Ohm Walsh Micro Talls: who's actually heard 'em?
bondmanp, I think you are absolutely right. We were listening to some piano playback and my wife (which is not into sound systems at all) came over from the adjacent room and said, I almost felt someone is playing the piano in here. I don't have as much freedom in placement as you do. Right now, I have them about 4 feet away from the side walls and close to 2 feet gap from the front wall (maybe a little less). They sound pretty good. The bass was a little boomy before running Dirac but, I fudged the frequency response curve and lowered the peaks around 50-100hz and it completely eliminated the boominess. I am sure the new amplifier is going to make a big difference. The nCore modules are rated at 400 watts into 8 ohms per channel (although not continues), I will keep you guys posted as the system is going through changes. |
I have Triangle Titus monitors I use in my second system in addition to various OHMs. These are most "detailed" in teh higher frequencies in particular. They have limited bass response below 55hz or so and do their thing best only with certain high quality gear upstream. They are also reasonably efficient and compete best at low to moderate volume only. As a whole I love the sound but there is a lot missing in the lower octaves that adds extra focus to what is there. Nobody will ever describe the sound of these as "warm". They image wonderfully and provide a nice clean detailed alternate window into the sound of the music. Apples and oranges comparing such small monitors to much larger full range OHMs but relevant nonetheless I suppose. I also have Dynaudio Contour 1.3 mkII monitors a tad larger than teh Triangles sitting idle currently. Those too have their unique charms including detail with just a touch of warmth. They are more like the OHMs in regards to amps they sound best with and have better bass extension than the Triangle Titus. They also tend to sound better at higher volumes than low. So which I use at any particular time all depends. The OHM Walshes hit all the marks overall best however no doubt for me. |
rodm_2001 - Congrats on the new arrivals! Unless your drivers are used, expect the speakers to change substantially as they break in. I don’t think mine were fully broken in until at least 6 months after I set them up. As for positioning, the uneven triangle works for me, with the distance to the listening position being a little greater than the distance between the speakers. I have them ~2 feet from the side walls and ~3 feet from the wall behind them. I have a lot room, ~ 11 feet, behind my listening chair. And while the Ohm Walsh x000 may not be the most hyper-detailed speaker I’ve heard, they are one of the most detailed sounding speakers I’ve heard that did not induce listener fatigue, at any price. So, the question is, do you want all the tiny details shoved in your face in a way that makes listening unpleasant for anything but a brief listen, or do you want to hear the bulk of all the details in a way that encourages long, enjoyable listening sessions? And don’t ignore the cables! I just upgraded the ICs connecting my DAC to my pre, and it’s like I upgraded my speakers! Huge improvement, and I am digging my 2000s now more than I have in all the eight years I’ve had them. |
Tweeters are angled 45 degree in with normal Ohm Walsh floorstanders and do not provide direct exposure with most listening locations by design. Orienting to have the tweets more directly face the listening position is not necessary imho but does brighten things up but also has effect of narrowing soundstage. |
Will do mapman! I am sure as the speakers and the new class D amp break in, the sound gets better and better. I just have to be patient. From what I have heard, both devices need extended break-in time. After reading the comments about folks adding a super tweeter to their speakers, I was a little concerned that the top end of the Ohms is somewhat dull but It definitely is not the case. Oh BTW, there is plenty of bass available with the 10" driver for me. I have no need or desire to add a sub. Even for HT duty, there is ample bass. I think, these speakers are bottoming out at about 35-40Hz which is fine. Not being able to go down to 20Hz is not a problem for me at all. |
