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

On a related note:

Understandably, there is something of an obsession with "accuracy" in the A'phile community. The idea is great, but how do you ever really know what's on a record? That information doesn't exist as "sound" without SOME playback system, and even the mastering set-up (which itself would sound radically different in your listening room) isn't a perfect reproduction reference - except with records that were made in that studio and mastered on that system.

I had the experience of being the "Executive Producer" (this means that I paid for a money losing proposition) on a jazz recording about 10 years ago. I was present for a fair bit of the sessions and can tell you that identifying the most "accurate" reproduction on a home system would be highly, highly subjective - even with the unusual benefit of being present at the particular performance as my reference. So, I try to take the holy grail "accuracy" thing with a grain of salt.

I might be more judgemental if there was any kind of meaningful uniformity in the sound of source material, but IME there isn't. Given the number of crappy sounding recordings that I own (including many, if not most, of my favorites), it's hard to expect any system to sound really good on a regular basis. I suppose that I end up listening disproportionately to those recordings that sound best on my main system and relegate the rest of my preferred music to either the distributed system in my home or the CD changer in my car.

So, just get me reasonably good octave to octave balance (relative to the -preferably extended- bandwidth of the speaker) and capture a sense of live players in space and I'm usually pretty happy. IMHO, it's remarkable how many high end designs are fair to pretty darn good on both counts and how few (including the Ohms) are really exceptional.

But I do recognize that this is just my take on a very subjective experience, so - Once Again, just MHO.

Marty

I can understand why many put "accuracy" as the most important attribute for a speaker. As for me, I have heard speakers that measure very, very good that I did not care for at all, and other speakers that measured less so, in some cases, much less so, that I found more appealing.

It is one reason why some earlier assertions about the Ohms not being very accurate don't concern me too much. Once I have a chance to hear them in my own home with my own gear, I'll know if I will still be on the merry-go-round or not for my main room. I'd like, funds permitting, to be able to listen to different speakers for the rest of my life, though, in my secondary room.

Update - As I posted previously, I ordered a pair of custom made, spiked cradle bases from Sound Anchors for my Walsh 2000s. Although John Strohbeen told me that this was not necessary for the Walsh speakers, my uneven floor prevented me from getting the speakers level and level with each other, and they rocked a bit too much (not rocked as in Rock & Roll, but as in back and forth). The stands were $300 plus shipping. Pictures can be seen on the Sound Anchors web site. They are solid, well made and heavy, with 3-point, adjustable spikes that screw into the base.

After I levelled the speakers on the bases, I noticed that the sound was cleaned up a bit, with a little more fine detail. The soundstage also seems a little larger than before, especially in the lateral plane.

As a side note, I think I need a different listening chair. The high-back leather reclining chairs and ottomans I bought when I set up my basement HT in 1994 are less than ideal for music listening. I discovered this when I leaned forward in the chair. The sound was significantly better in terms of details, soundstage and even smoothness in the highs. So, along with seeking improvements in acoustic treatments, cables, ICs and powercords, I will now be on the hunt for an *affordable* comfortable low-backed listing chair or two.

First, I admit I haven't read every single page in this thread, but I have read most of them, and I think what I am hearing is that the OHMs might be just the speaker I am looking for - I have a large room (24 x 36 x 12) with carpeted floors and a central seating area that I am looking to put a dedicated music system in. While I have heard speakers I like, I have been frustrated by the very tight sweet spot - this is my living room and I want to be able to share music with my wife and friends without playing musical chairs. The speakers that have jumped to my attention for this task have been the Shahinian and Ohm speakers and I was wondering if anyone had listened to both? I would very much like to know how they compare to one another. Are there any other contenders that I should be considering for the task?

D110 - Most of your assumptions are correct. I don't need the "wide sweet spot" feature of the Ohms (details on the Ohm web site), but it's still nice to have. The Shahinian is a fascinating speaker design with many loyal fans. I briefly looked into them. Unlike Ohm, there is no home-trial available. Shahinian's suggestion was for me to drive to Long Island from my New Jersey home to audition them. Having lived for years with a speaker that never sounded as good in my home as it did in the showroom, this was just a no-go for me. I insisted on a home trial for any potential speaker purchase. There is just no substitute for hearing a speaker in your room, with your gear, with your music. Of course, you can start buying and selling used speakers to try them out, with little financial risk, but the time and back-strain that goes with this meathod make it unappealing to me.

Ohm's 120-day home trial (you risk only the round-trip shipping) was ideal. And, as I have mentioned in this thread before, I really like Ohm's approach of making one "sound" for the whole Walsh line, and then scaling it for different room volumes, which are posted on the web site. I bought the 2000s, which are appropriate for my room, and I am very pleased. My complete review is posted in the speaker review section.