JWC,
I was not referring to clipping, though that is certainly always something to be concerned about. I was referring more to dynamic headroom, the drivers ability to pressurize the air in the room highly at higher volumes, especially at lower frequencies. The assumption is the amp is NOT clipping and not the bottleneck. Bottom line is I have never found the OHMs to be the bottleneck in achieving this, even with my current 500 w/ch Class D amps, which throw the most power and current the OHMs way of any amp I have ever used with them.
You hig the nail on the head I think regarding the way the driver operating in Walsh transmission line mode rather than pistonic helps utilize surface area better and reduce excursion magnitude. That is exactly how I think it works. Just not sure I could point to anything concrete or documented to support that theory.
2's and 2XOs are gen 1 Walshes. More recent revisions are much more refined, including at low volumes. I can vouch for that in that I actually compared my original Wash 2s to my newer 100S3 based Walsh 2 models in side by side a/b comparisons when I still had both. Night and day!!! Soon after I traded in my old Walsh 2s towards my current F5s. |
I will second Mapman's post. My 2000s sound wonderfull at lower volumes. So good, that when they are playing at moderate background levels, I will often stop to listen, even though I have things to do. And that's usually with low-res Pandora or internet radio! I did try my 2000s with an older Onkyo AVR, rated at 80 watts/channel, and even full range, the sound was surprisingly good. That said, my 150 watt/channel amp is clipping on sustained peaks in the midrange, and I am totally focused on upgrading to something much more powerful. But financially, that's about year away. |
Jwc,
I also have a pair of small Triangle Titus XS monitors. These have been acknowledged by many over the years as champions at low volume and I would agree. They convinced me that dynamic speakers could be as fast and detailed at low volumes as planars like the Maggies I had had for years, which were also low volume champs. I had the original Walsh 2s also still at the same time, and in comparisons of the Walsh 2s against the Maggies and Triangles at low to moderate volumes, the Walsh 2s left something to be desired.
The newer OHM Walshes at lower volume are pretty much the darn equal of the Triangles at lower volumes I would say, although of course the overall way the music is presented is night and day, the usual OHM/omni versus more directional design thing. |
Map and Bond, I am VERY happy to hear your low volume impressions. I ordered the upgrade to the 2000s a few days ago. I was a bit uncertain about it, in part because of this issue. You guys have helped stiffened my spine.
Bondman, your clipping problem is puzzling. It's probably buried somewhere in this now endless thread, but what's your amp and how much headroom is it supposed to have? How loud are you driving the music (peak/non-peak) when your system runs into trouble? It would be surprising to me if that much wattage would clip at non-deafening levels. Does the amp ever seem to run out of gas on non-peak volume? Could there be a problem with the amp--maybe the power supply caps? |
When I was in the process of comparing and upgrading a pair of OW2's to the new 2000 series drivers, I did not notice a big change at all in the two different speakers sensitivities and ability to play well at lower volumes with the impact and resolution that I would get at higher levels. With my 3XO upgrade to the 3000 series drivers, it seemed different to me, and I likened it to my Magnepan MMG's, they just seemed to open up at higher volume levels, not just the bass end, but the mids and treble as well. With the older 3XO can, they seemed to play better at lower levels on up. Maybe I just have cloth ears, who knows?
The above was with an Anthem MCA 20 amplifier at 225 wpc, and also an ARC D-130 at 130 wpc in a moderate listening space. Everyone's mileage may differ, and probably will.
Enjoy your 2000 upgrade John! Keep us posted! Tim |
OK guys, long time reader and sometimes contributor to this thread - but only in the way of questions. Well, about a week ago, I received a pair of 5000s.
Bummer.
Why? I had told John I did not need delivery until after the 4th but between John's ears and the shipping department, wires were crossed. I won't be able to listen to them much until after the 4th. In fact. I only hooked them up today.
Still, they are so much fun, even right out of the box. And the sweet spot? It is nearly the width of the room.
You may think I am daft but because I had other work to do and my special needs son was listening to some 70s music on his HTIB, I decided to bring him downstairs and we put on his 70s disc. And I retreated to my office.
And listened from another room. Wow, pretty good from another room.
And then.
Robert John's version of "The Lion Sleeps tonight" came on. I hurried out of the room and began dancing with my son. Ha! Next up. The " Coconut" song by Harry Nilsson came on.
Made me want to make "Midnight Margaritas" about 7 hours early.
So far, even out of the box, the speakers are great.
