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


Hi,

I'd love to hear the impressions of people who've actually spent some time with these speakers to share their sense of their plusses and minuses. Mapman here on Audiogon is a big fan, and has shared lots on them, but I'm wondering who else might be familiar with them.
rebbi
".what sort of image height do you perceive when the vocalist is at realistic listening levels i.e. singing between speakers or slightly behind the speaker plane? If 5-6ft, does this effect extend to multi-tracked lead vocalist in either channel?

That's a hard one to answer.

Specific recording parameters are a big factor. You get what's there. Often, that is a lot. There is always good natural ambience to vocals that make them sound natural in the space and easy to locate, usually somewhere between the driver height and the ceiling, from a typical listening position, but are seldom pinpoint in location, more like a live performance than what you would hear typically between two smaller stereo speakers.

THis tends to carry over even into mono recordings and make those seem very lifelike with a natural 3-d ambience, though not stereo, sometimes it can be hard to tell it is pure mono.

The omni-like wide dispersion helps keep the presentation sounding coherent from most anywhere you would listen from, so the sweet spot is essentially quite broad.

"Reading back through this Thread I'm staggered at some of the amplifier power reserves being rumoured. In the case of 500W or 1000W > 4 ohms, how does the Ohm 5000 react to Telarc 1812 type peaks? I've seen this type of program material blow many a fine bass driver :(
What is your experience?"

I have 5s, series 3, not 5000s, which I expect are similar, but I can speak for the 5s.

I have some old telarc CDs and records and I have witnessed exactly what you are talking about back in their heyday. They are known for overall dynamic range and peaks.

Lots of music I play has very demanding peaks, like orchestral, big band, electronica, etc., both on CD and record.

My goal with the OHM 5s and use of monster amps as I call them with same was to be able to raise the roof and go as loud as I would like without stress, breakup, compressed dynamics, etc. Like the biggest baddest systems one might hear out there, but at a price point I might handle.

I would say I accomplished that goal and have been most pleased. WHen I listen, I realize how fortunate I am to have been able to get to where I am audio/sound wise.

Some recordings make me nervous when I know what is coming next, not wanting to have to deal with any expensive repairs due to accidents, but I have yet to hear any of those bad things in my main rig with the BC ref1000m amps and the OHM 5s. I am not as brave with the rest of the gear I have at home, though most of it does quite well still in these regards by most any audiophile standards I would say.
Moon,

I'd agree with Mapman, the height thing is really recording specific.

One of my favorite "studio-stunt" recordings to demo the imaging capabilities of the Ohms (100s w/ a pair of Rythmik subs in my case) is found on Lindsey Buckingham's "Under The Skin". The track "It was You" bounces grouped/multi-tracked vocals around the stage - left/right, up/down, forward/back. This is not exactly a natural, audiophile approved recording technique, but a dramatic demo of how well the speakers place sources in space.

Similarly, "Q sound" recordings are shown in full glory.

IME, with more traditional recordings, results will vary too much to generalize.

Marty
Moonglum: I agree fully with Marty and Mapman regarding image hieght. I have just 6' ceilings in my man cave, and with good recordings, the vocalist is about a foot or so beneath the ceiling.

FWIW, I run my 2000s with an Odyssey Audio HT3 (w/ cap upgrade), rated at 150 watts/channel. I do have them rolled off below 80Hz, first order, as my Vandersteen subs roll in. So, the level to the Ohms is down 6dB at 40Hz, and 12dB at 20Hz. I do not push my system so loud that it hurts my ears, but I play it pretty loud, and the system also serves as part of my home theater rig, which can get pretty loud, too (but I don't think I usually watch at "Dolby reference levels"). In the 2.5 years I have had them, I have never felt that they were either underpowered or being over-driven.

And, just like Mapman, I take great pleasure in the fact that, at a fraction of the cost of statement speakers and gear, I have a system that gets closer to SOTA performance than I'd ever hoped for.
Hi Mapman,
Many thanks for your most detailed and informative reply. As a 'Stat user I can readily identify with the effects that you describe. It's good to hear that you are also experiencing "phase" effects which can place the sound in other parts of the room. Strangely enough I tended to hear those effects more with my old LP12 t/t than with the current Raven unsuspended table (I think attributable to the fact that the Raven has more dynamic contrast which ultimately leads to a more natural sound.)
I won't mention the Logans presentation but simply say that the reason I asked was that I've been interested in Ohms for some time.
It's always good to get genuine enthusiasts views (which you guys obviously are). The fact that you are so enthusiastic suggests that the Ohms are something special.

I only have a single reservation regarding the Ohms and that is the fact that John uses a fairly massive driver to cover most of the audible spectrum from DC upwards.
10K is one serious upper limit for a bass/midrange driver but I guess we should acknowledge that some speaker designers swear by only using one driver (period) and thereby no crossover. :)
Do you feel there is any sense of strain by the bass driver to capture those upper frequencies?
Best regards.....
Hi Marty,
Interesting.
I remember a collection of Beach Boys recordings where many of the tracks had been clearly recorded in the same studio with the same treatments. In these cases the voices appeared uniformly over 5ft but some tracks were clearly done elsewhere. In one case, a Beach Boy's voice appeared at the top of the L panel (>5ft) while his opposite number appeared (extraordinarily) at the BASE of the R panel (just above the sub-woofer)!!

Generally I find that height is a function of loudness. Full height is coincidentally achieved when the vocalist is pretty much level, or a whisker behind, the speaker plane - but sometimes can be even further back. Drums and guitars are generally about 3-4 ft from the floor while flutes etc tend to be same height as the vocalists so it all leads to a very realistic presentation.
Adding surround sound DSP increases the phasiness and results in all performers becoming slightly "taller" :)
Reverb embedded within the recording is the primary reason for outside-the-loudspeaker effects just as the complete absence of reverb causes the sound to appear dead centre of the panel.
Agreed that this sonic trickery is not based on reality but a function of the speakers using the room's reflective surfaces and also reverb/phasing within the recording itself.
It is undeniably entertaining and experience enhancing :)