2. speakers
  3. 1258480272

Ohm F remodel options

So, someone has offered me their Ohm F’s- all original parts with no modifications. The cabinets are rosewood, and really look like they’re about 34 years old.

The drivers are in horrible condition. The Right speaker has the surround disintegrated and is virtually un-playable. The Left is in slightly better shape, but reveals its age.

I have no idea what kind of room they will be in a year from now. The current room is too small, and in a 900-sq ft house it is a non-starter. We have no room to even store them at the moment. I would take possession of them the day that we move to Virginia, probably in April.

There seem to be quite a few options.

1) Send them to Ohm for an upgrade. But, an upgrade to what? The 2000 driver seems to be a safe bet, assuming they will be in a medium-to-small room next year. Sending them in for a full 5000 upgrade is possible, but the expense will delay the project for about a year.

2) Have Ohm send the drivers of choice and do it myself. Good option unless I go up to the 4000 or 5000 driver. I’m not that good with woodworking, and would be concerned about screwing them up.

3) Go for the gusto and send to Dale Harder and crew to be updated with their modern Walsh driver. But that expense will really delay the project.

What would you do if given Ohm F’s?
parasound63
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,179 posts
 
para,

Thanks for the update.

Please keep 'em coming as things develop! I would go out of my way to be able to have a properly functioning pair of original OHM F's myself someday.
parasound63 OP
162 posts
 
I'll keep that in mind, Mapman...
unsound
7,329 posts
 
Restoring historicaly correct Walsh drivers is a noble endevor, but I wonder what Licoln Walsh would have designed if he had access to todays technology or just lessons learned. Perhaps presumptious, but perhaps using Lincoln Walsh's design as a platform for the potential that was then not plausible, but currently is, might be just as noble an effort. Of course there is a difference between evolution and devolution. Choose your path wisely grasshopper:>).
parasound63 OP
162 posts
 
A new player has emerged to possibley work on the F's. Erik Wayne, nephew of Bill @Millersound has expressed interest in the project. He's in New Jersey, and a reasonable distance for me to drive to once I'm in Virginia.

I think I would like to avoid shipping if possible...

As far as being a noble venture, for me restoring the F is a logical course. There aren't that many in working condition.

-P
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,179 posts
 
"but I wonder what Licoln Walsh would have designed if he had access to todays technology or just lessons learned"

On paper at least, the evidence would seem to suggest that Dale Harder's technical vision is closest of the variations out there to that of Lincoln Walsh's, a single full range Walsh driver, along with the pros/cons that go along with that.

German Physics and OHM are both more focused on making the design more durable and reliable IMHO.

GP is more focused on using Walsh technology from the top frequencies on down and punting on the low end so that the driver is less inclined to destroy itself and hence more robust and marketable from a support perspective. Theirs is also more a "cost is no object" marketing approach.

OHM is also more focused on all but the top frequencies, also in the interest of making the design more robust and reliable at high output levels and hence more reliable as a solution for the masses. OHMs marketing scheme is more blue colar: find ways to make the technology more affordable for the masses.

Dale Harder has apparently improved on the robustness of the Walsh driver implementation from OHMs early attempts (the F and A) but my impression is that it is still more an issue with his design than the others.
More to discover