The rumble is there, but the notes and the music aren't. I could move it to a corner, but it seems as though that is supposed to make it more bloomy and less tight! Maybe I need a smaller subwoofer? A more "musical" sub?
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
Rbf, The Velodyne auto EQ is a mess. It only uses graphic (fixed band) EQ and doesn't incorporate the parametric (variable "Q") capabilities of the software. Get a video monitor and manually tweak all paramaters (x-over point, slope, phase, band center, Q, etc) until you see a pretty flat FR. Tweak by ear from there. This may not be the best subwoofer out there, but set-up this way it is very good. In all likelihood, you just need to work it a bit. Good Luck, Marty PS If this set-up process doesn't appeal to you, you might think about a preamp (or pre-pro or AVR) with Audyssey. Their auto set-up is IMHO just about flawless. |
Rbf, IMHO, once you're out of the real budget models, subwoofer set-up is usually more important than the specific choice of subwoofer model (unless you've defied the odds and chosen a truly crappy subwoofer!). Good news - you haven't. To clarify my post, the Velo sub includes an EQ function. When used automatically, it simply adjusts (IIRC) 6 fixed bands of equal range to eliminate peaks and suckouts. This is a pretty simple approach and IME doesn't work very well. However, manual EQ allows MUCH more effective adjustment. You can vary the width of each band, vary it's center point, and vary how "steep" the correction is. If you've got a big "hump" centered at, for example 90 hz (not uncommon), you can create a band centered at 90hz and apply correction in the opposite "shape" of the hump. When summed for playback, the combination of the original hump and the "mirror" correction that you've dialed in via manual EQ results in flat FR. Unfortunately, this is only possible via manual EQ and involves a fair bit of work on your part. All the other stuff - slope, phase, etc. - can also make a huge difference. IME, trial and error, aided by video readout - is the best way to go with Velodyne. In the end, you'll get flat response from the sub and smooth, precisely matched level at the point your cross to your Ohms. If you haven't yet guessed, I'm a huge fan of this approach. Unfortunately, REALLY GOOD subwoofer set-up is a giant PITA...but also makes a GIANT difference in the end result. The easy way is Audyssey, which includes a very sophisticated auto subwoofer set-up feature. Unfortunately, Audyssey is found mostly in multi channel home theater electronics - which I'm guessing you don't have handy. Shy of switching to Audyssey, you might want to wade thru the manual EQ instructions for your sub (either those in the instruction book or downloaded from the Velo web site). IME, the process is cumbersome, but worthwhile. Good luck, Marty |
Rbf, I've been out of the market for a bit, so I'm probably not your best resource for that question. I own Rythmiks, which are terrific, but start at $700+. The very fine, entry level SVS sub is a bit cheaper, but IIRC still north of $500. I understand that Emotiva has one at $500 that looks pretty nice, but I've neither heard it nor seen test results. You might want to search threads here for advice from other folks who are closer to the current market. Kbuzz, The issue with Ohm subs (as of app. 4 years ago, when I was looking) was their size. The footprint was substantially bigger than most and I just didn't have the space to accommodate them, so I never auditioned them. I don't know the current models, so I'm not sure if that's still a consideration. Marty |
Opinions vary on this one. I set the sub's low pass (and I low cut the mains with an active x-over) just above the highest frequency hump or suckout that I want to EQ away. Basically my approach is to fix the room passively as much as I can, recognizing that below a certain frequency (which varies room to room), passive treatments tend to become ineffective and EQ is the only approach that works (for me, anyway, others may have had different experience here). Note : EQ is much easier for reducing FR "humps" than it is for filling FR suckouts, so bear that in mind as you decide where to set the x-over point. I've treated my room with lots of "passive" (including bass-buser type hemholtz devices) treatments, but IME these run out of steam somewhere between 70 ish and 120 ish hz, depending on the room. So I fix what I can passively, set the x-over just where the passive stuff starts to fail and let the EQ do the rest below that frequency. I set slope, phase etc to get the smoothest response around the x-over point before applying EQ. There are two goals here - smooth overall bass response below the x-over frequency and smoothest response thru the crossover point. The latter helps insure an undetectable "hand-off" from main speaker to subwoofer and is absolutely critical for me. Since there are limited bands of EQ, you may have a judgement call in smoothing overall bass response versus super fine tuning the "hand-off". That is your call on the fly, made only (IME) via trial and error. Many folks disagree with this approach and prefer a lower x-over point. That has never worked as well for me, but YMMV. Marty |
I use an emotiva Ultra 10 sub with my MWT's. I run the MWT's full range (they have almost no energy below 40 Hz) I have the sub at low pass at about 50 Hz, so there is a slight overlap with them and the sub. I avoid corner placement as much as possible with subs. I also try not to run a sub above 80 Hz, as they tend to get directional at that point. My goal is to have the sub sonically disappear, and that you only notice it when it's off. Why is your x-over set so high @ 100 Hz? |
Finsup: I have a 7.4 HT system with all 100-S3 drivers. I use Yamaha's YPAO (RX-V763 with external amps), and it works fine. I also have a 2.1 system with 2XO's; an older HTR-5990's YPAO (no amps) works OK there as well. Rbf1138: In my 7.4 system I have four Epik Empires, with the Empires EQ'd using an SVS AS-EQ1, x-overed at 80Hz. My 2.1 system uses an older ACI Titan XL with no EQ on the sub, x-overed at 80Hz. I also have a 4.1 system with two Microwalsh Short omnis for the mains. The sub is a Paradigm Ultracube 10, EQ'd with an Anti-Mode 8033, x-overed at 100Hz. All the subs work fine with the Ohms. I also have used the inexpensive Behringer 1124 Feedback Destroyer as a sub EQ and gotten good integration with the Ohms. |
Frankly, I don't have the time, patience, money or know-how to EQ my sub/system. Right now I'm just trying to get the Velodyne setup so that I'm happy with it using it's built-in controls. An issue I still can't get past is that from album to album, artist to artist, the volume of bass will vary hugely. I'll put on Deerhoof, and the bass will be waaaay too overwhelming and overpower everything. Then I'll throw on the Walkmen and it's nice and tight. I feel like I shouldn't have to be tweaking controls on the sub every time the song changes! |
"An issue I still can't get past is that from album to album, artist to artist, the volume of bass will vary hugely. " That's inherent largely in recordings. Each recording usually requires unique processing in order to get all to sound a certain way. There is no single or easy solution. Pursuit of this will likely be time consuming at a minimum and fruitless at worst. Recordings are what they are, not what people might want them to be. I shoot to avoid too much, fat or inarticulate bass with any recordings, even the most bass heavy ones. THen the rest will fall in line as best possible and usually quite well from there bass-wise. A sub can help but can also be quite hard sometimes to blend in by ear. Patience and good ears are needed! |
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. |
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. |
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. |
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. |
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. |
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). |
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. |
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! |
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?! |
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. |
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, 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 |
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. |
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). |
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 |
"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. |
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 |
$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. |
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 |
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. |