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

Bond,

From what I can tell from the specs, 45amps, 150w into 8 OHm and 2 ohm load stable are all good indicators for good performance driving complex loads like the OHMs.

I've been enjoying this post for some time and took the plunge and bought a barely used pair of MWT's in rosewood and have been breaking them in for about a month. I'm powering them with a Bel Canto S300. I use a modded squeezebox running into a Peachtree Nova using the pre and DAC only. It is a pretty hot set up and I want more... Does anyone think that going for Ohm 4.5 MKii's is moving forward or backward? I am considering moving the MWT's as surrounds and the 4.5's as L/R with an HSU sub replacing my beloved KEF reference surround system. Any thoughts? I love the MWT's in my two chanell system and think that an all Ohm HT would be fabulous. Best, Peter

Nolo,

That is a very excellent sounding setup for the MWTs!

Would you be expanding that somehow to surround by adding amps and processors I'm assuming? If possible, I'd do that (keep with amp separates) rather than move to a surround receiver. That would most likely be a step backwards in terms of getting the most out of the OHMs.

I'm not a surround kind of guy, but if I were, I'm pretty certain I would prefer to build around OHMs and the wide range omni Walsh drivers in them. It seems a natural fit.

4.5 mkIIs are Walsh 5 mk II drivers (which I have never heard) on OHM 4 cabinets, right? I think this is the model that reviewer John Potis owned, reviewed, and praised.

Assuming this, from what I have read, yes, it should be a big step up for non-nearfield listening in a larger room in terms of impact and overall weight to the performance.

mkII drivers use a different tweeter than S3s I believe but the full range Walsh drivers are the same or mostly similar as I understand it. There may be a slight difference towards the top end as a result but mkIIs can probably be had for less. Its probably a very reasonable tradeoff, especially for home theater use.

Thank you Mapman for the comments. I'm usint the MWT's in the 2 channel rig and have a notion to go with an outboard processor with a blue ray player to take advantage to the high res possibilities, but I have a dedicated HT room with the KEF system. The MWT's sound so right, like live music and, as a musician, I am all over that concept. Maybe I should just keep the MWT's as is and look down the road at a more full range Ohm surround setup. By the way, I'm just outside of the, so called, nearfield sweet spot at about 8' listening distance with a L/R separation of about 6.5' due to room constraints. I'll play around more with toe in but, they sound pretty terrific face forward. Thanks for keeping the comments coming!

Marty, thanks for the Underwood lead. I will check them out. I am in Hawaii so its still a phone call and freight but some good used equipment is fine.

I understand the 45 wpc comment. I think the old Mac MA 5100 is actually doing a decent job at lesser volumes. BUT, that said my sense from the different postings and a couple of emails to John at Ohm is that I would be much more satisfied with more headroom, overall power, current etc. I am a little conflicted on tubes vs SS especially as I really liked the sound of the Mac tube amps I heard back in DE near my in-laws but those are out of my short term reach financially if I want to stay married. So I am thinking interim 6-12 month solution.