Back later with some more listening impressions. |
Finsup nice story about dancing with your son. A few weeks ago my 20 year old daughter had a few girlfriends over and I blasted Nick Curran and the Nitelifes "Down Boy Down" through my Ohm Walsh 3's and within seconds they were all dancing and jumping around the room, priceless! |
Dancability factor is a very useful speaker metric that is often overlooked.....:^) |
Aww . . . you guys have put a big smile on my face. Happy belated fathers' day! |
Finsup, keep us posted on how your 5000s burn in. Any comparisons to prior OW generations and other versions/models welcome too.
Yes, danceability--for lack of another term--is usually an underrated quality. I think Ohm Walshes sound like real people hear in real acoustic spaces (in a good way, not the way MY now noticeably aging ears hear in my living room). (;-) I think you could describe the sound as organic, as distinct from ananlytical.
JC |
Jwc2012: To answer your post, I have an Odyssey Stratos HT3 w/ cap upgrade. Not sure of the headroom, but I was very surprised to hear it clip. I thought it was room accoustics until I borrowed a pair of Class D 500 watt mono blocks, and the issues pretty much dissappeared. I do listen loud, but not crazy loud, I would guess 80-90 dB is not unusual. But, my room is 2800 c.f., and fairly "dead". Perhaps there is an issue with the amp. While still under warrenty, I did have to have a leaky cap replaced. However, this 65 lb. beast costs a fortune to ship, and I really preferred the overall sonic results I got with those Class D amps, so I would want to upgrade anyway. I will move the Odyssey to power the center and surrounds in my combo stereo/HT rig once I upgrade to a more powerful amp. I know this sounds a bit weird, but I am trusting my ears on this one. |
Bondman, that is weird, but your ears are the judge here. Serious clipping isn't subtle in my experience. They'd know. Though I do wonder if something was wrong with that amp.
You're on to something with class D amps. My tech was showing me some pro-audio OEM units he makes out of standardized modules: cool, clean, insane power, and TINY! I think we'll be seeing a lot of these amps in some shape and form in the future. |
Good news. Looks like D-Sonic has upgraded their amp lines to new M3 models. |
Tobeornottobe,
I am also interested in Class D now that I have a new pair of Ohms. What's the difference between the M2 Series and M3? When you go to D-Sonic's landing page, it features their M2 series but clicking anywhere on the page, you then see some info on the M3 series. All it says on that page: "The M3 Series offers improved Class D technology". Not much help there... |
I don't know. D-Sonic gives very little info. But I do trust and believe the company if they think M3 series is an improvement over M2. |
I'd like to see some unbiased reviews of D-Sonic M3 versus M2 to find out what the difference really is. |
Unfortunately there weren't too many reviews of the last iteration. 6 Moons .. any others? |
YEah, not much to go on, but price is right and there is a return policy of some sort if not satisfied.
In the case of D Sonic, where they are dependent on other amp module manufacturers for the main engine, I personally wish they would be a little more transparent about whats inside the box. Sound could change drastically from model to model if a different Class D amp engine is used. Different may or may not be better. Plus there is no "house sound". It could vary largely over time, for better or for worse. But again, the price will always probably be right, and that does matter. |
It's ironic that Map's wish for more transparency appears on the endless Ohm Walsh thread, since Ohm has never been known for being open about what's in their cans.
I suspect those class D modules are very cheap (not in quality or build, but in price), highly standardized, and substitutable. Not what you want to broadcast in a market that thrives on mystique (and at times audiophiles' willful suspension of disbelief).
Companies using these types of modular components, probably the majority out there to one extent or another, have to manage their supply networks and quality control to maintain standards, let alone a "house sound." The problem is that this management task is often made more difficult by cutthroat price-based competition among suppliers of standardized commodity goods. These newer manufactures also haven't been around long enough to establish a clear house sound and reputations for maintaining it.
This is where Ohm is distinctive and special. I've heard that the components used vary even within the same model and vintage. BUT, Ohm has a decades-long track record of almost obsessive, monomaniacal preservation and refinement of the house sound. Wanna know what's in the can? Tough. But you know in advance the character of the sound will come out of it, regardless of model.
Is there any other audio manufacturer that is comparable in this respect? |
"It's ironic that Map's wish for more transparency appears on the endless Ohm Walsh thread, since Ohm has never been known for being open about what's in their cans. "
Yes, it is and has been noted, but the OHM and D Sonic cases are not comparable otherwise IMHO. OHM has a long history, a dedicated customer base to go with it, and control over what goes into the can to make it "sound like an OHM".
Not the case at this point yet anyhow with D-Sonic.
Like Billy Joel sang, "It's a mater of trust...." |
"This is where Ohm is distinctive and special. I've heard that the components used vary even within the same model and vintage. BUT, Ohm has a decades-long track record of almost obsessive, monomaniacal preservation and refinement of the house sound. Wanna know what's in the can? Tough. But you know in advance the character of the sound will come out of it, regardless of model.