Well, The sound cylinders are at last here and I though I would share my experience with you guys. As some of you had mentioned, these speakers are indeed power hungry. I am cranking the Arcam receiver to about 60% volume to get good dynamic sound out of them for music and with movies I usually have to go to 65% volume to really get them singing. During explosion scenes my receiver clipped a few times but these speakers are definitely able to handle loud explosions. Overall, I have to say the speakers are an absolute keeper. I have to agree with your findings about the sound stage, the sound presentation and best of all the fact that you can have them blasting for hours without getting ear fatigue and headache. I can’t say, I could do that with any of my other speakers. They are not the most handsome speakers out there but for the money they sound extremely pleasant. They are probably not for super analytical listeners who are looking for the slightest or the most minute details. I ordered a pair of mono block Ncore 500 Class D amps to really give the Ohms some juice (Nord one SE up). I will give you guys more feedback when the new amp is added to the system. Thanks again for all your feedback. |
It's 5:45am and I have a Bosch binge hangover. Amazon do have some killer original programming. So Im sitting there watching the plot unfold in Bosch's house. Some tuneful music is perking up my ears, a slow pan over the classic stereo with an old pioneer receiver, a tuntable and to my surprise a pair of Ohm2 (I think). If you want to see it, check out First season episode 3... Have a great one..........🇸🇪 |
Yeah, stop....I'm hearing echos already.... I'll go get a ladder from Sofi.... https://www.google.com/search?q=sophie+needs+a+ladder&oq=sophi+need&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0l5.1... |
It's the Energizer Bunny Effect. The Perfect Stone on the Perfect Mountain, obliterating all in it's path. *L* As a DIY'er trying to make the 'perfect (IMHO) omni, I'm delighted...but it is my flavor of Kool Aid and may be a bit 'grainy'.... Carry On. If records are meant to break, let's have at it. ;) |
Aren’t 4XO’s larger than 2.2000 as well? That + higher efficiency would definitely make them different and probably more adept at bass in a larger room with more amps.The Walsh 2.2000 just never sounded that good; slightly muddy and lacking in detail. On Peter's rig, they sounded like different speakers - terrific. My 4XOs are a good match for my current low-budget system (B&K Reference 5 S2 preamp and Parasound 1500 amp). Plenty of clear bass, decent mid range and good high end for me, but I'm old and probably can't hear much above 12KHz or so. Rather than spend more money upgrading the electronics, I plan to just sell off the Walsh 2.2000 speakers to someone who has a better system than mine. |
enginedr_1960 i just wanted to tell tell you what to expect as far as what amount of space you would have for a super tweeter..........NONE Sorry didn't want to be a downer regarding the available space under either the can or under the soft cover/grill. To see what is under the can to a small degree, take an LED flash light hold it tight to the can. You will be able to see the tweeter, at what direction it's pointing and also how much space to expect without cutting in to the can. Hope that helped, something that would be even better is a rear facing tweeter on a simple X-over (2500-3000hz) and an Lpad which is an volume control. Believe me it makes a much bigger difference then a super tweeter by a margin. Im actually blown away that no one here has done it as it's a super cheap upgrade that makes an incredible difference. If someone want to try it I have a pair that will not be used on my beasts. These are inexpensive soft domes, x-over, and a volume control. No hard sell and I don't know how much, but I will figure it out if someone would be interested. Good tweeter day.........🇸🇪 |
I bought a pair of customsupertweeters on ebay three years ago I was using them on my Walsh 2s at some point I blew one of them out . I upgraded my 2s to 2000 and was not using them . I found a replacement driver and repaired the blown one . I just reintroduced them into my system . they have a crossover and gain selector switches 12hz 16hz & 20hzs - they are 93db with a -3 & -6 DB setting . I have them set @ 20hz & -6 and reversed the phase this sounds the best to me . I would like to try some Townshend supper tweeters they are small and think the will fit under the hats . If you are in NYC and want to here my system PM me |
The 4xo are the newer version of the 4s with foam surrounds that makes them more efficient . The 2000s have aluminum drivers and rubber surrounds . I run my 2000s with a pair of VTL100 tube mono amps I have no problem driving them with 80 watts the big power supplies help . As for super tweeters I use a pair on top of the grills and like the effect . Improved transient response |
