I acquired my 100S3's second hand first as a test. THese may have been somewhat broken in by the prior owner but nit certain. Totally foreign sound at first listen. Then I gradually got tuned in and tweaked. Based on that, then eventually I bought the 5S3s from OHM as my new cornerstone speakers. My ears were adapted more somewhat but it still took several months for these to really break-in I would say. Then I changed pre-amp, amp and tweaked ICs and setup as needed. It's been dialed in now for well over a year, going on two, and I am hesitant to change or touch a thing! Sometimes, the smallest thing can lead to a whole new sequence of tweaks/changes. I hate that when things are finally sounding just the way you want them too!
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.
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.
2,916 responses Add your response
Map, that is exactly what I thought when I first got my 3000's cahnged over from the original drivers. I thought "My goodness, what have I just done?" But knowing how good the 2000's ended up being during that trial period, I just kept on with them. Have had a few difficulties along the way, but all is paying off. It is nice to have that very generous trial period for sure. Tim |
Moth my current OHMs sounded totally foreign to me when I first hooked them up despite having owned Walsh 2s for years. The thought that they sounded like crap at first listen probably crossed my mind. It's a combo of the speakers breaking in and your ears adapting to listening to music in a totally different way. Hang in there and tweak as needed! You will either make the transition or not. I suppose that's one reason why John offers such a favorably long audition period. |
Congrats on the 3000's! I do enjoy mine very much so, and probably like many here, remember first listening to Ohm's back in the early/mid 80's and them kind of staying with you. I am glad John was able to work with you on these, I am sure you will enjoy them very much. What veneer did you get? Once you get them, hang in there with the break-in period, that can be somewhat frustrating at times, but they will come around. I think in the end they are a speaker that will just do it for you, or they won't, not much of an in-between. The main thing is just have fun and enjoy them along with your music! Tim |
I first encounter the OHM Walsh 4 as a penniless audiophile back in 1985 at a local dealer. That one experience has stay with me all these years. I want to thank John for keeping the faith in these unique speakers and I want to express my warmhearted recognition to the inventor Lincoln Walsh. At 56 years of age, these will probably be my last speakers. |
I would just call up John- he's very friendly and approachable. Just flat out ask him if they go on sale or if he can do something special for you like free shipping. Also, if you are willing, he can sometimes give you a deal on speakers that have been rebuilt from old cabinets. Or maybe someone returned a pair of 3000's so he could give a used price- one never knows unless you ask. |
I would really like to hear the OHMs on a SOTA high power tube amp but am probably not brave (or rich) enough to own such a rig myself and I really can't fault the sound with a good SS amp behind it. Modern high quality Class D amps and OHMs practically are a match made in heaven I would say. Definitely a case of innovations in technology helping to push the edge further than practical prior. |
As you know from my previous post, I switched my 5000's from being powered by a SUMO Polaris II (130 wpc) to a McCormack DNA-250 (250 wpc) and experienced a "fuller" bass. The midrange and highs seemed the same. So while the Ohms run fine on moderate power they do seem to light up more with muscular amps, though one needn't go overboard. Keep in mind that Ohms present 6 ohms, rather than the more typical 8 ohm load, so a given amp (customarily rated with an 8 ohm load) will put out more watts at the lower load. I myself am somewhat skeptical of high output tube amps, and think that a tube preamp coupled with a ss amp is more appropriate for a speaker like the Ohms, if one is looking for a "tube" sound. That's not to say that it can't be done with all tubes; it's just much easier. And tube rolling with a preamp is easily done because the power demands don't overwhelm the different tubes that one might use. My preamp uses 300B's (granted, overkill) and 6SN7's, with the option of rolling out the 300B's for 2A3's. But I suspect that the Ohms will sound good with just about any decent amp, even modestly priced integrated ss ones from one of the chain stores. |
