2. speakers
  3. 123125-1644

Are Ohm-Walsh micros and 1000 series disrespected because of omni-directional design??

I never was a big fan of Omni-directional speakers because they are often disappointing.  I don't need the sound in back of me or 2 foot to my right or left.  However, I have seen many testimonials for Ohm -Walsh speaker on Audiogon, yet they are infrequently reviewed. 

Therefore, are Ohm-Walsh speakers disrespected because of  their Omni directional design??. I  noticed two issues on their website: 1) how do your determine which micro or tall column will be compatible for the dimensions of your listening area, especially if your listening area is only part of a larger room. 2)  A  buyer can easily mistake  the way they are priced. For example, the OW Talls (w-1000)  are $ 1000 each, NOT $1000 FOR THE PAIR.  So, that model is $2000 a pair, and there is lot of competition from conventional designed speaker, in that price category For example. the Golden Ear Technology. model 7, and the Magneplanar .07 both in the $1400-1500 price range and, some of the PSB towers, like the T-2 or T-3. or Monitor Audio recent series.. 

Would like some feedback about whether this Ohm-Wash design is disrespected  by the major audio press. Are  hardcore audiophile not convinced by the Omni-directional design and results, and so it never gets a f"air shake or serious audition,

sunnyjim
finsup
289 posts
 
To construe what I wrote as a suggestion that these speakers don't allow you to hear into the music, I think you may have misunderstood, but then it seems as if you prefer the traditional presentation of monopole speakers and are partial to very analytical speakers.  I'll offer that these are not the type of speakers that will allow you to hear the second violinist pass gas.  Sorry for the crudity. So, yes, they do lack the resolution you'll find in other speakers. What they do well is render a smooth, coherent presentation.

As to your specific misgiving that these speakers might play some kind of "parlor trick" and that the sound was "around the listener, was not distinct or detailed, and kind of amorphous or nonspecific in imaging or sound staging", then I think your misgivings are misplaced.  

Still, what you want to do -  concentrate so as to enter the flow of the music played - is not what I look for in a speaker which is to enjoy music and appreciate the perspective the Ohm Walsh lays out. Neither approach is wrong, but I read of incessant audiophile- nervosa on these forums and am grateful I am not so afflicted. 

As to your subject title, it may be that Ohm Walsh speakers are not so much disrespected as to being misunderstood.

Best wishes on your journey!
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,179 posts
 
What the ohms are not is bright in any way which sometimes can be perceived as more detailed.  

How owe detailed they are depends largely on what they are fed and how set up in the room.  

I do do not find them wanting in detail compared to say my Dynaudios which are more renowned for that.   Or using good headphones as a reference for listening most directly to the recording.  THey are definitely less bright.  Which is truly more detailed depends.  For all practical purposes I find it to be a moot point in the end.   Which is better in regards to detail is mostly a question of what one is listening for.   Assuming both are being fed a clean detailed signal to start with. 
wtf's avatar
wtf
307 posts
 
I agree with Mapman. My Maggies and Mark & Daniel Rubys are definitely brighter than my MicroWalsh Talls (circa 2004) but there is plenty of detail without any of the hardness. I'm always surprised audiophiles dismiss Ohm speakers so easily and often without hearing for themselves. One day I hope to move up to the 2000's.
finsup
289 posts
 

I think both of you may be reading too much into my statement above about the Ohms lacking resolution. I perhaps should have used a qualifier such as they lack “some” of the resolution that can be found in other speakers. Not much, but they are not the last word in detail. That said, the Ohms do offer great detail, again depending on room, placement and quality of upstream components.

For me, however, it is not the [very decent] level of detail that compels me to write, as I did above, that these are keepers for me. Please see my Feb 19 post above. Rather, it is their rich, smooth, coherent sound – their ability to connect me with the music. It is an almost-there live experience for me. Almost. Very close. For me. 

Put another way, I really like Maggies. What they bring to the table, they bring incredibly well. Yet, for what I want in speakers, and need given how I listen to music, they don’t bring it well enough. I can go to a concert with my family – all five of us. I can switch places with any one of them and while I hear a small tonal shift, I am still engaged. Sitting on living room sofa, in the sweet spot, with the Ohms, I get that almost-there live experience, sitting back mid-hallish. If I get up, move around, switch places on the sofa, I get a small shift in how the music sounds but it doesn’t collapse on me they way it would with Maggies.

What I am trying to say – to SJ’s concern - is that this isn’t some fake, artificial trick the designer has used. In much the same way I can change seats during a concert and still maintain that live connection to the music, so too can I with the Ohms. 

Map, I think it was you who wrote in Rebbi’s epic Ohm Walsh Micro Talls thread (still going strong!) that the Ohm’s had plenty of “meat on the bones” If it wasn’t you, then a tip of the hat to the forgotten author. What that description conveys to me is the rich, harmonic, musical space these speakers render.

Anyway, SJ, sorry to take this thread in a slightly different direction, but I hope by now that your initial query has been answered by all the posters above.

sunnyjim OP
927 posts
 

Finsup,  Let me state for the record, I don't believe I misunderstood you that Ohm speakers don't let you "listen into the music". Actually from what you and Mapman and some others have said, it seems listeners are immersed in the music and can enjoy the music, and  also  analytically ponder

 Also for the record, I was basically describing "HOW I LISTEN", NOT HOW EVERYBODY SHOULD". I have no desire to pen a manifesto type guide to listening, that thunders.... "you must listen this way with this design of speakers or else"  

I am an analytical either by choice of genetics.  I trained as a historian, and to dig for the truth not what seems to be truth of events  However, I know I have always listened analytically, and also enjoyed the music, unless it really sounded sour, edgy, or "just not right"  (Please note this phrase "just sounds right" which should  be considered as part of  this exchange. it is a key idea).

I never have either pulled out my hair, or cried into my pillow,. or in my beer all night because of  a disappointing listening session.. 

Yes, I have gone through several speakers over the last 45 years, but made those changes not out of frustration, but curiosity as to what other speaker could deliver in terms of "NOTABLE or discernible" better sound and presentation. (of course within reasonable price range)  

If that is a sign of chronic audio nervosa, and ignoring the music played, then I may be guilty. (Please don't repo my current speakers, if officially charged by the membership  (LOL) 

However in the interim, I learned a great deal about sound, the physics of speaker design, and the structure of musical composition.  It is impossible (at least to me)  to listen to Bach's "Toccata and Fugue in D Minor) not to perceive the minor and major structural changes, and yet not appreciate the musical totality of this masterwork which I believe was created by Bach to test the organ at Thomaskirche Cathedral. 

 Get a copy  either a mint vinyl, or CD of:  "E.Power Biggs Play Bach at Thomaskirche"  It is impossible to just have this music wash over me.it is an also an outstanding recording.  Is  it possible to. listen to the Allman's " powerful tune  "In Memory of Elizabeth Reed" from their "Live at Fillmore East"  The changes that Duane Allman and Richard Betts made at such high velocity playing is remarkable.  I think this music and other masterworks of rock can be enjoyed as music and musical structure 

Lastly, I think you should launch a thread that addresses the first point you made in the previous reply.   Good Luck and Cheers!!          

  

More to discover