"If you want speakers that are etched, hyperanalytical or ultra-revealing, these probably won't float your boat. And it's because the Arros do lean more in those directions, I think, that this is such a difficult and interesting choice for me."
I've been reading this thread over the past couple of weeks, as I recently started auditioning the Ohm Walsh 100-S3s in my 12x15 living room. I've been paying particular attention to the way the sound of the Ohms is characterized compared to other speakers, like the Arros that Rebbi describes in the quote. In my case, I'm comparing a wonderful pair of GMA C-1s, which I love, to the Ohms and I'm also dealing with the "trade-off" between the detailed, pin-point imaging of the GMAs to the more rounded, room-filling imaging of the Ohms. This experiment got started because my spouse has tolerated the look of the GMAs, but hasn't been happy about the space they take up and the way they look. I, of course, am willing to overlook everything about them and their impact on our living space because they sound so good.
But here's what I've come to realize these past few weeks. The GMAs do have a very small sweet spot, and I've been hogging that seat, which is the best seat in the living room. If I get home and wife or kid is already sitting in that seat, I have to sit off to one side of the sweet spot, which means I hear only the speaker on that side. Alternatively, I ask the person to move, which usually results in their leaving the room. The net result is often that everyone cleared out when I wanted to listen to music.
Since I've had the Ohms, though, I find that audio elements like imaging, balance, and depth are quite acceptable even when sitting to one side of the room. And the sweet spot is quite musically engaging, even though the sharply defined imaging isn't nearly as effective as the GMAs. Plus, and this is key for me -- no one leaves the room when Dad wants to listen to music! I find it's far more satisfying to sit around these winter nights in New Hampshire, listening to Beethoven, say, with my family nestled around me.
My wife prefers the lower profile size of the Ohms, so that's a net win.
And now for my main point (sorry to be so long-winded) -- what I've come to realize about detailed imaging and other audio attributes of speakers is that, in the end, they really do not reproduce the way that live music sounds to me. I do listen to live music pretty regularly, and what I've been paying careful attention to lately is that no matter where I sit in the theater, arena, or club, I really do not hear imaging. If I pay careful attention to the saxophonist who's playing off to the left of the stage, I realize the sound I hear is omni-directional! The tone of the instrument is, of course, real saxophonee -- which no stereo system can come very close to (although the GMAs really nail instrumental voices). But the "sound stage" and "imaging" are a figment of my visual imagination -- I see the saxophone player off to the left and trick myself into hearing hm "there." But if I close my eyes, I hear that he's not there; he's everywhere! Wherever I wander in the room, there he is, blowing beautifully, filling the house.
And that aspect of live music is one that Ohm understands. A small trade-off in fabricated imaging in return for pleasurable listening anywhere in the room. For me, they're keepers.
