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

prior:

micro
100
200
300
5

current:

micro
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000

4000/5000 appear to share the same largest cabinet size similar to 300s and 5s prior.

Not clear to me yet how the new line compares to old line in terms of cabinet size and target room sizes model per model. There does appear to be one extra model and cabinet size overall this time around though.

I've been trying to figure this out myself, Mapman.

It looks to me like the 1000 is a new model, somewhere between the Micro and the old 100...

The 100-S3 (which I have) has a cabinet which is 9 x 9 inches. I'd originally assumed that the 1000 was the replacement model for the 100, but its cabinet is only 7.5 x 7.5 inches.

The cabinet of the 2000 seems closer in size: 9.5 x 9.5.

If so, I'm not replacing my 100's anytime soon... that's a full $1100 more than I paid for the 100's. But I wonder if I can just upgrade the drivers?

I think rebbi is correct. I was actually thinking about the Walsh 100S3 before the new line came out. In the new line, the 1000 is too small for my room (~2800 c.f.), so I went with the 2000. Given the improvements to the design, the economy, the dollar, and the cost of keeping the entire operation in New York City, the $1100 jump in price (100S3 to 2000) for a similar place in the model line was not outrageous to me. I don't hold it against John that he obfuscated a price hike somewhat by rearranging the line. The bottom line is that very few speaker companies aim for one sound - their best possible - and then just offer different models for different size spaces. Most other companies start with a statement speaker, then make progressive compromises to hit certain price points. Not only do these compromised designs work better in smaller rooms, they don't perform to the level of the statement model. Ohm claims that the goal is the same level of performance from the entire Walsh line, with different models optimized for different sized rooms. I am impressed with that approach, which indicates a no-compromise attitude towards performance.

Besides, the longer expected life span of the new series has serious appeal to me. If these speakers are keepers, I intend to run them until I die or go deaf.

Bondmanp,

Just to be clear, I don't begrudge John a dime of the price hike. I'm just not sure I can afford it. :-/

I hear ya, rebbi. The 2000s were a stretch for me too. But, I'm almost 50 years old, I get almost nothing from keeping the money in the bank, and with the kids about to start college, this may be my last chance for a decent pair of speakers. Considering my long-time dream speaker lists for $9K, if the Walsh 2000s do the trick for $2850 delivered, I will be one happy camper.

Bondman, I'm curious what is the $9K dream speaker you mentioned?