THe thing is, I have yet to hear the OHMs run out of gas at any volume one might listen to. The amp seems to practically always be the bottleneck first. Even my current 500w/ch CLass D amps cannot seem to phase my larger OHM 5s or even my smaller 100s when used with those practically. I used my 180w/ch TAD 125 Hibachi monoblocks as a substitute in my main rig when one of my BCs was out for repair recently. They did very well particularly at low to moderate volumes, but could not deliver quite to the same level at the higher volumes. I'm using the TADs now in my second system with my 100s only (also with a sub) and the sound is quite exceptional in my large family room/kitchen area, even if not quite up to par technically at very high levels with the BCs and 5s in comparison. |
Batch - As usual, I fully agree with Mapman. I have a pair of 2000s, in a basement that is about 20' X 18' X 6' (yes, a low ceiling), so it is in the upper range of the cubic footage for the 2000. I power them with an Odyssey Stratos HT3 w/cap upgrade (150 watts/channel). I do cross them over, first order, to a pair of Vandersteen 2Wq subs, so the power demands are reduced somewhat. Although I believe I have enough juice, one day I would like to try some really high powered amps with them, based on what Mapman and others have said. Arion Audio makes some very sweet sounding Class D and tube hybrid class D monoblock amps with either 250 or 500 watts each. I'd love to hear my Ohms on those, but due to financial considerations, I'll have to wait. They are not crazy expensive, and based on hearing them on several occassions, I think they are a terrific value. All that said, I did briefly hook up the 2000s, full range, to a vintage 1993 Onkyo surround receiver. I was knocked over by how good they sounded driven by the Onkyo, which is rated at about 80 watts/channel. The bass was full and deep. The bass was so good that if I didn't love my Vandy subs, I might consider running the Ohms full range and selling the subs. But I do love my Vandy subs! I am hardly unhappy with the sound I have now, even if every now and then I wonder if more power would improve on the already stellar Ohms. I may upgrade the amps someday, but the Ohms stay! |
I can also recommend the TAD 125 Hibachi monoblocks to make the OHMs sing more along the lines of a tube amp. These can come in used on Agon for well under $1000 a pair and are a fantastic bargain. The only caveat is that TAD shut down operations recently and the owner who had a sterling reputation for his designs and customer service unfortunately passed away recently as well, so any servicing down the road would have to be done elsewhere. But that should help assure very favorable used prices for those interested. |
Regarding using tube amps, yes, many report good results with tube amps. In many cases, I think people with tube amps also use separate powered subwoofers to offload the heavy power requirements for the low end from the tube amp so it is better able to work its magic elsewhere. Its surely a personal preference/taste type thing also to some extent, but personally I believe one would need a fairly heft tube amp indeed to power at least the larger OHMs to their maximum potential solo. |
BAtch, Having cut my teeth pairing OHMs and other speakers with many vintage receivers years ago at Tech Hifi, I think you can do a lot better soundwise with the new OHMs than you can with any vintage receiver. SIngle unit receivers generally have to compromise on power supplies and current delivery in order to work well. They are at the far end of the spectrum from what will work best. Not that it won't sound good, just not likely to max out what the OHMs can do. A good integrated is likely better but I would recommend even a separate power amp or even monoblocks in general for best results if possible. I'd look at some of the less expensive Class D amps as a great place to start, perhaps even used. |
"How would these compare to DecWare ERR Radials? Are there other similar designs out there?" Have not heard the DECWares to compare but from what I read, the design seems closest to some of the smaller OHM Walsh CLS perhaps as anything I have seen. They do not mention using Walsh technology or applying a wave bending approach, but the driver configuration appears similar to OHM CLS/Walsh. The OHMs appear to be designed by default (custom mods can be requested) to work better closer to walls perhaps. |
"My opinion is with the Ohm's, the more power-as long as it is good clean power and you are not overdriving your amp, the better." This is true though for smaller rooms it can become overkill at some point sooner. Look at power in reserve with the OHMs as your insurance policy to help rise to any occasion as needed. Current delivery is key even for lower power amps with even the smaller OHMs, which will generally go into smaller rooms and require less power to go loud in relation. Expect amps capable of delivering more current at any particular power rating to fair better in general. For Class A or A/B amps, this usually translates into more size and weight. The exception is Class D amps, which I use and can recommend highly with the OHMs for outstanding performance in a smaller and perhaps less expensive package. |
