wpc, so power and current are not a problem either.
I gather that the upshot is that these OW2s are what they are and that their performance is unlikely to improve by much. True, they are not as precise and dynamic as my more contemporary speakers (Monitor Audio S2s and Linn Tukans), but they are still extraordinary speakers (amazing for ones going on 30 years old).
What would you (and others) consider the most cost effective way to improve the performance or the upgrade path with the most bang for the buck? I'd like to get the options straight before looking for later versions or calling Ohm.
Did you keep the old cabinets for aesthetic or functional reasons (or both)? I find the bass from mine to be shockingly good, despite limitations of vintage.
I'm pretty hooked on the Ohm omni sound. Can't imagine not having some version of them now. It might have been foreordained. My very first pair of speakers were Ohm Es, bought with my paper route money from Tech HiFi in '77-'78, and I've always wanted a pair of the Walshes since then. Talk about delayed gratification! |
Jwc,
Can I assume your OHMs are original Walsh 2s from the 80s with the first generation CLS drivers (ie not newer or updated drivers on Walsh 2 cabinets)?
I had original Walsh 2s for over 25 years prior to my current OHMs with the 3rd generation CLS drivers (the X00 series 3 drivers). The current line is the 4th generation X000 series drivers. The "cans" on all these look similar.
My gen 1 OHM Walsh 2 CLS driver cans had the word OHM Stamped into the mesh. Newer models do not.
Also gen 1 drivers had crossover board mounted in the base of the cabinets with level adjustments on the bottom. Gen 2 and newer have all driver components including crossover mounted in the "can".
All OHM Walsh speakers I have heard tend to have a laid back presentation in most rooms with most of the soundstage at or behind the speakers. My gen 1 Walsh 2s perhaps most so. Also with original gen 1 Walsh 2s, soundstage size, imaging accuracy and overall detail was a notch behind what one expects with most modern speakers including newer OHM Walshes.
Walsh 2s can easily work well (within their limits mentioned above) in a larger room. I once had them cranked to teh max outdoors and they delivered the goods to those listening in a field about 30 yards or so away. Going loud is not a problem if drivers are still in good shape and low end extension is pretty good.
I use my smaller gen 3 "Super" Walsh 2s (100series 3 drivers mounted in Walsh 2 cabinets in a similar large family room/kitchen area. I happen to have a sub in that room also but for most things it really does not add much. |
Since this appears to have become the de facto Ohm Walsh thread, I have a couple of questions about my Ohm Walsh 2s. I picked these up a couple of months ago and immediately loved the spacious omni soundstage and imaging. Still do. One big question is what I can reasonably expect of their performance in a room that is 15 x 35 (though the primary listening positions are within the 15x15 space around the OW2s). I get a wonderful image between the speakers, but it never extends outside the space btween them. It doesn't matter if they are 6-7 feet apart or 10. Nor have I heard that sense of the sound floating through or the sound stage filling up the room. Is this simply a matter of the 2s being too small to adequately energize the space or are there some more tweaks I can do?
Second, the OW2s tend to sound better when I stand and my ears are above the tweeters. Anyone have this experience? Any hunch as to why this is the case? Is this a problem to be fixed or a peculiar interaction between these speakers and my (peculiar) ears?
The third question---maybe related to he second--concerns image height. Generally, it is at tweeter level--not bad, but hardly realistic. Sometimes it is only around 2 feet high (this always seems to me like the sonic equivalent of the great Spinal Tap scene with the dwarves dancing around the tiny Stonhenge). I've read in this thread that image height is recording dependent--but this shrunken?! |
Finsup:
The spec sheet that came with my Ohms says the sensitivity is 88 dB/W/m with a recommended peak amplification of 200 Watts. This means that, absent room/placement effects, I can get 102 dB's/speaker at 9 feet. Reference level requires 105dB's/speaker, which would mean 400 watts, and most people would recommend having another 3dB's of head room, which would mean 800 watts!
http://www.doctorproaudio.com/doctor/calculadores_en.htm
In any case, the Emotiva is 200 watts into 8 ohms and the Outlaw is 125 watts into 8 ohms.
Many people in HT are moving to speakers with higher sensitivities. For example a sensitivity of 94 means you can divide the wattages above by 4! |
I know Mapman has some great amps driving his; I am thinking your comments don't refer to your set-up, just generally speaking? Or are you saying the Emotiva and Outlaw combo still has a difficult time with the Ohms? |
Mapman, Finsup:
I got the Ohms because of their reputation for vocals (you see a lot of people over at AVS complaining about dialogue intelligibility in movies) and music (I'm a big fan of Bollywood). And they deliver the goods there!
Given what's on a modern soundtrack and the well-known room-mode issue, HT pretty much requires subwoofers. I prefer a sealed design. The Empires are great for music and integrate well with the Ohms. But the Empires leave a little to be desired below 20Hz.
The Ohms have one slight drawback for HT. They are not what HT people would call high sensitivity, and hence they can't be easily played at reference level.
When properly set up, a surround system playing a well-engineered 5.1/7.1 soundtrack creates a bubble of sound around you. The effect is quite dramatic.
|
That has to be some kind of sound in that theater! |
I would love to hear that OHM Walsh based surround sound system!