t8kc - I agree with you... I was kinda grasping at straws for an explanation. Maybe it's because my room, while large, is oddly shaped, with a ~10 ft. niche where the speakers are. Maybe that helps their efficiancy? So, I guess it would be my room, not yours, that could account for the different results with similarly rated amps. I don't know, just guessing. And I see from the photos that there is no reason not to place anything above the cans. And, yes, mapman is correct about the tweeter facing forward, and non-directional frequencies, so again, I stand corrected. Although, placing any significant weight directly on top of the grill caps is probably not a good idea, and it is not really flat, anyway. |
Maybe it’s your room? My 2000s do fine with 150 watts perIf the 4XOs sound good, why would the room cause the 2.2000s to sound bad? When I took the 2.2000 speakers to Peter's house, he couldn't believe how much power they needed to sound good. They were working his 500W/channel amps hard! The 4XOs seem just fine with my current amp (Parasound 1500) so my plan is to keep the 4XOs and sell the 2.2000s. I will eventually be posting them on the Audiogon 'for sale' site. |
Mapman.... You've been drinking the Orange Fanta again lol Believe me there was nothing cute or special under there. But it was the reason for me to start the Beasts so I'm happy about that, and I'm past the pissed off space I was in a few years ago. The tweeter allowed the frequency extension beyond what the paper tweeter could possibly touch especially at high output levels. Its like being in Vietnam buying a "can" of something, you take it home and you don't know if you got goat balls or papaya pigs feat jello......it's an adventure😎🇸🇪 |
HeHeHe..... I think there's some strange things in the Brooklyn water.... Here is how the smallest units look like on the inside. (For peace on earth I'm only showing the front) As for tweeter, there's nothing like it shipped from Ohm. https://www.flickr.com/photos/147883144@N08/shares/P9W217 Now I'm going out to do some work on the beasts......🇸🇪 |
When you look at the insides of the "cans", it all makes sense. JS kinda looks like a mad scientist so its only proper that his designs kinda resemble the speaker equivalent of Frankenstein. To top it all off he found a way to be able to use whatever he chooses that works and not have to worry about appearances. Pure genius! :^) |
Fantastic, the thread is alive.... Let me start to answer the layout of the main driver and tweeter assembly. Nothing is what you think with the Ohms, normally it would be called smoke and mirrors, but in this case JS has managed to make strawberry pie from potato dumplings and that is his magic. If you open the "Can" the first thing you see is a round 3/16" thick (varies from speaker to speaker) plywood platform. This platform is approx the diameter of the backside bottom of the main driver. On the platform (which is glued to the bottom of the magnet) you will have X-over parts the wiring harness going to the switch network, the tweeter and that's it on the top. On the bottom is a two inch thick insulation pad made from re-cycled denim. I have certainly thought over the why of this part and the only reason I can come up with is that the platform by it self would smear the sound stage if left in its raw state. Here are a few images of the platform. Sorry for the state of its shape Etc. But I needed it out and removed from the main driver. https://www.flickr.com/photos/147883144@N08/shares/9K82X5 So I see no issues with an ESS driver, or any other type of driver above the main driver. I agree you need beefy power supplies or it's a no go! These speakers are incredibly hard to drive and I can follow the power deliver on the output meters and very few speakers has managed to come even close to what both 2/2000 and 4/5000 has managed to do. Thank you for the input on the tweeter choice, I will mull it over this week and make some decisions. As for attaching the tweeter my solution is so deliciously cool that you wish 😜 you thought of it and I will share very soon. One more thought on subs. One of the big things youlll find when you add subs is that the stereo width opens up and the delivery is deeper and more palpable (just my take on it. P...........🇸🇪 |
BTW if newer OHm Walsh speakers do not sound "good" its not because of the parts or build quality. More likely a combo of the stuff upstream feeding them and room acoustics. OR something defective or damaged perhaps. Fact is I throw the kitchen sink at these power and current wise and they just go louder and louder with no sense of strain ever. Cheap speakers don’t do that. Cheap speakers will break up, compress or distort way before things get up to the really fun levels. Even after all that, hey no product is for everyone. They still might not sound "right" but never have I seen any OHM Walshes be the first one on the team to cry uncle when things get tough. Less so in fact than pretty much any other speaker I own or have ever owned for that matter. I've never observed them to be the weak link in the chain. Throw the kitchen sink at them. Best thing you can do! |
