Your reply helps SJ! Helps to put things in perspective overall I think. I can say that in my opinion, I think the Larsen is probably a bit better overall than the Ohm MWT, mainly a bit more meat on the bones in the lower end, and a fuller, more robust midrange.
Upper ends are probably more similar than not, both do a very nice job presenting a great soundstage, and in my opinion, imaging is very good. Also, both do a very good job with image height, something a lot of speakers do not do quite as well with.
The Ohm might do a slight bit better on stage depth, but in the end, might be a toss up really, as I felt both, once again, do a good job, especially seeing how the Larsen is a wall boundary type speaker, and the MWT is close to being one, although it doesn’t have quite the same constraints here.
One thing i might add, the Ohm MWT is not a true Omni, at least in the normal sense, and neither is the Larsen really for that matter, but close enough maybe. The Ohm can be purchased however, with the tweeter made to fire directly upwards, and the attenuation felt removed in the back portion of the can for a more “Omni” arrangement. I had a pair made this way from the factory, and was quite pleased with its presentation for both music as well as using it as rear surrounds for film. It is quite good in that mode!
Also, looking at pricing and what each model is capable of, I would generally say that the Ohm 1000 is probably more in line capability wise to the Larsen. Of course everyone’s mileage may differ slightly, but that is more my observation based on real listening.
The above speakers of course, certainly have a different perspective from forward firing, box speakers, so that is something you must determine if you like it enough to live with it or not. I can also see(hear) how you might favor the treble response of the GE speaker, that type of tweeter can be somewhat addicting. But, as anything, the whole speaker has to do its part.
I would maybe keep keep in touch with John on a pair of MWT’s or 1000’s though, if you can get a listen to them, it at least would give you another data point in your search. Have fun, enjoy the trip!
Upper ends are probably more similar than not, both do a very nice job presenting a great soundstage, and in my opinion, imaging is very good. Also, both do a very good job with image height, something a lot of speakers do not do quite as well with.
The Ohm might do a slight bit better on stage depth, but in the end, might be a toss up really, as I felt both, once again, do a good job, especially seeing how the Larsen is a wall boundary type speaker, and the MWT is close to being one, although it doesn’t have quite the same constraints here.
One thing i might add, the Ohm MWT is not a true Omni, at least in the normal sense, and neither is the Larsen really for that matter, but close enough maybe. The Ohm can be purchased however, with the tweeter made to fire directly upwards, and the attenuation felt removed in the back portion of the can for a more “Omni” arrangement. I had a pair made this way from the factory, and was quite pleased with its presentation for both music as well as using it as rear surrounds for film. It is quite good in that mode!
Also, looking at pricing and what each model is capable of, I would generally say that the Ohm 1000 is probably more in line capability wise to the Larsen. Of course everyone’s mileage may differ slightly, but that is more my observation based on real listening.
The above speakers of course, certainly have a different perspective from forward firing, box speakers, so that is something you must determine if you like it enough to live with it or not. I can also see(hear) how you might favor the treble response of the GE speaker, that type of tweeter can be somewhat addicting. But, as anything, the whole speaker has to do its part.
I would maybe keep keep in touch with John on a pair of MWT’s or 1000’s though, if you can get a listen to them, it at least would give you another data point in your search. Have fun, enjoy the trip!