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

Good to hear it, Mapman.

Finsup, nothing I sent you is private info, so feel free to share.

I did indeed install some absorbing foam panels at a first reflection point. This has greatly evened out the sound from the L/R channels, which had been very different in my asymetrical room. I also placed foam pipe insulation along some sharp edges that drop down from my ceiling. Along with some careful dialing in of the speakers, I am hearing a significant improvement in the sound overall. The forwardness that had bothered me on piano passages is greatly reduced. More treatments will come, but I am too busy and too broke right now. Overall, I am pretty pleased.

A succession of audiophile buddies have passed through my listening room. Although there was some limited criticism (these are very critical listeners!), they all have been fairly impressed, and amazed at the value the 2000s represent.

Last night, I listened to disc 2 of Danny Elfman's Music For a Darkened Theater, #2. Fantastic dynamics, long sustained tails of musical notes, startling percussion that made me jump, and a huge soundstage. And that timbre, always that true-to-life timbre. Perhaps it could be a little better, but I was hard-pressed to put my finger on exactly how.

One more audiphile friend is stopping by tonight (and his system cost him easily $40K). Unless he thinks I can do better with a specific speaker for $3K or less, I expect to be keeping the 2000s (just 9 days remain in my trial period).

Bondman,

Tell us what your critical listener friends said?

Amp news:

I'm giving serious consideration to trying a pair of Bel Canto ref1000 mkiis that are up for sale. The seller is confirming for me that these are in fact mkiis, which go for a hefty premium over original ref100s due to input stage and power supply enhancements.

On paper, the 100k unbalanced input impedance (200k balanced) of the ref1000 mkiis are an ideal match for tube pre-amps. FWIW the input impedance of my MF A3CR is 72K ohms, also very good. The ref1000s deliver 500w/ch into 8 ohm, doubling into 4.

I figure if I do this, I 'm going to try to go for broke.

We'll see...

Tell us what your critical listener friends said?

+1

Finsup -

Most of the criticism was that the high frequencies might be a tad rolled off. This might be changed by changing the toe-in, but, frankly, I like the frequency balance as is. Note that although the highs are a little rolled off, there is no lack of extension or transient information; it's all there, at a slightly reduced level, which makes these speakers easy on the ears during long listening sessions.

Some felt that the 2000s were not the last word in soundstage depth, although they did exhibit a reasonable amount. Note that there is a large, tube-based RPTV in between and behind the speakers, which has to have a negative affect on depth.

Most of the other criticisms involved my room acoustics and speaker cables (they are too long and not properly positioned).

90% or more of the comments were positive. Some checked items off a list - soundstage, imaging, timbre, frequency balance, extension, PRAT, etc., and found them all more than acceptable for the price, and in some cases acceptable at ANY price - a real strong endorsement IMO.

The last fellow stopped by earlier this week, and generally agreed with the others. That, and a few more hours of listening myself have convinced me that keeping the 2000s is the right move.

Since they are staying, I jumped on a pair of used MWTs offered locally here on Audiogon, to be used as surrounds. I wasn't going to address the surround channels before the center channel and spiked bases, but opportunity knocked, so I jumped. Now my wallet needs to catch its breath for a bit!