parasound 1500A: Continuous Power Output - Stereo: 205 Watts RMS x 2, 20 Hz-20 kHz, 8 Ω, both channels driven 315 watts RMS x 2, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 4 Ω, both channels driven Specs say 60 w peak current which sounds good but I suspect much less on average in real life. Ideally you want the amp to double down from 8 to 4 ohms ie 410 w/ch at 4ohm. From that spec alone the parasound is probably not the best match to get the best out of most OHMs which from impedance curves I’ve seen can have a drop down to 4 ohm or so in the very demanding mid bass region. Higher efficiency with the other OHMs no doubt helps. that is what they are designed to do. You need very robust power supplies capable of fairly continuous high current delivery in an amp to be able to double down to 4 ohms best. I had an amp with similar power specs originally, a Carver m4.0t 330 or so watts into 8ohm but significant fall off at 4ohm. The sound with my big OHMs was as you describe, loud but not great. Somewhat muddled, less dynamic and less articulate bass. This amp was designed with a tube amp like transfer function. Most tube amps would have similar issues which is why sub with high pass filter on the mains is required for optimal results if using most OHMs with a tube amp. Same Carver amp worked nicely with Magnepans I had prior which needed power but not current. |
t8kc - Maybe it’s your room? My 2000s do fine with 150 watts per - Odyssey Audio HT3 with cap upgrade. I had borrowed Arion Audio 500 watt monoblocks for a few weeks about 5 years ago. The sound might have been just a little more open, but not enough to make me want to give up the exceptionally good sounding Odyssey Audio amp. I did, however, hear real problems when I plugged the Odyssey into a PS Audio Quintet power filter. Going straight into my 20 amp dedicated outlet fixed that. |
With all that surface area and 2000 watts per side even a small movement will energize the room, no strain, no chuffing ports just pure energy......amazing. If you feel wanting for good deep vibrations. I can attest to Peter's subwoofer system; the house does shake. It is better than most movie house systems - hands down. My 2.2000 Ohms (on loan to Peter) sound really good on his system. I couldn't get them to play well using a Parasound 1500A (205W@8Ohms), but with 500W/channel, they come alive. This is doubly true when paired with the subs. OTOH, my Walsh 4XOs sound wonderful using the same Parasound amp and have really good bass. I know the 4XOs are more sensitive (90db verses 88db) and this might be the difference. |
Peter - I am a bit curious - wouldn't putting a large tweeter above the driver in the Ohms ruinn the upward radiation of sound? AFAIK, I think that is a big part of the Ohm sound. I have thought about adding a supertweeter to my Ohms, especially one of the omni designs out there, but short of mounting it on a high stand just behind the speaker, I am hesitant to place anything above the cans. I love the hieght projection I get from my Ohms, and I would hate to lose or diminish it. Separately, I am trying new wires for my DAC-to-preamp run, and it is very interesting. First, I was thrilled to hear that the 2000s easily and dramatically revealed the differences in the original cable and the new one. The balance has shifted, and now, the occassional rough patch in the lower treble-upper mids that I attributed to the speaker has moved down in frequency, to the midrange. It is the lesser of two evils, and the cable needs more time to break in, so I am hoepful. Most of all, the issue I was having with voices, in which the sibilants seemed separated in space from the rest of the voice is gone. Just like that - sibilants are anchored to the voices in space. And my soundstage is bigger than ever. On most recordings, the 2000s simply vanish, replaced by music that just hangs in space across the front of my room. Wonderful! |
