Ohm Walsh Micro Talls: who's actually heard 'em?

Reb,

Did you get the details regarding what mods were done to the driver for you?

Mapman,
What was done to the drivers? That's actually a very interesting question! When I spoke with John, he said something like (and this is a paraphrase from my unreliable memory), "We have a lot of room to play with that tweeter." The impression I got was that he wanted to "goose" or somehow play with the tweeter response. What he did, exactly, I'm not sure, but the difference is palpable right out of the box.
For example, I have a Sheryl Crow greatest hits CD. The recordings are very processed, very "studio" sounding, and yet, very pleasing in their own, rock 'n roll way. The opening instrumental sequence of Every Day Is a Winding Road, begins with some noodling around on an organ (the notes seemed to float in midair... very cool) followed by complex bongo drumming coming from both channels, before the guitars kick in. The first thing I was aware of listening to this track, which I like quite a bit, was that the modified speakers really projected a sense of "fingertips slapping skins" on those bongo drums... I mean, they sounded great before, but now you could really make out the particular percussive surface being played. This was quite startling. Also, I was listening to The Goodbye Look from Donald Fagen's first solo album, which begins with a lot of Marimba and other percussion, and the sense of being surrounded by all those instruments was remarkable.
By the way, for what it's worth, I was interested to see the construction of the drivers themselves. At the bottom of the drivers, you see what looks like a typical speaker cone like you might see on, say, a 4 inch or 5 inch midrange driver. Not knowing any better, it looks as if the driver fires downward into the speaker cabinet... I mean, it seems to have a rubberlike surround and everything. Of course, you can't actually look inside the driver, so you cannot see the cone shaped Walsh radiator. But I do wonder what's actually going on in there...
Both on the old and new set of drivers, that bottom surface that looks like a speaker cone is written on with blue ink or blue paint. There is a date, presumably, the date of manufacture, along with an arrow pointing in the direction of the super tweeter. Also, each set of drivers is painted with the initials "JS" -- presumably, John Strohbeen. Also, the newer set of drivers each has the letters SP (presumably for "special") painted on it. Interesting...

Great thread gentlemen.

I wonder if anyone has compared the Ohms to some of the Gallo Reference series. I just sold my Reference IIs, and I'm about to purchase some Reference 3.1s. It sounds like some 100-S3s may be a good alternative.

The CDT of the Gallo speakers is truly a magical transducer, and I was hesitant to sell the pair that I'd had for about 10 years, but someone contacted me and offered me the right price so I figured I'd try the new Gallos. This thread has me interested in hearing the Ohms though.

Barry,

I was interested in and auditioned Gallo Ref 3's for my larger listening room after acquiring the Ohm 100's and prior to acquiring the larger Ohm 5's.

I auditioned the Ref 3's in comparison to the top of the line $11000 Quad electrostats. I liked them very much but the Quads clearly blew them away in most every way, at least when I heard them...there was no comparison as one would expect for the price difference. The Gallo Ref 3's did very well for their cost though.

I considered the Quads the reference sound I was shooting for and the Ohm 5s which were more in the price range I was shooting for refurbished. The Ohm 5's on my system are in that same league overall I would say but clearly with better dynamics and muscle.

I have not a/b'd the Ohms directly with either Quads or the Gallo' Ref 3's though.

Well, I've made a decision: it's the Ohms! I'm not sure which drivers I'm going to keep, the originals or the modified ones from John. But I've made a decision and the Totems are for sale on Audiogon as of today!

It was a difficult decision, but for me, the defining moment came last night when I was listening to an old LP featuring Dave Grusin and a bunch of other jazz musicians playing Vince Guaraldi tunes from the series of Peanuts television specials, on the old GRP label. (The album is called, Happy Anniversary, Charlie Brown!) I had had the Ohms set up in the system, and it just after listening to the third track on the album called, "History Lesson," I put the Arros back in the system, and felt a real sense of letdown: that huge, room-filling Ohm presentation just collapsed, and the Arros -- certainly no slouches in the imaging department, sounded "collapsed" by comparison. Additionally, there were times when the Arros sense of "detail" seemed to give way to a brightness that I found grating/fatiguing.

One of the things that this whole experience has definitely taught me is that while there are, certainly, speakers that are objectively terrible, a lot of what we argue about is a matter of personal preference. There are certainly things that the Totem Arros do exceedingly well -- for one thing, as the speakers have continued to loosen up, I have found their bass response to be astonishing, especially given their size. But if, like me, you find yourself starting to get hooked on the Ohm "room filling" sound, it's hard to accept something "less," even if the level of imaging/detail at times seems more precise.

Your Mileage May Vary, as they say! :-)