Just a quick observation about the Ohms that I realized during a prolonged listening session. The Magnepans really made me listen to certain types of music. Those tracks where ones that I knew sounded good and there were many tracks that sounded terrible that I just stayed away from. I am noticing with the Ohms I am listening to albums that I haven't listened to in years and enjoying them as the speakers are just far more musical and listenable vs the Magnepans on the same track. There are some things with the Magnepans like I miss like the ribbon tweete, but the Ohms sound so much more dynamic, musical and cohesive.
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.
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.
- ...
- 2916 posts total
accurus - I know exactly what you mean about the Ohms and not-so-great recordings. I have commented on this aspect of the Ohms myself. And thanks for making me feel fine about not having the space for Maggies. Is it just me, or is the link you mentioned above to your response graphs missing from your post? Maybe my employer's web filters are to blame. |
Accurus agree 100% on that. Perhaps the single best thing about the OHMs for a music lover. My story is similar moving from Maggies and others before back to OHM after many years. Also wondering what microphone you use with teh software and how much was the total investment? I love teh idea that this is a program that runs on regular computers and attempts to do so much to optimize sound quality. Might have to give it a look sometime. |
Lets try this again with the linking: http://imgur.com/wQzU3N8 Mapman to answer your questions. I used the recommended USB microphone: UMIK-1 and bought a USB cable extender so it could reach around my room. I used the stereo version of the software (they make a home theater / more channel version) which is around $430. It is expensive, but there is no other product that is going to what Dirac can do acoustically for the money. But I would say if you can swing it even after getting Dirac get acoustic treatment in conjunction with Dirac. Dirac can only fix so much including room nulls. |
Nice! I like the overlay of target, before and after measurements! I’m noticing the target is not flat response. I’m guessing that is because software attempt to compensate for non-flatness of human hearing. Just a guess? Did you attempt any nearfield measurements with the OHMs ie measure them with room acoustics minimized? Just wondering what that would look like. What’s is your assessment of the results after Dirac versus prior from a non technical music enjoyment perspective? Very interesting stuff. Its a software only (no special hardware required besides microphone) significant tweak for sure as measured for the cost. Nothing grey or left to uncertainty from a technical perspective there. Very cool!!!! Affordable software only tweaks like this are just another reason to like computer audio. |
- 2916 posts total