peter, after wrestling an F1 around a track for a few hours with your 'stay alive' competing with 'go fast', I would chug some bubbly from a used condom. *L* But it'd better be mine...;) enginedr, pete..."Kiss Principal" protocol. If the ESS is centered over the lf driver, time alignment is Done, Rotation not necessary unless you absolutely have to have the base cabinet at a right angle to the wall. Since we're all familiar with 'toe in/out' of conventional speakers, that becomes the aesthetics of how you want the cabinets to look in the room... Yeah, the ESS driver is a heavy little punk. Mine mount with 2 1/4" bolts vertically through the case. Those can go into either a T-nut or a threaded insert into a base plate of nice ply or even a plate of metal if one taps the holes in it.. BTW, been there, done that...I do this sort of thing daily, making 'things' go together...and making it look Nice.... Put a piece of rubber or Sorbothane between the driver and said plate. Although I've really not noticed any spurious vibration from the driver, even at 'full song', granted it could be an issue... Mounting plate could be suspended above the base cabinet and the woofer with 4 threaded rods and some sleeves of metal tubing to set the height as desired. A variation of the above could allow the ESS to be rotated and cinched down fairly easily. Since you're mating a dipole with an omni, and if you'd rather not rotate the base cabinet, it's doable without too much more fuss. *L* I've gotten so used to doing the improbable with so little that mounting an ESS over an Ohm is Easy. Of course, 'resale value' heads out the window, but...if you're 'doing a clone', that point goes moot...or *poof*. *L* I could send a sketch of what I'm jabbering about, but I need to know that address...I do that sort of thing, too...;) And would be quite happy about doing so....*G* |
Just wanted to say....WOW The F1 race in Canada was A-mazing and I'm pumped. And I didn't know that Champagne taste great in a sweaty shoe, Patric Stewart does (If you watch F1 you will know what I'm talking about). I will try to work on the speakers this week, as few of you know I do have some health issues that makes it hard to work sometimes due to pain, but I will do my best to get started again tomorrow. So I do have to make some decisions on the tweeter unit as The whole upper assembly is dependent on the type of tweeter I want to use. I have given the ESS unit a thought as it does sound pretty awesome and it's amazingly easy to X-over the the unit to the Walsh driver. The issue I'm having is size and weight, the thing ways anywhere from 10-16lbs and the overall size at 6" tall on the big bad boy is something I have to consider. If anyone has an input feel free to tell me what you think......I'm open to suggestions. Other than that I love the way the cabinet looks even though I went through some tough times getting it right. I've done some test fitting of the finish and I will be killer and I believe no one else has done it so that's very exciting. Have a great rest of the weekend.......🇸🇪 |
"I do have in teh back of my head that powered subs + smaller speakers and smaller amp, like in my second system, could potentially surpass even my other bigger badder rig currently." (maps, 6/9) Exactly...;) Do that. With your ears and intellect, you ought to be pleasantly surprised, if not blown away. Yeah, I'm lurking out here on the periphery....y'all need to be watched. *L* |
Excellent discussion..... For deep impact and gut wrenching power I do agree full heartedly subs are a must. As a few people know I've been in the business and tried so many subs from A-Z that when I decided too go gang busters last time I wanted new subs. To go all out on subs you can spend your kids college tuition.....no problem. But at some point I said no way I'm spending $30k on subs. So looking around, talking to a few crazy people I decided to build my own subs and save some big bucks. My house is built on a raised foundation so I decided to take on an infinite baffle design. As I dove in to the planing stages I decided for a design containing four 18" drivers per side.....Ohhh no that got vetoed faster.....You know the rest of the story if your married lol. So two 18" per side was fine. My wife is very agreeable to all sort of hair brained ideas I have but before you know it she sniffed out the next hurdle....the holes in the floor. Due to the design I use the cavity under the house as the infinite baffle. That battle was slightly easier then a six foot stack of 18" drivers, at least the floor can be patched the other option was an eyesore of the first kind (according to her). With all that surface area and 2000 watts per side even a small movement will energize the room, no strain, no chuffing ports just pure energy......amazing. If you feel wanting for good deep vibrations in a movie, I never heard anything even coming close to the energy and output all the way down to 5 hz, 8hz will make the house react like we have an earth quake the house moves like in waves and all the wiring inside the walls will slap the drywall. Now even though the 4/5000s are dipping in to the 25hz region I find that to get the best sound for music is to x-over at 100 hz yep it sounds cleaner less muddy, just more musical. For movies I open the taps and let them go full tilt as it does sound fuller. Another weekend for F1 Racing so I'm a happy man...🇸🇪 |