Is there any other audio manufacturer that is comparable in this respect?"
The one that comes to mind is Audio Research. In the speaker world, maybe Klipsch or Magnepan are in the same category historically, though perhaps not quite to the same extent in regards to reliance mainly on a particular house sound in that their designs have tended to vary more over time and the drivers that make it happen are generally in plain view.. |
Exactly. That was my main point too. |
"OHM has a long history, a dedicated customer base to go with it, and control over what goes into the can to make it "sound like an OHM"."
Nice point!
There is a lot about the Ohm's that I simply do not understand, especially regarding the properties of Omni-directional speakers. They seem to violate a lot of the principles that I would otherwise be a stickler on.
And I just don't care. I'm all scientific and skeptical about DACs, amps, cables etc. But when it comes to these speakers, I don't need to know what they put in the can. I just want them to keep putting whatever it is in can!
Does anyone have experience with the satellites? My financial situation is about to take a turn for the better, and I will probably be expanding from 2.1 to 4.1 in the next few months. |
Just got my ohm Walsh 3000 mains and John had me get a 1000 center channel. He built the center channel to fit in my stand with a curved front in the speaker. I got the Sapele veneer and they are very nice looking. I can't wait to hear what they sound like when broken in. They sound pretty awesome right now. They pack the speakers like they need to survive a gorilla handling them. |
|
Jrhodus, I just ordered a new pair of 3000 Talls, and the Sapele veneer is high on my list (still awaiting a few veneer samples to arrive in the mail)... Would you be willing to post a photo of your 3000s? This would be of great help - Thanks - Gary
|
Jrhodus emailed me photos of his new 3000's today - Very nice looking in the Sapele veneer - Thanks, James! |
How do they perform in 7.1 or 5.1 HT setting ? |
If you review some of my older posts, the answer is, quite well. I have a combo 2-channel/HT rig, with Walsh 2000s and a Walsh Center up front, MicroWalsh Talls for the surrounds and a pair of Paradigm Atoms for the rear surrounds (some day I'll have MicroWalsh Walls instead). Add to that a dedicated subwoofer for the LFE and center/surround bass, and a pair of subs to augment the 2000s (which as a set run full range), and my HT is awesome. Last night I watched a BD of Oz the Great and Powerful. It sounded great and powerful, indeed! |
Just figured id throw my two cents in here as i have not posted in a while. Im using MWT talls up front with a walsh center that JS rigged up in a 5.1 system that i use for daily tv watching. Powered by a bryston monster amp, i do love the house sound. Very warm sounding and never strident, but with plenty of detail and of course the imaging/soundstaging wonders.....
Seems that the bryston + ohm is a very good combo that i stumbled on to. I have had dozens of speakers and amps and i continue to be impressed with the ohm sound. In fact i may have to dig out my decades old D2's out of the basement and refoam them just to see what they sound like. I recall dislking them when i used them in the 80s... |
Interesting you mention Bryston. I am looking to replace my B&K with a new amp. So far I am considering Bryston 4BSST2 (300W 8Ohms)-$4995, Van Alstine 600R (300W 8Ohms)-$3500, D-Sonic M2-1500 (1500W 8Ohms)-$2800. Not sure I want to blow the extra $$ for the Bryston. Right now, looks like I will try the D-Sonics. Speakers are Ohm Acoustics 5000s. Budget: $5k max. Any comments appreciated. |
Question WRT Ohm 5000 power and bass. It has ben said that adding wattage may obviate the need for subs. I need lower bass, not just firmer or louder bass. |
Adding watage alone with any speakers only means they should play somewhat louder with lower distortion. That is usually a good thing in regards to bass, especially at higher volume, but does not mean anything necessarily in terms of better frequency response at lower frequencies. Two similar wattage amps will likely perform differently at the lowest frequencies. A lot has to do with the impedance load of the speakers and the amps ability to perform accordingly, especially at lower frequencies. In general, smaller speakers that can extend lower will require a more robust power amp to deliver the current needed into lower impedance loads that typically occur at lower frequencies in order to have good low end frequency response. Of course this is just a general pattern, YMMV depending on amp, speakers, room acoustics, etc. |
Thanks Mapman. That helps. |
Coot: FWIW, I too have my eyes on that D-Sonics amp (although financially, I am farther away from a purchase now than I thought I'd be). I did ask John Strohbeen about that much power into the 2000s. His reply was, "go for it, but keep an eye on the volume control". IOW, don't turn it up loud, then leave the room for an hour. That much power could potentially overdrive the speakers. But if you are in the room, it would be obvious that the level is excessive. As for the bass, I would think the 5000s, properly driven, will have all the low end extension you desire. That said, I do have a pair of powered subs with my 2000s. Truthfully, I might be okay without them (the bass on the 2000s is pretty good), but I doubt any loudspeaker can move as much air in the bottom octave as my pair of powered subs. BTW, the D-Sonic is more like $2400 than $2800 (unless you are Canadian, I guess). |
I just pulled the trigger on a pair of D-Sonic M3-1500s. Yipee!!!
