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

Great thread gentlemen.

I wonder if anyone has compared the Ohms to some of the Gallo Reference series. I just sold my Reference IIs, and I'm about to purchase some Reference 3.1s. It sounds like some 100-S3s may be a good alternative.

The CDT of the Gallo speakers is truly a magical transducer, and I was hesitant to sell the pair that I'd had for about 10 years, but someone contacted me and offered me the right price so I figured I'd try the new Gallos. This thread has me interested in hearing the Ohms though.

Barry,

I was interested in and auditioned Gallo Ref 3's for my larger listening room after acquiring the Ohm 100's and prior to acquiring the larger Ohm 5's.

I auditioned the Ref 3's in comparison to the top of the line $11000 Quad electrostats. I liked them very much but the Quads clearly blew them away in most every way, at least when I heard them...there was no comparison as one would expect for the price difference. The Gallo Ref 3's did very well for their cost though.

I considered the Quads the reference sound I was shooting for and the Ohm 5s which were more in the price range I was shooting for refurbished. The Ohm 5's on my system are in that same league overall I would say but clearly with better dynamics and muscle.

I have not a/b'd the Ohms directly with either Quads or the Gallo' Ref 3's though.

Well, I've made a decision: it's the Ohms! I'm not sure which drivers I'm going to keep, the originals or the modified ones from John. But I've made a decision and the Totems are for sale on Audiogon as of today!

It was a difficult decision, but for me, the defining moment came last night when I was listening to an old LP featuring Dave Grusin and a bunch of other jazz musicians playing Vince Guaraldi tunes from the series of Peanuts television specials, on the old GRP label. (The album is called, Happy Anniversary, Charlie Brown!) I had had the Ohms set up in the system, and it just after listening to the third track on the album called, "History Lesson," I put the Arros back in the system, and felt a real sense of letdown: that huge, room-filling Ohm presentation just collapsed, and the Arros -- certainly no slouches in the imaging department, sounded "collapsed" by comparison. Additionally, there were times when the Arros sense of "detail" seemed to give way to a brightness that I found grating/fatiguing.

One of the things that this whole experience has definitely taught me is that while there are, certainly, speakers that are objectively terrible, a lot of what we argue about is a matter of personal preference. There are certainly things that the Totem Arros do exceedingly well -- for one thing, as the speakers have continued to loosen up, I have found their bass response to be astonishing, especially given their size. But if, like me, you find yourself starting to get hooked on the Ohm "room filling" sound, it's hard to accept something "less," even if the level of imaging/detail at times seems more precise.

Your Mileage May Vary, as they say! :-)

"But if, like me, you find yourself starting to get hooked on the Ohm "room filling" sound, it's hard to accept something "less,"

You nailed it. Most Ohm owners including myself would agree I think.

If I had to chose 1 pair of speakers, I'd have to let all my conventional dynamic design speaks, including my cherished Dyns and Triangles and vintage Ohm Ls go for this reason mainly.

Mapman,

And thanks you for getting me to try out the Ohm's! :-)