I would place the monitors on a pair of very short Isoacoustics isolation stands and set the stands on top of the subs.This is exactly what I’ve done since purchasing my Omega Super 3i’s (I have the IsoAcoustics Aperta). Funny, I did this as a work-around until I got proper new stands but I ended up loving the result. It was John S who gave me the idea btw. I’m still using two MicroSubwoofer 10’s for sub duty and in my experience, 2 is most definitely better than 1. |
I do have in teh back of my head that powered subs + smaller speakers and smaller amp, like in my second system, could potentially surpass even my other bigger badder rig currently. If so I could downsize somewhat sell stuff and save a lot of money maybe. I have an extra pair of monitors and some other extra stuff to sell first to help finance this if I were to do it. And yes on second level of my home with suspended plywood floors at least, I would require isolation pads under the subs as well as isolation stands under the "satellites" placed on the subs. I’ve done a lot of sub searching in recent months. My current choice after a lot of research would probably be 12" Rhythmik subs. I know Martykl uses and recommends those. Or, I would start out on the cheap and pick up the first pair of any decent quality 12" powered subs I might stumble across locally. I had a 12" 90’s vintage M&K sub that worked well in this application for many years until it died a couple years back. I had tried that with all my monitors at one point or another and also OHM 100s. The smaller monitors needed it. The 100s, it was more of a judgement call and I judged to keep it simple and not use it. I took the sub apart in an effort to possibly salvage it when it died but was underwhelmed with the innards and decided to just ditch it. |
Thanks for the kind words, engiedr1960. Funny - I feel the same way about my subs - I could never go back to not having them in my system. One of the requirements for a replacement speaker when I was shopping to upgrade from my Vandersteen 1Cs is that they must be compatible with the 2Wq subs (they have to exted well down to 40Hz). The 2000s fit the bill. |
I had JS modify my Walsh 2 cabinets I provided him with sorbothane feet and binding post of my choice the SATs sit on top of a pair of REL Q201e subs that sit on Isoacoustics sub stands this combo puts the tweeters at ear height . I upgraded one of the two pair of my Walsh 2s based on Bondmaps well written review and very happy I did . Subs add to the ambiance of the recording and the emotional response to the music I can not go back to not having them in a system |
I very much like the idea of smaller speakers/monitors (on isolation platforms) placed on top of powered subs. Reduces need for amp power and current greatly if mains are high pass filtered. You have to integrate the two yourself but if done right the results should be spectacular. I have a pair of small Triangle monitors on stands currently in my family room 2 channel A/V system. Sound great but not much bass for that room area. I have been on the verge of pulling the trigger on adding a pair of powered subs (I used to have a single sub in there that went up a few years back). I would place the monitors on a pair of very short Isoacoustics isolation stands and set the stands on top of the subs. I haven’t done it yet because my main system with the big OHMs does it all and I do not mind not having all the bass in my other rig. The sound is different without the lowest octaves but what is there is very high quality and provides an alternate view into the music. Were I placing OHM Walsh speakers on top of the subs I would use Auralex subdude platforms that I use with my smaller Walsh 100s when used on second floor of the house to isolate. |
As regular poster and lurkers here know, I run my 2000s each their own Vandersteen 2Wq sub, with the Vandy crossovers (MHP-5) that cross over, first order, starting at 80Hz, with the same slope inverted going to the power amp. Would I say that my 2000s sound refined? Heck yes! I just installed a new IC between my DAC and preamp last night, and the differences were immediately apparent. Ohm Walshes can be extremely revealing, yet always enjoyable to listen to. That's a hat trick very few speaker designers can pull off - John Strohbeen does so, and at a bargain price point. Bravo! |
