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

Question: When does Porcupine Tree sound like Nirvana?

Answer: When heard over my system with Ohm Walsh 2000s!
;-) (details below)

Much has changed over the last few days. As I mentioned, I got a deal on a really nice DAC. Although for now the digital cable I am using is a budget model that I doubt is getting the most out of this DAC, it still has brought significant improvements to my system. I also upgraded my PS Audio Quintet with a PS Audio Jewel power cord.

Between these upgrades and more run-in time on the Ohms, my system has slightly less bass output but better bass definition and extension. This works out well, since the bass output from my CD player/DAC is now similar to the bass output level from my turntable, which is lighter on bass than my CD player without the new DAC. I can now leave my subwoofers dialed where they are, and get satisfying bass output from both sources.

My system now sounds better than it ever has. I am getting smooth, detailed sound with a wide and high soundstage, some good extension into the room, and more balanced soundstage left-to-right. Although, due to the room layout, the soundstage is still irregular, I am finally getting some extension into the room from the left channel, which lacks a full-length wall like the right wall. The highs are smooth and clean.

Listening to a new (for me) CD of PT, "Stars Die" (a double CD collection of older PT tracks) was extremely enjoyable. Holographic soundstage, deep, solid bass, clear vocals, and that spot-on timbre. Listening to the second CD of the set on Saturday was a real carnival ride!

Over the weekend, I heard a system including a decent preamp, CD player and $20,000 powered speakers. They could definitely play louder than my Ohms (although the 2000s are as loud as I could want them to be) and were very dynamic, but they didn't do a lot of things as well as the 2000s, like soundstage, overall smoothness, and fine detail retrieval. I had that s--- eating grin on my face as I listened to this system, thinking about how my $2800 speakers and $1500 amp outperformed this $20,000 powered speaker in almost every important way!

Is my system perfect? No. Will it ever be? Doubtful. I am hoping more burn-in will bring better dynamics, better transient definition and detail retrieval to the Walsh 2000s. I am also hoping that experimenting with positioning and adding bases will further improve the soundstage and imaging. But I am really enjoying the limited time I have to listen, and look forward to listening more.

Away from the Ohms, my PV-11 is acting up again, with some high frequency noises that come and go. Although the C-J folks are very nice, I can't help thinking they are selling me tubes that are not very good in the PV-11. I had purposely sent the PV-11 into C-J for a retube and checkup prior to ordering the Ohms, so that I would be good to go for the trial period. I am not going to interrupt the trial period by sending it back again. Maybe I'll look elsewhere for different tubes. I guess I should post on the preamp forum for ideas, but if any of you have suggestions, I am all ears.

Hey, everybody,

Well, I finally got all my new electronics set up a few days ago.

I have to say that the combination of the of the Manley Shrimp preamplifier and the Bel Canto S300 power amplifier seems to have a lot of synergy to it. The bass is tight and controlled, midrange frequencies sound very nice, and the highs are light and airy.

I'm wondering, though, if any of you have ever found that a change in your electronics caused you to reposition your speakers.

When I first hooked up the new electronics, I was struck by the increased sense of "texture" in the music, particularly on orchestral works. Violins, for example, sounded "woody" in a way that they hadn't before. And everything had a sense of "air" around it.

But something was kind of missing, and I realized it was that the soundstage that I was used to have kind of collapsed... center fill was still very good, and there was a sense of depth, but that "energized room" that you get with Ohm speakers with the right source material was missing. What fixed it was simply moving the speakers back about 6 inches or so closer to the wall. Everything sprang back into place.

I called John and asked him about this, and he said that he'd never heard of imaging being affected by a change in electronics this way. I'm curious to see what you guys have found in this regard.

In any case, I'm very, very pleased. I think that the speakers have responded very well to the change in electronics, and I'll continue to report back as I have more time to listen.

"I'm wondering, though, if any of you have ever found that a change in your electronics caused you to reposition your speakers."

Yes, I had the same experience when changing amps and to a lesser extent digital source.

It may be a psychological thing more so than anything technical. The sound changes and a change in speaker location can help tweak it back more to what you had been used to.

Hello gang. I've been working with my Walsh 5000's and although I thought I was on the way to getting their performance right it's turned out to be a no go. The 5000's are inefficient and need high current and high power, particularly to play them and get good bass-fill at lower volumes. As some of you know I have the McCormack DNA-500 and a VTL 2.5 preamp. The DNA-500 is high current and 500 per side at 8 hohms. I like to play my setup at low volume sometimes and enjoy the music, thus the high current amp. At low volume the bass weight and fullness is not there and it should be with a high current amp. Now, you might say, "it could be your room or it could be speaker placement issues.". But I've heard the Walsh 5000's play with bigger bass in this room and in their current position in the room. The problem is that I've only heard them play with bigger bass when I've reconfigured some interconnects or power cords within the system. (When I powered up the system and the cables and system were settling back in after a reconfiguration) In other words, while the system was settling in after cables have been moved around there have been times when I heard these speakers play with the kind of low end weight I'd expect from speakers this size. But in my experience, the sonics of a system are never stable while cables and gear are in the process of settling in. Once everything in the system settles downs after reconfiguring cables, the sonics then stabilize. This can take a day or two. During that time I've heard the 5000's move more air and play with more bass weight, but as thing settle in the low end weight decreases. This has happened several times as I've experimented with cables and configurations and has been disappointing. But what this experience revealed to me is that the speakers have the capability to produce more and bigger low end weight in this room and in their current placement. So it's not the speakers, the room, or their placement holding back the low end. The question is, what to do? Change preamplifiers, power cables, or interconnects? I find it hard to believe that this high current amplifier could be the problem. I know that amp speaker matching is always a key to performance, but it does not seem possible in this case. I'm looking for answers.

Foster_9,

I'm at a loss. This is one for Mapman to figure out! ;-)