I am not a surround sound fan in general and do not do that currently, but I suspect I could live with that one! |
Finsup:
Speakers:
Left/Center/Right: 3xOhm Walsh 100-S3
Left/Right Surrounds: 2x 100-S3 in Ohm Walsh 2 cabinet
Left/Right Rears: 2x100-S3 half-sized and in omni config.
Subwoofers:
4xEpik Empire-2 up front and 2 to side of listening position
Electronics:
Oppo BDP-83 blu-ray player
Yamaha RX-V765
Emotiva XPA-5 Amplifier (for LCR and surrounds)
Outlaw 7125 Amplifier (for rears)
SVS AS-EQ1 subwoofer equalizer
Display:
Panasonic AE-4000U front projector
100 inch acoustically transparent screen
Cabeling:
Monoprice
Room:
12.5x17x8
listening position about 9 feet from screen
Some acoustic treatments and dark curtains/rugs
I got the surrounds, Empires, Yamaha, XPA-5, 7125, AS-EQ1, Panasonic, and screen at steep discounts (on sale/used/rebates). |
The damping factor of the amplifier used is another thing that can strongly affect how the bass sounds. I like the highest damping factor possible with mine. My Bel Canto ref1000m amps have 1000 damping factor and the bass is deep, full and articulate, just right! My TAB 125 Hibachi's have somewhat lower damping. WIth that, the bass is just a tad not as "tight". SOme bass fans may like that and some may not. It's a judgement call for the most part I would say.
I find damping factor still matters with my smaller 100S3s, but less so. The TADs sound just right with those.
In general, I would estimate any good SS amp, 80 watts/ch or higher with damping of 50 or higher should be a good candidate to drive MWTs. More power up to 250 w/ch or so might benefit bass as well, in particular at higher listening volumes. |
One other thing worth noting with all OHM Walshes and bass is that they are all bottom ported and can interact with the common wood particle board floors used in many modern homes including mine in ways that strongly affect the bass.
In my case with the 100s, that sit on the 4 factory installed wooden feet, I find the bass a tad "boomy" when sitting directly on the thin carpet 2nd level particle board floor. There is some resonance that occurs. This could vary home by home, room by room, but having owned OHM Walshes in one form or another since 1981 I would say it is typical. I solve the problem in my case by placing each ohm on a 12'X 12" ceramic tile from home depot. This provide just the right amount of additional dampening in my case.
My much larger OHM 5s are on the factory provided castors (great for tweaking location easily) and on the first level and sit direct on the house's thinly carpeted concrete foundation. Floor interactions from the bottom ports there are a non issue and the bass there is reference standard quality in my assessment. |
FWIW, I have read reviews from MWT owners that indicate bass levels is not a problem even in larger rooms. Certain recordings that plumb the lowest octaves and do it well benefit most from adding a sub. A good pipe organ recording is a typical case.
For a lot of popular and mainstream rock recordings, a sub may not do much in terms of delivering more bass that is also "clean". Its contribution will certainly be less in most cases.
I use an old M&K sub with my OHM 100S3s in my large family room/kitchen area. The 100s are somewhere between 1000s and 2000s in size as I recall. All are larger than MWTs. The sub is set at a very low level and crossed over as low as possible with that sub, at around 40-50hz or so. The level setting is quite minimal, around 1 or 2 out of ten. I could probably live without it 98% of the time. |
Rbf1138 - I feel partly responsible for your dissatisfaction, since I suggested the Velodyne to you. But I think the regulars on this thread have given you sound advice. I'd lower the crossover a bit, since I bet your Ohms go below 100Hz, at least to 80Hz and probably lower. Don't attempt to make the Velodyne your bass driver. Just have it to fill in on those rare moments when true deep bass is present in the signal. Ideally, shutting off the sub should not result in a huge apparent difference in the balance of the sound.
And, absolutely, bass content, amplitude, and extension varies tremendously with each recording. Find a happy average setting, and then you can make small adjustments on the fly with the Velo's remote. But remember what your baseline reference setting is.
This is why I am glad I have tone controls on my preamp. Purists will attack me, but it is nice to know I can make adjustments if needed, even though 95% of the time, I bypass those tone controls. |
I good "training" exercise is to go to a local high end audio dealer that you might be interested in doing business with and ask to listen to a variety of recordings on their biggest best system. That can help give you a frame of reference for what different recordings really sound like and what can be expected.
Many never achieve the goal of having realistic expectations in regards to how specific recordings actually sound. Most all recordings are different and inherently sound different, although over the long term with experience you might be able to put them into some general categories that work in regards to how different types of recordings sound in general.
Expectations that are not realistic will doom anyone every time.
One thing I can say with confidence, is that when set up well and with the right gear behind them driving, the OHMs themselves should never be the bottleneck in regards to getting the best possible bass in all cases. They can take almost anything you throw at them to a greater extent than most any other speaker in their price range I am familiar with. |
That actually makes me feel better to know I'm not having a problem with the equipment and also that I'm not insane. Fortunately I like just a touch of bass so I can keep the settings toned down the majority of the time. |
