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

I happen to think that the little Jordan driver is a fantastic device, but his subjective take on omnis can be summarily dismissed. I say this because anyone who groups all omnis as "thin" (or, for that matter, anything else)sounding is grouping Ohm with MBL and many other dissimilar sounding speakers.

Other than a certain shared imaging quality, anyone attempting to paint all omnis with a common brush is just being silly.

Marty

Also, just for the record, OHMs do not have a true omni sound radiation pattern, like mbl for example. They are physically damped/attentuated with acoustic sound absorbing material inside the can in the wall facing directions. That addresses Mr. Jordan's concern to some extent and is done to enable them to work well closer to walls than true omnis like mbl which is a practical consideration for many.

Bondmanp, not the Ohms, but I've heard Duevel's. I just remember the actual sound quality, IMHO, to be inferior to regular speakers like Epos, etc. It's been a while, but while the dimensionality was vague, it was far more natural and realistic than a box design.

I hope to hear the Ohms at home when I have a suitable comparison. Should be interesting comparing a single driver "headphone for your ears" (also goes for some Audio Physic designs) vs. omni. I like the statement that you know a speaker working correctly when it is doing the soundstaging correct

CDC,

If you listen to the OHMs or mbls, the soundstage will sound way different from typical directional box designs most likely.

You may have to give your ears a chance to adapt to the different presentation compared to the more directional designs. Ears that are trained to listen to more directional designs generally take some time to adapt to the omni presentation based on my experience.

It took me a couple of weeks to tune in to my OHM 100S3s (Super Walsh 2s) even after having owned original Walsh 2s for years. The two are mostly similar in appearance except the newer 100S3s use a newer flavor of the OHM CLS driver with a different tweeter that delivers better soundstage, imaging, focus and clarity, and tonal balance top to bottom.

I have owned various other speaker designs including large Maggie planars concurrently with OHMs over the years. Omnis are a different beast to digest all together from any of those.

Once your ears adjust, I find you will hear more similarities in the imaging/soundstage of the OHMs compared to other modern designs that also do imaging and soundstage very well, though omnis will always retain a fairly unique presentation from other designs I believe.

Mapman, I DID like the soundstaging of the Duevel's. I was referring the the quality of the drivers, not the spatial effects.

Thinking out loud:
Single driver: I would describe the soundstaging as transporting you to the event. When in the sweet spot, it's like your are there.

Omni's more bring the event to your room. This is good as one dealer commented, a quality of a good stereo is that it can be enjoyed by everyone, no matter where they sit.
Bad as the omni concept could be basically flawed because, unless the recording is done in an anechoic chamber, it already brings it own spatialilty to the recording and omni's just add room reverb to what is always on the recording, confusing the issue.

Actually IMHO neither single driver or omni is the best. The best concept is the waveguide. His prices are pretty reasonable too.
Even polar response = equal power response and may be one reason why B&W sound good, despite all their other faults. Sounds like Ohm does the same thing by dampening the side which faces the front wall.