Batch, the question of how much power for the OW2/2000 depends on several things. Room size, how loud you like your music. For what it is worth, I had a pair of 2/2000's for awhile in a room that measured roughly 15.5' X 16.5', with an adjoining kitchen/dining room area and two hallways off of this main room. So a decent amount of space to fill. If you do not play your music loudly, you might be okay with the 2000's, but in the end, and using Ohm's guide for speaker/room size, the 3000 was and is a btter choice for me. Where it mattered as to size of space, was mainly in the bass end of things, the 2000 could run out of steam in this space, the 3000 does not. I sometimes do like my music loud, not ear-splitting, but at decent volumes. As to the power question itself, my system comprised of several solid-state amplifiers, 2 Anthems, one a PVA-2 rated at 105 wpc/8 ohm, a MCA-20 rated at 200 wpc/8 ohm, and my Audio Research D-130, rated at 130 wpc/8 ohm. All of these did fine for me on the 2/2000, but I did feel that with the MCA20 and also the ARC, did a bit better handling the load of the Ohm better at higher volumes. My opinion is with the Ohm's, the more power-as long as it is good clean power and you are not overdriving your amp, the better. But, I have also read on this forum a few folks that have done well with fairly low-powered tube gear as well. It is all a matter of taste, try what you have and go from there. I don't find the Ohm's to be overly sensitive to what you have, and many use fairly budget gear with great results, but one thing is, the Ohm's will definately improve with better gear if/when you move up the ladder. Enjoy your music, and your Ohm's! Tim |
How would these compare to DecWare ERR Radials? Are there other similar designs out there? I didn't know of these but came across them by chance. I haven't read every post here so forgive me if this has already been asked. |
As per above, mine are only two weeks old. But if they break in the way i think they are headed, and based on past performance with other gear, im going to surmise that the signal cable silver resolution will be a nice match. Im using some audio art cables ive had lying around right now, but RBF, i would not hesitate to try some Blue jeans cabling as well. |
I would also consider the Kimber 4VS cables. A tad over-budget, but I have the older version of these and like them. I do plan to upgrade, though. Cables can be a matter of taste, so I would recommend you only buy cables you can return. Buying the Kimbers at Audio Advisor will give you that option, as will buying direct from Blue Jeans Cables. Also check out signalcable.com - low prices on well regarded cables that you can send back if you don't like them. |
So I'm looking at the Blue Jeans speaker cable, and I'm confused. If I want their best quality cables, with banana plugs on both ends, what're the differences between: Belden 5000UE 12 AWG Speaker Cable, Terminated BJC Twelve White Speaker Cable, Terminated BJC Ten White Speaker Cable, Terminated Belden 5T00UP 10 AWG Speaker Cable, Terminated Canare 4S11 Speaker Cable, Terminated The prices are similar, if not the same for some of them. I know to choose "Bananas to Bananas" for the termination, but otherwise I know very little about cables and would appreciate some guidance! Thanks! |
I certainly liked them out of the box! Keep in mind I haven't heard many speakers upwards of $1000, so these are a major step up to my ears from most anything. I think I need better speaker cables, though. Right now I'm using $35 banana cables I got on Amazon. Any sub-$100 cable you guys would recommend that would be solid and a good improvement? |
Speakers were delivered and I quickly set them up, In the 20 minutes I had to listen, after a haphazard setup, I'm extremely pleased. At first I thought something wasn't quite right and then found that the grills have cardboard in them for shipping, lol. That sorted things out! With the little I got to listen to, it was clear they're gonna be amazing when I have time for a proper setup. Closing my eyes, it sounded like the music was being played live in the room. Will have more next week when I'm back from vacation. |
I had the Micros in the past (loved them), then the 100 (loved those too) and now the 3000. Really love them. You need to give the Ohms at least 25 hours to start breaking in. Before that they will sound congested, no soundstage, ie, the sound is stuck to the speakers- like youd experience with a table radio, and limited in hight and low frequency extension. So Id hold off on posting impressions prior to 25 hours. About 100 hours in they will really sing. Im blown away at how my 3000s sound. |
