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

I can't comment on the older models, but my Ohm 100s absolutely go towards the leaner, more articulate side through the bass region.  If anything, I'd call the bass ever-so-slightly over damped.  It's possible that a more recent model may better serve the OP's preferences.

Sudont I also have larger F5 series 3 Ohms.  Listening to them as I write.   I believe these are same cabs as yours, refurbed OhmF cabs on casters.  12" cans.  

These are are on foundation level in my home so no need to isolate those from floors like my smaller models with Walsh 2 cabs upstairs.  

It it looks to me like casters might just fit on subdude platforms.  I'd measure and determine for sure if considered.   Also of course you'd want to get the location right first then put speakers on platform. And lock castors.  

There res are other effective isolation products out there as well I'm sure but have not researched.   

On my Walsh 3's I got rid of the casters, I simply unscrewed them and replaced them with solid rubber footers. I made sure that the final height was the same as the casters for proper vent clearance. I won't say the difference was dramatic but the bass tightened up nicely and overall clarity seemed improved. The speakers are more stable now and in my opinion  better looking.

Polarin,
Agree with you about looks! OTOH, when you first get the speakers, the casters are convenient. Long-term though, they have to go. I like your solution. Spikes on heavy equipment can make it difficult to move around. I always imagine one of those spikes going right through my foot.
Mapman,
Thanks! Maybe Polarin's rubber feet on top of the SubDudes would work? Will the SubDudes support that kind of weight, though, even if they do fit?Here's another thing I wonder: Mapman, you have a couple of different Walsh drivers at home. How do they differ in terms of sound? Do the smaller ones do better at the high-mids? From what I've heard you guys say, they seem to do no worse at the low-end.
What about sound at lower power levels? Do the smaller drivers do better in this regard? I find I have to play mine fairly loud to open them up, although this also seems to be a diminishing problem.
Bondmanp,
I think the cabinets have to play a significant role. After all, it is a type of bass reflex design, with its port on the bottom. I'm really not clear at all about how the CLS driver differs from a conventional driver, e.g., how they get it to vibrate the cone, and behave less like a piston. But looking at the "bottom" of the driver, it looks very much like a conventional driver, with a diaphragm, magnet cover, and flexible surrounds. This is firing into the cabinet, so it has to produce resonance.
If I'm not mistaken, stuffing is used to control midrange within the cabinet. It would be interesting to know how much, and what kind of, stuffing is in there. A person who knew what he was doing might be able to make some adjustments there.
I feel fairly certain I'm hearing the cabs, or the room, (or both). But as I say, much of this odd sound seems to have worked itself out, and the bass cut switch has helped in this regard. I'll need to go back to critical listening to see where I'm really at. I'm not distracted by their sound anymore, and that's a good sign.
Martykl,
Thanks for your comments! I can't help wondering sometimes if I bit off more driver than my room can chew. It would be nice to compare a smaller version of the Talls, just to see, particularly for quieter listening levels. But again, the sound is improving, and perhaps all these problems will work themselves out as I exercise the speakers?

Mapman,
Let me just add: When I first talked to JS, I brought up low listening levels, and he said the bigger speakers are easier to drive, i.e., more efficient. Does that make sense? I’ve always thought you wanted small speakers for lower level SPLs, and because they have less mass, they should be easier to drive. Anyway, what’s your experience with the different Walsh’s?