How do Ohm Walsh speakers compare to Maggies?

Zeljoh,

To amplify on Mapman's comments, the original Walsh designs used exotic cones that were very expensive to manufacture and were SPL limited. The current drivers are more conventional, cheaper to build and go louder. Some believe that SQ was better with the exotic cones (Dale Harder still makes a speaker using this approach), others feel that the difference isn't really significant

I have minimal experience with the older designs, so I can't comment either way on a comparison. I do like the new Ohms tho.

I appreciate these responses as I'm looking for my next pair of speakers. Ohm is definitely on my short list. As buying speakers today is pretty much an act of faith with so few B&M's I've been doing my due diligence in reading as much as I can find. I've come across just a few of these "criticisms" and wasn't sure how to rectify the difference of opinions. In one case, the author expressed significant "disdain" for the newer models. You folks have helped a lot. Thanks!

I've had Ohm Fs back in the day and they were good at what they did. Took some power to get them to light up however.
I do not care for the current Ohm speaker with the poly/plastic driver(s) (upgrade)(!).

They just sound, well, plastic. Just not the same, sorry.

If you're gonna try the Ohms, make sure you can return them.

You would do much better with these IMO. http://www.hhr-exoticspeakers.com/HHRabout.htm

I have a few questions about Ohm Walsh Talls. How sensitive are these speakers to placement near a rear wall? Do they require more than say 18"? How about the sweet spot, is it large, meaning do I have to break out a tape measure to position my chair just right? (I'm not that kind of listener). I'm the kind of guy that sits off axis so I can be closer to a lamp and read. Once in awhile I'll move my chair to a more optimal location but not often. I like my music to sound fantastic and I have a decent system with a Hegel H200 integrated but I haven't been overly thrilled with my Harbeths. I also have a nice REL B2 which I hate to have. Ages ago I had B&W DM602 speakers and a NAD integrated and never needed a sub.

Donjr, the Ohm MWT's as well as all the talls, are very easy overall to position, and they would work fine from around a foot or so from the wall behind them. I tended to like to position them about as wide apart as the distance I was seated from them, providing this distance isn't so far as to make the middle staging fall apart. For the most part, they are easy to position and don't suffer from the same room dependencies that other speakers have.

I had a pair of them for a few years along with OW3XO's upgraded to 3000 series drivers. I often enjoyed the MWT's just as much if not more so than the 3000's. I don't know why, but there is something really special about the smaller Ohms. They get the midrange just right, but then all of Johns speakers do a fabulous job of just playing music.

As is typical of Ohm in general, the sweet spot is wide and does not require that typical seated position in the middle or head in vise like Maggie's etc. a very livable, real world speaker in my opinion.

Your Hegel gear would also work fabulously with the Ohms, plenty of current drive and grunt, good choice there! Enjoy! Tim