Also I belive a Gundry dip refers to a dip in the 2-4 khz area with which I read some BBC monitors/speakers in particular are associated. Most speakers have crossover points somewhere in there as well but the OHMs crossover a fair bit higher, so it is an area where I expect a lot of subtle differences among speakers can be heard. |
Bondman, Have you ever heard your buddy's system? I wonder what it is like? I could make the same observation about my OHMs versus my Dynaudios which both are run off my system concurrently in different rooms. The Dyn's always seem at least a touch "hotter" in the midrange no matter what. Yet both probably measure fairly similarly flat in that area though likely not exactly the same. I doubt there is any significant measurable difference though there is little chance of mistaking one for the other typically I would say. |
Well, I guess tastes differ. I had an audiophile buddy over for a brief audition of my system on Sunday. I thought the thing was sounding pretty good, but he was clearly less than impressed. Afterwards, he asked me if I had intentionally built a Gundry dip into the system. Hmmm. That was interesting because what I like about my rig with the 2000s is that there is no glare or edge in the upper-mid to lower-treble range (to which I am very sensitive). I don't feel like I am missing any of the music, but maybe if one is less sensitive to that range, or if one is used to a system that spotlights that part of the frequency spectrum, it might sound that way. I do have them toed-in slightly. Interestingly, I do feel that many of the better systems I hear have as their Achiles' heel some glare in that range. I shrugged my shoulders. It is possible that people who hear differently will never "get" the Ohm Walsh sound. Heck, many speakers that I consider overly-bright and glarey sell well, and for very high prices. I still wouldn't trade my Ohms for those speakers, and some of them cost many multiples of my 2000s. To me, once you hear Ohms, with their finely detailed sound without any of the etch or grain of overly-bright speakers, there's no going back. |
Kbuzz - Interesting... I moved from my MWT's to a pair of Harbeth P3-ESR's. I had the Ohms for quite a while, but the bass was too much for my room, so I really needed a good pair of monitors. I miss my Ohm's but I now know that I made the right decision - I ended up selling my MWT's back to John, and we had a nice conversation, when I dropped them off (I live in NYC, and happily dropped them off to John's work-place. Actually, I also picked them up there, when I bought them, so I went full circle!). Anyway, I still recommend Ohms to lots of people, and I'm always happy to see them thrive. When I get a bigger space, look out! |
My mwt 's arrived on friday. Very impressive. I will have further post soon but my prelimninary thought is that they are the most non audiophile high end audiophile speaker ive heard. In a great way.... Second i put them in both my great room with hard wood floors no furntiture and large windows... Their ability to charge or couple tonthe room is unbeleivable. I then put them in my smaller tv room......equally impressive in a different way. Im happy.... |
"I find that I forget about right speaker/left speaker as it becomes completely irrelevant." To take that a bit further, once dialed in the physical location of the speakers may be totally disassociated with the soundstage and location of things in it. My 5s are in a decent sized L shaped room skewed to the left to fire mainly into the long dimension, about 5 feet from the rear wall. I sit at various locations within the long part of the room to listen anywhere from nearfield to ~ 15 feet back or so. When closer to the speakers, I can see the side wall all the way to the left in the short dimension. The further back I sit, I see less of the left hand portion of the rear wall, until about 7 feet back or so I only see the long length and the listening area becomes essentially a rectangle. Despite the OHMs location being skewed well to the left of center of the short dimension to face into the long, the soundstage is generally symetrical with the width of the short length I can see. When close to the speakers, the center of the image can be essentially to the right of the speaker on that side. Listening from further back, the soundstage becomes more symetrical around the speakers and less wide. Where I sit makes a big difference in soundstage width and where the center of the soundstage actually is. I mention this because I have found if you are used to listening to speakers, and expecting the sound to come mostly from where they are located, it can be disorienting and what you hear suffers. ONce the OHMs and your listening habits adjust and are locked in, it is golden. |