Report to follow. My hope is that the midrange on up is at least as sweet as my B&K. |
COot, we'll be waiting on pins and needles for your report.
I'm predicting good things..... |
Coot, I'm interested in anything you bring up on the D-Sonic M3-1500, no matter how trivial. |
|
D-sonics due to be here 8/15.
Don't expect too much from me, guys. I'm pretty much a conservative classical listener. We only have music on for serious listening - as opposed to background; approx. 10-12 hrs/wk. I have VERY limited knowledge of electronics, although I did go 100% computer audio 4 years ago. My hearing is still pretty good even at 73. I don't change components very often - averaging 20ys for speakers and amps.
Don't say I didn't warn ya. I'll do what I can... |
Anyone have experience using wyred amps with their Ohms? I am curious about the new mInt and how it would drive my 100S3 Walshes? Also what are people using for speaker cables? My Anti cable's seem bright now that my room has changed its flooring (the to the SO). |
Audiogoner Mamboni, who is one of the most knowledgeable OHM owners out there, moved to Wyred recently and reported good results. OHm + Wyred Class D is a natural match IMHO.
I have not payed much attention to wires used with my OHMs in that I use commercial grade in wall speaker wires mostly in my house with all my speakers. I think most any decent wirew should perform well. I do also use Audioquest Cv6 wires. I could easily recommend those. |
Mapleshade solid copper work well for me for speakers and for power. |
The both of you who responded. The quest shall go on.. |
I am using an older set of Kimber 4PR. I really cannot compare these to anything, since I had them before I got my Walsh 2000s, but I can't identify any problems with the Kimber. I would like to upgrade at some point, but financial considerations have put this, and any other upgrades, on hold. |
The easy classical pick for me is The Nutcracker on MLP. Its included in teh first MLP box set from a couple years back as well. |
D-sonic M3-1500 my first impression.
Out of the box, I am pleasantly surprised at what I am hearing. Be advised, I have nothing to compare them to but my old B&K EX442 and it is no longer connected so no AB. I was concerned about loosing mid and upper range sweetness, but am no longer worried about that. What I have gained - and almost goes without saying - is a substantial bottom end and generally fuller sound. I notice no high range digital edginess or screech. I should mention here that I am soon to hit 73, so take that with a little of salt I suppose. As to my background, I am a recovering music teacher and studied and have heard all instruments play live singly and in orchestras and bands.
Music I listened to was orchestra, solo men and women's voice, choral, string quartet and other chamber groups, brass bands, and finished off with St-Saens' Organ Symphony - Ormandy, Philadelphia w/Michael Murray - Still the best version to my ears. It was an excellent finish. I will say, that I feel Ohms are finally living up to my expectations in the bass department. Some of you have said more power might obviate any desire to add subs. I'm in full agreement with that assessment and I appreciate your suggestions!
System: PS Audio Power Plant Premier > 2009 Mac Mini (AIFF files) > M2Tech Hiface2 USB to SPDIF converter > M2Tech Young DAC > Placette Remote Volume Control Unit > D-sonic M3-1500 (2x mono) > Ohm Acoustic 5000. Power and Speaker cabling is Mapleshade solid copper except amp power cables are std mfg. |
Coot, did the amp come with any documentation like an owner manual? Do you know the input impedance and the voltage input sensitivity for full output? At your normal listening level is the volume control on your preamp set a little higher, lower or about the same? Good write up, it's what I expected, a more control and tunefulness bottom end. |
Tobe:
There is a brief manual that covers all M3 amps. I asked Dennis about impedance. He replied as follows "The M3-1500Ms have a 60k ohm input impedance which will assure a high common mode rejection factor."
I find volume settings are no different that what I am used to with the B&K.
Hope this helps. More remarks to follow when I've done more listening. Make that when "we" have done more listening. My wife is more sensitive to pinched, screechy string sound than I am. |
Re: D-sonic
I have to renig just a bit on my comment about treble sweetness. Today it is not as sweet as we would like. Still some digital edginess in upper violin range. Overall the sound is not as open as we would like as well, but still breaking in. To be continued... |
